This is a modern-English version of History of Phoenicia, originally written by Rawlinson, George. It has been thoroughly updated, including changes to sentence structure, words, spelling, and grammar—to ensure clarity for contemporary readers, while preserving the original spirit and nuance. If you click on a paragraph, you will see the original text that we modified, and you can toggle between the two versions.

Scroll to the bottom of this page and you will find a free ePUB download link for this book.





HISTORY
OF
P H OE N I C I A



by George Rawlinson

Camden Professor of Ancient History in the University of Oxford
Canon of Canterbury
Corresponding Member of the Royal Academy of Turin





First Published 1889 by Longmans, Green, and Co.














TO THE
CHANCELLOR, VICE-CHANCELLOR, and SCHOLARS
Of The
UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD

This Work

His Last as Occupant of a Professorial Chair
Is Dedicated
As a Token of Respect and Gratitude
By The

CAMDEN PROFESSOR





Oct. 1 MDCCCLXXXIX





PREPARER’S NOTE

     The original text contains a number of characters that are
     not available even in 8-bit Windows text. Where possible
     these have been represented with a similar letter, but some
     things, e.g. Hebrew script, have been omitted.

     The 8-bit version of this text includes Windows font
     characters. These may be lost in 7-bit versions of the text,
     or when viewed with different fonts.

     Greek text has been transliterated within brackets “{}”
      using an Oxford English Dictionary alphabet table.
     Diacritical marks have been lost. Phoenician or other
     Semitic text has been replaced with an ellipsis in brackets,
     i.e. “{...}”.

     The numerous sketches and maps in the original have also
     been omitted.
PREPARER’S NOTE

     The original text contains several characters that aren’t available even in 8-bit Windows text. Where possible, these have been replaced with similar letters, but some things, like Hebrew script, have been left out.

     The 8-bit version of this text includes Windows font characters. These may be lost in 7-bit versions of the text or when viewed with different fonts.

     Greek text has been transliterated within brackets “{}” using an Oxford English Dictionary alphabet table. Diacritical marks have been removed. Phoenician or other Semitic text has been replaced with an ellipsis in brackets, i.e. “{...}”.

     The many sketches and maps in the original have also been left out.




PREFACE

Histories of Phoenicia or of the Phoenicians were written towards the middle of the present century by Movers and Kenrick. The elaborate work of the former writer01 collected into five moderate-sized volumes all the notices that classical antiquity had preserved of the Religion, History, Commerce, Art, &c., of this celebrated and interesting nation. Kenrick, making a free use of the stores of knowledge thus accumulated, added to them much information derived from modern research, and was content to give to the world in a single volume of small size,02 very scantily illustrated, the ascertained results of criticism and inquiry on the subject of the Phoenicians up to his own day. Forty-four years have since elapsed; and in the course of them large additions have been made to certain branches of the inquiry, while others have remained very much as they were before. Travellers, like Robinson, Walpole, Tristram, Renan, and Lortet, have thrown great additional light on the geography, geology, fauna, and flora of the country. Excavators, like Renan and the two Di Cesnolas, have caused the soil to yield up most valuable remains bearing upon the architecture, the art, the industrial pursuits, and the manners and customs of the people. Antiquaries, like M. Clermont-Ganneau and MM. Perrot and Chipiez, have subjected the remains to careful examination and criticism, and have definitively fixed the character of Phoenician Art, and its position in the history of artistic effort. Researches are still being carried on, both in Phoenicia Proper and in the Phoenician dependency of Cyprus, which are likely still further to enlarge our knowledge with respect to Phoenician Art and Archæology; but it is not probable that they will affect seriously the verdict already delivered by competent judges on those subjects. The time therefore appeared to the author to have come when, after nearly half a century of silence, the history of the people might appropriately be rewritten. The subject had long engaged his thoughts, closely connected as it is with the histories of Egypt, and of the “Great Oriental Monarchies,” which for thirty years have been to him special objects of study; and a work embodying the chief results of the recent investigations seemed to him a not unsuitable termination to the historical efforts which his resignation of the Professorship of Ancient History at Oxford, and his entrance upon a new sphere of labour, bring naturally to an end.

Histories of Phoenicia or the Phoenicians were written around the middle of this century by Movers and Kenrick. The detailed work of the former writer—A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0—gathered into five moderately sized volumes all the information that classical antiquity preserved about the Religion, History, Commerce, Art, etc., of this well-known and fascinating nation. Kenrick, taking full advantage of the knowledge amassed, added much information from modern research and was satisfied to present a single small volume—A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_1—lightly illustrated, containing the confirmed results of criticism and inquiry on the Phoenicians as of his time. Forty-four years have passed since then; during that time, significant progress has been made in some areas of research, while others have remained largely unchanged. Travelers like Robinson, Walpole, Tristram, Renan, and Lortet have shed much light on the geography, geology, fauna, and flora of the region. Excavators like Renan and the two Di Cesnolas have unearthed valuable remnants related to the architecture, art, industrial activities, and the customs and practices of the people. Antiquarians like M. Clermont-Ganneau and MM. Perrot and Chipiez have thoroughly examined and critiqued the remains, definitively establishing the characteristics of Phoenician Art and its place in the history of artistic achievement. Research continues in both Phoenicia Proper and the Phoenician dependency of Cyprus, likely expanding our knowledge regarding Phoenician Art and Archaeology; however, it is unlikely that these efforts will significantly alter the conclusions already reached by qualified experts on those topics. Thus, the author felt it was time, after nearly fifty years of silence, to rewrite the history of the people. This subject had occupied his mind for a long time, closely linked as it is to the histories of Egypt and the “Great Oriental Monarchies,” which have been his specific focus of study for thirty years; creating a work that encapsulates the main findings of recent investigations seemed an appropriate conclusion to his historical endeavors, naturally brought to a close by his resignation from the Professorship of Ancient History at Oxford and his transition to a new area of work.

The author wishes to express his vast obligations to MM. Perrot and Chipiez for the invaluable assistance which he has derived from their great work,03 and to their publishers, the MM. Hachette, for their liberality in allowing him the use of so large a number of MM. Perrot and Chipiez’ Illustrations. He is also much beholden to the same gentlemen for the use of charts and drawings originally published in the “Géographie Universelle.” Other works from which he has drawn either materials or illustrations, or both, are (besides Movers’ and Kenrick’s) M. Ernest Renan’s “Mission de Phénicie,” General Di Cesnola’s “Cyprus,” A. Di Cesnola’s “Salaminia,” M. Ceccaldi’s “Monuments Antiques de Cypre,” M. Daux’s “Recherches sur les Emporia Phéniciens,” the “Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum,” M. Clermont-Ganneau’s “Imagerie Phénicienne,” Mr. Davis’s “Carthage and her Remains,” Gesenius’s “Scripturæ Linguæque Phoeniciæ Monumenta,” Lortet’s “La Syrie d’aujourd’hui,” Serra di Falco’s “Antichità della Sicilia,” Walpole’s “Ansayrii,” and Canon Tristram’s “Land of Israel.” The difficulty has been to select from these copious stores the most salient and noteworthy facts, and to marshal them in such a form as would make them readily intelligible to the ordinary English reader. How far he has succeeded in doing this he must leave the public to judge. In making his bow to them as a “Reader” and Writer “of Histories,"04 he has to thank them for a degree of favour which has given a ready sale to all his previous works, and has carried some of them through several editions.

The author wants to express his deep gratitude to Perrot and Chipiez for the invaluable help he gained from their outstanding work, 03 and to their publishers, Hachette, for their generosity in allowing him to use so many illustrations by Perrot and Chipiez. He is also very thankful to these gentlemen for letting him use charts and drawings originally published in the “Géographie Universelle.” Other works he has referenced for materials or illustrations include (besides Movers and Kenrick) Ernest Renan’s “Mission de Phénicie,” General Di Cesnola’s “Cyprus,” A. Di Cesnola’s “Salaminia,” Ceccaldi’s “Monuments Antiques de Cypre,” Daux’s “Recherches sur les Emporia Phéniciens,” the “Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum,” Clermont-Ganneau’s “Imagerie Phénicienne,” Mr. Davis’s “Carthage and her Remains,” Gesenius’s “Scripturæ Linguæque Phoeniciæ Monumenta,” Lortet’s “La Syrie d’aujourd’hui,” Serra di Falco’s “Antichità della Sicilia,” Walpole’s “Ansayrii,” and Canon Tristram’s “Land of Israel.” The challenge has been to choose from these extensive resources the most important and noteworthy facts and to present them in a way that is easy for the average English reader to understand. How successful he has been in this task is something he will leave for the public to decide. In addressing them as a “Reader” and “Writer of Histories,” 04 he thanks them for their support, which has ensured a quick sale of all his previous works and has allowed some of them to go through several editions.

CANTERBURY: August 1889.

CANTERBURY: August 1889.





HISTORY OF PHOENICIA





CHAPTER I—THE LAND

     Phoenicia—Origin of the name—Spread of the name
     southwards—Real length of Phoenicia along the coast—
     Breadth and area—General character of the region—The
     Plains—Plain of Sharon—Plain of Acre—Plain of Tyre—Plain
     of Sidon—Plain of Berytus—Plain of Marathus—Hilly
     regions—Mountain ranges—Carmel—Casius—Bargylus—Lebanon—
     Beauty of Lebanon—Rivers—The Litany—The Nahr-el-Berid—
     The Kadisha—The Adonis—The Lycus—The Tamyras—The
     Bostrenus—The Zaherany—The Headlands—Main
     characteristics, inaccessibility, picturesqueness,
     productiveness.
     Phoenicia—Origin of the name—Spread of the name southwards—Actual length of Phoenicia along the coast—Width and area—General nature of the region—The Plains—Plain of Sharon—Plain of Acre—Plain of Tyre—Plain of Sidon—Plain of Berytus—Plain of Marathus—Hilly regions—Mountain ranges—Carmel—Casius—Bargylus—Lebanon—Beauty of Lebanon—Rivers—The Litany—The Nahr-el-Berid—The Kadisha—The Adonis—The Lycus—The Tamyras—The Bostrenus—The Zaherany—The Headlands—Main characteristics: difficulty of access, scenic beauty, productivity.

Phoenicé, or Phoenicia, was the name originally given by the Greeks—and afterwards adopted from them by the Romans—to the coast region of the Mediterranean, where it faces the west between the thirty-second and the thirty-sixth parallels. Here, it would seem, in their early voyagings, the Pre-Homeric Greeks first came upon a land where the palm-tree was not only indigenous, but formed a leading and striking characteristic, everywhere along the low sandy shore lifting its tuft of feathery leaves into the bright blue sky, high above the undergrowth of fig, and pomegranate, and alive. Hence they called the tract Phoenicia, or “the Land of Palms;” and the people who inhabited it the Phoenicians, or “the Palm-tree people.”

Phoenicé, or Phoenicia, was the name originally given by the Greeks—and later adopted by the Romans—for the coastal region of the Mediterranean, which lies between the thirty-second and thirty-sixth parallels to the west. It seems that during their early voyages, the Pre-Homeric Greeks first encountered a land where the palm tree not only grew naturally but also stood out as a notable feature, its feathery leaves rising high into the bright blue sky along the low sandy shore, above the undergrowth of fig and pomegranate. As a result, they named the area Phoenicia, meaning “the Land of Palms,” and referred to the inhabitants as the Phoenicians, or “the Palm-tree people.”

The term was from the first applied with a good deal of vagueness. It was probably originally given to the region opposite Cyprus, from Gabala in the north—now Jebili—to Antaradus (Tortosa) and Marathus (Amrith) towards the south, where the palm-tree was first seen growing in rich abundance. The palm is the numismatic emblem of Aradus,11 and though not now very frequent in the region which Strabo calls “the Aradian coast-tract,"12 must anciently have been among its chief ornaments. As the Grecian knowledge of the coast extended southward, and a richer and still richer growth of the palm was continually noticed, almost every town and every village being embosomed in a circle of palm groves, the name extended itself until it reached as far south at any rate as Gaza, or (according to some) as Rhinocolura and the Torrens Ægypti. Northward the name seems never to have passed beyond Cape Posideium (Possidi) at the foot of Mount Casius, the tract between this and the range of Taurus being always known as Syria, never as Phoenecia or Phoenicé.

The term was initially used quite vaguely. It was probably first applied to the area opposite Cyprus, stretching from Gabala in the north—now Jebili—to Antaradus (Tortosa) and Marathus (Amrith) in the south, where palm trees were first seen flourishing. The palm is the symbolic emblem of Aradus, and while it's not very common now in the region that Strabo refers to as “the Aradian coast-tract,” it must have been one of its main features in ancient times. As Greek knowledge of the coast extended southward, the presence of palm trees grew richer and richer, with almost every town and village surrounded by circles of palm groves. The name gradually spread southward, reaching at least as far as Gaza, or (according to some) Rhinocolura and the Torrens Ægypti. To the north, the name seems to have never gone beyond Cape Posideium (Possidi) at the base of Mount Casius, with the area between it and the Taurus mountain range always referred to as Syria, never as Phoenicia or Phoenicé.

The entire length of the coast between the limits of Cape Possidi and Rhinocolura is, without reckoning the lesser indentations, about 380 miles, or nearly the same as that of Portugal. The indentations of the coast-line are slight. From Rhinocolura to Mount Carmel, a distance of 150 miles, not a single strong promontory asserts itself, nor is there a single bay of sufficient depth to attract the attention of geographers. Carmel itself is a notable headland, and shelters a bay of some size; but these once passed the old uniformity returns, the line being again almost unbroken for a distance of seventy-five miles, from Haifa to Beyrout (Berytus). North of Beyrout we find a little more variety. The coast projects in a tolerably bold sweep between the thirty-fourth parallel and Tripolis (Tarabulus) and recedes almost correspondingly between Tripolis and Tortosa (Antaradus), so that a deepish bay is formed between Lat. 34º 27´ and Lat. 34º 45´, whence the line again runs northward unindented for fifty miles, to beyond Gabala (Jebili). After this, between Gabala and Cape Posideium there is considerable irregularity, the whole tract being mountainous, and spurs from Bargylus and Casius running down into the sea and forming a succession of headlands, of which Cape Posideium is the most remarkable.

The entire stretch of coast between Cape Possidi and Rhinocolura is about 380 miles long, not counting the smaller indentations, which is roughly the same as Portugal's coastline. The coastlines have minor indents. From Rhinocolura to Mount Carmel, a distance of 150 miles, there aren't any prominent cliffs or bays deep enough to catch geographers' attention. Mount Carmel itself is a significant headland, offering a sizable bay; however, beyond that, the coastline returns to a nearly unbroken line for seventy-five miles, stretching from Haifa to Beyrout (Berytus). North of Beyrout, there's a bit more variety. The coastline curves boldly between the thirty-fourth parallel and Tripolis (Tarabulus) and then recedes almost equally between Tripolis and Tortosa (Antaradus), creating a moderately deep bay between Lat. 34º 27' and Lat. 34º 45'. From there, the coast runs straight north for another fifty miles, past Gabala (Jebili). After that, between Gabala and Cape Posideium, things get quite irregular, as the entire area is mountainous, with spurs from Bargylus and Casius extending into the sea, forming a series of headlands, including the notable Cape Posideium.

But while the name Phoenicia is applied geographically to this long extent—nearly 400 miles—of coast-line, historically and ethnically it has to be reduced within considerably narrower limits. A race, quite distinct from that of the Phoenicians, was settled from an early date on the southern portion of the west Asian coast, where it verges towards Africa. From Jabneh (Yebna) southwards was Palestine, the country of the Philistines, perhaps even from Joppa (Jaffa), which is made the boundary by Mela.13 Thus at least eighty miles of coast-line must be deducted from the 380, and the length of Phoenicia along the Mediterranean shore must be regarded as not exceeding three hundred miles.

But while the name Phoenicia refers geographically to this long stretch—nearly 400 miles—of coastline, historically and ethnically it needs to be narrowed down significantly. A group, quite different from the Phoenicians, settled early on in the southern part of the West Asian coast, where it borders Africa. From Jabneh (Yebna) southward was Palestine, the land of the Philistines, possibly even starting from Joppa (Jaffa), which Mela designates as the boundary. Thus, at least eighty miles of coastline must be subtracted from the 380, and the length of Phoenicia along the Mediterranean should be considered as no more than three hundred miles.

The width varied from eight or ten miles to thirty. We must regard as the eastern boundary of Phoenicia the high ridge which forms the watershed between the streams that flow eastward toward the Orontes, Litany, and Jordan, and those that flow westward into the Mediterranean. It is difficult to say what was the average width, but perhaps it may be fairly estimated at about fifteen miles. In this case the entire area would have been about 4,500 square miles.

The width ranged from eight or ten miles to thirty. We should consider the high ridge that creates the watershed between the rivers flowing east toward the Orontes, Litany, and Jordan, and those flowing west into the Mediterranean as the eastern boundary of Phoenicia. It's hard to determine the average width, but it can probably be estimated at around fifteen miles. This would mean the total area was about 4,500 square miles.

The tract was one of a remarkably diversified character. Lofty mountain, steep wooded hill, chalky slope, rich alluvial plain, and sandy shore succeeded each other, each having its own charm, which was enhanced by contrast. The sand is confined to a comparatively narrow strip along the seashore,14 and to the sites of ancient harbours now filled up. It is exceedingly fine and of excellent silicious quality, especially in the vicinity of Sidon and at the foot of Mount Carmel. The most remarkable plains are those of Sharon, Acre, Tyre, Sidon, Beyrout, and Marathus. Sharon, so dear to the Hebrew poets,15 is the maritime tract intervening between the highland of Samaria and the Mediterranean, extending from Joppa to the southern foot of Carmel—a distance of nearly sixty miles—and watered by the Chorseas, the Kaneh, and other rivers. It is a smooth, very slightly undulating tract, about ten miles in width from the sea to the foot of the mountains, which rise up abruptly from it without any intervening region of hills, and seem to bound it as a wall, above which tower the huge rounded masses of Ebal and Gerizim, with the wooded cone, on which stood Samaria, nestling at their feet.16 The sluggish streams, several of them containing water during the whole of the year, make their way across it between reedy banks,17 and generally spread out before reaching the shore into wide marshes, which might be easily utilised for purposes of irrigation. The soil is extremely rich, varying from bright red to deep black, and producing enormous crops of weeds or grain, according as it is cultivated or left in a state of nature. Towards the south the view over the region has been thus described: “From Ramleh there is a wide view on every side, presenting a prospect rarely surpassed in richness and beauty. I could liken it to nothing but the great plain of the Rhine by Heidelberg or, better still, to the vast plains of Lombardy, as seen from the cathedral of Milan and elsewhere. In the east the frowning mountains of Judah rose abruptly from the tract at their foot; while on the west, in fine contrast, the glittering waves of the Mediterranean Sea associated our thoughts with Europe. Towards the north and south, as far as the eye could reach, the beautiful plain was spread out like a carpet at our feet, variegated with tracts of brown from which the crops had just been taken, and with fields still rich with the yellow of the ripe corn, or green with the springing millet. Immediately below us the eye rested on the immense olive groves of Ramleh and Lydda, and the picturesque towers and minarets and domes of these large villages. In the plain itself were not many villages, but the tract of hills and the mountain-side beyond, especially in the north-east, were perfectly studded with them, and as now seen in the reflected beams of the setting sun they seemed like white villas and hamlets among the dark hills, presenting an appearance of thriftiness and beauty which certainly would not stand a closer examination."18 Towards its northern end Sharon is narrowed by the low hills which gather round the western flanks of Carmel, and gradually encroach upon the plain until it terminates against the shoulder of the mountain itself, leaving only a narrow beach at the foot of the promontory by which it is possible to communicate with the next plain towards the north.19

The area was incredibly diverse. Tall mountains, steep wooded hills, chalky slopes, rich alluvial plains, and sandy shores all succeeded one another, each having its own charm enhanced by contrast. The sand is limited to a relatively narrow strip along the seashore, 14 and to the sites of ancient harbors now filled in. It's very fine and of excellent siliceous quality, especially near Sidon and at the foot of Mount Carmel. The most notable plains include those of Sharon, Acre, Tyre, Sidon, Beyrout, and Marathus. Sharon, beloved by Hebrew poets, 15 is the coastal area between the highlands of Samaria and the Mediterranean, stretching from Joppa to the southern base of Carmel—a distance of nearly sixty miles—and watered by the Chorseas, the Kaneh, and other rivers. It’s a smooth, gently undulating area about ten miles wide from the sea to the mountain’s foot, which rises abruptly without any intervening hills, appearing to form a wall, with the massive rounded shapes of Ebal and Gerizim towering above, alongside the wooded cone where Samaria once stood nestled at their base. 16 The slow-moving streams, some of which contain water year-round, wind through it between reedy banks, 17 and generally spread out into wide marshes before reaching the shore, which could be easily used for irrigation. The soil is incredibly rich, ranging from bright red to deep black, producing huge crops of weeds or grain depending on whether it is cultivated or left natural. Towards the south, the view over the region has been described as: “From Ramleh, there’s a wide view on every side, displaying a scene rarely surpassed in richness and beauty. I could only compare it to the great plain of the Rhine near Heidelberg or, even better, the vast plains of Lombardy, as seen from the cathedral in Milan and elsewhere. To the east, the imposing mountains of Judah rise steeply from the land at their base; while to the west, in striking contrast, the sparkling waves of the Mediterranean Sea connect our thoughts to Europe. To the north and south, as far as the eye can see, the beautiful plain spreads out like a carpet at our feet, patterned with patches of brown where the crops have just been harvested, and fields still vibrant with the yellow of ripe corn, or green with sprouting millet. Directly below us, our gaze settled on the vast olive groves of Ramleh and Lydda, along with the picturesque towers, minarets, and domes of these large villages. There weren’t many villages in the plain itself, but the area of hills and mountains beyond, especially to the northeast, was dotted with them; seen now in the reflected light of the setting sun, they appeared as white villas and hamlets among the dark hills, presenting an impression of beauty and neatness that definitely wouldn’t hold up under close inspection.” 18 Towards its northern end, Sharon narrows due to the low hills that gather around the western slopes of Carmel, gradually encroaching upon the plain until it meets the mountain’s shoulder itself, leaving only a narrow beach at the base of the promontory that allows communication with the next plain to the north. 19

Compared with Sharon the plain of Acre is unimportant and of small extent. It reaches about eight miles along the shore, from the foot of Carmel to the headland on which the town of Acre stands, and has a width between the shore and the hills of about six miles. Like Sharon it is noted for its fertility. Watered by the two permanent streams of the Kishon and the Belus, it possesses a rich soil, which is said to be at present “perhaps the best cultivated and producing the most luxuriant crops, both of corn and weeds, of any in Palestine."110 The Kishon waters it on the south, where it approaches Carmel, and is a broad stream,111 though easily fordable towards its mouth. The Belus (Namâané) flows through it towards the north, washing Acre itself, and is a stream of even greater volume than the Kishon, though it has but a short course.

Compared to Sharon, the plain of Acre is relatively unimportant and small. It stretches about eight miles along the coast, from the base of Carmel to the headland where the town of Acre is located, and is about six miles wide between the coast and the hills. Like Sharon, it's known for its fertility. Fed by the two permanent rivers, the Kishon and the Belus, it has rich soil, which is currently considered “perhaps the best cultivated and producing the most lush crops, both of grain and weeds, of any in Palestine."110 The Kishon flows along the southern edge, near Carmel, and is a wide river,111 though it's easy to cross close to its mouth. The Belus (Namâané) runs through the area towards the north, flowing past Acre itself, and is an even larger river than the Kishon, despite its shorter length.

The third of the Phoenician plains, as we proceed from south to north, is that of Tyre. This is a long but comparatively narrow strip, reaching from the Ras-el-Abiad towards the south to Sarepta on the north, a distance of about twenty miles, but in no part more than five miles across, and generally less than two miles. It is watered about midway by the copious stream of the Kasimiyeh or Litany, which, rising east of Lebanon in the Buka’a or Coelesyrian valley, forces its way through the mountain chain by a series of tremendous gorges, and debouches upon the Tyrian lowland about three miles to the south-east of the present city, near the modern Khan-el-Kasimiyeh, whence it flows peaceably to the sea with many windings through a broad low tract of meadow-land. Other rills and rivulets descending from the west flank of the great mountain increase the productiveness of the plain, while copious fountains of water gush forth with surprising force in places, more especially at Ras-el-Ain, three miles from Tyre, to the south.112 The plain is, even at the present day, to a large extent covered with orchards, gardens, and cultivated fields, in which are grown rich crops of tobacco, cotton, and cereals.

The third of the Phoenician plains, as we move from south to north, is the one around Tyre. This area is a long but relatively narrow strip that stretches from Ras-el-Abiad in the south to Sarepta in the north, covering about twenty miles, but it’s no more than five miles wide at any point and generally less than two miles. Midway, it's fed by the abundant Kasimiyeh or Litany river, which starts east of Lebanon in the Buka’a or Coelesyrian valley, carving its way through the mountains in dramatic gorges before pouring onto the Tyrian lowland about three miles southeast of the present city, near the modern Khan-el-Kasimiyeh. From there, it flows peacefully to the sea, winding through a wide low area of meadows. Additional streams and small rivers coming down from the western side of the mountains boost the fertility of the plain, while plentiful springs emerge forcefully in some spots, especially at Ras-el-Ain, three miles south of Tyre. The plain is still largely filled with orchards, gardens, and cultivated fields that yield abundant crops of tobacco, cotton, and grains.

The plain of Sidon, which follows that of Tyre, and is sometimes regarded as a part of it,113 extends from a little north of Sarepta to the Ras-el-Jajunieh, a distance of about ten miles, and resembles that of Tyre in its principal features. It is long and narrow, never more than about two miles in width, but well-watered and very fertile. The principal streams are the Bostrenus (Nahr-el-Auly) in the north, just inside the promontory of Jajunieh, the Nahr-Sanîk, south of Sidon, a torrent dry in the summer-time,114 and the Nahr-ez-Zaherany, two and a half miles north of Sarepta, a river of moderate capacity. Fine fountains also burst from the earth in the plain itself, as the Ain-el-Kanterah and the Ain-el-Burâk,115 between Sarepta and the Zaherany river. Irrigation is easy and is largely used, with the result that the fruits and vegetables of Saïda and its environs have the name of being among the finest of the country.116

The Plain of Sidon, which lies next to Tyre and is sometimes considered part of it,113 stretches from just north of Sarepta to Ras-el-Jajunieh, covering about ten miles, and shares key features with Tyre. It is long and narrow, never more than about two miles wide, but has plenty of water and is very fertile. The main streams include the Bostrenus (Nahr-el-Auly) in the north, just inside the Jajunieh promontory, the Nahr-Sanîk, located south of Sidon and dry during the summer,114 and the Nahr-ez-Zaherany, which is two and a half miles north of Sarepta and has a moderate flow. There are also beautiful springs that emerge from the ground in the plain, like Ain-el-Kanterah and Ain-el-Burâk,115 situated between Sarepta and the Zaherany river. Irrigation is easy and widely practiced, which means that the fruits and vegetables from Saïda and its surrounding areas are known to be some of the best in the region.116

The plain of Berytus (Beyrout) is the most contracted of all the Phoenician plains that are at all noticeable. It lies south, south-east, and east of the city, intervening between the high dunes or sand-hills which form the western portion of the Beyrout peninsula, and the skirts of Lebanon, which here approach very near to the sea. The plain begins at Wady Shuweifat on the south, about four miles from the town of Beyrout, and extends northwards to the sea on the western side of the Nahr Beyrout. The northern part of the plain is known as Ard-el-Burâjineh. The plain is deficient in water,117 yet is cultivated in olives and mulberries, and contains the largest olive grove in all Syria. A little beyond its western edge is the famous pine forest118 from which (according to some) Berytus derived its name.119

The Berytus plain (Beyrout) is the smallest of all the Phoenician plains that are worth mentioning. It stretches south, southeast, and east of the city, lying between the tall dunes or sand hills that make up the western part of the Beyrout peninsula and the foothills of Lebanon, which come very close to the sea here. The plain starts at Wady Shuweifat in the south, about four miles from Beyrout, and goes northward to the sea on the western side of the Nahr Beyrout. The northern section of the plain is called Ard-el-Burâjineh. The plain lacks water, yet it is farmed with olives and mulberries and hosts the largest olive grove in all of Syria. Just beyond its western edge is the famous pine forest from which Berytus supposedly got its name.

The plain of Marathus is, next to Sharon, the most extensive in Phoenicia. It stretches from Jebili (Gabala) on the north to Arka towards the south, a distance of about sixty miles, and has a width varying from two to ten miles. The rock crops out from it in places and it is broken between Tortosa and Hammam by a line of low hills running parallel with the shore.120 The principal streams which water it are the Nahr-el-Melk, or Badas, six miles south of Jebili, the Nahr Amrith, a strong running brook which empties itself into the sea a few miles south of Tortosa (Antaradus), the Nahr Kublé, which joins the Nahr Amrith near its mouth, and the Eleutherus or Nahr-el-Kabir, which reaches the sea a little north of Arka. Of these the Eleutherus is the most important. “It is a considerable stream even in summer, and in the rainy season it is a barrier to intercourse, caravans sometimes remaining encamped on its banks for several weeks, unable to cross."121 The soil of the plain is shallow, the rock lying always near the surface; the streams are allowed to run to waste and form marshes, which breed malaria; a scanty population scarcely attempts more than the rudest and most inefficient cultivation; and the consequence is that the tract at present is almost a desert. Nature, however, shows its capabilities by covering it in the spring-time from end to end with a “carpet of flowers."122

The plain of Marathus is, after Sharon, the largest in Phoenicia. It stretches from Jebili (Gabala) in the north to Arka in the south, a distance of about sixty miles, with a width ranging from two to ten miles. In some areas, rock surfaces are exposed, and it's interrupted between Tortosa and Hammam by a series of low hills that run parallel to the shore.120 The main streams that flow through it are the Nahr-el-Melk, or Badas, six miles south of Jebili, the Nahr Amrith, a strong brook that empties into the sea a few miles south of Tortosa (Antaradus), the Nahr Kublé, which meets the Nahr Amrith near its mouth, and the Eleutherus or Nahr-el-Kabir, which reaches the sea just north of Arka. Of these, the Eleutherus is the most significant. “It's a substantial stream even in summer, and during the rainy season, it makes crossing impossible, with caravans sometimes stuck on its banks for several weeks, unable to get across."121 The soil of the plain is shallow, with rock always close to the surface; the streams are left to run waste, creating marshes that lead to malaria; a sparse population barely engages in more than the most basic and ineffective farming; as a result, the area is almost a desert now. However, nature reveals its potential by transforming it in the spring into a “carpet of flowers."122

From the edges of the plains, and sometimes from the very shore of the sea, rise up chalky slopes or steep rounded hills, partly left to nature and covered with trees and shrubs, partly at the present day cultivated and studded with villages. The hilly region forms generally an intermediate tract between the high mountains and the plains already described; but, not unfrequently, it commences at the water’s edge, and fills with its undulations the entire space, leaving not even a strip of lowland. This is especially the case in the central region between Berytus and Arka, opposite the highest portion of the Lebanon; and again in the north between Cape Possidi and Jebili, opposite the more northern part of Bargylus. The hilly region in these places is a broad tract of alternate wooded heights and deep romantic valleys, with streams murmuring amid their shades. Sometimes the hills are cultivated in terraces, on which grow vines and olives, but more often they remain in their pristine condition, clothed with masses of tangled underwood.

From the edges of the plains, and sometimes right by the sea, rise chalky slopes or steep rounded hills, some left to nature and covered in trees and shrubs, while others are currently cultivated and dotted with villages. This hilly area generally acts as a transition between the high mountains and the plains described earlier; however, often it starts at the water’s edge and fills the entire space with its rolling hills, leaving not even a strip of lowland. This is especially true in the central area between Berytus and Arka, opposite the highest part of the Lebanon; and again in the north between Cape Possidi and Jebili, facing the more northern section of Bargylus. The hilly region here is a wide expanse of alternating wooded heights and deep, picturesque valleys, with streams flowing quietly among the trees. Sometimes the hills are cultivated in terraces, growing vines and olives, but more often they remain in their natural state, covered in dense underbrush.

The mountain ranges, which belong in some measure to the geography of Phoenicia, are four in number—Carmel, Casius, Bargylus, and Lebanon. Carmel is a long hog-backed ridge, running in almost a straight line from north-west to south-east, from the promontory which forms the western protection of the bay of Acre to El-Ledjun, on the southern verge of the great plain of Esdraelon, a distance of about twenty-two miles. It is a limestone formation, and rises up abruptly from the side of the bay of Acre, with flanks so steep and rugged that the traveller must dismount in order to ascend them,123 but slopes more gently towards the south, where it is comparatively easy of access. The greatest elevation which it attains is about Lat. 32º 4´, where it reaches the height of rather more than 1,200 feet; from this it falls gradually as it nears the shore, until at the convent, with which the western extremity is crowned, the height above the sea is no more than 582 feet. In ancient times the whole mountain was thickly wooded,124 but at present, though it contains “rocky dells” where there are “thick jungles of copse,"125 and is covered in places with olive groves and thickets of dwarf oak, yet its appearance is rather that of a park than of a forest, long stretches of grass alternating with patches of woodland and “shrubberies, thicker than any in Central Palestine,” while the larger trees grow in clumps or singly, and there is nowhere, as in Lebanon, any dense growth, or even any considerable grove, of forest trees. But the beauty of the tract is conspicuous; and if Carmel means, as some interpret, a “garden” rather than a “forest,” it may be held to well justify its appellation. “The whole mountain-side,” says one traveller,126 “was dressed with blossoms and flowering shrubs and fragrant herbs.” “There is not a flower,” says another,127 “that I have seen in Galilee, or on the plains along the coast, that I do not find on Carmel, still the fragrant, lovely mountain that he was of old.”

The mountain ranges that are part of the geography of Phoenicia number four: Carmel, Casius, Bargylus, and Lebanon. Carmel is a long, ridged mountain that runs almost straight from northwest to southeast, stretching from the promontory that protects the bay of Acre to El-Ledjun, on the southern edge of the great plain of Esdraelon, covering about twenty-two miles. It is made of limestone and rises sharply from the side of the bay of Acre, with such steep and rugged sides that travelers need to dismount to climb them, but it slopes more gently to the south, making it relatively easy to access. The highest point reaches about 32º 4' latitude, climbing to just over 1,200 feet; it gradually descends towards the shore, so that at the convent at its western tip, the altitude is only 582 feet above sea level. In ancient times, the entire mountain was heavily forested, but today, while it has “rocky dells” with “thick jungles of copse,” and in places is covered with olive groves and dwarf oak thickets, it resembles more of a park than a forest, with long stretches of grass alternating with patches of woodlands and “shrubberies thicker than any found in Central Palestine,” while the larger trees grow in groups or alone, and there are no dense forests or significant groves like in Lebanon. Yet, the beauty of the area is striking; and if Carmel indeed means, as some suggest, a “garden” rather than a “forest,” it truly lives up to its name. “The whole mountain-side,” says one traveler, “was adorned with blossoms and flowering shrubs and fragrant herbs.” “There isn’t a flower,” says another, “that I’ve seen in Galilee, or on the coastal plains, that I don’t find on Carmel, still the fragrant, beautiful mountain it once was.”

The geological structure of Carmel is, in the main, what is called “the Jura formation,” or “the upper oolite”—a soft white limestone, with nodules and veins of flint. At the western extremity, where it overhangs the Mediterranean, are found chalk, and tertiary breccia formed of fragments of chalk and flint. On the north-east of the mountain, beyond the Nahr-el-Mukattah, plutonic rocks appear, breaking through the deposit strata, and forming the beginning of the basalt formation which runs through the plain of Esdraelon to Tabor and the Sea of Galilee.128 Like most limestone formations, Carmel abounds in caves, which are said to be more than 2,000 in number,129 and are often of great length and extremely tortuous.

The geological structure of Carmel is mainly what we call “the Jura formation” or “the upper oolite”—a soft white limestone, with nodules and veins of flint. At the western edge, where it overlooks the Mediterranean, there are chalk and tertiary breccia made up of fragments of chalk and flint. To the northeast of the mountain, beyond the Nahr-el-Mukattah, plutonic rocks appear, breaking through the layer deposits and forming the start of the basalt formation that extends through the plain of Esdraelon to Tabor and the Sea of Galilee.128 Like most limestone formations, Carmel is full of caves, which are said to number over 2,000,129 and are often very long and extremely winding.

Carmel, the great southern headland of Phoenicia, is balanced in a certain sense by the extreme northern headland of Casius. Mount Casius is, strictly speaking, the termination of a spur from Bargylus; but it has so marked and peculiar a character that it seems entitled to separate description. Rising up abruptly from the Mediterranean to the height of 5,318 feet, it dominates the entire region in its vicinity, and from the sea forms a landmark that is extraordinarily conspicuous. Forests of fine trees clothe its flanks, but the lofty summit towers high above them, a bare mass of rock, known at the present day as Jebel-el-Akra, or “the Bald Mountain.” It is formed mainly of the same cretaceous limestone as the other mountains of these parts, and like them has a rounded summit; but rocks of igneous origin enter into its geological structure; and in its vegetation it more resembles the mountain ranges of Taurus and Amanus than those of southern Syria and Palestine. On its north-eastern prolongation, which is washed by the Orontes, lay the enchanting pleasure-ground of Daphné, bubbling with fountains, and bright with flowering shrubs, where from a remote antiquity the Syrians held frequent festival to their favourite deity—the “Dea Syra”—the great nature goddess.

Carmel, the prominent southern headland of Phoenicia, is balanced by the extreme northern headland of Casius. Mount Casius is technically the end of a spur from Bargylus, but it has such a distinct and unique character that it deserves its own description. Rising abruptly from the Mediterranean to a height of 5,318 feet, it dominates the entire surrounding area and serves as a remarkably visible landmark from the sea. Its slopes are covered with beautiful forests, yet the high summit stands bare, known today as Jebel-el-Akra, or “the Bald Mountain.” It is primarily made up of the same cretaceous limestone found in the other mountains in the region, and like them, it has a rounded peak; however, its geological structure includes igneous rocks, and its vegetation is more similar to the mountain ranges of Taurus and Amanus than those of southern Syria and Palestine. On its northeastern extension, which is bordered by the Orontes River, lies the beautiful leisure area of Daphné, featuring bubbling fountains and vibrant flowering shrubs, where the Syrians have celebrated their favorite goddess, the “Dea Syra,” the great nature goddess, in festivals since ancient times.

The elevated tract known to the ancients as Bargylus, and to modern geographers as the Ansayrieh or Nasariyeh mountain-region, runs at right angles to the spur terminating in the Mount Casius, and extends from the Orontes near Antioch to the valley of the Eleutherus. This is a distance of not less than a hundred miles. The range forms the western boundary of the lower Coelesyrian valley, which abuts upon it towards the east, while westward it looks down upon the region, partly hill, partly lowland, which may be regarded as constituting “Northern Phoenicia.” The axis of the range is almost due north and south, but with a slight deflection towards the south-east. Bargylus is not a chain comparable to Lebanon, but still it is a romantic and picturesque region. The lower spurs towards the west are clothed with olive grounds and vineyards, or covered with myrtles and rhododendrons; between them are broad open valleys, productive of tobacco and corn. Higher up “the scenery becomes wild and bold; hill rises to mountain; soft springing green corn gives place to sterner crag, smooth plain to precipitous heights;"130 and if in the more elevated region the majesty of the cedar is wanting, yet forests of fir and pine abound, and creep up the mountain-side, in places almost to the summit, while here and there bare masses of rock protrude themselves, and crag and cliff rise into the clouds that hang about the highest summits. Water abounds throughout the region, which is the parent of numerous streams, as the northern Nahr-el-Kebir, which flows into the sea by Latakia, the Nahr-el-Melk, the Nahr Amrith, the Nahr Kublé, the Nahr-el-Abrath, and many others. From the conformation of the land they have of necessity short courses; but each and all of them spread along their banks a rich verdure and an uncommon fertility.

The high area known to the ancients as Bargylus, and to modern geographers as the Ansayrieh or Nasariyeh mountain region, runs perpendicular to the spur that ends in Mount Casius and stretches from the Orontes near Antioch to the Eleutherus valley. This distance is no less than a hundred miles. The range forms the western boundary of the lower Coelesyrian valley, which borders it to the east, while to the west it overlooks the region, which is partly hilly and partly lowland, and can be considered “Northern Phoenicia.” The axis of the range runs almost directly north and south, with a slight curve toward the southeast. Bargylus is not a mountain range like Lebanon, but it is still a romantic and picturesque area. The lower slopes to the west are covered with olive groves and vineyards, or adorned with myrtles and rhododendrons; between them are broad open valleys that produce tobacco and corn. Higher up, “the scenery becomes wild and bold; hill rises to mountain; soft springing green corn gives way to harsh crags, smooth plains to steep heights;"130 and although the majestic cedar is absent in the higher regions, forests of fir and pine thrive and climb nearly to the summit, while bare rock outcrops here and there, and crags and cliffs soar into the clouds that linger around the highest peaks. Water is abundant throughout the region, giving rise to numerous streams, such as the northern Nahr-el-Kebir, which flows into the sea near Latakia, the Nahr-el-Melk, the Nahr Amrith, the Nahr Kublé, the Nahr-el-Abrath, and many others. Due to the land's configuration, these streams have relatively short courses, but they all provide lush greenery and remarkable fertility along their banks.

But the great range of Phoenicia, its glory and its boast is Lebanon. Lebanon, the “White Mountain"131—“the Mont Blanc of Palestine"132—now known as “the Old White-headed Man” (Jebel-esh-Sheikh), or “the Mountain of Ice” (Jebel-el-Tilj), was to Phoenicia at once its protection, the source of its greatness, and its crowning beauty. Extended in a continuous line for a distance of above a hundred miles, with an average elevation of from 6,000 to 8,000 feet, and steepest on its eastern side, it formed a wall against which the waves of eastern invasion naturally broke—a bulwark which seemed to say to them, “Thus far shall ye go, and no further.” The flood of conquest swept along its eastern flank, down the broad vale of the Buka’a, and then over the hills of Galilee; but its frowning precipices and its lofty crest deterred or baffled the invader, and the smiling region between its summit and the Mediterranean was, in the early times at any rate, but rarely traversed by a hostile army. This western region it was which held those inexhaustible stores of forest trees that supplied Phoenicia with her war ships and her immense commercial navy; here were the most productive valleys, the vineyards, and the olive grounds, and here too were the streams and rills, the dashing cascades, the lovely dells, and the deep gorges which gave her the palm over all the surrounding countries for variety of picturesque scenery.

But the great range of Phoenicia, its pride and its claim to fame, is Lebanon. Lebanon, the “White Mountain” 131—“the Mont Blanc of Palestine” 132—now known as “the Old White-headed Man” (Jebel-esh-Sheikh) or “the Mountain of Ice” (Jebel-el-Tilj), was, for Phoenicia, both its defense and the source of its greatness, as well as its crowning beauty. Stretching in a continuous line for over a hundred miles, with an average height between 6,000 and 8,000 feet, and steepest on its eastern side, it formed a wall against which the waves of eastern invasion naturally crashed—a bulwark that seemed to say to them, “Thus far shall you go, and no further.” The tide of conquest flowed along its eastern slope, down the broad valley of the Buka’a, and then over the hills of Galilee; yet its sheer cliffs and high peaks deterred or thwarted the invader, and the lush area between its summit and the Mediterranean was, at least in earlier times, rarely crossed by an enemy army. This western region held those endless resources of forest trees that provided Phoenicia with her warships and her vast commercial navy; here lay the most fertile valleys, the vineyards, and the olive groves, and here too were the streams and brooks, the rushing waterfalls, the beautiful valleys, and the deep gorges that gave her the edge over all the neighboring countries in terms of stunning scenery.

The geology of the Lebanon is exceedingly complicated. “While the bulk of the mountain, and all the higher ranges, are without exception limestone of the early cretaceous period, the valleys and gorges are filled with formations of every possible variety, sedimentary, metamorphic, and igneous. Down many of them run long streams of trap or basalt; occasionally there are dykes of porphyry and greenstone, and then patches of sandstone, before the limestone and flint recur."133 Some slopes are composed entirely of soft sandstone; many patches are of a hard metallic-sounding trap or porphyry; but the predominant formation is a greasy or powdery limestone, bare often, but sometimes clothed with a soft herbage, or with a thick tangle of shrubs, or with lofty forest trees. The ridge of the mountain is everywhere naked limestone rock, except in the comparatively few places which attain the highest elevation, where it is coated or streaked with snow. Two summits are especially remarkable, that of Jebel Sunnin towards the south, which is a conspicuous object from Beyrout,134 and is estimated to exceed the height of 9,000 feet,135 and that of Jebel Mukhmel towards the north, which has been carefully measured and found to fall a very little short of 10,200 feet.136 The latter, which forms a sort of amphitheatre, circles round and impends over a deep hollow or basin, opening out towards the west, in which rise the chief sources that go to form the romantic stream of the Kadisha. The sides of the basin are bare and rocky, fringed here and there with the rough knolls which mark the deposits of ancient glaciers, the “moraines” of the Lebanon. In this basin stand “the Cedars.” It is not indeed true, as was for a long time supposed, that the cedar grove of Jebel Mukhmel is the sole remnant of that primeval cedar-forest which was anciently the glory of the mountain. Cedars exist on Lebanon in six other places at least, if not in more. Near Tannurin, on one of the feeders of the Duweir, a wild gorge is clothed from top to bottom with a forest of trees, untouched by the axe, the haunt of the panther and the bear, which on examination have been found to be all cedars, some of a large size, from fifteen to eighteen feet in girth. They grow in clusters, or scattered singly, in every variety of situation, some clinging to the steep slopes, or gnarled and twisted on the bare hilltops, others sheltered in the recesses of the dell. There are also cedar-groves at B’sherrah; at El Hadith; near Dûma, five hours south-west of El Hadith; in one of the glens north of Deir-el-Kamar, at Etnub, and probably in other places.137 But still “the Cedars” of Jebel Mukhmel are entitled to pre-eminence over all the rest, both as out-numbering any other cluster, and still more as exceeding all the rest in size and apparent antiquity. Some of the patriarchs are of enormous girth; even the younger ones have a circumference of eighteen feet; and the height is such that the birds which dwell among the upper branches are beyond the range of an ordinary fowling-piece.

The geology of Lebanon is incredibly complex. “While most of the mountain and all the higher ranges are exclusively limestone from the early Cretaceous period, the valleys and gorges are filled with a variety of formations: sedimentary, metamorphic, and igneous. Long streams of trap or basalt run through many of them; occasionally, there are dykes of porphyry and greenstone, followed by patches of sandstone before the limestone and flint appear again."133 Some slopes are made entirely of soft sandstone; many patches consist of a hard metallic-sounding trap or porphyry; but the most common formation is a greasy or powdery limestone, which is often bare, but sometimes covered with soft grass, thick bushes, or tall forest trees. The mountain ridge is mostly bare limestone rock, except in the few places that reach the highest elevation, where it is coated or streaked with snow. Two summits are particularly notable: Jebel Sunnin to the south, a prominent sight from Beyrouth, 134 estimated to be over 9,000 feet tall, 135 and Jebel Mukhmel to the north, which has been precisely measured and stands just short of 10,200 feet. 136 Jebel Mukhmel forms a sort of amphitheater that encircles a deep hollow or basin, opening out to the west, where the main sources of the beautiful Kadisha stream originate. The basin's sides are bare and rocky, occasionally bordered by the rugged knolls marking ancient glacial deposits, the “moraines” of Lebanon. In this basin are “the Cedars.” It's not true, as was long thought, that the cedar grove at Jebel Mukhmel is the last remnant of the ancient cedar forest that once thrived on the mountain. Cedars exist in at least six other places on Lebanon, if not more. Near Tannurin, one of the tributaries of the Duweir, a wild gorge is covered from top to bottom with an untouched forest of trees, home to panthers and bears, which upon inspection have all been identified as cedars, some being quite large, measuring fifteen to eighteen feet in circumference. They grow in clusters or scattered individually, in a variety of locations: some cling to steep slopes or twist on bare hilltops, while others find shelter in the recesses of the dell. Cedar groves can also be found at B’sherrah, at El Hadith, near Dûma five hours southwest of El Hadith, in one of the glens north of Deir-el-Kamar, at Etnub, and probably in other spots.137 Still, “the Cedars” of Jebel Mukhmel are superior to all others, both in number and in size and apparent age. Some of the older ones are enormous; even the younger ones have a circumference of eighteen feet, and their height is such that birds living among the upper branches are out of reach of an ordinary shotgun.

But it is through the contrasts which it presents that Lebanon has its extraordinary power of attracting and delighting the traveller. Below the upper line of bare and worn rock, streaked in places with snow, and seamed with torrent courses, a region is entered upon where the freshest and softest mountain herbage, the greenest foliage, and the most brilliant flowers alternate with deep dells, tremendous gorges, rocky ravines, and precipices a thousand feet high. Scarcely has the voyager descended from the upper region of naked and rounded rock, when he comes upon “a tremendous chasm—the bare amphitheatre of the upper basin contracts into a valley of about 2,000 feet deep, rent at its bottom into a cleft a thousand feet deeper still, down which dashes a river, buried between these stupendous walls of rock. All above the chasm is terraced as far as the eye can reach with indefatigable industry. Tiny streamlets bound and leap from terrace to terrace, fertilising them as they rush to join the torrent in the abyss. Some of the waterfalls are of great height and of considerable volume. From one spot may be counted no less than seven of these cascades, now dashing in white spray over a cliff, now lost under the shade of trees, soon to reappear over the next shelving rock."138 Or, to quote from another writer,139—“The descent from the summit is gradual, but is everywhere broken by precipices and towering rocks, which time and the elements have chiselled into strange fantastic shapes. Ravines of singular wildness and grandeur furrow the whole mountain-side, looking in many places like huge rents. Here and there, too, bold promontories shoot out, and dip perpendicularly into the bosom of the Mediterranean. The ragged limestone banks are scantily clothed with the evergreen oak, and the sandstone with pines; while every available spot is carefully cultivated. The cultivation is wonderful, and shows what all Syria might be of under a good government. Miniature fields of grain are often seen where one would suppose that the eagles alone, which hover round them, could have planted the seed. Fig-trees cling to the naked rock; vines are trained along narrow ledges; long ranges of mulberries on terraces like steps of stairs cover the more gentle declivities; and dense groves of olives fill up the bottoms of the glens. Hundreds of villages are seen, here built amid labyrinths of rock, there clinging like swallows’ nests to the sides of cliffs, while convents, no less numerous, are perched on the top of every peak. When viewed from the sea on a morning in early spring, Lebanon presents a picture which once seen is never forgotten; but deeper still is the impression left on the mind, when one looks down over its terraced slopes clothed in their gorgeous foliage, and through the vistas of its magnificent glens, on the broad and bright Mediterranean.”

But it's through the contrasts it offers that Lebanon has this incredible ability to attract and enchant travelers. Below the bare and worn rock peaks, which are streaked with snow in places and carved by rushing torrents, lies a region filled with lush, soft mountain grass, vibrant greenery, and stunning flowers that alternate with deep valleys, massive gorges, rocky ravines, and cliffs rising a thousand feet high. Just as the traveler descends from the upper expanse of bare, rounded rock, they encounter “a massive chasm—the open amphitheater of the upper basin compresses into a valley about 2,000 feet deep, splitting at its bottom into a crevice another thousand feet deeper, down which a river rushes, hidden between these colossal rock walls. Above the chasm, the landscape is terraced as far as the eye can see thanks to tireless human effort. Tiny streams bounce and leap from terrace to terrace, nourishing them as they hurry to merge with the torrent below. Some of the waterfalls are impressively tall and quite voluminous. From one vantage point, you can count no fewer than seven of these cascades, now splashing in white mist over a cliff, now concealed beneath the shade of trees, soon to reveal themselves over the next sloping rock."138 Or, to quote another writer,139—“The descent from the peak is gradual, but everywhere interrupted by cliffs and towering rocks, which time and the elements have carved into bizarre, fantastic shapes. Ravines of striking wildness and grandeur scar the entire mountainside, looking in many spots like enormous tears. Here and there, bold promontories jut out, plunging straight down into the Mediterranean. The jagged limestone slopes are sparsely covered with evergreen oaks, and the sandstone areas have pines; while every available patch of land is meticulously cultivated. The agriculture is remarkable and showcases what all of Syria could be under good governance. Miniature grain fields often appear where one would think only eagles, which soar around them, could have sown the seeds. Fig trees cling to the bare rock; vines are trained along narrow ledges; extensive rows of mulberry trees on terraces resembling stair steps cover the gentler slopes; and dense olive groves fill the bottoms of the valleys. Hundreds of villages are visible, some nestled among the rocks, others clinging like swallows' nests to cliff faces, while numerous convents sit atop every peak. When viewed from the sea on a spring morning, Lebanon presents an unforgettable scene; but the impression deepens when one gazes down over its terraced hills adorned in vibrant foliage, and through the vistas of its magnificent valleys, toward the broad, shining Mediterranean.”

The eastern flank of the mountain falls very far short of the western both in area and in beauty. It is a comparatively narrow region, and presents none of the striking features of gorge, ravine, deep dell, and dashing stream which diversify the side that looks westward. The steep slopes are generally bare, the lower portion only being scantily clothed with deciduous oak, for the most part stunted, and with low scrub of juniper and barberry.140 Towards the north there is an outer barrier, parallel with the main chain, on which follows a tolerably flat and rather bare plain, well watered, and with soft turf in many parts, which gently slopes to the foot of the main ascent, a wall of rock generally half covered with snow, up which winds the rough track whereby travellers reach the summit. Rills of water are not wanting; flowers bloom to the very edge of the snow, and the walnut-tree flourishes in sheltered places to within two or three thousand feet of the summit; but the general character of the tract is bare and bleak; the villages are few; and the terraced cultivation, which adds so much to the beauty of the western side, is wanting. In the southern half of the range the descent is abrupt from the crest of the mountain into the Buka’a, or valley of the Litany, and the aspect of the mountain-side is one of “unrelieved bareness."141

The eastern side of the mountain pales in comparison to the western side in both size and beauty. It's a narrower area and lacks the dramatic features like gorges, ravines, deep valleys, and rushing streams that you find on the western side. The steep slopes are mostly bare, with only the lower parts covered sparsely by stunted deciduous oak and some low juniper and barberry shrubs.140 To the north, there's an outer barrier parallel to the main chain, followed by a relatively flat and rather empty plain that's well-watered and has soft grass in many areas. This plain gently slopes down to the base of the main climb, which is a wall of rock typically half-covered with snow, and the rough path that leads travelers to the peak winds up it. There are streams of water, flowers bloom right at the edge of the snow, and walnut trees thrive in sheltered spots up to two or three thousand feet from the top; however, the overall character of the area is stark and desolate. The villages are few, and the terraced farming that enhances the beauty of the western side is absent. In the southern part of the range, the descent is steep from the mountain's peak down to the Buka’a, or valley of the Litany, giving the mountain side an appearance of "unrelieved bareness."141

There is, however, one beauty at one point on this side of the Lebanon range which is absent from the more favoured western region. On the ascent from Baalbek to the Cedars the traveller comes upon Lake Lemone, a beautiful mountain tarn, without any apparent exit, the only sheet of water in the Lebanon. Lake Lemone is of a long oval shape, about two miles from one end to the other, and is fed by a stream entering at either extremity, that from the north, which comes down from the village of Ainât, being the more important. As the water which comes into the lake cannot be discharged by evaporation, we must suppose some underground outlet,142 by which it is conveyed, through the limestone, into the Litany.

There is, however, one beauty on this side of the Lebanon range that isn't found in the more favored western region. On the way from Baalbek to the Cedars, travelers come across Lake Lemone, a stunning mountain lake with no visible outlet—it's the only body of water in the Lebanon. Lake Lemone is long and oval, about two miles from one end to the other, and it's fed by a stream that enters at both ends, with the stream from the north, flowing down from the village of Ainât, being the more significant. Since the water entering the lake can't be released through evaporation, we must assume there's an underground outlet, 142 that carries it through the limestone into the Litany.

The eastern side of Lebanon drains entirely into this river, which is the only stream whereto it gives birth. The Litany is the principal of all the Phoenician rivers, for the Orontes must be counted not to Phoenicia but to Syria. It rises from a small pool or lake near Tel Hushben,143 about six miles to the south-west of the Baalbek ruins. Springing from this source, which belongs to Antilibanus rather than to Lebanon, the Litany shortly receives a large accession to its waters from the opposite side of the valley, and thus augmented flows along the lower Buka’a in a direction which is generally a little west of south, receiving on either side a number of streams and rills from both mountains, and giving out in its turn numerous canals for irrigation. As the river descends with numerous windings, but still with the same general course, the valley of the Buka’a contracts more and more, till finally it terminates in a gorge of a most extraordinary character. Nothing in the conformation of the strata, or in the lie of ground, indicates the coming marvel144—the roots of Lebanon and Hermon appear to intermix—and the further progress of the river seems to be barred by a rocky ridge stretching across the valley from east to west, when lo! suddenly, the ridge is cut, as if by a knife, and a deep and narrow chasm opens in it, down which the stream plunges in a cleft 200 feet deep, and so narrow that in one place it is actually bridged over by masses of rock which have fallen from the cliffs above.145 In the gully below fig-trees and planes, besides many shrubs, find a footing, and the moist walls of rock on either side are hung with ferns of various kinds, among which is conspicuous the delicate and graceful maidenhair. Further down the chasm deepens, first to 1,000 and then to 1,500 feet, “the torrent roars in the gorge, milk-white and swollen often with the melting snow, overhung with semi-tropical oleanders, fig-trees, and oriental planes, while the upper cliffs are clad with northern vegetation, two zones of climate thus being visible at once."146 Where the gorge is the deepest, opposite the Castle of Belfort (the modern Kulat-esh-Shukif), the river suddenly makes a turn at right angles, altering its course from nearly due south to nearly due west, and cuts through the remaining roots of Lebanon, still at the bottom of a tremendous fissure, and still raging and chafing for a distance of fifteen miles, until at length it debouches on the coast plain, and meanders slowly through meadows to the sea,147 which it enters about five miles to the north of Tyre. The course of the Litany may be roughly estimated at from seventy to seventy-five miles.

The eastern side of Lebanon drains entirely into this river, which is the only stream it produces. The Litany is the main river of all the Phoenician rivers, since the Orontes belongs to Syria, not Phoenicia. It begins from a small pool or lake near Tel Hushben, about six miles southwest of the Baalbek ruins. Starting from this source, which is part of Antilibanus rather than Lebanon, the Litany quickly gains a significant amount of water from the opposite side of the valley. It then flows through the lower Buka’a, generally heading slightly west of south, picking up a number of streams from both mountains and providing many canals for irrigation. As the river winds down, maintaining its overall direction, the Buka’a valley narrows until it ultimately ends in a truly remarkable gorge. Nothing in the arrangement of the layers of rock or the terrain suggests the upcoming wonder—where the roots of Lebanon and Hermon seem to intertwine—and the river's further journey appears blocked by a rocky ridge stretching across the valley from east to west. Suddenly, however, the ridge is sliced open as if by a knife, creating a deep and narrow chasm where the stream plunges into a crack 200 feet deep, so narrow in some places that it's actually spanned by rock masses that have fallen from the cliffs above. In the gorge below, fig trees and plane trees, along with many shrubs, take root, while the damp rock walls on either side are adorned with various ferns, including the delicate and graceful maidenhair. Further down, the chasm deepens to 1,000 feet and then to 1,500 feet. “The torrent roars in the gorge, milky white and often swollen with melting snow, surrounded by semi-tropical oleanders, fig trees, and oriental planes, while the upper cliffs are covered with northern vegetation, showing two climate zones at once." Where the gorge is deepest, across from the Castle of Belfort (modern Kulat-esh-Shukif), the river sharply turns at a right angle, changing its course from nearly due south to nearly due west, cutting through the remaining roots of Lebanon, still at the bottom of a massive fissure, and continues raging and churning for fifteen miles until it finally flows onto the coastal plain, moving slowly through meadows to the sea, which it reaches about five miles north of Tyre. The Litany's course is roughly estimated to be between seventy and seventy-five miles.

The other streams to which Lebanon gives birth flow either from its northern or its western flank. From the northern flank flows one stream only, the Nahr-el-Kebir or Eleutherus. The course of this stream is short, not much exceeding thirty miles. It rises from several sources at the edge of the Coelesyrian valley, and, receiving affluents from either side, flows westward between Bargylus and Lebanon to the Mediterranean, which it enters between Orthosia (Artousi) and Marathus (Amrith) with a stream, the volume of which is even in the summer-time considerable. In the rainy season it constitutes an important impediment to intercourse, since it frequently sweeps away any bridge which may be thrown across it, and is itself unfordable. Caravans sometimes remain encamped upon its banks for weeks, waiting until the swell has subsided and crossing is no longer dangerous.148

The other rivers that originate in Lebanon flow from either its northern or western side. From the northern side, there is only one river, the Nahr-el-Kebir or Eleutherus. Its course is short, just over thirty miles. It rises from several springs at the edge of the Coelesyrian valley and, receiving tributaries from both sides, flows westward between Bargylus and Lebanon to the Mediterranean, entering between Orthosia (Artousi) and Marathus (Amrith) with a flow that is significant even in the summer. During the rainy season, it creates a major barrier to travel, as it often washes away any bridge built over it and is impossible to cross. Caravans sometimes camp along its banks for weeks, waiting for the water level to drop so crossing becomes safe again.148

From the western flank of Lebanon flow above a hundred streams of various dimensions, whereof the most important are the Nahr-el-Berid or river of Orthosia, the Kadisha or river of Tripolis, the Ibrahim or Adonis, the Nahr-el-Kelb or Lycus, the Damour or Tamyras, the Auly (Aouleh) or Bostrenus, and the Zaherany, of which the ancient name is unknown to us. The Nahr-el-Berid drains the north-western angle of the mountain chain, and is formed of two main branches, one coming down from the higher portion of the range, about Lat. 34º 20´, and flowing to the north-west, while the other descends from a region of much less elevation, about Lat. 34º 30´, and runs a little south of west to the point of junction. The united stream then forces its way down a gorge in a north-west direction, and enters the sea at Artousi, probably the ancient Orthosia.149 The length of the river from its remotest fountain to its mouth is about twenty miles.

From the western side of Lebanon, more than a hundred streams of different sizes flow, with the most significant ones being the Nahr-el-Berid (river of Orthosia), the Kadisha (river of Tripolis), the Ibrahim (Adonis), the Nahr-el-Kelb (Lycus), the Damour (Tamyras), the Auly (Aouleh, or Bostrenus), and the Zaherany, whose ancient name we don’t know. The Nahr-el-Berid drains the northwestern part of the mountain range and has two main branches: one comes down from the higher part of the range at about Latitude 34º 20´ and flows northwest, while the other descends from a lower area at about Latitude 34º 30´ and runs slightly south of west to where they join. The combined stream then rushes down a gorge in a northwestern direction and enters the sea at Artousi, likely the ancient Orthosia. The river is about twenty miles long from its farthest source to its mouth.

The Kadisha or “Holy River” has its source in the deep basin already described, round which rise in a semicircle the loftiest peaks of the range, and on the edge of which stand “the Cedars.” Fed by the perpetual snows, it shortly becomes a considerable stream, and flows nearly due west down a beautiful valley, where the terraced slopes are covered with vineyards and mulberry groves, and every little dell, every nook and corner among the jagged rocks, every ledge and cranny on precipice-side, which the foot of man can reach, or on which a basket of earth can be deposited, is occupied with patch of corn or fruit-tree.150 Lower down near Canobin the valley contracts into a sublime chasm, its rocky walls rising perpendicularly a thousand feet on either side, and in places not leaving room for even a footpath beside the stream that flows along the bottom.151 The water of the Kadisha is “pure, fresh, cool, and limpid,"152 and makes a paradise along its entire course. Below Canobin the stream sweeps round in a semicircle towards the north, and still running in a picturesque glen, draws near to Tripolis, where it bends towards the north-west, and enters the sea after passing through the town. Its course, including main windings, measures about twenty-five miles.

The Kadisha, or “Holy River,” originates in the deep basin previously described, around which the tallest peaks of the range rise in a semicircle, with “the Cedars” standing on the edge. Sustained by perpetual snows, it quickly becomes a substantial stream that flows nearly westward down a beautiful valley, where terraced slopes are filled with vineyards and mulberry groves. Every little dell, nook, and cranny among the jagged rocks, every ledge, and crevice on the side of the cliffs, where a person can reach or where soil can be placed, is taken up with a patch of corn or fruit trees.150 Further down near Canobin, the valley narrows into a magnificent chasm, with rocky walls rising vertically a thousand feet on either side, sometimes leaving no space for even a footpath alongside the stream flowing at the bottom.151 The water of the Kadisha is “pure, fresh, cool, and clear,”152 creating a paradise along its entire route. Below Canobin, the stream curves in a semicircle toward the north, continuing in a picturesque glen as it approaches Tripolis, where it shifts toward the northwest and flows into the sea after passing through the town. Its total length, including all major bends, is about twenty-five miles.

The Ibrahim, or Adonis, has its source near Afka (Apheca) in Lat. 34º 4´ nearly. It bursts from a cave at the foot of a tremendous cliff, and its foaming waters rush down into a wild chasm.153 Its flow is at first towards the north-west, but after receiving a small tributary from the north-east, it shapes its course nearly westward, and pursues this direction, with only slight bends to the north and south, for the distance of about fifteen miles to the sea. After heavy rain in Lebanon, its waters, which are generally clear and limpid, become tinged with the earth which the swollen torrent detaches from the mountain-side,154 and Adonis thus “runs purple to the sea”—not however once a year only, but many times. It enters the Mediterranean about four miles south of Byblus (Jebeil) and six north of Djouni.

The Ibrahim, or Adonis, starts near Afka (Apheca) at around Latitude 34º 4'. It rushes out from a cave at the base of a massive cliff, and its turbulent waters pour into a wild gorge.153 Initially, the river flows northwest, but after picking up a small tributary from the northeast, it heads almost directly west and continues in this direction, with only slight curves to the north and south, for about fifteen miles to the sea. After heavy rain in Lebanon, its waters, which are usually clear and clean, get stained with the soil that the swollen torrent washes away from the mountainside,154 and so Adonis “runs purple to the sea”—not just once a year, but many times. It empties into the Mediterranean about four miles south of Byblus (Jebeil) and six miles north of Djouni.

The Lycus or Nahr-el-Kelb (“Dog River”) flows from the northern and western flanks of Jebel Sunnin. It is formed by the confluence of three main streams. One of these rises near Afka, and runs to the south of west, past the castle and temples of Fakra, to its junction with the second stream, which is formed of several rivulets flowing from the northern flank of Sunnin. Near Bufkeiya the river constituted by the union of these two branches is joined by a third stream flowing from the western flank of Sunnin with a westerly course, and from this point the Lycus pursues its way in the same general direction down a magnificent gorge to the Mediterranean. Both banks are lofty, but especially that to the south, where one of Lebanon’s great roots strikes out far, and dips, a rocky precipice, into the bosom of the deep.155 Low in the depths of the gorge the mad torrent dashes over its rocky bed in sheets of foam, its banks fringed with oleander, which it bathes with its spray. Above rise jagged precipices of white limestone, crowned far overhead by many a convent and village.156 The course of the Nahr-el-Kelbis about equal to that of the Adonis.

The Lycus, or Nahr-el-Kelb (“Dog River”), flows down from the northern and western sides of Jebel Sunnin. It’s formed by the merging of three main streams. One of these starts near Afka and travels south-west, passing the castle and temples of Fakra, until it meets the second stream, which is made up of several small rivers coming from the northern side of Sunnin. Near Bufkeiya, the river created by these two branches is joined by a third stream coming from the western side of Sunnin, flowing west. From this point, the Lycus continues in that general direction through a stunning gorge down to the Mediterranean. Both banks rise high, especially the southern one, where one of Lebanon's prominent roots extends out and drops steeply into the depths below. In the depths of the gorge, the wild torrent rushes over its rocky bed in frothy sheets, with its banks lined with oleander, which it sprinkles with its spray. Above, jagged cliffs of white limestone tower, many of which are topped by various convents and villages. The length of the Nahr-el-Kelb is about the same as that of the Adonis.

The Damour or Tamyras drains the western flank of Lebanon to the south of Jebel Sunnin (about Lat. 33º 45´), the districts known as Menassif and Jourd Arkoub, about Barouk and Deir-el-Kamar. It collects the waters from an area of about 110 square miles, and carries them to the sea in a course which is a little north of west, reaching it half-way between Khan Khulda (Heldua) and Nebbi Younas. The scenery along its banks is tame compared with that of the more northern rivers.

The Damour or Tamyras river flows down the western side of Lebanon, just south of Jebel Sunnin (around Lat. 33º 45´), in the regions known as Menassif and Jourd Arkoub, near Barouk and Deir-el-Kamar. It gathers water from an area of about 110 square miles and takes it to the sea in a direction slightly north of west, reaching the coast halfway between Khan Khulda (Heldua) and Nebbi Younas. The landscape along its banks is quite mild compared to the more dramatic scenery of the northern rivers.

The Nahr-el-Auly or Bostrenus rises from a source to the north-east of Barouk, and flows in a nearly straight course to the south-west for a distance of nearly thirty-five miles, when it is joined by a stream from Jezzin, which flows into it from the south-east. On receiving this stream, the Auly turns almost at a right angle, and flows to the west down the fine alluvial track called Merj Bisry, passing from this point through comparatively low ground, and between swelling hills, until it reaches the sea two miles to the north of Sidon. Its entire course is not less than sixty miles.

The Nahr-el-Auly, or Bostrenus, starts from a source northeast of Barouk and flows almost straight to the southwest for about thirty-five miles. It’s joined by a stream from Jezzin, which comes in from the southeast. After taking in this stream, the Auly almost makes a right turn and flows west along the beautiful alluvial area known as Merj Bisry. From there, it travels through relatively low ground and between rolling hills until it reaches the sea, just two miles north of Sidon. Its total length is at least sixty miles.

The Zaherany repeats on a smaller scale the course of the Bostrenus. It rises near Jerjû’a from the western flank of Jebel Rihan, the southern extremity of the Lebanon range, and flows at first to the south-west. The source is “a fine large fountain bursting forth with violence, and with water enough for a mill race."157 From this the river flows in a deep valley, brawling and foaming along its course, through tracts of green grass shaded by black walnut-trees for a distance of about five miles, after which, just opposite Jerjû’a, it breaks through one of the spurs from Rihan by a magnificent chasm. The gorge is one “than which there are few deeper or more savage in Lebanon. The mountains on each side rise up almost precipitously to the height of two or three thousand feet above the stream, that on the northern bank being considerably the higher. The steep sides of the southern mountain are dotted with shrub, oak, and other dwarf trees."158 The river descends in its chasm still in a south-west direction until, just opposite Arab Salim, it “turns round the precipitous corner or bastion of the southern Rihan into a straight valley,” and proceeds to run due south for a short distance. Meeting, however, a slight swell of ground, which blocks what would seem to have been its natural course, the river “suddenly turns west,” and breaking through a low ridge by a narrow ravine, pursues its way by a course a little north of west to the Mediterranean, which it enters about midway between Sidon and Sarepta.159 The length of the stream, including main windings, is probably not more than thirty-five miles.

The Zaherany is a smaller version of the Bostrenus. It rises near Jerjû’a from the western side of Jebel Rihan, at the southern end of the Lebanon mountain range, and initially flows southwest. The source is “a large, impressive fountain bursting forth violently, with enough water for a mill race."157 From there, the river winds through a deep valley, bubbling and foaming as it moves for about five miles, through lush green grass shaded by black walnut trees. Just across from Jerjû’a, it carves through one of Rihan's spurs in a stunning chasm. The gorge is “deeper and more rugged than most in Lebanon.” The mountains on either side rise almost straight up to heights of two or three thousand feet above the water, with the northern bank being significantly higher. The steep slopes of the southern mountain are dotted with shrubs, oaks, and other small trees."158 The river continues to descend in its chasm southwest until, right across from Arab Salim, it “makes a sharp turn around the steep corner or bastion of southern Rihan into a straight valley,” and then flows directly south for a short distance. However, when it encounters a slight rise in the ground that interrupts its natural path, the river “suddenly turns west,” breaking through a low ridge in a narrow ravine and continuing on a path slightly north of west toward the Mediterranean, which it reaches about halfway between Sidon and Sarepta.159 The total length of the stream, including its main bends, is likely not more than thirty-five miles.

We have spoken of the numerous promontories, terminations of spurs from the mountains, which break the low coast-line into fragments, and go down precipitously into the sea. Of these there are two between Tyre and Acre, one known as the Ras-el-Abiad or “White Headland,” and the other as the Ras-en-Nakura. The former is a cliff of snow-white chalk interspersed with black flints, and rises perpendicularly from the sea to the height of three hundred feet.160 The road, which in some places impends over the water, has been cut with great labour through the rock, and is said by tradition to have been the work of Alexander the Great. Previously, both here and at the Ras-en-Nakura, the ascent was by steps, and the passes were known as the Climaces Tyriorum, or “Staircases of the Tyrians.” Another similar precipice guards the mouth of the Lycus on its south side and has been engineered with considerable skill, first by the Egyptians and then by the Romans.161 North of this, at Djouni, the coast road “traverses another pass, where the mountain, descending to the water, has been cut to admit it."162 Still further north, between Byblus and Tripolis, the bold promontory known to the ancients as Theu-prosopon, and now called the Ras-esh-Shakkah, is still unconquered, and the road has to quit the shore and make its way over the spur by a “wearisome ascent"163 at some distance inland. Again, “beyond the Tamyras the hills press closely on the sea,"164 and there is “a rocky and difficult pass, along which the path is cut for some distance in the rock."165

We have talked about the many promontories, which are the ends of mountain spurs, breaking the low coastline into pieces and dropping steeply into the sea. There are two of these between Tyre and Acre: one called Ras-el-Abiad or “White Headland,” and the other Ras-en-Nakura. The former is a snow-white chalk cliff mixed with black flints, rising straight up from the sea to a height of three hundred feet.160 The road, which in some areas hangs over the water, was cut through the rock with great effort and is said by tradition to have been created by Alexander the Great. Previously, both here and at Ras-en-Nakura, the ascent was via steps, known as the Climaces Tyriorum, or “Staircases of the Tyrians.” Another similar cliff protects the south side of the Lycus's mouth and was built with considerable skill, first by the Egyptians and then by the Romans.161 North of this, at Djouni, the coastal road “crosses another pass, where the mountain slopes down to the water, which has been cut to allow it."162 Further north, between Byblus and Tripolis, the striking promontory known to the ancients as Theu-prosopon, now called Ras-esh-Shakkah, remains unconquered, and the road has to leave the shore and navigate over the spur by a “tiring ascent"163 some distance inland. Again, “beyond the Tamyras, the hills closely press against the sea,"164 featuring “a rocky and challenging pass, where the path is carved into the rock for some distance."165

The effect of this conformation of the country was, in early times, to render Phoenicia untraversable by a hostile army, and at the same time to interpose enormous difficulties in the way of land communication among the natives themselves, who must have soon turned their thoughts to the possibility of communicating by sea. The various “staircases” were painful and difficult to climb, they gave no passage to animals, and only light forms of merchandise could be conveyed by them. As soon as the first rude canoe put forth upon the placid waters of the Mediterranean, it must have become evident that the saving in time and labour would be great if the sea were made to supersede the land as the ordinary line of communication.

The layout of the country had the effect, in ancient times, of making Phoenicia nearly impossible for a hostile army to cross, while also creating huge obstacles for land communication among the local people, who must have quickly considered the possibility of communicating by sea. The various “staircases” were painful and tough to climb; they couldn’t accommodate animals, and only light goods could be transported over them. Once the first crude canoe set out on the calm waters of the Mediterranean, it would have become clear that using the sea instead of land for regular communication would save a lot of time and effort.

The main characteristics of the country were, besides its inaccessibility, its picturesqueness and its productiveness. The former of these two qualities seems to have possessed but little attraction for man in his primitive condition. Beauties of nature are rarely sung of by early poets; and it appears to require an educated eye to appreciate them. But productiveness is a quality the advantages of which can be perceived by all. The eyes which first looked down from the ridge of Bargylus or Lebanon upon the well-watered, well-wooded, and evidently fertile tract between the mountain summits and the sea, if they took no note of its marvellous and almost unequalled beauty, must at any rate have seen that here was one of earth’s most productive gardens—emphatically a “good land,” that might well content whosoever should be so fortunate as to possess it. There is nothing equal to it in Western Asia. The Damascene oasis, the lower valley of the Orontes, the Ghor or Jordan plain, the woods of Bashan, and the downs of Moab are fertile and attractive regions; but they are comparatively narrow tracts and present little variety; each is fitted mainly for one kind of growth, one class of products. Phoenicia, in its long extent from Mount Casius to Joppa, and in its combination of low alluvial plain, rich valley, sunny slopes and hills, virgin forests, and high mountain pasturage, has soils and situations suited for productions of all manner of kinds, and for every growth, from that of the lowliest herb to that of the most gigantic tree. In the next section an account of its probable products in ancient times will be given; for the present it is enough to note that Western Asia contained no region more favoured or more fitted by its general position, its formation, and the character of its soil, to become the home of an important nation.

The main features of the country were, in addition to its remoteness, its stunning scenery and its fertility. The former of these two qualities seems to have had little appeal for humans in their early days. Nature’s beauty is rarely celebrated by early poets, and it seems that an educated eye is needed to truly appreciate them. However, fertility is a quality that everyone can recognize the benefits of. The first people who looked down from the ridge of Bargylus or Lebanon at the well-watered, well-wooded, and clearly fertile land between the mountains and the sea, even if they didn’t notice its incredible and almost unmatched beauty, must have at least realized that they were gazing at one of the most productive gardens on Earth—definitely a “good land” that would satisfy anyone fortunate enough to own it. There’s nothing comparable in Western Asia. The oasis around Damascus, the lower valley of the Orontes, the Ghor or Jordan plain, the woods of Bashan, and the hills of Moab are fertile and appealing areas, but they are relatively small and lack variety; each is primarily suited for one type of growth, one category of products. Phoenicia, stretching from Mount Casius to Joppa, with its mix of low alluvial plains, rich valleys, sunny slopes and hills, untouched forests, and high mountain pastures, offers soils and locations suitable for all kinds of products, ranging from the smallest herb to the largest tree. In the next section, we’ll discuss its likely products in ancient times; for now, it’s enough to point out that Western Asia had no region more blessed or better suited by its general location, its structure, and the nature of its soil to become the home of an important civilization.





CHAPTER II—CLIMATE AND PRODUCTIONS

     Climate of Phoenicia—Varieties—Climate of the coast, in
     the south, in the north—Climate of the more elevated
     regions—Vegetable productions—Principal trees—Most
     remarkable shrubs and fruit-trees—Herbs, flowers, and
     garden vegetables—Zoology—Land animals—Birds—Marine and
     fresh-water fish—Principal shell-fish—Minerals.
     Climate of Phoenicia—Varieties—Climate of the coast, in the south, in the north—Climate of the higher regions—Plant life—Main trees—Notable shrubs and fruit trees—Herbs, flowers, and garden vegetables—Zoology—Land animals—Birds—Marine and freshwater fish—Main shellfish—Minerals.

The long extent of the Phoenician coast, and the great difference in the elevation of its various parts, give it a great diversity of climate. Northern Phoenicia is many degrees colder than southern; and the difference is still more considerable between the coast tracts and the more elevated portions of the mountain regions. The greatest heat is experienced in the plain of Sharon,21 which is at once the most southern portion of the country, and the part most remote from any hills of sufficient elevation to exert an important influence on the temperature. Neither Carmel on the north, nor the hills of Samaria on the east, produce any sensible effect on the climate of the Sharon lowland. The heat in summer is intense, and except along the river courses the tract is burnt up, and becomes little more than an expanse of sand. As a compensation, the cold in winter is very moderate. Snow scarcely ever falls, and if there is frost it is short-lived, and does not penetrate into the ground.22

The long stretch of the Phoenician coast, along with the significant differences in elevation across its various areas, creates a diverse climate. Northern Phoenicia is much colder than the south, and the contrast is even greater between the coastal areas and the higher mountain regions. The hottest temperatures are found in the plain of Sharon, which is both the southernmost part of the country and far from any hills tall enough to have a significant impact on the temperature. Neither Mount Carmel in the north nor the hills of Samaria in the east noticeably affect the climate of the Sharon lowland. Summer heat is intense, and except near riverbanks, the land dries up and turns into little more than a sandy expanse. Conversely, winter cold is quite mild. Snow almost never falls, and if there is frost, it doesn’t last long and doesn’t penetrate the ground.

Above Carmel the coast tract is decidedly less hot than the region south of it, and becomes cooler and cooler as we proceed northwards. Northern Phoenicia enjoys a climate that is delightful, and in which it would be difficult to suggest much improvement. The summer heat is scarcely ever too great, the thermometer rarely exceeding 90º of Fahrenheit,23 and often sinking below 70º. Refreshing showers of rain frequently fall, and the breezes from the north, the east, and the south-east, coming from high mountain tracts which are in part snow-clad, temper the heat of the sun’s rays and prevent it from being oppressive. The winter temperature seldom descends much below 50º; and thus the orange, the lemon and the date-palm flourish in the open air, and the gardens are bright with flowers even in December and January. Snow falls occasionally, but it rarely lies on the ground for more than a few days, and is scarcely ever so much as a foot deep. On the other hand, rain is expected during the winter-time, and the entire line of coast is visited for some months with severe storms and gales, accompanied often by thunder and violent rain,24 which strew the shore with wrecks and turn even insignificant mountain streams into raging torrents. The storms come chiefly from the west and north-west, quarters to which the harbours on the coast are unfortunately open.25 Navigation consequently suffers interruption; but when once the winter is past, a season of tranquillity sets in, and for many months of the year—at any rate from May to October26—the barometer scarcely varies, the sky is unclouded, and rain all but unknown.

Above Carmel, the coastal area is noticeably cooler than the region to the south, and it gets progressively cooler as we head north. Northern Phoenicia has a pleasant climate that would be hard to improve. The summer heat rarely gets too intense, with temperatures seldom exceeding 90°F and often dropping below 70°F. Refreshing rain showers happen frequently, and the breezes from the north, east, and southeast—coming from high, partly snow-capped mountains—ease the heat of the sun and keep it from becoming unbearable. In winter, temperatures hardly drop below 50°F, allowing oranges, lemons, and date palms to thrive outdoors, and gardens are vibrant with flowers even in December and January. Snow does fall occasionally, but it hardly stays on the ground for more than a few days and is rarely deeper than a foot. However, winter brings expected rainfall, and the entire coastline experiences several months of fierce storms and gales, often accompanied by thunder and heavy rain, which scatter wreckage along the shore and turn even small mountain streams into rushing torrents. The storms mainly come from the west and northwest, directions to which the coastal harbors are unfortunately exposed. Consequently, navigation is often disrupted; but once winter is over, a peaceful season begins, and for many months of the year—at least from May to October—the barometer remains steady, the sky is clear, and rain is almost nonexistent.

As the traveller mounts from the coast tract into the more elevated regions, the climate sensibly changes. An hour’s ride from the plains, when they are most sultry, will bring him into a comparatively cool region, where the dashing spray of the glacier streams is borne on the air, and from time to time a breeze that is actually cold comes down from the mountain-tops.27 Shade is abundant, for the rocks are often perpendicular, and overhand the road in places, while the dense foliage of cedars, or pines, or walnut-trees, forms an equally effectual screen against the sun’s noonday rays. In winter the uplands are, of course, cold. Severe weather prevails in them from November to March;28 snow falls on all the high ground, while it rains on the coast and in the lowlands; the passes are blocked; and Lebanon and Bargylus replenish the icy stories which the summer’s heat has diminished.

As the traveler ascends from the coastal areas into the higher regions, the climate noticeably changes. After an hour’s ride from the plains, when they are at their hottest, he'll reach a much cooler area, where the refreshing spray from glacial streams fills the air, and occasionally a genuinely cold breeze flows down from the mountaintops.27 Shade is plentiful, as the rocks often rise straight up, overhanging the road in some places, while the thick foliage of cedars, pines, or walnut trees provides an effective barrier against the sun's midday rays. In winter, the uplands are, of course, chilly. Harsh weather lasts from November to March;28 snow falls over all the high ground, while rain falls on the coast and in the lowlands; the passes are blocked; and Lebanon and Bargylus replenish the icy tales that the summer heat has diminished.

The vegetable productions of Phoenicia may be best considered under the several heads of trees, shrubs, herbs, flowers, fruit-trees, and garden vegetables. The chief trees were the palm-tree, the sycamore, the maritime pine, and the plane in the lowlands; in the highlands the cedar, Aleppo pine, oak, walnut, poplar, acacia, shumac, and carob. We have spoken of the former abundance of the palm. At present it is found in comparatively few places, and seldom in any considerable numbers. It grows singly, or in groups of two or three, at various points of the coast from Tripolis to Acre, but is only abundant in a few spots more towards the south, as at Haifa, under Carmel, where “fine date-palms” are numerous in the gardens,29 and at Jaffa, where travellers remark “a broad belt of two or three miles of date-palms and orange-groves laden with fruit."210 The wood was probably not much used as timber except in the earliest times, since Lebanon afforded so many kinds of trees much superior for building purposes. The date-palm was also valued for its fruit, though the produce of the Phoenician groves can never have been of a high quality.

The vegetable production of Phoenicia can be best understood in terms of trees, shrubs, herbs, flowers, fruit trees, and garden vegetables. The main trees included the palm tree, sycamore, maritime pine, and plane trees in the lowlands; in the highlands, there were cedar, Aleppo pine, oak, walnut, poplar, acacia, shumac, and carob. We've discussed how plentiful the palm once was. Now, it's found in relatively few areas and rarely in large numbers. It grows alone or in small groups of two or three along the coast from Tripolis to Acre, but it is most plentiful in some spots further south, like in Haifa, under Carmel, where "fine date-palms" are common in the gardens, and in Jaffa, where travelers note "a wide stretch of two or three miles of date-palms and orange groves heavy with fruit." The wood was likely not used much for timber except in earlier times, as Lebanon had many types of trees that were much better for building. The date-palm was also appreciated for its fruit, although the quality of the fruit from Phoenician groves was never very high.

The sycamore, or sycamine-fig, is a dark-foliaged tree, with a gnarled stem when it is old;211 it grows either singly or in clumps, and much more resembles in appearance the English oak than the terebinth does, which has been so often compared to it. The stem is short, and sends forth wide lateral branches forking out in all directions, which renders the tree very easy to climb. It bears a small fig in great abundance, and probably at all seasons, which, however, is “tasteless and woody,"212 though eaten by the inhabitants. The sycamore is common along the Phoenician lowland, but is a very tender tree and will not grow in the mountains.

The sycamore, or sycamine-fig, is a tree with dark leaves and a twisted trunk when it gets older;211 it can grow alone or in groups and looks much more like the English oak than the terebinth, which has been frequently compared to it. The trunk is short and branches out widely in all directions, making the tree easy to climb. It produces a small fig in large quantities, likely at all times of the year, but it is “tasteless and woody,"212 although people do eat it. The sycamore is common in the Phoenician lowlands but is quite delicate and does not thrive in the mountains.

The plane-tree, common in Asia Minor, is not very frequent either in Phoenicia or Palestine. It occurs, however, on the middle course of the Litany, where it breaks through the roots of Lebanon,213 and also in many of the valleys214 on the western flank of the mountain. The maritime pine (Pinus maritama) extends in forests here and there along the shore,215 and is found of service in checking the advance of the sand dunes, which have a tendency to encroach seriously on the cultivable soil.

The plane tree, which is common in Asia Minor, isn’t very common in Phoenicia or Palestine. However, it can be found along the middle course of the Litany, where it pushes through the roots of Lebanon,213 and also in many valleys214 on the western side of the mountain. The maritime pine (Pinus maritama) grows in forests here and there along the coast,215 and is useful in preventing the sand dunes from spreading, which can seriously affect the arable land.

Of the upland trees the most common is the oak. There are three species of oak in the country. The most prevalent is an evergreen oak (Quercus pseudococcifera), sometimes mistaken by travellers for a holly, sometimes for an ibex, which covers in a low dense bush many miles of the hilly country everywhere, and occasionally becomes a large tree in the Lebanon valleys,216 and on the flanks of Casius and Bargylus. Another common oak is Quercus Ægilops, a much smaller and deciduous tree, very stout-trunked, which grows in scattered groups on Carmel and elsewhere, “giving a park-like appearance to the landscape."217 The third kind is Quercus infectoria, a gall-oak, also deciduous, and very conspicuous from the large number of bright, chestnut-coloured, viscid galls which it bears, and which are now sometimes gathered for exportation.218

Of the upland trees, the most common is the oak. There are three species of oak in the country. The most widespread is an evergreen oak (Quercus pseudococcifera), which travelers sometimes confuse with holly or an ibex. This oak covers many miles of the hilly terrain in a low, dense bush and can occasionally grow into a large tree in the valleys of Lebanon, 216 and on the slopes of Casius and Bargylus. Another common oak is Quercus Ægilops, a much smaller, deciduous tree with a very stout trunk that grows in scattered groups on Carmel and other places, "giving a park-like appearance to the landscape." 217 The third type is Quercus infectoria, a gall-oak, which is also deciduous and stands out due to the large number of bright, chestnut-colored, sticky galls it produces, which are sometimes harvested for export. 218

Next to the oak may be mentioned the walnut, which grows to a great size in sheltered positions in the Lebanon range, both upon the eastern and upon the western flank;219 the poplar, which is found both in the mountains220 and in the low country, as especially about Beyrout;221 the Aleppo pine (Pinus halepensis), of which there are large woods in Carmel, Lebanon, and Bargylus,222 while in Casius there is an enormous forest of them;223 and the carob (Ceratonia siliqua), or locust-tree, a dense-foliaged tree of a bright lucid green hue, which never grows in clumps or forms woods, but appears as an isolated tree, rounded or oblong, and affords the best possible shade.224 In the vicinity of Tyre are found also large tamarisks, maples, sumachs, and acacias.225

Next to the oak, we find the walnut, which can grow quite large in sheltered areas of the Lebanon range, both on the eastern and western sides;219 the poplar, which is present in both the mountains220 and in the lowlands, particularly around Beyrout;221 the Aleppo pine (Pinus halepensis), which grows in large forests in Carmel, Lebanon, and Bargylus,222 while in Casius there is a massive forest of them;223 and the carob (Ceratonia siliqua), also known as the locust-tree, a tree with dense foliage and a bright, clear green color that does not grow in clusters or form woods but stands alone, rounded or elongated, providing excellent shade.224 In the area around Tyre, there are also large tamarisks, maples, sumachs, and acacias.225

But the tree which is the glory of Phoenicia, and which was by far the most valuable of all its vegetable productions, is, of course, the cedar. Growing to an immense height, and attaining an enormous girth, it spreads abroad its huge flat branches hither and thither, covering a vast space of ground with its “shadowing shroud,"226 and presenting a most majestic and magnificent appearance. Its timber may not be of first-rate quality, and there is some question whether it was really used for the masts of their ships by the Phoenicians,227 but as building material it was beyond a doubt most highly prized, answering sufficiently for all the purposes required by architectural art, and at the same time delighting the sense of smell by its aromatic odour. Solomon employed it both for the Temple and for his own house;228 the Assyrian kings cut it and carried it to Nineveh;229 Herod the Great used it for the vast additions that he made to Zerubbabel’s temple;230 it was exported to Egypt and Asia Minor; the Ephesian Greeks constructed of cedar, probably of cedar from Lebanon, the roof of their famous temple of Diana.231 At present the wealth of Lebanon in cedars is not great, but the four hundred which form the grove near the source of the Kadisha, and the many scattered cedar woods in other places, are to be viewed as remnants of one great primeval forest, which originally covered all the upper slopes on the western side, and was composed, if not exclusively, at any rate predominantly, of cedars.232 Cultivation, the need of fuel, and the wants of builders, have robbed the mountain of its primitive bright green vest, and left it either bare rock or terraced garden; but in the early times of Phoenicia, the true Lebanon cedar must undoubtedly have been its chief forest tree, and have stood to it as the pine to the Swiss Alps and the chestnut to the mountains of North Italy.

But the tree that represents the glory of Phoenicia, and which was by far the most valuable of all its plant products, is definitely the cedar. Growing to an immense height and achieving a massive trunk, it spreads its huge flat branches everywhere, covering a large area with its “shadowing shroud,"226 and displaying a truly majestic and magnificent look. Its wood might not be top-quality, and there is some debate about whether it was actually used for the masts of Phoenician ships,227 but as building material, it was undoubtedly highly valued, meeting all the needs of architectural design while also pleasing the sense of smell with its aromatic scent. Solomon used it for both the Temple and his own house;228 the Assyrian kings cut it down and transported it to Nineveh;229 Herod the Great used it for the extensive renovations he made to Zerubbabel’s temple;230 it was exported to Egypt and Asia Minor; the Ephesian Greeks built the roof of their famous temple of Diana with cedar, likely from Lebanon.231 Today, the wealth of Lebanon in cedars is not significant, but the four hundred that make up the grove near the source of the Kadisha, along with the many scattered cedar forests in other areas, can be seen as remnants of one massive ancient forest that originally covered all the upper slopes on the western side, predominantly composed of cedars, if not exclusively.232 Agriculture, the need for fuel, and the demands of builders have stripped the mountain of its original lush green cover, leaving it as either bare rock or terraced gardens; however, in the early days of Phoenicia, the true Lebanon cedar must have been its main forest tree, comparable to the pine in the Swiss Alps and the chestnut in the mountains of Northern Italy.

Of shrubs, below the rank of trees, the most important are the lentisk (Pistachia lentiscus), the bay, the arbutus (A. andrachne), the cypress, the oleander, the myrtle, the juniper, the barberry, the styrax (S. officinalis), the rhododendron, the bramble, the caper plant, the small-leaved holly, the prickly pear, the honeysuckle, and the jasmine. Myrtle and rhododendron grow luxuriantly on the flanks of Bargylus, and are more plentiful than any other shrubs in that region.233 Eastern Lebanon has abundant scrub of juniper and barberry;234 while on the western slopes their place is taken by the bramble, the myrtle, and the clematis.235 The lentisk, which rarely exceeds the size of a low bush, is conspicuous by its dark evergreen leaves and numerous small red berries;236 the arbutus—not our species, but a far lighter and more ornamental shrub, the Arbutus andrachne—bears also a bright red fruit, which colours the thickets;237 the styrax, famous for yielding the gum storax of commerce, grows towards the east end of Carmel, and is a very large bush branching from the ground, but never assuming the form of a tree; it has small downy leaves, white flowers like orange blossoms, and round yellow fruit, pendulous from slender stalks, like cherries.238 Travellers in Phoenicia do not often mention the caper plant, but it was seen by Canon Tristram hanging from the fissures of the rock, in the cleft of the Litany,239 amid myrtle and bay and clematis. The small-leaved holly was noticed by Mr. Walpole on the western flank of Bargylus.240 The prickly pear is not a native of Asia, but has been introduced from the New World. It has readily acclimatised itself, and is very generally employed, in Phoenicia, as in the neighbouring countries, for hedges.241

Of shrubs lower than trees, the most significant are lentisk (Pistachia lentiscus), bay, arbutus (A. andrachne), cypress, oleander, myrtle, juniper, barberry, styrax (S. officinalis), rhododendron, bramble, caper plant, small-leaved holly, prickly pear, honeysuckle, and jasmine. Myrtle and rhododendron grow abundantly on the slopes of Bargylus, outnumbering other shrubs in that area.233 Eastern Lebanon has plenty of juniper and barberry scrub;234 whereas the western slopes are home to bramble, myrtle, and clematis.235 The lentisk, which rarely grows larger than a low bush, is notable for its dark evergreen leaves and many small red berries;236 the arbutus—not the species we have, but the lighter and more decorative Arbutus andrachne—also produces bright red fruit that colors the underbrush;237 the styrax, known for producing the gum storax used in commerce, grows towards the eastern end of Carmel and is a very large bush branching from the ground, but it never takes the form of a tree; it has small, soft leaves, white flowers similar to orange blossoms, and round yellow fruit that hangs from slender stalks, like cherries.238 Travelers in Phoenicia don’t often mention the caper plant, but Canon Tristram spotted it clinging to the rock crevices in the Litany,239 among myrtle, bay, and clematis. The small-leaved holly was observed by Mr. Walpole on the western side of Bargylus.240 The prickly pear isn’t native to Asia; it was brought over from the New World. It has adapted well and is widely used in Phoenicia, as in nearby countries, for hedges.241

The fruit-trees of Phoenicia are numerous, and grow most luxuriantly, but the majority have no doubt been introduced from other countries, and the time of their introduction is uncertain. Five, however, may be reckoned as either indigenous or as cultivated at any rate from a remote antiquity—the vine, the olive, the date-palm, the walnut, and the fig. The vine is most widely spread. Vineyards cover large tracts in the vicinity of all the towns; they climb up the sides of Carmel, Lebanon, and Bargylus,242 hang upon the edge of precipices, and greet the traveller at every turn in almost every region. The size of individual vines is extraordinary. “Stephen Schultz states that in a village near Ptolemaïs (Acre) he supped under a large vine, the stem of which measured a foot and a half in diameter, its height being thirty feet; and that the whole plant, supported on trellis, covered an area of fifty feet either way. The bunches of grapes weighed from ten to twelve pounds and the berries were like small plums."243 The olive in Phoenicia is at least as old as the Exodus, for it was said of Asher, who was assigned the more southern part of that country—“Let him be acceptable to his brethren, and let him dip his foot in oil."244 Olives at the present day clothe the slopes of Lebanon and Bargylus above the vine region,245 and are carried upward almost to the very edge of the bare rock. They yield largely, and produce an oil of an excellent character. Fine olive-groves are also to be seen on Carmel,246 in the neighbourhood of Esfia. The date-palm has already been spoken of as a tree, ornamenting the landscape and furnishing timber of tolerable quality. As a fruit-tree it is not greatly to be prized, since it is only about Haifa and Jaffa that it produces dates,247 and those of no high repute. The walnut has all the appearance of being indigenous in Lebanon, where it grows to a great size,248 and bears abundance of fruit. The fig is also, almost certainly, a native; it grows plentifully, not only in the orchards about towns, but on the flanks of Lebanon, on Bargylus, and in the northern Phoenician plain.249

The fruit trees of Phoenicia are abundant and grow very well, but most of them were likely brought in from other countries at uncertain times. However, five can be considered either native or cultivated since ancient times: the vine, the olive, the date-palm, the walnut, and the fig. The vine is the most widespread. Vineyards cover large areas around all the towns; they climb the slopes of Carmel, Lebanon, and Bargylus, hang over cliffs, and greet travelers at almost every turn across the region. The size of individual vines is remarkable. “Stephen Schultz mentions that in a village near Ptolemaïs (Acre), he dined under a large vine whose trunk measured a foot and a half in diameter and reached thirty feet in height, with the entire plant supported on trellises covering an area of fifty feet in all directions. The grape bunches weighed between ten to twelve pounds, and the berries resembled small plums." The olive tree in Phoenicia dates back at least to the Exodus, as it was said of Asher, who was given the southern part of the country—“Let him be acceptable to his brethren, and let him dip his foot in oil." Today, olive trees cover the slopes of Lebanon and Bargylus above the vineyards and reach almost to the bare rock. They produce abundantly and yield high-quality oil. Beautiful olive groves can also be found on Carmel, near Esfia. The date-palm has already been mentioned as a tree that enhances the landscape and provides decent-quality timber. However, as a fruit tree, it is not highly valued, as it only produces dates around Haifa and Jaffa, and they are not renowned. The walnut appears to be native to Lebanon, where it grows quite large and bears plenty of fruit. The fig is also almost certainly native; it grows abundantly not only in the orchards near towns but also on the slopes of Lebanon, on Bargylus, and in the northern Phoenician plain.

The other fruit-trees of the present day are the mulberry, the pomegranate, the orange, the lemon, the lime, the peach, the apricot, the plum, the cherry, the quince, the apple, the pear, the almond, the pistachio nut, and the banana. The mulberry is cultivated largely on the Lebanon250 in connection with the growth of silkworms, but is not valued as a fruit-tree. The pomegranate is far less often seen, but it is grown in the gardens about Saida,251 and the fruit has sometimes been an article of exportation.252 The orange and lemon are among the commonest fruits, but are generally regarded as comparatively late introductions. The lime is not often noticed, but obtains mention in the work of Mr. Walpole.253 The peach and apricot are for the most part standard trees, though sometimes trained on trellises.254 They were perhaps derived from Mesopotamia or Persia, but at what date it is quite impossible to conjecture. Apples, pears, plums, cherries, quinces, are not unlikely to have been indigenous, though of course the present species are the result of long and careful cultivation. The same may be said of the almond and the pistachio nut. The banana is a comparatively recent importation. It is grown along the coast from Jaffa as far north as Tripolis, and yields a fruit which is said to be of excellent quality.255

The other fruit trees today include the mulberry, pomegranate, orange, lemon, lime, peach, apricot, plum, cherry, quince, apple, pear, almond, pistachio nut, and banana. The mulberry is mainly grown in Lebanon250 for silkworm farming but isn't highly regarded as a fruit tree. The pomegranate is seen less often but is grown in the gardens around Saida,251 and its fruit has sometimes been exported.252 Oranges and lemons are among the most common fruits but are generally thought to have been introduced relatively recently. The lime isn't often mentioned, but it appears in Mr. Walpole's work.253 Peaches and apricots are mostly standard trees, although they are sometimes trained on trellises.254 They likely originated from Mesopotamia or Persia, but it's impossible to pinpoint when. Apples, pears, plums, cherries, and quinces may have been native, although the current species result from extensive cultivation. The same is true for almonds and pistachios. The banana is a relatively recent addition. It’s grown along the coast from Jaffa to Tripolis and produces fruit said to be of excellent quality.255

Altogether, Phoenicia may be pronounced a land of fruits. Hasselquist says,256 that in his time Sidon grew pomegranates, apricots, figs, almonds, oranges, lemons, and plums in such abundance as to furnish annually several shiploads for export, while D’Arvieux adds to this list pears, peaches, cherries, and bananas.257 Lebanon alone can furnish grapes, olives, mulberries, figs, apples, apricots, walnuts, cherries, peaches, lemons, and oranges. The coast tract adds pomegranates, limes, and bananas. It has been said that Carmel, a portion of Phoenicia, is “the garden of Eden run wild;"258 but the phrase might be fitly applied to the entire country.

Overall, Phoenicia can be described as a land of fruits. Hasselquist says,256 that during his time, Sidon produced pomegranates, apricots, figs, almonds, oranges, lemons, and plums in such abundance that they could export several shiploads of them every year. D’Arvieux adds pears, peaches, cherries, and bananas to this list.257 Lebanon alone can provide grapes, olives, mulberries, figs, apples, apricots, walnuts, cherries, peaches, lemons, and oranges. The coastal area contributes pomegranates, limes, and bananas. It's been said that Carmel, a part of Phoenicia, is “the garden of Eden run wild;"258 but that description could easily apply to the whole country.

Of herbs possessing some value for man, Phoenicia produces sage, rosemary, lavender, rue, and wormwood.259 Of flowers she has an extraordinary abundance. In early spring (March and April) not only the plains, but the very mountains, except where they consist of bare rock, are covered with a variegated carpet of the loveliest hues260 from the floral wealth scattered over them. Bulbous plants are especially numerous. Travellers mention hyacinths, tulips, ranunculuses, gladioli, anemones, orchises, crocuses of several kinds—blue and yellow and white, arums, amaryllises, cyclamens, &c., besides heaths, jasmine, honeysuckle, clematis, multiflora roses, rhododendrons, oleander, myrtle, astragalus, hollyhocks, convolvuli, valerian, red linum, pheasant’s eye, guelder roses, antirrhinums, chrysanthemums, blue campanulas, and mandrakes. The orchises include “Ophrys atrata, with its bee-like lip, another like the spider orchis, and a third like the man orchis;"261 the cyclamens are especially beautiful, “nestling under every stone and lavish of their loveliness with graceful tufts of blossoms varying in hue from purest white to deepest purple pink."262 The multiflora rose is not common, but where it grows “covers the banks of streams with a sheet of blossom;"263 the oleanders fringe their waters with a line of ruby red; the mandrake (Mandragora officinalis) is “one of the most striking plants of the country, with its flat disk of very broad primrose-like leaves, and its central bunch of dark blue bell-shaped blossom."264 Ferns also abound, and among them is the delicate maidenhair.265

Of herbs that are useful to people, Phoenicia produces sage, rosemary, lavender, rue, and wormwood.259 The area has an incredible variety of flowers. In early spring (March and April), the plains and even the mountains, except where there are bare rocks, are covered with a colorful carpet of beautiful blooms260 from the floral abundance scattered across them. Bulb plants are particularly plentiful. Travelers note hyacinths, tulips, buttercups, gladiolus, anemones, orchids, multiple types of crocuses—blue, yellow, and white—arum lilies, amaryllis, cyclamens, and so on, along with heaths, jasmine, honeysuckle, clematis, multiflora roses, rhododendrons, oleander, myrtle, astragalus, hollyhocks, bindweed, valerian, red flax, pheasant’s eye, guelder roses, snapdragons, chrysanthemums, blue bellflowers, and mandrakes. The orchids include “Ophrys atrata, which has a lip resembling a bee, another that looks like a spider orchid, and a third that resembles a man orchid;"261 the cyclamen are particularly stunning, “nestling under every stone and generously sharing their beauty with graceful clusters of flowers that range in color from pure white to deep purple pink."262 The multiflora rose is not common, but where it grows “covers the banks of streams with a blanket of blossoms;"263 the oleanders line their waterways with a strip of ruby red; the mandrake (Mandragora officinalis) is “one of the most striking plants in the region, with its flat disk of very broad primrose-like leaves and its central cluster of dark blue bell-shaped flowers."264 Ferns are also abundant, including the delicate maidenhair.265

The principal garden vegetables grown at the present day are melons, cucumbers, gourds, pumpkins, turnips, carrots, and radishes.266 The kinds of grain most commonly cultivated are wheat, barley, millet, and maize. There is also an extensive cultivation of tobacco, indigo, and cotton, which have been introduced from abroad in comparatively modern times. Oil, silk, and fruits are, however, still among the chief articles of export; and the present wealth of the country is attributable mainly to its groves and orchards, its olives, mulberries, figs, lemons, and oranges.

The main garden vegetables grown today are melons, cucumbers, gourds, pumpkins, turnips, carrots, and radishes. The grains most commonly cultivated include wheat, barley, millet, and corn. There is also a significant cultivation of tobacco, indigo, and cotton, which were introduced from other countries relatively recently. However, oil, silk, and fruits remain key exports; the current wealth of the country primarily comes from its groves and orchards, including olives, mulberries, figs, lemons, and oranges.

The zoology of Phoenicia has not until recently attracted very much attention. At present the list of land animals known to inhabit it is short,267 including scarcely more than the bear, the leopard or panther, the wolf, the hyæna, the jackal, the fox, the hare, the wild boar, the ichneumon, the gazelle, the squirrel, the rat, and the mole. The present existence of the bear within the limits of the ancient Phoenicia has been questioned,268 but the animal has been seen in Lebanon by Mr. Porter,269 and in the mountains of Galilee by Canon Tristram.270 The species is the Syrian bear (Ursus syriacus), a large and fierce beast, which, though generally frugivorous, will under the presser of hunger attack both men and animals. Its main habitat is, no doubt, the less accessible parts of Lebanon; but in the winter it will descend to the villages and gardens, where it often does much damage.271 The panther or leopard has, like the bear, been seen by Mr. Porter in the Lebanon range;272 and Canon Tristram, when visiting Carmel, was offered the skin of an adult leopard273 which had probably been killed in that neighbourhood. Anciently it was much more frequent in Phoenicia and Palestine than it is at present, as appears by the numerous notices of it in Scripture.274 Wolves, hyænas, and jackals are comparatively common. They haunt not only Carmel and Lebanon, but many portions of the coast tract. Canon Tristram obtained from Carmel “the two largest hyænas that he had ever seen,"275 and fell in with jackals in the vicinity.276 Wolves seem to be more scarce, though anciently very plentiful.

The zoology of Phoenicia hasn't really caught much attention until recently. Right now, the list of land animals known to inhabit the area is short, including barely more than the bear, the leopard or panther, the wolf, the hyena, the jackal, the fox, the hare, the wild boar, the ichneumon, the gazelle, the squirrel, the rat, and the mole. The current presence of the bear in the ancient Phoenicia has been questioned, but the animal has been spotted in Lebanon by Mr. Porter, and in the mountains of Galilee by Canon Tristram. The species is the Syrian bear (Ursus syriacus), a large and fierce animal that, although primarily a fruit-eater, will attack both people and other animals when hungry. Its main habitat is likely the more remote areas of Lebanon; however, in the winter it descends to the villages and gardens, where it often causes a lot of damage. The panther or leopard has also been seen by Mr. Porter in the Lebanon range; and Canon Tristram, while visiting Carmel, was offered the skin of an adult leopard that was probably killed nearby. In ancient times, it was much more common in Phoenicia and Palestine than it is now, as indicated by the many mentions of it in Scripture. Wolves, hyenas, and jackals are relatively common. They inhabit not only Carmel and Lebanon but also many parts of the coastal area. Canon Tristram obtained from Carmel “the two largest hyenas that he had ever seen,” and encountered jackals in the area. Wolves seem to be scarcer now, although they were once very plentiful.

The favourite haunts of the wild boar (Sus scrofa) in Phoenicia are Carmel277 and the deep valleys on the western slope of Lebanon. The valley of the Adonis (Ibrahim) is still noted for them,278 but, except on Carmel, they are not very abundant. Foxes and hares are also somewhat rare, and it is doubtful whether rabbits are to be found in any part of the country;279 ichneumons, which are tolerably common, seem sometimes to be mistaken for them. Gazelles are thought to inhabit Carmel,280 and squirrels, rats, and moles are common. Bats also, if they may be counted among land-animals, are frequent; they belong, it is probable, to several species, one of which is Xantharpyia ægyptiaca.281

The favorite spots for wild boars (Sus scrofa) in Phoenicia are Carmel277 and the deep valleys on the western slope of Lebanon. The valley of the Adonis (Ibrahim) is still known for them,278 but, except on Carmel, they aren't very common. Foxes and hares are also pretty rare, and it's uncertain if rabbits are found anywhere in the country;279 ichneumons, which are fairly common, are sometimes mistaken for them. Gazelles are believed to live in Carmel,280 and squirrels, rats, and moles are common. Bats, if they're considered land animals, are frequent; they likely belong to several species, one of which is Xantharpyia ægyptiaca.281

If the fauna of Phoenicia is restricted so far as land-animals are concerned, it is extensive and varied in respect of birds. The list of known birds includes two sorts of eagle (Circaëtos gallicus and Aquila nævioïdes), the osprey, the vulture, the falcon, the kite, the honey-buzzard, the marsh-harrier, the sparrow-hawk, owls of two kinds (Ketupa ceylonensis and Athene meridionalis), the grey shrike (Lanius excubitor), the common cormorant, the pigmy cormorant (Græculus pygmæus), numerous seagulls, as the Adriatic gull (Larus melanocephalus), Andonieri’s gull, the herring-gull, the Red-Sea-gull (Larus ichthyo-aëtos), and others; the gull-billed tern (Sterna anglica), the Egyptian goose, the wild duck, the woodcock, the Greek partridge (Caccabis saxatilis), the waterhen, the corncrake or landrail, the coot, the water-ouzel, the francolin; plovers of three kinds, green, golden, and Kentish; dotterels of two kinds, red-throated and Asiatic; the Manx shearwater, the flamingo, the heron, the common kingfisher, and the black and white kingfisher of Egypt, the jay, the wood-pigeon, the rock-dove, the blue thrush, the Egyptian fantail (Drymoeca gracilis), the redshank, the wheat-ear (Saxicola libanotica), the common lark, the Persian horned lark, the cisticole, the yellow-billed Alpine chough, the nightingale of the East (Ixos xanthopygius), the robin, the brown linnet, the chaffinch; swallows of two kinds (Hirundo cahirica and Hirundo rufula); the meadow bunting; the Lebanon redstart, the common and yellow water-wagtails, the chiffchaff, the coletit, the Russian tit, the siskin, the nuthatch, and the willow wren. Of these the most valuable for the table are the partridge, the francolin, and the woodcock. The Greek partridge is “a fine red-legged bird, much larger than our red-legged partridge, and very much better eating, with white flesh, and nearly as heavy as a pheasant."282 The francolin or black partridge is also a delicacy; and the woodcock, which is identical with our own, has the same delicate flavour.

If the wildlife of Phoenicia is limited in terms of land animals, it is extensive and diverse when it comes to birds. The list of known birds includes two types of eagle (Circaëtos gallicus and Aquila nævioïdes), the osprey, the vulture, the falcon, the kite, the honey-buzzard, the marsh-harrier, the sparrow-hawk, two types of owls (Ketupa ceylonensis and Athene meridionalis), the great grey shrike (Lanius excubitor), the common cormorant, the pigmy cormorant (Græculus pygmæus), various seagulls, such as the Adriatic gull (Larus melanocephalus), Andonieri’s gull, the herring-gull, the Red-Sea-gull (Larus ichthyo-aëtos), and others; the gull-billed tern (Sterna anglica), the Egyptian goose, the wild duck, the woodcock, the Greek partridge (Caccabis saxatilis), the waterhen, the corncrake or landrail, the coot, the water-ouzel, and the francolin; plovers of three kinds, green, golden, and Kentish; dotterels of two kinds, red-throated and Asiatic; the Manx shearwater, the flamingo, the heron, the common kingfisher, and the black and white kingfisher from Egypt, the jay, the wood-pigeon, the rock-dove, the blue thrush, the Egyptian fantail (Drymoeca gracilis), the redshank, the wheat-ear (Saxicola libanotica), the common lark, the Persian horned lark, the cisticole, the yellow-billed Alpine chough, the Eastern nightingale (Ixos xanthopygius), the robin, the brown linnet, the chaffinch; swallows of two kinds (Hirundo cahirica and Hirundo rufula); the meadow bunting; the Lebanon redstart, the common and yellow water-wagtails, the chiffchaff, the coletit, the Russian tit, the siskin, the nuthatch, and the willow wren. Among these, the most prized for eating are the partridge, the francolin, and the woodcock. The Greek partridge is “a fine red-legged bird, much larger than our red-legged partridge, and far tastier, with white flesh, and nearly as heavy as a pheasant."282 The francolin, or black partridge, is also considered a delicacy; and the woodcock, which is the same as our own, has a similarly delicate flavor.

The fish of Phoenicia, excepting certain shell-fish, are little known, and have seldom attracted the attention of travellers. The Mediterranean, however, where it washes the Phoenician coast, can furnish excellent mullet,283 while most of the rivers contain freshwater fish of several kinds, as the Blennius lupulus, the Scaphiodon capoëta, and the Anguilla microptera.284 All of these fish may be eaten, but the quality is inferior.

The fish from Phoenicia, aside from some shellfish, are not well-known and haven't really caught the attention of travelers. However, the Mediterranean, which borders the Phoenician coast, offers great mullet, 283 while most of the rivers have various types of freshwater fish, like the Blennius lupulus, the Scaphiodon capoëta, and the Anguilla microptera. 284 All of these fish are edible, but their quality is on the lower side.

On the other hand, to certain of the shell-fish of Phoenicia a great celebrity attaches. The purple dye which gave to the textile fabrics of the Phoenicians a world-wide reputation was prepared from certain shell-fish which abounded upon their coast. Four existing species have been regarded as more or less employed in the manufacture, and it seems to be certain, at any rate, that the Phoenicians derived the dye from more shell-fish than one. The four are the Buccinum lapillus of Pliny,285 which is the Purpura lapillus of modern naturalists; the Murex trunculus; the Murex brandaris; and the Helix ianthina. The Buccinum derives its name from the form of the shell, which has a wide mouth, like that of a trumpet, and which after one or two twists terminates in a pointed head.286 The Murex trunculus has the same general form as the Buccinum; but the shell is more rough and spinous, being armed with a number of long thin projections which terminate in a sharp point.287 The Murex brandaris is a closely allied species, and “one of the most plentiful on the Phoenician coast."288 It is unlikely that the ancients regarded it as a different shell from Murex trunculus. The Helix ianthina has a wholly different character. It is a sort of sea-snail, as the name helix implies, is perfectly smooth, “very delicate and fragile, and not more than about three-quarters of an inch in diameter."289 All these shell-fish contain a sac or bag full of colouring matter, which is capable of being used as a dye. It is quite possible that they were all, more or less, made use of by the Phoenician dyers; but the evidence furnished by existing remains on the Tyrian coast is strongly in favour of the Murex brandaris as the species principally employed.290

On the other hand, some shellfish from Phoenicia are very famous. The purple dye that gave Phoenician textiles a global reputation was made from certain shellfish that were plentiful along their coast. Four existing species are known to have been used in production, and it's clear that the Phoenicians sourced dye from more than one type of shellfish. The four are the Buccinum lapillus of Pliny, which is the Purpura lapillus of modern naturalists; the Murex trunculus; the Murex brandaris; and the Helix ianthina. The Buccinum gets its name from the shape of the shell, which has a wide mouth, similar to a trumpet, and which ends in a pointed tip after one or two twists. The Murex trunculus shares a similar general shape to the Buccinum, but its shell is rougher and spine-covered, featuring many long, thin projections that end in sharp points. The Murex brandaris is a closely related species and is considered "one of the most abundant on the Phoenician coast." It's unlikely that the ancients saw it as a different shell than Murex trunculus. The Helix ianthina has a completely different appearance. It resembles a sea snail, as implied by the name helix, and is perfectly smooth, “very delicate and fragile, and only about three-quarters of an inch in diameter." All these shellfish contain a sac or bag filled with coloring matter, which can be used as a dye. It's quite possible that all of them were somewhat utilized by the Phoenician dyers; however, the evidence from remains found on the Tyrian coast strongly suggests that Murex brandaris was the primary species used.

The mineral treasures of Phoenicia have not, in modern times, been examined with any care. The Jura limestone, which forms the substratum of the entire region, cannot be expected to yield any important mineral products. But the sandstone, which overlies it in places, is “often largely impregnated with iron,” and some strata towards the southern end of Lebanon are said to produce “as much as ninety per cent. of pure iron ore."291 An ochrous earth is also found in the hills above Beyrout, which gives from fifty to sixty per cent. of metal.292 Coal, too, has been found in the same locality, but it is of bad quality, and does not exist in sufficient quantity to form an important product. Limestone, both cretaceous and siliceous, is plentiful, as are sandstone, trap and basalt; while porphyry and greenstone are also obtainable.293 Carmel yields crystals of quarts and chalcedony,294 and the fine sand about Tyre and Sidon is still such as would make excellent glass. But the main productions of Phoenicia, in which its natural wealth consisted, must always have been vegetable, rather than animal or mineral, and have consisted in its timber, especially its cedars and pines; its fruits, as olives, figs, grapes, and, in early times, dates; and its garden vegetables, melons, gourds, pumpkins, cucumbers.

The mineral resources of Phoenicia haven't been examined closely in modern times. The Jura limestone, which underlies the entire area, is not expected to yield any significant mineral products. However, the sandstone that covers it in some places is often heavily infused with iron, and some layers towards the southern end of Lebanon are reported to produce up to ninety percent pure iron ore. An ochrous earth can also be found in the hills above Beirut, which contains between fifty to sixty percent metal. Coal has also been discovered in the same area, but it is of poor quality and not present in enough quantity to be significant. Limestone, both cretaceous and siliceous, is abundant, as are sandstone, trap, and basalt; while porphyry and greenstone are also available. Mount Carmel provides crystals of quartz and chalcedony, and the fine sand around Tyre and Sidon is still excellent for making glass. However, the main resources of Phoenicia, where its natural wealth lay, must have always been plant-based rather than animal or mineral, including its timber, particularly cedars and pines; its fruits like olives, figs, grapes, and, in ancient times, dates; and its garden vegetables such as melons, gourds, pumpkins, and cucumbers.





CHAPTER III—THE PEOPLE—ORIGIN AND CHARACTERISTICS

     Semitic origin of the Phoenicians—Characteristics of the
     Semites—Place of the Phoenicians within the Semitic group—
     Connected linguistically with the Israelites and the Assyro-
     Babylonians—Original seat of the nation, Lower Babylonia—
     Special characteristics of the Phoenician people—Industry
     and perseverance—Audacity in enterprise—Pliability and
     adaptability—Acuteness of intellect—Business capacity—
     Charge made against them of bad faith—Physical
     characteristics.
     Semitic origin of the Phoenicians—Characteristics of the
     Semites—Place of the Phoenicians within the Semitic group—
     Linguistically connected with the Israelites and the Assyro-
     Babylonians—Original homeland of the nation, Lower Babylonia—
     Unique traits of the Phoenician people—Industry
     and perseverance—Boldness in ventures—Flexibility and
     adaptability—Sharpness of intellect—Business skills—
     Accusations against them of dishonesty—Physical
     characteristics.

The Phoenician people are generally admitted to have belonged to the group of nations known as Semitic. This group, somewhat irrelevantly named, since the descent of several of them from Shem is purely problematic, comprises the Assyrians, the later Babylonians, the Aramæans or Syrians, the Arabians, the Moabites, the Phoenicians, and the Hebrews. A single and very marked type of language belongs to the entire group, and a character of homogeneity may, with certain distinctions, be observed among all the various members composing it. The unity of language is threefold: it may be traced in the roots, in the inflections, and in the general features of the syntax. The roots are, as a rule, bilateral or trilateral, composed (that is) of two or three letters, all of which are consonants. The consonants determine the general sense of the words, and are alone expressed in the primitive writing; the vowel sounds do but modify more or less the general sense, and are unexpressed until the languages begin to fall into decay. The roots are, almost all of them, more or less physical and sensuous. They are derived in general from an imitation of nature. “If one looked only to the Semitic languages,” says M. Renan,31 “one would say, that sensation alone presided over the first acts of the human intellect, and that language was primarily nothing but a mere reflex of the external world. If we run through the list of Semitic roots, we scarcely meet with a single one which does not present to us a sense primarily material, which is then transferred, by transitions more or less direct and immediate, to things which are intellectual.” Derivative words are formed from the roots by a few simple and regular laws. The noun is scarcely inflected at all; but the verb has a marvellous wealth of conjugations, calculated to express excellently well the external relations of ideas, but altogether incapable of expressing their metaphysical relations, from the want of definitely marked tenses and moods. Inflections in general have a half-agglutinative character, the meaning and origin of the affixes and suffixes being palpable. Syntax scarcely exists, the construction of sentences having such a general character of simplicity, especially in narrative, that one might compare it with the naïve utterances of an infant. The utmost endeavour of the Semites is to join words together so as to form a sentence; to join sentences is an effort altogether beyond them. They employ the {lexis eiromene} of Aristotle,32 which proceeds by accumulating atom on atom, instead of attempting the rounded period of the Latins and Greeks.

The Phoenician people are generally recognized as part of the group of nations known as Semitic. This label is somewhat misleading, as the ancestry of several members from Shem is uncertain. This group includes the Assyrians, the later Babylonians, the Arameans or Syrians, the Arabians, the Moabites, the Phoenicians, and the Hebrews. They all share a distinct type of language, and despite some differences, there is a noticeable homogeneity among all its members. The unity of language is threefold: it can be seen in the roots, inflections, and overall structure of the syntax. The roots typically consist of two or three letters, all consonants. These consonants give the words their fundamental meaning and are the only elements expressed in the original writing; vowel sounds modify the meaning to some extent but are generally not represented until the languages start to decline. Most roots are somewhat physical and sensory, often inspired by nature. M. Renan states, “If one looked only to the Semitic languages, one would say that sensation alone guided the first actions of the human intellect, and that language was originally just a reflection of the external world. When we examine the list of Semitic roots, we find that almost none do not convey a primarily material sense, which is then applied, through various direct transitions, to intellectual concepts.” Derivative words are formed from these roots through a few simple, regular rules. Nouns are seldom inflected; however, verbs have an impressive range of conjugations designed to convey external relationships of ideas, but they fall short in expressing metaphysical connections due to the lack of clearly defined tenses and moods. Generally, inflections have a somewhat agglutinative nature, with the meanings and origins of prefixes and suffixes being clear. Syntax is minimal, and sentence structure is so straightforward, especially in storytelling, that it can be compared to the simple expressions of a child. The primary aim of the Semites is to combine words to form sentences; linking sentences is a challenge beyond their capabilities. They use Aristotle's {lexis eiromene}, which builds by accumulating one element after another, rather than attempting the complex sentence structures of the Latins and Greeks.

The common traits of character among Semitic nations have been summed up by one writer under five heads:—1. Pliability combined with iron fixity of purpose; 2. Depth and force; 3. A yearning for dreamy ease; 4. Capacity for the hardest work; and 5. Love of abstract thought.33 Another has thought to find them in the following list:—1. An intuitive monotheism; 2. Intolerance; 3. Prophetism; 4. Want of the philisophic and scientific faculties; 5. Want of curiosity; 6. Want of appreciation of mimetic art; 7. Want of capacity for true political life.34 According to the latter writer, “the Semitic race is to be recognized almost entirely by negative characteristics; it has no mythology, no epic poetry, no science, no philosophy, no fiction, no plastic arts, no civil life; everywhere it shows absence of complexity; absence of combination; an exclusive sentiment of unity."35 It is not very easy to reconcile these two views, and not very satisfactory to regard a race as “characterised by negatives.” Agreement should consist in positive features, and these may perhaps be found, first, in strength and depth of the religious feeling, combined with firm belief in the personality of the Deity; secondly, in dogged determination and “iron fixity of purpose;” thirdly, in inventiveness and skill in the mechanical arts and other industries; fourthly, in “capacity for hard work;” and, fifthly, in a certain adaptability and pliability, suiting the race for expansion and for commerce. All these qualities are perhaps not conspicuous in all the branches of the Semites, but the majority of them will be found united in all, and in some the combination would seem to be complete.

The common traits of character among Semitic nations have been summarized by one writer under five categories: 1. Flexibility paired with unwavering determination; 2. Depth and intensity; 3. A longing for a peaceful, dreamy life; 4. Ability to endure hard work; and 5. A passion for abstract thinking.33 Another has identified them in the following list: 1. An innate belief in one God; 2. Intolerance; 3. Prophetic qualities; 4. Lack of philosophical and scientific abilities; 5. Lack of curiosity; 6. Lack of appreciation for mimetic art; 7. Lack of capability for true political involvement.34 According to this latter writer, “the Semitic race is recognized almost entirely by negative characteristics; it has no mythology, no epic poetry, no science, no philosophy, no fiction, no visual arts, no civic life; everywhere it reflects a lack of complexity; a lack of combination; an exclusive sense of unity."35 It’s not easy to reconcile these two perspectives, and it’s not very satisfying to define a race solely by “negatives.” Agreement should focus on positive attributes, which may possibly include, first, the strength and depth of religious feeling, coupled with a strong belief in the personal nature of God; second, steadfast determination and “unwavering commitment;” third, creativity and skill in mechanical arts and other industries; fourth, “willingness to work hard;” and fifth, a certain adaptability and flexibility that make the race well-suited for expansion and commerce. While these qualities may not be equally apparent in all branches of the Semites, most will be present in all, and in some, the combination appears to be complete.

It is primarily on account of their language that the Phoenicians are regarded as Semites. When there are no historical grounds for believing that a nation has laid aside its own original form of speech, and adopted an alien dialect, language, if not a certain, is at least a very strong, evidence of ethnic character. Counter-evidence may no doubt rebut the prima facie presumption; but in the case of the Phoenicians no counter-evidence is producible. They belong to exactly that geographic zone in which Semitism has always had its chief seat; they cannot be shown to have been ever so circumstanced as to have had any inducement to change their speech; and their physical character and mental characteristics would, by themselves, be almost sufficient ground for assigning them to the type whereto their language points.

The Phoenicians are mainly considered Semites because of their language. When there’s no historical evidence showing that a nation has abandoned its original language in favor of an outside dialect, language serves as a strong indicator of ethnic identity. While there could be counter-evidence to challenge this initial assumption, in the case of the Phoenicians, no such evidence exists. They are located in the geographic area where Semitism has always been most prominent; there’s no proof that they ever had a reason to change their language, and their physical and mental traits alone would be enough to categorize them based on the language they speak.

The place which the Phoenicians occupy within the Semitic group is a question considerably more difficult to determine. By local position they should belong to the western, or Aramaic branch, rather than to the eastern, or Assyro-Babylonian, or to the southern, or Arab. But the linguistic evidence scarcely lends itself to such a view, while the historic leads decidedly to an opposite conclusion. There is a far closer analogy between the Palestinian group of languages—Phoenician, Hebrew, Moabite, and the Assyro-Babylonian, than between either of these and the Aramaic. The Aramaic is scanty both in variety of grammatical forms and in vocabulary; the Phoenician and Assyro-Babylonian are comparatively copious.36 The Aramaic has the character of a degraded language; the Assyro-Babylonian and the Phoenician are modelled on a primitive type.37 In some respects Phoenician is even closer to Assyro-Babylonian than Hebrew is—e.g. in preferring at to ah for the feminine singular termination.38

The role of the Phoenicians within the Semitic group is a much more complex issue to determine. Based on their geographical location, they would seem to fit better with the western, or Aramaic, branch rather than the eastern, or Assyro-Babylonian, or the southern, or Arab. However, linguistic evidence hardly supports this idea, while historical evidence clearly suggests the opposite. There's a much closer relationship between the Palestinian group of languages—Phoenician, Hebrew, Moabite—and the Assyro-Babylonian than between any of these and Aramaic. Aramaic has a limited range of grammatical forms and vocabulary; Phoenician and Assyro-Babylonian are much richer in this aspect.36 Aramaic appears to be a degraded language, while Assyro-Babylonian and Phoenician are based on a more primitive model.37 In some ways, Phoenician is even more similar to Assyro-Babylonian than Hebrew is—for instance, in its preference for at over ah for the feminine singular ending.38

The testimony of history to the origin of the Phoenicians is the following. Herodotus tells us that both the Phoenicians themselves, and the Persians best acquainted with history and antiquities, agreed in stating that the original settlements of the Phoenician people were upon the Erythræan Sea (Persian Gulf), and that they had migrated from that quarter at a remote period, and transferred their abode to the shores of the Mediterranean.39 Strabo adds that the inhabitants of certain islands in the Persian Gulf had a similar tradition, and showed temples in their cities which were Phoenician in character.310 Justin, or rather Trogus Pompeius, whom he abbreviated, writes as follows:—“The Syrian nation was founded by the Phoenicians, who, being disturbed by an earthquake, left their native land, and settled first of all in the neighbourhood of the Assyrian Lake, and subsequently on the shore of the Mediterranean, where they built a city which they called Sidon on account of the abundance of the fish; for the Phoenicians call a fish sidon."311 The “Assyrian lake” of this passage is probably the Bahr Nedjif, or “Sea of Nedjif,” in the neighbourhood of the ancient Babylon, a permanent sheet of water, varying in its dimensions at different seasons, but generally about forty miles long, and from ten to twenty broad.312 Attempts have been made to discredit this entire story, but the highest living authority on the subject of Phoenicia and the Phoenicians adopts it as almost certainly true, and observes:—“The tradition relative to the sojourn of the Phoenicians on the borders of the Erythræan Sea, before their establishment on the coast of the Mediterranean, has thus a new light thrown upon it. It appears from the labours of M. Movers, and from the recent discoveries made at Nineveh and Babylon, that the civilisation and religion of Phoenicia and Assyria were very similar. Independently of this, the majority of modern critics admit it as demonstrated that the primitive abode of the Phoenicians ought to be placed upon the Lower Euphrates, in the midst of the great commercial and maritime establishments of the Persian Gulf, agreeable to the unanimous witness of all antiquity."313

The history of the Phoenicians is reflected in the following accounts. Herodotus notes that both the Phoenicians themselves and the Persians who were knowledgeable about history and antiquities agreed that the original settlements of the Phoenician people were along the Erythræan Sea (Persian Gulf). They had migrated from that area a long time ago and moved to the shores of the Mediterranean. 39 Strabo adds that people from certain islands in the Persian Gulf have a similar story and have shown temples in their cities that reflect Phoenician characteristics. 310 Justin, or rather Trogus Pompeius, whom he abbreviated, writes: “The Syrian nation was founded by the Phoenicians, who, disturbed by an earthquake, left their homeland and first settled near the Assyrian Lake, and later on the Mediterranean coast, where they built a city called Sidon, named for the abundance of fish; because the Phoenicians call a fish sidon." 311 The “Assyrian lake” mentioned here is likely the Bahr Nedjif, or “Sea of Nedjif,” near the ancient Babylon, a permanent water body that varies in size throughout the seasons, typically about forty miles long and between ten to twenty miles wide. 312 Some have tried to undermine this entire story, but the leading expert on Phoenicia and the Phoenicians considers it almost certainly accurate and states: “The tradition regarding the residence of the Phoenicians on the edges of the Erythræan Sea before they settled on the Mediterranean coast is now seen in a new light. The work of M. Movers and recent discoveries at Nineveh and Babylon suggest that the civilization and religion of Phoenicia and Assyria were quite similar. Apart from this, most modern critics agree that it is demonstrated that the original home of the Phoenicians should be placed on the Lower Euphrates, amidst the significant commercial and maritime centers of the Persian Gulf, in line with the overall consensus of ancient sources.” 313

If we pass from the probable origin of the Phoenician people, and their place in the Semitic group, to their own special characteristics, we shall find ourselves upon surer ground, though even here there are certain points which are debateable. The following is the account of their general character given by a very high authority, and by one who, on the whole, may be regarded as an admirer:—

If we move from the likely origins of the Phoenician people and their position in the Semitic group to their unique traits, we will find ourselves on more solid ground, although there are still some points that are open to debate. The following is an overview of their general character provided by a highly respected authority, who can generally be considered an admirer:—

“The Phoenicians form, in some respects, the most important fraction of the whole group of antique nations, notwithstanding that they sprang from the most obscure and insignificant families. This fraction, when settled, was constantly exposed to inroad by new tribes, was utterly conquered and subjected by utter strangers when it had taken a great place among the nations, and yet by industry, by perseverance, by acuteness of intellect, by unscrupulousness and wait of faith, by adaptability and pliability when necessary, and dogged defiance at other times, by total disregard of the rights of the weaker, they obtained the foremost place in the history of their times, and the highest reputation, not only for the things that they did, but for many that they did not. They were the first systematic traders, the first miners and metallurgists, the greatest inventors (if we apply such a term to those who kept an ever-watchful lookout for the inventions of others, and immediately applied them to themselves with some grand improvements on the original idea); they were the boldest mariners, the greatest colonisers, who at one time held not only the gorgeous East, but the whole of the then half-civilised West in fee—who could boast of a form of government approaching to constitutionalism, who of all nations of the time stood highest in practical arts and sciences, and into whose laps there flowed an unceasing stream of the world’s entire riches, until the day came when they began to care for nothing else, and the enjoyment of material comforts and luxuries took the place of the thirst for and search after knowledge. Their piratical prowess and daring was undermined; their colonies, grown old enough to stand alone, fell away from them, some after a hard fight, others in mutual agreement or silently; and the nations in whose estimation and fear they had held the first place, and who had been tributary to them, disdained them, ignored them, and finally struck them utterly out of the list of nations, till they dwindled away miserably, a warning to all who should come after them."314

“The Phoenicians, in many ways, were one of the most significant parts of the entire group of ancient nations, even though they came from very obscure and unremarkable backgrounds. Once they settled, they were constantly vulnerable to attacks from new tribes, faced total defeat and domination by complete outsiders at a time when they had established a prominent position among other nations. Yet, through hard work, determination, sharp intellect, lack of scruples, adaptability when needed, and stubborn resistance at other times, along with an utter disregard for the rights of the weaker, they secured a top spot in the history of their era and garnered a stellar reputation, not just for their achievements but also for things they didn’t do. They were the first organized traders, the first miners and metalworkers, the greatest innovators (if we consider innovators those who were constantly on the lookout for others' inventions and quickly improved upon them); they were also the boldest sailors and greatest colonizers, once holding claim to not only the lavish East but also the entire, partially civilized West. They boasted a government resembling constitutionalism, and among all nations of their time, they excelled in practical arts and sciences, receiving an endless flow of the world's wealth until they became more interested in material comforts and luxuries rather than the pursuit of knowledge. Their daring and piracy diminished; their colonies, now mature enough to be independent, separated from them, some after fierce battles, others through mutual consent or quietly; and the nations that once feared and respected them, who were once their subjects, began to dismiss and ignore them, ultimately erasing them from the list of nations, leading to their slow decline, serving as a cautionary tale for those who would follow.”314

The prominent qualities in this description would seem to be industry and perseverance, audacity in enterprise, adaptability and pliability, acuteness of intellect, unscrupulousness, and want of good faith. The Phoenicians were certainly among the most industrious and persevering of mankind. The accounts which we have of them from various quarters, and the remains which cover the country that they once inhabited, sufficiently attest their unceasing and untiring activity through almost the whole period of their existence as a nation. Always labouring in their workshops at home in mechanical and æsthetic arts, they were at the same time constantly seeking employment abroad, ransacking the earth for useful or beautiful commodities, building cities, constructing harbours, founding colonies, introducing the arts of life among wild nations, mining and establishing fisheries, organising lines of land traffic, perpetually moving from place to place, and leaving wherever they went abundant proofs of their diligence and capacity for hard work. From Thasos in the East, where Herodotus saw “a large mountain turned topsy-turvy by the Phoenicians in their search for gold,"315 to the Scilly Islands in the West, where workings attributable to them are still to be seen, all the metalliferous islands and coast tracts bear traces of Phoenician industry in tunnels, adits, and air-shafts, while manufactured vessels of various kinds in silver, bronze, and terra-cotta, together with figures and gems of a Phoenician type, attest still more widely their manufacturing and commercial activity.

The key traits in this description seem to be hard work and determination, boldness in business, flexibility, sharp intellect, a lack of scruples, and dishonesty. The Phoenicians were definitely among the most hardworking and persistent people in history. The records we have about them from different sources, along with the remnants scattered across the land they once occupied, clearly show their relentless and tireless efforts throughout their existence as a nation. Always working in their workshops at home on both practical and artistic tasks, they were also constantly looking for opportunities abroad, searching the world for useful or beautiful goods, building cities, constructing harbors, establishing colonies, introducing ways of life to untamed peoples, mining resources, and setting up fisheries, organizing trade routes, and continuously moving from place to place, leaving a clear mark of their hard work and capability wherever they went. From Thasos in the East, where Herodotus noted "a large mountain turned upside down by the Phoenicians in their quest for gold,"315 to the Scilly Islands in the West, where their operations can still be seen, all the mineral-rich islands and coastal areas show signs of Phoenician activity through tunnels, adits, and ventilation shafts, while various manufactured items in silver, bronze, and terra-cotta, along with figures and gems of Phoenician style, further highlight their extensive manufacturing and trading efforts.

Audacity in enterprise can certainly not be denied to the adventurous race which, from the islands and coasts of the Eastern Mediterranean, launched forth upon the unknown sea in fragile ships, affronted the perils of waves and storms, and still more dreaded “monsters of the deep,"316 explored the recesses of the stormy Adriatic and inhospitable Pontus, steered their perilous course amid all the islets and rocks of the Ægean, along the iron-bound shores of Thrace, Euboea, and Laconia, first into the Western Mediterranean basin, and then through the Straits of Gibraltar into the wild and boundless Atlantic, with its mighty tides, its huge rollers, its blinding rains, and its frequent fogs. Without a chart, without a compass, guided only in their daring voyages by their knowledge of the stars, these bold mariners penetrated to the shores of Scythia in one direction; to Britain, if not even to the Baltic, in another; in a third to the Fortunate Islands; while, in a fourth, they traversed the entire length of the Red Sea, and entering upon the Southern Ocean, succeeded in doubling the Cape of Storms two thousand years before Vasco di Gama, and in effecting the circumnavigation of Africa.317 And, wild as the seas were with which they had to deal, they had to deal with yet wilder men. Except in Egypt, Asia Minor, Greece, and perhaps Italy, they came in contact everywhere with savage races; they had to enter into close relations with men treacherous, bloodthirsty, covetous—men who were almost always thieves, who were frequently cannibals, sometimes wreckers—who regarded foreigners as a cheap and very delicious kind of food. The pioneers of civilisation, always and everywhere, incur dangers from which ordinary mortals would shrink with dismay; but the earliest pioneers, the first introducers of the elements of culture among barbarians who had never heard of it, must have encountered far greater peril than others from their ignorance of the ways of savage man, and a want of those tremendous weapons of attack and defence with which modern explorers take care to provide themselves. Until the invention of gunpowder, the arms of civilised men—swords, and spears, and javelins, and the like—were scarcely a match for the cunningly devised weapons—boomerangs, and blow-pipes, and poisoned arrows, and lassoes318—of the savage.

Boldness in enterprise can definitely be credited to the adventurous people who, from the islands and coasts of the Eastern Mediterranean, set out across the unknown sea in fragile ships, facing the dangers of waves and storms, and even more feared "monsters of the deep." They explored the turbulent Adriatic and inhospitable Pontus, navigated their risky course through all the islets and rocks of the Aegean, along the treacherous shores of Thrace, Euboea, and Laconia, first entering the Western Mediterranean and then passing through the Straits of Gibraltar into the wild and endless Atlantic, with its powerful tides, massive waves, blinding rains, and frequent fogs. Without a map, without a compass, guided only by their knowledge of the stars, these daring sailors reached the shores of Scythia in one direction; to Britain, and possibly even to the Baltic, in another; in a third direction to the Fortunate Islands; and in a fourth, they crossed the entire length of the Red Sea and entered the Southern Ocean, managing to round the Cape of Storms two thousand years before Vasco da Gama and successfully circumnavigating Africa. Although the seas they faced were wild, they dealt with even wilder people. Except in Egypt, Asia Minor, Greece, and possibly Italy, they encountered savage tribes everywhere; they had to establish close relations with treacherous, bloodthirsty, greedy individuals—people who were almost always thieves, often cannibals, and sometimes shipwreckers—who viewed foreigners as a cheap and delightful type of food. The pioneers of civilization have always faced dangers that would cause ordinary people to recoil in fear; however, the earliest pioneers, the first to introduce elements of culture to barbarians who had never encountered it, must have faced even greater risks due to their ignorance of the ways of savage people and the lack of the powerful weapons used for attack and defense that modern explorers make sure to carry. Until the invention of gunpowder, the weapons of civilized people—swords, spears, javelins, and similar arms—were hardly a match for the cleverly designed weapons—boomerangs, blowpipes, poisoned arrows, and lassos—of the savages.

The adaptability and pliability of the Phoenicians was especially shown in their power of obtaining the favourable regard of almost all the peoples and nations with which they came into contact, whether civilised or uncivilised. It is most remarkable that the Egyptians, intolerant as they usually were of strangers, should have allowed the Phoenicians to settle in their southern capital, Memphis, and to build a temple and inhabit a quarter there.319 It is also curious and interesting that the Phoenicians should have been able to ingratiate themselves with another most exclusive and self-sufficing people, viz. the Jews. Hiram’s friendly dealings with David and Solomon are well known; but the continued alliance between the Phoenicians and the Israelites has attracted less attention. Solomon took wives from Phoenicia;320 Ahab married the daughter of Ithobalus, king of Sidon;321 Phoenicia furnished timber for the second Temple;322 Isaiah wound up his prophecy against Tyre with a consolation;323 our Lord found faith in the Syro-Phoenician woman;324 in the days of Herod Agrippa, Tyre and Sidon still desired peace with Judæa, “because their country was nourished by the king’s country."325 And similarly Tyre had friendly relations with Syria and Greece, with Mesopotamia and Assyria, with Babylonia and Chaldæa. At the same time she could bend herself to meet the wants and gain the confidence of all the varieties of barbarians, the rude Armenians, the wild Arabs, the barbarous tribes of northern and western Africa, the rough Iberi, the passionate Gauls, the painted Britons, the coarse Sards, the fierce Thracians, the filthy Scyths, the savage races of the Caucasus. Tribes so timid and distrustful as those of Tropical Africa were lured into peaceful and friendly relations by the artifice of a “dumb commerce,"326 and on every side untamed man was softened and drawn towards civilisation by a spirit of accommodation, conciliation, and concession to prejudices.

The adaptability and flexibility of the Phoenicians were especially evident in their ability to win the favor of almost every people and nation they encountered, whether civilized or uncivilized. It's striking that the Egyptians, who were usually intolerant of outsiders, allowed the Phoenicians to settle in their southern capital, Memphis, and to build a temple and live in a designated area there.319 It's also intriguing that the Phoenicians could ingratiate themselves with another very exclusive and self-sufficient group, the Jews. Hiram’s friendly interactions with David and Solomon are well known, but the ongoing alliance between the Phoenicians and the Israelites has received less attention. Solomon took wives from Phoenicia;320 Ahab married the daughter of Ithobalus, king of Sidon;321 Phoenicia provided timber for the second Temple;322 Isaiah concluded his prophecy against Tyre with a message of comfort;323 our Lord recognized faith in the Syro-Phoenician woman;324 during the time of Herod Agrippa, Tyre and Sidon still sought peace with Judæa, “because their country was nourished by the king’s country."325 Similarly, Tyre maintained friendly relations with Syria and Greece, Mesopotamia and Assyria, Babylonia and Chaldæa. At the same time, it could adapt to meet the needs and earn the trust of all kinds of barbarians, including the rough Armenians, the wild Arabs, the barbaric tribes of northern and western Africa, the rugged Iberians, the passionate Gauls, the painted Britons, the coarse Sards, the fierce Thracians, the filthy Scythians, and the savage races of the Caucasus. Even tribes as timid and distrustful as those in Tropical Africa were drawn into peaceful and friendly relations by a kind of "dumb commerce,"326 and in every direction, untamed people were softened and drawn toward civilization by a spirit of accommodation, conciliation, and concession to their prejudices.

If the Phoenicians are to be credited with acuteness of intellect, it must be limited to the field of practical enquiry and discovery. Whatever may be said with regard to the extent and variety of their literature—a subject which will be treated in another chapter—it cannot be pretended that humanity owes to them any important conquests of a scientific or philosophic character. Herodotus, who admires the learning of the Persians,327 the science of the Babylonians,328 and the combined learning and science of the Egyptians,329 limits his commendation of the Phoenicians to their skill in navigation, in mechanics, and in works of art.330 Had they made advances in the abstract, or even in the mixed, sciences, in mathematics, or astronomy, or geometry, in logic or metaphysics, either their writings would have been preserved, or at least the Greeks would have made acknowledgments of being indebted to them.331 But it is only in the field of practical matters that any such acknowledgments are made. The Greeks allow themselves to have been indebted to the Phoenicians for alphabetic writing, for advances in metallurgy, for improvements in shipbuilding, and navigation, for much geographic knowledge, for exquisite dyes, and for the manufacture of glass. There can be no doubt that the Phoenicians were a people of great practical ability, with an intellect quick to devise means to ends, to scheme, contrive, and execute, and with a happy knack of perceiving what was practically valuable in the inventions of other nations, and of appropriating them to their own use, often with improvements upon the original idea. But they were not possessed of any great genius or originality. They were, on the whole, adapters rather than inventors. They owed their idea of alphabetic writing to the Accadians,332 their weights and measures to Babylon,333 their shipbuilding probably to Egypt,334 their early architecture to the same country,335 their mimetic art to Assyria, to Egypt, and to Greece. They were not poets, or painters, or sculptors, or great architects, much less philosophers or scientists; but in the practical arts, and even in the practical sciences, they held a high place, in almost all of them equalling, and in some exceeding, all their neighbours.

If we credit the Phoenicians with sharp intellect, it should only apply to practical inquiry and discovery. No matter how extensive and diverse their literature might be—a topic covered in another chapter—it’s clear that humanity doesn't owe them any major breakthroughs in scientific or philosophical areas. Herodotus, who respects the knowledge of the Persians, the science of the Babylonians, and the combined knowledge and science of the Egyptians, praises the Phoenicians solely for their navigation skills, mechanical expertise, and artistic works. If they had made strides in abstract or mixed sciences, mathematics, astronomy, geometry, logic, or metaphysics, either their writings would have survived, or at least the Greeks would have acknowledged their influence. However, the only acknowledgments come from their practical achievements. The Greeks credited the Phoenicians for creating alphabetic writing, advancements in metallurgy, improvements in shipbuilding and navigation, significant geographic knowledge, exquisite dyes, and glass manufacturing. There's no doubt that the Phoenicians were highly capable people, quick to find practical solutions, devise plans, execute them, and adept at recognizing valuable inventions from other cultures and adapting them for their own use, sometimes even enhancing the original idea. But they didn’t possess great genius or originality. Overall, they were more adapters than inventors. They derived their alphabet from the Accadians, their weights and measures from Babylon, their shipbuilding from Egypt, their early architecture from the same country, and their mimetic art from Assyria, Egypt, and Greece. They were not poets, painters, sculptors, or great architects, let alone philosophers or scientists; but in practical arts and even practical sciences, they were highly regarded, often matching or surpassing their neighbors in many of these fields.

We should be inclined also to assign to the Phoenicians, as a special characteristic, a peculiar capacity for business. This may be said, indeed, to be nothing more than acuteness of intellect applied in a particular way. To ourselves, however, it appears to be, in some sort, a special gift. As, beyond all question, there are many persons of extremely acute intellect who have not the slightest turn for business, or ability for dealing with it, so we think there are nations, to whom no one would deny high intellectual power, without the capacity in question. In its most perfect form it has belonged but to a small number of nations—to the Phoenicians, the Venetians, the Genoese, the English, and the Dutch. It implies, not so much high intellectual power, as a combination of valuable, yet not very admirable, qualities of a lower order. Industry, perseverance, shrewdness, quickness of perception, power of forecasting the future, power of organisation, boldness, promptness, are among the qualities needed, and there may be others discoverable by the skilful analyst. All these met in the Phoenicians, and met in the proportions that were needed for the combination to take full effect.

We should also recognize that the Phoenicians had a unique talent for business. This is really just a sharp intellect applied in a specific way. However, we see it as somewhat of a special gift. Undoubtedly, there are many people with very sharp minds who have no knack for business or the ability to manage it. Similarly, we believe there are nations that, while undeniably intellectually capable, lack this particular skill. The ability for business, in its most refined form, has only been found in a few nations—the Phoenicians, Venetians, Genoese, English, and Dutch. This ability doesn't necessarily indicate high intellectual power but rather a mix of useful yet not particularly admirable qualities of a lower kind. Traits such as hard work, perseverance, shrewdness, quick perception, foresight, organizational skills, boldness, and decisiveness are among those required, and there may be others identified by a skilled analyst. All these traits were present in the Phoenicians and were combined in the right proportions for optimal effect.

Whether unscrupulousness and want of good faith are rightly assigned to the Phoenicians as characteristic traits, is, at the least, open to doubt. The Latin writers, with whom the reproach contained in the expression “Punica fides” originated, are scarcely to be accepted as unprejudiced witnesses, since it is in most instances a necessity that they should either impute “bad faith” to the opposite side, or admit that there was “bad faith” on their own. The aspersions of an enemy are entitled to little weight. The cry of “perfide Albion” is often heard in the land of one of our near neighbours; but few Englishmen will admit the justice of it. It may be urged in favour of the Phoenicians that long-continued commercial success is impossible without fair-dealing and honesty; that where there is commercial fair-dealing and honesty, those qualities become part and parcel of the national character, and determine national policy; and, further, that in almost every one of the instances of bad faith alleged, there is at the least a doubt, of which the accused party ought to have the benefit. At any rate, let it be remembered that the charges made affect the Liby-Phoenicians alone, and not the Phoenicians of Asia, with whom we are here primarily concerned, and that we cannot safely, or equitably, transfer to a mother-country faults which are only even alleged against one of her colonies.

Whether dishonesty and lack of good faith can truly be attributed to the Phoenicians as defining traits is certainly questionable. The Latin writers, who coined the term "Punica fides," are hardly unbiased witnesses, as they often feel the need to either accuse their opponents of "bad faith" or acknowledge that their own side is guilty of it. The accusations from an enemy hold little weight. The phrase "perfide Albion" is frequently heard from our neighboring country, yet few English people would accept its validity. One could argue that sustained commercial success is impossible without fairness and honesty; when those qualities are present in commerce, they become ingrained in the national character and influence national policy. Furthermore, in nearly every instance of alleged bad faith, there is at least some doubt that the accused party should benefit from. In any case, it's important to note that the accusations apply only to the Liby-Phoenicians, not the Phoenicians of Asia, who are our primary focus here, and we cannot justly or fairly attribute the faults allegedly found in one of their colonies to the mother country.

Physically, the Phoenicians appear to have resembled the Assyrians and the Jews. They had large frames strongly made, well-developed muscles, curled beards, and abundant hair. In their features they may have borne a resemblance, but probably not a very strong resemblance, to the Cypriots,336 who were a mixed people recruited from various quarters.337 In complexion they belonged to the white race, but were rather sallow than fair. Their hair was generally dark, though it may have been sometimes red. Some have regarded the name “Phoenician” as indicating that they were of a red or red-brown colour;338 but it is better to regard the appellation as having passed from the country to its people, and as applied to the country by the Greeks on account of the palm-trees which grew along its shores.

Physically, the Phoenicians seem to have looked similar to the Assyrians and the Jews. They had large, strong bodies with well-developed muscles, curly beards, and lots of hair. Their features might have had some resemblance, but probably not a very strong one, to the Cypriots, who were a mixed group from various backgrounds. In terms of skin tone, they were part of the white race but were more sallow than fair. Their hair was mostly dark, though it could have been red at times. Some believe the name “Phoenician” suggests that they had a red or reddish-brown color, but it's more accurate to think of the name as coming from the country itself, applied by the Greeks because of the palm trees that grew along its coast.





CHAPTER IV—THE CITIES

     Importance of the cities in Phoenicia—Their names and
     relative eminence—Cities of the first rank—Sidon—Tyre—
     Arvad or Aradus—Marathus—Gebal or Byblus—Tripolis—Cities
     of the second rank—Aphaca—Berytus—Arka—Ecdippa—Accho—
     Dor—Japho or Joppa—Ramantha or Laodicea—Fivefold division
     of Phoenicia.
     Importance of the cities in Phoenicia—Their names and
     relative significance—First-tier cities—Sidon—Tyre—
     Arvad or Aradus—Marathus—Gebal or Byblus—Tripolis—Second-tier cities
     —Aphaca—Berytus—Arka—Ecdippa—Accho—
     Dor—Japho or Joppa—Ramantha or Laodicea—Fivefold division
     of Phoenicia.

Phoenicia, like Greece, was a country where the cities held a position of extreme importance. The nation was not a centralised one, with a single recognised capital, like Judæa, or Samaria, or Syria, or Assyria, or Babylonia. It was, like Greece, a congeries of homogeneous tribes, who had never been amalgamated into a single political entity, and who clung fondly to the idea of separate independence. Tyre and Sidon are often spoken of as if they were metropolitical cities; but it may be doubted whether there was ever a time when either of them could claim even a temporary authority over the whole country. Each, no doubt, from time to time, exercised a sort of hegemony over a certain number of the inferior cities; but there was no organised confederacy, no obligation of any one city to submit to another, and no period, as far as our knowledge extends, at which all the cities acknowledged a single one as their mistress.41 Between Tyre and Sidon there was especial jealousy, and the acceptance by either of the leadership of the other, even temporarily, was a rare fact in the history of the nation.

Phoenicia, like Greece, was a place where cities were extremely important. The nation wasn’t centralized with a single recognized capital, like Judea, Samaria, Syria, Assyria, or Babylonia. Instead, it was made up of similar tribes that had never been united into a single political entity and cherished their independence. Tyre and Sidon are often referred to as if they were major cities, but it’s questionable whether either ever had even temporary authority over the entire region. Each city occasionally held some level of influence over a number of smaller cities, but there was no organized alliance, no obligation for one city to submit to another, and no time, as far as we know, when all the cities recognized one as their leader. There was significant rivalry between Tyre and Sidon, and it was rare for one to accept the leadership of the other, even for a short time.

According to the geographers, the cities of Phoenicia, from Laodicea in the extreme north to Joppa at the extreme south, numbered about twenty-five. These were Laodicea, Gabala, Balanea, Paltos; Aradus, with its dependency Antaradus; Marathus; Simyra, Orthosia, and Arka; Tripolis, Calamus, Trieris, and Botrys; Byblus or Gebal; Aphaca; Berytus; Sidon, Sarepta, and Ornithonpolis; Tyre and Ecdippa; Accho and Porphyreon; Dor and Joppa. Of the twenty-five a certain number were, historically and politically, insignificant; for instance, Gabala, Balanea, Paltos, Orthosia, Calamus, Trieris, Botrys, Sarepta, Ornithonpolis, Porphyreon. Sarepta is immortalised by the memory of its pious widow,42 and Orthosia has a place in history from its connection with the adventures of Trypho;43 but the rest of the list are little more than “geographical expressions.” There remain fifteen important cities, of which six may be placed in the first rank and nine in the second—the six being Tyre, Sidon, Aradus, Byblus or Gebal, Marathus, and Tripolis; the nine, Laodicea, Simyra, Arka, Aphaca, Berytus, Ecdippa, Accho, Dor, and Joppa. It will be sufficient in the present place to give some account of these fifteen.

According to geographers, the cities of Phoenicia, ranging from Laodicea in the far north to Joppa in the far south, numbered about twenty-five. These included Laodicea, Gabala, Balanea, Paltos; Aradus, along with its dependency Antaradus; Marathus; Simyra, Orthosia, and Arka; Tripolis, Calamus, Trieris, and Botrys; Byblus or Gebal; Aphaca; Berytus; Sidon, Sarepta, and Ornithonpolis; Tyre and Ecdippa; Accho and Porphyreon; Dor and Joppa. Some of these twenty-five cities were historically and politically insignificant, such as Gabala, Balanea, Paltos, Orthosia, Calamus, Trieris, Botrys, Sarepta, Ornithonpolis, and Porphyreon. Sarepta is remembered for its devout widow,42 and Orthosia is notable for its link to the adventures of Trypho;43 but the others are little more than “geographical expressions.” There are fifteen notable cities, of which six can be considered the most important and nine as secondary—the six being Tyre, Sidon, Aradus, Byblus or Gebal, Marathus, and Tripolis; and the nine, Laodicea, Simyra, Arka, Aphaca, Berytus, Ecdippa, Accho, Dor, and Joppa. It is sufficient here to provide an overview of these fifteen.

There are some grounds for considering Sidon to have been the most ancient of the Phoenician towns. In the Book of Genesis Sidon is called “the eldest born of Canaan,"44 and in Joshua, where Tyre is simply a “fenced city” or fort,45 it is “Great Zidon."46 Homer frequently mentions it,47 whereas he takes no notice of Tyre. Justin makes it the first town which the Phoenicians built on arriving at the shores of the Mediterranean.48 The priority of Sidon in this respect was, however, not universally acknowledged, since Tyre claims on some of her coins to have been “the mother-city of the Sidonians,"49 and Marathus was also regarded as a city of the very highest antiquity.410 The city stood in Lat. 33º 34´ nearly, on the flat plain between the mountains and the shore, opposite a small promontory which projects into the sea towards the west, and is flanked towards the north-west and north by a number of rocky islands. The modern town of Saïda stands close upon the shore, occupying the greater part of the peninsula and a portion of the plain on which it abuts; but the ancient city is found to have been situated entirely in the plain, and its most western traces are almost half a mile from the nearest point of the present walls.411 The modern Saïda has clustered itself about what was the principal port of the ancient town, which lay north of the promontory, and was well protected from winds, on the west by the principal island, which has a length of 250 yards, and on the north by a long range of islets and reefs, extending in a north-easterly direction a distance of at least 600 yards. An excellent roadstead was thus formed by nature, which art early improved into a small but commodious harbour, a line of wall being carried out from the coast northwards to the most easterly of the islets, and the only unprotected side of the harbour being thus securely closed. There is reason to believe that this work was completed anterior to the time of Alexander,412 and was therefore due to the Phoenicians themselves, who were not blind to the advantages of closed harbours over open roadsteads. They seem also to have strengthened the natural barrier towards the north by a continuous wall of huge blocks along the reefs and the islets, portions of which are still in existence.

There are reasons to think Sidon was the oldest of the Phoenician towns. In the Book of Genesis, Sidon is referred to as “the firstborn of Canaan,"44 and in Joshua, where Tyre is just called a “fenced city” or fort,45 Sidon is referred to as “Great Zidon."46 Homer often mentions it,47 while he doesn’t mention Tyre at all. Justin states it was the first town built by the Phoenicians upon reaching the Mediterranean coast.48 However, not everyone agreed on Sidon's primacy, as Tyre claims on some of its coins to be “the mother-city of the Sidonians,"49 and Marathus was also considered a very ancient city.410 The city is located at about Lat. 33º 34´ on the flat plain between the mountains and the shore, across from a small promontory that juts into the sea to the west, flanked to the northwest and north by several rocky islands. The modern town of Saïda sits right on the shore, covering most of the peninsula and part of the adjacent plain, but the ancient city was entirely in the flat area, with its westernmost remnants nearly half a mile from the closest point of the current walls.411 The modern Saïda has developed around what used to be the main port of the ancient town, located north of the promontory and well sheltered from winds, protected to the west by the main island, which is about 250 yards long, and to the north by a long stretch of islets and reefs extending at least 600 yards in a northeast direction. Nature created an excellent roadstead, which was later adapted into a small but convenient harbor, with a wall extending north from the coast to the furthest islet, securely blocking the only unprotected side of the harbor. There’s reason to believe this work was completed before the time of Alexander,412 and was therefore undertaken by the Phoenicians themselves, who recognized the benefits of closed harbors over open roadsteads. They also seem to have reinforced the natural barrier to the north with a continuous wall of large blocks along the reefs and islets, parts of which still exist today.

Besides this excellent harbour, 500 yards long by 200 broad, Sidon possessed on the southern side of the peninsula a second refuge for its ships, less safe, but still more spacious. This was an oval basin, 600 yards long from north to south, and nearly 400 broad from east to west, wholly surrounded by land on three sides, the north, the east, and the south, but open for the space of about 200 yards towards the west. In fine weather this harbour was probably quite as much used as the other; it was protected from all the winds that were commonly prevalent, and offered a long stretch of sandy shore free from buildings on which vessels could be drawn up.

Besides this excellent harbor, 500 yards long and 200 yards wide, Sidon had a second refuge for its ships on the southern side of the peninsula, which was less safe but still more spacious. This was an oval basin, 600 yards long from north to south and nearly 400 yards wide from east to west, completely surrounded by land on three sides—the north, east, and south—but open for about 200 yards to the west. In good weather, this harbor was probably used just as much as the other; it was protected from all the common winds and provided a long stretch of sandy shore without buildings where vessels could be pulled up.

It is impossible to mark out the enceinte of the ancient town, or indeed to emplace it with any exactitude. Only scanty and scattered remains are left here and there between the modern city and the mountains. There is, however, towards the south an extensive necropolis,413 which marks perhaps the southern limits of the city, while towards the east the hills are penetrated by a number of sepulchural grottoes, and tombs of various kinds, which were also probably outside the walls. Were a northern necropolis to be discovered, some idea would be furnished of the extent of the city; but at present the plain has been very imperfectly examined in this direction. It is from the southern necropolis that the remarkable inscription was disinterred which first established beyond all possibility of doubt the fact that the modern Saïda is the representative of the ancient Sidon.414

It’s impossible to pinpoint the boundaries of the ancient town, or to place it exactly. Only a few scattered remains are visible here and there between the modern city and the mountains. However, in the south, there’s a large necropolis, 413 which likely marks the southern limits of the city. To the east, the hills are dotted with several burial caves and various types of tombs, which were probably also outside the walls. If a northern necropolis were to be found, it would provide some indication of the city’s size; but so far, the plain in that direction hasn’t been thoroughly explored. It is from the southern necropolis that the remarkable inscription was uncovered, which conclusively proved that modern Saïda is the same as ancient Sidon. 414

Twenty miles to the south of Sidon was the still more important city—the double city—of Tzur or Tyre. Tzur signifies “a rock,” and at this point of the Syrian coast (Lat. 33º 17´) there lay at a short distance from the shore a set of rocky islets, on the largest of which the original city seems to have been built. Indentations are so rare and so shallow along this coast, that a maritime people naturally looked out for littoral islands, as affording under the circumstances the best protection against boisterous winds; and, as in the north Aradus was early seized and occupied by Phoenician settlers, so in the south the rock, which became the heart of Tyre, was seized, fortified, covered with buildings, and converted from a bare stony eminence into a town. At the same time, or not much later, a second town grew up on the mainland opposite the isle; and the two together were long regarded as constituting a single city. After the time of Alexander the continental town went to decay; and the name of Palæ-Tyrus was given to it,415 to distinguish it from the still flourishing city on the island.

Twenty miles south of Sidon was the even more significant city—the double city—of Tzur or Tyre. Tzur means “a rock,” and off this part of the Syrian coast (Lat. 33º 17´), there was a group of rocky islets just a short distance from the shore, with the largest one seeming to be the original site of the city. Indentations are so rare and shallow along this coast that a seafaring people naturally looked for coastal islands, as they provided the best shelter against rough winds. Just as Aradus was early taken and settled by Phoenician colonists in the north, so in the south, the rock that became the heart of Tyre was seized, fortified, built upon, and transformed from a bare rocky outcrop into a town. Around the same time, or shortly after, a second town emerged on the mainland across from the island, and together they were long seen as a single city. After Alexander's time, the mainland town fell into decline, and it was called Palæ-Tyrus to distinguish it from the still-thriving city on the island.

The islands of which we have spoken formed a chain running nearly in parallel to the coast. They were some eleven or twelve in number. The southern extremity of the chain was formed by three, the northern by seven, small islets.416 Intermediate between these lay two islands of superior size, which were ultimately converted into one by filling up the channel between them. A further enlargement was effected by means of substructions thrown out into the sea, probably on two sides, towards the east and towards the south. By these means an area was produced sufficient for the site of a considerable town. Pliny estimated the circumference of the island Tyre at twenty-two stades,417 or somewhat more than two miles and a half. Modern measurements make the actual present area one of above 600,000 square yards.418 The shape was an irregular trapezium, 1,400 yards along its western face, 800 yards along its southern one, 600 along the face towards the east, and rather more along the face towards the north-east.

The islands we've mentioned formed a chain running almost parallel to the coast. There were about eleven or twelve of them. The southern end of the chain had three islands, while the northern end had seven small islets.416 Between these, there were two larger islands that were eventually combined into one by filling in the channel between them. Additional expansion was accomplished by building out into the sea, likely on two sides, toward the east and south. This created enough space for a significant town. Pliny estimated the circumference of the island of Tyre to be twenty-two stades,417 or a little over two and a half miles. Modern measurements show the current area to be over 600,000 square yards.418 The shape was an irregular trapezium, measuring 1,400 yards along the western side, 800 yards along the southern side, 600 yards along the eastern side, and slightly more along the north-eastern side.

The whole town was surrounded by a lofty wall, the height of which, on the side which faced the mainland, was, we are told, a hundred and fifty feet.419 Towards the south the foundations of the wall were laid in the sea, and may still be traced.420 They consist of huge blocks of stone strengthened inside by a conglomerate of very hard cement. The wall runs out from the south-eastern corner of what was the original island, in a direction a little to the south of west, till it reaches the line of the western coast, when it turns at a sharp angle, and rejoins the island at its south-western extremity. At present sea is found for some distance to the north of the wall, and this fact has been thought to show that originally it was intended for a pier or quay, and the space within it for a harbour;421 but the latest explorers are of opinion that the space was once filled up with masonry and rubbish, being an artificial addition to the island, over which, in the course of time, the sea has broken, and reasserted its rights.422

The entire town was surrounded by a tall wall, which, on the side facing the mainland, is said to be about a hundred and fifty feet high.419 To the south, the wall's foundations were laid in the sea and can still be seen.420 They are made up of large stone blocks reinforced inside with a very hard cement mixture. The wall extends from the south-eastern corner of what was the original island, heading slightly south of west, until it meets the western coast, where it makes a sharp turn and reconnects with the island at its south-western tip. Currently, there is open sea for some distance to the north of the wall, leading some to believe it was originally meant to serve as a pier or quay, with the area inside intended as a harbor;421 however, recent explorers think that the area was once filled with masonry and debris, being an artificial addition to the island, and over time, the sea has eroded it, reclaiming its territory.422

Like Sidon, Tyre had two harbours, a northern and a southern. The northern, which was called the “Sidonian,” because it looked towards Sidon, was situated on the east of the main island, towards the northern end of it. On the west and south the land swept round it in a natural curve, effectually guarding two sides; while the remaining two were protected by art. On the north a double line of wall was carried out in a direction a little south of east for a distance of about three hundred yards, the space between the two lines being about a hundred feet. The northern line acted as a sort of breakwater, the southern as a pier. This last terminated towards the east on reaching a ridge of natural rock, and was there met by the eastern wall of the harbour, which ran out in a direction nearly due north for a distance of 250 yards, following the course of two reefs, which served as its foundation. Between the reefs was a space of about 140 feet, which was left open, but could be closed, if necessary, by a boom or chain, which was kept in readiness. The dimensions of this northern harbour are thought to have been about 370 yards from north to south, by about 230 from east to west,423 or a little short of those which have been assigned to the northern harbour of Sidon. Concerning the southern harbour there is considerable difference of opinion. Some, as Kenrick and M. Bertou, place it due south of the island, and regard its boundary as the line of submarine wall which we have already described and regarded as constituting the southern wall of the town. Others locate it towards the south-east, and think that it is now entirely filled up. A canal connected the two ports, so that vessels could pass from the one to the other.

Like Sidon, Tyre had two harbors, one to the north and one to the south. The northern harbor, known as the “Sidonian” because it faced Sidon, was located on the east side of the main island, near its northern end. To the west and south, the land curved naturally around it, providing protection on two sides, while the other two sides were fortified by man-made structures. In the north, a double line of walls extended slightly south of east for about three hundred yards, with a gap of about a hundred feet between the two lines. The northern wall acted as a breakwater, while the southern wall served as a pier. This southern structure ended toward the east at a ridge of natural rock, where it met the eastern wall of the harbor, which extended nearly due north for 250 yards, following the line of two reefs that acted as its foundation. Between the reefs, there was an open space of about 140 feet that could be closed off if needed by a boom or chain kept ready for use. The northern harbor is estimated to be about 370 yards from north to south and about 230 yards from east to west, or slightly smaller than the northern harbor of Sidon. There is significant debate regarding the southern harbor. Some, like Kenrick and M. Bertou, place it directly south of the island, considering its boundary to be the line of the underwater wall we previously described as the town's southern wall. Others suggest it is located further southeast and believe it has now completely filled in. A canal connected the two ports, allowing vessels to move from one to the other.

The most remarkable of the Tyrian buildings were the royal palace, which abutted on the southern wall of the town, and the temples dedicated to Baal, Melkarth, Agenor, and Astarte or Ashtoreth.424 The probable character of the architecture of these buildings will be hereafter considered. With respect to their emplacement, it would seem by the most recent explorations that the temple of Baal, called by the Greeks that of the Olympian Zeus, stood by itself on what was originally a separate islet at the south-western corner of the city,425 while that of Melkarth occupied a position as nearly as possible central,426 and that of Agenor was placed near the point in which the island terminates toward the north.427 The houses of the inhabitants were closely crowded together, and rose to the height of several storeys.428 There was an open space for the transaction of business within the walls towards the east, called Eurychorus by those Phoenicians who wrote their histories in Greek.429 The town was full of dyeing establishments, which made it difficult to traverse.430 The docks and dockyards were towards the east.

The most impressive buildings in Tyre were the royal palace, which was right against the southern wall of the city, and the temples dedicated to Baal, Melkarth, Agenor, and Astarte or Ashtoreth.424 We'll discuss the likely style of these buildings' architecture later. Recent excavations suggest that the temple of Baal, known to the Greeks as that of Olympian Zeus, stood alone on what was originally a separate islet in the southwestern corner of the city,425 while the temple of Melkarth was situated as close to the center as possible,426 and Agenor's temple was located near the northern tip of the island.427 The homes of the residents were packed closely together and rose several stories high.428 There was a business area within the walls on the east, known as Eurychorus by the Phoenicians who recorded their histories in Greek.429 The city was filled with dyeing establishments, making it hard to get around.430 The docks and shipyards were located towards the east.

The population of the island Tyre, when it was captured by Alexander, seems to have been about forty thousand souls.431 As St. Malo, a city less than one-third of the size, is known to have had at one time a population of twelve thousand,432 the number, though large for the area, would seem not to be incredible.

The population of the island of Tyre when Alexander took it over was around forty thousand people.431 Considering that St. Malo, a city that is less than a third of that size, once had about twelve thousand residents,432 the number, while large for the area, doesn't seem too unbelievable.

Of Palæ-Tyrus, or the continental Tyre, no satisfactory account can be given, since it has absolutely left no remains, and the classical notices on the subject are exceedingly scanty. At different periods of its history, its limits and extent probably varied greatly. Its position was nearly opposite the island, and in the early times it must have been, like the other coast towns, strongly fortified; but after its capture by Alexander the walls do not seem to have been restored, and it became an open straggling town, extending along the shore from the river Leontes (Litany) to Ras-el-Ain, a distance of seven miles or more. Pliny, who wrote when its boundary could still be traced, computed the circuit of Palæ-Tyrus and the island Tyre together at nineteen Roman miles,433 the circuit of the island by itself being less than three miles. Its situation, in a plain of great fertility, at the foot of the south-western spurs of Lebanon, and near the gorge of the Litany, was one of great beauty. Water was supplied to it in great abundance from the copious springs of Ras-el-Ain, which were received into a reservoir of an octagonal shape, sixty feet in diameter, and inclosed within walls eighteen feet in height,434 whence they were conveyed northwards to the heart of the city by an aqueduct, whereof a part is still remaining.

Of Palæ-Tyrus, or the continental Tyre, there are no satisfactory records because it has left no remains, and the classical references are very limited. Throughout its history, its boundaries and size likely changed significantly. Its location was nearly opposite the island, and in ancient times, it must have been fortified like other coastal towns; however, after Alexander captured it, the walls do not seem to have been rebuilt, and it became an open, sprawling town stretching along the shore from the river Leontes (Litany) to Ras-el-Ain, a distance of seven miles or more. Pliny, who wrote when its borders could still be identified, estimated the combined circumference of Palæ-Tyrus and the island Tyre at nineteen Roman miles, with the island's circumference alone being less than three miles.433 Its location in a highly fertile plain, at the foot of the southwestern slopes of Lebanon, and near the gorge of the Litany, was very picturesque. It received an abundant water supply from the plentiful springs of Ras-el-Ain, which flowed into an octagonal reservoir, sixty feet in diameter, and surrounded by walls eighteen feet high,434 from which it was transported northward to the center of the city via an aqueduct, parts of which still remain.

The most important city of Phoenicia towards the north was Arvad, or Aradus. Arvad was situated, like Tyre, on a small island off the Syrian coast, and lay in Lat. 34º 48´ nearly. It was distant from the shore about two miles and a half. The island was even smaller than that which formed the nucleus of Tyre, being only about 800 yards, or less than half a mile in length, by 500 yards, or rather more than a quarter of a mile in breadth.435 The axis of the island was from north-west to south-east. It was a bare rock, low and flat, without water, and without any natural soil. The iron coast was surrounded on three sides, the north, the west, and the south, by a number of rocks and small islets, which fringed it like the trimming of a shawl. Its Phoenician occupiers early converted this debatable territory, half sea half shore, into solid land, by filling up the interstices between the rocks with squared stones and a solid cement as hard as the rock itself, which remains to this day.436 The north-eastern portion, which has a length of 150 yards by a breadth of 125, is perfectly smooth and almost flat, but with a slight slope towards the east, which is thought to show that it was used as a sort of dry dock, on which to draw up the lighter vessels, for safety or for repairs.437 The western and southern increased the area for house-building. Anciently, as at Tyre, the houses were built very close together, and had several storeys,438 for the purpose of accommodating a numerous population. The island was wholly without natural harbour; but on the eastern side, which faced the mainland, and was turned away from the prevailing winds, the art and industry of the inhabitants constructed two ports of a fair size. This was effected by carrying out from the shore three piers at right angles into the sea, the central one to a distance of from seventy to a hundred yards, and the other two very nearly as far—and thus forming two rectangular basins, one on either side of the central pier, which were guarded from winds on three sides, and only open towards the east, a quarter from which the winds are seldom violent, and on which the mainland, less than three miles off, forms a protection. The construction of the central pier is remarkable. It is formed of massive blocks of sandstone, which are placed transversely, so that their length forms the thickness of the pier, and their ends the wall on either side. On both sides of the wall are quays of concrete.439

The most important city of Phoenicia in the north was Arvad, or Aradus. Arvad was located, like Tyre, on a small island off the Syrian coast, near Lat. 34º 48'. It was about two and a half miles from the shore. The island was even smaller than the one that formed the center of Tyre, measuring only about 800 yards, or less than half a mile long, and 500 yards, or just over a quarter of a mile wide.435 The island ran from the northwest to the southeast. It was a bare rock, low and flat, without water or natural soil. The rocky coast was surrounded on three sides, the north, west, and south, by a number of rocks and small islets, which bordered it like the trim of a shawl. Its Phoenician inhabitants early transformed this disputed territory, half sea and half shore, into solid land by filling the gaps between the rocks with squared stones and a solid cement as hard as the rock itself, which remains to this day.436 The northeastern section, measuring 150 yards by 125, is perfectly smooth and almost flat, but has a slight slope towards the east, suggesting it was used as a sort of dry dock for pulling lighter vessels ashore for safety or repairs.437 The western and southern areas expanded the space for housing. In ancient times, like at Tyre, the houses were built very close together and had several stories,438 to accommodate a large population. The island had no natural harbor, but on the eastern side, facing the mainland and sheltered from the prevailing winds, the skill and effort of the inhabitants created two reasonably sized ports. This was achieved by extending three piers at right angles into the sea from the shore, the central one reaching a distance of seventy to a hundred yards, and the other two nearly as far—thus forming two rectangular basins, one on either side of the central pier, which were protected from the wind on three sides and only open towards the east, where winds are rarely strong, and where the mainland, less than three miles away, provides shelter. The central pier's design is notable. It consists of massive blocks of sandstone arranged transversely, so that their length forms the thickness of the pier, and their ends create the walls on either side. On both sides of the wall are concrete quays.439

The line of the ancient enceinte may still be traced around the three outer sides of the island. It is a gigantic work, composed of stones from fifteen to eighteen feet long, placed transversely, like those of the centre pier, and in two places still rising to the height of five or six courses (from thirty to forty feet).440 The blocks are laid side by side without mortar; they are roughly squared, and arranged generally in regular courses; but sometimes two courses for a while take the place of one.441 There is a want of care in the arrangement of the blocks, joints in one course being occasionally directly over joints in the course below it. The stones are without any bevel or ornamentation of any kind. They have been quarried in the island itself, and the beds of rock from which they were taken may be seen at no great distance. At one point in the western side of the island, the native rock itself has been cut into the shape of the wall, and made to take the place of the squared stones for the distance of about ten feet.442 A moat has also been cut along the entire western side, which, with its glacis, served apparently to protect the wall from the fury of the waves.443

The line of the ancient fortification can still be seen around three sides of the island. It's a massive structure made of stones that are fifteen to eighteen feet long, positioned crosswise like those of the central pier, and in two spots, it still rises to a height of five or six layers (about thirty to forty feet).440 The blocks are laid side by side without any mortar; they are roughly shaped and generally arranged in regular layers, though sometimes two layers replace one for a while.441 There's a lack of precision in how the blocks are arranged, with joints in one layer occasionally lining up directly above joints in the layer below. The stones have no bevel or decoration. They've been quarried from the island itself, and the rock layers from which they were taken can be seen not far away. At one point on the western side of the island, the native rock itself has been carved to form the wall, replacing the squared stones for about ten feet.442 A moat has also been dug along the entire western side, which, along with its slope, seems to have been designed to protect the wall from the force of the waves.443

We know nothing of the internal arrangements of the ancient town beyond the fact of the closeness and loftiness of the houses. Externally Aradus depended on her possessions upon the mainland both for water and for food. The barren rock could grow nothing, and was moreover covered with houses. Such rainwater as fell on the island was carefully collected and stored in tanks and reservoirs,444 the remains of which are still to be seen. But the ordinary supply of water for daily consumption was derived in time of peace from the opposite coast. When this supply was cut off by an enemy Aradus had still one further resource. Midway in the channel between the island and the continent there burst out at the bottom of the sea a fresh-water spring of great strength; by confining this spring within a hemisphere of lead to which a leathern pipe was attached the much-needed fluid was raised to the surface and received into a vessel moored upon the spot, whence supplies were carried to the island.445 The phenomenon still continues, though the modern inhabitants are too ignorant and unskilful to profit by it.446

We don't know much about the layout of the ancient town, except that the houses were close together and tall. Aradus relied on its mainland possessions for both water and food. The barren rock couldn’t grow anything and was covered with houses. The rainwater that fell on the island was carefully collected and stored in tanks and reservoirs, the remains of which can still be seen. However, during times of peace, the usual water supply for daily needs came from the opposite coast. When enemies cut off this supply, Aradus had another option. Midway in the channel between the island and the mainland, a strong freshwater spring bubbled up from the sea floor. By enclosing this spring with a lead hemisphere and attaching a leather pipe, the much-needed water was pumped to the surface and collected in a vessel anchored at that spot, from which supplies were transported to the island. This phenomenon still occurs, but the modern residents lack the knowledge and skills to take advantage of it.

On the mainland Aradus possessed a considerable tract, and had a number of cities subject to her. Of these Strabo enumerates six, viz. Paltos, Balanea, Carnus—which he calls the naval station of Aradus—Enydra, Marathus, and Simyra.447 Marathus was the most important of these. Its name recalls the “Brathu” of Philo-Byblius448 and the “Martu” of the early Babylonian inscriptions,449 which was used as a general term by some of the primitive monarchs almost in the sense of “Syria.” The word is still preserved in the modern “M’rith” or “Amrith,” a name attached to some extensive ruins in the plain south-east of Aradus, which have been carefully examined by M. Renan.450 Marathus was an ancient Phoenician town, probably one of the most ancient, and was always looked upon with some jealousy by the Aradians, who ultimately destroyed it and partitioned out the territory among their own citizens.451 The same fate befell Simyra,452 a place of equal antiquity, the home probably of those Zemarites who are coupled with the Arvadites in Genesis.453 Simyra appears as “Zimirra” in the Assyrian inscriptions, where it is connected with Arka,454 which was not far distant. Its exact site, which was certainly south of Amrith, seems to be fixed by the name Sumrah, which attaches to some ruins in the plain about a mile and a half north of the Eleutherus (Nahr-el-Kebir) and within a mile of the sea.455 The other towns—Paltos, Balanea, Carnus,456 and Enydra—were in the more northern portion of the plain, as was also Antaradus, now Tortosa, where there are considerable remains, but of a date long subsequent to the time of Phoenician ascendancy.

On the mainland, Aradus controlled a significant area and had numerous cities under its authority. Strabo lists six of them: Paltos, Balanea, Carnus—which he refers to as the naval station of Aradus—Enydra, Marathus, and Simyra.447 Marathus was the most important of these. Its name is reminiscent of the “Brathu” mentioned by Philo-Byblius448 and the “Martu” found in early Babylonian inscriptions,449 which was used as a broad term by some early rulers almost in the sense of “Syria.” The term is still seen in the modern “M’rith” or “Amrith,” a name linked to some extensive ruins in the plain southeast of Aradus, which were thoroughly studied by M. Renan.450 Marathus was an ancient Phoenician town, likely one of the oldest, and was often regarded with some jealousy by the Aradians, who eventually destroyed it and divided the land among their own citizens.451 The same fate happened to Simyra,452 an equally ancient site, probably home to the Zemarites who are mentioned alongside the Arvadites in Genesis.453 Simyra appears as “Zimirra” in Assyrian inscriptions, where it's associated with Arka,454 which was nearby. Its exact location, definitely south of Amrith, seems to be indicated by the name Sumrah, which refers to some ruins in the plain about a mile and a half north of the Eleutherus (Nahr-el-Kebir) and within a mile of the sea.455 The other towns—Paltos, Balanea, Carnus,456 and Enydra—were located in the more northern part of the plain, as was Antaradus, now known as Tortosa, where there are significant remains, but they date from long after the period of Phoenician dominance.

Of the remaining Phoenician cities the most important seems to have been Gebal, or Byblus. Mentioned under the name of Gubal in the Assyrian inscriptions as early as the time of Jehu457 (ab. B.C. 840), and glanced at even earlier in the Hebrew records, which tell of its inhabitants, the Giblites,458 Gebal is found as a town of note in the time of Alexander the Great,459 and again in that of Pompey.460 The traditions of the Phoenicians themselves made it one of the most ancient of the cities; and the historian Philo, who was a native of the place, ascribes its foundation to Kronos or Saturn.461 It was an especially holy city, devoted in the early times to the worship of Beltis,462 and in the later to that of Adonis.463 The position is marked beyond all reasonable doubt by the modern Jebeïl, which retains the original name very slightly modified, and answers completely to the ancient descriptions. The town lies upon the coast, in Lat. 34º 10´ nearly, about halfway between Tripolis and Berytus, four miles north of the point where the Adonis river (now the Ibrahim) empties itself into the sea. There is a “small but well-sheltered port,"464 formed mainly by two curved piers which are carried out from the shore towards the north and south, and which leave between them only a narrow entrance. The castle occupies a commanding position on a hill at a little distance from the shore, and has a keep built of bevelled stones of a large size. Several of them measure from fifteen to eighteen feet in length, and are from five to six feet thick.465 They were probably quarried by Giblite “stone-cutters,” but placed in their present position during the middle ages.

Of the remaining Phoenician cities, the most significant appears to be Gebal, or Byblus. It’s referred to as Gubal in Assyrian inscriptions dating back to the time of Jehu (around 840 B.C.), and even earlier in Hebrew records that mention its inhabitants, the Giblites. Gebal is noted as a prominent town during the era of Alexander the Great, and later in the time of Pompey. Phoenician traditions consider it one of the oldest cities, and the historian Philo, a local native, attributes its founding to Kronos or Saturn. It was a particularly sacred city, initially dedicated to the worship of Beltis, and later to Adonis. The current town of Jebeïl marks its location beyond doubt, retaining a slightly modified form of the original name and aligning perfectly with ancient descriptions. The town sits on the coast at approximately latitude 34º 10´, about halfway between Tripolis and Berytus, four miles north of where the Adonis River (now called the Ibrahim) flows into the sea. There’s a “small but well-sheltered port,” formed mainly by two curved piers extending from the shore towards the north and south, creating a narrow entrance between them. The castle stands on a hill a short distance from the shore, featuring a keep made of large, bevelled stones. Several stones measure between fifteen and eighteen feet in length and are five to six feet thick. They were likely quarried by Giblite “stone-cutters” but were positioned in their current location during the Middle Ages.

Tripolis, situated halfway between Byblus and Aradus, was not one of the original Phoenician cities, but was a joint colony from the three principal settlements, Tyre, Sidon, and Aradus.466 The date of its foundation, and its native Phoenician name, are unknown to us: conjecture hovers between Hosah, Mahalliba, Uznu, and Siannu, maritime towns of Phoenicia known to the Assyrians,467 but unmentioned by any Greek author. The situation was a promontory, which runs out towards the north-west, in Lat. 34º 27´ nearly, for the distance of a mile, and is about half a mile wide. The site is “well adapted for a haven, as a chain of seven small islands, running out to the north-west, affords shelter in the direction from which the most violent winds blow."468 The remotest of these islands is ten miles distant from the shore.469 We are told that the colonists who founded Tripolis did not intermix, but had their separate quarters of the town assigned to them, each surrounded by its own wall, and lying at some little distance one from the other.470 There are no present traces of this arrangement, which seems indicative of distrust; but some remains have been found of a wall which was carried across the isthmus on the land side.471 Tripolis is now Tarabolus.

Tripolis, located halfway between Byblus and Aradus, was not one of the original Phoenician cities. Instead, it was a joint colony established by the three main settlements: Tyre, Sidon, and Aradus.466 We don’t know the date of its founding or its native Phoenician name; speculation ranges among Hosah, Mahalliba, Uznu, and Siannu, which were coastal towns in Phoenicia known to the Assyrians,467 but none are mentioned by any Greek writer. The location is a promontory that stretches out to the northwest, around latitude 34º 27', for about a mile and is roughly half a mile wide. The site is “well suited for a harbor since a chain of seven small islands extending to the northwest provides shelter against the strongest winds."468 The furthest of these islands is ten miles from the shore.469 It's said that the settlers who established Tripolis did not mix, but were assigned separate areas of the city, each surrounded by its own wall and spaced apart from one another.470 There are no visible signs of this layout today, which seems to reflect a lack of trust; however, some remnants of a wall have been discovered running across the isthmus on the land side.471 Tripolis is now known as Tarabolus.

Aphaca, the only inland Phoenician town of any importance, is now Afka, and is visited by most travellers and tourists. It was situated in a beautiful spot at the head of the Adonis river,472 a sacred stream fabled to run with blood once a year, at the festival which commemorated the self-mutilation of the Nature-god Adonis. Aphaca was a sort of Delphi, a collection of temples rather than a town. It was dedicated especially to the worship of the Syrian goddess, Ashtoreth or Venus, sometimes called Beltis or Baaltis, whose orgies were of so disgracefully licentious a character that they were at last absolutely forbidden by Constantine. At present there are no remains on the ancient site except one or two ruins of edifices decidedly Roman in character.473 Nor is the gorge of the Adonis any richer in ancient buildings. There was a time when the whole valley formed a sort of “Holy Land,"474 and at intervals on its course were shown “Tombs of Adonis,"475 analogous to the artificial “Holy Sepulchres” of many European towns in the middle ages. All, however, have disappeared, and the traveller looks in vain for any traces of that curious cult which in ancient times made Aphaca and its river one of the most noted of the holy spots of Syria and a favourite resort of pilgrims.

Aphaca, the only significant inland Phoenician town, is now Afka and attracts many travelers and tourists. It was located in a stunning area at the source of the Adonis river, a sacred stream believed to flow with blood once a year during the festival that honored the self-mutilation of the nature god Adonis. Aphaca was more like Delphi, a collection of temples rather than an actual town. It was particularly dedicated to the worship of the Syrian goddess Ashtoreth or Venus, sometimes referred to as Beltis or Baaltis, whose orgies were so scandalously immoral that they were eventually banned by Constantine. Today, there are no remains at the ancient site except for one or two ruins of distinctly Roman buildings. The gorge of the Adonis is not any richer in ancient structures either. There was a time when the entire valley was considered a sort of “Holy Land," and throughout its course were the “Tombs of Adonis," similar to the artificial “Holy Sepulchres” found in many European towns during the Middle Ages. However, all of that has vanished, and travelers search in vain for any signs of the unique cult that once made Aphaca and its river one of the most renowned holy sites in Syria and a favored destination for pilgrims.

Twenty-three miles south of Byblus was Berytus, which disputed with Byblus the palm of antiquity.476 Berytus was situated on a promontory in Lat. 33º 54´, and had a port of a fair size, protected towards the west by a pier, which followed the line of a ridge of rocks running out from the promontory towards the north. It was not of any importance during the flourishing Phoenician period, but grew to greatness under the Romans,477 when its harbour was much improved, and the town greatly extended.478 By the time of Justinian it had become the chief city of Phoenicia, and was celebrated as a school of law and science.479 The natural advantages of its situation have caused it to retain a certain importance, and in modern times it has drawn to itself almost the whole of the commerce which Europe maintains with Syria.

Twenty-three miles south of Byblus was Berytus, which competed with Byblus for the title of the oldest city. Berytus was located on a promontory at Lat. 33º 54´, and had a reasonably sized port, protected on the west by a pier that followed the line of rocks extending from the promontory to the north. It wasn't very significant during the thriving Phoenician period, but it rose to prominence under the Romans, when its harbor was greatly improved and the town expanded considerably. By the time of Justinian, it had become the leading city of Phoenicia and was renowned as a center for law and science. The natural advantages of its location have allowed it to maintain some importance, and in modern times, it has attracted almost all the trade that Europe conducts with Syria.

Arka, or Arqa, the home of the Arkites of Genesis,480 can never have been a place of much consequence. It lies at a distance of four miles from the shore, on one of the outlying hills which form the skirts of Lebanon, in Lat. 34º 33, Long. 33º 44´ nearly. The towns nearest to it were Orthosia, Simyra, and Tripolis. It was of sufficient consequence to be mentioned in the Assyrian Inscriptions,481 though not to attract the notice of Strabo.

Arka, or Arqa, the home of the Arkites from Genesis, 480 was never really important. It's about four miles from the shore, located on one of the hills on the outskirts of Lebanon, at Latitude 34º 33 and Longitude 33º 44. The closest towns were Orthosia, Simyra, and Tripolis. It was significant enough to be mentioned in Assyrian inscriptions, 481 but not enough to catch Strabo's attention.

Ecdippa, south of Tyre, in Lat. 33º 1´, is no doubt the scriptural Achzib,482 which was made the northern boundary of Asher at the division of the Holy Land among the twelve tribes. The Assyrian monarchs speak of it under the same name, but mention it rarely, and apparently as a dependency of Sidon.483 The old name, in the shortened form of “Zeb,” still clings to the place.

Ecdippa, located south of Tyre at latitude 33º 1´, is definitely the biblical Achzib,482 which served as the northern boundary of Asher when the Holy Land was divided among the twelve tribes. The Assyrian kings refer to it by the same name, although they mention it infrequently and seem to consider it a part of Sidon.483 The old name, in its shortened form “Zeb,” is still associated with the area.

Still further to the south, five miles from Ecdippa, and about twenty-two miles from Tyre, lay Akko or Accho, at the northern extremity of a wide bay, which terminates towards the south in the promontory of Carmel. Next to the Bay of St. George, near Beyrout, this is the best natural roadstead on the Syrian coast; and this advantage, combined with its vicinity to the plain of Esdraelon, has given to Accho at various periods of history a high importance, as in some sense “the key of Syria.” The Assyrians, in their wars with Palestine and Egypt, took care to conquer and retain it.484 When the Ptolemies became masters of the tract between Egypt and Mount Taurus, they at once saw its value, occupied it, strengthened its defences, and gave it the name of Ptolemaïs. The old appellation has, however, reasserted itself; and, as Acre, the city played an important part in the Crusades, in the Napoleonic attempt on Egypt, and in the comparatively recent expedition of Ibrahim Pasha. It had a small port of its own to the south-east of the promontory on which it stood, which, like the other ports of the ancient Phoenicia, is at the present time almost wholly sanded up.485 But its roadstead was of more importance than its port, and was used by the Persians as a station for their fleet, from which they could keep watch on Egypt.486

Still further south, five miles from Ecdippa and about twenty-two miles from Tyre, was Akko or Accho, located at the northern end of a wide bay that extends southward to the promontory of Carmel. After the Bay of St. George near Beirut, this is the best natural harbor on the Syrian coast. This advantage, along with its proximity to the plain of Esdraelon, has given Accho significant importance at various points in history, as it has been seen as “the key to Syria.” The Assyrians, in their conflicts with Palestine and Egypt, made sure to conquer and hold it. When the Ptolemies took control of the region between Egypt and Mount Taurus, they immediately recognized its value, occupied it, strengthened its defenses, and renamed it Ptolemaïs. However, the old name has made a comeback; as Acre, the city played a crucial role during the Crusades, in Napoleon's attempt on Egypt, and in the more recent expedition of Ibrahim Pasha. It had a small port to the southeast of the promontory it stood on, which, like other ancient Phoenician ports, is now almost entirely filled with sand. But its harbor was more important than its port and was used by the Persians as a base for their fleet, enabling them to keep an eye on Egypt.

South of Accho and south of Carmel, close upon the shore, which is here low and flat, was Dor, now Tantura, the seat of a kingdom in the time of Joshua,487 and allotted after its conquest to Manasseh.488 Here Solomon placed one of his purveyors,489 and here the great Assyrian monarch Tiglath-pileser II. likewise placed a “governor,” about B.C. 732, when he reduced it.490 Dor was one of the places where the shell-fish which produced the purple dye were most abundant, and remained in the hands of the Phoenicians during all the political changes which swept over Syria and Palestine to a late period.491 It had fallen to ruin, however, by the time of Jerome,492 and the present remains are unimportant.

South of Accho and Carmel, right by the shore, which is low and flat here, was Dor, now known as Tantura, the capital of a kingdom during Joshua's time,487 and given to Manasseh after its conquest.488 Solomon appointed one of his officials here,489 and the great Assyrian king Tiglath-pileser II also installed a “governor” around 732 B.C., when he conquered it.490 Dor was one of the main places where the shellfish that produced purple dye were abundant and remained under Phoenician control through all the political changes in Syria and Palestine for a long time.491 However, by Jerome's time,492 it had fallen into ruin, and the current remains are insignificant.

The extreme Phoenician city on the south was Japho or Joppa. It lay in Lat. 32º 2´, close to the territory of Dan,493 but continued to be held by the Phoenicians until the time of the Maccabees,494 when it became Jewish. The town was situated on the slope of a low hill near the sea, and possessed anciently a tolerable harbour, from which a trade was carried on with Tartessus.495 As the seaport nearest to Jerusalem, it was naturally the chief medium of the commerce which was carried on between the Phoenicians and the Jews. Thither, in the time of Solomon, were brought the floats of timber cut in Lebanon for the construction of the Temple and the royal palace; and thither, no doubt, were conveyed “the wheat, and the barley, and the oil, and the wine,” which the Phoenicians received in return for their firs and cedars.496 A similar exchange of commodities was made nearly five centuries later at the same place, when the Jews returned from the captivity under Zerubbabel.497 In Roman times the foundation of Cæsaræa reduced Joppa to insignificance; yet it still, as Jaffa or Yáfa, retains a certain amount of trade, and is famous for its palm-groves and gardens.

The ancient Phoenician city located to the south was Japho or Joppa. It was situated at Lat. 32º 2´, near the territory of Dan,493 but remained under Phoenician control until the time of the Maccabees,494 when it became Jewish. The town was built on the slope of a low hill by the sea and had a decent harbor in ancient times, from which trade was conducted with Tartessus.495 As the closest seaport to Jerusalem, it naturally became the primary route for commerce between the Phoenicians and the Jews. During Solomon's time, timber logs cut in Lebanon for building the Temple and the royal palace were brought there; and it's likely that “the wheat, and the barley, and the oil, and the wine” were sent in exchange for their firs and cedars.496 A similar trade of goods occurred about five centuries later at the same location when the Jews returned from captivity under Zerubbabel.497 In Roman times, the establishment of Cæsaræa diminished Joppa’s importance; however, it still operates today as Jaffa or Yáfa, retaining some trade and is known for its palm groves and gardens.

Joppa towards the south was balanced by Ramantha, or Laodicea, towards the north. Fifty miles north of Aradus and Antaradus (Tortosa), in Lat. 35º 30´ nearly, occupying the slope of a hill facing the sea, with chalky cliffs on either side, that, like those of Dover, whiten the sea, and with Mount Casius in the background, lay the most northern of all the Phoenician cities in a fertile and beautiful territory.498 The original appellation was, we are told, Ramantha,499 a name intended probably to mark the lofty situation of the place;4100 but this appellation was forced to give way to the Greek term, Laodicea, when Seleucus Nicator, having become king of Syria, partially rebuilt Ramantha and colonised it with Greeks.4101 The coins of the city under the Seleucidæ show its semi-Greek, semi-Phoenician character, having legends in both languages. One of these, in the Phoenician character, is read as l’Ladika am b’Canaan, i.e. “of Laodicea, a metropolis in Canaan,” and seems to show that the city claimed not only to be independent, but to have founded, and to hold under its sway, a number of smaller towns.4102 It may have exercised a dominion over the entire tract from Mount Casius to Paltos, where the dominion of Aradus began. Laodicea is now Latakia, and is famous for the tobacco grown in the neighbourhood. It still makes use of its ancient port, which would be fairly commodious if it were cleared of the sand that at present chokes it.4103

Joppa in the south was matched by Ramantha, or Laodicea, in the north. Fifty miles north of Aradus and Antaradus (Tortosa), at about Latitude 35º 30´, located on a hill that faces the sea, with chalky cliffs on either side that, like those of Dover, whiten the sea, and with Mount Casius in the background, lay the furthest north of all the Phoenician cities in a fertile and beautiful area.498 The original name was, we're told, Ramantha,499 which probably aimed to highlight the high position of the place;4100 but this name had to give way to the Greek term, Laodicea, when Seleucus Nicator, becoming king of Syria, rebuilt Ramantha and populated it with Greeks.4101 The city’s coins from the Seleucid period show its mixed Greek and Phoenician identity, featuring inscriptions in both languages. One of these, in Phoenician script, reads as l’Ladika am b’Canaan, meaning “of Laodicea, a metropolis in Canaan,” and it seems to indicate that the city claimed not only independence but also to have established, and to control, several smaller towns.4102 It may have ruled over the entire area from Mount Casius to Paltos, where Aradus's territory began. Laodicea is now Latakia and is known for the tobacco grown nearby. It still uses its ancient port, which would be quite useful if it were cleared of the sand that currently blocks it.4103

It has been said that Phoenicia was composed of “three worlds” with distinct characteristics;4104 but perhaps the number of the “worlds” should be extended to five. First came that of Ramantha, reaching from the Mons Casius to the river Badas, a distance of about fifty miles, a remote and utterly sequestered region, into which neither Assyria nor Egypt ever thought of penetrating. Commerce with Cyprus and southern Asia Minor was especially open to the mariners of this region, who could see the shores of Cyprus without difficulty on a clear day. Next came the “world” of Aradus, reaching along the coast from the Badas to the Eleutherus, another stretch of fifty miles, and including the littoral islands, especially that of Ruad, on which Aradus was built. This tract was less sequestered than the more northern one, and contains traces of having been subjected to influences from Egypt at an early period. The gap between Lebanon and Bargylus made the Aradian territory accessible from the Coelesyrian valley; and there is reason to believe that one of the roads which Egyptian and Assyrian conquest followed in these parts was that which passed along the coast as far as the Eleutherus and then turned eastward and north-eastward to Emesa (Hems) and Hamath. It must have been conquerors marching by this line who set up their effigies at the mouth of the Nahr-el-Kelb, and those who pursued it would naturally make a point of reducing Aradus. Thus this second Phoenician “world” has not the isolated character of the first, but shows marks of Assyrian, and still more of early Egyptian, influence. The third Phoenician “world” is that of Gebal or Byblus. Its limits would seem to be the Eleutherus on the north, and on the south the Tamyras, which would allow it a length of a little above eighty miles. This district, it has been said, preserved to the last days of paganism a character which was original and well marked. Within its limits the religious sentiment had more intensity and played a more important part in life than elsewhere in Phoenicia. Byblus was a sort of Phoenician Jerusalem. By their turn of mind and by the language which they spoke, the Byblians or Giblites seem to have been, of all the Phoenicians, those who most resembled the Hebrews. King Jehavmelek, who probably reigned at Byblus about B.C. 400, calls himself “a just king,” and prays that he may obtain favour in the sight of God. Later on it was at Byblus, and in the valleys of the Lebanon depending on it, that the inhabitants celebrated those mysteries of Astarte, together with that orgiastic worship of Adonis or Tammuz, which were so popular in Syria during the whole of the Greco-Roman period.4105 The fourth Phoenician “world” was that of Tyre and Sidon, beginning at the Tamyras and ending with the promontory of Carmel. Here it was that the Phoenician character developed especially those traits by which it is commonly known to the world at large—a genius for commerce and industry, a passion for the undertaking of long and perilous voyages, an adaptability to circumstances of all kinds, and an address in dealing with wild tribes of many different kinds which has rarely been equalled and never exceeded. “All that we are about to say of Phoenicia,” declares the author recently quoted, “of its rapid expansion and the influence which it exercised over the nations of the West, must be understood especially of Tyre and Sidon. The other towns might furnish sailors to man the Tyrian fleet or merchandise for their cargo, but it was Sidon first and then (with even more determination and endurance) Tyre which took the initiative and the conduct of the movement; it was the mariners of these two towns who, with eyes fixed on the setting sun, pushed their explorations as far as the Pillars of Hercules, and eventually even further."4106 The last and least important of the Phoenician “worlds” was the southern one, extending sixty miles from Carmel to Joppa—a tract from which the Phoenician character was well nigh trampled out by the feet of strangers ever passing up and down the smooth and featureless region, along which lay the recognised line of route between Syria and Mesopotamia on the one hand, Philistia and Egypt on the other.4107

It has been said that Phoenicia was made up of “three worlds” with unique characteristics; but maybe the number of the “worlds” should actually be five. First came Ramantha, stretching from Mons Casius to the river Badas, about fifty miles apart, a remote and completely secluded area that neither Assyria nor Egypt ever thought to invade. Trade with Cyprus and southern Asia Minor was especially accessible for sailors from this region, who could clearly see the shores of Cyprus on a clear day. Next was the “world” of Aradus, extending along the coast from Badas to Eleutherus, another fifty-mile stretch, including the coastal islands, particularly Ruad, where Aradus was built. This area was less isolated than the northern one and showed signs of having been influenced by Egypt early on. The gap between Lebanon and Bargylus made the Aradian territory reachable from the Coelesyrian valley; and it’s likely that one of the routes followed by Egyptian and Assyrian conquerors was along the coast to the Eleutherus and then turned eastward and northeastward to Emesa (Hems) and Hamath. It must have been the conquerors marching this route who set up their statues at the mouth of the Nahr-el-Kelb, and those who followed would naturally aim to conquer Aradus. Therefore, this second Phoenician “world” was not as isolated as the first, showing evidence of Assyrian and even more of early Egyptian influence. The third Phoenician “world” is that of Gebal or Byblus. Its boundaries seem to be the Eleutherus to the north and the Tamyras to the south, giving it a length of just over eighty miles. This area, it has been said, retained a unique and well-defined character up until the last days of paganism. Within its territory, the religious sentiment was more intense and played a more significant role in daily life than anywhere else in Phoenicia. Byblus was like a Phoenician Jerusalem. By their mindset and the language they spoke, the Byblians or Giblites appeared to be the Phoenicians most similar to the Hebrews. King Jehavmelek, who likely ruled Byblus around 400 B.C., referred to himself as “a just king,” praying for favor in the eyes of God. Later on, it was at Byblus, and in the valleys of Lebanon associated with it, that the locals celebrated the mysteries of Astarte, along with the wild worship of Adonis or Tammuz, which were so popular in Syria throughout the Greco-Roman period. The fourth Phoenician “world” was that of Tyre and Sidon, starting at the Tamyras and ending at the Carmel promontory. Here, the Phoenician character developed those traits by which it is widely known today—an aptitude for commerce and industry, a passion for undertaking long and risky voyages, a remarkable adaptability to various circumstances, and a skill in dealing with diverse wild tribes that has rarely been matched and never surpassed. “Everything we are about to discuss regarding Phoenicia,” states the author recently quoted, “about its rapid growth and its influence over the nations of the West, must be understood especially in relation to Tyre and Sidon. The other cities may have provided sailors for the Tyrian fleet or merchandise for their cargo, but it was Sidon first and then (with even more determination and endurance) Tyre that took the lead and managed the movement; it was the sailors from these two cities who, with their sights set on the setting sun, pushed their explorations as far as the Pillars of Hercules, and eventually even beyond.” The last and least notable of the Phoenician “worlds” was the southern one, which stretched sixty miles from Carmel to Joppa—a region where the Phoenician character was almost eradicated by the constant influx of strangers moving through the flat and featureless land, which served as the recognized route between Syria and Mesopotamia on one side and Philistia and Egypt on the other.





CHAPTER V—THE COLONIES

     Circumstances which led the Phoenicians to colonise—Their
     colonies best grouped geographically—1. Colonies of the
     Eastern Mediterranean—in Cyprus, Citium, Amathus, Curium,
     Paphos, Salamis, Ammochosta, Tamisus, and Soli;—in Cilicia,
     Tarsus;—in Lycia, Phaselis;—in Rhodes, Lindus, Ialysus,
     Camirus;—in Crete, and the Cyclades;—in the Northern
     Egean; &c. 2. In the Central and Western Mediterranean—in
     Africa, Utica, Hippo-Zaritis, Hippo Regius, Carthage,
     Hadrumetum, Leptis Minor, Leptis Major, and Thapsus;—in
     Sicily, Motya, Eryx, Panormus, Solocis;—between Sicily and
     Africa, Cossura, Gaulos, and Melita;—in Sardinia, Caralis,
     Nora, Sulcis, and Tharros;—in the Balearic Isles;—in
     Spain, Malaca, Sex, Abdera. 3. Outside the Straits of
     Gibraltar;—in Africa, Tingis, and Lixus; in Spain,
     Tartessus, Gades, and Belon—Summary.
Circumstances that led the Phoenicians to colonize—Their colonies best grouped geographically—1. Colonies of the Eastern Mediterranean—in Cyprus, Citium, Amathus, Curium, Paphos, Salamis, Ammochosta, Tamisus, and Soli;—in Cilicia, Tarsus;—in Lycia, Phaselis;—in Rhodes, Lindus, Ialysus, Camirus;—in Crete, and the Cyclades;—in the Northern Aegean; etc. 2. In the Central and Western Mediterranean—in Africa, Utica, Hippo-Zaritis, Hippo Regius, Carthage, Hadrumetum, Leptis Minor, Leptis Major, and Thapsus;—in Sicily, Motya, Eryx, Panormus, Solocis;—between Sicily and Africa, Cossura, Gaulos, and Melita;—in Sardinia, Caralis, Nora, Sulcis, and Tharros;—in the Balearic Isles;—in Spain, Malaca, Sex, Abdera. 3. Outside the Straits of Gibraltar;—in Africa, Tingis, and Lixus; in Spain, Tartessus, Gades, and Belon—Summary.

The narrowness of the territory which the Phoenicians occupied the military strength of their neighbours towards the north and towards the south, and their own preference of maritime over agricultural pursuits, combined to force them, as they began to increase and multiply, to find a vent for their superfluous population in colonies. The military strength of Philistia and Egypt barred them out from expansion upon the south; the wild savagery of the mountain races in Casius, northern Bargylus, and Amanus was an effectual barrier towards the north; but before them lay the open Mediterranean, placid during the greater portion of the year, and conducting to a hundred lands, thinly peopled, or even unoccupied, where there was ample room for any number of immigrants. The trade of the Phoenicians with the countries bordering the Eastern Mediterranean must be regarded as established long previously to the time when they began to feel cramped for space; and thus, when that time arrived, they had no difficulty in finding fresh localities to occupy, except such as might arise from a too abundant amplitude of choice. Right in front of them lay, at the distance of not more than seventy miles, visible from Casius in clear weather,51 the large and important island, once known as Chittim,52 and afterwards as Cyprus, which played so important a part in the history of the East from the time of Sargon and Sennacherib to that of Bragadino and Mustapha Pasha. To the right, well visible from Cyprus, was the fertile tract of Cilicia Campestris, which led on to the rich and picturesque regions of Pamphylia, Lycia, and Caria. From Caria stretched out, like a string of stepping-stones between Asia and Europe, the hundred islets of the Ægean, Cyclades, and Sporades, and others, inviting settlers, and conducting to the large islands of Crete and Euboea, and the shores of Attica and the Peloponnese. It is impossible to trace with any exactness the order in which the Phoenician colonies were founded. A thousand incidental circumstances—a thousand caprices—may have deranged what may be called the natural or geographical order, and have caused the historical order to diverge from it; but, on the whole, probably something like the geographical order was observed; and, at any rate, it will be most convenient, in default of sufficient data for an historical arrangement, to adopt in the present place a geographic one, and, beginning with those nearest to Phoenicia itself in the Eastern Mediterranean, to proceed westward to the Straits of Gibraltar, reserving for the last those outside the Straits on the shores of the Atlantic Ocean.

The limited land the Phoenicians occupied, along with the military strength of their neighbors to the north and south, and their preference for sea trade over farming, forced them to look for new places to settle as their population grew. The powerful armies of Philistia and Egypt blocked their expansion to the south, while the fierce mountain tribes in Casius, northern Bargylus, and Amanus held them back to the north. However, in front of them lay the open Mediterranean Sea, calm for most of the year, leading to numerous lands that were sparsely populated or even empty, where there was plenty of room for new settlers. The Phoenicians had established trade with the countries along the Eastern Mediterranean long before they started feeling crowded, so when that time came, they had no trouble finding new places to settle, only the challenge of too many choices. Just seventy miles away, clearly visible from Casius on a clear day, was the large and significant island, once called Chittim and later known as Cyprus, which played an important role in Eastern history from the time of Sargon and Sennacherib to that of Bragadino and Mustapha Pasha. To the right of Cyprus was the fertile region of Cilicia Campestris, which led to the rich and scenic areas of Pamphylia, Lycia, and Caria. From Caria stretched a chain of smaller islands in the Aegean Sea, including the Cyclades and Sporades, inviting settlers and connecting to the larger islands of Crete and Euboea, as well as the coasts of Attica and the Peloponnese. It's difficult to determine the exact order in which the Phoenician colonies were established. Countless random factors and whims could have disrupted what might be considered the natural or geographical order and caused the historical order to differ from it; however, overall, it's likely that the geographical order was generally followed. Therefore, in the absence of enough information for a historical arrangement, it makes the most sense to adopt a geographic approach in this context, starting with those colonies closest to Phoenicia itself in the Eastern Mediterranean and moving westward to the Straits of Gibraltar, leaving for last those outside the Straits along the Atlantic Ocean.

The nearest, and probably the first, region to attract Phoenician colonies was the island of Cyprus. Cyprus lies in the corner of the Eastern Mediterranean formed by the projection of Asia Minor from the Syrian shore. Its mountain chains run parallel with Taurus, and it is to Asia Minor that it presents its longer flank, while to Phoenicia it presents merely one of its extremities. Its length from east to west is 145 miles, its greatest width about sixty miles.53 Two strongly marked mountain ranges form its most salient features, the one running close along the north coast from Cape Kormaciti to Cape S. Andreas; the other nearly central, but nearer the south, beginning at Cape Renaouti in the west and terminating at Cape Greco. The mountain ranges are connected by a tract of high ground towards the centre, and separated by two broad plains,54 towards the east and west. The eastern plain is the more important of the two. It extends along the course of the Pediæus from Leucosia, or Nicosia, the present capital, to Salamis, a distance of thirty-five miles, and is from five to twelve miles wide. The fertility of the soil was reckoned in ancient times to equal that of Egypt.55 The western plain, that of Morfou, is much smaller, and is watered by a less important river. The whole island, when it first became known to the Phoenicians, was well wooded.56 Lovely glens opened upon them, as they sailed along its southern coast, watered by clear streams from the southern mountain-range, and shaded by thick woods of pine and cedar, the latter of which are said to have in some cases attained a greater size even than those of the Lebanon.57 The range was also prolific of valuable metals.58 Gold and silver were found in places, but only in small quantities; iron was yielded in considerable abundance; but the chief supply was that of copper, which derived its name from that of the island.59 Other products of the island were wheat of excellent quality; the rich Cyprian wine which retains its strength and flavour for well nigh a century, the henna dye obtained from the plant called copher or cyprus, the Lawsonia alba of modern botany; valuable pigments of various kinds, red, yellow, green, and amber; hemp and flax; tar, boxwood,510 and all the materials requisite for shipbuilding from the heavy timbers needed for the keel to the lightest spar and the flimsiest sail.511

The closest, and likely the first, area to attract Phoenician colonies was the island of Cyprus. Cyprus is located in the corner of the Eastern Mediterranean, shaped by Asia Minor projecting from the Syrian coast. Its mountain ranges run parallel to the Taurus Mountains, and it shows a longer side to Asia Minor while only presenting one of its ends to Phoenicia. It stretches 145 miles from east to west, and its widest point is about 60 miles. Two distinct mountain ranges are its most prominent features: one runs along the northern coast from Cape Kormaciti to Cape S. Andreas, and the other is almost central but closer to the south, starting at Cape Renaouti in the west and ending at Cape Greco. These mountain ranges are connected by a high land area in the center and separated by two broad plains, one on the east and one on the west. The eastern plain is the more significant of the two. It extends along the Pediæus River from Leucosia, or Nicosia, the current capital, to Salamis, covering a distance of 35 miles and ranging from 5 to 12 miles wide. The soil was believed to be as fertile as that of Egypt in ancient times. The western plain, Morfou, is much smaller and is fed by a less significant river. When the Phoenicians first discovered the island, it was well-forested. Beautiful valleys opened up to them as they sailed along the southern coast, fed by clear streams from the southern mountain range and shaded by dense forests of pine and cedar, the latter of which is said to have sometimes grown even larger than those in Lebanon. The mountain range was also rich in valuable metals. Gold and silver were found in some places, but only in small amounts; iron was found in significant quantities, but the main resource was copper, which got its name from the island. Other products included high-quality wheat, the rich Cyprian wine that maintains its strength and flavor for nearly a century, the henna dye sourced from the plant known as copher or cyprus, the Lawsonia alba of modern botany; valuable pigments in red, yellow, green, and amber; hemp and flax; tar, boxwood, and all the materials needed for shipbuilding, from heavy timbers for the keel to the lightest spar and the thinnest sail.

The earliest of the Phoenician settlements in Cyprus seem to have lain upon its southern coast. Here were Citium, Amathus, Curium, and Paphus, the Palæ-paphus of the geographers, which have all yielded abundant traces of a Phoenician occupation at a very distant period. Citium, now Larnaka, was on the western side of a deep bay, which indents the more eastern portion of the southern coast, between the promontories of Citi and Pyla. It is sheltered from all winds except the south-east, and continues to the present day the chief port of the island. The Phoenician settlers improved on the natural position by the formation of an artificial basin, enclosed within piers, the lines of which may be traced, though the basin itself is sanded up.512 A plain extends for some distance inland, on which the palm-tree flourishes, and which is capable of producing excellent crops of wheat.513 Access to the interior is easy; for the mountain range sinks as it proceeds eastward, and between Citium and Dali (Idalium), on a tributary of the Pediæus, is of small elevation. There are indications that the Phoenicians did not confine themselves to the coast, but penetrated into the interior, and even settled there in large numbers. Idalium, sixteen miles north-west of Citium, and Golgi (Athiénau), ten miles nearly due north of the same, show traces of having supported for a considerable time a large Phoenician population,514 and must be regarded as outposts advanced from Citium into the mountains for trading, and perhaps for mining purposes. Idalium (Dali) has a most extensive Phoenician necropolis; the interments have a most archaic character; and their Phoenician origin is indicated both by their close resemblance to interments in Phoenicia proper and by the discovery, in connection with them, of Phoenician inscriptions.515 At Golgi the remains scarcely claim so remote an antiquity. They belong to the time when Phoenician art was dominated by a strong Egyptian influence, and when it also begins to have a partially Hellenic character. Some critics assign them to the sixth, or even to the fifth century, B.C.516

The earliest Phoenician settlements in Cyprus seem to have been located along its southern coast. Here were Citium, Amathus, Curium, and Paphus, known as Palæ-paphus by geographers, all of which have shown clear signs of a Phoenician presence from a very early period. Citium, now Larnaka, was situated on the western side of a deep bay that cuts into the eastern part of the southern coast, nestled between the promontories of Citi and Pyla. It is protected from all winds except the southeast and continues to be the main port of the island today. The Phoenician settlers enhanced the natural harbor by creating an artificial basin enclosed by piers, the outlines of which can still be traced, although the basin itself is now filled with sand.512 A plain stretches inland for some distance, thriving with palm trees and capable of yielding excellent wheat crops.513 Access to the interior is easy; the mountain range slopes down as it moves eastward, and the area between Citium and Dali (Idalium), located on a tributary of the Pediæus, is relatively low in elevation. There are signs that the Phoenicians didn't just stay along the coast, but moved into the interior and even settled there in significant numbers. Idalium, about sixteen miles northwest of Citium, and Golgi (Athiénau), roughly ten miles due north of Citium, show evidence of having supported a large Phoenician population for a considerable amount of time,514 and should be seen as outposts from Citium into the mountains for trade and possibly mining. Idalium (Dali) has a very large Phoenician cemetery; the burials have a distinctly archaic style; and their Phoenician origins are evident both by their close resemblance to burials in Phoenicia and by the discovery of Phoenician inscriptions associated with them.515 At Golgi, the remains date back to a less ancient period. They belong to the time when Phoenician art was heavily influenced by Egypt and began to show some Hellenic characteristics. Some scholars date them to the sixth, or even the fifth century, B.C.516

West of Citium, also upon the south coast, and in a favourable situation for trade with the interior, was Amathus. The name Amathus has been connected with “Hamath;"517 but there is no reason to suppose that the Hamathites were Phoenicians. Amathus, which Stephen of Byzantium calls “a most ancient Cyprian city,"518 was probably among the earliest of the Phoenician settlements in the island. It lay in the bay formed by the projection of Cape Gatto from the coast, and, like Citium, looked to the south-east. Westward and south-westward stretched an extensive plain, fertile and well-watered, shaded by carob and olive-trees,519 whilst towards the north were the rich copper mines from which the Amathusians derived much of their prosperity. The site has yielded a considerable amount of Phoenician remains—tombs, sarcophagi, vases, bowls, pateræ and statuettes.520 Many of the tombs resemble those at Idalium; others are stone chambers deeply buried in the earth. The mimetic art shows Assyrian and Egyptian influence, but is essentially Phoenician, and of great interest. Further reference will be made to it in the Chapter on the Æsthetic Art of the Phoenicians.

West of Citium, also on the south coast, and well-positioned for trade with the interior, was Amathus. The name Amathus has been linked to “Hamath;"517 but there's no reason to think that the Hamathites were Phoenicians. Amathus, which Stephen of Byzantium refers to as “a very ancient Cyprian city,"518 was likely one of the earliest Phoenician settlements on the island. It was located in the bay created by Cape Gatto extending from the coast, and like Citium, faced southeast. To the west and southwest stretched a large plain, rich and well-watered, lined with carob and olive trees,519 while to the north were the valuable copper mines that provided much of the Amathusians' wealth. The site has produced a significant number of Phoenician artifacts—tombs, sarcophagi, vases, bowls, pateræ, and statuettes.520 Many of the tombs are similar to those at Idalium; others are stone chambers buried deep in the earth. The mimetic art reflects Assyrian and Egyptian influences but is fundamentally Phoenician and of great interest. More details will be discussed in the Chapter on the Aesthetic Art of the Phoenicians.

Still further to the west, in the centre of the bay enclosed between the promontories of Zeugari and Boosoura, was the colony of Curium, on a branch of the river Kuras. Curium lay wholly open to the south-western-gales, but had a long stretch of sandy shore towards the south-east, on which vessels could be drawn up. The town was situated on a rocky elevation, 300 feet in height, and was further defended by a strong wall, a large portion of which may still be traced.521 The richest discovery of Phoenician ornaments and objects of art that has yet been made took place at Curium, where, in the year 1874, General Di Cesnola happened upon a set of “Treasure Chambers” containing several hundreds of rings, gems, necklaces, bracelets, armlets, ear-rings, bowls, basins, jugs, pateræ, &c., in the precious metals, which have formed the principal material for all recent disquisitions on the true character and excellency of Phoenician art. Commencing with works of which the probable date is the fifteenth or sixteenth century B.C., and descending at least as far as the best Greek period522 (B.C. 500-400), embracing, moreover, works which are purely Assyrian, purely Egyptian, and purely Greek, this collection has yet so predominant a Phoenician character as to mark Curium, notwithstanding the contrary assertions of the Greeks themselves,523 for a thoroughly Phoenician town. And the history of the place confirms this view, since Curium sided with Amathus and the Persians in the war of Onesilus.524 No doubt, like most of the other Phoenician cities in Cyprus, it was Hellenised gradually; but there must have been many centuries during which it was an emporium of Phoenician trade and a centre of Phoenician influence.

Further west, in the center of the bay surrounded by the cliffs of Zeugari and Boosoura, was the colony of Curium, located by a branch of the Kuras River. Curium was completely exposed to the southwestern gales but had a long sandy beach to the southeast where ships could be pulled up. The town was built on a rocky hill, 300 feet high, and was additionally protected by a strong wall, parts of which can still be seen. The most significant discovery of Phoenician jewelry and art has taken place in Curium, where in 1874, General Di Cesnola stumbled upon a set of "Treasure Chambers" holding hundreds of rings, gems, necklaces, bracelets, armlets, earrings, bowls, basins, jugs, and more, made from precious metals. These discoveries have become the main source for recent discussions on the true nature and excellence of Phoenician art. Starting with works likely dating back to the fifteenth or sixteenth century B.C. and spanning at least to the peak of Greek art (B.C. 500-400), including purely Assyrian, purely Egyptian, and purely Greek pieces, this collection still retains a strong Phoenician character, marking Curium, despite the claims of the Greeks, as a fully Phoenician town. The history of the place supports this perspective since Curium sided with Amathus and the Persians during the war of Onesilus. Undoubtedly, like most other Phoenician cities in Cyprus, it gradually adopted Hellenistic culture; however, there must have been many centuries during which it served as a hub of Phoenician trade and influence.

Where the southern coast of Cyprus begins to trend to the north-west, and a river of some size, the Bocarus or Diorizus, reaches the sea, stood the Phoenician settlement of Paphos, founded (as was said525) by Cinyras, king of Byblus. Here was one of the most celebrated of all the temples of Astarté or Ashtoreth,526 the Phoenician Nature-Goddess; and here ruled for many centuries the sacerdotal class of the Cinyridæ. The remains of the temple have been identified, and will be described in a future chapter. They have the massive character of all early Phoenician architecture.

Where the southern coast of Cyprus starts to curve to the northwest and a sizable river, the Bocarus or Diorizus, flows into the sea, there was the Phoenician settlement of Paphos, said to be founded by Cinyras, king of Byblus. This was home to one of the most famous temples of Astarté or Ashtoreth, the Phoenician Nature-Goddess; and for many centuries, the priestly class of the Cinyridæ held power here. The remains of the temple have been identified, and will be described in a future chapter. They showcase the impressive style of early Phoenician architecture.

Among other Phoenician settlements in Cyprus were, it is probable, Salamis, Ammochosta (now Famagosta), Tamasus, and Soli. Salamis must be regarded as originally Phoenician on account of the name, which cannot be viewed as anything but another form of the Hebrew “Salem,” the alternative name of Jerusalem.527 Salamis lay on the eastern coast of the island at the mouth of the main river, the Pediæus. It occupied the centre of a large bay which looked towards Phoenicia, and would naturally be the place where the Phoenicians would first land. There is no natural harbour beyond that afforded by the mouth of the Pediæus, but a harbour was easily made by throwing out piers into the bay; and of this, which is now sanded up, the outline may be traced.528 There are, however, no remains, either at Salamis or in the immediate neighbourhood, which can claim to be regarded as Phoenician; and the glories of the city belong to the history of Greece.

Among other Phoenician settlements in Cyprus were, likely, Salamis, Ammochosta (now Famagosta), Tamasus, and Soli. Salamis should be considered originally Phoenician because of its name, which is simply another version of the Hebrew “Salem,” an alternative name for Jerusalem.527 Salamis was located on the eastern coast of the island at the mouth of the main river, the Pediæus. It sat in the center of a large bay facing Phoenicia, and would naturally be the location where the Phoenicians would first arrive. There is no natural harbor beyond what the mouth of the Pediæus provides, but a harbor could easily be created by extending piers into the bay; and although this area has now filled with sand, the outline can still be seen.528 However, there are no remains, either at Salamis or in the nearby area, that can be considered Phoenician; the city's glory instead belongs to the history of Greece.

Ammochosta was situated within a few miles of Salamis, towards the south.529 Its first appearance in history belongs to the reign of Esarhaddon (B.C. 680), when we find it in a list of ten Cyprian cities, each having its own king, who acknowledged for their suzerain the great monarch of Assyria.530 Soon afterwards it again occurs among the cities tributary to Asshur-bani-pal.531 Otherwise we have no mention of it in Phoenician times. As Famagosta it was famous in the wars between the Venetians and the Turks.

Ammochosta was located just a few miles from Salamis, to the south. 529 Its first mention in history dates back to the reign of Esarhaddon (B.C. 680), when it appeared in a list of ten Cyprian cities, each governed by its own king, who recognized the great king of Assyria as their overlord. 530 Shortly after, it was again listed among the cities paying tribute to Asshur-bani-pal. 531 Otherwise, it’s not mentioned during Phoenician times. As Famagosta, it became well-known during the conflicts between the Venetians and the Turks.

Tamasus, or Tamassus, was an inland city, and the chief seat of the mining operations which the Phoenicians carried on in the island in search of copper.532 It lay a few miles to the west of Idalium (Dali), on the northern flank of the southern mountain chain. The river Pediæus flowed at its feet. Like Ammochosta, it appears among the Cyprian towns which in the seventh century B.C. were tributary to the Assyrians.533 The site is still insufficiently explored.

Tamasus, or Tamassus, was an inland city and the main hub for mining operations that the Phoenicians conducted on the island in search of copper.532 It was located a few miles west of Idalium (Dali), on the northern side of the southern mountain range. The river Pediæus flowed at its base. Like Ammochosta, it was one of the Cyprian towns that were under the Assyrians' control in the seventh century B.C.533 The site is still not fully explored.

Soli lay upon the coast, in the recess of the gulf of Morfou.534 The fiction of its foundation by Philocyprus at the suggestion of Solon535 is entirely disproved by the occurrence of the name in the Assyrian lists of Cyprian towns a century before Solon’s time. Its sympathies were with the Phoenician, and not with the Hellenic, population of the island, as was markedly shown when it joined with Amathus and Citium in calling to Artaxerxes for help against Evagoras.536 The city stood on the left bank of the river Clarius, and covered the northern slope of a low hill detached from the main range, extending also over the low ground at the foot of the hill to within a short distance of the shore, where are to be seen the remains of the ancient harbour. The soil in the neighbourhood is very rich, and adapted for almost any kind of cultivation.537 In the mountains towards the south were prolific veins of copper.

Soli was located on the coast in the bay of Morfou.534 The claim that it was founded by Philocyprus at Solon's suggestion535 is completely disproven by the presence of its name in Assyrian records of Cyprian towns a century before Solon's time. Its affiliations were with the Phoenician, rather than the Hellenic, population of the island, as clearly demonstrated when it allied with Amathus and Citium to seek help from Artaxerxes against Evagoras.536 The city was situated on the left bank of the Clarius River and covered the northern slope of a low hill that was separate from the main mountain range. It also extended over the flat land at the base of the hill, close to the shore, where the remains of the ancient harbor can still be seen. The surrounding soil is very fertile and suitable for nearly any type of farming.537 In the mountains to the south, there were abundant sources of copper.

The northern coast of the island between Capes Cormaciti and S. Andreas does not seem to have attracted the Phoenicians, though there are some who regard Lapethus and Cerynia as Phoenician settlements.538 It is a rock-bound shore of no very tempting aspect, behind which the mountain range rises up steeply. Such Phoenician emigrants as held their way along the Salaminian plain and, rounding Cape S. Andreas, passed into the channel that separates Cyprus from the mainland, found the coast upon their right attract them far more than that upon their left, and formed settlements in Cilicia which ultimately became of considerable importance. The chief of these was Tars or Tarsus, probably the Tarshish of Genesis,539 though not that of the later Books, a Phoenician city, which has Phoenician characters upon its coins, and worshipped the supreme Phoenician deity under the title of “Baal Tars,” “the Lord of Tarsus."540 Tarsus commanded the rich Cilician plain up to the very roots of Taurus, was watered by the copious stream of the Cydnus, and had at its mouth a commodious harbour. Excellent timber for shipbuilding grew on the slopes of the hills bounding the plain, and the river afforded a ready means of floating such timber down to the sea. Cleopatra’s ships are said to have been derived from the Cilician forests, which Antony made over to her for the purpose.541 Other Phoenician settlements upon the Cilician coast were, it is probable, Soli, Celenderis, and Nagidus.

The northern coast of the island between Capes Cormaciti and S. Andreas doesn't seem to have attracted the Phoenicians, although some consider Lapethus and Cerynia to be Phoenician settlements.538 It’s a rocky shoreline that isn’t very appealing, with a steep mountain range rising behind it. Phoenician migrants who traveled along the Salaminian plain and rounded Cape S. Andreas, passing into the channel separating Cyprus from the mainland, found the coast on their right much more inviting than the one on their left. They established settlements in Cilicia, which eventually became quite significant. The main one was Tars or Tarsus, likely the Tarshish mentioned in Genesis,539 but not the one referenced in the later Books. This Phoenician city featured Phoenician symbols on its coins and worshipped the chief Phoenician god under the name “Baal Tars,” meaning “the Lord of Tarsus."540 Tarsus controlled the fertile Cilician plain up to the foothills of Taurus, was fed by the abundant Cydnus river, and had a convenient harbor at its mouth. The hills bordering the plain provided excellent timber for shipbuilding, and the river made it easy to transport this timber to the sea. Cleopatra’s ships are said to have been made from the Cilician forests that Antony granted her for this purpose.541 Other possible Phoenician settlements along the Cilician coast include Soli, Celenderis, and Nagidus.

Pursuing their way westward, in search of new abodes, the emigrants would pass along the coast, first of Pamphylia and then of Lycia. In Pamphylia there is no settlement that can be with confidence assigned to them; but in Lycia it would seem that they colonised Phaselis, and perhaps other places. The mountain which rises immediately behind Phaselis was called “Solyma;"542 and a very little to the south was another mountain known as “Phoenicus."543 Somewhat further to the west lies the cape still called Cape Phineka,544 in which the root Phoenix ({phoinix}) is again to be detected. A large district inland was named Cabalis or Cabalia,545 or (compare Phoen. and Heb. gebal, mod. Arab. jebel) the “mountain” country. Phaselis was situated on a promontory projecting south-eastward into the Mediterranean,546 and was reckoned to have three harbours,547 which are marked in the accompanying chart. Of these the principal one was that on the western side of the isthmus, which was formed by a stone pier carried out for more than two hundred yards into the sea, and still to be traced under the water.548 The other two, which were of smaller size, lay towards the east. The Phoenicians were probably tempted to make a settlement at the place, partly by the three ports, partly by the abundance of excellent timber for shipbuilding which the neighbourhood furnishes. “Between Phaselis and Cape Avora, a little north of it,” says a modern traveller, “a belt of large and handsome pines borders the shore for some miles."549

Heading west in search of new homes, the emigrants traveled along the coast, first of Pamphylia and then of Lycia. In Pamphylia, there isn’t a settlement that can confidently be linked to them; however, in Lycia, it appears they established a colony at Phaselis and possibly other locations. The mountain directly behind Phaselis was called “Solyma;"542 and just a bit to the south was another mountain known as “Phoenicus."543 Further west lies the cape still named Cape Phineka,544 which shows the root Phoenix ({phoinix}) again. A large area inland was called Cabalis or Cabalia,545 or (compare Phoen. and Heb. gebal, mod. Arab. jebel) meaning the “mountain” country. Phaselis was located on a promontory that juts southeast into the Mediterranean,546 and it was considered to have three harbors,547 which are indicated in the accompanying chart. The main one was on the western side of the isthmus and was created by a stone pier extending more than two hundred yards into the sea, which can still be traced underwater.548 The other two were smaller and located towards the east. The Phoenicians were likely drawn to settle in this area, partly because of the three ports and partly due to the plentiful supply of high-quality timber for shipbuilding nearby. “Between Phaselis and Cape Avora, just north of it,” notes a modern traveler, “a stretch of large, attractive pines lines the shore for several miles."549

From Lycia the Asiatic coast westward and north-westward was known as Caria; and here Phoenician settlements appear to have been numerous. The entire country was at any rate called Phoenicé by some authors.550 But the circumstances do not admit of our pointing out any special Phoenician settlements in this quarter, which early fell under almost exclusive Greek influence. There are ample grounds, however, for believing that the Phoenicians colonised Rhodes at the south-western angle of Asia Minor, off the Carian coast. According to Conon,551 the earliest inhabitants of Rhodes were the Heliades, whom the Phoenicians expelled. The Phoenicians themselves were at a later date expelled by the Carians, and the Carians by the Greeks. Ergeias, however, the native historian, declared552 that the Phoenicians remained, at any rate in some parts of the island, until the Greeks drove them out. Ialysus was, he said, one of their cities. Dictys Cretensis placed Phoenicians, not only in Ialysus, but in Camirus also.553 It is the conclusion of Kenrick that “the Phoenician settlement in Rhodes was the first which introduced civilisation among the primeval inhabitants, and that they maintained their ascendancy till the rise of the naval power of the Carians. These new settlers reduced the Phoenicians to the occupancy of three principal towns”—i.e. Lindus, Ialysus, and Camirus; but “from these too they were expelled by the Dorians, or only allowed to remain at Ialysus as the hereditary priesthood of their native god."554 Rhodes is an island about one-fourth the size of Cyprus, with its axis from the north-east to the south-west. It possesses excellent harbours, accessible from all quarters,555 and furnishing a secure shelter in all weathers. The fertility of the soil is great; and the remarkable history of the island shows the importance which attaches to it in the hands of an enterprising people. Turkish apathy has, however, succeeded in reducing it to insignificance.

From Lycia, the Asian coast to the west and northwest was known as Caria, where there seemed to be many Phoenician settlements. At least some authors referred to the entire region as Phoenicé.550 However, there’s not enough evidence to point out any specific Phoenician settlements in this area, which soon came under almost exclusive Greek influence. There are strong reasons to believe that the Phoenicians colonized Rhodes at the southwestern tip of Asia Minor, off the Carian coast. According to Conon,551 the earliest inhabitants of Rhodes were the Heliades, who were pushed out by the Phoenicians. Later, the Carians expelled the Phoenicians, and then the Greeks expelled the Carians. However, the native historian Ergeias declared552 that the Phoenicians remained in some parts of the island until the Greeks drove them out. He mentioned that Ialysus was one of their cities. Dictys Cretensis noted that there were Phoenicians not just in Ialysus, but also in Camirus.553 Kenrick concluded that “the Phoenician settlement in Rhodes was the first to introduce civilization among the original inhabitants, and they maintained their influence until the naval power of the Carians emerged. These new settlers forced the Phoenicians to occupy three main towns”—i.e., Lindus, Ialysus, and Camirus; but “from these too they were expelled by the Dorians, or were only allowed to stay in Ialysus as the hereditary priesthood of their local god.”554 Rhodes is an island about one-fourth the size of Cyprus, stretching from northeast to southwest. It has great harbors that are accessible from all directions,555 providing a secure refuge in all types of weather. The soil is very fertile, and the island's remarkable history highlights its significance in the hands of a dynamic people. However, Turkish indifference has managed to diminish its importance.

The acquisition of Rhodes led the stream of Phoenician colonisation onwards in two directions, south-westward and north-westward. South-westward, it passed by way of Carpathus and Casus to Crete, and then to Cythera; north-westward, by way of Chalcia, Telos, and Astypalæa, to the Cyclades and Sporades. The presence of the Phoenicians in Crete is indicated by the haven “Phoenix,” where St. Paul’s conductors hoped to have wintered their ship;556 by the town of Itanus, which was named after a Phoenician founder,557 and was a staple of the purple-trade,558 and by the existence near port Phoenix of a town called “Araden.” Leben, on the south coast, near Cape Leo, seems also to have derived its name from the Semitic word for “lion."559 Crete, however, does not appear to have been occupied by the Phoenicians at more than a few points, or for colonising so much as for trading purposes. They used its southern ports for refitting and repairing their ships, but did not penetrate into the interior, must less attempt to take possession of the whole extensive territory. It was otherwise with the smaller islands. Cythera is said to have derived its name from the Phoenician who colonised it, and the same is also reported of Melos.560 Ios was, we are told, originally called Phoenicé;561 Anaphé had borne the name of Membliarus, after one of the companions of Cadmus;562 Oliarus, or Antiparos, was colonised from Sidon.563 Thera’s earliest inhabitants were of the Phoenician race;564 either Phoenicians or Carians had, according to Thucydides,565 colonised in remote times “the greater part of the islands of the Ænean.” There was a time when probably all the Ægean islands were Phoenician possessions, or at any rate acknowledged Phoenician influence, and Siphnus gave its gold, its silver,566 and its lead,567 Cythera its shell-fish,568 Paros its marble, Melos its sulphur and its alum,569 Nisyrus its millstones,570 and the islands generally their honey,571 to increase the wealth and advance the commercial interests of their Phoenician masters.

The takeover of Rhodes pushed Phoenician colonization forward in two main directions: southwest and northwest. Southwest, they traveled from Carpathus and Casus to Crete, then onward to Cythera; northwest, they moved through Chalcia, Telos, and Astypalæa to the Cyclades and Sporades. The Phoenicians' presence in Crete is shown by the harbor called “Phoenix,” where St. Paul's guides hoped to dock their ship; 556 by the town of Itanus, named after a Phoenician founder, 557 which was a hub of purple dye trade, 558 and by the nearby town of “Araden” close to port Phoenix. Leben, located on the south coast near Cape Leo, also seems to get its name from the Semitic word for “lion.” 559 However, it looks like the Phoenicians only occupied a few spots in Crete, mainly for trading rather than colonizing. They used the southern ports for repairing their ships but didn’t venture inland, let alone try to take control of the vast territory. The situation was different for the smaller islands. Cythera is said to be named after the Phoenician who settled there, and the same is reported for Melos. 560 Ios was originally called Phoenicé; 561 Anaphé was named after Membliarus, one of Cadmus's companions; 562 Oliarus, or Antiparos, was colonized from Sidon. 563 The earliest settlers of Thera were of Phoenician descent; 564 either Phoenicians or Carians had, as Thucydides mentioned, 565 settled much of the Ægean islands long ago. There was a time when almost all the Aegean islands were under Phoenician control or at least influenced by them, and Siphnus contributed its gold, silver, 566 and lead, 567 Cythera provided shellfish, 568 Paros its marble, Melos its sulfur and alum, 569 Nisyrus its millstones, 570 and the islands as a whole supplied honey 571 to boost the wealth and commercial interests of their Phoenician rulers.

From the Sporades and Cyclades the advance was easy to the islands of the Northern Ægean, Lemnos, Imbrus, Thasos, and Samothrace. The settlement of the Phoenicians in Thasos is attested by Herodotus, who says that the Tyrian Hercules (Melkarth) was worshipped there,572 and ascribes to the Phoenicians extensive mining operations on the eastern shores of the island between Ænyra and Coenyra.573 A Phoenician occupation of Lemnos, Imbrus, and Samothrace is indicated by the worship in those islands of the Cabeiri,574 who were undoubtedly Phoenician deities. Whether the Phoenicians passed from these islands to the Thracian mainland, and worked the gold-mines of Mount Pangæus in the vicinity of Philippi, may perhaps be doubtful, but such seems to have been the belief of Strabo and Pliny.575 Strabo also believed that there had been a Semitic element in the population of Euboea which had been introduced by Cadmus;576 and a Phoenician settlement in Boeotia was the current tradition of the Greek writers upon primitive times, whether historians or geographers.577

From the Sporades and Cyclades, it was easy to move on to the islands of the Northern Aegean: Lemnos, Imbrus, Thasos, and Samothrace. Herodotus notes that the Phoenicians settled in Thasos, mentioning that the Tyrian Hercules (Melkarth) was worshipped there,572 and attributes extensive mining operations on the eastern shores of the island, between Ænyra and Coenyra, to the Phoenicians.573 The worship of the Cabeiri on Lemnos, Imbrus, and Samothrace suggests a Phoenician presence there,574 as these were undoubtedly Phoenician deities. It may be uncertain whether the Phoenicians moved from these islands to the Thracian mainland to mine the gold mines of Mount Pangæus near Philippi, but this appears to be what Strabo and Pliny believed.575 Strabo also thought that there had been a Semitic influence in the population of Euboea introduced by Cadmus;576 and a Phoenician settlement in Boeotia was a common belief among Greek writers discussing early times, whether they were historians or geographers.577

The further progress of the Phoenician settlements northward into the Propontis and the Euxine is a point whereon different opinions may be entertained. Pronectus, on the Bithynian, and Amastris, on the Paphlagonian coast, have been numbered among the colonies of the Phoenicians by some;578 while others have gone so far as to ascribe to them the colonisation of the entire countries of Bithynia, Mariandynia, and Paphlagonia.579 The story of the Argonauts may fairly be held to show580 that Phoenician enterprise early penetrated into the stormy and inhospitable sea which washes Asia Minor upon the north, and even reached its deepest eastern recess; but it is one thing to sail into seas, and, landing where the natives seem friendly, to traffic with the dwellers on them—it is quite another thing to attempt a permanent occupation of portions of their coasts. To do so often provokes hostility, and puts a stop to trade instead of encouraging it. The Phoenicians may have been content to draw their native products from the barbarous tribes of Northern Asia Minor and Western Thrace—nay, even of Southern Scythia—without risking the collisions that might have followed the establishment of settlements.

The further expansion of the Phoenician settlements north into the Sea of Marmara and the Black Sea is a topic with varying opinions. Some consider Pronectus, on the Bithynian coast, and Amastris, on the Paphlagonian coast, to be Phoenician colonies; while others even credit them with colonizing the whole regions of Bithynia, Mariandynia, and Paphlagonia. The tale of the Argonauts suggests that Phoenician ventures reached the rough and unwelcoming seas along the northern coast of Asia Minor early on, even exploring its farthest eastern areas. However, sailing into new waters and trading with seemingly friendly natives is one thing, while trying to establish a lasting presence on their shores is entirely different. Such attempts can often lead to conflict and disrupt trade instead of fostering it. The Phoenicians might have preferred to obtain their goods from the uncivilized tribes of Northern Asia Minor and Western Thrace—indeed, even from Southern Scythia—rather than risking the conflicts that could arise from setting up settlements.

As with the Black Sea, so with the Adriatic, the commercial advantages were not sufficient to tempt the Phoenicians to colonise. From Crete and Cythera they sent their gaze afar, and fixed it midway in the Mediterranean, at the western extremity of the eastern basin, on the shores of Sicily, and the vast projection from the coast of North Africa which goes forth to meet them. They knew the harbourless character of the African coast west of Egypt, and the dangers of the Lesser and Greater Syrtes. They knew the fertility of the Tunisian projection, the excellence of its harbours, and the prolificness of the large island that lay directly opposite. Here were the tracts where they might expand freely, and which would richly repay their occupation of them. It was before the beginning of the eleventh century B.C.—perhaps some centuries before—that the colonisation of North Africa by the Phoenicians was taken in hand:581 and about the same time, in all probability, the capes and isles about Sicily were occupied,582 and Phoenician influence in a little time extended over the entire island.

As with the Black Sea, the Adriatic also didn't offer enough commercial benefits to lure the Phoenicians into settling there. From Crete and Cythera, they looked out into the distance, focusing their sights on the Mediterranean, particularly at the western edge of the eastern basin, along the shores of Sicily, and the large stretch of North Africa that met them. They were aware of the lack of harbors along the African coast west of Egypt and the risks posed by the Lesser and Greater Syrtes. They recognized the fertile land of the Tunisian peninsula, the quality of its harbors, and the abundance of resources on the large island directly across from it. These were areas where they could expand without restrictions, and which would greatly reward their colonization efforts. The Phoenicians began settling in North Africa well before the eleventh century B.C.—likely several centuries earlier—around the same time they probably occupied the capes and islands around Sicily, and Phoenician influence soon spread throughout the entire island.

In North Africa the first colony planted is said to have been Utica. Utica was situated a little to the west of Carthage, at the mouth of the Mejerda or Bagradas river.583 It stood on a rocky promontory which ran out into the sea eastward, and partially protected its harbour. At the opposite extremity, towards the north, ran out another promontory, the modern Ras Sidi Ali-el-Mekki, while the mouth of the harbour, which faced to the south-east, was protected by some islands. At present the deposits of the Mejerda have blocked up almost the whole of this ancient port, and the rocky eminence upon which the city stood looks down on three sides upon a broad alluvial plain, through which the Mejerda pursues a tortuous course to the sea.584 The remains of the ancient town, which occupy the promontory and a peninsula projecting from it, include a necropolis, an amphitheatre, a theatre, a castle, the ruins of a temple, and some remains of baths; but they have nothing about them bearing any of the characteristics of Phoenician architecture, and belong wholly to the Roman or post-Roman period. The neighbourhood is productive of olives, which yield an excellent oil; and in the hills towards the south-west are veins of lead, containing a percentage of silver, which are thought to bear traces of having been worked at a very early date.585

In North Africa, the first colony established is believed to be Utica. Utica was located just west of Carthage, at the mouth of the Mejerda or Bagradas river. It was positioned on a rocky promontory that jutted out into the sea to the east, partially shielding its harbor. At the northern end, another promontory, now called Ras Sidi Ali-el-Mekki, extended out, while the entrance to the harbor, facing southeast, was protected by some islands. Today, the sediments from the Mejerda have nearly filled this ancient port, and the rocky hill where the city once stood overlooks three sides of a wide alluvial plain, through which the Mejerda winds its way to the sea. The remnants of the ancient town, found on the promontory and a peninsula extending from it, include a necropolis, an amphitheater, a theater, a castle, the ruins of a temple, and some remains of baths; however, these structures do not exhibit any features of Phoenician architecture and are entirely from the Roman or post-Roman era. The surrounding area is rich in olive trees, producing excellent oil; and in the hills to the southwest, there are lead veins with a percentage of silver, which are believed to have been mined a long time ago.

Near Utica was founded, probably not many years later, the settlement of Hippo-Zaritis, of which the name still seems to linger in the modern Bizerta. Hippo-Zaritis stood on the west bank of a natural channel, which united with the sea a considerable lagoon or salt lake, lying south of the town. The channel was kept open by an irregular flux and reflux, the water of the lake after the rainy season flowing off into the sea, and that of the sea, correspondingly, in the dry season passing into the lake.586 At the present time the lake is extraordinarily productive of fish,587 and the sea outside yields coral;588 but otherwise the advantages of the situation are not great.

Near Utica, the settlement of Hippo-Zaritis was probably established not long after, and its name seems to have survived in the modern Bizerta. Hippo-Zaritis was located on the west bank of a natural channel that connected a large lagoon or salt lake, situated south of the town, to the sea. The channel was kept open by irregular tides, with the lake's water flowing into the sea after the rainy season, and the sea's water, in return, flowing into the lake during the dry season.586 Nowadays, the lake is extremely rich in fish,587 and the sea outside produces coral;588 however, aside from that, the advantages of the location are not considerable.

Two degrees further to the west, on a hill overlooking the sea, and commanding a lovely prospect over the verdant plain at its base, watered by numerous streams, was founded the colony of Hippo Regius, memorable as having been for five-and-thirty years the residence of St. Augustine. The Phoenicians were probably attracted to the site by the fertility of the soil, the unfailing supplies of water, and the abundant timber and rich iron ore of the neighbouring mountains.589 Hippo Regius is now Bona, or rather has been replaced by that town, which lies about a mile and a half north of the ancient Hippo, close upon the coast, in the fertile tract formed by the soil brought down by the river Seybouse. The old harbour of Hippo is filled up, and the remains of the ancient city are scanty; but the lovely gardens and orchards, which render Bona one of the most agreeable of Algerian towns, sufficiently explain and justify the Phoenician choice of the site.590

Two degrees further west, on a hill overlooking the sea and providing a beautiful view of the green plain below, which is nourished by many streams, the colony of Hippo Regius was established. It is noteworthy for being the home of St. Augustine for thirty-five years. The Phoenicians were likely drawn to this location because of the fertile soil, the continuous supply of water, and the plentiful timber and rich iron ore from the nearby mountains.589 Hippo Regius is now called Bona, or rather, it has been replaced by that town, which is about a mile and a half north of the ancient Hippo, right by the coast, in the fertile area created by the soil deposited by the Seybouse River. The old harbor of Hippo is filled in, and the remnants of the ancient city are limited; however, the beautiful gardens and orchards that make Bona one of the most pleasant towns in Algeria clearly illustrate why the Phoenicians chose this site.590

In the same bay with Utica, further to the south, and near its inner recess, was founded, nearly three centuries after Utica, the most important of all the Phoenician colonies, Carthage. The advantages of the locality are indicated by the fact that the chief town of Northern Africa, Tunis, has grown up within a short distance of the site. It combined the excellences of a sheltered situation, a good soil, defensible eminences, and harbours which a little art made all that was to be desired in ancient times and with ancient navies. These basins, partly natural, partly artificial, still exist;591 but their communication with the sea is blocked up, as also is the channel which connected the military harbour with the harbours of commerce. The remains of the ancient town are mostly beneath the surface of the soil, but modern research has uncovered a portion of them, and brought to light a certain number of ruins which belong probably to the very earliest period. Among these are walls in the style called “Cyclopian,” built of a very hard material, and more than thirty-two feet thick, which seem to have surrounded the ancient Byrsa or citadel, and which are still in places sixteen feet high.592 The Roman walls found emplaced above these are of far inferior strength and solidity. An extensive necropolis lies north of the ancient town, on the coast near Cape Camart.

In the same bay as Utica, further south and near its inner area, Carthage was founded nearly three centuries after Utica, becoming the most significant of all the Phoenician colonies. The benefits of this location are highlighted by the fact that the main city of Northern Africa, Tunis, developed just a short distance from the site. It had the advantages of a sheltered position, fertile soil, defensible heights, and harbors that, with a bit of effort, met all the needs of ancient times and navies. These harbors, some natural and some man-made, still exist; 591 but their access to the sea is blocked, as is the channel that connected the military harbor with the commercial ports. Most of the remains of the ancient city lie beneath the soil, but modern research has revealed part of them, uncovering a number of ruins likely from the very earliest period. Among these are walls in the “Cyclopian” style, made of very hard material and more than thirty-two feet thick, which seem to have encircled the ancient Byrsa or citadel, and in some places, they still stand sixteen feet high.592 The Roman walls built over these are much weaker and less durable. An extensive necropolis is situated north of the ancient city, on the coast near Cape Camart.

Another early and important Phoenician settlement in these parts was Hadrumetum or Adrymes,593 which seems to be represented by the modern Soûsa. Hadrumetum lay on the eastern side of the great Tunisian projection, near the southern extremity of a large bay which looks to the east, and is now known as the Gulf of Hammamet. Its position was upon the coast at the edge of the vast plain called at present the “Sahel of Soûsa,” which is sandy, but immensely productive of olive oil. “Millions of olive-trees,” it is said, “cover the tract,"594 and the present annual exportation amounts to 40,000 hectolitres.595 Ancient remains are few, but the Cothon, or circular harbour, may still be traced, and in the necropolis, which almost wholly encircles the town, many sepulchral chambers have been found, excavated in the chalk, closely resembling in their arrangements those of the Phoenician mainland.

Another early and significant Phoenician settlement in this area was Hadrumetum or Adrymes, which appears to correspond to the modern Soûsa. Hadrumetum was located on the eastern side of the large Tunisian projection, near the southern end of a big bay that faces east, now known as the Gulf of Hammamet. Its location was on the coast at the edge of the vast plain currently referred to as the “Sahel of Soûsa,” which is sandy yet incredibly productive for olive oil. It is said that “millions of olive trees” cover the area, and the current annual export amounts to 40,000 hectolitres. Ancient remains are scarce, but the Cothon, or circular harbor, can still be traced, and in the necropolis that almost completely surrounds the town, many burial chambers have been discovered, carved in the chalk, closely resembling those found on the Phoenician mainland.

South of Hadrumetum, at no great distance, was Leptis Minor, now Lemta. The gulf of Hammamet terminates southwards in the promontory of Monastir, between which and Ras Dimas is a shallow bay looking to the north-east. Here was the Lesser Leptis, so called to distinguish it from the larger city of the same name between the Lesser and the Greater Syrtis; it was, however, a considerable town, as appears from its remains. These lie along the coast for two miles and a half in Lat. 35º 43´, and include the ruins of an aqueduct, of a theatre, of quays, and of jetties.596 The neighbourhood is suited for the cultivation of the olive.

South of Hadrumetum, not far away, was Leptis Minor, now Lemta. The Gulf of Hammamet ends to the south at the Monastir promontory, with a shallow bay between it and Ras Dimas that faces northeast. This was Lesser Leptis, named to differentiate it from the larger city of the same name located between the Lesser and Greater Syrtis; nonetheless, it was a significant town, as evidenced by its remains. These stretch along the coast for two and a half miles at Latitude 35º 43', and include the ruins of an aqueduct, a theater, quays, and jetties.596 The area is suitable for olive cultivation.

The Greater Leptis (Leptis Major) lay at a considerable distance from the Lesser one. Midway in the low African coast which intervenes between the Tunisian projection and the Cyrenaic one, about Long. 14º 22´ E. of Greenwich, are ruins, near a village called Lebda, which, it is generally agreed, mark the site of this ancient city. Leptis Major was a colony from Sidon, and occupied originally a small promontory, which projects from the coast in a north-easterly direction, and attains a moderate elevation above the plain at its base. Towards the mainland it was defended by a triple line of wall still to be traced, and on the sea-side by blocks of enormous strength, which are said to resemble those on the western side of the island of Aradus.597 In Roman times the town, under the name of Neapolis,598 attained a vast size, and was adorned with magnificent edifices, of which there are still numerous remains. The neighbourhood is rich in palm-groves and olive-groves,599 and the Cinyps region, regarded by Herodotus as the most fertile in North Africa,5100 lies at no great distance to the east.

The Greater Leptis (Leptis Major) was located a good distance from the Lesser one. Situated halfway along the low African coast between the Tunisian and Cyrenaic areas, around Long. 14º 22´ E. of Greenwich, there are ruins near a village called Lebda, which are widely accepted as the site of this ancient city. Leptis Major was a colony from Sidon and originally occupied a small promontory that juts out from the coast in a north-easterly direction and has a moderate height above the plain below. On the mainland side, it was protected by a triple line of walls that can still be traced, and on the sea side, there were massive blocks of great strength, said to be similar to those on the western side of the island of Aradus.597 In Roman times, the town, known as Neapolis,598 grew significantly and was embellished with stunning buildings, of which many remains can still be seen. The area is rich in palm and olive groves,599 and the Cinyps region, seen by Herodotus as the most fertile region in North Africa,5100 is located not far to the east.

Ten miles east, and a little south of Leptis Minor,5101 was Thapsus, a small town, but one of great strength, famous as the scene of Julius Cæsar’s great victory over Cato.5102 It occupied a position close to the promontory now known as Ras Dimas, in Lat. 35º 39´, Long. 11º 3´, and was defended by a triple enclosure, whereof considerable remains are still existing. The outermost of the three lines appears to have consisted of little more than a ditch and a palisaded rampart, such as the Romans were accustomed to throw up whenever they pitched a camp in their wars; but the second and third were more substantial. The second, which was about forty yards behind the first, was guarded by a deeper ditch, from which rose a perpendicular stone wall, battlemented at top. The third, forty yards further back, resembled the second, but was on an enlarged scale, and the wall was twenty feet thick.5103 Such triple enclosures are thought to be traceable in other Phoenician settlements also;5104 but in no case are the remains so perfect as at Thapsus. The harbour, which lay south of the town, was protected from the prevalent northern and north-eastern winds by a huge mole or jetty, carried out originally to a distance of 450 yards from the shore, and still measuring 325 yards. The foundation consists of piles driven into the sand, and placed very close together; but the superstructure is a stone wall thirty-five feet thick, and still rising to a height of ten feet above the surface of the water.5105

Ten miles east and a bit south of Leptis Minor, 5101 was Thapsus, a small but powerful town, known for being the site of Julius Cæsar’s significant victory over Cato.5102 It was located near the promontory now called Ras Dimas, at Lat. 35º 39´, Long. 11º 3´, and was protected by a triple enclosure, with considerable remains still in existence. The outermost of the three lines seems to have been just a ditch and a wooden palisade, similar to what the Romans would set up when they established a camp during their campaigns; however, the second and third were more solid. The second enclosure, which was about forty yards behind the first, was defended by a deeper ditch, from which a steep stone wall rose, topped with battlements. The third, forty yards further back, was similar to the second, but larger in scale, with a wall twenty feet thick.5103 Such triple enclosures are believed to be found in other Phoenician settlements as well; 5104 but nowhere are the remains as well-preserved as those at Thapsus. The harbor, located south of the town, was shielded from the common northern and north-eastern winds by a large mole or jetty, originally extending 450 yards from the shore and still measuring 325 yards. The foundation is made of piles driven into the sand and placed very closely together; the superstructure, however, is a stone wall thirty-five feet thick, and it still rises to a height of ten feet above the surface of the water.5105

It is probable that there were many other early Phoenician settlements on the North African seaboard; but those already described were certainly the most important. The fertile coast tract between Hippo Regius and the straits is likely to have been occupied at various points from an early period. But none of these small trading settlements attained to any celebrity; and thus it is unnecessary to go into particulars respecting them.

It’s likely that there were many other early Phoenician settlements along the North African coast, but the ones mentioned were definitely the most significant. The fertile coastal area between Hippo Regius and the straits was probably occupied at various points from an early time. However, none of these small trading settlements became well-known, so there’s no need to discuss them in detail.

In Sicily the permanent Phoenician settlements were chiefly towards the west and the north-west. They included Motya, Eryx, Panormus (Palermo), and Soloeis. That the Phoenicians founded Motya, Panormus, and Soloeis is distinctly stated by Thucydides;5106 while Eryx is proved to have been Phoenician by its remains. Motya, situated on a littoral island less than half a mile from the western shore, in Lat. 38º nearly, has the remains of a wall built of large stones, uncemented, in the Phoenician manner,5107 and carried, like the western wall of Aradus, so close to the coast as to be washed by the waves. It is said by Diodorus to have been at one time a most flourishing town.5108 The coins have Phoenician legends.5109

In Sicily, the permanent Phoenician settlements were mainly located in the west and northwest. These included Motya, Eryx, Panormus (Palermo), and Soloeis. Thucydides clearly states that the Phoenicians established Motya, Panormus, and Soloeis; while the evidence of Phoenician presence in Eryx can be seen in its ruins. Motya is on a coastal island less than half a mile from the western shore, at about 38º latitude, and features the remains of a wall built of large, uncemented stones in the Phoenician style, and similar to the western wall of Aradus, positioned so close to the coast that it is washed by the waves. Diodorus mentions that it was once a very prosperous town. The coins found there bear Phoenician inscriptions.

Eryx lay about seven miles to the north-east of Motya, in a very strong position. Mount Eryx (now Mount Giuliano), on which it was mainly built, rises to the height of two thousand feet above the plain,5110 and, being encircled by a strong wall, was rendered almost impregnable. The summit was levelled and turned into a platform, on which was raised the temple of Astarte or Venus.5111 An excellent harbour, formed by Cape Drepanum (now Trapani), lay at its base. There were springs of water within the walls which yielded an unfailing supply. The walls were of great strength, and a considerable portion of them is still standing, and attests the skill of the Phoenician architects. The blocks in the lower courses are mostly of a large size, some of them six feet long, or more, and bear in many cases the well-known Phoenician mason-marks.5112 They are laid without cement, like those of Aradus and Sidon, and recall the style of the Aradian builders, but are at once less massive and arranged with more skill. The breadth of the wall is about seven feet. At intervals it is flanked by square towers projecting from it, which are of even greater strength than the curtain between them, and which were carried up to a greater height. The doorways in the wall are numerous, and are of a very archaic character, being either covered in by a single long stone lintel or else terminating in a false arch.5113 The commercial advantages of Eryx were twofold, consisting in the produce of the sea as well as in that of the shore. The shore is well suited for the cultivation of the vine,5114 while the neighbouring sea yields tunny-fish, sponges, and coral.5115

Eryx was located about seven miles northeast of Motya, in a very strong position. Mount Eryx (now Mount Giuliano), where it was primarily built, rises to a height of two thousand feet above the plain, 5110 and, surrounded by a strong wall, was made almost impregnable. The summit was flattened and turned into a platform, where the temple of Astarte or Venus was built. 5111 An excellent harbor, formed by Cape Drepanum (now Trapani), was located at its base. There were springs of water within the walls that provided a constant supply. The walls were very strong, with a significant portion still standing, showcasing the skill of Phoenician architects. The blocks in the lower courses are mostly quite large, some measuring six feet long or more, and often feature the recognizable Phoenician mason-marks. 5112 They are laid without mortar, similar to those in Aradus and Sidon, and resemble the style of the Aradian builders, but are less massive and arranged with greater skill. The wall is about seven feet wide. At intervals, it is flanked by square towers that project from it and are even stronger than the wall between them, reaching a greater height. There are numerous doorways in the wall, which have a very archaic design, either covered by a single long stone lintel or ending in a false arch. 5113 The commercial advantages of Eryx were twofold, coming from both the sea's produce and that of the shore. The shore is suitable for vineyard cultivation, 5114 while the nearby sea provides tunny-fish, sponges, and coral. 5115

Panormus (now Palermo) occupies a site almost unequalled by any other Mediterranean city, a site which has conferred upon it the title of “the happy,” and has rendered it for above a thousand years the most important place in the island. “There is no town in Europe which enjoys a more delicious climate, none so charming to look on from a distance, none more delightfully situated in a nest of verdure and flowers. Its superb mountains, with their bare flanks pierced along their base with grottoes, enclose a marvellous garden, the famous ‘Shell of Gold,’ in the midst of which are seen the numerous towers and domes, the fan-like foliage of the palms, the spreading branches of the pines, and Mount Reale on the south towering over all with its vast mass of convents and churches."5116 The harbour lies open to the north; but the Phoenician settlers, here as elsewhere, no doubt made artificial ports by means of piers and moles, which have, however, disappeared on this much-frequented site, where generation after generation has been continually at work building and destroying. Panormus has left us no antique remains beyond its coins, which are abundant, and show that the native name of the settlement was Mahanath.5117 Mahanath was situated about forty miles east of Eryx, on the northern coast of the island.

Panormus (now Palermo) is located in a spot that’s hard to match in any other Mediterranean city, a place that has earned the nickname “the happy” and has been the most significant location on the island for over a thousand years. “There’s no town in Europe with a more pleasant climate, none as picturesque from a distance, and none more beautifully nestled in greenery and flowers. Its impressive mountains, with their bare sides dotted with grottoes at the base, surround a stunning garden, the famed ‘Shell of Gold,’ where you can see numerous towers and domes, the fan-like leaves of the palms, the sprawling branches of the pines, and Mount Reale to the south, looming above with its massive collection of monasteries and churches.”5116 The harbor is open to the north; however, the Phoenician settlers, as they did elsewhere, likely constructed artificial ports using piers and moles, which have since vanished from this busy location, where countless generations have continuously engaged in building and tearing down. Panormus has left behind no ancient remnants other than its coins, which are plentiful and indicate that the original name of the settlement was Mahanath.5117 Mahanath was located about forty miles east of Eryx, on the northern coast of the island.

Solus, or Soloeis, the Soluntum of the Romans (now Solanto), lay on the eastern side of the promontory (Cape Zafferana) which shuts in the bay of Palermo on the right. It stood on a slope at the foot of a lofty hill, overlooking a small round port, and was fortified by a wall of large squared blocks of stone,5118 which may be still distinctly traced. The site has yielded sarcophagi of an unmistakably Phoenician character,5119 and other objects of a high antiquity which recall the Phoenician manner;5120 but the chief remains belong to the Greco-Roman times.

Solus, or Soloeis, the Soluntum of the Romans (now Solanto), was located on the eastern side of the promontory (Cape Zafferana) that borders the bay of Palermo on the right. It was built on a slope at the base of a high hill, overlooking a small round port, and was surrounded by a wall made of large squared stone blocks, which can still be clearly seen today. The site has uncovered sarcophagi that clearly have Phoenician characteristics and other ancient artifacts that reflect Phoenician styles; however, the main remains are from Greco-Roman times.

The islands in the strait which separates the North African coast from Sicily were also colonised by the Phoenicians. These were three in number, Cossura (now Pantellaria), Gaulos (now Gozzo), and Melita (now Malta). Cossura, the most western of the three, lay about midway in the channel, but nearer to the African coast, from which it is distant not more than about thirty-five miles. It is a mass of igneous rock, which was once a volcano, and which still abounds in hot springs and in jets of steam.5121 There was no natural harbour of any size, but the importance of the position was such that the Phoenicians felt bound to occupy the island, if only to prevent its occupation by others. The soil was sterile; but the coins, which are very numerous,5122 give reason to suppose that the rocks were in early times rich in copper.

The islands in the strait that separates the North African coast from Sicily were also colonized by the Phoenicians. There were three of them: Cossura (now Pantelleria), Gaulos (now Gozo), and Melita (now Malta). Cossura, the westernmost of the three, was situated about halfway across the channel but closer to the African coast, which is only about thirty-five miles away. It is made up of volcanic rock and still has hot springs and steam jets. There wasn't a large natural harbor, but the strategic importance of the location meant that the Phoenicians felt they had to occupy the island to prevent others from taking it. The soil was barren; however, the numerous coins found there suggest that the area was once rich in copper.

Gaulos (now Gozzo) forms, together with Malta and some islets, an insular group lying between the eastern part of Sicily and the Lesser Syrtis. It is situated in Lat. 36º 2´, Long. 12º 10´ nearly, and is distant from Sicily only about fifty miles. The colonisation of the island by the Phoenicians, asserted by Diodorus,5123 is entirely borne out by the remains, which include a Phoenician inscription of some length,5124 coins with Phoenician legends,5125 and buildings, believed to be temples, which have Phoenician characteristics.5126 Some of the blocks of stone employed in their construction have a length of nearly twenty feet,5127 with a width and height proportionate; and all are put together without cement or mortar of any kind. A conical stone of the kind known to have been used by the Phoenicians in their worship was found in one of the temples.5128 Gaulos had a port which was reckoned sufficiently commodious, and which lay probably towards the south-east end of the island.

Gaulos (now Gozzo) forms an island group with Malta and some islets, located between the eastern part of Sicily and the Lesser Syrtis. It's positioned at approximately 36º 2' N latitude and 12º 10' E longitude, and is about fifty miles from Sicily. The colonization of the island by the Phoenicians, as stated by Diodorus,5123 is fully supported by the remains found there, including a lengthy Phoenician inscription,5124 coins with Phoenician writing,5125 and buildings believed to be temples that show Phoenician features.5126 Some stone blocks used in these structures are nearly twenty feet long,5127 with matching width and height; all are assembled without any kind of cement or mortar. A conical stone, known to have been used by the Phoenicians in their worship, was discovered in one of the temples.5128 Gaulos had a port that was considered spacious enough, probably located at the southeast end of the island.

Melita, or Malta, which lies at a short distance from Gozzo, to the south-east, is an island of more than double the size, and of far greater importance. It possesses in La Valetta one of the best harbours, or rather two of the best harbours, in the world. All the navies of Europe could anchor comfortably in the “great port” to the east of the town. The western port is smaller, but is equally well sheltered. Malta has no natural product of much importance, unless it be the honey, after which some think that it was named.5129 The island is almost treeless, and the light powdery soil gives small promise of fertility. Still, the actual produce, both in cereals and in green crops, is large; and the oranges, especially those known as mandarines, are of superior quality. Malta also produced, in ancient as in modern times, the remarkable breed of small dogs5130 which is still held in such high esteem. But the Phoenician colonisation must have taken place rather on account of the situation and the harbour than on account of the products.

Melita, or Malta, located a short distance southeast of Gozzo, is an island over twice the size and of much greater significance. It has one of the best harbors, or rather two of the best harbors, in the world, with La Valetta. All the navies of Europe could comfortably anchor in the "great port" to the east of the town. The western port is smaller but equally well protected. Malta doesn't have any significant natural products, except for the honey, which some believe is where it got its name.5129 The island is almost treeless, and the light, powdery soil doesn’t promise much fertility. Still, its actual yield, both in grains and in vegetables, is considerable; and the oranges, particularly those known as mandarines, are of exceptional quality. Malta has also produced, both in ancient and modern times, a remarkable breed of small dogs5130 that are still greatly valued. However, the Phoenician colonization likely occurred more due to its location and harbor than because of its products.

From Sicily and North Africa the tide of emigration naturally and easily flowed on into Sardinia, which is distant, from the former about 150 and from the latter about 115 miles. The points chosen by the Phoenician settlers lay in the more open and level region of the south and the south-west, and were all enclosed within a line which might be drawn from the coast a little east of Cagliari to the northern extremity of the Gulf of Oristano.5131 The tract includes some mountain groups, but consists mainly of the long and now marshy plain, called the “Campidano,” which reaches across the island from Cagliari on the southern to Oristano on the western coast. This plain, if drained, would be by far the most fertile part of the island; and was in ancient times exceedingly productive in cereals, as we learn from Diodorus.5132 The mountains west of it, especially those about Iglesias, contain rich veins of copper and of lead, together with a certain quantity of silver.5133 Good harbours exist at Cagliari, at Oristano, and between the island of S. Antioco and the western shore. It was at these points especially that the Phoenicians made their settlements, the most important of which were Caralis (Cagliari), Nora, Sulcis, and Tharros. Caralis, or Cagliari, the present capital, lies at the bottom of a deep bay looking southwards, and has an excellent harbour, sheltered in all weathers. There are no remains of Phoenician buildings; but the neighbourhood yields abundant specimens of Phoenician art in the shape of tombs, statuettes, vases, bottles, and the like.5134 Caralis was probably the first of the settlements made by the Phoenicians in Sardinia; it would attract them by its harbour, its mines, and the fertility of its neighbourhood. From Caralis they probably passed to Nora, which lay on the same bay to the south-west; and from Nora they rounded the south-western promontory of Sardinia, and established themselves on the small island now known as the Isola di San Antioco, where they built a town which they called Sulchis or Sulcis.5135 Sulcis has yielded votive tablets of the Phoenician type, tombs, vases, &c.5136 The island was productive of lead, and had an excellent harbour towards the north, and another more open one towards the south. Finally, mid-way on the west coast, at the northern extremity of the Gulf of Oristano, the Phoenicians occupied a small promontory which projects into the sea southwards and there formed a settlement which became known as Tharras or Tharros.5137 Very extensive remains, quite unmistakably Phoenician, including tombs, cippi, statuettes in metal and clay, weapons, and the like, have been found on the site.5138

From Sicily and North Africa, emigration naturally and easily flowed into Sardinia, which is about 150 miles from the former and about 115 miles from the latter. The Phoenician settlers chose locations in the more open and flat areas of the south and southwest, all enclosed within a line that could be drawn from the coast a little east of Cagliari to the northern tip of the Gulf of Oristano.5131 This area includes some mountain groups but mainly consists of the long and now marshy plain known as the "Campidano," which stretches across the island from Cagliari on the southern coast to Oristano on the western coast. If drained, this plain would be the most fertile part of the island and was extremely productive in grains in ancient times, as noted by Diodorus.5132 The mountains to the west, particularly those near Iglesias, contain rich deposits of copper, lead, and some silver.5133 There are good harbors at Cagliari, Oristano, and between the island of San Antioco and the western shore. It was at these locations that the Phoenicians established their settlements, the most significant of which were Caralis (Cagliari), Nora, Sulcis, and Tharros. Caralis, or Cagliari, the current capital, is located at the bottom of a deep bay facing south and has an excellent harbor that is protected in all weather conditions. There are no remains of Phoenician buildings, but the surrounding area yields plenty of examples of Phoenician art in the form of tombs, statuettes, vases, bottles, and the like.5134 Caralis was likely the first settlement the Phoenicians established in Sardinia; they would have been attracted by its harbor, its mines, and the fertility of the surrounding area. From Caralis, they probably went to Nora, which was located on the same bay to the southwest; and from Nora, they rounded the southwestern cape of Sardinia and settled on the small island now called Isola di San Antioco, where they built a town named Sulchis or Sulcis.5135 Sulcis has produced votive tablets of the Phoenician style, tombs, vases, etc.5136 The island was a source of lead and had an excellent northern harbor and another more open one to the south. Finally, midway along the west coast, at the northern edge of the Gulf of Oristano, the Phoenicians occupied a small promontory that juts out into the sea to the south and established a settlement known as Tharras or Tharros.5137 Extensive remains, unmistakably Phoenician, including tombs, cippi, metal and clay statuettes, weapons, and more, have been discovered at the site.5138

The passage would have been easy from Sardinia to Corsica, which is not more than seven miles distant from it; but Corsica seems to have possessed no attraction for the Phoenicians proper, who were perhaps deterred from colonising it by its unhealthiness, or by the savagery of its inhabitants. Or they may have feared to provoke the jealousy of the Tyrrhenians, off whose coast the island lay, and who, without having any colonising spirit themselves, disliked the too near approach of rivals.5139 At any rate, whatever the cause, it seems to have been left to the Carthaginians, to bring Corsica within the range of Phoenician influence; and even the Carthaginians did little more than hold a few points on its shores as stations for their ships.5140

The trip from Sardinia to Corsica would have been simple, as they are only about seven miles apart. However, Corsica didn’t seem to attract the Phoenicians, who might have been put off by its unhealthy conditions or the fierceness of its people. They could have also worried about angering the Tyrrhenians, who lived nearby and were not interested in colonizing themselves but didn’t like the idea of competition. Regardless of the reason, it appears that it was up to the Carthaginians to bring Corsica under Phoenician influence. Even then, the Carthaginians only managed to secure a few spots along the coast as bases for their ships.5139 At any rate, whatever the cause, it seems to have been left to the Carthaginians, to bring Corsica within the range of Phoenician influence; and even the Carthaginians did little more than hold a few points on its shores as stations for their ships.5140

If from Sardinia the Phoenicians ventured on an exploring voyage westward into the open Mediterranean, a day’s sail would bring them within sight of the eastern Balearic Islands, Minorca and Majorca. The sierra of Majorca rises to the height of between 3,000 and 4,000 feet,5141 and can be seen from a great distance. The occupation of the islands by “the Phoenicians” is asserted by Strabo,5142 but we cannot be sure that he does not mean Phoenicians of Africa, i.e. Carthaginians. Still, on the whole, modern criticism inclines to the belief that, even before the foundation of Carthage, Phoenician colonisation had made its way into the Balearic Islands, directly, from the Syrian coast.5143 Some resting-places between the middle Mediterranean and Southern Spain must have been a necessity; and as the North African coast west of Hippo offered no good harbours, it was necessary to seek them elsewhere. Now Minorca has in Port Mahon a harbour of almost unsurpassed excellence,5144 while in Majorca there are fairly good ports both at Palma and at Aleudia.5145 Ivica is less well provided, but there is one of some size, known as Pormany (i.e. “Porta magna”), on the western side of the island, and another, much frequented by fishing-boats,5146 on the south coast near Ibiza. The productions of the Balearides were not, perhaps, in the early times of much importance, since the islands are not, like Sardinia, rich in metals, nor were the inhabitants sufficiently civilised to furnish food supplies or native manufactures in any quantity. If, then, the Phoenicians held them, it must have been altogether for the sake of their harbours.

If the Phoenicians set off from Sardinia on an exploratory journey westward into the open Mediterranean, a day’s sail would bring them into view of the eastern Balearic Islands, Minorca and Majorca. The Sierra of Majorca rises to a height of between 3,000 and 4,000 feet,5141 and can be seen from far away. Strabo claims that “the Phoenicians” occupied the islands,5142 but we can’t be sure he’s not referring to the Phoenicians of Africa, or the Carthaginians. Overall, modern scholars lean towards the belief that even before Carthage was founded, Phoenician colonization had reached the Balearic Islands from the Syrian coast.5143 Some stopping points between the central Mediterranean and Southern Spain must have been essential; since the North African coast west of Hippo lacked good harbors, it was necessary to look elsewhere for them. Minorca has Port Mahon, which is an almost unmatched harbor,5144 while Majorca has reasonably good ports at Palma and Aleudia.5145 Ivica is less well-equipped, but there is a sizable port known as Pormany (i.e. “Porta magna”) on the western side of the island and another, often used by fishing boats,5146 on the south coast near Ibiza. The products of the Balearic Islands may not have been very important in early times, as the islands are not rich in metals like Sardinia, and the inhabitants weren’t civilized enough to provide food supplies or local goods in significant quantities. So, if the Phoenicians did occupy them, it would have been mainly for their harbors.

The colonies of the Mediterranean have now been, all of them, noticed, excepting those which lay upon the south coast of Spain. Of these the most important were Malaca (now Malaga), Sex or Sexti, and Abdera (now Adra). Malaca is said by Strabo to have been “Phoenician in its plan,"5147 Abdera is expressly declared by him to have been “a Phoenician settlement,"5148 while Sexti has coins which connect it with early Phoenician legends.5149 The mountain range above Malaca was anciently rich in gold-mines;5150 Sexti was famous for its salt-pans;5151 Abdera lay in the neighbourhood of productive silver-mines.5152 These were afterwards worked from Carthagena, which was a late Carthaginian colony, founded by Asdrubal, the uncle of Hannibal. Malaga and Carthagena (i.e. New-Town) had well-sheltered harbours; but the ports of Sexti and Abdera were indifferent.

The Mediterranean colonies have now all been recognized, except for those on the southern coast of Spain. The most notable among these were Malaca (now Malaga), Sex or Sexti, and Abdera (now Adra). Strabo mentions that Malaca was “Phoenician in its design,"5147 and he specifically states that Abdera was “a Phoenician settlement,"5148 while Sexti has coins that trace back to early Phoenician legends.5149 The mountain range above Malaca was historically rich in gold mines;5150 Sexti was known for its salt pans;5151 and Abdera was located near productive silver mines.5152 These resources were later exploited from Carthagena, which was a later Carthaginian colony founded by Asdrubal, Hannibal's uncle. Both Malaga and Carthagena (meaning New Town) had well-protected harbors, but the ports of Sexti and Abdera were mediocre.

Outside the Straits of Gibraltar, on the shores of the Atlantic, were two further sets of Phoenician colonies, situated respectively in Africa and in Spain. The most important of those in Africa were Tingis (now Tangiers) and Lixus (now Chemmish), but besides these there were a vast number of staples ({emporia}) without names,5153 spread along the coast as far as Cape Non, opposite the Canary Islands. Tingis, a second Gibraltar, lay nearly opposite that wonderful rock, but a little west of the narrowest part of the strait. It had a temple of the Tyrian Hercules, said to have been older than that at Gades;5154 and its coins have Phoenician legends.5155 The town was situated on a promontory running out to the north-east at the extremity of a semicircular bay about four miles in width, and thus possessed a harbour not to be despised, especially on such a coast. The country around was at once beautiful and fertile, dotted over with palms, and well calculated for the growth of fruit and vegetables. The Atlas mountains rose in the background, with their picturesque summits, while in front were seen the blue Mediterranean, with its crisp waves merging into the wilder Atlantic, and further off the shores of Spain, lying like a blue film on the northern horizon.5156

Outside the Straits of Gibraltar, along the Atlantic coast, were two additional groups of Phoenician colonies located in Africa and Spain. The most significant ones in Africa were Tingis (now Tangiers) and Lixus (now Chemmish), but there were many unnamed trading posts ({emporia}) spread along the coast all the way to Cape Non, across from the Canary Islands. Tingis, often referred to as the second Gibraltar, was situated almost directly across from that famous rock but a bit west of the narrowest part of the strait. It featured a temple dedicated to the Tyrian Hercules, which was said to be older than the one at Gades; and its coins bore Phoenician inscriptions. The town was perched on a promontory stretching out to the northeast at the end of a semicircular bay about four miles wide, providing a harbor that was quite decent, especially for that coastline. The surrounding countryside was both beautiful and fertile, dotted with palm trees and ideal for growing fruits and vegetables. The Atlas mountains rose in the background with their scenic peaks, while in front lay the blue Mediterranean, its crisp waves blending into the more turbulent Atlantic, and further away, the shores of Spain appeared like a blue outline on the northern horizon.

While Tingis lay at the junction of the two seas, on the northern African coast, about five miles east of Cape Spartel, Lixus was situated on the open Atlantic, forty miles to the south of that cape, on the West African coast, looking westward towards the ocean. The streams from Atlas here collect into a considerable river, known now as the Wady-el-Khous, and anciently as the Lixus.5157 The estuary of this river, before reaching the sea, meanders through the plain of Sidi Oueddar, from time to time returning upon itself, and forming peninsulas, which are literally almost islands.5158 From this plain, between two of the great bends made by the stream, rose in one place a rocky hill; and here the Phoenicians built their town, protecting it along the brow of the hill with a strong wall, portions of which still remain in place.5159 The blocks are squared, carefully dressed, and arranged in horizontal courses, without any cement. Some of them are as much as eleven feet long by six feet or somewhat more in height. The wall was flanked at the corners by square towers, and formed a sort of irregular hexagon, above a mile in circumference.5160 A large building within the walls seems to have been a temple;5161 and in it was found one of those remarkable conical stones which are known to have been employed in the Phoenician worship. The estuary of the river formed a tolerably safe harbour for the Phoenician ships, and the valley down which the river flows gave a ready access into the interior.

While Tingis was located at the meeting point of two seas on the northern African coast, about five miles east of Cape Spartel, Lixus was positioned on the open Atlantic, forty miles south of that cape, facing west toward the ocean. The streams from the Atlas Mountains converge here into a significant river, now known as the Wady-el-Khous, and in ancient times as the Lixus.5157 The estuary of this river meanders through the plain of Sidi Oueddar before reaching the sea, sometimes looping back on itself and creating peninsulas that are almost islands.5158 In this plain, between two major bends of the river, a rocky hill rises; here, the Phoenicians established their town, fortifying it along the edge of the hill with a sturdy wall, portions of which still stand today.5159 The blocks are cut, carefully shaped, and laid out in horizontal rows without any mortar. Some of them measure as much as eleven feet long and six feet or slightly taller. The wall had square towers at the corners and formed an irregular hexagon, over a mile around.5160 A large structure within the walls appears to have been a temple;5161 inside it was found one of the notable conical stones known to have been used in Phoenician worship. The river's estuary provided a fairly safe harbor for Phoenician ships, and the valley along which the river flows offered easy access to the interior.

In Spain, outside the Pillars of Hercules, the chief Phoenician settlements were Tartessus, Agadir or Gades, and Belon. Tartessus has been regarded by some as properly the name of a country rather than a town;5162 but the statements of the Greek and Roman geographers to the contrary are too positive to be disregarded. Tartessus was a town in the opinions of Scymnus Chius, Strabo, Mela, Pliny, Festus Avienus, and Pausanias,5163 who could not be, all of them, mistaken on such a point. It was a town named from, or at any rate bearing the same name with, an important river of southern Spain,5164 probably the Guadalquivir. It was not Gades, for Scymnus Chius mentions both cities as existing in his day;5165 it was not Carteia, for it lay west of Gades, while Carteia lay east. Probably it occupied, as Strabo thought, a small island between two arms of the Guadalquivir, and gradually decayed as Gades rose to importance. It certainly did not exist in Strabo’s time, but five or six centuries earlier it was a most flourishing place.5166 If it is the Tarshish of Scripture, its prosperity and importance must have been even anterior to the time of Solomon, whose “navy of Tarshish” brought him once in every three years “gold, and silver, and ivory, and apes, and peacocks."5167 The south of Spain was rich in metallic treasures, and yielded gold, silver, copper, iron, lead, and tin;5168 trade along the west coast of Africa would bring in the ivory and apes abundant in that region; while the birds called in our translation of the Bible “peacocks” may have been guinea-fowl. The country on either side of the Guadalquivir to a considerable distance took its name from the city, being called Tartessis.5169 It was immensely productive. “The wide plains through which the Guadalquiver flows produced the finest wheat, yielding an increase of a hundredfold; the oil and the wine, the growth of the hills, were equally distinguished for their excellence. The wood was not less remarkable for its fineness than in modern times, and had a native colour beautiful without dye."5170 Nor were the neighbouring sea and stream less bountiful. The tunny was caught in large quantities off the coast, shell-fish were abundant and of unusual size,5171 while huge eels were sometimes taken by the fishermen, which, when salted, formed an article of commerce, and were reckoned a delicacy at Athenian tables.5172

In Spain, beyond the Pillars of Hercules, the main Phoenician settlements were Tartessus, Agadir or Gades, and Belon. Some have considered Tartessus to be more the name of a region than a city;5162 but the accounts of Greek and Roman geographers against this idea are too definitive to ignore. Tartessus was a city according to Scymnus Chius, Strabo, Mela, Pliny, Festus Avienus, and Pausanias,5163 and they couldn't all be wrong about this. It was a city named after, or at least sharing its name with, a significant river in southern Spain,5164 likely the Guadalquivir. It wasn't Gades, as Scymnus Chius mentions both cities existing during his time;5165 nor was it Carteia, since Carteia was located east of Gades while Tartessus was to the west. It probably sat, as Strabo believed, on a small island between two branches of the Guadalquivir, eventually declining as Gades grew in significance. It definitely didn't exist in Strabo's era, but five or six centuries earlier, it was a vibrant place.5166 If it is indeed the Tarshish from the Bible, its wealth and significance must have preceded the time of Solomon, whose “navy of Tarshish” brought him every three years “gold, silver, ivory, monkeys, and peacocks."5167 The southern region of Spain was rich in metallic resources, producing gold, silver, copper, iron, lead, and tin;5168 trade along the west coast of Africa would have supplied the ivory and monkeys abundant in that area, while the birds referred to as “peacocks” in our Bible translation may have actually been guinea-fowl. The land on both sides of the Guadalquivir for a significant distance was named after the city, called Tartessis.5169 It was incredibly fertile. “The vast plains through which the Guadalquivir flows produced the finest wheat, yielding a harvest a hundredfold; the oil and wine, grown in the hills, were equally noted for their quality. The timber was just as distinguished for its quality as it is today, showcasing a natural color that was beautiful without any dye."5170 The nearby sea and river were no less generous. Large quantities of tuna were caught off the coast, shellfish were plentiful and unusually large,5171 while fishermen sometimes caught huge eels, which, when salted, became a trade item and were considered a delicacy on Athenian tables.5172

Gades is said to have been founded by colonists from Tyre a few years anterior to the foundation of Utica by the same people.5173 Utica, as we have seen, dated from the twelfth century before Christ. The site of Gades combined all the advantages that the Phoenicians desired for their colonies. Near the mouth of the Guadalete there detaches itself from the coast of Spain an island eleven miles in length, known now as the “Isla de Leon,” which is separated from the mainland for half its length by a narrow but navigable channel, while to this there succeeds on the north an ample bay, divided into two portions, a northern and a southern.5174 The southern, or interior recess, is completely sheltered from all winds; the northern lies open to the west, but is so full of creeks, coves, and estuaries as to offer a succession of fairly good ports, one or other of which would always be accessible. The southern half of the island is from one to four miles broad; but the northern consists of a long spit of land running out to the north-west, in places not more than a furlong in width, but expanding at its northern extremity to a breadth of nearly two miles. The long isthmus, and the peninsula in which it ends, have been compared to the stalk and blossom of a flower.5175 The flower was the ancient Gades, the modern Cadiz. The Phoenician occupation of the site is witnessed to by Strabo, Diodorus, Scymnus Chius, Mela, Pliny, Velleius Paterculus, Ælian and Arrian,5176 and is further evidenced by the numerous coins which bear the legend of “Agadir” in Phoenician characters.5177 But the place itself retains no traces of the Phoenician occupation. The famous temple of Melkarth, with its two bronze pillars in front bearing inscriptions, has wholly perished, as have all other vestiges of the ancient buildings. This is the result of the continuous occupation of the site, which has been built on successively by Phoenicians, Carthaginians, Romans, Vandals, Moors, and Spaniards. The space is somewhat confined, and the houses in ancient times were, we are told, closely crowded together,5178 as they were at Aradus and Tyre. But the advantages of the harbour and the productiveness of the vicinity more than made up for this inconvenience. Gades may have been, as Cadiz is now said to be, “a mere silver plate set down upon the edge of the sea,"5179 but it was the natural centre of an enormous traffic. It had easy access by the valley of a large stream to the interior with its rich mineral and vegetable products; it had the command of two seas, the Atlantic and the Mediterranean; it trained its sailors to affront greater perils than any which the Mediterranean offers; and it enjoyed naturally by its position an almost exclusive commerce with the Northern Atlantic, with the western coasts of Spain and Gaul, with Britain, North Germany, and the Baltic.

Gades is believed to have been established by colonists from Tyre a few years before the founding of Utica by the same group. Utica, as we’ve seen, was founded in the twelfth century BC. The location of Gades had all the benefits the Phoenicians wanted for their colonies. Near the mouth of the Guadalete, an island eleven miles long, now known as “Isla de Leon,” extends from the coast of Spain and is separated from the mainland by a narrow but navigable channel for half its length. To the north is a large bay divided into two parts: a northern and a southern. The southern part, or interior recess, is fully sheltered from all winds; the northern is open to the west but is filled with creeks, coves, and estuaries that provide several decent ports, ensuring that at least one would always be accessible. The southern half of the island ranges from one to four miles wide; the northern part consists of a long strip of land extending northwest, at times only a furlong wide, but widening at its northern end to nearly two miles. The long isthmus and the peninsula it leads to have been likened to the stalk and bloom of a flower. The flower represents ancient Gades, now modern-day Cadiz. The Phoenician presence at the site is documented by Strabo, Diodorus, Scymnus Chius, Mela, Pliny, Velleius Paterculus, Ælian, and Arrian, and is further supported by the numerous coins bearing the name “Agadir” in Phoenician script. However, there are no remnants of the Phoenician occupation. The famous temple of Melkarth, with its two bronze pillars featuring inscriptions, has completely disappeared, along with all other signs of ancient buildings. This results from the continuous use of the site, which has been successively built upon by Phoenicians, Carthaginians, Romans, Vandals, Moors, and Spaniards. The area is somewhat limited, and in ancient times, houses were closely packed together, similar to those in Aradus and Tyre. Yet, the advantages of the harbor and the productivity of the surrounding area more than compensated for this inconvenience. Gades may have been, as it is now described, “a mere silver plate set down upon the edge of the sea,” but it was the natural hub of extensive trade. It had easy access to the interior via a large stream valley with its rich mineral and agricultural outputs; it had control over two seas, the Atlantic and the Mediterranean; it trained its sailors to face greater dangers than those presented by the Mediterranean; and it naturally benefited from its location, enjoying almost exclusive trade with the Northern Atlantic, the western coasts of Spain and Gaul, as well as Britain, North Germany, and the Baltic.

Compared with Gades and Tartessus, Belon was an insignificant settlement. Its name5180 and coins5181 mark it as Phoenician, but it was not possessed of any special advantages of situation. The modern Bolonia, a little south of Cadiz, is thought to mark the site.5182

Compared to Gades and Tartessus, Belon was a minor settlement. Its name5180 and coins5181 identify it as Phoenician, but it didn't have any particular advantages in terms of location. The present-day Bolonia, just south of Cadiz, is believed to be the site.5182

We have reached now the limits of Phoenician colonisation towards the West. While their trade was carried, especially from Gades, into Luisitania and Gallæcia on the one hand, and into North-western Africa on the other, reaching onward past these districts to Gaul and Britain, to the Senegal and Gambia, possibly to the Baltic and the Fortunate Islands, the range of their settlements was more circumscribed. As, towards the north-east, though their trade embraced the regions of Colchis and Thrace, of the Tauric Chersonese, and Southern Scythia, their settlements were limited to the Ægean and perhaps the Propontis, so westward they seem to have contented themselves with occupying a few points of vantage on the Spanish and West African coasts, at no great distance from the Straits, and from these stations to have sent out their commercial navies to sweep the seas and gather in the products of the lands which lay at a greater distance. The actual extent of their trade will be considered in a later chapter. We have been here concerned only with their permanent settlements or colonies. These, it has been seen, extended from the Syrian coast to Cyprus, Cilicia, Rhodes, Crete, the islands and shores of the Ægean and Propontis, the coasts of Sicily, Sardinia, and North Africa, the Balearic Islands, Southern Spain, and North-western Africa as far south as Cape Non. The colonisation was not so continuous as the Greek, nor was it so extensive in one direction,5183 but on the whole it was wider, and it was far bolder and more adventurous. The Greeks, as a general rule, made their advances by slow degrees, stealing on from point to point, and having always friendly cities near at hand, like an army that rests on its supports. The Phoenicians left long intervals of space between one settlement and another, boldly planted them on barbarous shores, where they had nothing to rely on but themselves, and carried them into regions where the natives were in a state of almost savagery. The commercial motive was predominant with them, and gave them the courage to plunge into wild seas and venture themselves among even wilder men. With the Greeks the motive was generally political, and a safe home was sought, where social and civil life might have free scope for quiet development.

We have now reached the limits of Phoenician colonization to the west. Their trade was primarily conducted from Gades into Lusitania and Galicia on one side, and into North-western Africa on the other, extending further into Gaul and Britain, down to the Senegal and Gambia, and possibly even reaching the Baltic and the Fortunate Islands. However, their settlements were more limited. In the northeast, while their trade included regions like Colchis and Thrace, the Tauric Chersonese, and Southern Scythia, their settlements were confined to the Aegean and perhaps the Sea of Marmara. To the west, they seem to have focused on a few strategic locations along the Spanish and West African coasts, not far from the Straits, from where they dispatched their commercial fleets to explore the seas and collect goods from more distant lands. The actual extent of their trade will be discussed in a later chapter. Here, we are only addressing their permanent settlements or colonies, which ranged from the Syrian coast to Cyprus, Cilicia, Rhodes, Crete, the islands and shores of the Aegean and Sea of Marmara, the coasts of Sicily, Sardinia, and North Africa, the Balearic Islands, Southern Spain, and North-western Africa down to Cape Non. Their colonization was not as continuous as the Greek model, nor was it as extensive in one direction, but overall, it was broader, bolder, and more adventurous. The Greeks typically made their advances gradually, moving from point to point with friendly cities nearby, like an army relying on its support. In contrast, the Phoenicians settled far apart from one another, boldly establishing their presence on unfamiliar shores, relying solely on themselves, and venturing into regions where the natives were almost savage. Their primary motive was trade, which fueled their willingness to navigate treacherous seas and engage with even rougher people. For the Greeks, the motivation was often political, seeking a safe home where social and civil life could develop peacefully.





CHAPTER VI—ARCHITECTURE

     Origin of the architecture in rock dwellings—Second style,
     a combination of the native rock with the ordinary wall—
     Later on, the use of the native rock, discarded—Employment
     of huge blocks of stone in the early walls—Absence of
     cement—Bevelling—Occurrence of Cyclopian walls—Several
     architectural members comprised in one block—Phoenician
     shrines—The Maabed and other shrines at Amrith—Phoenician
     temples—Temple of Paphos—Adjuncts to temples—Museum of
     Golgi—Treasure chambers of Curium—Walls of Phoenician
     towns—Phoenician tombs—Excavated chambers—Chambers built
     of masonry—Groups of chambers—Colonnaded tomb—Sepulchral
     monuments—The Burdj-el-Bezzâk—The Kabr Hiram—The two
     Méghâzil—Tomb with protected entrance—Phoenician
     ornamentation—Pillars and their capitals—Cornices and
     mouldings—Pavements in mosaic and alabaster—False arches—
     Summary.
     Origin of architecture in rock dwellings—Second style, a blend of native rock and standard walls—Later, native rock was no longer used—Large stone blocks were featured in early walls—No cement used—Beveling—Appearance of Cyclopean walls—Multiple architectural elements made from a single block—Phoenician shrines—The Maabed and other shrines at Amrith—Phoenician temples—Temple of Paphos—Additions to temples—Museum of Golgi—Treasure chambers of Curium—Walls of Phoenician towns—Phoenician tombs—Excavated chambers—Chambers built of masonry—Groups of chambers—Colonnaded tomb—Sepulchral monuments—The Burdj-el-Bezzak—The Kabr Hiram—The two Méghâzil—Tomb with protected entrance—Phoenician ornamentation—Pillars and their capitals—Cornices and moldings—Mosaic and alabaster pavements—False arches—Summary.

The architecture of the Phoenicians began with the fashioning of the native rock—so abundant in all parts of the country where they had settled themselves—into dwellings, temples, and tombs. The calcareous limestone, which is the chief geological formation along the Syrian coast, is worked with great ease; and it contains numerous fissures and caverns,61 which a very moderate amount of labour and skill is capable of converting into fairly comfortable dwelling-places. It is probable that the first settlers found a refuge for a time in these natural grottos, which after a while they proceeded to improve and enlarge, thus obtaining a practical power of dealing with the material, and an experimental knowledge of its advantages and defects. But it was not long before these simple dwellings ceased to content them, and they were seized with an ambition to construct more elaborate edifices—edifices such as they must have seen in the lands through which they had passed on their way from the shores of the Persian Gulf to the seaboard of the Mediterranean. They could not at once, however, divest themselves of their acquired habits, and consequently, their earliest buildings continued to have, in part, the character of rock dwellings, while in part they were constructions of the more ordinary and regular type. The remains of a dwelling-house at Amrith,62 the ancient Marathus, offer a remarkable example of this intermixture of styles. The rock has been cut away so as to leave standing two parallel walls 33 yards long, 19 feet high, and 2 1/2 feet thick, which are united by transverse party-walls formed in the same way.63 Windows and doorways are cut in the walls, some square at top, some arched. At the two ends the main walls were united partly by the native rock, partly by masonry. The northern wall was built of masonry from the very foundation, the southern consisted for a portion of its height of the native rock, while above that were several courses of stones carrying it up further. At Aradus and at Sidon, similarly, the town walls are formed in many places of native rock, squared and smoothed, up to a certain height, after which courses of stone succeed each other in the ordinary fashion. It is as if the Phoenician builders could not break themselves of an inveterate habit, and rather than disuse it entirely submitted to an intermixture which was not without a certain amount of awkwardness.

The architecture of the Phoenicians started with shaping the native rock—found all over the regions where they settled—into homes, temples, and tombs. The limestone, which is the main geological material along the Syrian coast, can be easily worked; it has many cracks and caves, which can be turned into fairly comfortable living spaces with just a bit of effort and skill. It's likely that the first settlers took refuge in these natural caves for a while, eventually improving and expanding them, gaining practical experience in using the material and understanding its pros and cons. But soon, these simple homes weren’t enough for them, and they became eager to build more elaborate structures—ones they must have seen in the lands they passed through on their journey from the shores of the Persian Gulf to the Mediterranean coastline. However, they couldn’t completely shake off their old habits, so their earliest buildings still partly resembled rock dwellings, while also incorporating more typical, regular designs. The remains of a house at Amrith, the ancient Marathus, provide a striking example of this blend of styles. The rock has been shaped to leave two parallel walls 33 yards long, 19 feet high, and 2.5 feet thick, connected by transverse party-walls made in the same way. Windows and doorways have been cut into the walls, some with square tops and others arched. At both ends, the main walls were joined partly by the native rock and partly by masonry. The northern wall was entirely built of masonry from the ground up, while the southern wall was partly made of native rock for part of its height, topped with several courses of stones that extended it further. Similarly, at Aradus and Sidon, many town walls are made of native rock, shaped and smoothed up to a certain height, after which stone courses continue in the usual manner. It’s as if the Phoenician builders couldn’t break their long-held habits, so rather than completely abandoning them, they opted for a mix that came with a bit of awkwardness.

Another striking example of the mixed system is found at a little distance from Amrith, in the case of a building which appears to have been a shrine, tabernacle, or sanctuary. The site is a rocky platform, about a mile from the shore. Here the rock has been cut away to a depth varying from three to six yards, and a rectangular court has been formed, 180 feet long by 156 feet wide, in the centre of which has been left a single block of the stone, still of one piece with the court, which rises to a height of ten feet, and forms the basis or pedestal of the shrine itself.64 The shrine is built of a certain number of large blocks, which have been quarried and brought to the spot; it has a stone roof with an entablature, and attains an elevation above the court of not less than twenty-seven feet. The dimensions of the shrine are small, not much exceeding seventeen feet each way.65

Another striking example of the mixed system is found a short distance from Amrith, in the case of a building that seems to have been a shrine, tabernacle, or sanctuary. The site is a rocky platform, about a mile from the shore. Here, the rock has been cut away to a depth ranging from three to six yards, and a rectangular court has been created, measuring 180 feet long by 156 feet wide. In the center, there’s a single block of stone that remains one piece with the court, rising to a height of ten feet, serving as the base or pedestal of the shrine itself.64 The shrine is constructed from several large blocks that were quarried and brought to the site; it has a stone roof with an entablature and reaches an elevation above the court of at least twenty-seven feet. The dimensions of the shrine are small, not exceeding seventeen feet in any direction.65

From constructions of this mixed character the transition was easy to buildings composed entirely of detached stones put together in the ordinary manner. Here, what is chiefly remarkable in the Phoenician architecture is the tendency to employ, especially for the foundations and lower courses of buildings, enormous blocks. When the immovable native rock is no longer available, the resource is to make use of vast masses of stone, as nearly immovable as possible. The most noted example is that of the substructions which supported the platform whereon stood the Temple of Jerusalem, which was the work of the Phoenician builders whom Hiram lent to Solomon.66 These substructions, laid bare at their base by the excavations of the Palestine Exploration Fund, are found to consist of blocks measuring from fifteen to twenty-five feet in length, and from ten to twelve feet in height. The width of the blocks at the angles of the wall, where alone it can be measured, is from twelve to eighteen feet. At the south-west angle no fewer than thirty-one courses of this massive character have been counted by the recent explorers, who estimate the weight of the largest block at something above a hundred tons!67

From these mixed constructions, it was easy to transition to buildings made entirely of separate stones assembled in the usual way. What stands out in Phoenician architecture is the preference for using enormous blocks, particularly for the foundations and lower levels of buildings. When the solid native rock isn't available, they relied on massive stone pieces that were as immovable as possible. The most famous example is the substructures that supported the platform where the Temple of Jerusalem stood, built by the Phoenician workers that Hiram provided to Solomon.66 These substructures, uncovered at their base by the excavations of the Palestine Exploration Fund, consist of blocks measuring between fifteen to twenty-five feet in length and ten to twelve feet in height. The width of the blocks at the corners of the wall, where it can be measured, ranges from twelve to eighteen feet. At the southwest corner, recent explorers have counted at least thirty-one layers of this massive structure, estimating the weight of the largest block to be over a hundred tons!67

A similar method of construction is found to have prevailed at Tyre, at Sidon, at Aradus, at Byblus, at Leptis Major, at Eryx, at Motya, at Gaulos, and at Lixus on the West African coast. The blocks employed do not reach the size of the largest discovered at Jerusalem, but still are of dimensions greatly exceeding those of most builders, varying, as they do, from six feet to twenty feet in length, and being often as much as seven or eight feet in breadth and height. As the building rises, the stones diminish in size, and the upper courses are often in no way remarkable. Stones of various sizes are used, and often the courses are not regular, but one runs into another. A tower in the wall of Eryx is a good specimen of this kind of construction.68

A similar construction method was used in Tyre, Sidon, Aradus, Byblus, Leptis Major, Eryx, Motya, Gaulos, and Lixus on the West African coast. The blocks used aren't as large as the biggest ones found in Jerusalem, but they are still much bigger than what most builders use, ranging from six to twenty feet in length and often reaching seven or eight feet in width and height. As the building goes up, the stones get smaller, and the upper layers are usually not very notable. Stones of different sizes are used, and the layers often aren't regular; they often fit into each other. A tower in the wall of Eryx is a good example of this type of construction.68

Where the stones are small, mortar has been employed by the builders, but where they are of a large size, they are merely laid side by side in rows or courses, without mortar or cement of any kind, and remain in place through their own mass and weight. In the earliest style of building the blocks are simply squared,69 and the wall composed of them presents a flat and level surface, or one only broken by small and casual irregularities; but, when their ideas became more advanced, the Phoenicians preferred that style of masonry which is commonly regarded as peculiarly, if not exclusively, theirs610—the employment of large blocks with deeply bevelled edges. The bevel is a depression round the entire side of the stone, which faces outwards, and may be effected either by a sloping cut which removes the right-angle from the edge, or by two cuts, one perpendicular and the other horizontal, which take out from the edge a rectangular bar or plinth. The Phoenician bevelling is of this latter kind, and is generally accompanied by an artificial roughening of the surface inside the bevel, which offers a strong contrast to the smooth and even surface of the bevel itself.611 The style is highly ornamental and effective, particularly where a large space of wall has to be presented to the eye, unbroken by door or window.612

Where the stones are small, builders have used mortar, but where the stones are large, they are simply laid side by side in rows or layers, without any mortar or cement, relying solely on their own mass and weight to stay in place. In the earliest style of building, the blocks are just squared, and the walls made from them present a flat and level surface, only slightly disrupted by small and random irregularities. However, as their ideas evolved, the Phoenicians favored a style of masonry that is often seen as uniquely, if not exclusively, theirs—the use of large blocks with deeply beveled edges. The bevel is a groove that runs along the entire side of the stone that faces outwards and can be created either by a sloping cut that removes the right angle from the edge or by two cuts, one vertical and the other horizontal, that cut out a rectangular bar or plinth from the edge. The Phoenician beveling is of the latter type and is typically combined with an artificial roughening of the surface inside the bevel, creating a stark contrast with the smooth and even surface of the bevel itself. This style is highly ornamental and visually striking, especially when a large area of wall needs to be presented to the eye without interruption from doors or windows.

Occasionally, but very rarely, and only (so far as appears) in their remoter dependencies, the Phoenicians constructed their buildings in the rude and irregular way, which has been called Cyclopian, employing unhewn polygonal blocks of various sizes, and fitting them roughly together. The temples discovered in Malta and Gozzo have masonry of this description.613

Occasionally, but very rarely, and only (as far as it seems) in their more distant territories, the Phoenicians built their structures in a rough and uneven style known as Cyclopian, using unshaped polygonal blocks of different sizes and putting them together in a rough manner. The temples found in Malta and Gozo feature masonry of this kind.613

A peculiarity in Phoenician architecture, connected with the preference for enormous blocks over stones of a moderate size, is the frequent combination in a single mass of distinct architectural members; for instance, of the shaft and capital of pillars, of entire pediments with a portion of the wall below them, and of the walls of monuments with the cornice and architrave. M. Renan has made some strong remarks on this idiosyncrasy. “In the Grecian style,” he says, “the beauty of the wall is a main object with the architect, and the wall derives its beauty from the divisions between the stones, which observe symmetrical laws, and are in agreement with the general lines of the edifice. In a style of this kind the stones of a wall have, all of them, the same dimension, and this dimension is determined by the general plan of the building; or else, as in the kind of work which is called ‘pseud-isodomic,’ the very irregularity of the courses is governed by a law of symmetry. The stones of the architrave, the metopes, the triglyphs, are, all of them, separate blocks, even when it would have been perfectly easy to have included in a single block all these various members. Such facts, as one observes frequently in Syria, where three or four architectural members are brought out from a single block, would have appeared to the Greeks monstrous, since they are the negation of all logic."614

A unique feature of Phoenician architecture, related to its preference for huge blocks instead of more moderate stones, is the frequent merging of different architectural elements into a single mass. For example, the shaft and capital of columns, entire pediments with parts of the wall beneath them, and the walls of monuments along with the cornice and architrave are often combined. M. Renan has made some strong observations about this quirk. "In Greek style," he says, "the beauty of the wall is a key focus for the architect, and this beauty comes from the divisions between the stones, which follow symmetrical patterns and align with the overall lines of the building. In such a style, all the stones of a wall share the same dimensions, determined by the building's overall design; or, as seen in what is called 'pseud-isodomic' work, even the irregularity of the courses is governed by a symmetry law. The stones of the architrave, the metopes, and the triglyphs are all distinct blocks, even though it would have been easy to include all these different elements in one block. Such examples, often seen in Syria, where three or four architectural elements are extracted from a single block, would seem monstrous to the Greeks, as they contradict all logic."614

In cannot be denied that the habit of preferring large to small blocks, even in monuments of a very moderate size, involved the Phoenician architects in awkwardnesses and anomalies, which offend a cultivated taste; but it should be remembered, on the other hand, that massiveness in the material conduces greatly to stability, and that, in lands where earthquakes are frequent, as they are along all the Mediterranean shores, not many monuments would have survived the lapse of three thousand years had the material employed been of a less substantial and solid character.

It cannot be denied that the tendency to favor large over small blocks, even in monuments of a modest size, led Phoenician architects to create some awkward and unusual designs that may not please a refined taste. However, it's important to remember that using massive materials greatly contributes to stability, and in areas where earthquakes are common, like along the Mediterranean coasts, not many monuments would have lasted three thousand years if less sturdy materials had been used.

Among the Phoenician constructions, of which it is possible to give some account at the present day, without drawing greatly on the imagination, are their shrines, their temples, the walls of their towns, and, above all, their tombs. Recent researches in Phoenicia Proper, in Cyprus, Sicily, Africa, and the smaller Mediterranean islands, have brought to light numerous remains previously unknown; the few previously known remains have been carefully examined, measured, and in some cases photographed; and the results have been made accessible to the student in numerous well-illustrated publications. When Movers and Kenrick published their valuable works on the history of Phoenicia, and the general characteristics of the Phoenician people, it was quite impossible to do more than form conjectures concerning their architecture from a few coins, and a few descriptions in ancient writers. It is now a matter of comparatively little difficulty to set before the public descriptions and representations which, if they still leave something to be desired in the way of completeness, are accurate, so far as they go, and will give a tolerably fair idea of the architectural genius of the people.

Among the Phoenician constructions that we can discuss today without stretching the imagination too much are their shrines, temples, city walls, and especially their tombs. Recent research in Phoenicia, Cyprus, Sicily, Africa, and the smaller Mediterranean islands has uncovered many previously unknown remains; the few known remains have been carefully examined, measured, and in some cases photographed. The results are now available to students in various well-illustrated publications. When Movers and Kenrick published their important works on Phoenician history and the general traits of the Phoenician people, it was nearly impossible to make more than educated guesses about their architecture based on a few coins and some descriptions from ancient writers. Now, it's relatively easy to present the public with descriptions and representations that, while still not entirely complete, are accurate enough to provide a fairly good idea of the architectural brilliance of the Phoenicians.

One very complete and two ruined shrines have been found in Phoenicia Proper, in positions and of a character which, in the judgment of the best antiquaries, mark them as the work of the ancient people. All these are situated on the mainland, near the site of Marathus, which lay nearly opposite the island of Ruad, the ancient Aradus. The shrine which is complete, or almost complete, bears the name of “the Maabed” or “Temple.” Its central position, in the middle of an excavated court, and its mixed construction, partly of native rock and partly of quarried stone, have been already described. It remains to give an account of the shrine or tabernacle itself.615 This is emplaced upon the mass of rock left to receive it midway in the court, and is a sort of cell, closed in on three sides by walls, and open on one side, towards the north. The cell is formed of four quarried blocks, which are laid one over the other. These are nearly of the same size, and similarly shaped, each of them enclosing the cell on three sides, towards the east, the south, and the west. The fourth, which is larger than any of the others, constitutes the roof. It is a massive stone, carefully cut, which projects considerably in front of the rest of the building, and is ornamented towards the top with a cornice and string-course, extending along the four sides.616 Internally the roof is scooped into a sort of shallow vault. The height of the shrine proper is about seventeen feet, and the elevation of the entire structure above the court in which it stands appears to be about twenty-seven feet. M. Renan conjectures that the projecting portion of the roof had originally the support of two pillars, which may have been either of wood, of stone, or of metal, and notes that there are two holes in the basement stone, into which the bottoms of the pillars were probably inserted.617 He imagines that the court was once enclosed completely by the construction of a wall at its northern end, and that the water from a spring, which still rises within the enclosure, was allowed to overflow the entire space, so that the shrine looked down upon a basin or shallow lake and glassed itself in the waters.618 An image of a deity may have stood in the cell under the roof, dimly visible to the worshipper between the two porch pillars.

One very complete shrine and two ruined ones have been discovered in Phoenicia Proper, located in ways that, according to prominent experts, indicate they were made by ancient people. All of these are situated on the mainland, near the site of Marathus, which was almost directly across from the island of Ruad, the ancient Aradus. The nearly complete shrine is known as “the Maabed” or “Temple.” Its central position, in the middle of an excavated courtyard, and its mixed construction of native rock and quarried stone have already been described. Now, let’s talk about the shrine or tabernacle itself.615 It sits on a rock mass in the center of the courtyard, designed like a cell, enclosed on three sides by walls, and open on one side facing north. The cell consists of four quarried blocks stacked one on top of the other. These blocks are almost the same size and shape, with each enclosing the cell on the east, south, and west sides. The fourth block, which is larger than the others, serves as the roof. It's a massive stone, carefully cut, that extends significantly out in front of the rest of the structure and is decorated at the top with a cornice and string-course running along all four sides.616 Inside, the roof has a shallow vault shape. The height of the shrine itself is about seventeen feet, and the total elevation of the structure above the courtyard is approximately twenty-seven feet. M. Renan suggests that the extended part of the roof might have originally been supported by two pillars, which could have been made of wood, stone, or metal, and notes that there are two holes in the base stone where the bottoms of the pillars were likely inserted.617 He thinks that the courtyard was once fully enclosed by a wall at its north end and that water from a spring, which still rises inside the enclosure, was allowed to flow throughout the area, so the shrine overlooked a basin or shallow lake that reflected its image.618 An image of a deity might have been in the cell beneath the roof, faintly visible to worshippers between the two porch pillars.

The two ruined tabernacles lie at no great distance from the complete one, which has just been described. One of them is so injured that its plan is irrecoverable; but M. Renan carefully collected and measured the fragments of the other, and thus obtained sufficient data for its restoration.619 It was, he believes, a monolithic chamber, with a roof slightly vaulted, like that of the Maabed, having a length of eight feet, a breadth of five, and a height of about ten feet, and ornamented externally with a very peculiar cornice. This consisted of a series of carvings, representing the fore part of an uræus or basilisk serpent, uprearing itself against the wall of the shrine, which were continued along the entire front of the chamber. There was also an internal ornamentation of the roof, consisting of a winged circle of an Egyptian character—a favourite subject with the Phoenician artists620—the circle having an uræus erect on either side of it, and also of another winged figure which appeared to represent an eagle.621 The monolithic chamber was emplaced upon a block of stone, ten feet in length and breadth, and six feet in height, which itself stood upon a much smaller stone, and overhung it on all sides. A flight of six steps, cut in the upper block at either side, gave access to the chamber, which, however, as it stood in a pool of water, must have been approached by a boat. The entire height of the shrine above the water must have been about eighteen feet.

The two ruined tabernacles are not far from the intact one that was just described. One of them is so damaged that its layout is beyond recovery; however, M. Renan carefully collected and measured the pieces of the other, providing enough information for its reconstruction.619 He believes it was a monolithic chamber with a slightly arched roof, similar to the Maabed, measuring eight feet long, five feet wide, and about ten feet high, adorned on the outside with a unique cornice. This cornice featured a series of carvings depicting the front of an uræus or basilisk serpent, rising against the shrine wall, extending along the entire front of the chamber. Additionally, the interior of the roof displayed a winged circle with an Egyptian style—a popular theme among Phoenician artists620—with an uræus on either side and another winged figure that seemed to represent an eagle.621 The monolithic chamber was set on a stone block that was ten feet long and wide, and six feet high, which itself rested on a much smaller stone and extended over it on all sides. A set of six steps, carved into the upper block on either side, provided access to the chamber, which, given that it stood in a pool of water, would have required an approach by boat. The entire height of the shrine above the water was about eighteen feet.

Some other ruined shrines have been found in the more distant of the Phoenician settlements, and representations of them are common upon the stelæ, set up in temples as votive offerings. On these last the uræus cornice is frequently repeated, and the figure of a goddess sometimes appears, standing between the pillars which support the front of the shrine.622 There is a decided resemblance between the Phoenician shrines and the small Egyptian temples, which have been called mammeisi, the chief difference being that the latter are for the most part peristylar.623 M. Renan says of the Maabed, or main shrine at Amrith:—“L’aspect général de l’édifice est Egyptian, mais avec une certaine part d’originalité. Le bandeau et la corniche sur les quatre côtés de la stalle supériere en sont le seul ornement. Cette simplicité, cette sévérité de style, jointes à l’idée de force et de puissance qu’éveillent les dimensions énormes des matériaux employés, sont des caractères que nous avons déjà signalés dans les monumens funéraires d’Amrith."624

Some other ruined shrines have been discovered in the more remote Phoenician settlements, and images of them are commonly found on the stelæ displayed in temples as votive offerings. On these, the uræus cornice often appears repeatedly, and the figure of a goddess can sometimes be seen, standing between the pillars that support the front of the shrine.622 There is a clear resemblance between the Phoenician shrines and the small Egyptian temples known as mammeisi, the main difference being that the latter are mostly peristylar.623 M. Renan remarks about the Maabed, or main shrine at Amrith:—“The general appearance of the building is Egyptian, but with a certain level of originality. The frieze and cornice on all four sides of the upper stall are its only decoration. This simplicity and severity of style, combined with the sense of strength and power evoked by the enormous size of the materials used, are characteristics we have already noted in the funerary monuments of Amrith."624

From the shrines of the Phoenicians we may now pass to their temples, of which, however, the remains are, unfortunately, exceedingly scanty. Of real temples, as distinct from shrines, Phoenicia Proper does not present to us so much as a single specimen. To obtain any idea of them, we must quit the mother country, and betake ourselves to the colonies, especially to those island colonies which have been less subjected than the mainland to the destructive ravages of barbarous conquerors, and the iconoclasm of fanatical populations. It is especially in Cyprus that we meet with extensive remains, which, if not so instructive as might have been wished, yet give us some important and interesting information.

From the Phoenician shrines, we can now move on to their temples, although the remains are unfortunately very limited. Phoenicia Proper doesn’t give us a single example of actual temples separate from shrines. To get any idea of them, we need to leave the homeland and look to the colonies, particularly those island colonies that have been less affected than the mainland by the destructive invasions of barbaric conquerors and the iconoclasm of fanatical groups. It is particularly in Cyprus that we find extensive remains, which, while not as informative as we might hope, still provide some important and interesting insights.

The temple of Paphos, according to the measurements of General Di Cesnola,625 was a rectangular building, 221 feet long by 167 feet wide, built along its lower corners of large blocks of stone, but probably continued above in an inferior material, either wood or unbaked brick.626 The four corner-stones are still standing in their proper places, and give the dimensions without a possibility of mistake. Nothing is known of the internal arrangements, unless we attach credit to the views of the savant Gerhard, who, in the early years of the present century, constructed a plan from the reports of travellers, in which he divided the building into a nave and two aisles, with an ante-chapel in front, and a sacrarium at the further extremity.627 M. Gerhard also added, beyond the sacrarium, an apse, of which General Di Cesnola found no traces, but which may possibly have disappeared in the course of the sixty years which separated the observations of M. Gerhard’s informants from the researches of the later traveller. The arrangement into a nave and two aisles is, to a certain extent, confirmed by some of the later Cyprian coins, which certainly represent Cyprian temples, and probably the temple of Paphos.628 The floor of the temple was, in part at any rate, covered with mosaic.629

The temple of Paphos, based on General Di Cesnola's measurements,625 was a rectangular structure, 221 feet long by 167 feet wide, constructed with large stone blocks at its lower corners, but likely made with cheaper materials like wood or unbaked brick above.626 The four cornerstones are still in their original positions, accurately providing the dimensions. There is little known about the interior layout unless we consider the insights of the scholar Gerhard, who, in the early 2000s, created a plan based on travelers' accounts that divided the building into a central nave and two aisles, with an ante-chapel at the front and a sacrarium at the far end.627 Gerhard also proposed an apse beyond the sacrarium, which General Di Cesnola found no evidence of, but it might have disappeared over the sixty years between Gerhard's sources and the later traveler's observations. The division into a nave and two aisles is somewhat supported by some later Cypriot coins that likely depict Cypriot temples, and probably the temple of Paphos.628 Part of the temple's floor was covered with mosaic.629

This large building, which extended over an area of 36,800 square feet, was emplaced within a sacred court, surrounded by a peribolus, or wall of enclosure, built of even larger blocks than the temple itself, and entered by at least one huge doorway. The width of this entrance, situated near a corner of the western wall, was nearly eighteen feet.630 On one side of it were found still fixed in the wall the sockets for the bolts on which the door swung, in length six inches, and of proportionate width and depth. The peribolus was rectangular, like the temple, and was built in lines parallel to it. The longer sides measured 690 and the shorter 530 feet. One block, which was of blue granite and must have come either from Asia Minor or from Egypt, measured fifteen feet ten inches in length, with a width of seven feet eleven inches, and a depth of two feet five inches.631 It is thought that the court was probably surrounded by a colonnade or cloister,632 though no traces have been at present observed either of the pillars which must have supported such a cloister or of the rafters which must have formed its roof. Ponds,633 fountains, shrubberies, gardens, groves of trees, probably covered the open space between the cloister and the temple, while well-shaded walks led across it from the gates of the enclosure to those of the sanctuary.

This large building, covering an area of 36,800 square feet, was located within a sacred courtyard, surrounded by a peribolus, or enclosing wall, made of even larger blocks than the temple itself, and accessed through at least one massive doorway. The width of this entrance, positioned near a corner of the western wall, was almost eighteen feet.630 On one side of it were the sockets still fixed in the wall for the bolts on which the door swung, which were six inches long, with proportions to match in width and depth. The peribolus was rectangular, like the temple, and was constructed in lines parallel to it. The longer sides measured 690 feet and the shorter sides 530 feet. One block, made of blue granite and believed to be from either Asia Minor or Egypt, measured fifteen feet ten inches in length, seven feet eleven inches in width, and two feet five inches in depth.631 It's thought that the courtyard was likely surrounded by a colonnade or cloister,632 though no traces of the pillars that would have supported such a cloister or the rafters that would have formed its roof have been found so far. Ponds,633 fountains, shrubs, gardens, and groves of trees probably filled the open space between the cloister and the temple, while well-shaded pathways led across it from the gates of the enclosure to those of the sanctuary.

If we allow ourselves to indulge our fancy for a brief space, and to complete the temple according to the idea which the coins above represented naturally suggest, we may suppose that it did, in fact, consist of a nave, two aisles, and a cell, or “holy of holies,” the nave being of superior height to the aisles, and rising in front into a handsome façade, like the western end of a cathedral flanked by towers. Through the open doorway between the towers might be seen dimly the sacred cone or pillar which was emblematic of deity; on either side the eye caught the ends of the aisles, not more than half the height of the towers, and each crowned with a strongly projecting cornice, perhaps ornamented with a row of uræi. In front of the two aisles, standing by themselves, were twin columns, like Jachin and Boaz before the Temple of Solomon. The aisles were certainly roofed: whether the nave also was covered in, or whether, like the Greek hypæthral temples, it lay open to the blue vault of heaven, is perhaps doubtful. The walls of the buildings, after a few courses of hewn stone, were probably of wood, perhaps of cedar, enriched with the precious metals, and the pavement was adorned with a mosaic of many colours, “white, yellow, red, brown, and rose."634 Outside the temple was a mass of verdure. “In the sacred precinct, and in its dependencies, all breathed of voluptuousness, all spoke to the senses. The air of the place was full of perfumes, full of soft and caressing sounds. There was the murmur of rills which flowed over a carpet of flowers; there was, in the foliage above, the song of the nightingale, and the prolonged and tender cooing of the dove; there were, in the groves around, the tones of the flute, the instrument which sounds the call to pleasure, and summons to the banquet chamber the festive procession and the bridal train. Beneath the shelter of tents, or of light booths with walls formed by the skilful interlacing of a green mass of boughs, through which the myrtle and the laurel spread their odours, dwelt the fair slaves of the goddess, those whom Pindar called, in the drinking-song which he composed for Theoxenus of Corinth, ‘the handmaids of persuasion.’”635 Here and there in the precincts, sacred processions took their prescribed way; ablutions were performed; victims led up to the temple; votive offerings hung on the trees; festal dances, it may be, performed; while in the cloister which skirted the peribolus, dealers in shrines and images chaffered with their customers, erotic poets sang their lays, lovers whispered, fortune-tellers plied their trade, and a throng of pilgrims walked lazily along, or sat on the ground, breathing in the soft, moist air, feasting their eyes upon the beauty of upspringing fountain and flowering shrub, and lofty tree, while their ears drank in the cadences of the falling waters, the song of the birds, and the gay music which floated lightly on the summer breeze.

If we let ourselves imagine for a moment and picture the temple as the coins above naturally suggest, we might think it included a main hall, two side aisles, and a inner sanctum, or "holy of holies," with the main hall being taller than the aisles and rising in front to a beautiful façade, similar to the western end of a cathedral flanked by towers. Through the open doorway between the towers, you could faintly see the sacred cone or pillar that symbolized the divine; on either side, you’d notice the ends of the aisles, which were half the height of the towers and topped with a prominent cornice, possibly decorated with a row of uræi. In front of the two aisles stood twin columns, like Jachin and Boaz before the Temple of Solomon. The aisles were definitely covered; it’s uncertain if the main hall was also roofed or, like Greek open-air temples, was exposed to the bright sky. The walls of the structure, after a few layers of stone, were likely made of wood, maybe cedar, enhanced with precious metals, and the floor was decorated with a mosaic of various colors: "white, yellow, red, brown, and rose."634 Outside the temple was a lush green area. “In the sacred precinct and its surroundings, everything was lush and appealing to the senses. The air was filled with fragrances and soothing sounds. You could hear the soft flow of streams over a carpet of flowers; in the trees above, there was the song of the nightingale and the gentle cooing of doves; and in the nearby groves, the sweet sounds of flutes called to pleasure and signaled the arrival of festive processions and bridal parties. Beneath the shelter of tents or light structures made by skillfully weaving green branches, through which the myrtle and laurel spread their scents, lived the beautiful attendants of the goddess, those whom Pindar referred to, in a drinking song for Theoxenus of Corinth, as ‘the handmaids of persuasion.’”635 Here and there in the sacred areas, religious processions followed their set paths; rituals were conducted; sacrificial animals were brought to the temple; offerings were tied to the trees; festive dances might have taken place, while in the cloister bordering the peribolus, shrine and image sellers bargained with customers, romantic poets recited their verses, lovers whispered sweet nothings, fortune-tellers engaged clients, and a crowd of pilgrims strolled lazily or sat on the ground, soaking up the soft, damp air and admiring the stunning fountains, flowering plants, and tall trees, while their ears enjoyed the sounds of water flowing, birds singing, and the cheerful music carried by the summer breeze.

Phoenician temples had sometimes adjuncts, as cathedrals have their chapter-houses and muniment rooms, which were at once interesting and important. There has been discovered at Athiénau in Cyprus—the supposed site of Golgi—a ruined edifice, which some have taken for a temple,636 but which appears to have been rather a repository for votive offerings, a sort of ecclesiastical museum. A picture of the edifice, as he conceives it to have stood in its original condition, has been drawn by one of its earliest visitants. “The building,” he says,637 “was constructed of sun-dried bricks, forming four walls, the base of which rested upon a substruction of solid stone-work. The walls were covered, as are the houses of the Cypriot peasants of to-day, with a stucco which was either white or coloured, and which was impenetrable by rain. Wooden pillars with stone capitals supported internally a pointed roof, which sloped at a low angle. It formed thus a sort of terrace, like the roofs that we see in Cyprus at the present day. This roof was composed of a number of wooden rafters placed very near each other, above which was spread a layer of rushes and coarse mats, covered with a thick bed of earth well pressed together, equally effective against the entrance of moisture and against the sun’s rays. Externally the building must have presented a very simple appearance. In the interior, which received no light except from the wide doorways in the walls, an immovable and silent crowd of figures in stone, with features and garments made more striking by the employment of paint, surrounded, as with a perpetual worship, the mystic cone. Stone lamps, shaped like diminutive temples, illumined in the corners the grinning ex-votos which hung upon the walls, and the curious pictures with which they were accompanied. Grotesque bas-reliefs adorned the circuit of the edifice, where the slanting light was reflected from the white and polished pavement-stones."638 In length and breadth the chamber measured sixty feet by thirty; the thickness of the basement wall was three feet.639 Midway between the side walls stood three rows of large square pedestals—regularly spaced, and dividing the interior into four vistas or avenues, which some critics regard as bases for statues, and some as supports for the pillars which sustained the roof.640 Two stone capitals of pillars were found within the area of the chamber; and it is conjectured that the entire disappearance of the shafts may be accounted for by their having been of wood,641 the employment of wooden shafts with stone bases and capitals being common in Cyprus at the present time.642 Against each of the four walls was a row of pedestals touching each other, which had certainly been bases for statues, since the statues were found lying, mostly broken, in front of them. The figures varied greatly in size, some being colossal, others mere statuettes. Most probably all were votive offerings, presented by those who imagined that they had been helped by the god of the temple to which the chamber belonged, as an indication of their gratitude. The number of pedestals found along one of the walls was seventy-two,643 and the original number must have been at least three times as great.

Phoenician temples sometimes had additional features, similar to how cathedrals have chapter houses and storage rooms that are both interesting and important. At Athiénau in Cyprus—the believed site of Golgi—there's a ruined building that some people think was a temple,636 but it seems more like a storage place for votive offerings, almost like an ecclesiastical museum. One of its earliest visitors has drawn a picture of how the structure looked originally. “The building,” he explains,637 “was made of sun-dried bricks, forming four walls, with a solid stone foundation. The walls were coated, just like the homes of today's Cypriot peasants, with a stucco that was either white or colored and was resistant to rain. Wooden columns with stone capitals supported a pointed roof inside, which sloped gently. It created a terrace-like structure, like the roofs seen in Cyprus today. This roof had many closely spaced wooden rafters, with layers of rushes and coarse mats on top, covered by a thick layer of packed earth, effective against moisture and the sun’s rays. On the outside, the building looked quite simple. Inside, which was only lit by the wide doorways, an immovable and silent crowd of stone figures—with features and clothing made more vivid by paint—surrounded the mystic cone in a constant state of worship. Stone lamps, shaped like tiny temples, lit up the corners where grinning ex-votos hung on the walls, along with curious pictures. Grotesque bas-reliefs decorated the perimeter of the building, where slanting light reflected off the white and polished stone floor."638 The chamber measured sixty feet by thirty, with walls that were three feet thick.639 Between the side walls were three rows of large square pedestals, evenly spaced, dividing the interior into four pathways, which some critics believe were bases for statues, while others think they supported the pillars that held up the roof.640 Two stone capitals were found in the chamber area, and it's believed that the complete absence of the shafts might be explained by them being made of wood,641 as using wooden shafts with stone bases and capitals is common in Cyprus today.642 Each of the four walls had a row of pedestals touching each other that were definitely bases for statues, as mostly broken statues were found lying in front of them. The figures varied significantly in size, with some being colossal and others tiny statuettes. They were likely all votive offerings given by those who believed the god of the temple had helped them, as a sign of their gratitude. Seventy-two pedestals were found along one wall,643 and there must have originally been at least three times that amount.

Another Cyprian temple, situated at Curium, not far from Paphos, contained a very remarkable crypt, which appears to have been used as a treasure-house.644 It was entered by means of a flight of steps which conducted to a low and narrow passage cut in the rock, and giving access to a set of three similar semi-circular chambers, excavated side by side, and separated one from another by doors. Beyond the third of these, and at right angles to it, was a fourth somewhat smaller chamber, which gave upon a second passage that it was found impossible to explore.645 The three principal chambers were fourteen feet six inches in height, twenty-three feet long, and twenty-one feet broad. The fourth was a little smaller,646 and shaped somewhat irregularly. All contained plate and jewels of extraordinary richness, and often of rare workmanship. “The treasure found,” says M. Perrot, “surpassed all expectation, and even all hope. Never had such a discovery been made of such a collection of precious articles, where the material was of the richest, and the specimens of different styles most curious. There were many bracelets of massive gold, and among them two which weighed a pound apiece, and several others of a weight not much short of this. Gold was met with in profusion under all manner of forms—finger-rings, ear-rings, amulets, flasks, small bottles, hair-pins, heavy necklaces. Silver was found in even greater abundance, both in ornaments and in vessels; besides which there were articles in electrum, which is an amalgam of silver with gold. Among the stones met with were rock-crystals, carnelians, onyxes, agates, and other hard stones of every variety; and further there were paste jewels, cylinders in soft stone, statuettes in burnt clay, earthen vases, and also many objects in bronze, as lamps, tripods, candelabra, chairs, vases, arms, &c. &c. A certain amount of order reigned in the repository. The precious objects in gold were collected together principally in the first chamber. The second contained the silver vessels, which were arranged along a sort of shelf cut in the rock, at the height of about eight inches above the floor. Unfortunately the oxydation of these vessels had proceeded to such lengths, that only a very small number could be extracted from the mass, which for the most part crumbled into dust at the touch of a finger. The third chamber held lamps and fibulæ in bronze, vases in alabaster, and, above all, the groups and vessels modelled in clay; while the fourth was the repository of the utensils in bronze, and of a certain number which were either in copper or in iron. In the further passage, which was not completely explored, there were nevertheless found seven kettles in bronze."647

Another Cyprian temple, located at Curium, not far from Paphos, had a very impressive crypt that seems to have been used as a treasure house.644 It was accessed by a set of steps that led to a low and narrow passage carved into the rock, opening up to a series of three similar semi-circular chambers dug side by side, each separated by doors. Beyond the third chamber, and at a right angle to it, was a fourth, slightly smaller chamber, which opened into a second passage that was impossible to explore.645 The three main chambers were fourteen feet six inches high, twenty-three feet long, and twenty-one feet wide. The fourth was a bit smaller,646 and had an irregular shape. All of them contained plates and jewels of incredible richness, often featuring rare craftsmanship. “The treasure found,” says M. Perrot, “exceeded all expectations and even all hopes. Never has such a collection of valuable items been discovered, where the material was the finest and the specimens of various styles most interesting. There were many heavy gold bracelets, including two that weighed a pound each, along with several others not far from that weight. Gold was found in abundance in all sorts of forms—rings, earrings, amulets, flasks, small bottles, hairpins, and heavy necklaces. Silver was even more plentiful, both in jewelry and in vessels; along with items made from electrum, which is a mix of silver and gold. Among the stones discovered were rock crystals, carnelians, onyxes, agates, and other varieties of hard stones; also, there were paste jewels, small stone cylinders, clay figurines, earthen vases, and many bronze objects like lamps, tripods, candelabra, chairs, vases, weapons, etc. A certain level of organization was evident in the repository. The gold objects were mostly gathered in the first chamber. The second contained silver vessels arranged along a type of shelf cut into the rock, about eight inches off the ground. Unfortunately, due to extensive oxidation, very few of these vessels could be retrieved, as most crumbled into dust at the slightest touch. The third chamber held bronze lamps and fibulae, alabaster vases, and especially clay groups and vessels; while the fourth housed bronze utensils, along with several in copper or iron. In the further passage, which was not fully explored, seven bronze kettles were found nonetheless.”647

In the construction of the walls of their towns, especially of those which were the most ancient, the feature which is most striking at first sight is that on which some remarks have already been made, the attachment of the lower portion of the wall to the soil from which the wall springs. At Sidon, at Aradus, and at Semar-Gebeil, the enceinte which protected the town consisted, up to the height of ten or twelve feet, of native rock, cut to a perpendicular face, upon which were emplaced several courses of hewn stone. The principle adopted was to utilise the rock as far as possible, and then to supplement what was wanting by a superstructure of masonry. Large blocks of stone, shaped to fit the upper surface of the rock, were laid upon it, generally endways, that is, with their smallest surface outwards, their length forming the thickness of the wall, which was sometimes as much as fifteen or twenty feet.648 The massive blocks, once placed, were almost immovable, and it was considered enough to lay them side by side, without clamps or mortar, since their own weight kept them in place. It was not thought of much consequence whether the joints of the courses coincided or not; though care was taken that, if a coincidence occurred in two courses, it should not be repeated in the third.649 The elevation of walls does not seem to have often exceeded from thirty to forty feet, though Diodorus makes the walls of Carthage sixty feet high,650 and Arrian gives to the wall of Tyre which faced the continent the extraordinary height of a hundred and fifty feet.651

In building the walls of their towns, especially the oldest ones, the most noticeable feature right away is the connection between the lower part of the wall and the ground it rises from. In Sidon, Aradus, and Semar-Gebeil, the defensive walls reached heights of ten or twelve feet and were made of native rock, cut straight up, with several layers of shaped stone added on top. The idea was to make the most of the rock available and then add to it with masonry as needed. Large stones were set on top of the rock, usually positioned on their ends, with their smaller sides facing outwards, making the length the thickness of the wall, which sometimes reached fifteen to twenty feet. The heavy stones, once in place, were nearly immovable, and it was considered sufficient to lay them side by side without any clamps or mortar since their weight alone held them securely. It wasn't seen as a big deal whether the joints of the layers lined up; however, care was taken to ensure that if two layers lined up, the third would not. The height of the walls rarely went beyond thirty to forty feet, although Diodorus mentions the walls of Carthage were sixty feet high, and Arrian claims the wall of Tyre that faced the continent was an incredible hundred and fifty feet tall.

If we may generalise from the most perfect specimens of Phoenician town-walls that are still fairly traceable, as those of Eryx and Lixus,652 we may lay it down, that such walls were usually flanked, at irregular intervals, by square or rectangular towers, which projected considerably beyond the line of the curtain. The towers were of a more massive construction than the wall itself, especially in the lower portion, where vast blocks were common. The wall was also broken at intervals by gates, some of which were posterns, either arched or covered in by flat stones,653 while others were of larger dimensions, and were protected, on one side or on both, by bastions. The sites of towns were commonly eminences, and the line of the walls followed the irregularities of the ground, crowning the slopes where they were steepest. Sometimes, as at Carthage and Thapsus, where the wall had to be carried across a flat space, the wall of defence was doubled, or even tripled. The restorations of Daux654 contain, no doubt, a good deal that is fanciful; but they give, probably, a fair idea of the general character of the so-called “triple wall” of certain Phoenician cities. The outer line, or {proteikhisma}, was little more than an earthwork, consisting of a ditch, with the earth from it thrown up inwards, crowned perhaps at top with a breastwork of masonry. The second line was far more elaborate. There was first a ditch deeper than the outer one, while behind this rose a perpendicular battlemented wall to the height, from the bottom of the ditch, of nearly forty feet. In the thickness of the wall, which was not much less than the height, were chambers for magazines and cisterns, while along the top, behind the parapet, ran a platform, from which the defenders discharged their arrows and other missiles against the enemy. Further back, at the distance of about thirty yards, came the main line of defence, which in general character resembled the second, but was loftier and stronger. There was, first, a third ditch (or moat, if water could be introduced), and behind it a wall thirty-five feet thick and sixty feet high, pierced by two rows of embrasures from which arrows could be discharged, and having a triple platform for the defenders. This wall was kept entirely clear of the houses of the town, and the different storeys could be reached by sloping ascents or internal staircases. It was flanked at intervals by square towers, somewhat higher than the walls, which projected sufficiently for the defenders to enfilade the assailants when they approached the base of the curtain.

If we can generalize from the best examples of Phoenician town walls that are still somewhat traceable, like those of Eryx and Lixus,652 we can say that these walls were usually accompanied, at irregular intervals, by square or rectangular towers that extended significantly beyond the line of the wall. The towers were built more robustly than the wall itself, especially in the lower section, where large blocks were common. The wall also had gaps at intervals for gates, some of which were small doors, either arched or covered with flat stones,653 while others were larger and were protected on one side or both by bastions. Towns were usually located on elevated ground, and the walls followed the landscape's contours, topping the steepest slopes. Sometimes, as seen in Carthage and Thapsus, when the wall had to cross a flat area, the defensive wall was doubled or even tripled. Daux's restorations654 certainly include some fanciful elements; however, they likely provide a good sense of the general design of the so-called "triple wall" of certain Phoenician cities. The outer line, or {proteikhisma}, was barely more than an earthwork, consisting of a ditch with the dirt pushed inward, possibly topped with a small masonry wall. The second line was much more complex. It featured a ditch deeper than the outer one, and behind this stood a vertical wall with battlements rising nearly forty feet from the bottom of the ditch. Within the thickness of the wall, which was almost as high as it was thick, there were chambers for storage and cisterns, while along the top, behind the parapet, a platform allowed the defenders to launch arrows and other projectiles at the enemy. Further back, about thirty yards away, was the main line of defense, which generally resembled the second but was taller and stronger. It included another ditch (or moat, if water could be added) and a wall that was thirty-five feet thick and sixty feet high, with two rows of openings for shooting arrows and a triple platform for defenders. This wall was kept entirely clear of town houses, and the different levels could be accessed by sloped paths or internal staircases. It was flanked at intervals by square towers, slightly taller than the walls, which jutted out enough for defenders to fire at attackers as they approached the wall base.

The tombs of the Phoenicians were, most usually, underground constructions, either simple excavations in the rock, or subterranean chambers, built of hewn stone, at the bottom of sloping passages, or perpendicular shafts, which gave access to them. The simpler kinds bear a close resemblance to the sepulchres of the Jews. A chamber is opened in the rock, in the sides of which are hollowed out, horizontally, a number of caverns or loculi, each one intended to receive a corpse.655 If more space is needed, a passage is made from one of the sides of the chamber to a certain distance, and then a second chamber is excavated, and more loculi are formed; and the process is repeated as often as necessary. But chambers thus excavated were apt to collapse, especially if the rock was of the soft and friable nature so common in Phoenicia Proper and in Cyprus; on which account, in such soils, the second kind of tomb was preferred, sepulchural chambers being solidly built,656 either singly or in groups, each made to hold a certain number of sarcophagi. The most remarkable tombs of this class are those found at Amathus, on the south coast of Cyprus, by General Di Cesnola. They lie at the depth of from forty to fifty-five feet below the surface of the soil,657 and are square chambers, built of huge stones, carefully squared, some of them twenty feet in length, nine in breadth, and three in thickness, and even averaging a length of fourteen feet.658 Two shapes occur. Some of the tombs are almost perfect cubes, the upright walls rising to a height of twelve or fifteen feet, and being then covered in by three or four long slabs of stone. Others resemble huts, having a gable at either end, and a sloping roof formed of slabs which meet and support each other. A squared doorway, from five to six feet in height, gives entrance to the tombs at one end, and has for ornament a fourfold fillet, which surrounds it on three sides. Otherwise, ornamentation is absent, the stonework of both walls and roofs being absolutely plain and bare. Internally the chambers present the same naked appearance, walls and roofs being equally plain, and the floor paved with oblong slabs of stone, about a foot and a half in length.

The tombs of the Phoenicians were usually underground structures, either simple excavations in the rock or underground chambers made of cut stone, located at the bottom of sloping passages or vertical shafts that provided access to them. The simpler ones closely resemble the burial sites of the Jews. A chamber is created in the rock, with several hollows or loculi carved horizontally into the sides, each designed to hold a corpse.655 If more space is needed, a passage can be made from one side of the chamber for a certain distance, followed by the excavation of a second chamber with additional loculi; this process can be repeated as needed. However, such excavated chambers were prone to collapse, especially if the rock was soft and crumbly, which is common in Phoenicia and Cyprus; for this reason, the second type of tomb was preferred, with burial chambers built solidly,656 either individually or in groups, each designed to hold a specific number of sarcophagi. The most noteworthy tombs of this type are those discovered at Amathus, on the southern coast of Cyprus, by General Di Cesnola. They are located forty to fifty-five feet below the surface of the soil,657 consisting of square chambers made from large, carefully squared stones, some measuring twenty feet long, nine feet wide, and three feet thick, with an average length of fourteen feet.658 There are two shapes. Some tombs are nearly perfect cubes, with vertical walls rising to twelve or fifteen feet, capped with three or four long stone slabs. Others resemble huts, featuring a gable at each end and a sloping roof made of slabs that meet and support each other. A squared doorway, five to six feet high, provides entrance to the tombs at one end and is decorated with a fourfold fillet that wraps around it on three sides. Otherwise, there is no decoration; both the walls and roofs are completely plain and unadorned. Internally, the chambers have the same stark appearance, with plain walls and ceilings, and the floor is paved with rectangular slabs of stone, about a foot and a half long.

The grouped chambers are of several kinds. Sometimes there are two chambers only, one opening directly into the other, and not always similarly roofed. Occasionally, groups of three are found, and there are examples of groups of four. In these instances, the exact symmetry is remarkable. A single doorway of the usual character gives entrance to a nearly square chamber, the exact dimensions of which are thirteen feet four inches by twelve feet two inches. Midway in the side and opposite walls are three other doorways, each of them three foot six inches in width, which lead into exactly similar square chambers, having a length of twelve feet two inches, and a width of ten feet nine.659

The grouped chambers come in various types. Sometimes there are just two chambers, one that opens directly into the other, and they don’t always have the same style of roof. Occasionally, there are groups of three, and there are also examples with four chambers. In these cases, the symmetry is quite striking. A single standard doorway leads into a nearly square chamber, measuring thirteen feet four inches by twelve feet two inches. In the middle of each side wall, there are three additional doorways, each three feet six inches wide, which open into identical square chambers, each having a length of twelve feet two inches and a width of ten feet nine.659

Chambers of the character here described contain in almost every instance stone sarcophagi. These are ranged along the walls, at a little distance from them. The chambers commonly contain two or three; but sometimes one sarcophagus is superimposed upon another, and in this way the number occasionally reaches to six.660 Mostly, the sarcophagi are plain, or nearly so, but are covered over with a sloping lid. Sometimes, however, they are elaborately carved, and constitute works of art, which are of the highest value. An account will be given of the most remarkable of these objects in the chapter on Phoenician Æsthetic Art.

Chambers of the character described here typically contain stone sarcophagi. These are lined up along the walls, spaced a little away from them. The chambers usually have two or three sarcophagi, but sometimes one is placed on top of another, occasionally totaling up to six. Mostly, the sarcophagi are plain or nearly so, but they have a sloping lid covering them. However, some are intricately carved and are considered works of art of the highest value. A detailed description of the most notable of these objects will be provided in the chapter on Phoenician Aesthetic Art.

Another distinct type of Phoenician tomb is that which is peculiar to Nea-Paphos, and which is thought by some to have been employed exclusively by the High Priests of the great temple there.661 The peculiarity of these burial-places is, that the sepulchral chambers are adjuncts of a quadrangular court open to the sky, and surrounded by a colonnade supported on pillars.662 The court, the colonnade, the pillars, the entablature, and the chambers, with their niches for the dead, are all equally cut out of the rock, as well as the passage by which the court is entered, at one corner of the quadrangle. The columns are either square or rounded, the rounded ones having capitals resembling those of the Doric order; and the entablature is also a rough imitation of the Doric triglyphs, and guttæ. The entrances to the sepulchral chambers are under the colonnade, behind the pillars;663 and the chambers contain, beside niches, a certain number of bases for sarcophagi, but no sarcophagi have been found in them. The quadrangle is of a small size, not more than about eighteen feet each way.

Another unique type of Phoenician tomb is specific to Nea-Paphos, which some believe was used solely by the High Priests of the major temple there.661 The unique feature of these burial sites is that the sepulchral chambers are part of a square courtyard that is open to the sky and surrounded by a colonnade supported by pillars.662 The courtyard, colonnade, pillars, entablature, and chambers, complete with their niches for the dead, are all carved from the rock, as well as the passage that leads into the courtyard at one corner of the square. The columns can be either square or rounded, with the rounded ones having capitals that resemble those of the Doric style; the entablature also roughly imitates the Doric triglyphs and guttæ. The entrances to the sepulchral chambers are located under the colonnade, behind the pillars;663 and the chambers contain, in addition to niches, several bases for sarcophagi, although no sarcophagi have been found in them. The quadrangle is relatively small, measuring only about eighteen feet on each side.

Thus far we have described that portion of the sepulchral architecture of the Phoenicians which is most hidden from sight, lying, as it does, beneath the surface of the soil. With tombs of this quiet character the Phoenicians were ordinarily contented. They were not, however, wholly devoid of those feelings with respect to their dead which have caused the erection, in most parts of the world, of sepulchral monuments intended to attract the eye, and to hand on to later ages the memory of the departed. Well acquainted with Egypt, they could not but have been aware from the earliest times of those massive piles which the vanity of Egyptian monarchs had raised up for their own glorification on the western side of the valley of the Nile; nor in later days could such monuments have escaped their notice as the Mausoleum of Halicarnassus664 or the Tomb of the Maccabees.665 Accordingly, we find them, at a very remote period, not merely anxious to inter their dead decently and carefully in rock tombs or subterranean chambers of massive stone, but also wishful upon occasions to attract attention to the last resting-places of their great men, by constructions which showed themselves above the ground, and had some architectural pretensions. One of these, situated near Amrith, the ancient Marathus, is a very curious and peculiar structure. It is known at the present day as the Burdj-el-Bezzâk,666 and was evidently constructed to be, like the pyramids, at once a monument and a tomb. It is an edifice, built of large blocks of stone, and rising to a height of thirty-two feet above the plain at its base, so contrived as to contain two sepulchral chambers, the one over the other. Externally, the monument is plain almost to rudeness, being little more than a cubic mass, broken only by two doorways, and having for its sole ornament a projecting cornice in front. Internally, there is more art and contrivance. The chambers are very carefully constructed, and contain a number of niches intended to receive sarcophagi, the lower having accommodation for three and the upper for twelve bodies.667 It is thought that originally the cubic mass, which is all that now remains, was surmounted by a pyramidical roof, many stones from which were found by M. Renan among the débris that were scattered around. The height of the monument was thus increased by perhaps one-half, and did not fall much short of sixty-five feet.668 The cornice, which is now seen on one side only, and which is there imperfect, originally, no doubt, encircled the entire edifice.

So far, we've talked about the part of Phoenician funerary architecture that's mostly out of sight, buried beneath the soil. Typically, the Phoenicians were content with tombs that had this quiet character. However, they weren't entirely lacking in the feelings about the dead that have prompted the creation of prominent burial monuments around the world, meant to catch the eye and preserve the memory of those who have passed away. Having a good understanding of Egypt, they must have been aware from early on of the massive structures built by the egos of Egyptian pharaohs for their own glory on the western side of the Nile valley; and in later times, they couldn't have missed monuments like the Mausoleum of Halicarnassus.664 or the Tomb of the Maccabees.665 Consequently, we see that even at a very early stage, they not only wanted to bury their dead respectfully and carefully in rock tombs or underground chambers of solid stone but also sometimes aimed to draw attention to the final resting places of their notable individuals with structures that rose above the ground and displayed some architectural flair. One such notable structure, located near Amrith, the ancient Marathus, is a very interesting and unique building. Today, it's known as the Burdj-el-Bezzâk.666 It was clearly designed to serve as both a monument and a tomb, similar to the pyramids. This building, made from large stone blocks, rises thirty-two feet above the plain at its base and is constructed to hold two burial chambers, one above the other. Externally, the monument is simple to the point of being crude, appearing mostly as a cubic mass, broken only by two doorways, with a single decorative cornice at the front. Inside, there's more artistry and design. The chambers are constructed with care and include several niches for sarcophagi, accommodating three in the lower chamber and twelve in the upper.667 It's believed that originally, the cubic mass that remains today was topped with a pyramidal roof, many stones of which were found by M. Renan among the debris scattered around. This would have increased the height of the monument by about half, making it close to sixty-five feet tall.668 The cornice, which is now visible on only one side and is incomplete, would have originally surrounded the entire building.

The other constructions erected by the Phoenicians to mark the resting-places of their dead are simple monuments erected near, and generally over, the tombs in which the bodies are interred. The best known is probably that in the vicinity of Tyre, which the natives call the Kabr-Hiram, or “Tomb of Hiram."669 No great importance can be attached to this name, which appears to be a purely modern one;670 but the monument is undoubtedly ancient, perhaps as ancient as any other in Phoenicia.671 It is composed of eight courses of huge stones superimposed one upon another,672 the blocks having in some cases a length of eleven or twelve feet, with a breadth of seven or eight, and a depth of three feet. The courses retreat slightly, with the exception of the fifth, which projects considerably beyond the line of the fourth and still more beyond that of the sixth. The whole effect is less that of a pyramid than of a stelé or pillar, the width at top being not very much smaller than that at the base. The monument is a solid mass, and is not a square but a rectangular oblong, the broader sides measuring fourteen feet and the narrower about eight feet six inches. Two out of the eight courses are of the nature of substructions, being supplemental to the rock, which supplies their place in part; and it is only recently that they have been brought to light by means of excavation. Hence the earlier travellers speak of the monument as having no more than six courses. The present height above the soil is a little short of twenty-five feet. A flight of steps cut in the rock leads down from the monument to a sepulchral chamber, which, however, contains neither sepulchral niche nor sarcophagus.

The other structures built by the Phoenicians to mark their dead are straightforward monuments placed near, and usually over, the tombs where the bodies are buried. The most well-known is probably the one near Tyre, which locals call the Kabr-Hiram, or “Tomb of Hiram."669 This name doesn't seem to hold much significance and appears to be a modern addition;670 however, the monument itself is definitely ancient, possibly as old as any other in Phoenicia.671 It consists of eight layers of massive stones stacked on top of each other,672 with some blocks measuring eleven or twelve feet long, seven or eight feet wide, and three feet deep. The layers step back slightly, except for the fifth layer, which extends significantly beyond the fourth and even further than the sixth. The overall appearance is more like a stele or pillar than a pyramid, with the top not much narrower than the base. The monument is a solid structure, being a rectangular shape rather than a square, with the longer sides measuring fourteen feet and the shorter sides about eight feet six inches. Two of the eight layers serve as foundations, partially supported by the rock beneath, and they were only recently uncovered through excavation. Because of this, earlier travelers described the monument as having only six layers. The current height above ground is just under twenty-five feet. A staircase carved into the rock leads down from the monument to a burial chamber, which, however, doesn't contain either a burial niche or a sarcophagus.

But the most striking of the Phoenician sepulchral monuments are to be found in the north of Phoenicia, and not in the south, in the neighbourhood, not of Tyre and Sidon, but of Marathus and Aradus. Two of them, known as the Méghâzil,673 form a group which is very remarkable, and which, if we may trust the restoration of M. Thobois,674 must have had considerable architectural merit. Situated very near each other, on the culminating point of a great plateau of rock, they dominate the country far and wide, and attract the eye from a long distance. One seems to have been in much simpler and better taste than the other. M. Renan calls it “a real masterpiece, in respect of proportion, of elegance, and of majesty."675 It is built altogether in three stages. First, there is a circular basement story flanked by four figures of lions, attached to the wall behind them, and only showing in front of it their heads, their shoulders, and their fore paws. This basement, which has a height of between seven and eight feet, is surmounted by a cylindrical tower in two stages, the lower stage measuring fourteen and the upper, which is domed, ten feet. The basement is composed of four great stones, the entire tower above it is one huge monolith. An unusual and very effective ornamentation crowns both stages of the tower, consisting of a series of gradines at top with square machicolations below.

But the most striking Phoenician burial monuments are found in the north of Phoenicia, not in the south, near Marathus and Aradus instead of Tyre and Sidon. Two of them, known as the Méghâzil,673 form a remarkable group that, if we can trust M. Thobois's restoration,674 must have had significant architectural value. Located very close to each other on the highest point of a large rock plateau, they overlook the surrounding area and can be seen from far away. One appears to be much simpler and more tastefully designed than the other. M. Renan describes it as “a real masterpiece, in terms of proportion, elegance, and majesty."675 It is built in three levels. First, there is a circular base flanked by four lion figures attached to the wall behind them, showing only their heads, shoulders, and forepaws from the front. This base, which is between seven and eight feet tall, supports a cylindrical tower that rises in two stages, measuring fourteen feet for the lower stage and ten feet for the domed upper stage. The base consists of four large stones, and the entire tower above it is made from a single massive monolith. An unusual and striking decoration tops both levels of the tower, featuring a series of steps at the top with square machicolations below.

The other monument of the pair, distant about twenty feet from the one already described, is architecturally far less happy. It is composed of four members, viz. a low plinth for base, above this a rectangular pedestal, surmounted by a strong band or cornice; next, a monolithic cylinder, without ornaments, which contracts slightly as it ascends; and, lastly, a pentagonal pyramid at the top. The pedestal is exceedingly rough and unfinished; generally, the workmanship is rude, and the different members do not assort well one with another. Still it would seem that the two monuments belong to the same age and are parts of the same plan.676 Their lines are parallel, as are those of the subterranean apartments which they cover, and they stand within a single enclosure. Whether the same architect designed them both it is impossible to determine, but if so he must have been one of the class of artists who have sometimes happy and sometimes unhappy inspirations.

The other monument in the pair, located about twenty feet from the one already described, is architecturally far less appealing. It consists of four parts: a low base plinth, a rectangular pedestal on top of that, a strong band or cornice above the pedestal, a monolithic cylinder that tapers slightly as it rises, and finally, a pentagonal pyramid at the top. The pedestal is extremely rough and unfinished; overall, the craftsmanship is crude, and the different parts don’t fit together well. Still, it seems that the two monuments are from the same time period and are part of the same design. Their lines are parallel, just like those of the underground chambers they cover, and they are within a single enclosure. It’s impossible to say for sure if the same architect designed both of them, but if he did, he must have been the kind of artist who has moments of both brilliance and mediocrity.

Both the Méghâzil are superimposed upon subterranean chambers, containing niches for bodies, and reached by a flight of steps cut in the rock, the entrance to which is at some little distance from the monuments.677 But there is nothing at all striking or peculiar in the chambers, which are without ornament of any kind.

Both the Méghâzil are built on top of underground chambers that have spaces for bodies, accessible via a flight of steps carved into the rock, with the entrance located a short distance from the monuments.677 But there is nothing particularly impressive or unusual in the chambers, which are completely unadorned.

Another tomb, in the vicinity of the Méghâzil, is remarkable chiefly for the care taken to shelter and protect the entrance to the set of chambers which it covers.678 The monument is a simple one. A square monolith, crowned by a strong cornice, stands upon a base consisting of two steps. Above the cornice is another monolith, the lower part squared and the upper shaped into a pyramid. The upper part of the pyramid has crumbled away, but enough remains to show the angle of the slope, and to indicate for the original erection a height of about twenty feet. At the distance of about ten yards from the base of the monument is a second erection, consisting of two tiers of large stones, which roof in the entrance to a flight of eighteen steps. These steps lead downwards to a sloping passage, in which are sepulchral niches, and thence into two chambers, the inner one of which is almost directly under the main monument. Probably, a block of stone, movable but removed with difficulty, originally closed the entrance at the point where the steps begin. This stone ordinarily prevented ingress, but when a fresh corpse was to be admitted, or funeral ceremonies were to be performed in one of the chambers, it could be “rolled"679 or dragged away.

Another tomb, near the Méghâzil, is notable for the careful protection of the entrance to the chambers it covers.678 The monument is quite simple. A square monolith, topped with a sturdy cornice, stands on a base made of two steps. Above the cornice is another monolith, the lower part square and the upper shaped like a pyramid. The top of the pyramid has crumbled, but enough remains to show the slope angle, indicating that it originally stood about twenty feet tall. About ten yards from the base of the monument is another structure, made of two tiers of large stones, which covers the entrance to a flight of eighteen steps. These steps lead down to a sloping passage, featuring sepulchral niches, and further into two chambers, with the inner chamber almost directly beneath the main monument. It’s likely that a large, movable stone originally blocked the entrance at the point where the steps begin. This stone usually prevented entry, but when a new corpse needed to be brought in or funeral ceremonies were held in one of the chambers, it could be “rolled"679 or pulled away.

Phoenician architects were, as a general rule, exceedingly sparing in the use of ornament. Neither the pillar, nor the arch, much less the vault, was a feature in their principal buildings, which affected straight lines, right-angles, and a massive construction, based upon the Egyptian. The pillar came ultimately to be adopted, to a certain extent, from the Greeks; but only the simplest forms, the Doric and Ionic, were in use, if we except certain barbarous types which the people invented for themselves. The true arch was scarcely known in Phoenicia, at any rate till Roman times, though false arches were not infrequent in the gateways of towns and the doors of houses.680 The external ornamentation of buildings was chiefly by cornices of various kinds, by basement mouldings, by carvings about doorways,681 by hemispherical or pyramidical roofs, and by the use of bevelled stones in the walls. The employment of animal forms in external decoration was exceedingly rare; and the half lions of the circular Méghâzil of Amrith are almost unique.

Phoenician architects were generally quite minimalistic with decoration. They didn't use pillars, arches, or vaults in their main buildings, which emphasized straight lines, right angles, and a solid construction style influenced by the Egyptians. Eventually, they adopted pillars to some extent from the Greeks, but only the simplest styles, the Doric and Ionic, were utilized, aside from some crude versions they created themselves. The true arch was hardly known in Phoenicia, at least until Roman times, although false arches appeared frequently in city gates and house doors.680 The exterior decoration of buildings mostly included various types of cornices, basement moldings, carvings around doorways,681 hemispherical or pyramid-shaped roofs, and beveled stones in the walls. The use of animal shapes in external decoration was very rare; the half-lions from the circular Méghâzil of Amrith are almost one of a kind.

In internal ornamentation there was greater variety. Pavements were sometimes of mosaic, and glowed with various colours;682 sometimes they were of alabaster slabs elaborately patterned. Alabaster slabs also, it is probable, adorned the walls of temples and houses, excepting where woodwork was employed, as in the Temple of Solomon. There is much richness and beauty in many of the slabs now in the Phoenician collection of the Louvre,683 especially in those which exhibit the forms of sphinxes or griffins. Many of the patterns most affected are markedly Assyrian in character, as the rosette, the palm-head, the intertwined ribbons, and the rows of gradines which occur so frequently. Even the Sphinxes are rather Assyrian than Egyptian in character; and exhibit the recurved wings, which are never found in the valley of the Nile. In almost all the forms employed there is a modification of the original type, sufficient to show that the Phoenician artist did not care merely to reproduce.

In the interior decoration, there was a lot more variety. Floors were sometimes made of mosaic and shone with different colors; 682 other times, they were made of intricately patterned alabaster slabs. Alabaster slabs probably also decorated the walls of temples and homes, except where woodwork was used, like in the Temple of Solomon. Many of the slabs in the Phoenician collection at the Louvre 683 are quite rich and beautiful, especially those that display forms of sphinxes or griffins. Many of the popular patterns are distinctly Assyrian in style, such as the rosette, palm-head, intertwined ribbons, and the frequently occurring rows of gradines. Even the sphinxes carry more Assyrian traits than Egyptian, displaying the recurved wings that are never found in the Nile Valley. In almost all the designs used, there's a variation from the original type, indicating that the Phoenician artist aimed to create something unique rather than just copy.

On the whole the architecture must be pronounced wanting in originality and in a refined taste. What M. Renan says of Phoenician art in general684 is especially true of Phoenician architecture. “Phoenician art, which issued, as it would seem, originally from mere troglodytism, was, from the time when it arrived at the need of ornament, essentially an art of imitation. That art was, above all, industrial; that art never raised itself for its great public monuments to a style that was at once elegant and durable. The origin of Phoenician architecture was the excavated rock, not the column, as was the case with the Greeks. The wall replaced the excavated rock after a time, but without wholly losing its character. There is nothing that leads us to believe that the Phoenicians knew how to construct a keyed vault. The monolithic principle which dominated the Phoenician and Syrian art, even after it had taken Greek art for its model, is the exact contrary of the Hellenic style. Greek architecture starts from the principle of employing small stones, and proclaims the principal loudly. At no time did the Greeks extract from Pentelicus blocks at all comparable for size with those of Baalbek or of Egypt; they saw no use in doing so; on the contrary, with masses of such enormity, which it is desired to use in their entirety, the architect is himself dominated; the material, instead of being subordinate to the design of the edifice, runs counter to the design and contradicts it. The monuments on the Acropolis of Athens would be impossible with blocks of the size usual in Syria."685 Thus there is always something heavy, rude, and coarse in the Phoenician buildings, which betray their troglodyte origin by an over-massive and unfinished appearance.

Overall, the architecture lacks originality and refined taste. What M. Renan says about Phoenician art in general is particularly true for Phoenician architecture. “Phoenician art, which seems to have originated from mere cave-dwelling, was fundamentally an art of imitation from the moment it began to require decoration. This art was mainly industrial and never achieved a style that was both elegant and durable for its major public monuments. The roots of Phoenician architecture lay in the excavated rock, not in the column, as was the case with the Greeks. Over time, the wall replaced the excavated rock, but still retained much of its character. There’s no evidence that the Phoenicians knew how to construct a keyed vault. The monolithic principle that dominated Phoenician and Syrian art, even after they adopted Greek art as a model, stands in stark contrast to the Hellenic style. Greek architecture starts with the use of small stones and loudly proclaims this principle. The Greeks never extracted blocks from Pentelicus that were anywhere near the size of those in Baalbek or Egypt; they saw no point in doing so. Conversely, when using such massive stones, which they aimed to incorporate fully, the architect is constrained; the material, rather than serving the design of the building, opposes it and contradicts it. The monuments on the Acropolis of Athens would be impossible to construct using the typical block sizes found in Syria." Thus, there is always something heavy, crude, and rough about Phoenician buildings, which reveal their cave-dwelling origins through an overly massive and unfinished look.

There is also a want of originality, more especially in the ornamentation. Egypt, Assyria, and Greece have furnished the “motives” which lie at the root of almost all the decorative art that is to be met with, either in the mother country or in the colonies. Winged disks, uræi, scarabs, sphinxes, have been adopted from Egypt; Assyria has furnished gradines, lotus blossoms, rosettes, the palm-tree ornament, the ribbon ornament, and the form of the lion; Greece has supplied pillars, pediments, festoons, and chimæras. Native talent has contributed little or nothing to the ornamentation of buildings, if we except the modification of the types which have been derived from foreign sources.

There is also a lack of originality, especially in the decoration. Egypt, Assyria, and Greece have provided the “motifs” that are the foundation of almost all decorative art found in both the home country and its colonies. Winged disks, uraei, scarabs, and sphinxes have been borrowed from Egypt; Assyria has contributed gradines, lotus flowers, rosettes, palm tree motifs, ribbon designs, and the form of the lion; Greece has given us columns, pediments, garlands, and chimeras. Local talent has added little or nothing to the decoration of buildings, except for some adaptations of the styles that have been taken from other cultures.

Finally, there is a want of combination and general plan in the Phoenician constructions where they fall into groups. “This is sensibly felt,” according to M. Renan, “at Amrith, at Kabr-Hiram, and at Um-el-Awamid. In the remains still visible in these localities there are many fine ideas, many beautiful details; but they do not fall under any general dominant plan, as do the buildings on the Acropolis of Athens. One seems to see a set of people who are fond of working in stone for its own sake, but who do not care to arrive at a mutual understanding in order to produce in common a single work, since they do not know that it is the conception of a grand whole which constitutes greatness in art. Hence the incompleteness of the monuments; there is not a tomb to which the relations of the deceased have deemed it fitting to give the finishing touches; there is everywhere a certain egotism, like that which in later times prevented the Mussulman monuments from enduring. A passing pleasure in art does not induce men to finish, since finishing requires a certain stiffness of will. In general, the ancient Phoenicians appear to have had the spirit of sculptors rather than of architects. They did not construct in great masses, but every one laboured on his own account. Hence there was no exact measurement, and no symmetry. Even the capitals of the columns at Um-el-Awamid are not alike; in the portions which most evidently correspond the details are different."686

Finally, there’s a lack of cohesion and a general plan in the Phoenician constructions when they are grouped together. “This is noticeably felt,” according to M. Renan, “at Amrith, Kabr-Hiram, and Um-el-Awamid. In the remains still visible in these areas, there are many great ideas and beautiful details; however, they don’t adhere to any overarching dominant plan, unlike the buildings on the Acropolis of Athens. It seems like there’s a group of people who love working with stone for its own sake, but who aren’t interested in collaborating to create a single coherent work, as they don’t realize that a grand overall concept is what defines greatness in art. This leads to the unfinished nature of the monuments; there’s not a single tomb that the deceased’s relatives decided to give finishing touches to; there’s an inherent egotism, similar to what later inhibited the longevity of Muslim monuments. A fleeting enjoyment of art doesn’t motivate people to finish their work, as finishing requires a certain determination. Overall, the ancient Phoenicians seem to have had the mindset of sculptors rather than architects. They didn’t build in large masses; instead, each person worked independently. Therefore, there was no precise measurement and no symmetry. Even the capitals of the columns at Um-el-Awamid aren’t identical; in the areas that seem most obviously related, the details differ.”686





CHAPTER VII—ÆSTHETIC ART

     Recent discoveries of Phoenician artistic remains—
     Phoenician sculpture—Statues and busts—Animal forms—Bas-
     reliefs—Hercules and Geryon—Scenes on sarcophagi—
     Phoenicians metal castings—Jachin and Boaz—Solomon’s
     “Molten Sea”—Solomon’s lavers—Statuettes in bronze—
     Embossed work upon cups and pateræ—Cup of Præneste—
     Intaglios on cylinders and gems—Phoenician painting—Tinted
     statues—Paintings on terra-cotta and clay.
     Recent discoveries of Phoenician artistic remains—Phoenician sculpture—statues and busts—animal forms—bas-reliefs—Hercules and Geryon—scenes on sarcophagi—Phoenician metal castings—Jachin and Boaz—Solomon’s “Molten Sea”—Solomon’s basins—statuettes in bronze—embossed work on cups and plates—Cup of Praeneste—intaglios on cylinders and gems—Phoenician painting—colored statues—paintings on terracotta and clay.

Phoenician æsthetic art embraced sculpture, metal-casting, intaglio, and painting to a small extent. Situated as the Phoenicians were, in the immediate neighbourhood of nations which had practised from a remote antiquity the imitation of natural forms, and brought into contact by their commercial transactions with others, with whom art of every kind was in the highest esteem—adroit moreover with their hands, clever, active, and above all else practical—it was scarcely possible that they should not, at an early period in their existence as a nation, interest themselves in what they found so widely appreciated, and become themselves ambitious of producing such works as they saw everywhere produced, admired, and valued. The mere commercial instinct would lead them to supply a class of goods which commanded a high price in the world’s markets; while it is not to be supposed that they were, any more than other nations, devoid of those æsthetic propensities which find a vent in what are commonly called the “fine arts,” or less susceptible of that natural pleasure which successful imitation evokes from all who find themselves capable of it. Thus, we might have always safely concluded, even without any material evidence of it, that the Phoenicians had an art of their own, either original or borrowed; but we are now able to do more than this. Recent researches in Phoenicia Proper, in Cyprus, in Sardina, and elsewhere, have recovered such a mass of Phoenician artistic remains, that it is possible to form a tolerably complete idea of the character of their æsthetic art, of its methods, its aims, and its value.

Phoenician aesthetic art included sculpture, metalwork, engraving, and to a lesser extent, painting. Given the Phoenicians' location near nations that had long practiced the representation of natural forms, and their trade connections with others who highly valued all forms of art—along with their skillful, clever, and practical nature—it’s hardly surprising that they would have been interested in what was so widely admired and aimed to create similar works early on as a nation. Their commercial instincts would drive them to offer goods that were in high demand in global markets, and it’s not reasonable to think they were any less inclined than other nations to appreciate the aesthetic pleasures that come from successful imitation in what we call the "fine arts." Therefore, we could have always assumed, even without tangible evidence, that the Phoenicians had their own unique art, whether original or inspired. However, we can now do more than speculate. Recent excavations in Phoenicia proper, Cyprus, Sardinia, and other places have uncovered such a wealth of Phoenician artistic remains that we can form a fairly complete understanding of the nature of their aesthetic art, its techniques, goals, and significance.

Phoenician sculpture, even at its best, is somewhat rude. The country possesses no marble, and has not even any stone of a fine grain. The cretaceous limestone, which is the principal geological formation, is for the most part so pierced with small holes and so thickly sown with fossil shells as to be quite unsuited for the chisel; and even the better blocks, which the native sculptors were careful to choose, are not free from these defects, and in no case offer a grain that is satisfactory. To meet these difficulties, the Phoenician sculptor occasionally imported his blocks either from Egypt or from the volcanic regions of Taurus and Amanus;71 but it was not until he had transported himself to Cyprus, and found there an abundance of a soft, but fairly smooth, compact, and homogeneous limestone, that he worked freely, and produced either statues or bas-reliefs in any considerable number.72 The Cyprian limestone is very easy to work. “It is a whitish stone when it comes out of the quarry, but by continued exposure to the air the tone becomes a greyish yellow, which, though a little dull, is not disagreeable to the eye. The nail can make an impression on it, and it is worked by the chisel much more easily and more rapidly than marble. But it is in the plastic arts as in literature and poetry—what costs but little trouble has small chance of enduring. The Cyprian limestone is too soft to furnish the effects and the contrasts which marble offers, so to speak, spontaneously; it is incapable of receiving the charming polish which makes so strong an opposition to the dark shadows of the parts where the chisel has scooped deep. The chisel, whatever efforts it may make and however laboriously it may be applied, cannot impress on such material the strong and bold touches which indicate the osseous structure, and make the muscles and the veins show themselves under the epidermis in Greek statuary. The sculptor’s work is apt to be at once finikin and lax; it wants breadth, and it wants decision. Moreover, the material, having little power of resistance, retains but ill what the chisel once impressed; the more delicate markings and the more lifelike touches that it once received, it loses easily through friction or exposure to rough weather. A certain number of the sculptured figures found by M. Di Cesnola at Athiénau were discovered under conditions that were quite peculiar, having passed from the shelter of a covered chamber to that of a protecting bed of dust, which had hardened and adhered to their surfaces; and these figures had preserved an unusual freshness, and seem as if just chiselled; but, saving these exceptions, the Cypriot figures have their angles rounded, and their projections softened down. It is like a page of writing, where the ink, before it had time to dry, preserving its sharpness of tone, has been absorbed by the blotting paper and has left only pale and feeble traces."73

Phoenician sculpture, even at its best, is somewhat rough. The region has no marble or any fine-grained stone. The primary geological formation, cretaceous limestone, is mostly full of small holes and heavily marked with fossil shells, making it unsuitable for detailed carving. Even the better blocks that local sculptors choose aren’t free from these flaws and don’t provide a satisfactory grain. To overcome these challenges, Phoenician sculptors sometimes imported their blocks from Egypt or the volcanic areas of Taurus and Amanus; however, it wasn't until they moved to Cyprus and discovered a plentiful supply of soft, yet fairly smooth, compact, and homogeneous limestone that they were able to work more freely, producing a greater number of statues or bas-reliefs. The Cyprian limestone is very easy to carve. "It starts as a whitish stone when quarried, but, through continued exposure to the air, it turns a greyish-yellow, which, although a bit dull, is still pleasant to the eye. A nail can leave an impression on it, and it's worked with a chisel much easier and faster than marble. However, just like in literature and poetry, something that costs little effort has a small chance of lasting. The Cyprian limestone is too soft to provide the effects and contrasts that marble offers naturally; it can't hold the beautiful polish that creates strong contrasts against the deep shadows where the chisel has carved deeply. No matter how much effort the chisel puts in, it can't create strong, bold touches that showcase the underlying bone structure, or make the muscles and veins visible beneath the skin like in Greek sculptures. The sculptor’s work tends to be both overly fussy and loose; it lacks depth and clarity. Furthermore, the material has little resilience and struggles to retain what the chisel has shaped; finer details and lifelike touches are easily lost to wear or rough weather. A certain number of sculpted figures found by M. Di Cesnola at Athiénau were discovered in very unusual conditions, having transitioned from a sheltered chamber to a protective layer of dust, which hardened and clung to their surfaces; these figures retained a remarkable freshness, appearing as though they were just carved. But aside from these exceptions, the Cypriot figures typically have softened edges and rounded angles. It's like a written page where the ink, before it could dry and keep its sharp tone, has been absorbed by blotting paper, leaving only faint and weak traces."

Another striking defect in the Phoenician, or at any rate in the Cyprio-Phoenician, sculpture, and one that cannot be excused on account of any inherent weakness in the material, is the thinness and flatness of the greater part of the figures. The sculptor seems to have been furnished by the stonecutter, not so much with solid blocks of stone, as with tolerably thick slabs.74 These he fashioned carefully in front, and produced statues, which, viewed in front, are lifelike and fairly satisfactory. But to the sides and back of the slab he paid little attention, not intending that his work should be looked at from all quarters, but that the spectator should directly face it. The statues were made to stand against walls,75 or in niches, or back to back, the heels and backs touching;76 they were not, properly speaking, works in the round, but rather alti relievi a little exaggerated, not actually part of the wall, but laid closely against it. A striking example of this kind of work may be seen in a figure now at New York, which appears to represent a priest, whereof a front view is given by Di Cesnola in his “Cyprus,” and a side view by Perrot and Chipiez in their “History of Ancient Art.” The head and neck are in good proportion, but the rest of the figure is altogether unduly thin, while for some space above the feet it is almost literally a slab, scarcely fashioned at all.

Another noticeable flaw in Phoenician, or at least Cyprio-Phoenician, sculpture is that most of the figures are thin and flat. This issue can't be blamed on any weakness in the material; it seems like the sculptor received not solid blocks of stone from the stonecutter, but rather fairly thick slabs.74 The sculptor worked carefully on the front and created statues that appear lifelike and quite satisfactory when viewed head-on. However, little attention was given to the sides and back of the slabs, as the intention was for the viewer to look at the pieces straight on. The statues were designed to stand against walls,75 or in niches, or back to back, with their heels and backs touching;76 they weren't truly works in the round, but more like slightly exaggerated alti relievi, not actually part of the wall but positioned closely against it. A clear example of this style can be seen in a figure currently in New York that seems to depict a priest, which Di Cesnola illustrates with a front view in his “Cyprus,” while Perrot and Chipiez provide a side view in their “History of Ancient Art.” The head and neck are well-proportioned, but the rest of the figure is excessively thin, and for a section above the feet, it is nearly just a flat slab, barely shaped at all.

This fault is less pronounced in some statues than in others, and from a certain number of the statuettes is wholly absent. This is notably the case in a figure found at Golgi, which represents a female arrayed in a long robe, the ample folds of which she holds back with one hand, while the other hand is advanced, and seems to have held a lotus flower. Three graceful tresses fall on either side of the neck, round which is a string of beads or pearls, with an amulet as pendant; while a long veil, surmounted by a diadem, hangs from the back of the head. This statue is in no respect narrow or flat, as may be seen especially from the side view given by Di Cesnola;77 but it is short and inelegant, though not wanting in dignity; and it is disfigured by sandalled feet of a very disproportionate size, which stand out offensively in front. The figure has been viewed as a representation of the goddess Astarte or Ashtoreth;78 but the identification can scarcely be regarded as more than a reasonable conjecture.

This flaw is less noticeable in some statues than in others, and in some of the statuettes, it's completely absent. This is particularly true for a figure found at Golgi, which depicts a woman dressed in a long robe, the generous folds of which she holds back with one hand, while her other hand is extended, appearing to have held a lotus flower. Three elegant strands of hair fall on each side of her neck, around which is a string of beads or pearls, with an amulet hanging from it; a long veil, topped with a diadem, flows from the back of her head. This statue is by no means narrow or flat, especially evident from the side view presented by Di Cesnola;77 but it is short and lacks elegance, though it still maintains a sense of dignity; it is marred by sandals that are disproportionately large, which stand out awkwardly at the front. The figure has been interpreted as representing the goddess Astarte or Ashtoreth;78 but this identification can hardly be considered more than a plausible guess.

The general defects of Phoenician statuary, besides want of finish and flatness, are a stiff and conventional treatment, recalling the art of Egypt and Assyria, a want of variety, and a want of life. Most of the figures stand evenly on the two feet, and have the arms pendant at the two sides, with the head set evenly, neither looking to the right nor to the left, while even the arrangement of the drapery is one of great uniformity. In the points where there is any variety, the variety is confined within very narrow limits. One foot may be a little advanced;79 one arm may be placed across the breast, either as confined by the robe,710 or as holding something, e.g. a bird or a flower.711 In female figures both arms may be laid along the thighs,712 or both be bent across the bosom, with the hands clasping the breasts,713 or one hand may be so placed, and the other depend in front.714 The hair and beard are mostly arranged with the utmost regularity in crisp curls, resembling the Assyrian; where tresses are worn, they are made to hang, whatever their number, with exact uniformity on either side.715 Armlets and bracelets appear always in pairs, and are exactly similar; the two sides of a costume correspond perfectly; and in the groups the figures have, as nearly as possible, the same attitude.

The common flaws in Phoenician statues, aside from their rough finish and flatness, include a stiff and formulaic style reminiscent of Egyptian and Assyrian art, a lack of variety, and lifelessness. Most figures stand evenly on both feet, with arms hanging straight down at their sides, and heads positioned straight ahead, not looking to either side. Even the way the drapery is arranged is very uniform. Where there is any variety, it’s quite limited. One foot might be slightly forward; one arm could be crossed over the chest, either constrained by the robe or holding something like a bird or a flower. In female figures, both arms might rest along the thighs or be bent across the chest, with hands clasping the breasts, or one hand may be placed like that while the other hangs in front. Hair and beards are usually styled very neatly in crisp curls, similar to Assyrian styles; when tresses are worn, they hang uniformly on both sides, no matter how many there are. Armlets and bracelets are always in pairs and are exactly the same; both sides of a costume match perfectly, and in groups, the figures generally share the same pose.

Repose is no doubt the condition of human existence which statuary most easily and most naturally expresses; and few things are more obnoxious to a refined taste than that sculpture which, like that of Roubiliac, affects movement, fidget, flutter, and unquiet. But in the Phoenician sculpture the repose is overdone; except in the expression of faces, there is scarcely any life at all. The figures do nothing; they simply stand to be looked at. And they stand stiffly, sometimes even awkwardly, rarely with anything like elegance or grace. The heads, indeed, have life and vigour, especially after the artists have become acquainted with Greek models;716 but they are frequently too large for the bodies whereto they are attached, and the face is apt to wear a smirk that is exceedingly disagreeable. This is most noticeable in the Cypriot series, as will appear by the accompanying representations; but it is not confined to them, since it reappears in the bronzes found in Phoenicia Proper.

Repose is undoubtedly the state of human existence that sculpture best conveys; and few things irritate a refined taste more than sculptures, like those by Roubiliac, that try too hard to show movement, restlessness, and unease. However, in Phoenician sculpture, the sense of repose is taken too far; aside from the facial expressions, there's hardly any life at all. The figures do nothing; they simply stand as objects to be viewed. They stand stiffly, sometimes awkwardly, and rarely with any elegance or grace. The heads do have vitality, especially after artists become familiar with Greek styles;716 but they are often disproportionately large for the bodies they're attached to, and the faces can have a smirk that is quite unpleasant. This is most apparent in the Cypriot series, as shown in the accompanying representations, but it isn't limited to them, as it also appears in the bronzes found in Phoenicia Proper.

Phoenician statues are almost always more or less draped. Sometimes nothing is worn besides the short tunic, or shenti, of the Egyptians, which begins below the navel and terminates at the knee.717 Sometimes there is added to this a close-fitting shirt, like a modern “jersey,” which has short sleeves and clings to the figure, so that it requires careful observation to distinguish between a statue thus draped and one which has the shenti only.718 But there are also a number of examples where the entire figure is clothed from the head to the ankles, and nothing is left bare but the face, the hands, and the feet. A cap, something like a Phrygian bonnet, covers the head; a long-sleeved robe reaches from the neck to the ankles, or sometimes rests upon the feet; and above this is a mantle or scarf thrown over the left shoulder, and hanging down nearly to the knees. Ultimately a drapery greatly resembling that of the Greeks seems to have been introduced; a long cloak, or chlamys, is worn, which falls into numerous folds, and is disposed about the person according to the taste and fancy of the wearer, but so as to leave the right arm free.719 Statues of this class are scarcely distinguishable from Greek statues of a moderately good type.

Phoenician statues are usually draped in various ways. Sometimes, they wear just a short tunic, or shenti, like the Egyptians, which starts below the navel and ends at the knee.717 Other times, there's a fitted shirt similar to a modern “jersey” that has short sleeves and hugs the body, making it hard to tell the difference between a statue with just the shenti and one that also has the shirt.718 However, there are many examples where the whole figure is covered from head to ankles, leaving only the face, hands, and feet exposed. A cap resembling a Phrygian bonnet sits on the head; a long-sleeved robe extends from the neck to the ankles, sometimes reaching the feet; and on top of this, there's a mantle or scarf draped over the left shoulder, hanging down close to the knees. Eventually, a drapery that looks a lot like that of the Greeks was adopted; a long cloak, or chlamys, is worn, which falls into many folds and is arranged on the body according to the wearer's style, while keeping the right arm free.719 Statues of this kind are hard to tell apart from Greek statues of decent quality.

Phoenician sculptors in the round did not very often indulge in the representation of animal forms. The lion, however, was sometimes chiselled in stone, either partially, as in a block of stone found by M. Renan at Um-el-Awamid, or completely, as in a statuette brought by General Di Cesnola from Cyprus. The representations hitherto discovered have not very much merit. We may gather from them that the sculptors were unacquainted with the animal itself, had never seen the king of beasts sleeping in the shade or stretching himself and yawning as he awoke, or walking along with a haughty and majestic slowness, or springing with one bound upon his prey, but had simply studied without much attention or interest the types furnished them by Egyptian or Assyrian artists, who were familiar with the beast himself. The representations are consequently in every case feeble and conventional; in some they verge on the ridiculous. What, for instance, can be weaker than the figure above given from the great work of Perrot and Chipiez, with its good-humoured face, its tongue hanging out of its mouth, its tottering forelegs, and its general air of imbecility? The lioness’ head represented in the same work is better, but still leaves much to be desired, falling, as it does, very far behind the best Assyrian models. Nor were the sculptors much more successful in their mode of expressing animals with whose forms they were perfectly well acquainted. The sheep carried on the back of a shepherd, brought from Cyprus and now in the museum of New York, is a very ill-shaped sheep, and the doves so often represented are very poor doves.720 They are just recognisable, and that is the most that can be said for them. A dog in stone,721 found at Athiénau, is somewhat better, equally the dogs of the Egyptians and Assyrians. On the other hand, the only fully modelled horses that have been found are utterly childish and absurd.722

Phoenician sculptors rarely created three-dimensional representations of animals. However, the lion was sometimes carved in stone, either partially, like a block discovered by M. Renan at Um-el-Awamid, or entirely, as seen in a statuette that General Di Cesnola brought from Cyprus. The representations found so far generally lack merit. We can infer that the sculptors were unfamiliar with the actual animal; they had likely never seen the king of beasts lounging in the shade, stretching and yawning as he woke, walking with proud, graceful slowness, or pouncing on his prey. Instead, they appeared to have studied the types presented to them by Egyptian or Assyrian artists who understood the animal. As a result, the representations are consistently weak and conventional, and in some cases, they border on being laughable. For example, what could be weaker than the lion figure shown in the significant work of Perrot and Chipiez, with its cheerful expression, tongue hanging out, wobbly forelegs, and an overall air of foolishness? The lioness’s head depicted in the same work is an improvement but still falls short of the best Assyrian examples. The sculptors were not much more successful in representing animals they knew well. The sheep carried by a shepherd, found in Cyprus and now displayed in the New York museum, is poorly shaped, and the doves often depicted are disappointing as well. They are barely recognizable, which is the best that can be said about them. A stone dog found at Athiénau is somewhat better, along with the dogs from Egyptian and Assyrian art. However, the only fully modeled horses discovered so far are utterly childish and absurd.

The reliefs of the Phoenicians are very superior to their statues. They vary in their character from almost the lowest kind of relief to the highest. On dresses, on shields, on slabs, and on some sarcophagi it is much higher than is usual even in Greece. A bas-relief of peculiar interest was discovered at Athiénau by General Di Cesnola, and has been represented both by him and by the Italian traveller Ceccaldi.723 It represents Hercules capturing the cattle of Geryon from the herdsman Eurytion, and gives us reason to believe that that myth was a native Phoenician legend adopted by the Greeks, and not a Hellenic one imported into Phoenicia. The general character of the sculpture is archaic and Assyrian; nor is there a trace of Greek influence about it. Hercules, standing on an elevated block of stone at the extreme left, threatens the herdsman, who responds by turning towards him, and making a menacing gesture with his right hand, while in his left, instead of a club, he carries an entire tree. His hair and beard are curled in the Assyrian fashion, while his figure, though short, is strong and muscular. In front of him are his cattle, mixed up in a confused and tangled mass, some young, but most of them full grown, and amounting to the number of seventeen. They are in various attitudes, and are drawn with much spirit, recalling groups of cattle in the sculptures of Assyria and Egypt, but surpassing any such group in the vigour of their life and movement. Above, in an upper field or plain, divided from the under one by a horizontal line, is the triple-headed dog, Orthros, running full speed towards Hercules, and scarcely checked by the arrow which has met him in mid career, and entered his neck at the point of junction between the second and the third head.724 The bas-relief is three feet two inches in length, and just a little short of two feet in height. It served to ornament a huge block of stone which formed the pedestal of a colossal statue of Hercules, eight feet nine inches high.725

The reliefs created by the Phoenicians are far better than their statues. They range from very basic relief work to highly sophisticated pieces. On clothing, shields, slabs, and some sarcophagi, the quality is much higher than what is typically found even in Greece. A particularly interesting bas-relief was found at Athiénau by General Di Cesnola, and it has been documented by both him and the Italian traveler Ceccaldi.723 It depicts Hercules capturing Geryon's cattle from the herdsman Eurytion, suggesting that this myth was originally a Phoenician legend adopted by the Greeks, rather than a Hellenic story brought into Phoenicia. The overall style of the sculpture is archaic and Assyrian, with no signs of Greek influence. Hercules is shown standing on a raised block of stone to the far left, threatening the herdsman, who responds by turning to him and making a threatening gesture with his right hand, while carrying an entire tree in his left instead of a club. His hair and beard are styled in the Assyrian manner, and although his figure is short, it is strong and muscular. In front of him, the cattle are portrayed in a chaotic mass, including some young ones, but most are fully grown, totaling seventeen. They are depicted in various poses, filled with energy, reminiscent of cattle groups in Assyrian and Egyptian sculptures, but surpassing them with their liveliness and movement. Above, in an upper section separated from the lower one by a horizontal line, the three-headed dog, Orthros, is running at full speed towards Hercules, barely slowed down by the arrow that struck him mid-run, piercing his neck where the second and third heads connect.724 The bas-relief measures three feet two inches in length and just under two feet in height. It was used to decorate a massive block of stone that served as the pedestal for a colossal statue of Hercules, which stands eight feet nine inches tall.725

A sarcophagus, on which the relief is low, has been described and figured by Di Cesnola,726 who discovered it in the same locality as the sculpture which has just engaged our attention. The sarcophagus, which had a lid guarded by lions at the four corners, was ornamented at both ends and along both sides by reliefs. The four scenes depicted appear to be distinct and separate. At one end Perseus, having cut off Medusa’s head and placed it in his wallet, which he carries behind him by means of a stick passed over his shoulder, departs homewards followed by his dog. Medusa’s body, though sunk upon one knee, is still upright, and from the bleeding neck there spring the forms of Chrysaor and Pegasus. At the opposite end of the tomb is a biga drawn by two horses, and containing two persons, the charioteer and the owner, who is represented as bearded, and rests his hand upon the chariot-rim. The horse on the right hand, which can alone be distinctly seen, is well proportioned and spirited. He is impatient and is held in by the driver, and prevented from proceeding at more than a foot’s pace. On the longer sides are a hunting scene, and a banqueting scene. In a wooded country, indicated by three tall trees, a party, consisting of five individuals, engages in the pleasures of the chase. Four of the five are accoutred like Greek soldiers; they wear crested helmets, cuirasses, belts, and a short tunic ending in a fringe: the arms which they carry are a spear and a round buckler or shield. The fifth person is an archer, and has a lighter equipment; he wears a cloth about his loins, a short tunic, and a round cap on his head. The design forms itself into two groups. On the right two of the spearmen are engaged with a wild boar, which they are wounding with their lances; on the left the two other spearmen and the archer are attacking a wild bull. In the middle a cock separates the two groups, while at the two extremities two animal forms, a horse grazing and a dog trying to make out a scent, balance each other. The fourth side of the sarcophagus presents us with a banqueting scene. On four couches, much like the Assyrian,727 are arranged the banqueters. At the extreme right the couch is occupied by a single person, who has a long beard and extends a wine-cup towards an attendant, a naked youth, who is advancing towards him with a wine-jug in one hand, and a ladle or strainer in the other. The three other couches are occupied respectively by three couples, each comprising a male and a female. The male figure reclines in the usual attitude, half sitting and half lying, with the left arm supported on two pillows;728 the female sits on the edge of the couch, with her feet upon a footstool. The males hold wine-cups; of the females, one plays upon the lyre, while the two others fondle with one hand their lover or husband. A fourth female figure, erect in the middle between the second and third couches, plays the double flute for the delectation of the entire party. All the figures, except the boy attendant, are decently draped, in robes with many folds, resembling the Greek. At the side of each couch is a table, on which are spread refreshments, while at the extreme left is a large bowl or amphora, from which the wine-cups may be replenished. This is placed under the shade of a tree, which tells us that the festivity takes place in a garden.729

A sarcophagus, featuring low relief work, was described and illustrated by Di Cesnola,726 who found it in the same area as the sculpture we've just discussed. This sarcophagus had a lid with lions guarding each corner and was decorated on both ends and along both sides with reliefs. The four scenes shown seem to be separate and distinct. At one end, Perseus, having chopped off Medusa’s head and placed it in his wallet, which he carries behind him using a stick over his shoulder, heads home with his dog following. Medusa’s body, though resting on one knee, remains upright, and from the bleeding neck emerge the forms of Chrysaor and Pegasus. On the other end of the tomb is a chariot drawn by two horses, containing two figures: the charioteer and the owner, depicted as bearded and resting his hand on the rim of the chariot. The horse on the right, the only one clearly visible, is well-proportioned and spirited. It is restless and is held back by the driver, who prevents it from going faster than a foot’s pace. On the longer sides, there are scenes of hunting and a banquet. In a forested area, indicated by three tall trees, a group of five people enjoys a hunting excursion. Four of them are dressed like Greek soldiers, wearing crested helmets, armor, belts, and a short tunic with a fringe; they carry a spear and a round shield. The fifth person is an archer, dressed lightly, wearing a cloth around his waist, a short tunic, and a round cap. The scene splits into two groups. On the right, two of the spearmen are attacking a wild boar with their lances; on the left, the other two spearmen and the archer are attacking a wild bull. A cock in the center separates the two groups, while two animals at the ends—a grazing horse and a dog sniffing the ground—balance each other out. The fourth side of the sarcophagus shows a banquet scene. Four couches, resembling Assyrian styles,727 are set up for the guests. At the far right, one couch is occupied by a man with a long beard who is extending a wine-cup toward a young naked attendant approaching him with a wine jug in one hand and a ladle or strainer in the other. The other three couches hold three couples, each made up of a man and a woman. The male figure reclines in a typical posture, half-sitting and half-lying, with his left arm supported on two pillows;728 while the female sits at the edge of the couch with her feet on a footstool. The men hold wine cups; one of the women plays a lyre, while the other two fondle their partner or husband with one hand. A fourth female figure stands between the second and third couches, playing the double flute for everyone's enjoyment. All the figures, except for the boy attendant, are appropriately draped in flowing robes that resemble Greek attire. At the side of each couch is a table with refreshments, while at the far left is a large bowl or amphora for refilling the wine cups. This is placed under the shade of a tree, indicating that the celebration is happening in a garden.729

No one can fail to see, in this entire series of sculptures, the dominant influence of Greece. While the form of the tomb, and the lions that ornament the covering, are unmistakably Cyprio-Phoenician, the reliefs contain scarcely a feature which is even Oriental; all has markedly the colouring and the physiognomy of Hellenism. Yet Cyprian artists probably executed the work. There are little departures from Greek models, which indicate the “barbarian” workman, as the introduction of trees in the backgrounds, the shape of the furniture, the recurved wings of the Gorgon, and the idea of hunting the wild bull. But the figures, the proportions, the draperies, the attitudes, the chariot, the horse, are almost pure Greek. There is a grace and ease in the modelling, an elegance, a variety, to which Asiatic art, left to itself, never attained. The style, however, is not that of Greece at its best, but of archaic Greece. There is something too much of exact symmetry, both in the disposition of the groups and in the arrangement of the accessories; nay, even the very folds of the garments are over-stiff and regular. All is drawn in exact profile; and in the composition there is too much of balance and correspondence. Still, a new life shows itself through the scenes. There is variety in the movements; there is grace and suppleness in the forms; there is lightness in the outline, vigour in the attitudes, and beauty spread over the whole work. It cannot be assigned an earlier date than the fifth century B.C., and is most probably later,730 since it took time for improved style to travel from the head-centres of Greek art to the remoter provinces, and still more time for it to percolate through the different layers of Greek society until it reached the stratum of native Cyprian artistic culture.

No one can miss the strong influence of Greece in this entire series of sculptures. While the shape of the tomb and the lions that decorate the cover are clearly Cyprio-Phoenician, the reliefs contain hardly any features that are even Oriental; everything distinctly reflects the style and look of Hellenism. Yet, it's likely that Cyprian artists created the works. There are slight deviations from Greek models that suggest "barbarian" craftsmanship, such as the inclusion of trees in the backgrounds, the design of the furniture, the curved wings of the Gorgon, and the concept of hunting the wild bull. However, the figures, proportions, draperies, poses, chariots, and horses are almost purely Greek. There is a grace and ease in the modeling, an elegance, and a variety that Asian art, when left on its own, never reached. The style, however, isn't that of Greece at its peak but rather of archaic Greece. There is too much exact symmetry in the arrangement of the groups and accessories; even the folds of the garments are overly stiff and regular. Everything is depicted in strict profile; the composition has an excess of balance and correspondence. Still, there is a new energy evident throughout the scenes. There is variety in the movements, grace and flexibility in the forms, lightness in the outline, strength in the poses, and beauty spread across the entire work. It's unlikely to be dated earlier than the fifth century B.C., and is most likely later, since it took time for the improved style to spread from the main centers of Greek art to more distant regions, and even longer for it to filter through the various layers of Greek society until it reached the level of native Cyprian artistic culture.

We may contrast with the refined work of the Athiénau sarcophagus the far ruder, but more genuinely native, designs of a tomb of the same kind found on the site of Amathus.731 On this sarcophagus, the edges of which are most richly adorned with patterning, there are, as upon the other, four reliefs, two of them occupying the sides and two the ends. Those at the ends are curious, but have little artistic merit. They consist, in each case, of a caryatid figure four times repeated, representations, respectively, of Astarté and of a pygmy god, who, according to some, is Bes, and, according to others, Melkarth or Esmun.732 The figures of Astarté are rude, as are generally her statues.733 They have the hair arranged in three rows of crisp curls, the arms bent, and the hands supporting the breasts. The only ornament worn by them is a double necklace of pearls or round beads. The representations of the pygmy god have more interest. They remind us of what Herodotus affirms concerning the Phoenician pataikoi, which were used for the figure-heads of ships,734 and which he compares to the Egyptian images of Phthah, or Ptah, the god of creation. They are ugly dwarf figures, with a large misshapen head, a bushy beard, short arms, fat bodies, a short striped tunic, and thick clumsy legs. Only one of the four figures is at present complete, the sarcophagus having been entered by breaking a hole into it at this end.

We can compare the detailed work of the Athiénau sarcophagus with the rougher, but more authentically local, designs of a similar tomb found at Amathus.731 This sarcophagus, which has its edges richly decorated with patterns, features four reliefs, just like the other one, with two on the sides and two on the ends. The ones at the ends are interesting but lack artistic quality. Each one shows a caryatid figure repeated four times, depicting Astarté and a pygmy god, who some say is Bes, while others claim is Melkarth or Esmun.732 The figures of Astarté are rough, typical of her statues.733 They have hair styled in three rows of tight curls, bent arms, and hands that support their breasts. The only decoration they wear is a double necklace of pearls or round beads. The representations of the pygmy god are more engaging. They remind us of what Herodotus says about the Phoenician pataikoi, which were used for the figureheads of ships,734 and which he compares to the Egyptian images of Phthah, or Ptah, the god of creation. These are unattractive dwarf figures, with large misshapen heads, bushy beards, short arms, pudgy bodies, short striped tunics, and thick, clumsy legs. Right now, only one of the four figures is complete, as a hole has been broken into the sarcophagus at this end.

The work at the sides is much superior to that at the ends. The two panels represent, apparently, a single scene. The scene is a procession, but whether funeral or military it is hard to decide.735 First come two riders on horseback, wearing conical caps and close-fitting jerkins; they are seated on a species of saddle, which is kept in place by a board girth passing round the horse’s belly, and by straps attached in front. The two cavaliers are followed by four bigæ. The first contains the principal personages of the composition, who sits back in his car, and shades himself with a parasol, the mark of high rank in the East, while his charioteer sits in front of him and holds the reins. The second car has three occupants; the third two; and the fourth also two, one of whom leans back and converses with the footmen, who close the procession. These form a group of three, and seem to be soldiers, since they bear shield and spear; but their costume, a loose robe wrapped round the form, is rather that of civilians. The horses are lightly caparisoned, with little more than a head-stall and a collar; but they carry on their heads a conspicuous fan-like crest.736 MM. Perrot and Chipiez thus sum up their description of this monument:—“Both in the ornamentation and in the sculpture properly so-called there is a mixture of two traditions and two inspirations, diverse one from the other. The persons who chiselled the figures in the procession which fills the two principal sides of the sarcophagus were the pupils of Grecian statuaries; they understood how to introduce variety into the attitudes of those whom they represented, and even into the movements of the horses. Note, in this connection, the steeds of the two cavaliers in front; one of them holds up his head, the other bends it towards the ground. The draperies are also cleverly treated, especially those of the foot soldiers who bring up the rear, and resemble in many respects the costume of the Greeks. On the other hand, the types of divinity, repeated four times at the two ends of the monument, have nothing that is Hellenic about them, but are borrowed from the Pantheon of Phoenicia. Even in the procession itself—the train of horsemen, footmen, and chariots, which is certainly the sculptor’s true subject—there are features which recall the local customs and usages of the East. The conical caps of the two cavaliers closely resemble those which we see on the heads of many of the Cyprian statues; the parasol which shades the head of the great person in the first biga is the symbol of Asiatic royalty; lastly, the fan-shaped plume which rises above the heads of all the chariot horses is an ornament that one sees in the same position in Assyria and in Lycia, whensoever the sculptor desires to represent horses magnificently caparisoned."737

The work on the sides is much better than that on the ends. The two panels seem to show a single scene. It looks like a procession, but it's hard to tell if it's a funeral or a military one. First, there are two riders on horseback, wearing conical caps and tight-fitting jackets. They're seated on a type of saddle, secured by a board girth around the horse's belly and straps in the front. Following the two riders are four bigæ. The first one holds the main figures of the scene, who sits back in his chariot, sheltered by a parasol—a sign of high rank in the East—while his charioteer sits in front and holds the reins. The second chariot has three people; the third has two; and the fourth also has two, one of whom leans back and talks to the footmen who close the procession. These footmen form a group of three and appear to be soldiers since they carry shields and spears, but their loose robes wrapped around them look more like civilian attire. The horses are lightly dressed, with just a headstall and a collar; however, they sport a prominent fan-like crest on their heads. 736 MM. Perrot and Chipiez summarize their description of this monument as follows: “In both the decoration and the sculpture itself, there's a blend of two traditions and inspirations that are quite different from each other. The artisans who carved the figures in the procession filling the two main sides of the sarcophagus were students of Greek sculptors; they knew how to bring variety into the poses of those they depicted and even into the horses' movements. Note, for example, the horses of the two riders at the front; one raises its head while the other lowers it to the ground. The drapery is also skillfully designed, especially that of the foot soldiers at the back, resembling Greek attire in many ways. However, the representations of divinity, repeated four times at the two ends of the monument, have no Greek characteristics; they're taken from the Pantheon of Phoenicia. Even in the procession itself—the line of horsemen, foot soldiers, and chariots, which is clearly the sculptor’s main focus—there are elements that reflect local customs and practices of the East. The conical caps of the two riders look a lot like those seen on many Cyprian statues; the parasol shading the head of the high-ranking individual in the first biga symbolizes Asiatic royalty; and finally, the fan-shaped plume above the heads of all the chariot horses is an ornament commonly seen in Assyria and Lycia whenever a sculptor wants to depict horses in rich adornment.” 737

Sarcophagi recently exhumed in the vicinity of Sidon are said to be adorned with reliefs superior to any previously known specimens of Phoenician art. As, however, no drawings or photographs of these sculptures have as yet reached Western Europe, it will perhaps be sufficient in this place to direct attention to the descriptions of them which an eye-witness has published in the “Journal de Beyrout."738 No trustworthy critical estimate can be formed from mere descriptions, and it will therefore be necessary to reserve our judgment until the sculptures themselves, or correct representations of them, are accessible.

Sarcophagi recently dug up near Sidon are said to be decorated with reliefs that are better than any known examples of Phoenician art. However, since no drawings or photos of these sculptures have reached Western Europe yet, it might be enough to refer to the descriptions published by an eyewitness in the “Journal de Beyrout." 738 We can’t make a reliable critical assessment based on descriptions alone, so we’ll need to hold off on our judgment until we can see the actual sculptures or accurate representations of them.

The metal castings of the Phoenicians, according to the accounts which historians give of them, were of a very magnificent and extraordinary character. The Hiram employed by Solomon in the ornamentation of the Temple at Jerusalem, who was a native of Tyre,739 designed and executed by his master’s orders a number of works in metal, which seem to have been veritable masterpieces. The strangest of all were the two pillars of bronze, which bore the names of “Jachin” and “Boaz,"740 and stood in front of the Temple porch, or possibly under it.741 These pillars, with their capitals, were between thirty-four and thirty-five feet high, and had a diameter of six feet.742 They were cast hollow, the bronze whereof they were composed having a uniform thickness of three inches,743 or thereabouts. Their ornamentation was elaborate. A sort of chain-work covered the “belly” or lower part of the capitals,744 while above and below were representations of pomegranates in two rows, probably at the top and bottom of the “belly,” the number of the pomegranates upon each pillar being two hundred.745 At the summit of the whole was a sort of “lily-work"746 or imitation of the lotus blossom, a “motive” adopted from Egypt. Various representations of the pillars have been attempted in works upon Phoenician art, the most remarkable being those designed by M. Chipiez, and published in the “Histoire de l’Art dans l’Antiquité."747 Perhaps, however, there is more to be said in favour of M. de Vogüé’s view, as enunciated in his work on the Jewish Temple.

The metal castings of the Phoenicians, as described by historians, were incredibly grand and unique. Hiram, who was hired by Solomon to embellish the Temple in Jerusalem and was originally from Tyre, designed and created several projects in metal according to his master’s instructions, which seem to have been true masterpieces. The most unusual were the two bronze pillars named “Jachin” and “Boaz,” which stood in front of the Temple porch, or perhaps underneath it. These pillars, including their tops, were between thirty-four and thirty-five feet tall and had a diameter of six feet. They were cast hollow, with the bronze having a consistent thickness of about three inches. Their decoration was intricate. A type of chain-work covered the lower part of the capitals, while above and below were depictions of pomegranates arranged in two rows, likely at the top and bottom of the lower section, with two hundred pomegranates on each pillar. At the very top, there was a design resembling “lily-work” or an imitation of the lotus flower, a design element borrowed from Egypt. Various representations of the pillars have been made in works about Phoenician art, with the most notable being those created by M. Chipiez and published in the “Histoire de l’Art dans l’Antiquité.” However, there might be more support for M. de Vogüé’s perspective, as presented in his work on the Jewish Temple.

The third great work of metallurgy which Hiram constructed for Solomon was “the molten sea."748 This was an enormous bronze basin, fifteen feet in diameter, supported on the backs of twelve oxen, grouped in sets of three.749 The basin stood fourteen or fifteen feet above the level of the Temple Court,750 and was a vast reservoir, always kept full of water, for the ablutions of the priests. There was an ornamentation of “knops” or “gourds,” in two rows, about the “brim” of the reservoir; and it must have been supplied in its lower part with a set of stopcocks, by means of which the water could be drawn off when needed. Representations of the “molten sea” have been given by Mangeant, De Vogüé, Thenius, and others; but all of them are, necessarily, conjectural. The design of Mangeant is reproduced in the preceding representation. It is concluded that the oxen must have been of colossal size in order to bear a proper proportion to the basin, and not present the appearance of being crushed under an enormous weight.751

The third major work of metallurgy that Hiram made for Solomon was “the molten sea.”748 This was a huge bronze basin, fifteen feet wide, resting on the backs of twelve oxen arranged in groups of three.749 The basin stood around fourteen or fifteen feet above the Temple Court,750 and served as a large reservoir, always filled with water for the priests' washing rituals. It had decorative “knops” or “gourds” in two rows around the edge of the reservoir, and it was likely equipped with stopcocks at the bottom to drain the water when needed. Various representations of the “molten sea” have been created by Mangeant, De Vogüé, Thenius, and others, but all of them are, by necessity, speculative. The design by Mangeant is shown in the previous illustration. It’s concluded that the oxen must have been very large to maintain the right proportion to the basin and to avoid looking crushed under the heavy weight.751

Next in importance to these three great works were ten minor ones, made for the Jewish Temple by the same artist. These were lavers mounted on wheels,752 which could be drawn or pushed to any part of the Temple Court where water might be required. The lavers were of comparatively small size, capable of containing only one-fiftieth part753 of the contents of the “molten sea,” but they were remarkable for their ornamentation. Each was supported upon a “base;” and the bases, which seem to have been panelled, contained, in the different compartments, figures of lions, oxen, and cherubim,754 either single or in groups. On the top of the base, which seems to have been square, was a circular stand or socket, a foot and a half in height, into which the laver or basin fitted.755 This, too, was panelled, and ornamented with embossed work, representing lions, cherubim, and palm-trees.756 Each base was emplaced upon four wheels, which are said to have resembled chariot wheels, but which were molten in one piece, naves, spokes, and felloes together.757 A restoration by M. Mangeant, given by Perrot and Chipiez in the fourth volume of their “History of Ancient Art,” is striking, and leaves little to be desired.

Next in importance to these three great works were ten minor ones, created for the Jewish Temple by the same artist. These were basins mounted on wheels, which could be pulled or pushed to any part of the Temple Court where water was needed. The basins were relatively small, able to hold only one-fiftieth of the contents of the “molten sea,” but they were remarkable for their decoration. Each was supported by a base, which seemed to have been paneled, featuring figures of lions, oxen, and cherubim in various arrangements. On top of the square base was a circular stand or socket, about a foot and a half high, into which the basin fit. This too was paneled and decorated with embossed designs of lions, cherubim, and palm trees. Each base was placed on four wheels, which were said to resemble chariot wheels but were cast in one piece, including the hubs, spokes, and rims. A reconstruction by M. Mangeant, presented by Perrot and Chipiez in the fourth volume of their “History of Ancient Art,” is striking and highly detailed.

Hiram is also said to have made for Solomon a number of pots, shovels, basins, flesh-hooks, and other instruments,758 which were all used in the Temple service; but as no description is given of any of these works, even their general character can only be conjectured. We may, however, reasonably suppose them not to have differed greatly from the objects of a similar description found in Cyprus by General Di Cesnola.759

Hiram is also said to have made a bunch of pots, shovels, basins, flesh-hooks, and other tools, 758 which were all used in the Temple service; but since there's no description of any of these works, we can only guess what they were like. However, we can reasonably assume they weren’t too different from similar items found in Cyprus by General Di Cesnola.759

From the conjectural, which may amuse, but can scarcely satisfy, the earnest student, it is fitting that we should now pass to the known and actual. Phoenician metal-work of various descriptions has been found recently in Phoenicia Proper, in Cyprus, and in Sardinia; and, though much of it consists of works of utility or of mere personal adornment, which belong to another branch of the present enquiry, there is a considerable portion which is more or less artistic and which rightly finds its place in the present chapter. The Phoenicians, though they did not, so far as we know, attempt with any frequency the production, in bronze or other metal, of the full-sized human form,760 were fond of fabricating, especially in bronze, the smaller kinds of figures which are known as “figurines” or “statuettes.” They also had a special talent for producing embossed metal-work of a highly artistic character in the shape of cups, bowls, and dishes or pateræ, whereon scenes of various kinds were represented with a vigour and precision that are quite admirable. Some account of these two classes of works must here be given.

From what we can guess, which might be entertaining but hardly satisfying for serious students, it's time to shift to what we know and what actually exists. Recently, Phoenician metalwork of various types has been discovered in Phoenicia, Cyprus, and Sardinia. While much of it includes functional items or mere personal decorations, which belong to a different area of this discussion, there is a significant amount that is more or less artistic and rightly belongs in this chapter. The Phoenicians, although we don't have evidence that they frequently created life-sized human figures in bronze or other metals, enjoyed making the smaller types of figures known as "figurines" or "statuettes," particularly in bronze. They also excelled at creating embossed metalwork of a highly artistic nature in the form of cups, bowls, and dishes or pateræ, depicting various scenes with admirable energy and precision. Here, we need to give an account of these two categories of works.

The statuettes commence with work of the rudest kind. The Phoenician sites in Sardinia have yielded in abundance grotesque figures of gods and men,761 from three or four to six or eight inches high, which must be viewed as Phoenician productions, though perhaps they were not the best works which Phoenician artists could produce, but such as were best suited to the demands of the Sardinian market. The savage Sards would not have appreciated beauty or grace; but to the savage mind there is something congenial in grotesqueness. Hence gods with four arms and four eyes,762 warriors with huge horns projecting from their helmets,763 tall forms of extraordinary leanness,764 figures with abnormally large heads and hands,765 huge noses, projecting eyes, and various other deformities. For the home consumption statuettes of a similar character were made; but they were neither so rude nor so devoid of artistic merit. There is one in the Louvre, which was found at Tortosa, in Northern Phoenicia, approaching nearly to the Sardinian type, while others have less exaggeration, and seem intended seriously. In Cyprus bronzes of a higher order have been discovered.766 One is a figure of a youth, perhaps Æsculapius, embracing a serpent; another is a female form of much elegance, which may have been the handle of a vase or jug; it springs from a grotesque bracket, and terminates in a bar ornamented at either end with heads of animals. The complete bronze figure found near Curium, which is supposed to represent Apollo and is figured by Di Cesnola,767 is probably not the production of a Phoenician artists, but a sculpture imported from Greece.

The statuettes start with really basic work. The Phoenician sites in Sardinia have produced many bizarre figures of gods and humans, ranging from about three to four inches up to six or eight inches tall, which should be seen as Phoenician creations, even if they weren't the finest pieces that Phoenician artists could make, but rather what was best suited for the Sardinian market. The rough Sardinians wouldn't have appreciated beauty or elegance; instead, there’s something appealing to them about grotesqueness. So, there are gods with four arms and four eyes, warriors with giant horns sticking out of their helmets, tall figures that are extremely skinny, figures with unusually large heads and hands, big noses, bulging eyes, and various other deformities. For local use, similar statuettes were made, but they were neither as crude nor as lacking in artistic quality. One such piece in the Louvre, found at Tortosa in Northern Phoenicia, closely resembles the Sardinian type, while others are less exaggerated and seem to be more serious in intention. In Cyprus, higher-quality bronzes have been discovered. One is a figure of a young man, possibly Æsculapius, holding a serpent; another is an elegantly formed female figure, which may have served as the handle of a vase or jug; it rises from a quirky bracket and ends in a bar decorated with animal heads on either side. The complete bronze figure found near Curium, thought to represent Apollo and illustrated by Di Cesnola, is likely not the work of Phoenician artists, but rather a sculpture imported from Greece.

The embossed work upon cups and pateræ is sometimes of great simplicity, sometimes exceedingly elaborate. A patera of the simplest kind was found by General Di Cesnola in the treasury of Curium and is figured in his work.768 At the bottom of the dish, in the middle, is a rosette with twenty-two petals springing from a central disk; this is surrounded by a ring whereon are two wavy lines of ribbon intertwined. Four deer, with strongly recurved horns, spaced at equal intervals, stand on the outer edge of the ring in a walking attitude. Behind them and between them are a continuous row of tall stiff reeds terminating in blossoms, which are supposed to represent the papyrus plant. The reeds are thirty-two in number. We may compare with this the medallion at the bottom of a cup found at Cære in Italy, which has been published by Grifi.769 Here, on a chequered ground, stands a cow with two calves, one engaged in providing itself with its natural sustenance, the other disporting itself in front of its dam. In the background are a row of alternate papyrus blossoms and papyrus buds bending gracefully to the right and to the left, so as to form a sort of framework to the main design. Above the cow and in front of the papyrus plants two birds wing their flight from left to right across the scene.

The embossed designs on cups and pateræ can be really simple or super intricate. A really basic patera was found by General Di Cesnola in the treasury of Curium and is shown in his work.768 In the center of the dish’s bottom is a rosette with twenty-two petals coming from a central disk; this is surrounded by a ring decorated with two wavy lines of intertwined ribbon. Four deer with strongly curved horns are evenly spaced around the outer edge of the ring, standing as if they’re walking. Behind and between them is a continuous line of tall, stiff reeds ending in blossoms, which are thought to represent the papyrus plant. There are thirty-two reeds in total. We can compare this with the medallion at the bottom of a cup found in Cære, Italy, which has been published by Grifi.769 Here, on a checked background, is a cow with two calves, one busy getting its food, and the other playing in front of its mother. In the background is a row of alternating papyrus blooms and buds gracefully bending to the left and right, creating a sort of frame around the main design. Above the cow and in front of the papyrus plants, two birds are flying from left to right across the scene.

A bronze bowl, discovered at Idalium (Dali) in Cyprus,770 is, like these specimens, Egyptian in its motive, but is more ambitious in that it introduces the human form. On a throne of state sits a goddess, draped in a long striped robe which reaches to the feet, and holding a lotus flower in her right hand and a ball or apple in her left. Bracelets adorn her wrists and anklets her feet. Behind her stands a band of three instrumental performers, all of them women, and somewhat variously costumed: the first plays the double pipe, the second performs on a lyre or harp, the third beats the tambourine. In front of the goddess is a table or altar, to which a votary approaches bringing offerings. Then follows another table whereon two vases are set; finally comes a procession of six females, holding hands, who are perhaps performing a solemn dance. Behind them are a row of lotus pillars, the supports probably of a temple, wherein the scene takes place. The human forms in this design are ill-proportioned, and very rudely traced. The heads and hands are too large, the faces are grotesque, and the figures wholly devoid of grace. Mimetic art is seen clearly in its first stage, and the Phoenician artist who has designed the bowl has probably fallen short of his Egyptian models.

A bronze bowl, found in Idalium (Dali) in Cyprus, is, like these examples, inspired by Egyptian design but is more ambitious because it features the human form. Sitting on a throne is a goddess, dressed in a long striped robe that reaches down to her feet, holding a lotus flower in her right hand and a ball or apple in her left. Bracelets decorate her wrists and anklets adorn her feet. Behind her is a group of three female musicians, each dressed differently: the first plays a double pipe, the second strums a lyre or harp, and the third plays a tambourine. In front of the goddess is a table or altar, where a devotee approaches with offerings. Following this is another table with two vases on it; finally, there's a procession of six women holding hands, possibly performing a solemn dance. Behind them are a series of lotus pillars, likely supporting a temple where this scene takes place. The human figures in this artwork are poorly proportioned and roughly drawn. The heads and hands are oversized, the faces are bizarre, and the figures lack any elegance. The art clearly shows the early stages of mimetic representation, and the Phoenician artist who created the bowl has probably not matched his Egyptian influences.

Animal and human forms intermixed occur on a silver patera found at Athiénau, which is more complicated and elaborate than the objects hitherto described, but which is, like them, strikingly Egyptian.771 A small rosette occupies the centre; round it is, apparently, a pond or lake, in which fish are disporting themselves; but the fish are intermixed with animal and human forms—a naked female stretches out her arms after a cow; a man clothed in a shenti endeavours to seize a horse. The pond is edged by papyrus plants, which are alternately in blossom and in bud. A zigzag barrier separates this central ornamentation from that of the outer part of the dish. Here a marsh is represented in which are growing papyrus and other water-plants. Aquatic birds swim on the surface or fly through the tall reeds. Four boats form the chief objects in this part of the field. In one, which is fashioned like a bird, there sits under a canopy a grandee, with an attendant in front and a rower or steersman at the stern. Behind him, in a second boat, is a band consisting of three undraped females, one of whom plays a harp and another a tambourine, while the third keeps time with her hands. A man with a punt-pole directs the vessel from the stern. In the third boat, which has a freight of wine-jars, a cook is preparing a bird for the grandee’s supper. The fourth boat contains three rowers, who possibly have the vessel of the grandee in tow. The first and second boats are separated by two prancing steeds, the second and third by two cows, the third and fourth by a chariot and pair. It is difficult to explain the mixture of the aquatic with the terrestrial in this piece; but perhaps the grandee is intended to be enjoying himself in a marshy part of his domain, where he might ride, drive, or boat, according to his pleasure. The whole scene is rather Egyptian than Phoenician or Cypriot, and one cannot help suspecting that the patera was made for an Egyptian customer.

Animal and human figures are mixed together on a silver patera discovered at Athiénau, which is more intricate and detailed than the objects previously described, yet, like them, it has a distinctly Egyptian feel. A small rosette sits at the center; around it is, apparently, a pond or lake, where fish are playing; however, the fish are mixed with animal and human shapes—a naked woman reaches out her arms towards a cow; a man dressed in a shenti attempts to catch a horse. The pond is lined with papyrus plants that are alternately in bloom and in bud. A zigzag barrier separates this central decoration from the outer part of the dish. Here, a marsh is depicted with papyrus and other aquatic plants. Water birds swim on the surface or fly among the tall reeds. Four boats are the main focus in this section. In one boat, shaped like a bird, there's a noble under a canopy, with an attendant in front and a rower or steersman at the back. Behind him, in a second boat, a group of three naked women is featured, one playing a harp, another a tambourine, and the third keeping time with her hands. A man with a punt-pole is steering the boat from the back. In the third boat, which is carrying wine jars, a cook is preparing a bird for the noble's dinner. The fourth boat holds three rowers, who may be towing the noble's vessel. The first and second boats are separated by two prancing horses, the second and third by two cows, and the third and fourth by a chariot and a pair of horses. It’s challenging to explain the combination of water and land in this piece; perhaps the noble is meant to be enjoying himself in a marshy area of his estate, where he could ride, drive, or boat as he pleased. The entire scene is more Egyptian than Phoenician or Cypriot, leading one to suspect that the patera was created for an Egyptian client.

There is a patera at Athens,772 almost certainly Phoenician, which may well be selected to introduce the more elaborate and complicated of the Phoenician works of art in this class. It has been figured,773 and carefully described by MM. Perrot and Chipiez in these terms:—“The medallion in the centre is occupied by a rosette with eight points. The zone outside this, in which are distributed the personages represented, is divided into four compartments by four figures, which correspond to each other in pairs. They lift themselves out of a trellis-work, bounded on either side by a light pillar without a base. The capitals which crown the pillars recall those of the Ionic order, but the abacus is much more developed. A winged globe, stretching from pillar to pillar, roofs in this sort of little chapel; each is the shrine of a divinity. One of the divinities is that nude goddess, clasping her breasts with her hands, whom we have already met with in the Phoenician world more than once; the other is a bearded personage, whose face is framed in by his abundant hair; he appears to be dressed in a close-fitting garment, made of a material folded in narrow plaits. We do not know what name to give the personage. Each of the figures is repeated twice. The rest of the field is occupied by four distinct subjects, two of them being scenes of adoration. In one may be recognised the figure of Isis-Athor, seated on a sort of camp-stool, and giving suck to the young Horus;774 on an altar in front of the goddess is placed the disk of the moon, enveloped (as we have seen it elsewhere) by a crescent which recalls the moon’s phases. Behind the altar stands a personage whose sex is not defined; the right hand, which is raised, holds a patera, while the left, which falls along the hip, has the ankh or crux ansata. Another of the scenes corresponds to this, and offers many striking analogies. The altar indeed is of a different form, but it supports exactly the same symbols. The goddess sits upon a throne with her feet on a footstool; she has no child; in one hand she holds out a cup, in the other a lotus blossom. The personage who confronts her wears a conical cap, and is clothed, like the worshipper of the corresponding representation, in a long robe pressed close to the body by a girdle à cordelière; he has also the crux ansata, and holds in the right hand an object the character and use of which I am unable to conjecture. We may associate with these two scenes of homage and worship another representation in which there figure three musicians. The instruments are the same as usual—the lyre, the tambourine, and the double pipe; two of the performers march at a steady pace; the third, the one who beats the metal(?) disk, dances, as he plays, with much vigour and spirit. In the last compartment we come again upon a group that we have already met with in one of the cups from Idalium.775 . . . A beardless individual, clothed in the shenti, has put his foot upon the body of a griffin, which, in struggling against the pressure, flings its hind quarters into the air in a sort of wild caper; the conqueror, however, holds it fast by the plume of feathers which rises from its head, and plunges his sword into its half-open beak. It is this group, drawn in relief, and on a larger scale, that we meet with for a second time on the Athenian patera; but in this case the group is augmented by a second personage, who takes part in the struggle. This is an old man with a beard who is armed with a formidable pike. Both the combatants wear conical caps upon their heads, similar to those which we have noticed as worn by a number of the statues from Cyprus; but the cap of the right-hand personage terminates in a button, whereto is attached a long appendage, which looks like the tail of an ox.” The Egyptian character of much of this design is incontestable. The ankh, the lotus blossom in the hand, the winged disk, are purely Egyptian forms; the Isis Athor with Horus in her lap speaks for itself; and the worshipper in front of Isis has an unmistakably Egyptian head dress. But the contest with the winged griffin is more Assyrian than Egyptian; the seat whereon Isis sits recalls a well-known Assyrian type;776 one of the altars has a distinctly Assyrian character, while the band of musicians, the Astarté figures standing in their shrines, and the pillars which support, and frame in, the shrines are genuine Phoenician contributions. Artistically this patera is much upon a par with those from Dali and Athiénau, which have been already described.

There is a patera in Athens, 772 that is almost certainly Phoenician, which might be chosen to introduce the more detailed and complex Phoenician artworks in this category. It has been illustrated, 773 and carefully explained by MM. Perrot and Chipiez as follows: “The medallion in the center features a rosette with eight points. The outer zone, where the figures are arranged, is divided into four sections by four figures that correspond in pairs. They rise from a trellis work that is flanked on either side by a light pillar without a base. The capitals on the pillars remind us of the Ionic style, but the abacus is more pronounced. A winged globe stretches from pillar to pillar, forming a kind of little chapel; each serves as a shrine for a deity. One of the deities is a nude goddess holding her breasts with her hands, a figure we've encountered in the Phoenician world several times; the other is a bearded figure with a face framed by thick hair, dressed in a close-fitting garment made of narrow pleats. We’re unsure of this character's name. Each figure appears twice. The remaining space depicts four distinct subjects, with two being scenes of worship. In one of these, we can identify Isis-Athor seated on a kind of camp-stool, nursing the young Horus; 774 on an altar before the goddess is the disk of the moon, surrounded (as we have seen elsewhere) by a crescent that echoes the moon’s phases. Behind the altar stands a figure whose gender is unclear; the right hand, raised, holds a patera, while the left hangs at the hip, holding the ankh or crux ansata. Another scene parallels this one and offers many striking similarities. Although the altar differs in shape, it holds the same symbols. The goddess sits on a throne with her feet on a footstool; she has no child; in one hand she presents a cup, and in the other a lotus blossom. The figure opposite her wears a conical cap and is dressed, like the worshiper in the corresponding scene, in a long robe tightly gathered by a corded belt; he also has the crux ansata and holds in his right hand an object I can’t identify. We can connect these two scenes of homage to another depiction featuring three musicians. The instruments are the usual ones—the lyre, tambourine, and double pipe; two of the musicians walk at a steady pace while the third, who strikes the metal(?) disk, dances energetically as he plays. In the final section, we encounter a group we’ve seen before on one of the cups from Idalium. 775 . . . A beardless man, dressed in the shenti, has placed his foot on the body of a griffin, which, in its struggle against the weight, lifts its hindquarters into the air in a wild leap; the victor, however, holds it firmly by the plume of feathers on its head and drives his sword into its half-open beak. This group, depicted in relief and at a larger scale, reappears on the Athenian patera; in this instance, it’s joined by a second figure participating in the struggle. This is an older man with a beard armed with a large spear. Both combatants wear conical caps similar to those noticed on several statues from Cyprus; however, the cap of the figure on the right ends in a button to which a long tail resembling an ox's tail is attached.” The Egyptian features of much of this design are undeniable. The ankh, the lotus flower in hand, and the winged disk are purely Egyptian symbols; the Isis-Athor with Horus on her lap is self-evident; and the worshiper in front of Isis has a distinctly Egyptian headdress. But the battle with the winged griffin seems more Assyrian than Egyptian; the seat where Isis sits suggests a well-known Assyrian style; 776 one of the altars exhibits a distinctly Assyrian character, while the group of musicians, the figures of Astarté in their shrines, and the pillars that support and frame those shrines are authentic Phoenician elements. Artistically, this patera is on par with those from Dali and Athiénau that have already been discussed.

Our space will not admit of our pursuing this subject much further. We cannot give descriptions of all the twenty pateræ,777 pronounced by the best critics to be Phoenician, which are contained in the museums of Europe and America. Excellent representations of most of these works of art will be found in Longpérier’s “Musée Napoléon III.,” in M. Clermont-Ganneau’s “Imagerie Phénicienne,” and in the “Histoire de l’Art dans l’Antiquité” of MM. Perrot et Chipiez. The bowls brought from Larnaca, from Curium, and from Amathus are especially interesting.778 We must, however, conclude our survey with a single specimen of the most elaborate kind of patera; and, this being the case, we cannot hesitate to give the preference to the famous “Cup of Præneste,” which has been carefully figured and described in two of the three works above cited.779

Our space doesn't allow us to continue this topic much longer. We can't provide descriptions of all twenty pateræ, which the best critics agree are Phoenician, found in museums across Europe and America. Great representations of most of these artworks can be found in Longpérier’s “Musée Napoléon III.,” M. Clermont-Ganneau’s “Imagerie Phénicienne,” and the “Histoire de l’Art dans l’Antiquité” by MM. Perrot et Chipiez. The bowls from Larnaca, Curium, and Amathus are particularly interesting. However, we must wrap up our discussion with one example of the most intricate type of patera; for this, we can't overlook the renowned “Cup of Præneste,” which has been thoroughly illustrated and described in two of the three works mentioned above.

The cup in question consists of a thin plate of silver covered over with a layer of gold; its greatest diameter is seven inches and three-fifths. The under or outside is without ornament; the interior is engraved with a number of small objects in low relief. In the centre, and surrounded by a circle of beads, there is a subject to which we shall presently have to return. The zone immediately outside this medallion, which is not quite an inch in width, is filled with a string of eight horses, all of them proceeding at a trot, and following each other to the right. Over each horse two birds fly in the same direction. The horses’ tails are extraordinarily conventional, consisting of a stem with branches, and resembling a conventional palm branch. Outside this zone there is an exterior and a wider one, which is bounded on its outer edge by a huge snake, whose scaly length describes an almost exact circle, excepting towards the tail, where there are some slight sinuosities. This serpent, whose head reaches and a little passes the thin extremity of the tail, is “drawn,” says M. Clermont-Ganneau, “with the hand of a master."780 It has been compared781 with the well-known Egyptian and Phoenician symbol for the {kosmos} or universe, which was a serpent with its tail in its mouth. “Naturally,” he continues,782 “the outer zone by its very position offers the greatest room for development. The artist is here at his ease, and having before him a field relatively so vast, has represented on it a series of scenes, remarkably alike for the style of their execution, the diversity of their subject-matter, the number of the persons introduced, and the nature of the acts which they accomplish. . . . The scenes, however, are not, as some have imagined, a series of detached fantastic subjects, arbitrarily chosen and capriciously grouped, a mere confused mêlée of men, animals, chariots, and other objects; on the contrary, they form a little history, a plastic idyll, a story with a beginning, a middle, and an end. It is a narrative divided into nine scenes.” (1) An armed hero, mounted in a car driven by a charioteer, quits in the morning a castle or fortified town. He is going to hunt, and carries his bow in his left hand. Over his head is an umbrella, the badge of his high rank, and his defence against the mid-day sun. A quiver hangs at the side of his chariot. He wears a conical cap, while the driver has his head bare, and leans forwards over the front of the car, seeming to shake the reins, and encourage the horses to mend their pace. (2) After the car has proceeded a certain distance, the hunter espies a stag upon a rocky hill. He stops his chariot, gets down, and leaving the driver in charge of the vehicle, ensconces himself behind a tree, and thus screened lets fly an arrow against the quarry, which strikes it midway in the chest. (3) Weak and bleeding copiously, the stag attempts to escape; but the hunter pursues and takes possession of him without having to shoot a second time. (4) The hour is come now for a rest. The sportsman has reached a wood, in which date-bearing palms are intermingled with trees of a different kind. He fastens his game to one of them, and proceeds to the skinning and the disembowelling. Meanwhile, his attendant detaches the horses from the car, relieves them of their harness, and proceeds to feed them from a portable manger. The car, left to itself, is tilted back, and stands with its pole in the air. (5) Food and drink having been prepared and placed on two tables, or altars, the hunter, seated on a throne under the shadow of his umbrella, pours a libation to the gods. They, on their part, scent the feast and draw near, represented by the sun and moon—a winged disk, and a crescent embracing a full orb. The feast is also witnessed by a spirit of evil, in the shape of a huge baboon or cynocephalous ape, who from a cavern at the foot of a wooded mountain, whereon a stag and a hare are feeding, furtively surveys the ceremony. (6) Remounting his chariot the hunter sets out on his return home, when the baboon quits his concealment, and rushes after him, threatening him with a huge stone. Hereupon a winged deity descends from heaven, and lifting into the air chariot, horses, charioteer, and hunter, enfolds them in an embrace and saves them. (7) The ape, baffled, pursues his way; the chariot is replaced on the earth. The hunter prepares his bow, places an arrow on the string, and hastily pursues his enemy, who is speedily overtaken and thrown to the ground by the horses. (8) The hunter dismounts, puts his foot upon the prostrate ape, and gives him the coup de grâce with a heavy axe or mace. A bird of prey hovers near, ready to descend upon the carcase. (9) The hero remounts his chariot, and returns to the castle or city which he left in the morning.783

The cup in question is made of a thin plate of silver coated with a layer of gold; it has a maximum diameter of seven inches and three-fifths. The underside is plain, while the inside is engraved with several small objects in low relief. In the center, surrounded by a circle of beads, there is a design we’ll discuss shortly. The band immediately outside this medallion, which is just under an inch wide, features a line of eight horses, all trotting and following each other to the right. Above each horse, two birds fly in the same direction. The horses’ tails are very stylized, appearing like a stem with branches and resembling a typical palm branch. Outside this band is a broader outer one, bordered on its outer edge by a large snake, whose scaly body nearly forms a complete circle, except for the tail, where it has some slight curves. This serpent, whose head reaches just beyond the thin tip of the tail, is “drawn,” as M. Clermont-Ganneau puts it, “with the hand of a master." It has been compared with the well-known Egyptian and Phoenician symbol for the {kosmos} or universe, which depicted a serpent with its tail in its mouth. “Naturally,” he continues, “the outer zone provides the most space for development. The artist is here at ease, and with such a relatively vast field before him, he has depicted a series of scenes that are notable for their uniform style, a diversity of subjects, the number of characters involved, and the nature of their actions. . . . However, these scenes are not, as some have thought, a series of randomly chosen and whimsically grouped fantastic subjects, a mere chaotic mêlée of men, animals, chariots, and other objects; instead, they tell a coherent story, a visual narrative with a beginning, middle, and end. It's essentially a narrative divided into nine scenes.” (1) An armed hero, riding in a chariot driven by a charioteer, sets out in the morning from a castle or fortified town. He’s going hunting, carrying his bow in his left hand. Above him is an umbrella, signifying his high rank and protecting him from the midday sun. A quiver hangs beside his chariot. He wears a conical cap, while the driver is bareheaded and leans forward over the front of the chariot, seeming to shake the reins and encourage the horses to pick up speed. (2) After the chariot has traveled a certain distance, the hunter spots a stag on a rocky hill. He stops the chariot, gets down, and leaving the driver in charge, hides behind a tree. From this cover, he shoots an arrow at the stag, hitting it squarely in the chest. (3) Weak and bleeding heavily, the stag tries to escape; however, the hunter pursues and captures it without needing to shoot again. (4) Now it's time for a rest. The hunter reaches a wooded area where date palms are mixed with other types of trees. He ties his kill to one of them and begins skinning and gutting it. Meanwhile, his assistant takes the horses out of the chariot, removes their harness, and feeds them from a portable trough. The chariot, left alone, tips back, standing with its pole in the air. (5) Once food and drink are prepared and laid out on two tables or altars, the hunter, seated on a throne beneath the shade of his umbrella, makes a libation to the gods. In response, the gods, represented by the sun and moon—a winged disk and a crescent embracing a full orb—smell the feast and approach. The feast is also observed by an evil spirit, represented by a huge baboon or dog-headed ape, who from a cave at the base of a wooded mountain, where a stag and hare are grazing, secretly watches the ceremony. (6) Climbing back into his chariot, the hunter starts his journey home when the baboon emerges from hiding and chases after him, threatening him with a large stone. Then, a winged deity descends from the heavens, lifting the chariot, horses, charioteer, and hunter into the air, embracing them and saving them. (7) The ape, thwarted, continues on its way; the chariot is returned to the ground. The hunter readies his bow, nocks an arrow, and quickly chases after the enemy, who is soon caught and knocked to the ground by the horses. (8) The hunter dismounts, places his foot on the fallen ape, and delivers the coup de grâce with a heavy axe or mace. A bird of prey hovers nearby, ready to swoop down on the carcass. (9) The hero remounts his chariot and returns to the castle or city he left in the morning.783

We have now to return to the medallion which forms the centre of the cup. Within a circle of pearls or beads, similar to that separating the two zones, is a round space about two inches in diameter, divided into two compartments by a horizontal line. In the upper part are contained three human figures, and the figure of a dog. At the extreme left is a prisoner with a beard and long hair that falls upon his shoulders. His entire body is naked. Behind him his two arms are brought together, tied by a cord, and then firmly attached to a post. His knees are bent, but do not reach the ground, and his feet are placed with their soles uppermost against the post at its base. The attitude is one which implies extreme suffering.784 In front of the prisoner, occupying the centre of the medallion, is the main figure of the upper compartment, a warrior, armed with a spear, who pursues the third figure, a fugitive, and seems to be thrusting his spear into the man’s back. Both have long hair, but are beardless; and wear the shenti for their sole garment. Between the legs of the main figure is a dog of the jackal kind, which has his teeth fixed in the heels of the fugitive, and arrests his flight. Below, in the second compartment, are two figures only, a man and a dog. The man is prostrate, and seems to be crawling along the ground, the dog stands partly on him, and appears to be biting his left heel. The interpretation which M. Clermont-Ganneau gives to this entire scene lacks the probability which attaches to his explanation of the outer scene. He suggests that the prisoner is the hunter of the other scene, plundered and bound by his charioteer, who is hastening away, when he is seized by his master’s dog and arrested in his flight. The dog gnaws off his right foot and then attacks the left, while the fugitive, in order to escape his tormentor, has to crawl along the ground. But M. Clermont-Ganneau himself distrusts his interpretation,785 while he has convinced no other scholar of its soundness. Judicious critics will be content to wait the further researches which he promises, whereby additional light may perhaps be thrown on this obscure matter.

We now return to the medallion at the center of the cup. Inside a circle of pearls or beads, similar to the one that separates the two zones, there’s a round area about two inches in diameter, divided into two sections by a horizontal line. In the upper section, there are three human figures and a dog. On the far left is a prisoner with a beard and long hair that falls to his shoulders. He’s completely naked. His arms are tied together behind him with a cord, firmly secured to a post. His knees are bent but don’t touch the ground, and his feet are placed with the soles facing up against the base of the post. His position suggests extreme suffering.784 In front of the prisoner, taking center stage in the medallion, is the main figure of the upper section, a warrior holding a spear, who appears to be thrusting it into the back of the third figure, a fugitive. Both have long hair but are clean-shaven and are wearing the shenti as their only garment. Between the legs of the main figure is a dog of the jackal variety, biting the fugitive's heels and halting his escape. Below, in the second section, there are only two figures, a man and a dog. The man is lying on the ground, seeming to crawl, while the dog is partly on him and appears to be biting his left heel. M. Clermont-Ganneau’s interpretation of this entire scene lacks the credibility that his explanation of the outer scene possesses. He suggests that the prisoner is the hunter from the other scene, robbed and bound by his charioteer, who is fleeing. He claims the dog of the master seizes him and stops his escape. The dog gnaws off his right foot and then attacks the left, forcing the fugitive to crawl to escape his tormentor. However, M. Clermont-Ganneau himself is doubtful of his interpretation,785 and he hasn’t convinced any other scholar of its validity. Wise critics will wait for the further research he promises, which may shed more light on this obscure matter.

In its artistic character the “cup of Præneste” claims a high place among the works of art probably or certainly assignable to the Phoenicians. The relief is high; the forms, especially the animal ones, are spirited and well-proportioned. The horses are especially good. As M. Clermont-Ganneau says, “their forms and their movements are indicated with a great deal of precision and truth."786 They show also a fair amount of variety; they stand, they walk, they trot, they gallop at full speed, always truthfully and naturally. The stag, the hare, and the dog are likewise well portrayed; the ape has less merit; he is too human, too like a mere unkempt savage. The human forms are about upon a par with those of the Assyrians and Egyptians, which have evidently served for their models, the Assyrian for the outer zone, the Egyptian for the medallion. The encircling snake, as already observed, is a masterpiece. There is no better drawing in any of the other pateræ. At best they equal, they certainly do not surpass, the Prænestine specimen.

In its artistic quality, the “cup of Præneste” holds a prominent position among the artworks that can be attributed to the Phoenicians. The relief is raised; the shapes, especially the animal figures, are dynamic and well-proportioned. The horses, in particular, are impressive. As M. Clermont-Ganneau states, "their shapes and movements are represented with a high level of precision and accuracy." 786 They also display a good variety; they stand, walk, trot, and gallop at full speed, always realistically and naturally. The stag, hare, and dog are also well depicted; the ape is less impressive; he appears too human, almost like a disheveled savage. The human figures are similar to those of the Assyrians and Egyptians, which clearly influenced their designs, with the Assyrian style for the outer zone and the Egyptian for the medallion. The surrounding snake, as previously noted, is a masterpiece. There is no better drawing in any of the other pateræ. At best, they match but do not surpass the Prænestine example.

The intaglios of the Phoenicians are either on cylinders or on gems, and can rarely be distinguished, unless they are accompanied by an inscription, from the similar objects obtained in such abundance from Babylonia and Assyria. They reproduce, with scarcely any variation, the mythological figures and emblems native to those countries—the forms of gods and priests, of spirits of good and evil, of kings contending with lions, of sacred trees, winged circles, and the like—scarcely ever introducing any novelty. The greater number of the cylinders are very rudely cut. They have been worked simply by means of a splinter of obsidian,787 and are barbarous in execution, though interesting to the student of archaic art. The subjoined are specimens. No. 1 represents a four-winged genius of the Assyrian type, bearded, and clad in a short tunic and a long robe, seizing with either hand a winged griffin, or spirit of evil, and reducing them to subjection. In the field, towards the two upper corners, are the same four Phoenician characters, twice repeated; they designate, no doubt, the owner of the cylinder, which he probably used as a seal, and are read as Harkhu.788 No. 2, which is better cut than No. 1, represents a king of the Persian (Achæmenian) type,789 who stands between two rampant lions, and seizes each by the forelock. Behind the second lion is a sacred tree of a type that is not uncommon; and behind the tree is an inscription, which has been read as l’Baletân—i.e. “(the seal) of Baletan."790 This cylinder was found recently in the Lebanon.791 Nos. 3 and 4 come from Salamis in Cyprus, where they were found by M. Alexandre Di Cesnola,792 the brother of the General. No. 3 represents a robed figure holding two nondescript animals by the hind legs; the creatures writhe in his grasp, and turn their heads towards him, as though wishing to bite. The remainder of the field is filed with detached objects, scattered at random—two human forms, a griffin, two heads of oxen, a bird, two balls, three crosses, a sceptre, &c. The forms are, all of them, very rudely traced. No. 4 resembles in general character No. 3, but is even ruder. Three similar robed figures hold each other’s hands and perhaps execute a dance around some religious object. Two heads of oxen or cows, with a disk between their horns, occupy the spaces intervening between the upper parts of the figures. In the lower portion of the field, the sun and moon fill the middle space, the sun, moon, and five planets the spaces to the right and to the left. Another cylinder from the same place (No. 5)793 is tolerably well designed and engraved. It shows us two persons, a man and a woman, in the act of presenting a dove to a female, who is probably the goddess Astarté, and who willingly receives it at their hands. Behind Astarté a seated lion echoes the approval of the goddess by raising one of his fore paws, while a griffin, who wholly disapproves of the offering, turns his back in disgust.

The intaglios made by the Phoenicians are found on cylinders or gems and are rarely distinguishable from similar items found in abundance from Babylonia and Assyria, unless they come with an inscription. They depict, with almost no variation, the mythological figures and symbols typical of those regions: gods and priests, spirits of good and evil, kings battling lions, sacred trees, winged circles, and more—almost never bringing anything new. Most of the cylinders are quite crudely cut. They were crafted simply using a splinter of obsidian, and while the execution is rough, they hold interest for those studying early art. Below are some examples. No. 1 shows a four-winged spirit of the Assyrian type, bearded and dressed in a short tunic and a long robe, grabbing a winged griffin, or spirit of evil, with both hands and subduing it. In the field, towards the top corners, are the same four Phoenician characters, repeated twice; they likely identify the owner of the cylinder, which he probably used as a seal, and are read as Harkhu. No. 2, which is better carved than No. 1, depicts a king of the Persian (Achaemenian) type, standing between two rampant lions, gripping each by the forelock. Behind the second lion is a common type of sacred tree, and behind the tree is an inscription that has been read as l’Baletân—meaning “(the seal) of Baletan." This cylinder was recently found in Lebanon. Nos. 3 and 4 are from Salamis in Cyprus, discovered by M. Alexandre Di Cesnola, the General's brother. No. 3 depicts a robed figure holding two unidentified animals by their hind legs; the animals struggle in his grasp, turning their heads toward him as if trying to bite. The rest of the field is filled with random objects—a couple of human figures, a griffin, two ox heads, a bird, two balls, three crosses, a scepter, etc. All of these forms are very roughly outlined. No. 4 is similar to No. 3 but even more rudimentary. Three alike robed figures hold hands and possibly dance around some religious object. Two ox or cow heads, with a disk between their horns, occupy the spaces between the upper parts of the figures. In the lower section of the field, the sun and moon occupy the center, with the sun, moon, and five planets filling the spaces on the right and the left. Another cylinder from the same place (No. 5) is fairly well designed and engraved. It shows a man and a woman presenting a dove to a female figure, probably the goddess Astarté, who willingly receives it. Behind Astarté, a seated lion echoes the goddess's approval by raising one of its forepaws, while a griffin, clearly disapproving of the offering, turns away in disgust.

On another cylinder, which is certainly Phoenician, a rude representation of a sacred tree occupies the central position. To the left stands a worshipper with the right hand upraised, clad in a very common Assyrian dress. Over the sacred tree is a coarse specimen of the winged circle or disk, with head and tail, and fluttering ends of ribbon.794 On either side stand two winged genii, dressed in long robes, and tall stiff caps, such as are often seen on the heads of Persians in the Persepolitan sculptures, and on the darics.795 In the field is a Phoenician inscription, which is read as {...} or Irphael ben Hor’adad, “Irphael, the son of Horadad."796

On another cylinder, which is definitely Phoenician, a rough depiction of a sacred tree takes center stage. To the left is a worshipper with their right hand raised, dressed in a typical Assyrian outfit. Above the sacred tree is a crude version of the winged circle or disk, complete with a head and tail, along with fluttering ribbons.794 On either side are two winged genies, wearing long robes and tall, stiff caps, similar to what you often see on Persian figures in Persepolitan sculptures and on the darics.795 In the field is a Phoenician inscription, which reads as {...} or Irphael ben Hor’adad, “Irphael, the son of Horadad."796

Phoenician cylinders are in glass, green serpentine, cornaline, black hæmatite, steatite, and green jasper.797 They are scratched rather than deeply cut, and cannot be said ever to attain to any considerable artistic beauty. Those which have been here given are among the best; and they certainly fall short, both in design and workmanship, of many Assyrian, Babylonian, and even Persian specimens.

Phoenician cylinders are made from glass, green serpentine, cornaline, black hematite, steatite, and green jasper.797 They are scratched rather than deeply engraved, and they can’t really be considered to have any significant artistic value. The ones presented here are among the best, but they definitely lack the design and craftsmanship of many Assyrian, Babylonian, and even Persian examples.

The gems, on the other hand, are in many cases quite equal to the Assyrian. There is one of special merit, which has been pronounced “an exquisite specimen of Phoenician lapidary art,"798 figured by General Di Cesnola in his “Cyprus."799 Two men in regular Assyrian costume, standing on either side of a “Sacred Tree,” grasp, each of them, a branch of it. Above is a winged circle, with the wings curved so as to suit the shape of the gem. Below is an ornament, which is six times repeated, like the blossom of a flower; and below this is a trelliswork. The whole is cut deeply and sharply. Its Phoenician authorship is assured by its being an almost exact repetition of a group upon the silver patera found at Amathus.7100

The gems, on the other hand, are often just as impressive as the Assyrian ones. There's one in particular that's been called "an exquisite example of Phoenician lapidary art,"798 showcased by General Di Cesnola in his “Cyprus.”799 Two men dressed in traditional Assyrian attire stand on either side of a "Sacred Tree," each holding a branch from it. Above them is a winged circle, with the wings shaped to fit the gem. Below is an ornament that repeats six times, resembling a flower blossom; and beneath that is a trellis design. The entire piece is cut deeply and precisely. Its Phoenician origin is confirmed by its nearly identical repetition of a group found on the silver patera discovered at Amathus.7100

Of other gems equally well engraved the following are specimens. No. 1 is a scarab of cornaline found by M. de Vogüé in Phoenicia Proper.7101 Two male figures in Assyrian costume face each other, their advanced feet crossing. Both hold in one hand the ankh or symbol of life. One has in the left hand what is thought to be a lotus blossom. The other has the right hand raised in the usual attitude of adoration. Between the figures, wherever there was space for them, are Phoenician characters, which are read as {...}, or l’Beka—i.e. “(the seal) of Beka."7102 No. 2, which has been set in a ring, is one of the many scarabs brought by General Di Cesnola from Cyprus.7103 It contains the figure of a hind, suckling her fawn, and is very delicately carved. The hind, however, is in an impossible attitude, the forelegs being thrown forwards, probably in order to prevent them from interfering with the figure of the fawn. Above the hind is an inscription, which appears to be in the Cyprian character, and which gives (probably) the name of the owner. No. 3 introduces us to domestic life. A grand lady, of Tyre perhaps or Sidon,7104 by name Akhot-melek, seated upon an elegant throne, with her feet upon a footstool, and dressed in a long robe which envelops the whole of her figure, receives at the hands of a female attendant a bowl or wine-cup, which the latter has just filled from an oenochoë of elegant shape, still held in her left hand. The attendant wears a striped robe reaching to the feet, and over it a tunic fastened round the waist with a belt. Her hair flows down on her shoulders, while that of her mistress is confined by a band, from which depends an ample veil, enveloping the cheeks, the back of the head, and the chin. We are told that such veils are still worn in the Phoenician country.7105 An inscription, in a late form of the Phoenician character, surrounds the two figures, and is read as {...} or l’Akhot-melek ishat Joshua(?)—i.e. “(the seal) of Akhot-melek, wife of Joshua."7106 No. 4 contains the figure of a lion, cut with much spirit. MM. Perrot et Chipiez say of it—“Among the numerous representations of lions that have been discovered in Phoenicia, there is none which can be placed on a par with that on the scarab bearing the name of ‘Ashenel: small as it is, this lion has something of the physiognomy of those magnificent ones which we have borrowed from the bas-reliefs of the Assyrians. Still, the intaglio is in other respects decidedly Phoenician and not Assyrian. Observe, for instance, the beetle with the wings expanded, which fills up the lower part of the field; this is a motive borrowed from Egypt, which a Ninevite lapidary would certainly not have put in such a place."7107 The Phoenician inscription takes away all doubt as to the nationality. It reads as {...}, or ’Ashenêl, and no doubt designates the owner. No. 5 is beautifully engraved on a chalcedony. It represents a stag attacked by a griffin, which has jumped suddenly on its back. The drawing is excellent, both of the real and of the imaginary animal, and leaves nothing to be desired. The inscription, which occupies the upper part of the field to the right, is in Cyprian characters, and shows that the gem was the signet of a certain Akestodaros.7108

Of other gems that are equally well engraved, here are some examples. No. 1 is a carnelian scarab found by M. de Vogüé in Phoenicia Proper.7101 Two male figures in Assyrian attire face each other, their forward feet crossing. Both hold an ankh or symbol of life in one hand. One has what appears to be a lotus blossom in the left hand. The other has raised his right hand in the usual gesture of adoration. Between the figures, where there is space, are Phoenician letters that read as {...}, or l’Beka—i.e. “(the seal) of Beka."7102 No. 2, which is set in a ring, is one of the many scarabs collected by General Di Cesnola from Cyprus.7103 It features the image of a doe nursing her fawn, carved with great delicacy. However, the doe is positioned in an awkward way, with her front legs stretched forward, likely to avoid interfering with the fawn's image. Above the doe is an inscription that appears to be in Cyprian script, probably indicating the name of the owner. No. 3 gives us a glimpse of domestic life. A grand lady, possibly from Tyre or Sidon, named Akhot-melek, is seated on an elegant throne with her feet on a footstool, dressed in a long robe that covers her entire figure, receiving a bowl or wine-cup from a female attendant. The attendant has just filled the cup from an elegantly shaped oenochoë, which she still holds in her left hand. She wears a striped robe that reaches her feet, along with a tunic secured at the waist with a belt. Her hair flows down her shoulders, while the mistress's hair is held back with a band from which hangs a large veil covering her cheeks, back of her head, and chin. We are told that such veils are still worn in Phoenicia.7105 An inscription in a later form of Phoenician script surrounds the two figures and reads as {...} or l’Akhot-melek ishat Joshua(?)—i.e. “(the seal) of Akhot-melek, wife of Joshua."7106 No. 4 features a lion, carved with a lot of spirit. MM. Perrot and Chipiez say of it—“Among the numerous representations of lions found in Phoenicia, there is none equivalent to that on the scarab bearing the name of ‘Ashenel: small though it is, this lion has some of the characteristics of those magnificent lions we have taken from Assyrian bas-reliefs. Still, the engraving is otherwise undeniably Phoenician and not Assyrian. Notice, for example, the beetle with its wings spread, filling the lower part of the field; this is a motive borrowed from Egypt, which a Ninevite engraver would certainly not have placed there."7107 The Phoenician inscription makes the nationality clear. It reads as {...}, or ’Ashenêl, clearly designating the owner. No. 5 is beautifully engraved on chalcedony. It depicts a stag being attacked by a griffin that has jumped onto its back. The drawing is excellent, showcasing both the real and imagined animals, and meets all expectations. The inscription occupying the upper part of the field to the right is in Cyprian characters and indicates that the gem was the signet of a certain Akestodaros.7108

There are some Phoenician gems which are interesting from their subject matter without being especially good as works of art. One of these contains a representation of two men fighting.7109 Both are armed with two spears, and both carry round shields or bucklers. The warrior to the right wears a conical helmet, and is thought to be a native Cyprian;7110 he carries a shield without an umbo or boss. His adversary on the left wears a loose cap, or hood, the {pilos apages} of Herodotus,7111 and has a prominent umbo in the middle of his shield. He probably represents a Persian, and appears to have received a wound from his antagonist, which is causing him to sink to the ground. This gem was found at Curium in Cyprus by General Di Cesnola.

There are some Phoenician gems that are interesting because of their subject matter, even if they aren't particularly impressive as works of art. One of these features a depiction of two men fighting.7109 Both are armed with two spears and are holding round shields or bucklers. The warrior on the right wears a conical helmet and is believed to be a native of Cyprus;7110 he has a shield without an umbo or boss. His opponent on the left wears a loose cap or hood, referred to as the {pilos apages} by Herodotus,7111 and has a prominent umbo in the center of his shield. He likely represents a Persian and seems to have been wounded by his opponent, causing him to sink to the ground. This gem was discovered at Curium in Cyprus by General Di Cesnola.

Another, found at the same place, exhibits a warrior, or a hunter, going forth to battle or to the chase in his chariot.7112 A large quiver full of arrows is slung at each side of his car. The warrior and his horse (one only is seen) are rudely drawn, but the chariot is very distinctly made out, and has a wheel of an Assyrian type. The Salaminians of Cyprus were famous for their war chariots,7113 of which this may be a representation.

Another one, found in the same place, shows a warrior, or a hunter, heading out to battle or on a hunt in his chariot.7112 A large quiver filled with arrows is fastened on each side of his cart. The warrior and his horse (only one is visible) are roughly drawn, but the chariot is very clearly depicted, with a wheel of Assyrian design. The Salaminians of Cyprus were known for their war chariots,7113 and this may be a representation of that.

The island of Sardinia has furnished a prodigious number of Phoenician seals. A single private collection contains as many as six hundred.7114 They are mostly scarabs, and the type of them is mostly Egyptian. Sometimes they bear the forms of Egyptian gods, as Horus, or Thoth, or Anubis;7115 sometimes cartouches with the names of kings as Menkara, Thothmes III., Amenophis III., Seti I., &c.;7116 sometimes mere sacred emblems, as the winged uræus, the disk between two uræi,7117 and the like. Occasionally there is the representation of a scene with which the Egyptian bas-reliefs have made us familiar:7118 a warrior has caught hold of his vanquished and kneeling enemy by a lock of his hair, and threatens him with an axe or mace, which he brandishes above his head. Or a lion takes the place of the captive man, and is menaced in the same way. Human figures struggling with lions, and lions killing wild bulls, are also common;7119 but the type in these cases is less Egyptian than Oriental.

The island of Sardinia has produced an impressive number of Phoenician seals. One private collection holds as many as six hundred.7114 Most of them are scarabs, and they primarily follow an Egyptian style. Sometimes they feature Egyptian gods like Horus, Thoth, or Anubis;7115 other times, they include cartouches with names of kings such as Menkara, Thothmes III, Amenophis III, Seti I, etc.;7116 sometimes, they just display sacred symbols like the winged uraeus or the disk between two uraei.7117 Occasionally, they depict scenes that are familiar from Egyptian bas-reliefs:7118 a warrior grabbing his defeated, kneeling enemy by a lock of hair and threatening him with an axe or mace held above his head. In some cases, a lion replaces the captured man and is threatened in the same way. Human figures battling lions and lions attacking wild bulls are also common;7119 however, the style in these instances is less Egyptian and more Oriental.

Phoenician painting was not, like Egyptian, displayed upon the walls of temples, nor was it, like Greek, the production of actual pictures for the decoration of houses. It was employed to a certain extent on statues, not so as to cover the entire figure, but with delicacy and discretion, for the marking out of certain details, and the emphasising of certain parts of the design.7120 The hair and beard were often painted a brownish red; the pupil of the eye was marked by means of colour; and robes had often a border of red or blue. Statuettes were tinted more generally, whole vestments being sometimes coloured red or green,7121 and a gay effect being produced, which is said to be agreeable and harmonious.7122 But the nearest approach to painting proper which was made by the Phoenicians was upon their vessels in clay, in terra-cotta, and in alabaster. Here, though, the ornamentation was sometimes merely by patterns or bands,7123 there were occasionally real attempts to depict animal and human forms, which, if not very successful, still possess considerable interest. The noble amphora from Curium, figured by Di Cesnola,7124 contains above forty representations of horses, and nearly as many of birds. The shape of the horse is exceedingly conventional, the whole form being attenuated in the highest degree; but the animal is drawn with spirit, and the departure from nature is clearly intentional. In the animals that are pasturing, the general attitude is well seized; the movement is exactly that of the horse when he stretches his neck to reach and crop the grass.7125 In the birds there is equal spirit and greater truth to nature: they are in various attitudes, preening their feathers, pecking the ground, standing with head erect in the usual way. Other vases contain figures of cows, goats, stags, fish and birds of various kinds, while one has an attempt at a hippopotamus. The attempts to represent the human form are certainly not happy; they remind us of the more ambitious efforts of Chinese and Japanese art.

Phoenician painting wasn't displayed on temple walls like Egyptian art, nor was it focused on creating actual pictures for decorating homes like Greek art. Instead, it was somewhat used on statues, but not to cover the entire figure; rather, it was applied delicately to highlight specific details and emphasize certain parts of the design. The hair and beard were often painted a reddish-brown; the pupil of the eye was colored in; and robes frequently had a border of red or blue. Statuettes were often tinted more extensively, with entire garments sometimes painted red or green, creating a vibrant effect that is said to be pleasing and harmonious. However, the closest thing to proper painting by the Phoenicians was found on their clay vessels, terra-cotta, and alabaster. Here, while some decoration was simply patterns or bands, there were also genuine attempts to depict animal and human forms, which, though not very successful, are still quite interesting. The impressive amphora from Curium, illustrated by Di Cesnola, features over forty images of horses and almost as many birds. The depiction of the horse is highly stylized, with the whole form elongated, but it’s drawn with energy, clearly departing from realism on purpose. In the grazing animals, the overall posture is accurately captured; the movement reflects how a horse stretches its neck to graze on grass. The birds show equal vitality and a closer adherence to nature: they are depicted in various poses, preening their feathers, pecking at the ground, and standing upright in their usual manner. Other vases showcase cows, goats, stags, fish, and various bird species, while one even features an attempt at a hippopotamus. The efforts to depict the human form are definitely lacking; they remind us of the more ambitious approaches found in Chinese and Japanese art.





CHAPTER VIII—INDUSTRIAL ART AND MANUFACTURES

     Phoenician textile fabrics, embroidered or dyed—Account of
     the chief Phoenician dye—Mollusks from which the purple was
     obtained—Mode of obtaining them—Mode of procuring the dye
     from them—Process of dyeing—Variety of the tints—
     Manufacture of glass—Story of its invention—Three kinds of
     Phoenician glass—1. Transparent colourless glass—2. Semi-
     transparent coloured glass—3. Opaque glass, much like
     porcelain—Description of objects in glass—Methods pursued
     in the manufacture—Phoenician ceramic art—Earliest
     specimens—Vases with geometrical designs—Incised
     patterning—Later efforts—Use of enamel—Great amphora of
     Curium—Phoenician ceramic art disappointing—Ordinary
     metallurgy—Implements—Weapons—Toilet articles—Lamp-
     stands and tripods—Works in iron and lead.
     Phoenician textile fabrics, embroidered or dyed—Overview of the main Phoenician dye—Mollusks used for purple dye—How they were gathered—How the dye was extracted from them—Dyeing process—Variety of colors—Glass manufacturing—Story of its invention—Three types of Phoenician glass—1. Clear, colorless glass—2. Semi-transparent colored glass—3. Opaque glass, similar to porcelain—Description of glass objects—Manufacturing methods—Phoenician ceramic art—Earliest examples—Vases with geometric designs—Incised patterns—Later developments—Use of enamel—Great amphora from Curium—Phoenician ceramic art is underwhelming—Basic metallurgy—Tools—Weapons—Toiletries—Lampstands and tripods—Works in iron and lead.

Phoenicia was celebrated from a remote antiquity for the manufacture of textile fabrics. The materials which she employed for them were wool, linen yarn, perhaps cotton, and, in the later period of her commercial prosperity, silk. The “white wool” of Syria was supplied to her in abundance by the merchants of Damascus,81 and wool of lambs, rams, and goats seems also to have been furnished by the more distant parts of Arabia.82 Linen yarn may have been imported from Egypt, where it was largely manufactured, and was of excellent quality;83 while raw silk is said to have been “brought to Tyre and Berytus by the Persian merchants, and there both dyed and woven into cloaks."84 The price of silk was very high, and it was customary in Phoenicia to intermix the precious material either with linen or with cotton;85 as is still done to a certain extent in modern times. It is perhaps doubtful whether, so far as the mere fabric of stuffs was concerned, the products of the Phoenician looms were at all superior to those which Egypt and Babylonia furnished, much less to those which came from India, and passed under the name of Sindones. Two things gave to the Phoenician stuffs that high reputation which caused them to be more sought for than any others; and these were, first, the brilliancy and beauty of their colours, and, secondly, the delicacy with which they were in many instances embroidered. We have not much trace of Phoenician embroidery on the representations of dresses that have come down to us; but the testimony of the ancients is unimpeachable,86 and we may regard it as certain that the art of embroidery, known at a very early date to the Hebrews,87 was cultivated with great success by their Phoenician neighbours, and under their auspices reached a high point of perfection. The character of the decoration is to be gathered from the extant statues and bas-reliefs, from the representations on pateræ, on cups, dishes, and gems. There was a tendency to divide the surface to be ornamented into parallel stripes or bands, and to repeat along the line a single object, or two alternately. Rosettes, monsters of various kinds, winged globes with uræi, scarabs, sacred trees, and garlands or blossoms of the lotus were the ordinary “motives."88 Occasionally human figures might be introduced, and animal forms even more frequently; but a stiff conventionalism prevailed, the same figures were constantly repeated, and the figures themselves had in few cases much beauty.

Phoenicia was renowned since ancient times for its production of textile fabrics. The materials used included wool, linen yarn, and possibly cotton, with silk becoming common during its later commercial success. The "white wool" of Syria was readily provided by the merchants of Damascus, and it seems that wool from lambs, rams, and goats also came from more distant regions of Arabia. Linen yarn was likely imported from Egypt, where it was primarily produced and known for its high quality, while raw silk is said to have been “brought to Tyre and Berytus by Persian merchants, and there dyed and woven into cloaks." The price of silk was quite high, and it was common in Phoenicia to blend this premium material with either linen or cotton, as is still done to some extent today. It's uncertain whether the fabric quality from Phoenician looms was actually superior to that from Egypt and Babylon, let alone the materials from India known as Sindones. Two factors contributed to the Phoenician textiles' esteemed reputation: their vibrant colors and the intricate embroidery often applied. We don't have much evidence of Phoenician embroidery in the surviving depictions of garments, but ancient writings affirm its significance, and we can confidently say that the art of embroidery, recognized early on by the Hebrews, was skillfully developed by their Phoenician neighbors, reaching a high level of excellence. The style of decoration can be seen in surviving statues and bas-reliefs, along with designs on plates, cups, dishes, and gemstones. There was a tendency to divide the areas for decoration into parallel stripes or bands, repeating one or two motifs along the lines. Common motifs included rosettes, various mythical creatures, winged globes with uræi, scarabs, sacred trees, and lotus garlands or blossoms. Occasionally, human figures were included, and animal shapes were even more common, but the overall style was quite conventional, with the same figures consistently repeated, and they often lacked true beauty.

The brilliancy and beauty of the Phoenician coloured stuffs resulted from the excellency of their dyes. Here we touch a second branch of their industrial skill, for the principal dyes used were originally invented and continuously fabricated by the Phoenicians themselves, not imported from any foreign country. Nature had placed along the Phoenician coast, or at any rate along a great portion of it, an inexhaustible supply of certain shell-fish, or molluscs, which contained as a part of their internal economy a colouring fluid possessing remarkable, and indeed unique, qualities. Some account has been already given of the species which are thought to have been anciently most esteemed. They belong, mainly, to the two allied families of the Murex and the Buccinum or Purpura. Eight species of the former, and six of the latter, having their habitat in the Mediterranean, have been distinguished by some naturalists;89 but two of the former only, and one of the latter, appear to have attracted the attention of the Phoenicians. The Murex brandaris is now thought to have borne away the palm from all the others; it is extremely common upon the coast; and enormous heaps of the shells are found, especially in the vicinity of Tyre, crushed and broken—the débris, as it would seem, cast away by the manufacturers of old.810 The Murex trunculus, according to some, is just as abundant, in a crushed state, in the vicinity of Sidon, great banks of it existing, which are a hundred yards long and several yards thick.811 It is a more spinous shell than the M. brandaris, having numerous projecting points, and a generally rough and rugged appearance. The Purpura employed seems to have been the P. lapillus, a mollusc not confined to the Mediterranean, but one which frequents also our own shores, and was once turned to some account in Ireland.812 The varieties of the P. lapillus differ considerably. Some are nearly white, some greyish, others buff striped with brown. Some, again, are smooth, others nearly as rough as the Murex trunculus. The Helix ianthina, which is included by certain writers among the molluscs employed for dyeing purposes by the Phoenicians,813 is a shell of a completely different character, smooth and delicate, much resembling that of an ordinary land snail, and small compared to the others. It is not certain, however, that the helix, though abounding in the Eastern Mediterranean,814 ever attracted the notice of the Phoenicians.

The brilliance and beauty of the Phoenician colored fabrics came from the quality of their dyes. This brings us to another aspect of their industrial skill, as the primary dyes used were originally developed and consistently produced by the Phoenicians themselves, rather than being imported from elsewhere. Nature provided an endless supply of specific shellfish or mollusks along the Phoenician coast, or at least a large part of it, which contained a coloring fluid with remarkable and unique properties. Some previously mentioned species were considered particularly valuable in ancient times. They mainly belong to the two related families of the Murex and the Buccinum or Purpura. Naturalists have identified eight species of the former and six of the latter that inhabit the Mediterranean; however, it seems that only two of the former and one of the latter caught the Phoenicians' interest. The Murex brandaris is now believed to be the most significant among them; it's very common along the coast, and vast piles of the shells can be found, especially near Tyre, crushed and broken—apparently discarded by ancient manufacturers. The Murex trunculus, according to some sources, is just as plentiful in crushed form near Sidon, where large banks of it extend a hundred yards long and several yards thick. It's a more spiny shell than the M. brandaris, featuring numerous projecting points and a generally rough appearance. The Purpura used seems to have been the P. lapillus, a mollusk found not only in the Mediterranean but also along our own shores, which was once utilized in Ireland. The varieties of the P. lapillus differ significantly. Some are nearly white, some greyish, and others are buff with brown stripes. Some are smooth, while others are almost as rough as the Murex trunculus. The Helix ianthina, which some writers include among the mollusks used for dyeing by the Phoenicians, is a shell of a completely different kind—smooth and delicate, resembling an ordinary land snail and small compared to the others. However, it’s uncertain whether the helix, which is abundant in the Eastern Mediterranean, ever caught the attention of the Phoenicians.

The molluscs needed by the Phoenician dyers were not obtained without some difficulty. As the Mediterranean has no tides, it does not uncover its shores at low water like the ocean, or invite man to rifle them. The coveted shell-fish, in most instances, preferred tolerably deep water; and to procure them in any quantity it was necessary that they should be fished up from a depth of some fathoms. The mode in which they were captured was the following. A long rope was let down into the sea, with baskets of reeds or rushes attached to it at intervals, constructed like our lobster-traps or eel-baskets, with an opening that yielded easily to pressure from the outside, but resisted pressure from the inside, and made escape, when once the trap was entered, impossible. The baskets were baited with mussels or frogs, both of which had great attractions for the Purpuræ, and were seized and devoured with avidity. At the upper end of the rope was attached to a large piece of cork, which, even when the baskets were full, could not be drawn under water. It was usual to set the traps in the evening, and after waiting a night, or sometimes a night and a day, to draw them up to the surface, when they were generally found to be full of the coveted shell-fish.815

The mollusks needed by the Phoenician dyers were not collected without some difficulty. Since the Mediterranean doesn’t have tides, its shores don’t get exposed at low water like the ocean does, making it hard for people to gather them. The desired shellfish usually preferred fairly deep water, so to catch them in any significant number, they had to be fished up from several fathoms below. The way they were caught was as follows: a long rope was lowered into the sea, with baskets made of reeds or rushes attached to it at intervals, constructed like modern lobster traps or eel baskets. These baskets had an opening that was easy to push in from the outside but resisted escape from the inside, ensuring once they entered, the shellfish couldn’t get out. The baskets were baited with mussels or frogs, both of which were very attractive to the Purpuræ, and were eagerly seized and eaten. At the top of the rope, a large piece of cork was attached, which, even when the baskets were full, couldn’t be pulled underwater. They typically set the traps in the evening and after waiting a night, or sometimes a night and a day, they would pull them up to the surface, where they were usually found to be full of the desired shellfish.815

There were two ways in which the dye was obtained from the molluscs. Sometimes a hole was broken in the side of the shell, and the fish taken out entire.816 The sac containing the colouring matter, which is a sort of vein, beginning at the head of the animal, and following the tortuous line of the body as it twists through the spiral shell,817 was then carefully extracted, either while the mollusc was still alive, or as soon as possible after death, as otherwise the quality of the dye was impaired. This plan was pursued more especially with the larger species of Purpuræ, where the sac attained a certain size; while with a smaller kinds a different method was followed. In their case no attempt was made to extract the sac, but the entire fish was crushed, together with its shell, and after salt had been added in the proportion of twenty ounces to a hundred pounds of the pulp, three days were allowed for maceration; heat was then applied, and when, by repeated skimming, the coarse particles had been removed, the dye was left in a liquid state at the bottom. It was necessary that the vessel in which this final process took place should be of lead, and not of bronze or iron, since those metals gave the dye a disagreeable tinge.818

There were two ways to obtain dye from the mollusks. Sometimes a hole was made in the side of the shell, and the whole animal was taken out. The sac containing the coloring matter, which is like a vein that starts at the head of the animal and follows the twisting line of its body through the spiral shell, was then carefully removed, either while the mollusk was still alive or as soon as possible after it died, because otherwise, the quality of the dye would be reduced. This method was mainly used with the larger species of Purpuræ, where the sac was a certain size; with smaller types, a different method was used. In those cases, there was no attempt to extract the sac; instead, the entire mollusk was crushed along with its shell, and after adding salt in the ratio of twenty ounces to a hundred pounds of the pulp, it was left to soak for three days. Heat was then applied, and by skimming off the coarse particles, the dye was left in a liquid state at the bottom. It was crucial that the container for this final process was made of lead, not bronze or iron, as those metals would give the dye an unpleasant tint.

The colouring matter contained in the sac of the Purpuræ is a liquid of a creamy consistency, and of a yellowish-white hue. On extraction, it is at first decidedly yellow; then after a little time it becomes green; and, finally, it settles into some shade of violet or purple. Chemical analysis has shown that in the case of the Murex trunculus the liquid is composed of two elementary substances, one being cyanic acid, which is of a blue or azure colour, and the other being purpuric oxide, which is a bright red.819 In the case of the Murex brandaris one element only has been found: it is an oxide, which has received the name of oxyde tyrien.820 No naturalist has as yet discovered what purpose the liquid serves in the economy, or in the preservation, of the animal; it is certainly not exuded, as sepia is by the cuttle-fish, to cloud the water in the neighbourhood, and enable the creature to conceal itself.

The coloring substance found in the sac of the Purpuræ is a liquid that has a creamy texture and a yellowish-white color. When it's first extracted, it appears distinctly yellow; after a short while, it turns green; and eventually, it settles into a shade of violet or purple. Chemical analysis has revealed that in the case of the Murex trunculus, the liquid consists of two basic substances: one is cyanic acid, which is blue or azure, and the other is purpuric oxide, which is bright red.819 For the Murex brandaris, only one element has been found: an oxide known as oxyde tyrien. 820 No naturalist has yet figured out what function the liquid serves in the animal’s biology or preservation; unlike sepia from the cuttlefish, it is definitely not released to cloud the water and help the creature hide.

Concerning the Phoenician process of dyeing, the accounts which have come down to us are at once confused and incomplete. Nothing is said with respect to their employment of mordants, either acid or alkali, and yet it is almost certain that they must have used one or the other, or both, to fix the colours, and render them permanent. The gamins of Tyre employ to this day mordants of each sort;821 and an alkali derived from seaweed is mentioned by Pliny as made use of for fixing some dyes,822 though he does not distinctly tell us that it was known to the Phoenicians or employed in fixing the purple. What we chiefly learn from this writer as to the dyeing process is823—first, that sometimes the liquid derived from the murex only, sometimes that of the purpura or buccinum only, was applied to the material which it was wished to colour, while the most approved hue was produced by an application of both dyes separately. Secondly, we are told that the material, whatever it might be, was steeped in the dye for a certain number of hours, then withdrawn for a while, and afterwards returned to the vat and steeped a second time. The best Tyrian cloths were called Dibapha, i.e. “twice dipped;” and for the production of the true “Tyrian purple” it was necessary that the dye obtained from the Buccinum should be used after that from the Murex had been applied. The Murex alone gave a dye that was firm, and reckoned moderately good; but the Buccinum alone was weak, and easily washed out.

Regarding the Phoenician dyeing process, the information we have is both unclear and incomplete. There’s no mention of their use of mordants, whether acid or alkaline, but it’s quite likely that they used one or both to fix the colors and make them permanent. The people of Tyre still use both types of mordants today; an alkali derived from seaweed is mentioned by Pliny as used for fixing some dyes, although he doesn’t clearly state if it was known to the Phoenicians or used for fixing purple dye. What we mainly learn from this writer about the dyeing process is—first, that sometimes only the dye obtained from the murex was used, other times only that from the purpura or buccinum, while the best hue was produced by using both dyes separately. Secondly, we are told that the material, whatever it was, was soaked in the dye for several hours, then taken out for a while, and then put back in the vat for a second soaking. The finest Tyrian cloths were called Dibapha, meaning “twice dipped;” to produce the true “Tyrian purple,” the dye from the Buccinum had to be used after the dye from the Murex. The Murex alone yielded a dye that was strong and considered moderately good; however, the Buccinum alone produced a weak dye that washed out easily.

The actual tints produced from the shell-fish appear to have ranged from blue, through violet and purple, to crimson and rose.824 Scarlet could not be obtained, but was yielded by the cochineal insect. Even for the brighter sorts of crimson some admixture of the cochineal dye was necessary.825 The violet tint was not generally greatly prized, though there was a period in the reign of Augustus when it was the fashion;826 redder hues were commonly preferred; and the choicest of all is described as “a rich, dark purple, the colour of coagulated blood."827 A deep crimson was also in request, and seems frequently to be intended when the term purple ({porphureos}, purpureus) is used.

The actual colors produced from shellfish seem to have ranged from blue, through violet and purple, to crimson and pink.824 Scarlet couldn’t be obtained, but was produced by the cochineal insect. Even for the brighter shades of crimson, some blend of the cochineal dye was necessary.825 The violet shade wasn’t generally highly valued, although there was a time during Augustus’s reign when it was in fashion;826 redder tones were more commonly preferred, and the finest of all is described as “a rich, dark purple, the color of coagulated blood."827 A deep crimson was also in demand and seems to often be meant when the term purple ({porphureos}, purpureus) is used.

A third industry greatly affected by the Phoenicians was the manufacture of glass. According to Pliny,828 the first discovery of the substance was made upon the Phoenician coast by a body of sailors whom he no doubt regarded as Phoenicians. These persons had brought a cargo of natrum, which is the subcarbonate of soda, to the Syrian coast in the vicinity of Acre, and had gone ashore at the mouth of the river Belus to cook their dinner. Having lighted a fire upon the sand, they looked about for some stones to prop up their cooking utensils, but finding none, or none convenient for the purpose, they bethought themselves of utilising for the occasion some of the blocks of natrum with which their ship was laden. These were placed close to the fire, and the heat was sufficient to melt a portion of one of them, which, mixing with the siliceous sand at its base, produced a stream of glass. There is nothing impossible or even very improbable in this story; but we may question whether the scene of it is rightly placed. Glass was manufactured in Egypt many centuries before the probable date of the Phoenician occupation of the Mediterranean coast; and, if the honour of the invention is to be assigned to a particular people, the Egyptians would seem to have the best claim to it. The process of glass-blowing is represented in tombs at Beni Hassan of very great antiquity,829 and a specimen of Egyptian glass is in existence bearing the name of a Usurtasen, a king of the twelfth dynasty.830 Natrum, moreover, was an Egyptian product, well known from a remote date, being the chief ingredient used in the various processes of embalming.831 Phoenicia has no natrum, and not even any vegetable alkali readily procurable in considerable quantity. There may have been an accidental discovery of glass in Phoenicia, but priority of discovery belonged almost certainly to Egypt; and it is, upon the whole, most probable that Phoenicia derived from Egypt her knowledge both of the substance itself and of the method of making it.

A third industry significantly impacted by the Phoenicians was glass manufacturing. According to Pliny, the first discovery of glass happened on the Phoenician coast by a group of sailors who he likely considered Phoenicians. These sailors had brought a cargo of natron, a subcarbonate of soda, to the Syrian coast near Acre and decided to go ashore at the river Belus to cook their dinner. After starting a fire on the sand, they looked for stones to support their cooking pots but found none suitable. As a solution, they thought to use some of the natron blocks from their ship. They placed these near the fire, and the heat melted some of it, mixing it with the sandy soil beneath and creating a stream of glass. There's nothing implausible about this story, but we might question whether the location is accurate. Glass was being made in Egypt many centuries before the Phoenicians became prominent on the Mediterranean coast, and if credit for the invention goes to a specific culture, the Egyptians hold the strongest claim. The process of glass-blowing is depicted in ancient tombs at Beni Hassan, and a piece of Egyptian glass exists that bears the name of a king from the twelfth dynasty, Usurtasen. Moreover, natron was an Egyptian product, well-known from ancient times and used primarily for embalming. Phoenicia lacked natron and didn't have any vegetable alkalis obtainable in large quantities. There could have been an accidental discovery of glass in Phoenicia, but the original discovery likely belongs to Egypt. Overall, it seems more probable that Phoenicia learned about both the material and the production process from Egypt.

Still, there can be no doubt that the manufacture was one on which the Phoenicians eagerly seized, and which they carried out on a large scale and very successfully. Sidon, according to the ancients,832 was the chief seat of the industry; but the best sand is found near Tyre, and both Tyre and Sarepta also seem to have been among the places where glassworks were early established. At Sarepta extensive banks of débris have been found, consisting of broken glass of many colours, the waste beyond all doubt of a great glass manufactory;833 at Tyre, the traces of the industry are less extensive,834 but on the other hand we have historical evidence that it continued to be practised there into the middle ages.835

Still, there’s no doubt that the Phoenicians enthusiastically embraced this manufacture, which they carried out on a large scale and with great success. Sidon, according to the ancients, 832 was the main hub of the industry; however, the best sand can be found near Tyre, and both Tyre and Sarepta also appear to have been among the places where glassworks were established early on. At Sarepta, large piles of débris have been discovered, consisting of broken glass in various colors, undoubtedly the waste from a major glass factory; 833 at Tyre, the signs of the industry are less extensive, 834 but on the other hand, we have historical evidence that it continued to be practiced there into the middle ages. 835

The glass produced by the Phoenicians was of three kinds: first, transparent colourless glass, which the eye could see through; secondly, translucent coloured glass, through which light could pass, though the eye could not penetrate it so as to distinguish objects; and, thirdly, opaque glass, scarcely distinguishable from porcelain. Transparent glass was employed for mirrors, round plates being cast, which made very tolerable looking-glasses,836 when covered at the back by thin sheets of metal, and also for common objects, such as vases, urns, bottles, and jugs, which have been yielded in abundance by tombs of a somewhat late date in Cyprus.837 No great store, however, seems to have been set upon transparency, in which the Oriental eye saw no beauty; and the objects which modern research has recovered under this head at Tyre, in Cyprus, and elsewhere, seem the work of comparatively rude artists, and have little æsthetic merit. The shapes, however, are not inelegant.

The glass made by the Phoenicians came in three types: first, clear colorless glass that you could see through; second, translucent colored glass that allowed light to pass but you couldn't see objects clearly; and third, opaque glass that was hard to tell apart from porcelain. Transparent glass was used for mirrors, with round plates being shaped to make decent looking-glasses when coated on the back with thin metal sheets, and it was also used for everyday items like vases, urns, bottles, and jugs, which have been found in abundance in tombs from a relatively late period in Cyprus. However, little value seems to have been placed on transparency, as the Eastern eye saw no beauty in it; and the items that modern research has uncovered in Tyre, Cyprus, and other places appear to be made by fairly unskilled artists, lacking much artistic value. The shapes, though, are not unattractive.

The most beautiful of the objects in glass produced by the Phoenicians are the translucent or semi-transparent vessels of different kinds, most of them variously coloured, which have been found in Cyprus, at Camirus in Rhodes, and on the Syrian coast, near Beyrout and elsewhere.838 These comprise small flasks or bottles, from three to six inches long, probably intended to contain perfumes; small jugs (oenochoæ) from three inches in height to five inches; vases of about the same size; amphoræ pointed at the lower extremity; and other varieties. They are coloured, generally, either in longitudinal or in horizontal stripes and bands; but the bands often deviate from the straight line into zig-zags, which are always more or less irregular, like the zig-zags of the Norman builders, while sometimes they are deflected into crescents, or other curves, as particularly one resembling a willow-leaf. The colours are not very vivid, but are pleasing and well-contrasted; they are chiefly five—white, blue, yellow, green, and a purplish brown. Red scarcely appears, except in a very pale, pinkish form; and even in this form it is uncommon. Blue, on the other hand, is greatly affected, being sometimes used in the patterns, often taken for the ground, and occasionally, in two tints, forming both groundwork and ornamentation.839 It is not often that more than three hues are found on the same vessel, and sometimes the hues employed are only two. There are instances, however, and very admirable instances, of the employment, on a single vessel, of four hues.840

The most beautiful glass items made by the Phoenicians are the translucent or semi-transparent vessels of various types, most of which are colorful. They've been discovered in Cyprus, Camirus in Rhodes, and along the Syrian coast near Beirut and other places.838 These include small flasks or bottles that are three to six inches tall, likely meant for perfumes; small jugs (oenochoæ) ranging from three to five inches; vases of similar size; amphorae that taper at the bottom; and other kinds. They're typically decorated with stripes and bands, either longitudinally or horizontally; however, the bands often curve into zigzags that are usually irregular, similar to the designs by Norman builders. Sometimes, they shift into crescent shapes or other curves, particularly one that looks like a willow leaf. The colors aren't very bright but are nice and well-matched; the main ones are white, blue, yellow, green, and a purplish-brown. Red is rare, showing up only in a light, pinkish hue, and even then, it's uncommon. In contrast, blue is heavily favored, often used in patterns, sometimes as the base color, and occasionally in two shades, creating both the background and decorative elements.839 It’s not common to see more than three colors on one vessel, and sometimes only two colors are used. However, there are remarkable examples of a single vessel featuring four different colors.840

The colours were obtained, commonly, at any rate, from metallic oxides. The ordinary blue employed is cobalt, though it is suspected that there was an occasional use of copper. Copper certainly furnished the greens, while manganese gave the brown, which shades off into purple and into black. The beautiful milky white which forms the ground tint of some vases is believed to have been derived from the oxide of tin, or else from phosphate of chalk. It is said that the colouring matter of the patterns does not extend through the entire thickness of the glass, but lies only on the outer surface, being a later addition to the vessels as first made.

The colors were typically obtained from metallic oxides. The usual blue used is cobalt, although there's a chance that copper was occasionally used as well. Copper definitely provided the greens, while manganese supplied the brown, which transitions into purple and black. The lovely milky white that serves as the background for some vases is thought to come from tin oxide or possibly from chalk phosphate. It's said that the coloring in the patterns doesn't go all the way through the glass but only covers the outer surface, added later to the vessels after they were initially made.

Translucent coloured glass was also largely produced by the Phoenicians for beads and other ornaments, and also for the imitation of gems. The huge emerald of which Herodotus speaks,841 as “shining with great brilliancy at night” in the temple of Melkarth at Tyre, was probably a glass cylinder, into which a lamb was introduced by the priests. In Phoenician times the pretended stone is quite as often a glass paste as a real gem, and the case is the same with the scarabs so largely used as seals. In Phoenician necklaces, glass beads alternate frequently with real agates, onyxes, and crystals; while sometimes glass in various shapes is the only material employed. A necklace found at Tharros in Sardinia, and now in the collection of the Louvre, which is believed to be of Phoenician manufacture, is composed of above forty beads, two cylinders, four pendants representing heads of bulls, and one representing the face of a man, all of glass.842 Another, found by M. Renan in Phoenicia itself, is made up of glass beads imitating pearls, intermixed with beads of cornaline and agate.843

Translucent colored glass was widely made by the Phoenicians for beads and other ornaments, as well as for mimicking gems. The massive emerald that Herodotus mentions, described as “shining with great brilliance at night” in the temple of Melkarth in Tyre, was likely a glass cylinder with a lamb placed inside by the priests. During Phoenician times, the so-called stone is just as often glass paste as it is a real gem, and the same goes for the scarabs commonly used as seals. In Phoenician necklaces, glass beads frequently alternate with genuine agates, onyxes, and crystals; sometimes, glass in various shapes is the only material used. A necklace discovered at Tharros in Sardinia, now housed in the Louvre, believed to be of Phoenician origin, consists of over forty beads, two cylinders, four pendants shaped like bull heads, and one that depicts a man's face, all made of glass. Another necklace, found by M. Renan in Phoenicia itself, includes glass beads that imitate pearls, mixed with beads of carnelian and agate.

Another class of glass ornaments consists of small flat plaques or plates, pierced with a number of fine holes, which appear to have been sewn upon garments. These are usually patterned, sometimes with spirals, sometimes with rosettes, occasionally, though rarely, with figures. Messrs. Perrot and Chipiez represent one in their great work upon ancient art,844 where almost the entire field is occupied by a winged griffin, standing upright on its two hind legs, and crowned with a striped cap, or turban.

Another type of glass ornament includes small flat plaques or plates, decorated with several fine holes, which seem to have been attached to clothing. These usually feature patterns, sometimes spirals, sometimes rosettes, and occasionally, though infrequently, figures. Messrs. Perrot and Chipiez showcase one in their significant work on ancient art, 844, where almost the entire surface is taken up by a winged griffin, standing upright on its two hind legs, and wearing a striped cap or turban.

Phoenician opaque glass is comparatively rare, and possesses but little beauty. It was rendered opaque in various ways. Messrs. Perrot and Chipiez found that in a statue of Serapis, which they analysed, the glass was mixed with bronze in the proportions of ten to three. An opaque material of a handsome red colour was thus produced, which was heavy and exceedingly hard.845

Phoenician opaque glass is relatively rare and lacks aesthetic appeal. It was made opaque using different methods. Perrot and Chipiez discovered that in a statue of Serapis they analyzed, the glass was mixed with bronze in a ratio of ten to three. This created an attractive opaque material in a striking red color that was heavy and extremely hard. 845

The methods pursued by the Phoenician glass-manufacturers were probably much the same as those which are still employed for the production of similar objects, and involved the use of similar implements, as the blowpipe, the lathe, and the graver. The materials having been procured, they were fused together in a crucible or melting-pot by the heat of a powerful furnace. A blowpipe was then introduced into the viscous mass, a portion of which readily attached itself to the implement, and so much glass was withdrawn as was deemed sufficient for the object which it was designed to manufacture. The blower then set to work, and blew hard into the pipe until the glass at its lower extremity began to expand and gradually took a pear-shaped form, the material partially coolling and hardening, but still retaining a good deal of softness and pliability. While in this condition, it was detached from the pipe, and modelled with pincers or with the hand into the shape required, after which it was polished, and perhaps sometimes cut by means of the turning-lathe. Sand and emery were the chief polishers, and by their help a surface was produced, with which little fault could be found, being smooth, uniform, and brilliant. Thus the vessel was formed, and if no further ornament was required, the manufacture was complete—a jug, vase, alabastron, amphora, was produced, either transparent or of a single uniform tint, which might be white, blue, brown, green, &c., according to the particular oxide which had been thrown, with the silica and alkali, into the crucible. Generally, however, the manufacturer was not content with so simple a product: he aimed not merely at utility, but at beauty, and proceeded to adorn the work of his hands—whatever it was—with patterns which were for the most part in good taste and highly pleasing. These patterns he first scratched on the outer surface of the vessel with a graving tool; then, when he had made his depressions deep enough, he took threads of coloured glass, and having filled up with the threads the depressions which he had made, he subjected the vessel once more to such a heat that the threads were fused, and attached themselves to the ground on which they had been laid. In melting they would generally more than fill the cavities, overflowing them, and protruding from them, whence it was for the most part necessary to repeat the polishing process, and to bring by means of abrasion the entire surface once more into uniformity. There are cases where this has been incompletely done and where the patterns project; there are others where the threads have never thoroughly melted into the ground, and where in the course of time they have partially detached themselves from it; but in general the fusion and subsequent polishing have been all that could be wished, and the patterns are perfectly level with the ground and seem one with it.846

The methods used by Phoenician glassmakers were likely similar to those still in use today for creating similar items. They involved tools like the blowpipe, lathe, and graver. Once the materials were gathered, they were melted together in a crucible or melting pot using the heat from a powerful furnace. A blowpipe was then inserted into the thick molten glass, allowing a portion to stick to it, and enough glass was drawn out for the intended item. The glassblower then worked to blow into the pipe until the glass at the end started to expand and gradually shaped into a pear-like form, with the material cooling and hardening but still remaining soft and malleable. While in this state, it was removed from the pipe and formed into the desired shape using pincers or by hand, after which it was polished, and sometimes cut using the lathe. Sand and emery were the main polishing agents, leaving a surface that was smooth, uniform, and shiny. Thus, the vessel was created; if no further decoration was needed, the process was complete—producing a jug, vase, alabastron, or amphora, either clear or in a single color like white, blue, brown, or green, depending on the specific oxide added with the silica and alkali in the crucible. However, most manufacturers aimed for more than just utility; they sought beauty, decorating their pieces with patterns that were generally tasteful and appealing. They first etched these designs onto the surface of the vessel with a graver, and once the etchings were deep enough, they filled the grooves with colored glass threads. The vessel was then reheated so the threads melted and became attached to the base. During melting, the threads would often overflow from the grooves, necessitating a repeat of the polishing process to smooth the entire surface again. In some cases, this was not thoroughly completed, leading to patterns that protrude, while in others, the threads may never have fully melted into the base and have partially separated over time. Overall, though, the fusion and polishing processes usually produced excellent results, with the patterns lying perfectly level with the surface and appearing as one with it.846

The running of liquid glass into moulds, so common nowadays, does not seem to have been practised by the Phoenicians, perhaps because their furnaces were not sufficiently hot to produce complete liquefaction. But—if this was so—the pressure of the viscous material into moulds cannot have been unknown, since we have evidence of the existence of moulds,847 and there are cases where several specimens of an object have evidently issued from a single matrix.848 Beads, cylinders, pendants, scarabs, amulets, were probably, all of them, made in this way, sometimes in translucent, sometimes in semi-opaque glass, as perhaps were also the plaques which have been already described.

The process of pouring liquid glass into molds, which is very common today, doesn't seem to have been used by the Phoenicians, possibly because their furnaces weren't hot enough to fully melt the material. However—if that’s the case—the method of pressing the thick material into molds likely wasn’t unheard of, since we have evidence of molds.847 There are instances where several items appear to have come from a single mold.848 Beads, cylinders, pendants, scarabs, and amulets were probably all made this way, sometimes using translucent glass and other times using semi-opaque glass, just like the plaques that have already been described.

The ceramic art of the Phoenicians is not very remarkable. Phoenicia Proper is deficient in clay of a superior character, and it was probably a very ordinary and coarse kind of pottery that the Phoenician merchants of early times exported regularly in their trading voyages, both inside and outside the Mediterranean. We hear of their carrying this cheap earthenware northwards to the Cassiterides or Scilly Islands,849 and southwards to the isle of Cerné, which is probably Arguin, on the West African coast;850 nor can we doubt that they supplied it also to the uncivilised races of the Mediterranean—the Illyrians, Ligurians, Sicels, Sards, Corsicans, Spaniards, Libyans. But the fragile nature of the material, and its slight value, have caused its entire disappearance in the course of centuries, unless in the shape of small fragments; nor are these fragments readily distinguishable from those whose origin is different. Phoenicia Proper has furnished no earthen vessels, either whole or in pieces, that can be assigned to a time earlier than the Greco-Roman period,851 nor have any such vessels been found hitherto on Phoenician sites either in Sardinia, or in Corsica, or in Spain, or Africa, or Sicily, or Malta, or Gozzo. The only places that have hitherto furnished earthen vases or other vessels presumably Phoenician are Jerusalem, Camirus in Rhodes, and Cyprus; and it is from the specimens found at these sites that we must form our estimate of the Phoenician pottery.

The ceramic art of the Phoenicians isn’t very impressive. Phoenicia itself lacks high-quality clay, and it was likely a pretty ordinary and rough type of pottery that Phoenician traders regularly exported during their trading journeys, both within and outside the Mediterranean. We know they transported this inexpensive earthenware north to the Cassiterides or Scilly Islands, and south to the island of Cerné, which is probably Arguin on the West African coast; we can also assume they supplied it to the uncivilized peoples of the Mediterranean—the Illyrians, Ligurians, Sicilians, Sardinians, Corsicans, Spaniards, and Libyans. However, because the material is fragile and of little value, it has entirely disappeared over the centuries, aside from some small fragments; and those fragments are not easily distinguishable from others of different origins. Phoenicia has not produced any earthen vessels, either intact or in pieces, that can be traced back to a time earlier than the Greco-Roman period, nor have any such vessels been found so far at Phoenician sites in Sardinia, Corsica, Spain, Africa, Sicily, Malta, or Gozzo. The only locations that have provided earthen vases or other vessels likely associated with the Phoenicians are Jerusalem, Camirus in Rhodes, and Cyprus; it is from the examples found at these sites that we must form our assessment of Phoenician pottery.

The earliest specimens are of a moderately good clay, unglazed. They are regular in shape, being made by the help of a wheel, and for the most part not inelegant, though they cannot be said to possess any remarkable beauty. Many are without ornament of any kind, being apparently mere jars, used for the storing away of oil or wine; they have sometimes painted or scratched upon them, in Phoenician characters, the name of the maker or owner. A few rise somewhat above the ordinary level, having handles of some elegance, and being painted with designs and patterns, generally of a geometrical character. A vase about six inches high, found at Jerusalem, has, between horizontal bands, a series of geometric patterns, squares, octagons, lozenges, triangles, pleasingly arranged, and painted in brown upon a ground which is of a dull grey. At the top are two rude handles, between which runs a line of zig-zag, while at the bottom is a sort of stand or base. The shape is heavy and inelegant.852

The earliest examples are made from decent clay and are unglazed. They have a regular shape, crafted with the help of a wheel, and are mostly not unattractive, though they aren't particularly beautiful. Many of them lack any decoration and seem to be just jars for storing oil or wine; some have the name of the maker or owner painted or scratched on them in Phoenician letters. A few stand out a bit more, featuring elegant handles and painted designs, usually of a geometric style. One vase, about six inches tall, discovered in Jerusalem, has a series of geometric patterns—squares, octagons, diamonds, triangles—nicely arranged in between horizontal bands, all painted in brown on a dull grey background. It has two crude handles at the top, with a zig-zag line running between them, and a sort of stand or base at the bottom. The shape is heavy and not very graceful. 852

Another vase of a similar character to this, but superior in many respects, was found by General Di Cesnola at Dali (Idalium), and is figured in his “Cyprus."853 This vase has the shape of an urn, and is ornamented with horizontal bands, except towards the middle, where it has its greatest diameter, and exhibits a series of geometric designs. In the centre is a lozenge, divided into four smaller lozenges by a St. Andrew’s cross; other compartments are triangular, and are filled with a chequer of black and white, resembling the squares of a chessboard. Beyond, on either side, are vertical bands, diversified with a lozenge ornament. Two hands succeed, of a shape that is thought to have “a certain elegance."854 There is a rim, which might receive a cover, at top, and at bottom a short pedestal. The height of the vase is about thirteen inches.

Another vase similar to this one, but better in many ways, was discovered by General Di Cesnola at Dali (Idalium), and is shown in his “Cyprus."853 This vase is shaped like an urn and is decorated with horizontal bands, except in the middle where it is widest, showcasing a series of geometric patterns. In the center is a diamond shape, which is divided into four smaller diamonds by a St. Andrew’s cross; other sections are triangular and filled with a black and white checkerboard pattern, resembling a chessboard. On either side are vertical bands, adorned with a diamond motif. Following that are two hands shaped in a way that is considered “certainly elegant."854 There is a rim at the top that could hold a cover, and at the bottom, there is a short pedestal. The vase stands about thirteen inches tall.

In many of the Cyprian vases having a geometric decoration, the figures are not painted on the surface but impressed or incised. Messrs. Perrot and Chipiez regard this form of ornamentation as the earliest; but the beauty and finish of several vases on which it occurs is against the supposition. There is scarcely to be found, even in the range of Greek art, a more elegant form than that of the jug in black clay brought by General Di Cesnola from Alambra and figured both in his “Cyprus"855 and in the “Histoire de l’Art."856 Yet its ornamentation is incised. If, then, incised patterning preceded painted in Phoenicia, at any rate it held its ground after painting was introduced, and continued in vogue even to the time when Greek taste had largely influenced Phoenician art of every description.

In many Cyprian vases with geometric designs, the figures aren't painted on the surface but instead impressed or carved. Messrs. Perrot and Chipiez consider this type of decoration to be the earliest; however, the beauty and detail of several vases featuring this technique contradict that assumption. There’s hardly a more elegant form, even within Greek art, than that of the black clay jug brought by General Di Cesnola from Alambra, which is illustrated in both his “Cyprus"855 and in the “Histoire de l’Art."856 Yet its decoration is incised. So, if incised patterns came before painted ones in Phoenicia, they certainly persisted after painting was introduced and remained popular even into the era when Greek tastes heavily influenced Phoenician art across the board.

The finest Phoenician efforts in ceramic art resemble either the best Egyptian or the best Greek. As the art advanced, the advantage of a rich glaze was appreciated, and specimens which seem to be Phoenician have all the delicacy and beauty of the best Egyptian faïence. A cup found at Idalium, plain on the outside, is covered internally with a green enamel, on which are patterns and designs in black.857 In a medallion at the bottom of the cup is the representation of a marshy tract overgrown with the papyrus plant, whereof we see both the leaves and blossoms, while among them, rushing at full speed, is the form of a wild boar. The rest of the ornamentation consists chiefly of concentric circles; but between two of the circles is left a tolerably broad ring, which has a pattern consisting of a series of broadish leaves pointing towards the cup’s centre. Nothing can be more delicate, or in better taste, than the entire design.

The best Phoenician ceramic art looks a lot like the finest Egyptian and Greek pieces. As the art evolved, they recognized the advantage of a rich glaze, and examples that seem Phoenician showcase all the delicacy and beauty of top-quality Egyptian faïence. A cup discovered at Idalium is plain on the outside but has a green enamel inside, adorned with black patterns and designs. In a medallion at the bottom of the cup, there’s an illustration of a marshy area filled with papyrus plants, showing both the leaves and flowers, while a wild boar dashes through. The rest of the decoration mainly features concentric circles, with a fairly broad ring between two of the circles that has a pattern of wide leaves pointing towards the center of the cup. The whole design is incredibly delicate and stylish.

The most splendid of all the Cyprian vases was found at Curium, and has been already represented in this volume. It is an amphora of large dimensions, ornamented in part with geometrical designs, in part with compartments, in which are represented horses and birds. The form, the designs, and the general physiognomy of the amphora are considered to be in close accordance with Athenian vases of the most antique school. The resemblance is so great that some have supposed the vase to have been an importation from Attica into Cyprus;858 but such conjectures are always hazardous; and the principal motives of the design are so frequent on the Cyprian vases, that the native origin of the vessel is at least possible, and the judgment of some of the best critics seems to incline in this direction.

The most impressive of all the Cyprian vases was discovered at Curium and has already been shown in this volume. It's a large amphora decorated partly with geometric patterns and partly with sections featuring images of horses and birds. The shape, designs, and overall appearance of the amphora closely resemble the oldest Athenian vases. The similarity is so striking that some people think the vase may have been imported from Attica to Cyprus; however, such assumptions are always risky. The main design elements are so common in Cyprian vases that it’s at least possible the vessel was made locally, and the opinion of some top critics seems to lean in this direction.

Still, on the whole, the Cyprian ceramic art is somewhat disappointing. What is original in it is either grotesque, as the vases in the shape of animals,859 or those crowned by human heads,860 or those again which have for spout a female figure pouring liquid out of a jug.861 What is superior has the appearance of having been borrowed. Egyptian, Assyrian, and Greek art, each in turn, furnished shapes, designs, and patterns to the Phoenician potters, who readily adopted from any and every quarter the forms and decorations which hit their fancy. Their fancy was, predominantly, for the bizarre and the extravagant. Vases in the shape of helmets, in the shape of barrels, in the shape of human heads,862 have little fitness, and in the Cyprian specimens have little beauty; the mixture of Assyrian with Egyptian forms is incongruous; the birds and beasts represented are drawn with studied quaintness, a quaintness recalling the art of China and Japan. If there is elegance in some of the forms, it is seldom a very pronounced elegance; and, where the taste is best, the suspicion continually arises that a foreign model has been imitated. Moreover, from first to last the art makes little progress. There seems to have been an arrest of development.863 The early steps are taken, but at a certain point stagnation sets in; there is no further attempt to improve or advance; the artists are content to repeat themselves, and reproduce the patterns of the past. Perhaps there was no demand for ceramic art of a higher order. At any rate, progress ceases, and while Greece was rising to her grandest efforts, Cyprus, and Phoenicia generally, were content to remain stationary.

Overall, Cyprian ceramic art is a bit underwhelming. What's original in it tends to be strange, like vases shaped like animals,859 or those topped with human heads,860 or the ones that have a female figure as the spout pouring liquid from a jug.861 The more impressive pieces often seem borrowed. Egyptian, Assyrian, and Greek art each contributed shapes, designs, and patterns that Phoenician potters eagerly adopted from various sources that caught their interest. Their interest typically leaned toward the bizarre and extravagant. Vases shaped like helmets, barrels, or human heads,862 are not very fitting and have little beauty in the Cyprian examples; the mix of Assyrian and Egyptian styles feels mismatched; the birds and animals depicted are drawn with an intentional oddity that reminds one of Chinese and Japanese art. While some designs show elegance, it's rarely pronounced; where the taste seems best, there's a constant feeling that a foreign model has been copied. Moreover, throughout its history, the art makes little progress. It seems to have stalled. The early development occurs, but after a certain point, stagnation kicks in; there are no further attempts to improve or advance; the artists are content to replicate themselves and reproduce past patterns. Maybe there wasn't a demand for higher quality ceramic art. In any case, progress halts, and while Greece was reaching its peak, Cyprus and Phoenicia stayed stagnant.

Besides their ornamental metallurgy, which has been treated of in a former chapter, the Phoenicians largely employed several metals, especially bronze and copper, in the fabrication of vessels for ordinary use, of implements, arms, toilet articles, furniture, &c. The vessels include pateræ, bowls, jugs, amphoræ, and cups;864 the implements, hatchets, adzes, knives, and sickles;865 the arms, spearheads, arrowheads, daggers, battle-axes, helmets, and shields;866 the toilet articles, mirrors, hand-bells, buckles, candlesticks, &c.;867 the furniture, tall candelabra, tripods, and thrones.868 The bronze is of an excellent quality, having generally about nine parts of copper to one of tin; and there is reason to believe that by the skilful tempering of the Phoenician metallurgists, it attained a hardness which was not often given it by others. The Cyprian shields were remarkable. They were of a round shape, slightly convex, and instead of the ordinary boss, had a long projecting cone in the centre. An actual shield, with the cone perfect, was found by General Di Cesnola at Amathus,869 and a projection of the same kind is seen in several of the Sardinian bronze and terra-cotta statuettes.870 Shields were sometimes elaborately embossed, in part with patterning, in part with animal and vegetable forms.871 Helmets were also embossed with care, and sometimes inscribed with the name of the maker or the owner.872

Besides their decorative metalwork, which was discussed in a previous chapter, the Phoenicians extensively used various metals, particularly bronze and copper, to create everyday items, tools, weapons, personal care items, and furniture, etc. The vessels included plates, bowls, jugs, amphorae, and cups;864 the tools consisted of hatchets, adzes, knives, and sickles;865 the weapons featured spearheads, arrowheads, daggers, battle-axes, helmets, and shields;866 the personal care items included mirrors, hand-bells, buckles, candlesticks, etc.;867 and the furniture comprised tall candelabras, tripods, and thrones.868 The bronze was of excellent quality, generally consisting of about nine parts copper to one part tin, and it is believed that through the skilled techniques of the Phoenician metalworkers, it reached a hardness that was not often achieved by others. The shields from Cyprus were notable. They were round, slightly curved, and instead of the usual boss, had a long cone protruding from the center. An actual shield, with the cone intact, was discovered by General Di Cesnola at Amathus,869 and similar projections can be seen on several Sardinian bronze and terracotta statuettes.870 Shields were sometimes intricately embossed, featuring patterns as well as animal and plant designs.871 Helmets were also carefully embossed and sometimes inscribed with the name of the maker or the owner.872

Some remains of swords, probably Phoenician, have been found in Sardinia. They vary from two feet seven inches to four feet two inches in length.873 The blade is commonly straight, and very thick in the centre, but tapers off on both sides to a sharp edge. The point is blunt, so that the intention cannot have been to use the weapon both for cutting and thrusting, but only for the former. It would scarcely make such a clean cut as a modern broadsword, but would no doubt be equally effectual for killing or disabling. Another weapon, found in Sardinia, and sometimes called a sword, is more properly a knife or dagger. In length it does not exceed seven or eight inches, and of this length more than a third is occupied by the handle.874 Below the handle the blade broadens for about an inch or an inch and a half; after this it contracts, and tapers gently to a sharp point. Such a weapon appears sometimes in the hand of a statuette.875

Some remnants of swords, likely Phoenician, have been discovered in Sardinia. They range in length from two feet seven inches to four feet two inches. The blade is typically straight and quite thick in the center, tapering off on both sides to a sharp edge. The tip is blunt, indicating that the weapon was probably not intended for cutting and thrusting, but rather just for cutting. It wouldn’t create as clean a cut as a modern broadsword, but would likely be just as effective for killing or incapacitating. Another weapon found in Sardinia, often referred to as a sword, is more accurately a knife or dagger. It does not exceed seven or eight inches in length, with more than a third taken up by the handle. Below the handle, the blade widens for about an inch or an inch and a half; after that, it narrows and gently tapers to a sharp point. This type of weapon sometimes appears in the hand of a statuette.

The bronze articles of the toilet recovered by recent researches in Cyprus and elsewhere are remarkable. The handle of a mirror found in Cyprus, and now in the Museum of New York, possesses considerable merit. It consists mainly of a female figure, naked, and standing upon a frog.876 In her hands she holds a pair of cymbals, which she is in the act of striking together. A ribbon, passed over her left shoulder, is carried through a ring, from which hangs a seal. On her arms and shoulders appear to have stood two lions, which formed side supports to the mirror that was attached to the figure’s head. If the face of the cymbal-player cannot boast of much beauty, and her figure is thought to “lack distinction,” still it is granted that the tout ensemble of the work was not without originality, and may have possessed a certain amount of elegance.877 The frog is particularly well modelled.

The bronze toilet items found in recent excavations in Cyprus and other locations are impressive. The handle of a mirror discovered in Cyprus, now housed in the Museum of New York, is quite notable. It features a female figure, naked, standing on a frog. In her hands, she holds a pair of cymbals, which she is in the process of striking together. A ribbon, draped over her left shoulder, goes through a ring, from which a seal hangs. Two lions seem to have been positioned on her arms and shoulders, serving as side supports for the mirror attached to her head. Although the face of the cymbal-player may not be particularly beautiful and her figure is said to "lack distinction," the overall composition of the work is recognized for its originality and a certain level of elegance. The frog is especially well crafted.

Some candlesticks found in the Treasury of Curium,878 and a tripod from the same place, seem to deserve a short notice. The candlesticks stand upon a sort of short pillar as a base, above which is the blossom of a flower inverted, a favourite Phoenician ornament.879 From this rises the lamp-stand, composed of three leaves, which curl outwards, and support between them a ring into which the bottom of the lamp fitted. The tripod880 is more elaborate. The legs, which are fluted, bulge considerably at the top, after which they bend inwards, and form a curve like one half of a Cupid’s bow. To retain them in place, they are joined together by a sort of cross-bar, about half-way in their length; while, to keep them steady, they are made to rest on large flat feet. The circular hoop which they support is of some width, and is ornamented along its entire course with a zig-zag. From the hoop depend, half-way in the spaces between the legs, three rings, from each of which there hangs a curious pendant.

Some candlesticks found in the Treasury of Curium, 878 and a tripod from the same place, seem to deserve a brief mention. The candlesticks rest on a short pillar as a base, topped with an inverted flower blossom, a popular Phoenician design. 879 From this rises the lamp stand, made of three leaves that curl outward, supporting a ring in which the bottom of the lamp fits. The tripod 880 is more intricate. Its fluted legs bulge significantly at the top, then bend inward, forming a curve reminiscent of half of a Cupid’s bow. To keep them stable, the legs are linked together by a cross-bar about halfway down their length, and they rest on large flat feet for added stability. The circular hoop they support is wide and features a zig-zag pattern along its entire edge. Hanging from the hoop, positioned halfway between the legs, are three rings, each with a unique pendant dangling from it.

Besides copper and bronze, the Phoenicians seem to have worked in lead and iron, but only to a small extent. Iron ore might have been obtained in some parts of their own country, but appears to have been principally derived from abroad, especially from Spain.881 It was worked up chiefly, so far as we know, into arms offensive and defensive. The sword of Alexander, which he received as a gift from the king of Citium,882 was doubtless in this metal, which is the material of a sword found at Amathus, and of numerous arrowheads.883 We are also told that Cyprus furnished the iron breast-plates worn by Demetrius Poliorcetes;884 and in pre-Homeric times it was a Phoenician—Cinyras—who gave to Agamemnon his breast-plate of steel, gold, and tin.885 That more remains of iron arms and implements have not been found on Phoenician sites is probably owing to the rapid oxydisation of the metal, which consequently decays and disappears. The Hiram who was sent to assist Solomon in building and furnishing the Temple of Jerusalem was, we must remember, “skilful to work,” not only “in gold, and silver, and bronze,” but also “in iron."886

Besides copper and bronze, the Phoenicians also worked with lead and iron, but only to a limited extent. They might have sourced some iron ore locally, but it mainly came from abroad, particularly Spain. It was primarily used, as far as we know, for weapons—both offensive and defensive. The sword of Alexander, which he received as a gift from the king of Citium, was likely made of this metal, which is similar to a sword found at Amathus and various arrowheads. We also know that Cyprus supplied the iron breastplates worn by Demetrius Poliorcetes; and in pre-Homeric times, it was a Phoenician named Cinyras who gave Agamemnon his breastplate made of steel, gold, and tin. The reason more iron weapons and tools haven’t been found at Phoenician sites is probably due to the rapid oxidation of the metal, which leads it to decay and vanish. The Hiram who was sent to help Solomon build and furnish the Temple of Jerusalem was, we should remember, “skillful to work,” not only “in gold, and silver, and bronze,” but also “in iron."

Lead was largely furnished to the Phoenicians by the Scilly Islands,887 and by Spain.888 It has not been found in any great quantity on Phoenician sites, but still appears occasionally. Sometimes it is a solder uniting stone with bronze;889 sometimes it exists in thin sheets, which may have been worn as ornaments.890 In Phoenicia Proper it has been chiefly met with in the shape of coffins,891 which are apparently of a somewhat late date. They are formed of several sheets placed one over the other and then soldered together. There is generally on the lid and sides of the coffin an external ornamentation in a low relief, wherein the myth of Psyché is said commonly to play a part; but the execution is mediocre, and the designs themselves have little merit.

Lead was mostly supplied to the Phoenicians by the Scilly Islands,887 and by Spain.888 It hasn’t been found in large amounts at Phoenician sites, but it does show up occasionally. Sometimes it’s used as solder to connect stone and bronze;889 other times it appears in thin sheets, which might have been worn as jewelry.890 In Phoenicia Proper, it has mainly been found in the form of coffins,891 which seem to be of a somewhat later date. They are made from several sheets stacked on top of each other and then soldered together. Typically, there is some decorative detail on the lid and sides of the coffin in low relief, where the myth of Psyché is often depicted; however, the craftsmanship is mediocre, and the designs themselves lack much value.





CHAPTER IX—SHIPS, NAVIGATION, AND COMMERCE

     Earliest navigation by means of rafts and canoes—Model of a
     very primitive boat—Phoenician vessel of the time of
     Sargon—Phoenician biremes in the time of Sennacherib—
     Phoenician pleasure vessels and merchant ships—Superiority
     of the Phoenician war-galleys—Excellence of the
     arrangements—Patæci—Early navigation cautious—Increasing
     boldness—Furthest ventures—Extent of the Phoenician land
     commerce—Witness of Ezekiel—Wares imported—Caravans—
     Description of the land trade—Sea trade of Phoenicia—1.
     With her own colonies—2. With foreigners—Mediterranean and
     Black Sea trade—North Atlantic trade—Trade with the West
     Coast of Africa and the Canaries—Trade in the Red Sea and
     Indian Ocean.
     Earliest navigation using rafts and canoes—Model of a very basic boat—Phoenician ship from the time of Sargon—Phoenician biremes during Sennacherib's era—Phoenician pleasure boats and merchant ships—Advantages of the Phoenician war galleys—Quality of the setups—Patæci—Early navigation was careful—Gradual increase in daring—Farthest ventures—Scale of Phoenician land trade—Ezekiel as a witness—Imported goods—Caravans—Overview of land trade—Sea trade of Phoenicia—1. With its own colonies—2. With foreign nations—Trade in the Mediterranean and the Black Sea—North Atlantic trade—Trade with the West Coast of Africa and the Canaries—Trade in the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean.

The first attempts of the Phoenicians to navigate the sea which washed their coast were probably as clumsy and rude as those of other primitive nations. They are said to have voyaged from island to island, in their original abodes within the Persian Gulf, by means of rafts.91 When they reached the shores of the Mediterranean, it can scarcely have been long ere they constructed boats for fishing and coasting purposes, though no doubt such boats were of a very rude construction. Probably, like other races, they began with canoes, roughly hewn out of the trunk of a tree. The torrents which descended from Lebanon would from time to time bring down the stems of fallen trees in their flood-time; and these, floating on the Mediterranean waters, would suggest the idea of navigation. They would, at first, be hollowed out with hatchets and adzes, or else with fire; and, later on, the canoes thus produced would form the models for the earliest efforts in shipbuilding. The great length, however, would soon be found unnecessary, and the canoe would give place to the boat, in the ordinary acceptation of the term. There are models of boats among the Phoenician remains which have a very archaic character,92 and may give us some idea of the vessels in which the Phoenicians of the remoter times braved the perils of the deep. They have a keel, not ill shaped, a rounded hull, bulwarks, a beak, and a high seat for the steersman. The oars, apparently, must have been passed through interstices in the bulwark.

The Phoenicians' first attempts to sail the sea along their coast were likely as awkward and rough as those of other early civilizations. They reportedly traveled from island to island in their home region of the Persian Gulf using rafts.91 When they reached the shores of the Mediterranean, it couldn't have been long before they built boats for fishing and coastal travel, although these boats were probably very primitive. Like many other cultures, they likely started with canoes, roughly carved from tree trunks. The floods from Lebanon would occasionally wash downstream fallen tree trunks, which, floating in the Mediterranean, might have inspired the idea of navigation. Initially, these canoes would have been hollowed out using hatchets and adzes or even fire, and later on, these canoes would serve as models for their early shipbuilding efforts. However, they soon realized that long canoes were unnecessary and switched to boats in the more typical sense of the term. Among the Phoenician artifacts, there are models of boats that have a very ancient look,92 which may provide some insight into the vessels the Phoenicians used in earlier times to face the dangers of the sea. They have a well-shaped keel, a rounded hull, bulwarks, a beak, and a high seat for the helmsman. The oars were likely inserted through gaps in the bulwark.

From this rude shape the transition was not very difficult to the bark represented in the sculptures of Sargon,93 which is probably a Phoenician one. Here four rowers, standing to their oars, impel a vessel having for prow the head of a horse and for stern the tail of a fish, both of them rising high above the water. The oars are curved, like golf or hockey-sticks, and are worked from the gunwale of the bark, though there is no indication of rowlocks. The vessel is without a rudder; but it has a mast, supported by two ropes which are fastened to the head and stern. The mast has neither sail nor yard attached to it, but is crowned by what is called a “crow’s nest”—a bell-shaped receptacle, from which a slinger or archer might discharge missiles against an enemy.94

From this rough shape, transitioning to the boat depicted in the sculptures of Sargon was not very difficult, which is probably a Phoenician vessel. Here, four rowers stand at their oars, propelling a boat with the head of a horse at the front and the tail of a fish at the back, both rising high above the water. The oars are curved, similar to golf or hockey sticks, and are operated from the edge of the boat, although there are no signs of oarlocks. The boat doesn’t have a rudder, but it does have a mast supported by two ropes that are fastened to the front and back. The mast has no sail or yard attached to it, but it is topped with what’s known as a “crow’s nest”—a bell-shaped container from which a slinger or archer could launch projectiles at an enemy.

A vessel of considerably greater size than this, but of the same class—impelled, that is, by one bank of oars only—is indicated by certain coins, which have been regarded by some critics as Phoenician, by others as belonging to Cilicia.95 These have a low bow, but an elevated stern; the prow exhibits a beak, while the stern shows signs of a steering apparatus; the number of the oars on each side is fifteen or twenty. The Greeks called these vessels triaconters or penteconters. They are represented without any mast on the coins, and thus seem to have been merely row-boats of a superior character.

A ship much larger than this one, but of the same type—powered solely by a single row of oars—is suggested by certain coins, which some critics believe are Phoenician, while others attribute them to Cilicia. 95 These ships have a low bow but a raised stern; the front features a beak, and the back shows evidence of a steering mechanism. There are fifteen or twenty oars on each side. The Greeks referred to these ships as triaconters or penteconters. They are depicted without any mast on the coins, indicating that they were likely just advanced rowboats.

About the time of Sennacherib (B.C. 700), or a little earlier, some great advances seem to have been made by the Phoenician shipbuilders. In the first place, they introduced the practice of placing the rowers on two different levels, one above the other; and thus, for a vessel of the same length, doubling the number of the rowers. Ships of this kind, which the Greeks called “biremes,” are represented in Sennacherib’s sculptures as employed by the inhabitants of a Phoenician city, who fly in them at the moment when their town is captured, and so escape their enemy.96 The ships are of two kinds. Both kinds have a double tier of rowers, and both are guided by two steering oars thrust out from the stern; but while the one is still without mast or sail, and is rounded off in exactly the same way both at stem and stern, the other has a mast, placed about midship, a yard hung across it, and a sail close reefed to the yard, while the bow is armed with a long projecting beak, like a ploughshare, which must have been capable of doing terrible damage to a hostile vessel. The rowers, in both classes of ships, are represented as only eight or ten upon a side; but this may have arisen from artistic necessity, since a greater number of figures could not have been introduced without confusion. It is thought that in the beaked vessel we have a representation of the Phoenician war-galley; in the vessel without a beak, one of the Phoenician transport.97

Around the time of Sennacherib (B.C. 700), or slightly earlier, Phoenician shipbuilders seem to have made significant advancements. First, they started placing rowers on two different levels, one above the other, which doubled the number of rowers for a ship of the same length. Ships like these, called “biremes” by the Greeks, are depicted in Sennacherib’s sculptures as being used by the people of a Phoenician city, who escape in them just as their town is being captured. The ships fall into two categories. Both types feature a double tier of rowers and are steered by two oars extending from the back; however, one type lacks a mast or sail and is designed symmetrically at both the front and back, while the other has a mast placed around the middle, with a yard across it and a tightly furled sail. The bow of this ship is equipped with a long protruding beak, resembling a ploughshare, which could cause significant damage to an enemy vessel. In both types of ships, the rowers are shown as only eight or ten on each side; this might be due to artistic reasons, as adding more figures could lead to confusion. It’s believed that the beaked vessel represents the Phoenician war galley, while the unarmed vessel represents the Phoenician transport.

A painting on a vase found in Cyprus exhibits what would seem to have been a pleasure-vessel.98 It is unbeaked, and without any sign of oars, except two paddles for steering with. About midship is a short mast, crossed by a long spar or yard, which carries a sail, closely reefed along its entire length. The yard and sail are managed by means of four ropes, which are, however, somewhat conventionally depicted. Both the head and stern of the vessel rise to a considerable height above the water, and the stern is curved, very much as in the war-galleys. It perhaps terminated in the head of a bird.

A painting on a vase discovered in Cyprus shows what appears to be a pleasure boat. It has no beak and no visible oars, just two paddles for steering. In the middle of the boat, there's a short mast crossed by a long spar, which holds a sail tightly reefed along its entire length. The spar and sail are controlled by four ropes, although they are portrayed a bit simplistically. Both the front and back of the boat rise significantly above the water, and the back is curved, similar to war galleys. It may have ended in the shape of a bird's head.

According to the Greek writers, Phoenician vessels were mainly of two kinds, merchant ships and war-vessels.99 The merchant ships were of a broad, round make, what our sailors would call “tubs,” resembling probably the Dutch fishing-boats of a century ago. They were impelled both by oars and sails, but depended mainly on the latter. Each of them had a single mast of moderate height, to which a single sail was attached;910 this was what in modern times is called a “square sail,” a form which is only well suited for sailing with when the wind is directly astern. It was apparently attached to the yard, and had to be hoisted together with the yard, along which it could be closely reefed, or from which it could be loosely shaken out. It was managed, no doubt, by ropes attached to the two lower corners, which must have been held in the hands of sailors, as it would have been most dangerous to belay them. As long as the wind served, the merchant captain used his sail; when it died away, or became adverse, he dropped yard and sail on to his deck, and made use of his oars.

According to Greek writers, Phoenician ships mainly came in two types: merchant ships and warships.99 The merchant ships were broad and round, what sailors today might call “tubs,” likely resembling Dutch fishing boats from a century ago. They were powered by both oars and sails, but mainly relied on the latter. Each ship had a single mast of moderate height with a single sail attached;910 this was what we now refer to as a “square sail,” which is only suitable for sailing when the wind is right behind. It was probably attached to the yard and had to be raised along with the yard, allowing it to be closely reefed or loosened. It was likely controlled by ropes attached to the two lower corners, which sailors would have held, as it was too dangerous to secure them. As long as the wind was favorable, the merchant captain used the sail; when it faded or turned against him, he would lower the yard and sail onto the deck and switch to using his oars.

Merchant ships had, commonly, small boats attached to them, which afforded a chance of safety if the ship foundered, and were useful when cargoes had to be landed on a shelving shore.911 We have no means of knowing whether these boats were hoisted up on deck until they were wanted, or attached to the ships by ropes and towed after them; but the latter arrangement is the more probable.

Merchant ships usually had small boats attached to them, providing a chance of safety if the ship sank and were helpful when cargo needed to be unloaded on a sloping shore.911 We don't know for sure whether these boats were pulled up onto the deck until needed, or tied to the ships by ropes and towed along; however, the latter setup seems more likely.

The war-galleys of the Phoenicians in the early times were probably of the class which the Greeks called triaconters or penteconters, and which are represented upon the coins. They were long open rowboats, in which the rowers sat, all of them, upon a level, the number of rowers on either side being generally either fifteen or twenty-five. Each galley was armed at its head with a sharp metal spike, or beak, which was its chief weapon of offence, vessels of this class seeking commonly to run down their enemy. After a time these vessels were superseded by biremes, which were decked, had masts and sails, and were impelled by rowers sitting at two different elevations, as already explained. Biremes were ere long superseded by triremes, or vessels with three banks of oars, which are said to have been invented at Corinth,912 but which came into use among the Phoenicians before the end of the sixth century B.C.913 In the third century B.C. the Carthaginians employed in war quadriremes, and even quinqueremes; but there is no evidence of the employment of either class of vessel by the Phoenicians of Phoenicia Proper.

The war galleys of the Phoenicians in ancient times were likely what the Greeks referred to as triaconters or penteconters, which are depicted on their coins. They were long, open rowboats where all the rowers sat at the same level, usually having either fifteen or twenty-five rowers on each side. Each galley was equipped at its front with a sharp metal spike, or beak, which served as its primary weapon, often aiming to ram into enemy vessels. Over time, these boats were replaced by biremes, which were decked, had masts and sails, and were powered by rowers positioned at two different heights, as previously mentioned. Biremes were soon succeeded by triremes, or ships with three rows of oars, believed to have been invented in Corinth, but which came into use among the Phoenicians before the end of the sixth century B.C. By the third century B.C., the Carthaginians used quadriremes and even quinqueremes in warfare; however, there is no evidence that these types of vessels were used by the Phoenicians of Phoenicia Proper.

The superiority of the Phoenician ships to others is generally allowed, and was clearly shown when Xerxes collected his fleet of twelve hundred and seven triremes against Greece. The fleet included contingents from Phoenicia, Cyprus, Egypt, Cilicia, Pamphylia, Lycia, Caria, Ionia, Æolis, and the Greek settlements about the Propontis.914 When it reached the Hellespont, the great king, anxious to test the quality of his ships and sailors, made proclamation for a grand sailing match, in which all who liked might contend. Each contingent probably—at any rate, all that prided themselves on their nautical skill—selected its best vessel, and entered it for the coming race; the king himself, and his grandees and officers, and all the army, stood or sat along the shore to see: the race took place, and was won by the Phoenicians of Sidon.915 Having thus tested the nautical skill of the various nations under his sway, the great king, when he ventured his person upon the dangerous element, was careful to embark in a Sidonian galley.916

The superiority of Phoenician ships over others is widely recognized, especially demonstrated when Xerxes assembled his fleet of twelve hundred and seven triremes against Greece. The fleet included groups from Phoenicia, Cyprus, Egypt, Cilicia, Pamphylia, Lycia, Caria, Ionia, Æolis, and the Greek settlements around the Propontis.914 When it reached the Hellespont, the great king, eager to test the quality of his ships and sailors, announced a grand sailing competition for anyone who wanted to join. Each group, or at least those proud of their seafaring skills, probably selected their best vessel to enter the race; the king, along with his nobles, officers, and the entire army, gathered along the shore to watch. The race took place and was won by the Phoenicians from Sidon.915 After testing the nautical skills of the various nations under his control, the great king, when he decided to venture onto the risky waters, made sure to board a Sidonian galley.916

A remarkable testimony to the excellence of the Phoenician ships with respect to internal arrangements is borne by Xenophon, who puts the following words into the mouth of Ischomachus, a Greek:917 “I think that the best and most perfect arrangement of things that I ever saw was when I went to look at the great Phoenician sailing-vessel; for I saw the largest amount of naval tackling separately disposed in the smallest stowage possible. For a ship, as you well know, is brought to anchor, and again got under way, by a vast number of wooden implements and of ropes and sails the sea by means of a quantity of rigging, and is armed with a number of contrivances against hostile vessels, and carries about with it a large supply of weapons for the crew, and, besides, has all the utensils that a man keeps in his dwelling-house, for each of the messes. In addition, it is laden with a quantity of merchandise which the owner carries with him for his own profit. Now all the things which I have mentioned lay in a space not much bigger than a room which would conveniently hold ten beds. And I remarked that they severally lay in a way that they did not obstruct one another, and did not require anyone to search for them; and yet they were neither placed at random, nor entangled one with another, so as to consume time when they were suddenly wanted for use. Also, I found the captain’s assistant, who is called ‘the look-out man,’ so well acquainted with the position of all the articles, and with the number of them, that even when at a distance he could tell where everything lay, and how many there were of each sort, just as anyone who has learnt to read can tell the number of letters in the name of Socrates and the proper place for each of them. Moreover, I saw this man, in his leisure moments, examining and testing everything that a vessel needs when at sea; so, as I was surprised, I asked him what he was about, whereupon he replied—‘Stranger, I am looking to see, in case anything should happen, how everything is arranged in the ship, and whether anything is wanting, or is inconveniently situated; for when a storm arises at sea, it is not possible either to look for what is wanting, or to put to right what is arranged awkwardly.’”

A remarkable example of the quality of Phoenician ships in terms of internal organization comes from Xenophon, who has Ischomachus, a Greek, say: 917 “I believe the best and most organized setup I’ve ever seen was when I checked out a large Phoenician sailing vessel; I noticed that a significant amount of naval equipment was neatly packed into a very small space. A ship, as you know, is anchored and set sailing with many wooden tools, ropes, and sails, thanks to various rigging, is equipped with several devices to defend against enemy ships, and carries many weapons for the crew, as well as all the items one keeps in a home for each crew member. Additionally, it's loaded with merchandise that the owner brings for profit. All the items I mentioned were stored in an area no bigger than a room that could comfortably fit ten beds. I observed that they were organized in a way that didn’t block each other and didn’t require anyone to search for them; yet they were neither scattered randomly nor tangled together, which would waste time when they were suddenly needed. I also found the captain’s assistant, known as ‘the lookout man,’ so familiar with the placement and number of all the items that he could identify where everything was and how many of each item there were, even from a distance, just as someone who knows how to read can count the letters in the name Socrates and know their correct places. Furthermore, I saw this man, in his spare time, inspecting and testing everything the ship needs when at sea; so, surprised, I asked him what he was doing, and he replied, ‘Stranger, I’m making sure that, if anything happens, everything on the ship is properly arranged and checking if anything is missing or poorly positioned; when a storm hits at sea, it’s impossible to search for what’s missing or fix anything that’s awkwardly placed.’”

Phoenician ships seem to have been placed under the protection of the Cabeiri, and to have had images of them at their stem or stern or both.918 These images were not exactly “figure-heads,” as they are sometimes called. They were small, apparently, and inconspicuous, being little dwarf figures, regarded as amulets that would preserve the vessel in safety. We do not see them on any representations of Phoenician ships, and it is possible that they may have been no larger than the bronze or glazed earthenware images of Phthah that are so common in Egypt. The Phoenicians called them pittuchim, “sculptures,"919 whence the Greek {pataikoi} and the French fétiche.

Phoenician ships seemed to have been protected by the Cabeiri, featuring their images at the front or back, or both. These images weren’t exactly “figure-heads” as they are sometimes referred to. They were small and not very noticeable, resembling little dwarf figures seen as charms to keep the ship safe. We don’t find them in any depictions of Phoenician ships, and they may have been no bigger than the bronze or glazed earthenware figures of Phthah that are quite common in Egypt. The Phoenicians called them pittuchim, meaning “sculptures,”919 which led to the Greek {pataikoi} and the French fétiche.

The navigation of the Phoenicians, in early times, was no doubt cautious and timid. So far from venturing out of sight of land, they usually hugged the coast, ready at any moment, if the sea or sky threatened, to change their course and steer directly for the shore. On a shelving coast they were not at all afraid to run their ships aground, since, like the Greek vessels, they could be easily pulled up out of reach of the waves, and again pulled down and launched, when the storm was over and the sea calm once more. At first they sailed, we may be sure, only in the daytime, casting anchor at nightfall, or else dragging their ships up upon the beach, and so awaiting the dawn. But after a time they grew more bold. The sea became familiar to them, the positions of coasts and islands relatively one to another better known, the character of the seasons, the signs of unsettled or settled weather, the conduct to pursue in an emergency, better apprehended. They soon began to shape the course of their vessels from headland to headland, instead of always creeping along the shore, and it was not perhaps very long before they would venture out of sight of land, if their knowledge of the weather satisfied them that the wind might be trusted to continue steady, and if they were well assured of the direction of the land that they wished to make. They took courage, moreover, to sail in the night, no less than in the daytime, when the weather was clear, guiding themselves by the stars, and particularly by the Polar star,920 which they discovered to be the star most nearly marking the true north. A passage of Strabo921 seems to show that—in the later times at any rate—they had a method of calculating the rate of a ship’s sailing, though what the method was is wholly unknown to us. It is probable that they early constructed charts and maps, which however they would keep secret through jealousy of their commercial rivals.

The navigation of the Phoenicians in ancient times was definitely cautious and hesitant. Instead of venturing far from shore, they typically stayed close to the coast, ready to change their course and head straight for land at any sign of trouble from the sea or sky. On a gradual coastline, they weren't afraid to run their ships aground since, like Greek vessels, they could easily pull them up and out of the waves and then launch them again when the storm passed and the sea calmed down. In the beginning, they likely sailed only during the day, anchoring at night or dragging their ships up on the beach to wait for dawn. But over time, they became more daring. The sea became familiar to them, they better understood the positions of coasts and islands in relation to each other, the nature of the seasons, the signs of good or bad weather, and the actions to take in an emergency. They soon started to chart a course from headland to headland instead of always creeping along the shore, and it probably didn’t take long before they were willing to venture out of sight of land, as long as they felt confident about the weather conditions and knew the direction of the land they aimed for. They also grew bold enough to sail at night, just as they did during the day, when the weather was clear, navigating by the stars, especially the North Star, 920, which they noticed was the star closest to true north. A passage by Strabo 921 seems to indicate that, at least in later times, they had a method for calculating the speed of a ship, although the specifics of that method are completely unknown to us. It's likely that they created charts and maps early on, which they kept secret out of jealousy for their commercial competitors.

The Phoenicians for some centuries confined their navigation within the limits of the Mediterranean, the Propontis, and the Euxine, land-locked seas, which are tideless and far less rough than the open ocean. But before the time of Solomon they had passed the Pillars of Hercules, and affronted the dangers of the Atlantic.922 Their frail and small vessels, scarcely bigger than modern fishing-smacks, proceeded southwards along the West African coast, as far as the tract watered by the Gambia and Senegal, while northwards they coasted along Spain, braved the heavy seas of the Bay of Biscay, and passing Cape Finisterre, ventured across the mouth of the English Channel to the Cassiterides. Similarly, from the West African shore, they boldly steered for the Fortunate Islands (the Canaries), visible from certain elevated points of the coast, though at 170 miles distance. Whether they proceeded further, in the south to the Azores, Madeira, and the Cape de Verde Islands, in the north to the coast of Holland, and across the German Ocean to the Baltic, we regard as uncertain. It is possible that from time to time some of the more adventurous of their traders may have reached thus far; but their regular, settled, and established navigation did not, we believe, extend beyond the Scilly Islands and coast of Cornwall to the north-west, and to the south-west Cape Non and the Canaries.

The Phoenicians spent centuries navigating only within the Mediterranean, the Propontis, and the Euxine, which are calm, enclosed seas much less turbulent than the open ocean. However, before Solomon's time, they had already sailed past the Pillars of Hercules and confronted the risks of the Atlantic. Their fragile, small ships, not much larger than modern fishing boats, headed south along the West African coast, all the way to the regions around the Gambia and Senegal. To the north, they traveled along the Spanish coastline, braving the rough waters of the Bay of Biscay, and after rounding Cape Finisterre, they crossed over to the mouth of the English Channel, heading towards the Cassiterides. From the West African coast, they also boldly set sail for the Fortunate Islands (the Canaries), which could be seen from some high points along the coast, even though they were 170 miles away. It’s unclear whether they ventured further south to the Azores, Madeira, and the Cape Verde Islands, or north to the coast of Holland and across the North Sea to the Baltic. It's possible that some of their more daring traders made it that far occasionally, but we believe their regular, established trade routes did not go beyond the Scilly Islands and the Cornwall coast to the northwest, and to the southwest as far as Cape Non and the Canaries.

The commerce of the Phoenicians was carried on, to a large extent, by land, though principally by sea. It appears from the famous chapter of Ezekiel923 which describes the riches and greatness of Tyre in the sixth century B.C., that almost the whole of Western Asia was penetrated by the Phoenician caravans, and laid under contribution to increase the wealth of the Phoenician traders.

The Phoenicians mainly conducted their trade over land, but primarily by sea. According to the well-known chapter of Ezekiel923, which details the wealth and power of Tyre in the sixth century B.C., nearly all of Western Asia was reached by Phoenician caravans, contributing to the prosperity of Phoenician traders.

     “Thou, son of man, (we read) take up a lamentation for Tyre,
          and say
     unto her,
     O thou that dwellest at the entry of the sea,
     Which art the merchant of the peoples unto many isles,
     Thus saith the Lord God, Thou, O Tyre, hast said, I am perfect in
     beauty.
     Thy borders are in the heart of the sea;
     Thy builders have perfected thy beauty.
     They have made all thy planks of fir-trees from Senir;
     They have taken cedars from Lebanon to make a mast for thee
     Of the oaks of Bashan have they made thine oars;
     They have made thy benches of ivory,
     Inlaid in box-wood, from the isles of Kittim.
     Of fine linen with broidered work from Egypt was thy sail,
     That it might be to thee for an ensign;
     Blue and purple from the isles of Elishah was thy awning.
     The inhabitants of Zidon and of Arvad were thy rowers;
     Thy wise men, O Tyre, were in thee—they were thy pilots.
     The ancients of Gebal, and their wise men, were thy calkers;
     All the ships of the sea, with their mariners, were in thee,
     That they might occupy thy merchandise.
     Persia, and Lud, and Phut were in thine army, thy men of war;
     They hanged the shield and helmet in thee;
     They set forth thy comeliness.
     The men of Arvad, with thine army, were upon thy walls round about;
     And the Gammadim were in thy towers;
     They hanged their shields upon thy walls round about;
     They have brought to perfection thy beauty.
     Tarshish was thy merchant by reason of the multitude of all
          kinds of
     riches;
     With silver, iron, tin, and lead, they traded for thy wares.
     Javan, Tubal, and Meshech, they were thy traffickers;
     They traded the persons of men, and vessels of brass, for thy
     merchandise.
     They of the house of Togarmah traded for thy wares,
     With horses, and with chargers, and with mules.
     The men of Dedan were thy traffickers; many isles were the mart of
     thy hands;
     They brought thee in exchange horns of ivory, and ebony.
     Syria was thy merchant by reason of the multitude of thy
          handiworks;
     They traded for thy wares with emeralds, purple, and broidered
          work,
     And with fine linen, and coral, and rubies.
     Judah, and the land of Israel, they were thy traffickers;
     They traded for thy merchandise wheat of Minnith,
     And Pannag, and honey, and oil, and balm.
     Damascus was thy merchant for the multitude of thy handiworks;
     By reason of the multitude of all kinds of riches;
     With the wine of Helbon, and white wool.
     Dedan and Javan traded with yarn for thy wares;
     Bright iron, and cassia, and calamus were among thy merchandise.
     Dedan was thy trafficker in precious cloths for riding;
     Arabia, and all the princes of Kedar, they were the merchants
          of thy
     hand,
     In lambs, and rams, and goats, in these were they thy merchants.
     The traffickers of Sheba and Raamah, they were thy traffickers;
     They traded for thy wares with chief of all spices,
     And with all manner of precious stones, and gold.
     Haran, and Canneh, and Eden, the traffickers of Sheba,
     Asshur and Chilmad, were thy traffickers:
     They were thy traffickers in choice wares,
     In wrappings of blue and broidered work, and in chests of rich
     apparel,
     Bound with cords, and made of cedar, among thy merchandise.
     The ships of Tarshish were thy caravans for they merchandise;
     And thou wast replenished, and made very glorious, in the heart of
     the sea.
     Thy rowers have brought thee into great waters;
     The east wind hath broken thee in the heart of the sea.
     Thy reaches, and thy wares, thy merchandise, thy mariners, and thy
     pilots,
     Thy calkers, and the occupiers of thy merchandise,
     With all the men of war, that are in thee,
     Shall fall into the heart of the seas in the day of thy ruin.
     At the sound of thy pilot’s cry the suburb’s shall shake;
     And all that handle the oar, the mariners, and all the pilots
          of the
     sea,
     They shall come down from their ships, they shall stand upon the
     land,
     And shall cause their voice to be heard over thee, and shall cry
     bitterly,
     And shall cast up dust upon their heads, and wallow in the ashes;
     And they shall make themselves bald for thee, and gird them with
     sackcloth,
     And they shall weep for thee in bitterness of soul with bitter
     mourning.
     And in their wailing they shall take up a lamentation for thee,
     And lament over thee saying, Who is there like Tyre,
     Like her that is brought to silence in the midst of the sea?
     When thy wares went forth out of the seas, thou filledst many
     peoples;
     Thou didst enrich the kings of the earth with thy merchandise and
     thy riches.
     In the time that thou was broken by the seas in the depths of the
     waters,
     Thy merchandise, and all thy company, did fall in the midst of
          thee,
     And the inhabitants of the isles are astonished at thee,
     And their kings are sore afraid, they are troubled in their
     countenance,
     The merchants that are among the peoples, hiss at thee;
     Thou art become a terror; and thou shalt never be any more.”
 
“Son of man, take up a lament for Tyre and say to her: O you who dwell at the entrance of the sea, you are the merchant for many peoples on numerous islands. This is what the Lord God says: You, O Tyre, have declared, 'I am perfect in beauty.' Your borders are in the heart of the sea; your builders have perfected your beauty. They made all your planks from fir trees from Senir; they took cedars from Lebanon to create a mast for you. They made your oars from the oaks of Bashan; your benches are made of ivory, inlaid with boxwood from the islands of Kittim. Your sail was made of fine linen, embroidered work from Egypt for your banner; blue and purple from the islands of Elishah made your awning. The inhabitants of Zidon and Arvad were your rowers; your wise men, O Tyre, were in you—they were your pilots. The elders of Gebal and their wise men were your caulkers; all the ships of the sea, with their crews, were in you to trade your goods. Persia, Lud, and Phut were in your army—your men of war; they hung shields and helmets in you; they showcased your splendor. The men of Arvad, with your army, were on your walls all around; the Gammadim were in your towers; they hung their shields on your walls all around; they perfected your beauty. Tarshish was your merchant because of the abundance of all kinds of riches; with silver, iron, tin, and lead, they traded for your goods. Javan, Tubal, and Meshech were your traders; they traded people and bronze vessels for your merchandise. The house of Togarmah traded for your goods, with horses, chargers, and mules. The men of Dedan were your traders; many islands were your marketplace; they brought you in exchange horns of ivory and ebony. Syria was your merchant because of the multitude of your handiworks; they traded for your goods with emeralds, purple, and embroidered work, along with fine linen, coral, and rubies. Judah and the land of Israel were your traders; they exchanged for your merchandise wheat from Minnith, Pannag, honey, oil, and balm. Damascus was your merchant for the abundance of your handiworks; they traded with the wine of Helbon and white wool. Dedan and Javan traded yarn for your goods; bright iron, cassia, and calamus were among your merchandise. Dedan traded in fine cloth for riding; Arabia and all the princes of Kedar were your traders in lambs, rams, and goats. The traders from Sheba and Raamah were your traders; they exchanged for your goods the best of all spices and a variety of precious stones and gold. Haran, Canneh, and Eden, the traders from Sheba, Asshur and Chilmad, were your traders; they traded in choice goods, blue and embroidered wrappings, and chests of rich apparel, bound with cords and made of cedar, among your merchandise. The ships of Tarshish were your caravans for your trade; you were replenished and made very glorious in the heart of the sea. Your rowers brought you into deep waters; the east wind broke you in the heart of the sea. Your reach, your goods, your merchandise, your sailors, and your pilots, your caulkers, and those who engage in your trade, along with all the men of war that are in you, will fall into the heart of the seas on the day of your disaster. At the sound of your pilot’s cry, the suburbs will shake; all who handle the oar, the sailors, and all the pilots of the sea will come down from their ships, stand on the land, and raise their voices over you, crying bitterly. They will throw dust on their heads and roll in ashes; they will shave their heads for you and wear sackcloth; they will weep for you with deep sorrow and bitter mourning. In their wailing, they will take up a lament for you, saying, 'Who is like Tyre, like her that is brought to silence in the midst of the sea?' When your goods went out from the seas, you filled many peoples; you enriched the kings of the earth with your merchandise and your riches. At the time you were shattered by the seas in the depths of the waters, your merchandise and all your crew fell in the midst of you. The inhabitants of the islands are astonished at you, and their kings are terrified; they are troubled in their demeanor. The merchants among the peoples hiss at you; you have become a terror, and you will never exist again.”

Translating this glorious burst of poetry into prose, we find the following countries mentioned as carrying on an active trade with the Phoenician metropolis:—Northern Syria, Syria of Damascus, Judah and the land of Israel, Egypt, Arabia, Babylonia, Assyria, Upper Mesopotamia,924 Armenia,925 Central Asia Minor, Ionia, Cyprus, Hellas or Greece,926 and Spain.927 Northern Syria furnishes the Phoenician merchants with butz, which is translated “fine linen,” but is perhaps rather cotton,928 the “tree-wool” of Herodotus; it also supplies embroidery, and certain precious stones, which our translators have considered to be coral, emeralds, and rubies. Syria of Damascus gives the “wine of Helbon”—that exquisite liquor which was the only sort that the Persian kings would condescend to drink929—and “white wool,” the dainty fleeces of the sheep and lambs that fed on the upland pastures of Hermon and Antilibanus. Judah and the land of Israel supply corn of superior quality, called “corn of Minnith”—corn, i.e. produced in the rich Ammonite country930—together with pannag, an unknown substance, and honey, and balm, and oil. Egypt sends fine linen, one of her best known products931—sometimes, no doubt, plain, but often embroidered with bright patterns, and employed as such embroidered fabrics were also in Egypt,932 for the sails of pleasure-boats. Arabia provides her spices, cassia, and calamus (or aromatic reed), and, beyond all doubt, frankincense,933 and perhaps cinnamon and ladanum.934 She also supplies wool and goat’s hair, and cloths for chariots, and gold, and wrought iron, and precious stones, and ivory, and ebony, of which the last two cannot have been productions of her own, but must have been imported from India or Abyssinia.935 Babylonia and Assyria furnish “wrappings of blue, embroidered work, and chests of rich apparel."936 Upper Mesopotamia partakes in this traffic.937 Armenia gives horses and mules. Central Asia Minor (Tubal and Meshech) supplies slaves and vessels of brass, and the Greeks of Ionia do the like. Cyprus furnishes ivory, which she must first have imported from abroad.938 Greece Proper sends her shell-fish, to enable the Phoenician cities to increase their manufacture of the purple dye.939 Finally, Spain yields silver, iron, tin, and lead—the most useful of the metals—all of which she is known to have produced in abundance.940

Translating this amazing burst of poetry into prose, we find the following countries mentioned as actively trading with the Phoenician city:—Northern Syria, Damascus in Syria, Judah and Israel, Egypt, Arabia, Babylonia, Assyria, Upper Mesopotamia,924 Armenia,925 Central Asia Minor, Ionia, Cyprus, Greece,926 and Spain.927 Northern Syria provides the Phoenician merchants with butz, which is translated as “fine linen,” but is probably more like cotton,928 the “tree-wool” of Herodotus; it also supplies embroidery and various precious stones, which our translators have identified as coral, emeralds, and rubies. Damascus in Syria offers the “wine of Helbon”—that exquisite beverage which was the only kind that the Persian kings would deign to drink929—and “white wool,” the delicate fleeces from the sheep and lambs that grazed on the high pastures of Hermon and Antilibanus. Judah and Israel provide high-quality grain, known as “grain of Minnith”—grain produced in the fertile Ammonite region930—along with pannag, an unknown substance, honey, balm, and oil. Egypt sends fine linen, one of her best-known products931—sometimes plain, but often embroidered with bright patterns, which were also used in Egypt,932 for the sails of pleasure boats. Arabia contributes her spices, cassia, and calamus (or aromatic reed), and undoubtedly, frankincense,933 and possibly cinnamon and ladanum.934 She also supplies wool, goat’s hair, fabrics for chariots, gold, wrought iron, precious stones, ivory, and ebony, with the latter two likely not being her own products but imported from India or Abyssinia.935 Babylonia and Assyria provide “wrappings of blue, embroidered work, and chests of rich clothing."936 Upper Mesopotamia joins in this trade.937 Armenia supplies horses and mules. Central Asia Minor (Tubal and Meshech) provides slaves and brass vessels, and the Greeks of Ionia do the same. Cyprus supplies ivory, which she must have first imported from overseas.938 Greece Proper sends her shellfish, allowing the Phoenician cities to enhance their production of purple dye.939 Finally, Spain provides silver, iron, tin, and lead—the most useful metals—all of which she is known to produce in abundance.940

With the exception of Egypt, Ionia, Cyprus, Hellas, and Spain, the Phoenician intercourse with these places must have been carried on wholly by land. Even with Egypt, wherewith the communication by sea was so facile, there seems to have been also from a very early date a land commerce. The land commerce was in every case carried on by caravans. Western Asia has never yet been in so peaceful and orderly condition as to dispense prudent traders from the necessity of joining together in large bodies, well provisioned and well armed, when they are about to move valuable goods any considerable distance. There have always been robber-tribes in the mountain tracts, and thievish Arabs upon the plains, ready to pounce on the insufficiently protected traveller, and to despoil him of all his belongings. Hence the necessity of the caravan traffic. As early as the time of Joseph—probably about B.C. 1600—we find a company of the Midianites on their way from Gilead, with their camels bearing spicery, and balm, and myrrh, going to carry it down to Egypt.941 Elsewhere we hear of the “travelling companies of the Dedanim,"942 of the men of Sheba bringing their gold and frankincense;943 of a multitude of camels coming up to Palestine with wood from Kedar and Nebaioth.944 Heeren is entirely justified in his conclusion that the land trade of the Phoenicians was conducted by “large companies or caravans, since it could only have been carried on in this way."945

Except for Egypt, Ionia, Cyprus, Hellas, and Spain, the Phoenicians must have conducted trade with these places entirely over land. Even with Egypt, where sea travel was quite easy, there seems to have been land trade from a very early time. This land trade was always done by caravans. Western Asia has never been in such a peaceful and orderly state that prudent traders could avoid the need to travel in large, well-provisioned and well-armed groups when moving valuable goods over long distances. There have always been robber tribes in the mountains and sneaky Arabs on the plains, ready to attack poorly protected travelers and steal their belongings. This need for caravan travel makes sense. As early as the time of Joseph—around 1600 B.C.—we see a company of Midianites journeying from Gilead, with their camels loaded with spices, balm, and myrrh, headed to Egypt.941 Elsewhere, we hear about the "traveling companies of the Dedanim,"942 of the men of Sheba bringing their gold and frankincense;943 of a multitude of camels coming to Palestine with wood from Kedar and Nebaioth.944 Heeren is completely justified in concluding that the Phoenicians' land trade was carried out by “large companies or caravans, since it could only have been done this way."945

The nearest neighbours of the Phoenicians on the land side were the Jews and Israelites, the Syrians of Damascus, and the people of Northern Syria, or the Orontes valley and the tract east of it. From the Jews and Israelites the Phoenicians seem to have derived at all times almost the whole of the grain which they were forced to import for their sustenance. In the time of David and Solomon it was chiefly for wheat and barley that they exchanged the commodities which they exported,946 in that of Ezekiel it was primarily for “wheat of Minnith;"947 and a similar trade is noted on the return of the Jews from the captivity,948 and in the first century of our era.949 But besides grain they also imported from Palestine at some periods wine, oil, honey, balm, and oak timber.950 Western Palestine was notoriously a land not only of corn, but also of wine, of olive oil, and of honey, and could readily impart of its superfluity to its neighbour in time of need. The oaks of Bashan are very abundant, and seem to have been preferred by the Phoenicians to their own oaks as the material of oars.951 Balm, or basalm, was a product of the land of Gilead,952 and also of the lower Jordan valley, where it was of superior quality.953

The closest neighbors of the Phoenicians on land were the Jews and Israelites, the Syrians of Damascus, and the people from Northern Syria, including the Orontes valley and the area east of it. The Phoenicians mainly relied on the Jews and Israelites for most of the grain they had to import for their survival. During the time of David and Solomon, they primarily traded for wheat and barley in exchange for the goods they exported; in Ezekiel's time, it was mainly for “wheat of Minnith;” and a similar trade was noted when the Jews returned from captivity and in the first century of our era. Along with grain, they also imported wine, oil, honey, balm, and oak timber from Palestine at various times. Western Palestine was well-known not just for its grain, but also for wine, olive oil, and honey, and could easily share its surplus with its neighbors in times of need. The oaks of Bashan were quite abundant and seemed to be preferred by the Phoenicians for making oars over their own local oaks. Balm, or basalm, came from the land of Gilead and the lower Jordan valley, where it was of particularly high quality.

From the Damascene Syrians we are told that Phoenicia imported “wine of Helbon” and “white wool."954 The “wine of Helbon” is reasonably identified with that {oinos Khalubonios} which is said to have been the favourite beverage of the Persian kings.955 It was perhaps grown in the neighbourhood of Aleppo.956 The “white wool” may have been furnished by the sheep that cropped the slopes of the Antilibanus, or by those fed on the fine grass which clothes most of the plain at its base. The fleece of these last is, according to Heeren,957 “the finest known, being improved by the heat of the climate, the continual exposure to the open air, and the care commonly bestowed upon the flocks.” From the Syrian wool, mixed perhaps with some other material, seems to have been woven the fabric known, from the city where it was commonly made,958 as “damask.”

From the Damascene Syrians, we learn that Phoenicia imported “wine of Helbon” and “white wool.” 954 The “wine of Helbon” is likely the same as {oinos Khalubonios}, which is said to have been the preferred drink of the Persian kings. 955 It probably came from the area around Aleppo. 956 The “white wool” may have come from sheep grazing on the slopes of the Antilibanus or from those fed on the fine grass that covers most of the plain at its base. According to Heeren, 957 “the finest known” fleece is produced by the latter, improved by the warm climate, continuous exposure to the open air, and the care typically given to the flocks. The fabric known as “damask,” which seems to have been woven from Syrian wool mixed with some other material, is named after the city where it was commonly produced. 958

According to the existing text of Ezekiel,959 Syria Proper “occupied in the fairs” of Phoenicia with cotton, with embroidered robes, with purple, and with precious stones. The valley of the Orontes is suitable for the cultivation of cotton; and embroidered robes would naturally be produced in the seat of an old civilisation, which Syria certainly was. Purple seems somewhat out of place in the enumeration; but the Syrians may have gathered the murex on their seaboard between Mt. Casius and the Gulf of Issus, and have sold what they collected in the Phoenician market. The precious stones which Ezekiel assigns to them are difficult of identification, but may have been furnished by Casius, Bargylus, or Amanus. These mountains, or at any rate Casius and Amanus, are of igneous origin, and, if carefully explored, would certainly yield gems to the investigator. At the same time it must be acknowledged that Syria had not, in antiquity, the name of a gem-producing country; and, so far, the reading of “Edom” for “Aram,” which is preferred by many,960 may seem to be the more probable.

According to the current text of Ezekiel, Syria Proper “traded at the markets” of Phoenicia with cotton, embroidered robes, purple dye, and precious stones. The Orontes Valley is ideal for growing cotton, and embroidered robes would naturally be made in a place with such an ancient civilization, which Syria certainly was. Purple seems a bit odd in this list; however, the Syrians might have collected the murex along their coast between Mt. Casius and the Gulf of Issus and sold what they gathered in the Phoenician market. The precious stones Ezekiel mentions are hard to identify but could have come from Casius, Bargylus, or Amanus. These mountains, especially Casius and Amanus, are volcanic, and if explored thoroughly, they would likely yield gems for the researcher. At the same time, it must be noted that Syria was not known in ancient times as a gem-producing region; thus, the reading of “Edom” instead of “Aram,” which many prefer, may actually seem more likely.

The commerce of the Phoenicians with Egypt was ancient, and very extensive. “The wares of Egypt” are mentioned by Herodotus as a portion of the merchandise which they brought to Greece before the time of the Trojan War.961 The Tyrians had a quarter in the city of Memphis assigned to them,962 probably from an early date. According to Ezekiel, the principal commodity which Egypt furnished to Phoenicia was “fine linen"963—especially the linen sails embroidered with gay patterns, which the Egyptian nobles affected for their pleasure-boats. They probably also imported from Egypt natron for their glass-works, papyrus for their documents, earthenware of various kinds for exportation, scarabs and other seals, statuettes and figures of gods, amulets, and in the later times sarcophagi.964 Their exports to Egypt consisted of wine on a large scale,965 tin almost certainly, and probably their peculiar purple fabrics, and other manufactured articles.

The trade between the Phoenicians and Egypt was ancient and quite extensive. “The goods of Egypt” are noted by Herodotus as part of the merchandise they brought to Greece before the Trojan War.961 The Tyrians likely had a district in the city of Memphis allocated to them from an early time.962 According to Ezekiel, the main product Egypt supplied to Phoenicia was “fine linen”963—particularly the linen sails decorated with vibrant patterns, which the Egyptian nobles used for their pleasure boats. They also likely imported from Egypt natron for their glass-making, papyrus for their documents, various types of pottery for export, scarabs and other seals, statuettes and figures of gods, amulets, and later on, sarcophagi.964 Their exports to Egypt included a large quantity of wine,965 almost certainly tin, and probably their unique purple fabrics along with other manufactured goods.

The Phoenician trade with Arabia was of especial importance, since not only did the great peninsula itself produce many of the most valuable articles of commerce, but it was also mainly, if not solely, through Arabia that the Indian market was thrown open to the Phoenician traders, and the precious commodities obtained for which Hindustan has always been famous. Arabia is par excellence the land of spices, and was the main source from which the ancient world in general, and Phoenicia in particular, obtained frankincense, cinnamon, cassia, myrrh, calamus or sweet-cane, and ladanum.966 It has been doubted whether these commodities were, all of them, the actual produce of the country in ancient times, and Herodotus has been in some degree discredited, but perhaps without sufficient reason. He is supported to a considerable extent by Theophrastus, the disciple of Aristotle, who says:967 “Frankincense, myrrh, and cassia grow in the Arabian districts of Saba and Hadramaut; frankincense and myrrh on the sides or at the foot of mountains, and in the neighbouring islands. The trees which produce them grow sometimes wild, though occasionally they are cultivated; and the frankincense-tree grows sometimes taller than the tree producing the myrrh.” Modern authorities declare the frankincense-tree (Boswellia thurifera) to be still a native of Hadramaut;968 and there is no doubt that the myrrh-tree (Balsamodendron myrrha) also grows there. If cinnamon and cassia, as the terms are now understood, do not at present grow in Arabia, or nearer to Phoenicia than Hindustan, it may be that they have died out in the former country, or our modern use of the terms may differ from the ancient one. On the other hand, it is no doubt possible that the Phoenicians imagined all the spices which they obtained from Arabia to be the indigenous growth of the country, when in fact some of them were importations.

The Phoenician trade with Arabia was especially important because not only did the huge peninsula produce many valuable goods, but it was also primarily, if not solely, through Arabia that the Indian market was opened to Phoenician traders, allowing them to acquire the precious items for which Hindustan has always been known. Arabia is the ultimate land of spices, and it was the main source from which the ancient world, particularly Phoenicia, got frankincense, cinnamon, cassia, myrrh, calamus or sweet-cane, and ladanum.966 There has been some doubt about whether all these goods were actually produced in the country in ancient times, and Herodotus has faced some criticism, but perhaps not for good reason. He is largely supported by Theophrastus, Aristotle's student, who says:967 “Frankincense, myrrh, and cassia grow in the Arabian regions of Saba and Hadramaut; frankincense and myrrh are found on the slopes or at the base of mountains, and in nearby islands. The trees that produce them sometimes grow wild, although they are also cultivated; and the frankincense tree sometimes grows taller than the myrrh tree.” Modern experts say that the frankincense tree (Boswellia thurifera) is still native to Hadramaut;968 and there’s no doubt that the myrrh tree (Balsamodendron myrrha) also grows there. If cinnamon and cassia, as we understand them today, no longer grow in Arabia or closer to Phoenicia than Hindustan, it might be that they have disappeared from the former, or our modern definitions differ from the ancient ones. On the other hand, it’s quite possible that the Phoenicians believed all the spices they obtained from Arabia were native to the region, when in fact some of them were imports.

Next to her spices, Arabia was famous for the production of a superior quality of wool. The Phoenicians imported this wool largely. The flocks of Kedar are especially noted,969 and are said to have included both sheep and goats.970 It was perhaps a native woollen manufacture, in which Dedan traded with Tyre, and which Ezekiel notices as a trade in “cloths for chariots."971 Goat’s hair was largely employed in the production of coverings for tents.972 Arabia also furnished Phoenicia with gold, with precious stones, with ivory, ebony, and wrought iron.973 The wrought iron was probably from Yemen, which was celebrated for its manufacture of sword blades. The gold may have been native, for there is much reason to believe that anciently the Arabian mountain ranges yielded gold as freely as the Ethiopian,974 with which they form one system; or it may have been imported from Hindustan, with which Arabia had certainly, in ancient times, constant communication. Ivory and ebony must, beyond a doubt, have been Arabian importations. There are two countries from which they may have been derived, India and Abyssinia. It is likely that the commercial Arabs of the south-east coast had dealings with both.975

Next to her spices, Arabia was known for producing high-quality wool. The Phoenicians imported a lot of this wool. The flocks of Kedar are particularly famous, and they are said to have included both sheep and goats. It was possibly a local woolen industry in which Dedan traded with Tyre, which Ezekiel mentions as a trade in “cloths for chariots.” Goat hair was commonly used to make coverings for tents. Arabia also supplied Phoenicia with gold, precious stones, ivory, ebony, and wrought iron. The wrought iron likely came from Yemen, which was renowned for producing sword blades. The gold may have come from local sources, as there’s plenty of evidence to suggest that the ancient Arabian mountain ranges yielded gold just as freely as those in Ethiopia, with which they share a geological system; or it may have been imported from Hindustan, with which Arabia definitely had ongoing trade connections in ancient times. Ivory and ebony were undoubtedly imports into Arabia. They likely came from two countries: India and Abyssinia. It's probable that the commercial Arabs from the southeast coast traded with both.

Of Phoenician imports into Arabia we have no account; but we may conjecture that they consisted principally of manufactured goods, cotton and linen fabrics, pottery, implements and utensils in metal, beads, and other ornaments for the person, and the like. The nomadic Arabs, leading a simple life, required but little beyond what their own country produced; there was, however, a town population976 in the more southern parts of the peninsula, to which the elegancies and luxuries of life, commonly exported by Phoenicia, would have been welcome.

Of Phoenician imports into Arabia, we don’t have any detailed records, but we can guess they mainly included manufactured goods, cotton and linen fabrics, pottery, metal tools and utensils, beads, and other personal ornaments. The nomadic Arabs lived a simple life and needed very little beyond what they could produce in their own land. However, there were towns in the southern regions of the peninsula where the finer things and luxuries typically exported by Phoenicia would have been appreciated.

The Phoenician trade with Babylonia and Assyria was carried on probably by caravans, which traversed the Syrian desert by way of Tadmor or Palmyra, and struck the Euphrates about Circesium. Here the route divided, passing to Babylon southwards along the course of the great river, and to Nineveh eastwards by way of the Khabour and the Sinjar mountain-range. Both countries seem to have supplied the Phoenicians with fabrics of extraordinary value, rich in a peculiar embroidery, and deemed so precious that they were packed in chests of cedar-wood, which the Phoenician merchants must have brought with them from Lebanon.977 The wares furnished by Assyria were in some cases exported to Greece,978 while no doubt in others they were intended for home consumption. They included cylinders in rock crystal, jasper, hematite, steatite, and other materials, which may sometimes have found purchasers in Phoenicia Proper, but appear to have been specially affected by the Phoenician colonists in Cyprus.979 On her part Phoenicia must have imported into Assyria and Babylonia the tin which was a necessary element in their bronze; and they seem also to have found a market in Assyria for their own most valuable and artistic bronzes, the exquisite embossed pateræ which are among the most precious of the treasures brought by Sir Austen Layard from Nineveh.980

The Phoenician trade with Babylonia and Assyria was likely conducted by caravans that crossed the Syrian desert via Tadmor or Palmyra and reached the Euphrates near Circesium. Here, the route split, heading south to Babylon along the river and east to Nineveh via the Khabour and the Sinjar mountain range. Both regions seemed to provide the Phoenicians with fabrics of incredible value, adorned with unique embroidery, so precious that they were packed in cedar chests that the Phoenician traders probably brought from Lebanon.977 The goods supplied by Assyria were sometimes exported to Greece,978 while in other cases they were likely meant for local use. These included cylinders made of rock crystal, jasper, hematite, steatite, and other materials, which may have occasionally found buyers in Phoenicia but were particularly favored by Phoenician colonists in Cyprus.979 In return, Phoenicia must have imported tin needed for bronze production into Assyria and Babylonia, and it seems they also found a market in Assyria for their own highly valued and artistic bronzes, such as the exquisite embossed pateræ, which are among the most treasured artifacts brought by Sir Austen Layard from Nineveh.980

The nature of the Phoenician trade with Upper Mesopotamia is unknown to us; and it is not impossible that their merchants visited Haran,981 rather because it lay on the route which they had to follow in order to reach Armenia than because it possessed in itself any special attraction for them. Gall-nuts and manna are almost the only products for which the region is celebrated; and of these Phoenicia herself produced the one, while she probably did not need the other. But the natural route to Armenia was by way of the Coelesyrian valley, Aleppo and Carchemish, to Haran, and thence by Amida or Diarbekr to Van, which was the capital of Armenia in the early times.

The details of Phoenician trade with Upper Mesopotamia are unclear to us; it’s quite possible that their merchants went to Haran not because it had any unique appeal, but because it was on the path to Armenia they needed to take. Gall-nuts and manna are nearly the only products the area is known for; Phoenicia produced gall-nuts herself, while she likely didn’t require manna. However, the natural route to Armenia went through the Coelesyrian valley, Aleppo, and Carchemish, leading to Haran, and then on to Amida or Diarbekr to reach Van, which was the capital of Armenia in ancient times.

Armenia supplied the Phoenicians with “horses of common and of noble breeds,"982 and also with mules.983 Strabo says that it was a country exceedingly well adapted for the breeding of the horse,984 and even notes the two qualities of the animal that it produced, one of which he calls “Nisæan,” though the true “Nisæan plain” was in Media. So large was the number of colts bred each year, and so highly were they valued, that, under the Persian monarchy the Great King exacted from the province, as a regular item of its tribute, no fewer than twenty thousand of them annually.985 Armenian mules seem not to be mentioned by any writer besides Ezekiel; but mules were esteemed throughout the East in antiquity,986 and no country would have been more likely to breed them than the mountain tract of Armenia, the Switzerland of Western Asia, where such surefooted animals would be especially needed.

Armenia provided the Phoenicians with "common and elite horses,"982 and also with mules.983 Strabo mentions that it was a country extremely well suited for horse breeding,984 and he even points out the two qualities of the horses it produced, one of which he calls "Nisæan,” although the actual “Nisæan plain” was in Media. The number of colts born each year was so large, and they were so highly regarded, that during the Persian monarchy, the Great King required the province to provide a regular tribute of no less than twenty thousand colts annually.985 Armenian mules don't seem to be mentioned by any other writer besides Ezekiel; however, mules were valued throughout the East in ancient times,986 and no place would have been more likely to breed them than the mountainous region of Armenia, the Switzerland of Western Asia, where such surefooted animals would be particularly necessary.

Armenia adjoined the country of the Moschi and Tibareni—the Meshech and Tubal of the Bible. These tribes, between the ninth and the seventh centuries B.C., inhabited the central regions of Asia Minor and the country known later as Cappadocia. They traded with Tyre in the “persons of men” and in “vessels of brass” or copper.987 Copper is found abundantly in the mountain ranges of these parts, and Xenophon remarks on the prevalence of metal vessels in the portion of the region which he passed through—the country of the Carduchians.988 The traffic in slaves was one in which the Phoenicians engaged from very early times. They were not above kidnapping men, women, and children in one country and selling them into another;989 besides which they seem to have frequented regularly the principal slave marts of the time. They bought such Jews as were taken captive and sold into slavery by the neighbouring nations,990 and they looked to the Moschi and Tibareni for a constant supply of the commodity from the Black Sea region.991 The Caucasian tribes have always been in the habit of furnishing slave-girls to the harems of the East, and the Thracians, who were not confined to Europe, but occupied a great part of Asia Minor, regularly trafficked in their children.992

Armenia was next to the land of the Moschi and Tibareni—the Meshech and Tubal mentioned in the Bible. Between the ninth and seventh centuries B.C., these tribes lived in the central areas of Asia Minor and what would later be known as Cappadocia. They traded with Tyre using "people" and "brass" or copper items.987 Copper was plentiful in the mountains of this region, and Xenophon noted the abundance of metal vessels in the area he traveled through—the land of the Carduchians.988 The slave trade was something the Phoenicians participated in from very early times. They would kidnap men, women, and children from one country and sell them in another;989 and they regularly visited the major slave markets of the time. They purchased Jews who were captured and sold into slavery by neighboring nations,990 and they relied on the Moschi and Tibareni for a steady supply of slaves from the Black Sea area.991 The Caucasian tribes have always supplied slave girls to Eastern harems, and the Thracians, who were not limited to Europe but occupied much of Asia Minor, routinely traded their children.992

Such was the extent of the Phoenician land trade, as indicated by the prophet Ezekiel, and such were, so far as is at present known, the commodities interchanged in the course of it. It is quite possible—nay, probable—that the trade extended much further, and certain that it must have included many other articles of commerce besides those which we have mentioned. The sources of our information on the subject are so few and scanty, and the notices from which we derive our knowledge for the most part so casual, that we may be sure what is preserved is but a most imperfect record of what was—fragments of wreck recovered from the sea of oblivion. It may have been a Phoenician caravan route which Herodotus describes as traversed on one occasion by the Nasamonians,993 which began in North Africa and terminated with the Niger and the city of Timbuctoo; and another, at which he hints as lying between the coast of the Lotus-eaters and Fezzan.994 Phoenician traders may have accompanied and stimulated the slave hunts of the Garamantians,995 as Arab traders do those of the Central African nations at the present day. Again, it is quite possible that the Phoenicians of Memphis designed and organised the caravans which, proceeding from Egyptian Thebes, traversed Africa from east to west along the line of the “Salt Hills,” by way of Ammon, Augila, Fezzan, and the Tuarik country to Mount Atlas.996 We can scarcely imagine the Egyptians showing so much enterprise. But these lines of traffic can be ascribed to the Phoenicians only by conjecture, history being silent on the subject.

The Phoenician land trade was extensive, as noted by the prophet Ezekiel, and these were, as far as we know, the goods exchanged during that time. It's quite possible—actually, likely—that the trade reached even farther, and it’s certain that it must have included many other goods besides those we've mentioned. Our sources of information on this topic are few and limited, and most of the references we have are quite casual, so we can be sure that what we've found is just an incomplete record of what actually existed—fragments salvaged from the sea of forgetfulness. Herodotus might have been describing a Phoenician caravan route traversed once by the Nasamonians, which started in North Africa and ended with the Niger and the city of Timbuktu; he also hints at another route between the coast of the Lotus-eaters and Fezzan. Phoenician traders might have participated in and fueled the slave hunts of the Garamantians, similar to how Arab traders engage with the Central African nations today. Additionally, it's quite possible that the Phoenicians in Memphis planned and organized the caravans that traveled from Egyptian Thebes, crossing Africa from east to west along the "Salt Hills," passing through Ammon, Augila, Fezzan, and the Tuarik region to Mount Atlas. It's hard to imagine the Egyptians showing that much initiative. But we can only speculate that these trade routes were linked to the Phoenicians, as history provides no clarity on the matter.

The sea trade of the Phoenicians was still more extensive than their land traffic. It is divisible into two branches, their trade with their own colonists, and that with the natives of the various countries to which they penetrated in their voyages. The colonies sent out from Phoenicia were, except in the single instance of Carthage, trading settlements, planted where some commodity or commodities desired by the mother-country abounded, and were intended to secure to the mother-country the monopoly of such commodity or commodities. For instance, Cyprus was colonised for the sake of its copper mines and its timber; Cilicia and Lycia for their timber only; Thasos for its gold mines; Salamis and Cythera for the purple trade; Sardinia and Spain for their numerous metals; North Africa for its fertility and for the trade with the interior. Phoenicia expected to derive, primarily, from each colony the commodity or commodities which had caused the selection of the site. In return she supplied the colonists with her own manufactured articles; with fabrics in linen, wool, cotton, and perhaps to some extent in silk; with every variety of pottery, from dishes and jugs of the plainest and most simple kind to the most costly and elaborate vases and amphoræ; with metal utensils and arms, with gold and silver ornaments, with embossed shields and pateræ, with faïnce and glass, and also with any foreign products or manufactures that they desired and that the countries within the range of her influence could furnish. Phoenicia must have imported into Cyprus, to suit a peculiar Cyprian taste, the Egyptian statuettes, scarabs, and rings,997 and the Assyrian and Babylonian cylinders, which have been found there. The tin which she brought from the Cassiterides she distributed generally, for she did not discourage her colonists from manufacturing for themselves to some extent. There was probably no colony which did not make its own bronze vessels of the commoner sort and its own coarser pottery.

The sea trade of the Phoenicians was even more extensive than their land trade. It can be divided into two parts: their trade with their own colonies and their trade with the local populations of the various countries they explored on their voyages. The colonies established by Phoenicia were, aside from Carthage, predominantly trading posts set up where specific goods desired by the mother country were plentiful, aiming to give the mother country control over these goods. For example, Cyprus was colonized for its copper mines and timber; Cilicia and Lycia for their timber; Thasos for its gold mines; Salamis and Cythera for the purple dye trade; Sardinia and Spain for their abundant metals; and North Africa for its fertility and trade with the interior. Phoenicia expected to gain primarily from each colony the specific goods that had led to the selection of each site. In return, she provided the colonists with her own manufactured products, including fabrics made of linen, wool, cotton, and possibly some silk; a variety of pottery ranging from simple dishes and jugs to expensive and intricate vases and amphorae; metal utensils and weapons; gold and silver jewelry; decorated shields and plates; faience and glass; as well as any foreign products or goods they sought that countries within her trading range could supply. Phoenicia would have imported into Cyprus, to cater to the unique Cypriot taste, Egyptian statuettes, scarabs, and rings, along with Assyrian and Babylonian cylinders that have been discovered there. The tin brought from the Cassiterides was distributed widely, as she did not prevent her colonists from producing some of their own goods. It’s likely that every colony manufactured its own basic bronze vessels and coarser pottery.

In her trade with the nations who peopled the coasts of the Mediterranean, the Propontis, and the Black Sea, Phoenicia aimed primarily at disposing to advantage of her own commodities, secondarily at making a profit in commodities which she had obtained from other countries, and thirdly on obtaining commodities which she might dispose of to advantage elsewhere. Where the nations were uncivilised, or in a low condition of civilisation, she looked to making a large profit by furnishing them at a cheap rate with all the simplest conveniences of life, with their pottery, their implements and utensils, their clothes, their arms, the ornaments of their persons and of their houses. Underselling the native producers, she soon obtained a monopoly of this kind of trade, drove the native products out of the market, and imposed her own instead, much as the manufacturers of Manchester, Birmingham, and the Potteries impose their calicoes, their cutlery, and their earthenware on the savages of Africa and Polynesia. Where culture was more advanced, as in Greece and parts of Italy,998 she looked to introduce, and no doubt succeeded in introducing, the best of her own productions, fabrics of crimson, violet, and purple, painted vases, embossed pateræ, necklaces, bracelets, rings—“cunning work” of all manner of kinds999—mirrors, glass vessels, and smelling-bottles. At the same time she also disposed at a profit of many of the wares that she had imported from foreign countries, which were advanced in certain branches of art, as Egypt, Babylonia, Assyria, possibly India. The muslins and ivory of Hindustan, the shawls of Kashmir, the carpets of Babylon, the spices of Araby the Blest, the pearls of the Persian Gulf, the faïence and the papyrus of Egypt, would be readily taken by the more civilised of the Western nations, who would be prepared to pay a high price for them. They would pay for them partly, no doubt, in silver and gold, but to some extent also in their own manufactured commodities, Attica in her ceramic products, Corinth in her “brass,” Etruria in her candelabra and engraved mirrors,9100 Argos in her highly elaborated ornaments.9101 Or, in some cases, they might make return out of the store wherewith nature had provided them, Euboea rendering her copper, the Peloponnese her “purple,” Crete her timber, the Cyrenaica its silphium.

In her trade with the nations along the Mediterranean coast, the Propontis, and the Black Sea, Phoenicia mainly focused on taking advantage of her own products, secondly on making a profit from items acquired from other countries, and thirdly on obtaining goods that she could sell effectively elsewhere. In areas where people were less civilized or at a lower stage of civilization, she aimed to make a large profit by providing them cheaply with essential goods for everyday life, including pottery, tools and utensils, clothing, weapons, and personal and household decorations. By undercutting local producers, she quickly gained a monopoly in this type of trade, pushing native products out of the market and replacing them with her own, similar to how manufacturers in Manchester, Birmingham, and the Potteries supply their fabrics, cutlery, and pottery to the less developed regions of Africa and Polynesia. In places with a more advanced culture, like Greece and parts of Italy, she sought to introduce—and likely succeeded in introducing—the best of her own products, such as fabrics in crimson, violet, and purple, decorative vases, embossed plates, necklaces, bracelets, rings—"skillfully made" items of all kinds—mirrors, glass containers, and perfume bottles. At the same time, she also profited from many goods imported from more culturally developed countries, like Egypt, Babylonia, Assyria, and possibly India. The muslins and ivory of India, the shawls from Kashmir, the carpets from Babylon, the spices from Arabia, the pearls from the Persian Gulf, the faïence and papyrus from Egypt would find a ready market among the more civilized Western nations, who would be willing to pay a high price for them. They would compensate partly with silver and gold, but also to some extent with their own manufactured goods, such as Attica's ceramics, Corinth's "brass," Etruria's candelabras and engraved mirrors, and Argos's intricately crafted jewelry. Alternatively, in some instances, they might barter using resources provided by nature, with Euboea offering copper, the Peloponnese supplying "purple," Crete contributing timber, and Cyrenaica providing silphium.

Outside the Pillars of Hercules the Phoenicians had only savage nations to deal with, and with these they seem to have traded mainly for the purpose of obtaining certain natural products, either peculiarly valuable or scarcely procurable elsewhere. Their trade with the Scilly Islands and the coast of Cornwall was especially for the procuring of tin. Of all the metals, tin is found in the fewest places, and though Spain seems to have yielded some anciently,9102 yet it can only have been in small quantities, while there was an enormous demand for tin in all parts of the old world, since bronze was the material almost universally employed for arms, tools, implements, and utensils of all kinds, while tin is the most important, though not the largest, element in bronze. From the time that the Phoenicians discovered the Scilly Islands—the “Tin Islands” (Cassiterides), as they called them—it is probable that the tin of the civilised world was almost wholly derived from this quarter. Eastern Asia, no doubt, had always its own mines, and may have exported tin to some extent, in the remoter times, supplying perhaps the needs of Egypt, Assyria, and Babylon. But, after the rich stores of the metal which our own islands possess were laid open, and the Phoenicians with their extensive commercial dealings, both in the West and in the East, became interested in diffusing it, British tin probably drove all other out of use, and obtained the monopoly of the markets wherever Phoenician influence prevailed. Hence the trade with the Cassiterides was constant, and so highly prized that a Phoenician captain, finding his ship followed by a Roman vessel, preferred running it upon the rocks to letting a rival nation learn the secret of how the tin-producing coast might be approached in safety.9103 With the tin it was usual for the merchants to combine a certain amount of lead and a certain quantity of skins or hides; while they gave in exchange pottery, salt, and articles in bronze, such as arms, implements, and utensils for cooking and for the table.9104

Outside the Pillars of Hercules, the Phoenicians only had to deal with savage tribes, and they mainly traded with them to get certain natural products that were either highly valuable or hard to find elsewhere. Their trade with the Scilly Islands and the coast of Cornwall was particularly focused on acquiring tin. Tin is one of the rarest metals, and while Spain may have produced some in ancient times, it was likely in limited amounts. There was a huge demand for tin throughout the ancient world, as bronze was widely used for weapons, tools, and various utensils, with tin being the most crucial, although not the largest, component of bronze. After the Phoenicians discovered the Scilly Islands—known as the “Tin Islands” (Cassiterides)—it’s likely that nearly all the tin in the civilized world came from this region. Eastern Asia certainly had its own mines and may have exported some tin in ancient times, possibly meeting the demands of Egypt, Assyria, and Babylon. However, once the rich tin deposits of the British Isles were revealed, and with the Phoenicians' extensive trading activities in both the West and the East, British tin likely outperformed all competitors and claimed a monopoly in the markets influenced by Phoenician trade. Thus, trade with the Cassiterides was steady and so highly valued that a Phoenician captain, upon seeing a Roman ship pursue him, preferred to run his vessel aground rather than allow a rival nation to discover the safe route to approach the tin-rich coast. Merchants usually combined tin with a certain amount of lead and some hides; in exchange, they offered pottery, salt, and bronze items, including weapons, tools, and cooking utensils.

If the Phoenicians visited, as some maintain that they did,9105 the coasts of the Baltic, it must have been for the purpose of obtaining amber. Amber is thrown up largely by the waters of that land-locked sea, and at present especially abounds on the shore in the vicinity of Dantzic. It is very scarce elsewhere. The Phoenicians seem to have made use of amber in their necklaces from a very early date;9106 and, though they might no doubt have obtained it by land-carriage across Europe to the head of the Adriatic, yet their enterprise and their commercial spirit were such as would not improbably have led them to seek to open a direct communication with the amber-producing region, so soon as they knew where it was situated. The dangers of the German Ocean are certainly not greater than those of the Atlantic; and if the Phoenicians had sufficient skill in navigation to reach Britain and the Fortunate Islands, they could have found no very serious difficulty in penetrating to the Baltic. On the other hand, there is no direct evidence of their having penetrated so far, and perhaps the Adriatic trade may have supplied them with as much amber as they needed.

If the Phoenicians did visit, as some believe, the coasts of the Baltic, it was likely to collect amber. Amber is commonly found along the shores of that enclosed sea and is particularly abundant near Danzig today. It’s quite rare in other places. The Phoenicians seem to have started using amber in their necklaces very early on; and while they could have transported it overland across Europe to the head of the Adriatic, their adventurous spirit and commercial drive likely would have encouraged them to seek a direct route to the amber-producing region as soon as they knew where it was located. The dangers of the German Ocean are not necessarily greater than those of the Atlantic; if the Phoenicians had enough skill in navigation to reach Britain and the Fortunate Islands, they would likely have found it manageable to venture into the Baltic. On the flip side, there’s no concrete evidence that they traveled that far, and perhaps the trade through the Adriatic provided them with enough amber to meet their needs.

The trade of the Phoenicians with the west coast of Africa had for its principal objects the procuring of ivory, of elephant, lion, leopard, and deer-skins, and probably of gold. Scylax relates that there was an established trade in his day (about B.C. 350) between Phoenicia and an island which he calls Cerne, probably Arguin, off the West African coast. “The merchants,” he says,9107 “who are Phoenicians, when they have arrived at Cerne, anchor their vessels there, and after having pitched their tents upon the shore, proceed to unload their cargo, and to convey it in smaller boats to the mainland. The dealers with whom they trade are Ethiopians; and these dealers sell to the Phoenicians skins of deer, lions, panthers, and domestic animals—elephants’ skins also, and their teeth. The Ethiopians wear embroidered garments, and use ivory cups as drinking vessels; their women adorn themselves with ivory bracelets; and their horses also are adorned with ivory. The Phoenicians convey to them ointment, elaborate vessels from Egypt, castrated swine(?), and Attic pottery and cups. These last they commonly purchase [in Athens] at the Feast of Cups. These Ethiopians are eaters of flesh and drinkers of milk; they make also much wine from the vine; and the Phoenicians, too, supply some wine to them. They have a considerable city, to which the Phoenicians sail up.” The river on which the city stood was probably the Senegal.

The Phoenicians traded with the west coast of Africa primarily to obtain ivory, as well as elephant, lion, leopard, and deer skins, and likely gold. Scylax mentions that during his time (around 350 B.C.), there was a regular trade between Phoenicia and an island he refers to as Cerne, which was probably Arguin, off the West African coast. “The merchants,” he says, 9107 “who are Phoenicians, once they reach Cerne, anchor their ships there, set up their tents on the shore, unload their cargo, and transport it in smaller boats to the mainland. The traders they deal with are Ethiopians, who sell the Phoenicians deer, lion, panther, and domestic animal skins—along with elephant skins and their tusks. The Ethiopians wear embroidered clothes and use ivory cups for drinking; their women wear ivory bracelets, and their horses are also decorated with ivory. The Phoenicians bring them ointments, elaborate vessels from Egypt, castrated pigs(?), and Attic pottery and cups. They usually buy these last items [in Athens] during the Feast of Cups. These Ethiopians eat meat and drink milk, and they also produce a lot of wine from grapes; the Phoenicians supply them with some wine as well. They have a significant city where the Phoenicians sail up.” The river where this city was located was likely the Senegal.

It will be observed that Scylax says nothing in this passage of any traffic for gold. We can scarcely suppose, however, that the Phoenicians, if they penetrated so far south as this, could remain ignorant of the fact that West Africa was a gold-producing country, much less that, being aware of the fact, they would fail to utilise it. Probably they were the first to establish that “dumb commerce” which was afterwards carried on with so much advantage to themselves by the Carthaginians, and whereof Herodotus gives so graphic an account. “There is a country,” he says,9108 “in Libya, and a nation, beyond the Pillars of Hercules, which the Carthaginians are wont to visit, where they no sooner arrive than forthwith they unlade their wares, and having disposed them after an orderly fashion along the beach, there leave them, and returning aboard their ships, raise a great smoke. The natives, when they see the sample, come down to the shore, and laying out to view so much gold as they think the wares are worth, withdraw to a distance. The Carthaginians upon this come ashore again and look. If they think the gold to be enough, they take it and go their way; but if it does not seem to them sufficient, they go aboard ship once more, and wait patiently. Then the others approach and add to their gold, till the Carthaginians are satisfied. Neither party deals unfairly by the other: for they themselves never touch the gold till it comes up to the worth of their goods, nor do the natives ever carry off the goods until the gold has been taken away.”

It’s clear that Scylax doesn’t mention any trade for gold in this passage. However, it’s hard to believe that the Phoenicians, if they traveled this far south, wouldn’t have known that West Africa was a gold-producing region. It’s even less likely that they would ignore this fact and not take advantage of it. They were probably the first to set up that “dumb commerce” that the Carthaginians later operated with great success, which Herodotus describes so vividly. “There is a country,” he says, 9108 “in Libya, and a nation, beyond the Pillars of Hercules, that the Carthaginians often visit. When they arrive, they immediately unload their goods and neatly arrange them along the beach. Then they return to their ships and create a large smoke signal. The locals, seeing the offerings, come down to the shore and display enough gold that they believe their goods are worth. They then step back. The Carthaginians come ashore again to check. If they think the gold offered is enough, they take it and leave; if not, they board their ship again to wait. Then the locals add more gold until the Carthaginians are satisfied. Neither side cheats the other: they never touch the gold until it matches the value of their goods, and the locals only take the goods after the gold has been collected.”

The nature of the Phoenician trade with the Canaries, or Fortunate Islands, is not stated by any ancient author, and can only be conjectured. It would scarcely have been worth the Phoenicians’ while to convey timber to Syria from such a distance, or we might imagine the virgin forests of the islands attracting them.9109 The large breed of dogs from which the Canaries derived their later name9110 may perhaps have constituted an article of export even in Phoenician times, as we know they did later, when we hear of their being conveyed to King Juba;9111 but there is an entire lack of evidence on the subject. Perhaps the Phoenicians frequented the islands less for the sake of commerce than for that of watering and refitting the ships engaged in the African trade, since the natives were less formidable than those who inhabited the mainland.9112

The details of Phoenician trade with the Canaries, or Fortunate Islands, aren’t mentioned by any ancient writers, and can only be guessed at. It hardly seems worth the Phoenicians' time to haul timber to Syria from such a distance, or we might think the unspoiled forests of the islands would have drawn them in.9109 The large breed of dogs that eventually gave the Canaries their name9110 could have been an export even in Phoenician times, just as we know they were later when they were sent to King Juba;9111 but there’s a complete lack of evidence on this topic. It’s possible that the Phoenicians visited the islands less for trade and more for refueling and repairing their ships involved in African trade, since the locals were less intimidating than those on the mainland.9112

There was one further direction in which the Phoenicians pushed their maritime trade, not perhaps continuously, but at intervals, when their political relations were such as to give them access to the sea which washed Asia on the south and on the southeast. The nearest points at which they could embark for the purpose of exploring or utilising the great tract of ocean in this quarter were the inner recesses of the two deep gulfs known as the Persian and the Arabian. It has been thought by some9113 that there were times in their history when the Phoenicians had the free use of both these gulfs, and could make the starting-point of their eastern explorations and trading voyages either a port on one of the two arms into which the Red Sea divides towards the north, or a harbour on the Persian Gulf near its north-western extremity. But the latter supposition rests upon grounds which are exceedingly unsafe and uncertain. That the Phoenicians migrated at some remote period from the shores of the Persian Gulf to the Mediterranean may be allowed to be highly probable; but that, after quitting their primitive abodes and moving off nearly a thousand miles to the westward, they still maintained a connection with their early settlements and made them centres for a trade with the Far East, is as improbable a hypothesis as any that has ever received the sanction of men of learning and repute. The Babylonians, through whose country the connection must have been kept up, were themselves traders, and would naturally keep the Arabian and Indian traffic in their own hands; nor can we imagine them as brooking the establishment of a rival upon their shores. The Arabians were more friendly; but they, too, would have disliked to share their carrying trade with a foreign nation. And the evidence entirely fails to show that the Phoenicians, from the time of their removal to the Mediterranean, ever launched a vessel in the Persian Gulf, or had any connection with the nations inhabiting its shores, beyond that maintained by the caravans which trafficked by land between the Phoenician cities and the men of Dedan and Babylon.9114

There was one more direction in which the Phoenicians expanded their maritime trade, not continuously but at intervals, when their political situation allowed them to access the sea that bordered Asia to the south and southeast. The closest places they could set sail from to explore or utilize the vast area of ocean in that region were the inner recesses of the two deep gulfs known as the Persian and the Arabian. Some have suggested that there were times in their history when the Phoenicians had unrestricted use of both these gulfs and could begin their eastern explorations and trading voyages from a port on one of the two branches where the Red Sea divides to the north, or from a harbor on the Persian Gulf near its northwestern point. However, this latter assumption is based on very uncertain and unreliable grounds. It is highly probable that the Phoenicians migrated from the shores of the Persian Gulf to the Mediterranean at some point in the past; but after leaving their original homes and moving nearly a thousand miles to the west, the idea that they still kept a connection with their early settlements and used them as hubs for trade with the Far East is as unlikely as any hypothesis that has ever been supported by scholars. The Babylonians, through whose territory this connection would have been maintained, were traders themselves and would naturally keep the Arabian and Indian trade under their control; it’s hard to imagine them allowing a competitor on their shores. The Arabians were more welcoming, but they also would have been reluctant to share their trade routes with a foreign nation. Moreover, there is no evidence to show that the Phoenicians, after moving to the Mediterranean, ever sent a ship into the Persian Gulf or had any ties with the nations along its shores, except for the trade carried out by caravans that transported goods by land between the Phoenician cities and those of Dedan and Babylon.

It was otherwise with the more western gulf. There, certainly, from time to time, the Phoenicians launched their fleets, and carried on a commerce which was scarcely less lucrative because they had to allow the nations whose ports they used a participation in its profits. It is not impossible that, occasionally, the Egyptians allowed them to build ships in some one or more of their Red Sea ports, and to make such port or ports the head-quarters of a trade which may have proceeded beyond the Straits of Babelmandeb and possibly have reached Zanzibar and Ceylon. At any rate, we know that, in the time of Solomon, two harbours upon the Red Sea were open to them—viz. Eloth and Ezion-Geber—both places situated in the inner recess of the Elanitic Gulf, or Gulf of Akaba, the more eastern of the two arms into which the Red Sea divides. David’s conquest of Edom had put these ports into the possession of the Israelites, and the friendship between Hiram and Solomon had given the Phoenicians free access to them. It was the ambition of Solomon to make the Israelites a nautical people, and to participate in the advantages which he perceived to have accrued to Phoenicia from her commercial enterprise. Besides sharing with the Phoenicians in the trade of the Mediterranean,9115 he constructed with their help a fleet at Ezion-Geber upon the Red Sea,9116 and the two allies conjointly made voyages to the region, or country, called Ophir, for the purpose of procuring precious stones, gold, and almug-wood.9117 Ophir is, properly speaking, a portion of Arabia,9118 and Arabia was famous for its production of gold,9119 and also for its precious stones.9120 Whether it likewise produced almug-trees is doubtful;9121 and it is quite possible that the joint fleet went further than Ophir proper, and obtained the “almug-wood” from the east coast of Africa, or from India. The Somauli country might have been as easily reached as South-eastern Arabia, and if India is considerably more remote, yet there was nothing to prevent the Phoenicians from finding their way to it.9122 We have, however, no direct evidence that their commerce in the Indian Ocean ever took them further than the Arabian coast, about E. Long. 55º.

It was different in the more western gulf. There, the Phoenicians regularly sent out their fleets and engaged in trade that was almost as profitable, even though they had to share some of the profits with the nations whose ports they used. It's possible that sometimes the Egyptians allowed them to build ships in one or more of their Red Sea ports and set up those ports as bases for trade that might have gone beyond the Straits of Babelmandeb, potentially reaching Zanzibar and Ceylon. At the very least, we know that during Solomon's time, two harbors on the Red Sea were accessible to them—namely, Eloth and Ezion-Geber—both located in the inner area of the Elanitic Gulf, or Gulf of Akaba, which is the more eastern of the two branches of the Red Sea. David’s defeat of Edom had placed these ports in the hands of the Israelites, and the friendship between Hiram and Solomon allowed the Phoenicians free access to them. Solomon aimed to make the Israelites a seafaring people and to benefit from the advantages he saw that Phoenicia gained from its commercial activities. In addition to sharing in the Mediterranean trade, he built a fleet at Ezion-Geber on the Red Sea with the help of the Phoenicians, and the two allies made joint voyages to the area known as Ophir to obtain precious stones, gold, and almug wood. Ophir is technically part of Arabia, which was known for its gold production and precious stones. Whether it also produced almug trees is uncertain, and it's quite possible that the joint fleet went beyond Ophir itself and sourced the “almug wood” from the east coast of Africa or from India. The Somauli region could have been just as easily accessible as southeastern Arabia, and while India is considerably further away, nothing stopped the Phoenicians from reaching it. However, we have no direct evidence that their trade in the Indian Ocean ever took them beyond the Arabian coast, around E. Long. 55º.





CHAPTER X—MINING

     Surface gathering of metals, anterior to mining—Earliest
     known mining operations—Earliest Phoenician mining in
     Phoenicia Proper—Mines of Cyprus—Phoenician mining in
     Thasos and Thrace—in Sardinia—in Spain—Extent of the
     metallic treasures there—Phoenician methods not unlike
     those of the present day—Use of shafts, adits, and
     galleries—Roof of mines propped or arched—Ores crushed,
     pounded, and washed—Use of quicksilver unknown—Mines
     worked by slave labour.
     Surface collection of metals, before mining—Earliest known mining operations—Earliest Phoenician mining in Phoenicia Proper—Mines of Cyprus—Phoenician mining in Thasos and Thrace—in Sardinia—in Spain—Extent of the metallic treasures there—Phoenician methods not unlike those used today—Use of shafts, adits, and galleries—Roof of mines supported or arched—Ores crushed, pounded, and washed—Use of mercury unknown—Mines operated by slave labor.

The most precious and useful of the metals lie, in many places, so near the earth’s surface that, in the earliest times, mining is unneeded and therefore unpractised. We are told that in Spain silver was first discovered in consequence of a great fire, which consumed all the forests wherewith the mountains were clothed, and lasted many days; at the end of which time the surface of the soil was found to be intersected by streams of silver from the melting of the superficial silver ore through the intense heat of the conflagration. The natives did not know what to do with the metal, so they bartered it away to the Phoenician traders, who already frequented their country, in return for some wares of very moderate value.101 Whether this tale be true or no, it is certain that even at the present day, in what are called “new countries,” valuable metals often show themselves on the surface of the soil, either in the form of metalliferous earths, or of rocks which shine with spangles of a metallic character, or occasionally, though rarely, of actual masses of pure ore, sometimes encrusted with an oxide, sometimes bare, bright, and unmistakable. In modern times, whenever there is a rush into any gold region—whether California, or Australia, or South Africa—the early yield is from the surface. The first comers scratch the ground with a knife or with a pick-axe, and are rewarded by discovering “nuggets” of greater or less dimensions; the next flight of gold-finders search the beds of the streams; and it is not until the supply from these two sources begins to fail that mining, in the proper sense of the term, is attempted.

The most valuable and useful metals are often found close to the Earth's surface, so in ancient times, there was no need for mining, and it wasn't practiced. It’s said that in Spain, silver was first discovered after a massive fire burned down all the forests covering the mountains for many days. When the fire was over, the soil was found to be crisscrossed by streams of silver, created by the melting of surface silver ore from the intense heat. The locals didn't know what to do with the metal, so they traded it to Phoenician merchants who already visited their land, in exchange for goods of little value.101 Whether this story is true or not, it’s clear that even today, in what we call "new countries," valuable metals often appear on the surface, either as mineral-rich soil, rocks that sparkle with metallic flecks, or occasionally, though rarely, as actual chunks of pure ore, sometimes covered with an oxide, and sometimes bright and unmistakable. In modern times, whenever there is a gold rush—whether in California, Australia, or South Africa—the initial find comes from the surface. The first arrivals scrape the ground with a knife or pickaxe and find "nuggets" of varying sizes; the next group of gold prospectors searches the riverbeds; and it's only when the supply from these two sources starts to dwindle that proper mining begins.

The earliest mining operations, whereof we have any record, are those conducted by the Egyptian kings of the fourth, fifth and twelfth dynasties, in the Sinaitic region. At two places in the mountains between Suez and Mount Sinai, now known as the Wady Magharah and Sarabit-el-Khadim, copper was extracted from the bosom of the earth by means of shafts laboriously excavated in the rocks, under the auspices of these early Pharaohs.102 Hence at the time of the Exodus the process of mining was familiar to the Hebrews, who could thus fully appreciate the promise,103 that they were about to be given “a good land”—“a land whose stones were iron, and out of whose hills they might dig brass.” The Phoenicians, probably, derived their first knowledge of mining from their communications with the Egyptians, and no doubt first practised the art within the limits of their own territory—in Lebanon, Casius, and Bargylus. The mineral stores of these regions were, however, but scanty, and included none of the more important metals, excepting iron. The Phoenicians were thus very early in their history driven afield for the supply of their needs, and among the principal causes of their first voyages of discovery must be placed the desire of finding and occupying regions which contained the metallic treasures wherein their own proper country was deficient.

The earliest mining operations we have any record of were carried out by the Egyptian kings of the fourth, fifth, and twelfth dynasties in the Sinai region. At two spots in the mountains between Suez and Mount Sinai, now called Wady Magharah and Sarabit-el-Khadim, copper was pulled from the earth using shafts that were painstakingly dug into the rocks, under the authority of these early Pharaohs. Hence, at the time of the Exodus, mining was familiar to the Hebrews, who could fully appreciate the promise that they were about to receive “a good land”—“a land whose stones were iron, and out of whose hills they might dig brass.” The Phoenicians likely learned about mining from their contacts with the Egyptians and probably first practiced this skill within their own territory—in Lebanon, Casius, and Bargylus. However, the mineral resources in these areas were quite limited and included none of the more important metals, except iron. As a result, the Phoenicians were pushed early in their history to seek supplies elsewhere, and one of the main reasons for their initial exploratory voyages was the desire to find and settle in regions rich in the metallic resources that their own homeland lacked.

It is probable that they first commenced mining operations on a large scale in Cyprus. Here, according to Pliny,104 copper was first discovered; and though this may be a fable, yet here certainly it was found in great abundance at a very early time, and was worked to such an extent, that the Greeks knew copper, as distinct from bronze, by no other name than that of {khalkos Kuprios}, whence the Roman Æs Cyprium, and our own name for the metal. The principal mines were in the southern mountain range, near Tamasus,105 but there were others also at Amathus, Soli, and Curium.106 Some of the old workings have been noticed by modern travellers, particularly near Soli and Tamasus,107 but they have neither been described anciently nor examined scientifically in modern times. The ore from which the metal was extracted is called chalcitis by Pliny,108 and may have been the “chalcocite” of our present metallurgical science, which is a sulphide containing very nearly eighty per cent. of copper. The brief account which Strabo gives of the mines of Tamasus shows that the ore was smelted in furnaces which were heated by wood fires. We gather also from Strabo that Tamasus had silver mines.

It’s likely that they began large-scale mining operations in Cyprus. According to Pliny, copper was first discovered here; and while this might be a myth, it was definitely found in great quantities very early on and was mined extensively enough that the Greeks referred to copper, distinct from bronze, by the name {khalkos Kuprios}, from which the Roman term Æs Cyprium and our own name for the metal is derived. The main mines were located in the southern mountain range, near Tamasus, but there were also others at Amathus, Soli, and Curium. Some of the ancient workings have been noted by modern travelers, especially near Soli and Tamasus, but they haven't been described in ancient texts or examined scientifically in modern times. The ore that the metal was extracted from is called chalcitis by Pliny and may have been what we now know as “chalcocite,” a sulfide containing almost eighty percent copper. The brief description Strabo provides of the mines at Tamasus suggests that the ore was smelted in furnaces heated by wood fires. We also learn from Strabo that Tamasus had silver mines.

That the Phoenicians conducted mining operations in Thasos we know from Herodotus,109 and from other writers of repute1010 we learn that they extended these operations to the mainland opposite. Herodotus had himself visited Thasos, and tells us that the mines were on the eastern coast of the island, between two places which he calls respectively Ænyra and Coenyra. The metal sought was gold, and in their quest of it the Phoenicians had, he says, turned an entire mountain topsy-turvy. Here again no modern researches seem to have been made, and nothing more is known than that at present the natives obtain no gold from their soil, do not seek for it, and are even ignorant that their island was ever a gold-producing region.1011 The case is almost the same on the opposite coast, where in ancient times very rich mines both of gold and silver abounded,1012 which the Phoenicians are said to have worked, but where at the present day mining enterprise is almost at a standstill, and only a very small quantity of silver is produced.1013

We know the Phoenicians were mining in Thasos from Herodotus, and other reputable writers inform us that they expanded these mining operations to the mainland across from the island. Herodotus visited Thasos himself and mentioned that the mines were located on the eastern coast, between two places he referred to as Ænyra and Coenyra. They were after gold, and he noted that the Phoenicians had turned an entire mountain upside down in their search for it. No modern research seems to have been conducted in this area, and currently, the locals are not extracting any gold from their land, do not look for it, and are even unaware that their island was once a source of gold. Similarly, on the opposite coast, where very rich mines of gold and silver once existed, which the Phoenicians are said to have exploited, mining efforts today are nearly non-existent, producing only a tiny amount of silver.

Sardinia can scarcely have been occupied by the Phoenicians for anything but its metals. The southern and south-western parts of the island, where they made their settlements, were rich in copper and lead; and the position of the cities seems to indicate the intention to appropriate these metals. In the vicinity of the lead mines are enormous heaps of scoriæ, mounting up apparently to a very remote era.1014 The scoriæ are not so numerous in the vicinity of the copper mines, but “pigs” of copper have been found in the island, unlike any of the Roman period, which are perhaps Phoenician, and furnish specimens of the castings into which the metal was run, after it had been fused and to some extent refined. The weight of the pigs is from twenty-eight to thirty-seven kilogrammes.1015 Pigs of lead have also been found, but they are less frequent.

Sardinia was likely occupied by the Phoenicians mainly for its metals. The southern and southwestern parts of the island, where they established their settlements, were rich in copper and lead; and the locations of the cities suggest a plan to take advantage of these metals. Near the lead mines, there are huge piles of slag, which seem to date back to a very early time.1014 There isn't as much slag near the copper mines, but “pigs” of copper have been found on the island, which are different from those of the Roman period, and are probably Phoenician. They provide examples of the castings made from the metal after it had been melted and partially refined. The weight of these pigs ranges from twenty-eight to thirty-seven kilograms.1015 Pigs of lead have also been discovered, but they are less common.

But all the other mining operations of the Phoenicians were insignificant compared with those of which the theatre was Spain. Spain was the Peru of the ancient world, and surpassed its modern rival, in that it produced not only gold and silver, but also copper, iron, tin, and lead. Of these metals gold was the least abundant. It was found, however, as gold dust in the bed of the Tagus;1016 and there were mines of it in Gallicia,1017 in the Asturias, and elsewhere. There was always some silver mixed with it, but in one of the Gallician mines the proportion was less than three per cent. Elsewhere the proportion reached to ten or even twelve and a half per cent.; and, as there was no known mode of clearing the gold from it, the produce of the Gallician mine was in high esteem and greatly preferred to that of any other. Silver was yielded in very large quantities. “Spain,” says Diodorus Siculus,1018 “has the best and most plentiful silver from mines of all the world.” “The Spanish silver,” says Pliny,1019 “is the best.” When the Phoenicians first visited Spain, they found the metal held in no esteem at all by the natives. It was the common material of the cheapest drinking vessels, and was readily parted with for almost anything that the merchants chose to offer. Much of it was superficial, but the veins were found to run to a great depth; and the discovery of one vein was a sure index of the near vicinity of more.1020 The out-put of the Spanish silver mines during the Phoenician, Carthaginian, and Roman periods was enormous, and cannot be calculated; nor has the supply even yet failed altogether. The iron and copper of Spain are also said to have been exceedingly abundant in ancient times,1021 though, owing to the inferior value of the metals, and to their wider distribution, but little is recorded with regard to them. Its tin and lead, on the other hand, as being metals found in comparatively few localities, receive not infrequent mention. The Spanish tin, according to Posidonius, did not crop out upon the surface,1022 but had to be obtained by mining. It was produced in some considerable quantity in the country of the Artabri, to the north of Lusitania,1023 as well as in Lusitania itself, and in Gallicia;1024 but was found chiefly in small particles intermixed with a dark sandy earth. Lead was yielded in greater abundance; it was found in Cantabria, in Bætica, and many other places.1025 Much of it was mixed with silver, and was obtained in the course of the operations by means of which silver was smelted and refined.1026 The mixed metal was called galena.1027 Lead, however, was also found, either absolutely pure,1028 or so nearly so that the alloy was inappreciable, and was exported in large quantities, both by the Phoenicians and the Carthaginians, and also by the Romans. It was believed that the metal had a power of growth and reproduction, so that if a mine was deserted for a while and then re-opened, it was sure to be found more productive than it was previously.1029 The fact seems to be simply that the supply is inexhaustible, since even now Spain furnishes more than half the lead that is consumed by the rest of Europe. Besides the ordinary metals, Spain was capable of yielding an abundance of quicksilver;1030 but this metal seems not to have attracted the attention of the Phoenicians, who had no use for it.

But all the other mining activities of the Phoenicians were minor compared to those in Spain. Spain was the ancient equivalent of Peru, surpassing its modern counterpart by producing not just gold and silver, but also copper, iron, tin, and lead. Among these metals, gold was the least common. It was found as gold dust in the Tagus River;1016 and there were mines in Galicia,1017 Asturias, and other places. There was always some silver mixed in, but in one of the Galician mines, the silver content was less than three percent. In other areas, the content reached up to ten or even twelve and a half percent; and since there was no known way to separate the gold from it, the output from the Galician mine was highly valued and preferred over any other. Silver was produced in very large quantities. “Spain,” says Diodorus Siculus,1018 “has the best and most plentiful silver mines in the world.” “The Spanish silver,” says Pliny,1019 “is the best.” When the Phoenicians first came to Spain, they found that the locals held the metal in low regard. It was used for the most inexpensive drinking vessels and could easily be traded for nearly anything the merchants offered. Much of it was on the surface, but the veins were found to extend deep underground; the discovery of one vein indicated the likely presence of more nearby.1020 The output of the Spanish silver mines during the Phoenician, Carthaginian, and Roman times was massive and cannot be quantified; the supply hasn’t fully depleted even today. The iron and copper from Spain were also said to have been very plentiful in ancient times,1021 although there’s little record of them due to their lower value and wider distribution. The tin and lead, on the other hand, receive more frequent mentions since they were found in relatively few locations. According to Posidonius, Spanish tin did not occur on the surface;1022 it had to be mined. It was produced in significant amounts in the region of the Artabri, north of Lusitania,1023 as well as in Lusitania itself and Galicia;1024 but it was usually found in small particles mixed with a dark sandy earth. Lead was more abundantly produced; it was found in Cantabria, Bætica, and many other places.1025 Much of it was combined with silver, obtained during the processes for smelting and refining silver.1026 This mixed metal was called galena.1027 However, lead was also found either completely pure,1028 or so close to pure that the alloy was negligible, and it was exported in large quantities by the Phoenicians, Carthaginians, and Romans. It was believed that the metal had a power of growth and reproduction, meaning if a mine was abandoned for a while and then reopened, it would surely be more productive than before.1029 The reality appears to be that the supply is infinite, as even now Spain provides more than half of the lead consumed by the rest of Europe. In addition to these common metals, Spain could yield plenty of quicksilver;1030 but this metal seems to have gone unnoticed by the Phoenicians, who had no use for it.

The methods employed by the Phoenicians to obtain the metals which they coveted were not, on the whole, unlike those which continue in use at the present day. Where surface gold was brought down by the streams, the ground in their vicinity, and such portions of their beds as could be laid bare, were searched by the spade; any earth or sand that was seen to be auriferous was carefully dug out and washed, till the earthy particles were cleared away, and only the gold remained. Where the metal lay deeper, perpendicular shafts were sunk into the ground to a greater or less depth—sometimes, if we may believe Diodorus,1031 to the depth of half a mile or more; from these shafts horizontal adits were carried out at various levels, and from the adits there branched lateral galleries, sometimes at right angles, sometimes obliquely, which pursued either a straight or a tortuous course.1032 The veins of metal were perseveringly followed up, and where faults occurred in them, filled with trap,1033 or other hard rock, the obstacle was either tunnelled through or its flank turned, and the vein still pursued on the other side. As the danger of a fall of material from the roofs of the adits and galleries was well understood, it was customary to support them by means of wooden posts, or, where the material was sufficiently firm, to arch them.1034 Still, from time to time, falls would occur, with great injury and loss of life to the miners. Nor was there much less danger where a mountain was quarried for the sake of its metallic treasures. Here, too, galleries were driven into the mountain-side, and portions of it so loosened that after a time they detached themselves and fell with a loud crash into a mass of débris.1035 It sometimes happened that, as the workings proceeded, subterranean springs were tapped, which threatened to flood the mine, and put an end to its further utilisation. In such cases, wherever it was possible, tunnels were constructed, and the water drained off to a lower level.1036 In the deeper mines this, of course, could not be done, and such workings had to be abandoned, until the invention of the Archimedes’ screw (ab. B.C. 220-190), when the water was pumped up to the surface, and so got rid of.1037 But before this date Phoenicia had ceased to exist as an independent country, and the mines that had once been hers were either no longer worked, or had passed into the hands of the Romans or the Carthaginians.

The methods used by the Phoenicians to obtain the metals they desired were, overall, not very different from those still in practice today. Where surface gold was washed down by rivers, the nearby ground and parts of the riverbeds that could be exposed were dug up with shovels; any soil or sand that appeared to contain gold was carefully removed and washed until all the dirt was gone, leaving only the gold behind. When the metal was buried deeper, vertical shafts were dug into the ground to varying depths—sometimes, according to Diodorus, up to half a mile or more; from these shafts, horizontal tunnels were created at different levels, and from those tunnels, lateral galleries branched off, sometimes at right angles and sometimes at angles, following either a straight or a winding path. The metal veins were diligently tracked, and if they were blocked by hard rock or trap, the obstacles were either tunneled through or bypassed, and the vein was pursued on the other side. Since the risk of rock falls from the roofs of the tunnels and galleries was well known, it was common to support them with wooden posts or, where the material was solid enough, to arch them. Still, falls would occasionally happen, causing great injuries and loss of life among the miners. There was also considerable danger when extracting metal from mountains. Galleries were dug into the mountainside, and portions were loosened until they eventually broke away and fell with a loud crash into a pile of debris. Sometimes, while working, underground springs were hit, threatening to flood the mine and halt its use. In these cases, wherever possible, tunnels were built to drain the water to a lower level. In deeper mines, of course, this wasn't feasible, and those operations had to be abandoned until the invention of the Archimedes’ screw (around 220-190 B.C.), when water could be pumped up to the surface and removed. But by that time, Phoenicia had ceased to exist as an independent nation, and its once-valuable mines were either not being worked anymore or had come under the control of the Romans or the Carthaginians.

When the various ores were obtained, they were first of all crushed, then pounded to a paste; after which, by frequent washings, the non-metallic elements were to a large extent eliminated, and the metallic ones alone left. These, being collected, were placed in crucibles of white clay,1038 which were then submitted to the action of a furnace heated to the melting point. This point could only be reached by the use of the bellows. When it was reached, the impurities which floated on the top of the molten metal were skimmed off, or the metal itself allowed, by the turning of a cock, to flow from an upper crucible into a lower one. For greater purity the melting and skimming process was sometimes repeated; and, in the case of gold, the skimmings were themselves broken up, pounded, and again submitted to the melting pot.1039 The use of quicksilver, however, being unknown, the gold was never wholly freed from the alloy of silver always found in it, nor was the silver ever wholly freed from an alloy of lead.1040

When the different ores were collected, they were first crushed and then turned into a paste. After that, through repeated washings, most of the non-metallic elements were removed, leaving only the metallic ones. These metals were gathered and placed in crucibles made of white clay, which were then heated in a furnace to the melting point. This temperature could only be achieved by using bellows. Once it was reached, the impurities that floated on top of the molten metal were skimmed off, or the metal itself was allowed to flow from an upper crucible into a lower one by turning a valve. To ensure greater purity, the melting and skimming process was sometimes repeated; in the case of gold, the skimmings were broken up, pounded, and melted again. However, since quicksilver was not used, the gold was never completely separated from the silver alloy always present in it, nor was the silver ever entirely free from an alloy of lead.

The Romans and Carthaginians worked their mines almost wholly by slave labour; and very painful pictures are drawn of the sufferings undergone by the unhappy victims of a barbarous and wasteful system.1041 The gangs of slaves, we are told, remained in the mines night and day, never seeing the sun, but living and dying in the murky and foetid atmosphere of the deep excavations. It can scarcely be hoped that the Phoenicians were wiser or more merciful. They had a large command of slave labour, and would naturally employ it where the work to be done was exceptionally hard and disagreeable. Moreover, the Carthaginians, their colonists, are likely to have kept up the system, whatever it was, which they found established on succeeding to the inheritance of the Phoenician mines, and the fact that they worked them by means of slaves makes it more than probable that the Phoenicians had done so before them.1042

The Romans and Carthaginians primarily operated their mines using slave labor, and there are very distressing accounts of the suffering experienced by the unfortunate victims of this cruel and wasteful system. The groups of slaves, it is said, stayed in the mines day and night, never seeing the sun, but living and dying in the dark and foul air of the deep shafts. It’s hard to believe that the Phoenicians were any wiser or more compassionate. They had a significant supply of slave labor and would naturally use it for the particularly tough and unpleasant tasks. Furthermore, the Carthaginians, their colonists, likely continued whatever system was in place when they took over the Phoenician mines, and the fact that they relied on slave labor makes it highly likely that the Phoenicians had operated in the same way before them.

When the metals were regarded as sufficiently cleansed from impurities, they were run into moulds, which took the form of bars, pigs, or ingots. Pigs of copper and lead have, as already observed, been found in Sardinia which may well belong to Phoenician times. There is also in the museum of Truro a pig of tin, which, as it differs from those made by the Romans, Normans, and later workers, has been supposed to be Phoenician.1043 Ingots of gold and silver have not at present been found on Phoenician localities; but the Persian practice, witnessed to by Herodotus,1044 was probably adopted from the subject nation, which confessedly surpassed all the others in the useful arts, in commerce, and in practical sagacity.

When the metals were considered clean enough from impurities, they were poured into molds, creating bars, pigs, or ingots. Pigs of copper and lead have been discovered in Sardinia that likely date back to Phoenician times. In the Truro museum, there's also a pig of tin, which differs from those made by the Romans, Normans, and later smiths, suggesting it might be Phoenician. Currently, no gold or silver ingots have been found in Phoenician sites; however, the Persian practice mentioned by Herodotus probably originated from the Phoenicians, who were known to excel in useful arts, trade, and practical wisdom.





CHAPTER XI—RELIGION

     Strength of the religious sentiment among the Phoenicians—
     Proofs—First stage of the religion, monotheistic—Second
     stage, a polytheism within narrow limits—Worship of Baal—
     of Ashtoreth—of El or Kronos—of Melkarth—of Dagon—of
     Hadad—of Adonis—of Sydyk—of Esmun—of the Cabeiri—of
     Onca—of Tanith—of Beltis—Third stage marked by
     introduction of foreign deities—Character of the Phoenician
     worship—Altars and sacrifice—Hymns of praise, temples, and
     votive offerings—Wide prevalence of human sacrifice and of
     licentious orgies—Institution of the Galli—Extreme
     corruption of the later religion—Views held on the subject
     of a future life—Piety of the great mass of the people
     earnest, though mistaken.
     Strength of the religious feeling among the Phoenicians—  
     Evidence—First stage of the religion, monotheistic—Second  
     stage, a polytheism within narrow limits—Worship of Baal—  
     of Ashtoreth—of El or Kronos—of Melkarth—of Dagon—of  
     Hadad—of Adonis—of Sydyk—of Esmun—of the Cabeiri—of  
     Onca—of Tanith—of Beltis—Third stage marked by  
     introduction of foreign deities—Nature of Phoenician  
     worship—Altars and sacrifices—Hymns of praise, temples, and  
     votive offerings—Widespread human sacrifice and  
     sexual orgies—Institution of the Galli—Extreme  
     corruption of the later religion—Beliefs regarding  
     the afterlife—The piety of the vast majority of the people  
     is sincere, though misguided.

There can be no doubt that the Phoenicians were a people in whose minds religion and religious ideas occupied a very prominent place. Religiousness has been said to be one of the leading characteristics of the Semitic race;0111 and it is certainly remarkable that with that race originated the three principal religions, two of which are the only progressive religions, of the modern world. Judaism, Christianity, and Mohammedanism all arose in Western Asia within a restricted area, and from nations whose Semitic origin is unmistakable. The subject of ethnic affinities and differences, of the transmission of qualities and characteristics, is exceedingly obscure; but, if the theory of heredity be allowed any weight at all, there should be no difficulty in accepting the view that particular races of mankind have special leanings and aptitudes.

There’s no doubt that the Phoenicians were a people for whom religion and religious ideas were very important. It's been said that spirituality is one of the main traits of the Semitic race; 0111 and it’s certainly noteworthy that this race gave rise to the three major religions, two of which are the only progressive religions in the modern world. Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all emerged in Western Asia within a limited area and from nations whose Semitic roots are clear. The topic of ethnic connections and distinctions, as well as the passing down of traits and characteristics, is quite complex; but if we consider the theory of heredity at all, it’s reasonable to believe that specific races of humans have particular tendencies and abilities.

Still, the religiousness of the Phoenicians does not rest on any à priori arguments, or considerations of what is likely to have been. Here was a nation among whom, in every city, the temple was the centre of attraction, and where the piety of the citizens adorned every temple with abundant and costly offerings. The monarchs who were at the head of the various states showed the greatest zeal in continually maintaining the honour of the gods, repaired and beautified the sacred buildings, and occasionally added to their kingly dignity the highly esteemed office of High Priest.0112 The coinage of the country bore religious emblems,0113 and proclaimed the fact that the cities regarded themselves as under the protection of this or that deity. Both the kings and their subjects bore commonly religious names—names which designated them as the worshippers or placed them under the tutelage of some god or goddess. Abd-alonim, Abdastartus, Abd-osiris, Abdemon (which is properly Abd-Esmun), Abdi-milkut, were names of the former kind, Abi-baal (= “Baal is my father”), Itho-bal (= “with him is Baal”), Baleazar or Baal-azur (= “Baal protects”), names of the latter. The Phoenician ships carried images of the gods0114 in the place of figure-heads. Wherever the Phoenicians went, they bore with them their religion and their worship; in each colony they planted a temple or temples, and everywhere throughout their wide dominion the same gods were worshipped with the same rites and with the same observances.

Still, the religious nature of the Phoenicians wasn't based on any a priori arguments or what seemed likely. This was a nation where, in every city, the temple was the main attraction, and the piety of the citizens filled each temple with generous and expensive offerings. The monarchs in charge of the various states showed great enthusiasm in consistently honoring the gods, repairing and beautifying the sacred buildings, and sometimes even adding the highly regarded position of High Priest to their royal status.0112 The currency of the country featured religious symbols,0113 declaring that the cities saw themselves as under the protection of certain deities. Both the kings and their subjects often had religious names—names that identified them as worshippers or placed them under the care of some god or goddess. Abd-alonim, Abdastartus, Abd-osiris, Abdemon (which is actually Abd-Esmun), and Abdi-milkut were examples of the former type, while Abi-baal (= “Baal is my father”), Itho-bal (= “with him is Baal”), and Baleazar or Baal-azur (= “Baal protects”) were examples of the latter. Phoenician ships displayed images of the gods0114 instead of figureheads. Wherever the Phoenicians traveled, they brought their religion and worship; in each colony, they built a temple or temples, and throughout their vast territories, the same gods were honored with the same rites and observances.

In considering the nature of the Phoenician religion, we must distinguish between its different stages. There is sufficient reason to believe that originally, either when they first occupied their settlements upon the Mediterranean or before they moved from their primitive seats upon the shores of the Persian Gulf, the Phoenicians were Monotheists. We must not look for information on this subject to the pretentious work which Philo of Byblus, in the first or second century of our era, put forth with respect to the “Origines” of his countrymen, and attributed to Sanchoniatho;0115 we must rather look to the evidence of language and fact, records which may indeed be misread, but which cannot well be forged or falsified. These will show us that in the earliest times the religious sentiment of the Phoenicians acknowledged only a single deity—a single mighty power, which was supreme over the whole universe. The names by which they designated him were El, “great;” Ram or Rimmon, “high;” Baal, “Lord;” Melek or Molech, “King;” Eliun, “Supreme;” Adonai, “My Lord;” Bel-samin, “Lord of Heaven,” and the like.0116 Distinct deities could no more be intended by such names as these than by those under which God is spoken of in the Hebrew Scriptures, several of them identical with the Phoenician names—El or Elohim, “great;” Jehovah, “existing;” Adonai, “my Lord;” Shaddai, “strong;” El Eliun,0117 “the supreme Great One.” How far the Phoenicians actually realised all that their names properly imply, whether they went so far as to divest God wholly of a material nature, whether they viewed Him as the Creator, as well as the Lord, of the world, are problems which it is impossible, with the means at present at our disposal, to solve. But they certainly viewed Him as “the Lord of Heaven,"0118 and, if so, no doubt also as the Lord of earth; they believed Him to be “supreme” or “the Most High;” and they realised his personal relation to each one of his worshippers, who were privileged severally to address Him as Adonai—“my Lord.” It may be presumed that at this early stage of the religion there was no idolatry; when One God alone is acknowledged and recognised, the feeling is naturally that expressed in the Egyptian hymn of praise—“He is not graven in marble; He is not beheld; His abode is unknown; there is no building that can contain Him; unknown is his name in heaven; He doth not manifest his forms; vain are all representations."0119

In examining the Phoenician religion, we need to identify its various stages. There’s good reason to believe that originally, whether when they first settled along the Mediterranean or before they migrated from their early homes on the shores of the Persian Gulf, the Phoenicians practiced Monotheism. We shouldn’t rely on the elaborate work that Philo of Byblus, in the first or second century of our era, produced about the “Origins” of his people, which he attributed to Sanchoniatho; we should instead look to language and factual evidence, which may be misinterpreted but cannot easily be fabricated. These sources will show us that in ancient times, the religious beliefs of the Phoenicians acknowledged only one deity—a single powerful force, supreme over the entire universe. The names they used for this deity included El, meaning “great;” Ram or Rimmon, meaning “high;” Baal, meaning “Lord;” Melek or Molech, meaning “King;” Eliun, meaning “Supreme;” Adonai, meaning “My Lord;” Bel-samin, meaning “Lord of Heaven,” and others. Distinct gods couldn’t have been intended by these names any more than by those used to refer to God in the Hebrew Scriptures, several of which are identical to the Phoenician names—El or Elohim, meaning “great;” Jehovah, meaning “existing;” Adonai, meaning “my Lord;” Shaddai, meaning “strong;” El Eliun, meaning “the supreme Great One.” How far the Phoenicians truly understood all that their names suggested, whether they completely stripped God of all material attributes, or whether they considered Him as both the Creator and Lord of the world, are questions we cannot answer with the resources currently available. However, they certainly saw Him as “the Lord of Heaven,” and likely also as the Lord of earth; they believed Him to be “supreme” or “the Most High;” and they recognized His personal connection to each of His worshippers, who had the privilege of addressing Him as Adonai—“my Lord.” It can be assumed that during this early stage of the religion, there was no idolatry; when one God alone is acknowledged and recognized, the feeling aligns with that expressed in the Egyptian hymn of praise—“He is not carved in marble; He cannot be seen; His home is unknown; no building can contain Him; His name is unknown in heaven; He does not reveal His forms; all representations are futile."

But this happy state of things did not—perhaps we may say, could not—in the early condition of the human intelligence, last long. Fallen man, left to himself, very soon corrupts his way upon the earth; his hands deal with wickedness; and, in a little while, “every imagination of the thoughts of his heart is only evil continually."1110 When he becomes conscious to himself of sin, he ceases to be able to endure the thought of One Perfect Infinite Being, omnipotent, ever-present, who reads his heart, who is “about his path, and about his bed, and spies out all his ways."1111 He instinctively catches at anything whereby he may be relieved from the intolerable burden of such a thought; and here the imperfection of language comes to his aid. As he has found it impossible to express in any one word all that is contained in his idea of the Divine Being, he has been forced to give Him many names, each of them originally expressive of some one of that Being’s attributes. But in course of time these words have lost their force—their meaning has been forgotten—and they have come to be mere proper names, designative but not significative. Here is material for the perverted imagination to work upon. A separate being is imagined answering to each of the names; and so the nomina become numina.1112 Many gods are substituted for one; and the idea of God is instantly lowered. The gods have different spheres. No god is infinite; none is omnipotent, none omnipresent; therefore none omniscient. The aweful, terrible nature of God is got rid of, and a company of angelic beings takes its place, none of them very alarming to the conscience.

But this happy situation didn’t—perhaps we should say, couldn’t—last long in the early stages of human intelligence. Fallen man, left to his own devices, quickly corrupts his way on earth; he engages in wickedness, and soon “every imagination of the thoughts of his heart is only evil continually."1110 Once he becomes aware of his sin, he can’t bear the thought of a Perfect Infinite Being, all-powerful, ever-present, who sees his heart, who is “about his path, and about his bed, and spies out all his ways."1111 He instinctively looks for anything that can relieve him from the unbearable weight of such a thought, and here the limitations of language come to his rescue. Since he finds it impossible to express all that his idea of the Divine Being contains in a single word, he has been compelled to give Him many names, each originally reflecting one of that Being’s attributes. However, over time these words have lost their significance—their meaning has been forgotten—and they have turned into mere proper names, identifying but not conveying meaning. This provides material for a twisted imagination to exploit. A separate being is conceived for each of the names; thus, the nomina become numina.1112 Many gods replace one God; and the concept of God is immediately diminished. The gods each have different domains. No god is infinite; none is all-powerful, none all-present; therefore, none is all-knowing. The awe-inspiring, terrifying nature of God is discarded, and a group of angelic beings takes its place, none of whom are particularly alarming to the conscience.

In its second stage the religion of Phoenicia was a polytheism, less multitudinous than most others, and one in which the several divinities were not distinguished from one another by very marked or striking features. At the head of the Pantheon stood a god and a goddess—Baal and Ashtoreth. Baal, “the Lord,” or Baal-samin,1113 “the Lord of Heaven,” was compared by the Greeks to their Zeus, and by the Romans to their Jupiter. Mythologically, he was only one among many gods, but practically he stood alone; he was the chief of the gods, the main object of worship, and the great ruler and protector of the Phoenician people. Sometimes, but not always, he had a solar character, and was represented with his head encircled by rays.1114 Baalbek, which was dedicated to him, was properly “the city of the Sun,” and was called by the Greeks Heliopolis. The solar character of Baal is, however, far from predominant, and as early as the time of Josiah we find the Sun worshipped separately from him,1115 no doubt under a different name. Baal is, to a considerable extent, a city god. Tyre especially was dedicated to him; and we hear of the “Baal of Tyre"1116 and again of the “Baal of Tarsus."1117 Essentially, he was the embodiment of the generative principle in nature—“the god of the creative power, bringing all things to life everywhere."1118 Hence, “his statue rode upon bulls, for the bull was the symbol of generative power; and he was also represented with bunches of grapes and pomegranates in his hand,"1119 emblems of productivity. The sacred conical stones and pillars dedicated in his temples1120 may have had their origin in a similar symbolism. As polytheistic systems had always a tendency to enlarge themselves, Baal had no sooner become a separate god, distinct from El, and Rimmon, and Molech, and Adonai, than he proceeded to multiply himself, and from Baal became Baalim,1121 either because the local Baals—Baal-Tzur, Baal-Sidon, Baal-Tars, Baal-Libnan, Baal-Hermon—were conceived of as separate deities, or because the aspects of Baal—Baal as Sun-God, Baal as Lord of Heaven, Baal as lord of flies,1122, &c.—were so viewed, and grew to be distinct objects of worship. In later times he was identified with the Egyptian Ammon, and worshipped as Baal-Hammon.

In its second stage, the religion of Phoenicia was a form of polytheism that was less diverse than many others. The various gods weren’t distinguished by particularly striking features. At the top of the Pantheon were a god and a goddess—Baal and Ashtoreth. Baal, “the Lord,” or Baal-samin, “the Lord of Heaven,” was likened by the Greeks to Zeus and by the Romans to Jupiter. Mythologically, he was one of many gods, but practically he was seen as the primary one; he was the chief deity, the main focus of worship, and the great ruler and protector of the Phoenician people. Sometimes, but not always, he had a solar aspect and was depicted with rays encircling his head. Baalbek, which was dedicated to him, was correctly known as “the city of the Sun,” and the Greeks called it Heliopolis. However, Baal's solar aspect was not dominant, and as far back as the time of Josiah, we see the Sun worshipped separately from him, likely under a different name. Baal was, to a large extent, a city god. Tyre, in particular, was dedicated to him; and we hear of the “Baal of Tyre” and again of the “Baal of Tarsus.” Fundamentally, he represented the generative principle in nature—“the god of creative power, bringing all things to life everywhere.” Therefore, “his statue rode on bulls, as the bull symbolized generative power; and he was also depicted with bunches of grapes and pomegranates in his hand,” symbols of productivity. The sacred conical stones and pillars found in his temples may have originated from similar symbolism. As polytheistic systems generally tended to expand, Baal soon became a separate god distinct from El, Rimmon, Molech, and Adonai, and then he multiplied himself. From Baal, he became Baalim, either because local Baals—Baal-Tzur, Baal-Sidon, Baal-Tars, Baal-Libnan, Baal-Hermon—were seen as individual deities, or because the different aspects of Baal—like Baal as the Sun-God, Baal as the Lord of Heaven, Baal as the lord of flies, etc.—were viewed that way and became distinct objects of worship. Later on, he was identified with the Egyptian Ammon and worshipped as Baal-Hammon.

Baal is known to have had temples at Baalbek, at Tyre, at Tarsus, at Agadir1123 (Gades), in Sardinia,1124 at Carthage, and at Ekron. Though not at first worshipped under a visible form, he came to have statues dedicated to him,1125 which received the usual honours. Sometimes, as already observed, his head was encircled with a representation of the solar rays; sometimes his form was assimilated to that under which the Egyptians of later times worshipped their Ammon. Seated upon a throne and wrapped in a long robe, he presented the appearance of a man in the flower of his age, bearded, and of solemn aspect, with the carved horn of a ram on either side of his forehead. Figures of rams also supported the arms of his throne on either side, and on the heads of these two supports his hands rested.1126

Baal is known to have had temples in Baalbek, Tyre, Tarsus, Agadir (Gades), Sardinia, Carthage, and Ekron. While he wasn’t initially worshipped in a physical form, he eventually had statues dedicated to him, which received the usual honors. Sometimes, as noted earlier, his head was surrounded by a depiction of solar rays; other times, his form resembled that of the Egyptian god Ammon worshipped in later times. Seated on a throne and dressed in a long robe, he appeared as a man in the prime of his life, bearded and serious, with carved ram horns on either side of his forehead. Figures of rams also supported the arms of his throne, and his hands rested on the heads of these two supports.

The female deity whose place corresponded to that of Baal in the Phoenician Pantheon, and who was in a certain sense his companion and counterpart, was Ashtoreth or Astarte. As Baal was the embodiment of the generative principle in nature, so was Ashtoreth of the receptive and productive principle. She was the great nature-goddess, the Magna Mater, regent of the stars, queen of heaven, giver of life, and source of woman’s fecundity.1127 Just as Baal had a solar, so she had a lunar aspect, being pictured with horns upon her head representative of the lunar crescent.1128 Hence, as early as the time of Moses, there was a city on the eastern side of Jordan, named after her, Ashtoreth-Karnaim,1129 or “Astarte of the two horns.” Her images are of many forms. Most commonly she appears as a naked female, with long hair, sometimes gathered into tresses, and with her two hands supporting her two breasts.1130 Occasionally she is a mother, seated in a comfortable chair, and nursing her babe.1131 Now and then she is draped, and holds a dove to her breast, or else she takes an attitude of command, with the right hand raised, as if to bespeak attention. Sometimes, on the contrary, her figure has that modest and retiring attitude which has caused it to be described by a distinguished archæologist1132 as “the Phoenician prototype of the Venus de Medici.” The Greeks and Romans, who identified Baal determinately with their Zeus or Jupiter, found it very much more difficult to fix on any single goddess in their Pantheon as the correspondent of Astarte. Now they made her Hera or Juno, now Aphrodite or Venus, now Athene, now Artemis, now Selene, now Rhea or Cybele. But her aphrodisiac character was certainly the one in which she most frequently appeared. She was the goddess of the sexual passion, rarely, however, represented with the chaste and modest attributes of the Grecian Aphrodite-Urania, far more commonly with those coarser and more repulsive ones which characterise Aphrodite Pandemos.1133 Her temples were numerous, though perhaps not quite so numerous as those of Baal. The most famous were those at Sidon, Aphaca, Ashtoreth-Karnaim, Paphos, Pessinus, and Carthage. At Sidon the kings were sometimes her high-priests;1134 and her name is found as a frequent element in Phoenician personal names, royal and other: e.g.—Astartus, Abdastartus, Delæastartus, Am-ashtoreth, Bodoster, Bostor, &c.

The female deity who matched Baal's role in the Phoenician Pantheon and served as his companion and counterpart was Ashtoreth or Astarte. Just as Baal represented the creative principle in nature, Ashtoreth embodied the nurturing and productive principle. She was the great nature goddess, the Magna Mater, ruler of the stars, queen of heaven, giver of life, and source of women's fertility. Just as Baal had a solar aspect, she had a lunar one, often depicted with horns on her head that symbolize the lunar crescent. As early as the time of Moses, there was a city on the eastern side of Jordan named after her, Ashtoreth-Karnaim, or “Astarte of the two horns.” Her representations vary widely. Most commonly, she appears as a naked woman with long hair, sometimes styled in braids, with her hands supporting her breasts. Occasionally, she is shown as a mother seated in a comfy chair nursing her baby. Sometimes she is draped and holds a dove close to her chest, or takes a commanding pose with her right hand raised, as if asking for attention. Other times, her figure reflects a modest and reserved demeanor, which has led a noted archaeologist to describe her as “the Phoenician prototype of the Venus de Medici.” The Greeks and Romans, who closely identified Baal with their Zeus or Jupiter, found it challenging to associate a single goddess from their Pantheon with Astarte. They sometimes equated her with Hera or Juno, other times with Aphrodite or Venus, Athene, Artemis, Selene, or Rhea or Cybele. However, her erotic nature was definitely the form in which she most often appeared. She was the goddess of sexual desire, rarely depicted with the pure and modest traits of the Greek Aphrodite-Urania, much more frequently shown with the coarser and more unrefined characteristics that define Aphrodite Pandemos. Her temples were numerous, though perhaps not quite as many as Baal’s. The most famous ones were located in Sidon, Aphaca, Ashtoreth-Karnaim, Paphos, Pessinus, and Carthage. In Sidon, the kings were sometimes her high priests, and her name appears frequently in Phoenician personal names, both royal and common: e.g.—Astartus, Abdastartus, Delæastartus, Am-ashtoreth, Bodoster, Bostor, etc.

The other principal Phoenician deities were El, Melkarth, Dagon, Hadad, Adonis, Sydyk, Eshmun, the Cabeiri, Onca, Tanith, Tanata, or Anaitis, and Baalith, Baaltis, or Beltis. El, or Il, originally a name of the Supreme God, became in the later Phoenician mythology a separate and subordinate divinity, whom the Greeks compared to their Kronos1135 and the Romans to their Saturn. El was the special god of Gebal or Byblus,1136 and was worshipped also with peculiar rites at Carthage.1137 He was reckoned the son of Uranus and the father of Beltis, to whom he delivered over as her especial charge the city of Byblus.1138 Numerous tales were told of him. While reigning on earth as king of Byblus, or king of Phoenicia, he had fallen in love with a nymph of the country, called Anobret, by whom he had a son named Ieoud. This son, much as he loved him, when great dangers from war threatened the land, he first invested with the emblems of royalty, and then sacrificed.1139 Uranus (Heaven) married his sister Ge (Earth), and Il or Kronos was the issue of this marriage, as also were Dagon, Bætylus, and Atlas. Ge, being dissatisfied with the conduct of her husband, induced her son Kronos to make war upon him, and Kronos, with the assistance of Hermes, overcame Uranus, and having driven him from his kingdom succeeded to the imperial power. Besides sacrificing Ieoud, Kronos murdered another of his sons called Sadid, and also a daughter whose name is not given. Among his wives were Astarte, Rhea, Dioné, Eimarmené, and Hora, of whom the first three were his sisters.1140 There is no need to pursue this mythological tangle. If it meant anything to the initiated, the meaning is wholly lost; and the stories, gravely as they are related by the ancient historian, to the modern, who has no key to them, are almost wholly valueless.

The main Phoenician gods included El, Melkarth, Dagon, Hadad, Adonis, Sydyk, Eshmun, the Cabeiri, Onca, Tanith, Tanata (or Anaitis), and Baalith (Baaltis or Beltis). El, originally known as the Supreme God, later became a distinct and lesser deity in Phoenician mythology, which the Greeks associated with Kronos and the Romans with Saturn. He was the principal god of Gebal or Byblus, and was also worshipped with unique rituals at Carthage. He was considered the son of Uranus and the father of Beltis, to whom he entrusted the city of Byblus. Many stories were told about him. While he ruled as king of Byblus, or Phoenicia, he fell in love with a local nymph named Anobret, with whom he had a son named Ieoud. Although he loved Ieoud dearly, when war threatened the land, he first gave him the symbols of royalty and then sacrificed him. Uranus (Heaven) married his sister Ge (Earth), and their children included Il or Kronos, Dagon, Bætylus, and Atlas. Ge, unhappy with her husband's actions, convinced her son Kronos to wage war against him, and Kronos, with help from Hermes, defeated Uranus and took over the reign. In addition to sacrificing Ieoud, Kronos also killed another son named Sadid and a daughter whose name isn't mentioned. His wives included Astarte, Rhea, Dioné, Eimarmené, and Hora, with the first three being his sisters. There's no need to delve deeper into this mythological maze. If it had any significance to those in the know, that meaning is completely lost now; and those stories, as serious as they were presented by ancient historians, are nearly worthless to modern readers without context.

Originally, Melkarth would seem to have been a mere epithet, representing one aspect of Baal. The word is formed from the two roots melek and kartha1141 (= Heb. kiriath, “city”), and means “King of the City,” or “City King,” which Baal was considered to be. But the two names in course of time drifted apart, and Melicertes, in Philo Byblius, has no connection at all with Baal-samin.1142 The Greeks, who identified Baal with their Zeus, viewed Melkarth as corresponding to their Heracles, or Hercules; and the later Phoenicians, catching at this identification, represented Melkarth under the form of a huge muscular man, with a lion’s skin and sometimes with a club.1143 Melkarth was especially worshipped at Tyre, of which city he was the tutelary deity, at Thasos, and at Gades. Herodotus describes the temple of Hercules at Tyre, and attributes to it an antiquity of 2,300 years before his own time.1144 He also visited a temple dedicated to the same god at Thasos.1145 With Gades were connected the myths of Hercules’ expedition to the west, of his erection of the pillars, his defeat of Chrysaor of the golden sword, and his successful foray upon the flocks and herds of the triple Geryon.1146 Whether these legends were Greek or Phoenician in origin is uncertain; but the Phoenicians, at any rate, adopted them, and here have been lately found on Phoenician sites representations both of Geryon himself,1147 and the carrying off by Hercules of his cattle.1148 The temple of Heracles at Gades is mentioned by Strabo1149 and others. It was on the eastern side of the island, where the strait between the island and the continent was narrowest. Founded about B.C. 1100, it continued to stand to the time of Silius Italicus, and, according to the tradition, had never needed repair.1150 An unextinguished fire had burnt upon its altar for thirteen hundred years; and the worship had remained unchanged—no image profaned the Holy of Holies, where the god dwelt, waited on by bare-footed priests with heads shaved, clothed in white linen robes, and vowed to celibacy.1151 The name of the god occurs as an element in a certain small number of Phoenician names of men—e.g. Bomilcar, Himilcar, Abd-Melkarth, and the like.

Originally, Melkarth seemed to be just a title, representing one aspect of Baal. The term comes from the two roots melek and kartha1141 (= Heb. kiriath, “city”), meaning “King of the City” or “City King,” which is how Baal was viewed. However, over time, the two names started to diverge, and Melicertes, as mentioned in Philo Byblius, became completely unrelated to Baal-samin.1142 The Greeks, who associated Baal with their Zeus, viewed Melkarth as akin to their Heracles, or Hercules; the later Phoenicians, embracing this connection, depicted Melkarth as a large muscular man, often wearing a lion’s skin and sometimes wielding a club.1143 Melkarth was particularly worshipped in Tyre, which he was considered the guardian deity of, as well as in Thasos and Gades. Herodotus describes the temple of Hercules in Tyre and states it was 2,300 years old before his time.1144 He also visited a temple dedicated to the same god in Thasos.1145 The myths associated with Gades involve Hercules’ journey to the west, his creation of the pillars, his victory over Chrysaor with the golden sword, and his successful raids on the herds and flocks of the three-bodied Geryon.1146 It’s unclear whether these legends originated in Greek or Phoenician culture; nevertheless, the Phoenicians adopted them, and recent discoveries at Phoenician sites have shown depictions of both Geryon himself,1147 and Hercules stealing his cattle.1148 The temple of Heracles in Gades is noted by Strabo1149 and others. It was located on the eastern side of the island, where the strait between the island and the mainland was the narrowest. Established around B.C. 1100, it remained standing until the time of Silius Italicus, and tradition says it had never needed repairs.1150 An extinguished fire had burned on its altar for thirteen hundred years; and the worship practices had remained unchanged—no image desecrated the Holy of Holies, where the god resided, attended by barefoot priests with shaved heads, dressed in white linen robes, and committed to celibacy.1151 The name of the god appears as a part of a small number of Phoenician male names—such as Bomilcar, Himilcar, Abd-Melkarth, and others.

Dagon appears in scripture only as a Philistine god,1152 which would not prove him to have been acknowledged by the Phoenicians; but as Philo of Byblus admits him among the primary Phoenician deities, making him a son of Uranus, and a brother of Il or Kronis,1153 it is perhaps right that he should be allowed a place in the Phoenician list. According to Philo, he was the god of agriculture, the discoverer of wheat, and the inventor of the plough.1154 Whether he was really represented, as is commonly supposed,1155 in the form of a fish, or as half man and half fish, is extremely doubtful. In the Hebrew account of the fall of Dagon’s image before the Ark of the Covenant at Ashdod there is no mention made of any “fishy part;” nor is there anything in the Assyrian remains to connect the name Dagon, which occurs in them, with the remarkable figure of a fish-god so frequent in the bas-reliefs. That figure would seem rather to represent, or symbolise, either Hea or Nin. The notion of Dagon’s fishy form seems to rest entirely on an etymological basis—on the fact, i.e. that dag means “fish,” in Hebrew. In Assyrian, however, kha is “fish,” and not dag; while in Hebrew, though dag is “fish,” dagan is “corn.” It may be noted also that the Phoenician remains contain no representation of a fish deity. On the whole, it is perhaps best to be content with the account of Philo, and to regard the Phoenician Dagon as a “Zeus Arotrios”—a god presiding over agriculture and especially worshipped by husbandmen. The name, however, does not occur in the Phoenician remains which have come down to us.

Dagon is mentioned in scripture only as a Philistine god, 1152 which doesn’t necessarily mean he was recognized by the Phoenicians. However, since Philo of Byblus includes him among the major Phoenician deities, claiming he is a son of Uranus and a brother of Il or Kronis, 1153 it’s reasonable to include him in the Phoenician pantheon. According to Philo, he was the god of agriculture, the one who discovered wheat, and the inventor of the plow. 1154 It’s highly questionable whether he was actually depicted, as is commonly believed, 1155 in the form of a fish, or as a half-man, half-fish figure. The Hebrew account of the fall of Dagon’s image before the Ark of the Covenant at Ashdod doesn’t mention any “fishy part,” and there’s nothing in the Assyrian records that ties the name Dagon, which appears there, to the notable fish-god found in the bas-reliefs. That figure seems to represent or symbolize either Hea or Nin. The idea of Dagon having a fish form primarily comes from etymology—specifically, the fact that dag means “fish” in Hebrew. In Assyrian, though, kha means “fish,” not dag; while in Hebrew, even though dag means “fish,” dagan means “corn.” It’s also worth noting that Phoenician artifacts don’t show any fish deity. Overall, it might be best to accept Philo's description and see the Phoenician Dagon as a “Zeus Arotrios”—a god overseeing agriculture and particularly honored by farmers. However, his name does not appear in the Phoenician artifacts that have survived.

Hadad, like Dagon, obtains his right to be included in the list of Phoenician deities solely from the place assigned to him by Philo. Otherwise he would naturally be viewed as an Aramean god, worshipped especially in Aram-Zobah, and in Syria of Damascus.1156 In Syria, he was identified with the sun;1157 and it is possible that in the Phoenician religion he was the Sun-God, worshipped (as we have seen) sometimes independently of Baal. His image was represented with the solar rays streaming down from it towards the earth, so as to indicate that the earth received from him all that made it fruitful and abundant.1158 Macrobius connects his name with the Hebrew chad, “one;” but this derivation is improbable.1159 Philo gives him the title of “King of Gods,” and says that he reigned conjointly with Astarte and Demaroüs,1160 but this does not throw much light on the real Phoenician conception of him. The local name, Hadad-rimmon,1161 may seem to connect him with the god Rimmon, likewise a Syrian deity,1162 and it is quite conceivable that the two words may have been alternative names of the same god, just as Phoebus and Apollo were with the Greeks. We may conjecture that the Sun was worshipped under both names in Syria, while in Phoenicia Hadad was alone made use of. The worship of Baal as the Sun, which tended to prevail ever more and more, ousted Hadad from his place, and caused him to pass into oblivion.

Hadad, like Dagon, is included in the list of Phoenician gods mainly because of the role given to him by Philo. Otherwise, he would likely be seen as an Aramean god, primarily worshipped in Aram-Zobah and in Damascus, Syria. In Syria, he was associated with the sun; and it's possible that in the Phoenician religion, he was the Sun-God, worshipped (as we've seen) sometimes independently of Baal. His image was depicted with solar rays coming down towards the earth, symbolizing that the earth received from him everything that made it fruitful and abundant. Macrobius links his name to the Hebrew chad, meaning “one,” but this connection seems unlikely. Philo refers to him as the “King of Gods” and states that he ruled alongside Astarte and Demaroüs, but this doesn’t really clarify the true Phoenician understanding of him. The local name, Hadad-rimmon, might suggest a link to the god Rimmon, who is also a Syrian deity, and it’s quite possible that the two names were alternate names for the same god, similar to how the Greeks used Phoebus and Apollo. We can speculate that the Sun was worshipped under both names in Syria, while in Phoenicia, only Hadad was used. The growing worship of Baal as the Sun eventually led to Hadad being pushed aside and forgotten.

Adonis was probably, like Hadad, originally a sun-god; but the myths connected with him gave him, at any rate in the late Phoenician times, a very distinct and definite personality. He was made the son of Cinryas, a mythic king of Byblus,1163 and the husband of Astarte or Ashtoreth. One day, as he chased the wild boar in Lebanon, near the sources of the river of Byblus, the animal which he was hunting turned upon him, and so gored his thigh that he died of the wound. Henceforth he was mourned annually. At the turn of the summer solstice, the anniversary of his death, all the women of Byblus went in a wild procession to Aphaca, in the Lebanon, where his temple stood, and wept and wailed on account of his death. The river, which his blood had once actually stained, turned red to show its sympathy with the mourners, and was thought to flow with his blood afresh. After the “weeping for Tammuz"1164 had continued for a definite time, the mourning terminated with the burial of an image of the god in the sacred precinct. Next day Adonis was supposed to return to life; his image was disinterred and carried back to the temple with music and dances, and every circumstance of rejoicing.1165 Wild orgies followed, and Aphaca became notorious for scenes to which it will be necessary to recur hereafter. The Adonis myth is generally explained as representing either the perpetually recurrent decay and recovery of nature, or the declension of the Sun as he moves from the summer to the winter constellations, and his subsequent return and reappearance in all his strength. But myths obtained a powerful hold on ancient imaginations, and the worshippers of Adonis probably in most cases forgot the symbolical character of his cult, and looked on him as a divine or heroic personage, who had actually gone through all the adventures ascribed to him in the legend. Hence the peculiarly local character of his worship, of which we find traces only at Byblus and at Jerusalem.

Adonis was likely, like Hadad, originally a sun god; but the myths surrounding him gave him, especially in later Phoenician times, a very distinct and defined personality. He was considered the son of Cinryas, a mythical king of Byblus,1163 and the husband of Astarte or Ashtoreth. One day, while hunting a wild boar in Lebanon, near the sources of the river of Byblus, the animal he was pursuing turned on him and gored his thigh, leading to his death from the wound. From then on, he was mourned every year. At the summer solstice, the anniversary of his death, all the women of Byblus would take part in a wild procession to Aphaca, in Lebanon, where his temple was located, weeping and lamenting for him. The river, which his blood had once stained, would turn red to show its sympathy for the mourners, as if it were flowing with his blood again. After the “weeping for Tammuz"1164 had gone on for a set amount of time, the mourning ended with the burial of an image of the god in the sacred area. The following day, Adonis was thought to return to life; his image was unearthed and brought back to the temple with music and dancing, celebrating his resurrection.1165 Wild parties followed, and Aphaca became infamous for the scenes that would later need to be revisited. The Adonis myth is typically understood as representing either the ongoing cycles of decay and renewal in nature or the decline of the Sun as it moves from the summer to the winter constellations, followed by its return and resurgence in full strength. However, myths had a strong influence on ancient minds, and the worshippers of Adonis likely often overlooked the symbolic nature of his cult, viewing him instead as a divine or heroic figure who truly experienced all the adventures detailed in the legend. This explains the uniquely local nature of his worship, which we find reflected only in Byblus and Jerusalem.

Sydyk, “Justice,” or, the “Just One,"1166 whose name corresponds to the Hebrew Zadok or Zedek, appears in the Phoenician mythology especially as the father of Esmun and the Cabeiri. Otherwise he is only known as the son of Magus (!) and the discoverer of salt.1167 It is perhaps his name which forms the final element in Melchizedek, Adoni-zedek,1168 and the like. We have no evidence that he was really worshipped by the Phoenicians.

Sydyk, “Justice,” or the “Just One,”1166 whose name is linked to the Hebrew Zadok or Zedek, shows up in Phoenician mythology primarily as the father of Esmun and the Cabeiri. He's also known as the son of Magus (!) and the discoverer of salt.1167 His name might be the final part of Melchizedek, Adoni-zedek,1168 and similar names. There's no evidence that he was actually worshipped by the Phoenicians.

Esmun, on the other hand, the son of Sydyk, would seem to have been an object of worship almost as much as any other deity. He was the special god of Berytus,1169 but was honoured also in Cyprus, at Sidon, at Carthage, in Sardinia, and elsewhere.1170 His name forms a frequent element in Phoenician names, royal and other:—e.g. Esmun-azar, Esmun-nathan, Han-Esmun, Netsib-Esmun, Abd-Esmun, &c. According to Damascius,1171 he was the eighth son of Sydyk, whence his name, and the chief of the Cabeiri. Whereas they were dwarfish and misshapen, he was a youth of most beautiful appearance, truly worthy of admiration. Like Adonis, he was fond of hunting in the woods that clothe the flanks of Lebanon, and there he was seen by Astronoë, the Phoenician goddess, the mother of the gods (in whom we cannot fail to recognise Astarte), who persecuted him with her attentions to such an extent that to escape her he was driven to the desperate resource of self-emasculation. Upon this the goddess, greatly grieved, called him Pæan, and by means of quickening warmth brought him back to life, and changed him from a man into a god, which he thenceforth remained. The Phoenicians called him Esmun, “the eighth,” but the Greeks worshipped him as Asclepius, the god of healing, who gave life and health to mankind. Some of the later Phoenicians regarded him as identical with the atmosphere, which, they said, was the chief source of health to man.1172 But it is not altogether clear that the earlier Phoenicians attached to him any healing character.1173

Esmun, on the other hand, the son of Sydyk, seems to have been worshipped almost as much as any other deity. He was the special god of Berytus, 1169 but was also honored in Cyprus, at Sidon, at Carthage, in Sardinia, and other places.1170 His name appears frequently in Phoenician names, both royal and otherwise: e.g. Esmun-azar, Esmun-nathan, Han-Esmun, Netsib-Esmun, Abd-Esmun, etc. According to Damascius, 1171 he was the eighth son of Sydyk, which is where his name comes from, and he was the chief of the Cabeiri. While they were dwarfish and deformed, he was a handsome young man, truly worthy of admiration. Like Adonis, he loved hunting in the forests on the slopes of Lebanon, where he was seen by Astronoë, the Phoenician goddess, the mother of the gods (whom we can easily recognize as Astarte), who pursued him with such intensity that he resorted to the drastic measure of self-emasculation to escape her. In response, the goddess, deeply saddened, called him Pæan and, by means of revitalizing warmth, brought him back to life and transformed him from a man into a god, which he remained thereafter. The Phoenicians referred to him as Esmun, "the eighth," while the Greeks worshipped him as Asclepius, the god of healing, who granted life and health to humanity. Some of the later Phoenicians considered him to be identical with the atmosphere, which they said was the primary source of health for people.1172 However, it's not completely clear that the earlier Phoenicians associated him with healing at all.1173

The seven other Cabeiri, or “Great Ones,” equally with Esmun the sons of Sydyk, were dwarfish gods who presided over navigation,1174 and were the patrons of sailors and ships. The special seat of their worship in Phoenicia Proper was Berytus, but they were recognised also in several of the Phoenician settlements, as especially in Lemnos, Imbrus, and Samothrace.1175 Ships were regarded as their invention,1176 and a sculptured image of some one or other of them was always placed on every Phoenician war-galley, either at the stern or stem of the vessel.1177 They were also viewed as presiding over metals and metallurgy,1178 having thus some points of resemblance to the Greek Hephæstus and the Latin Vulcan. Pigmy and misshapen gods belong to that fetishism which has always had charms for the Hamitic nations; and it may be suspected that the Phoenicians adopted the Cabeiri from their Canaanite predecessors, who were of the race of Ham.1179 The connection between these pigmy deities and the Egyptian Phthah, or rather Phthah-Sokari, is unmistakable, and was perceived by Herodotus.1180 Clay pigmy figurines found on Phoenician sites1181 very closely resemble the Egyptian images of that god; and the coins attributed to Cossura exhibit a similar dwarfish form, generally carrying a hammer in the right hand.1182 An astral character has been attached by some writers to the Cabeiri,1183 but chiefly on account of their number, which is scarcely a sufficient proof.

The seven other Cabeiri, or “Great Ones,” along with Esmun, the sons of Sydyk, were small gods who oversaw navigation and were the guardians of sailors and ships. Their main place of worship in Phoenicia was Berytus, but they were also recognized in several Phoenician settlements, especially in Lemnos, Imbrus, and Samothrace. Ships were considered their invention, and a carved image of one of them was always placed on every Phoenician war galley, either at the back or the front of the vessel. They were also seen as overseeing metals and metallurgy, sharing some similarities with the Greek Hephaestus and the Latin Vulcan. The small and misshapen gods reflect the fetishism that has always fascinated the Hamitic nations; it may be suspected that the Phoenicians adopted the Cabeiri from their Canaanite predecessors, who were of the lineage of Ham. The connection between these small deities and the Egyptian Phthah, or rather Phthah-Sokari, is clear and was noted by Herodotus. Clay figurines of these small gods found at Phoenician sites closely resemble the Egyptian representations of that god; the coins attributed to Cossura also show a similar small form, typically holding a hammer in the right hand. Some writers have assigned an astral aspect to the Cabeiri, mainly because of their number, although this is hardly conclusive proof.

Several Greek writers speak of a Phoenician goddess corresponding to the Grecian Athene,1184 and some of them say that she was named Onga or Onca.1185 The Phoenician remains give us no such name; but as Philo Byblius has an “Athene” among his Phoenician deities, whom he makes the daughter of Il, or Kronos, and the queen of Attica,1186 it is perhaps best to allow Onca to retain her place in the Phoenician Pantheon. Philo says that Kronos by her advice shaped for himself out of iron a sword and a spear; we may therefore presume that she was a war-goddess (as was Pallas-Athene among the Greeks), whence she naturally presided over the gates of towns,1187 which were built and fortified for warlike purposes.

Several Greek writers mention a Phoenician goddess that corresponds to the Greek Athena, and some of them claim she was called Onga or Onca. The Phoenician remains do not provide such a name; however, since Philo Byblius includes an “Athene” among his Phoenician deities, whom he describes as the daughter of Il, or Kronos, and the queen of Attica, it may be best to keep Onca in the Phoenician Pantheon. Philo states that Kronos, with her guidance, crafted a sword and a spear out of iron; therefore, we can assume she was a war goddess (similar to Pallas-Athene among the Greeks), which is why she naturally oversaw the gates of towns, which were built and fortified for military purposes.

The worship of a goddess, called Tanath or Tanith, by the later Phoenicians, is certain, since, besides the evidence furnished by the name Abd-Tanith, i.e. “Servant of Tanith,"1188 the name Tanith itself is distinctly read on a number of votive tablets brought from Carthage, in a connection which clearly implies her recognition, not only as a goddess, but as a great goddess, the principal object of Carthaginian worship. The form of inscription on the tablets is, ordinarily, as follows:—1189

The worship of a goddess named Tanath or Tanith by the later Phoenicians is clear, as indicated by the name Abd-Tanith, meaning "Servant of Tanith." The name Tanith itself appears on several votive tablets from Carthage, suggesting her recognition not just as a goddess, but as a major goddess and the primary focus of worship in Carthage. The typical format of the inscriptions on the tablets is as follows:—1189

     “To the great [goddess], Tanith, and
     To our lord and master Baal-Hammon.
     The offerer is ....,
     Son of ...., son of ....”
 
 “To the great goddess Tanith, and to our lord and master Baal-Hammon. The person making the offering is ...., son of ...., son of ....”

Tanith is invariable placed before Baal, as though superior to him, and can be no other than the celestial goddess (Dea coelestis), whose temple in the Roman Carthage was so celebrated.1190 The Greeks regarded her as equivalent to their Artemis;1191 the Romans made her Diana, or Juno, or Venus.1192 Practically she must at Carthage have taken the place of Ashtoreth. Apuleius describes her as having a lunar character, like Ashtoreth, and calls her “the parent of all things, the mistress of the elements, the initial offspring of the ages, the highest of the deities, the queen of the Manes, the first of the celestials, the single representative of all the gods and goddesses, the one divinity whom all the world worships in many shapes, with varied rites, and under a multitude of names."1193 He says that she was represented as riding upon a lion, and it is probably her form which appears upon some of the later coins of Carthage, as well as upon a certain number of gems.1194 The origin of the name is uncertain. Gesenius would connect it at once with the Egyptian Neith (Nit), and with the Syrian Anaïtis or Tanaïtis;1195 but the double identification is scarcely tenable, since Anaïtis was, in Egypt, not Neith, but Anta.1196 The subject is very obscure, and requires further investigation.

Tanith is consistently placed above Baal, as if she is superior to him, and she can only be the celestial goddess (Dea coelestis), whose temple in Roman Carthage was so renowned.1190 The Greeks considered her equivalent to their Artemis;1191 the Romans identified her as Diana, Juno, or Venus.1192 Practically, she must have taken the place of Ashtoreth in Carthage. Apuleius describes her as having a lunar quality, similar to Ashtoreth, and refers to her as “the parent of all things, the mistress of the elements, the initial offspring of the ages, the highest of the deities, the queen of the Manes, the first of the celestials, the singular representative of all the gods and goddesses, the one divinity whom all the world worships in various forms, with different rites, and under many names."1193 He mentions that she was depicted riding a lion, and it’s likely her image appears on some of the later coins of Carthage, as well as on certain gems.1194 The origin of the name is unclear. Gesenius would link it to the Egyptian Neith (Nit) and the Syrian Anaïtis or Tanaïtis;1195 however, the connection is questionable, since Anaïtis in Egypt was not Neith, but Anta.1196 The subject is quite obscure and needs further exploration.

Baaltis, or Beltis, was, according to Philo Byblius, the daughter of Uranus and the sister of Asthoreth or Astarte.1197 Il made her one of his many wives, and put the city of Byblus, which he had founded, under her special protection.1198 It is doubtful, however, whether she was really viewed by the Phoenicians as a separate goddess, and not rather as Ashtoreth under another name. The word is the equivalent of {...}, “my lady,” a very suitable title for the supreme goddess. Beltis, indeed, in Babylonia, was distinct from Ishtar;1199 but this fact must not be regarded as any sufficient proof that the case was the same in Phoenicia. The Phoenician polytheism was decidedly more restricted than the Babylonian, and did not greatly affect the needless multiplication of divinities. Baaltis in Phoenicia may be the Beltis of Babylon imported at a comparatively late date into the country, but is more probably an alternative name, or rather, perhaps, a mere honorary title of Ashtoreth.11100

Baaltis, or Beltis, was, according to Philo Byblius, the daughter of Uranus and the sister of Asthoreth or Astarte.1197 He made her one of his many wives and placed the city of Byblus, which he had founded, under her special protection.1198 However, it's unclear whether the Phoenicians actually considered her a distinct goddess or simply another name for Ashtoreth. The word is equivalent to {...}, “my lady,” which is a fitting title for the supreme goddess. In Babylon, Beltis was indeed separate from Ishtar;1199 but this doesn’t necessarily mean that it was the same in Phoenicia. The Phoenician polytheism was notably more limited than the Babylonian and didn’t lead to an unnecessary increase in deities. Baaltis in Phoenicia might be the Beltis of Babylon brought into the region at a relatively late time, but it's more likely an alternative name, or perhaps just an honorary title for Ashtoreth.11100

The chief characteristic of the third period of the Phoenician religion was the syncretistic tendency,11101 whereby foreign gods were called in, and either identified with the old national divinities, or joined with them, and set by their side. Ammon, Osiris, Phthah, Pasht, and Athor, were introduced from Egypt, Tanith from either Egypt or Syria, Nergal from Assyria, Beltis (Baaltis) perhaps from Babylon. The worship of Osiris in the later times appears from such names as Abd-Osir, Osir-shamar, Melek-Osir, and the like,11102 and is represented on coins with Phoenician legends, which are attributed either to Malta or Gaulos.11103 Osiris was, it would seem, identified with Adonis,11104 and was said to have been buried at Byblus;11105 which was near the mouth of the Adonis river. His worship was not perhaps very widely spread; but there are traces of it at Byblus, in Cyprus, and in Malta.11106 Ammon was identified with Baal in his solar character,11107 and was generally worshipped in conjunction with Tanith, more especially at Carthage.11108 He was represented with his head encircled by rays, and with a perfectly round face.11109 His common title was “Lord” {...}, but in Numidia he was worshipped as “the Eternal King” {...}.11110 As the giver of all good things, he held trees or fruits in his hands.11111

The main feature of the third period of Phoenician religion was the syncretistic tendency,11101 where foreign gods were introduced and either merged with the old national deities or placed alongside them. Ammon, Osiris, Phthah, Pasht, and Athor were brought in from Egypt, Tanith from either Egypt or Syria, Nergal from Assyria, and Beltis (Baaltis) possibly from Babylon. The worship of Osiris in later times is evident from names like Abd-Osir, Osir-shamar, Melek-Osir, and others,11102 and is depicted on coins with Phoenician inscriptions, attributed either to Malta or Gaulos.11103 Osiris seems to have been identified with Adonis,11104 and it was said he was buried at Byblus,11105 which was near the mouth of the Adonis river. His worship may not have been very widespread, but there are signs of it at Byblus, in Cyprus, and in Malta.11106 Ammon was associated with Baal in his solar aspect,11107 and was typically worshipped alongside Tanith, especially at Carthage.11108 He was depicted with rays around his head and a perfectly round face.11109 His common title was “Lord” {...}, but in Numidia he was worshipped as “the Eternal King” {...}.11110 As the giver of all good things, he held trees or fruits in his hands.11111

The Phoenicians worshipped their gods, like most other ancient nations, with prayer, with hymns of praise, with sacrifices, with processions, and with votive offerings. We do not know whether they had any regularly recurrent day, like the Jewish Sabbath, or Christian Sunday, on which worship took place in the temples generally; but at any rate each temple had its festival times, when multitudes flocked to it, and its gods were honoured with prolonged services and sacrifices on a larger scale than ordinary. Most festivals were annual, but some recurred at shorter intervals; and, besides the festivals, there was an every day cult, which was a duty incumbent upon the priests, but at which the private worshipper also might assist to offer prayer or sacrifice. The ordinary sacrificial animals were oxen, cows, goats, sheep, and lambs; swine were not offered, being regarded as unclean;11112 but the stag was an acceptable victim, at any rate on certain occasions.11113 At all functions the priests attended in large numbers, habited in white garments of linen or cotton, and wearing a stiff cap or mitre upon their heads:11114 on one occasion of a sacrifice Lucian counted above three hundred engaged in the ceremony.11115 It was the duty of some to slay the victims; of others to pour libations; of a third class to bear about pans of coal on which incense could be offered; of a fourth to attend upon the altars.11116 The priests of each temple had at their head a Chief or High Priest, who was robed in purple and wore a golden tiara. His office, however, continued only for a year, when another was chosen to succeed him.11117

The Phoenicians worshipped their gods, like most other ancient nations, with prayer, hymns of praise, sacrifices, processions, and votive offerings. We don’t know if they had a specific day for worship, like the Jewish Sabbath or Christian Sunday, but every temple definitely had its festival times when large crowds would come, and its gods were honored with extended services and bigger sacrifices than usual. Most festivals happened once a year, but some occurred more frequently; in addition to these festivals, there was an everyday ritual that the priests were required to perform, which private worshippers could also join in to offer prayers or sacrifices. The typical animals for sacrifice were oxen, cows, goats, sheep, and lambs; pigs were not offered, as they were considered unclean; however, stags were acceptable victims on certain occasions. During all events, the priests attended in large numbers, dressed in white garments made of linen or cotton, and wearing a stiff cap or mitre on their heads: on one occasion of a sacrifice, Lucian counted over three hundred involved in the ceremony. Some priests were tasked with killing the victims, others poured libations, a third group carried pans of coal for incense burning, and a fourth attended to the altars. Each temple had a Chief or High Priest at the helm, who was dressed in purple and wore a golden tiara. This position, however, lasted only a year before another was chosen to take over.

Ordinarily, sacrifices were offered, in Phoenicia as elsewhere, singly, and upon altars; but sometimes it was customary to have a great holocaust. Large trees were dug up by the roots, and planted in the court of the temple; the victims, whether goats, or sheep, or cattle of any other kind, were suspended by ropes from the branches; birds were similarly attached, and garments, and vessels in gold and silver. Then the images of the gods belonging to the temple were brought out, and carried in a solemn procession round the trees; after which the trees were set on fire, and the whole was consumed in a mighty conflagration.11118 The season for this great holocaust was the commencement of the spring-time, when the goodness of Heaven in once more causing life to spring up on every side seemed to require man’s special acknowledgment.

Usually, sacrifices were made in Phoenicia and elsewhere one at a time on altars; but sometimes, it was customary to hold a big holocaust. Large trees were uprooted and planted in the temple courtyard; the victims, whether goats, sheep, or other livestock, were hung from the branches with ropes; birds were similarly tied up, along with garments and gold and silver vessels. Then the temple's images of the gods were brought out and paraded around the trees in a solemn procession; after that, the trees were set on fire, and everything was consumed in a massive blaze. The time for this great holocaust was the beginning of spring, when the goodness of Heaven in bringing life back all around seemed to call for a special acknowledgment from humanity.

Hymns of praise are spoken of especially in connection with this same Spring-Festival.11119 Votive offerings were continually being offered in every temple by such as believed that they had received any benefit from any god, either in consequence of their vows, or prayers, or even by the god’s spontaneous action. The sites of temples yield numerous traces of such offerings. Sometimes they are in the shape of stone stelæ or pillars, inscribed and more or less ornamented,11120 sometimes of tablets placed within an ornamental border, and generally accompanied by some rude sculptures;11121 more often of figures, either in bronze or clay, which are mostly of a somewhat rude character. M. Renan observes with respect to these figures, which are extremely numerous:—“Ought we to see in these images, as has been supposed, long series of portraits of priests and priestesses continued through several centuries? We do not think so. The person represented in these statues appears to us to be the author of a vow or of a sacrifice made to the divinity of the temple . . . Vows and sacrifices were very fleeting things; it might be feared that the divinity would soon forget them. An inscription was already recognised as a means of rendering the memory of a vow more lasting; but a statue was a momento still more—nay, much more efficacious. By having himself represented under the eyes of the divinity in the very act of accomplishing his vow, a man called to mind, as one may say, incessantly the offering which he had made to the god, and the homage which he had rendered him. An idea of this sort is altogether in conformity with the materialistic and self-interested character of the Phoenician worship, where the vow is a kind of business affair, a matter of debtor and creditor account, in which a man stipulates very clearly what he is to give, and holds firmly that he is to be paid in return . . . We have then, in these statues, representations of pious men, who came one after another to acquit themselves of their debt in the presence of the divinity; in order that the latter should not forget that the debt was discharged, they set up their images in front of the god. The image was larger or smaller, more or less carefully elaborated, in a more or less valuable material, according to the means of the individual who consecrated it."11122

Hymns of praise are especially mentioned in connection with the Spring Festival. Votive offerings were constantly made in every temple by those who believed they had received some benefit from a god, whether due to their vows, prayers, or even the god’s spontaneous action. The locations of temples provide many signs of such offerings. Sometimes they take the form of stone stelæ or pillars, inscribed and decorated to varying degrees; sometimes they are tablets set within an ornamental border, usually accompanied by some simple sculptures; more often, they are figures, either in bronze or clay, which are mostly quite crude. M. Renan remarks about these numerous figures: “Should we see in these images, as has been thought, long series of portraits of priests and priestesses spanning several centuries? We do not believe so. The person depicted in these statues seems to us to be the individual who made a vow or a sacrifice to the temple’s divinity . . . Vows and sacrifices were very fleeting; there was a risk that the divinity would soon forget them. An inscription was already seen as a way to make the memory of a vow more lasting, but a statue was an even more—actually, much more—effective memento. By having himself portrayed in front of the divinity at the moment of fulfilling his vow, a person was constantly reminded of the offering he had made to the god and the homage he had paid. This idea aligns perfectly with the materialistic and self-interested nature of Phoenician worship, where a vow is like a business deal, a matter of debtor and creditor, in which a person clearly states what he will give and firmly expects to be compensated in return . . . Thus, we have in these statues representations of devout individuals who came one after another to settle their debts in the presence of the divinity; to ensure that the latter did not forget that the debt was paid, they erected their images in front of the god. The size and quality of the image varied, based on the financial means of the person who dedicated it."

Thus far there was no very remarkable difference between the Phoenician religious system and other ancient Oriental worships, which have a general family likeness, and differ chiefly in the names and number of the deities, the simplicity or complication of the rites, and the greater or less power and dignity attached to the priestly office. In these several respects the Phoenician religion seems to have leant towards the side of simplicity, the divinities recognised being, comparatively speaking, few, priestly influence not great, and the ceremonial not very elaborate. But there were two respects in which the religion was, if not singular, at any rate markedly different from ordinary polytheisms, though less in the principles involved than in the extent to which they were carried out in practice. These were the prevalence of licentious orgies and of human sacrifice. The worship of Astarte was characterised by the one, the worship of Baal by the other. Phoenician mythology taught that the great god, Il or El, when reigning upon earth as king of Byblus, had, under circumstances of extreme danger to his native land, sacrificed his dearly loved son, Ieoud, as an expiatory offering. Divine sanction had thus been given to the horrid rite; and thenceforth, whenever in Phoenicia either public or private calamity threatened, it became customary that human victims should be selected, the nobler and more honourable the better, and that the wrath of the gods should be appeased by taking their lives. The mode of death was horrible. The sacrifices were to be consumed by fire; the life given by the Fire God he should also take back again by the flames which destroy being. The rabbis describe the image of Moloch as a human figure with a bull’s head and outstretched arms;11123 and the account which they give is confirmed by what Diodorus relates of the Carthaginian Kronos. His image, Diodorus says,11124 was of metal, and was made hot by a fire kindled within it; the victims were placed in its arms and thence rolled into the fiery lap below. The most usual form of the rite was the sacrifice of their children—especially of their eldest sons11125—by parents. “This custom was grounded in part on the notion that children were the dearest possession of their parents, and, in part, that as pure and innocent beings they were the offerings of atonement most certain to pacify the anger of the deity; and further, that the god of whose essence the generative power of nature was had a just title of that which was begotten of man, and to the surrender of their children’s lives . . . Voluntary offering on the part of the parents was essential to the success of the sacrifice; even the first-born, nay, the only child of the family, was given up. The parents stopped the cries of their children by fondling and kissing them, for the victim ought not to weep; and the sound of complaint was drowned in the din of flutes and kettledrums. Mothers, according to Plutarch,11126 stood by without tears or sobs; if they wept or sobbed they lost the honour of the act, and their children were sacrificed notwithstanding. Such sacrifices took place either annually or on an appointed day, or before great enterprises, or on the occasion of public calamities, to appease the wrath of the god."11127

So far, there wasn't a significant difference between the Phoenician religious system and other ancient Eastern religions, which share a general resemblance and mainly differ in the names and number of the deities, the simplicity or complexity of the rituals, and the level of authority and prestige associated with the priesthood. In these aspects, the Phoenician religion seemed to favor simplicity, having relatively few recognized gods, not much priestly influence, and fairly straightforward ceremonies. However, there were two areas where the religion stood out, if not uniquely, at least noticeably different from typical polytheistic religions, though this was more about how these principles were implemented in practice than about the principles themselves. These were the frequent licentious orgies and human sacrifices. The worship of Astarte was marked by the former, while the worship of Baal was associated with the latter. Phoenician mythology held that the supreme god, Il or El, when reigning on earth as the king of Byblus, had, in a moment of extreme peril for his homeland, sacrificed his beloved son, Ieoud, as a means of atonement. This gave divine approval to the gruesome practice; from that point on, whenever there was any public or private disaster in Phoenicia, it became a common practice to choose human victims, preferably of noble birth, to appease the gods' anger by taking their lives. The method of execution was horrific. The sacrifices were to be burned; the life granted by the Fire God was to be reclaimed by the flames that destroy existence. The rabbis describe the figure of Moloch as a human-shaped statue with a bull’s head and outstretched arms;11123 and their account aligns with what Diodorus reports about the Carthaginian Kronos. According to Diodorus,11124 his figure was made of metal and heated by a fire within it; the victims were placed in its arms and then rolled into the fiery pit below. The most common form of the ritual involved the sacrifice of children—especially their eldest sons11125—by their parents. “This practice was partly based on the idea that children were the most precious possession of their parents, and partly on the belief that, as pure and innocent beings, they were the offerings most likely to appease the deity's anger; furthermore, the god whose essence embodies nature's generative power had a rightful claim to what was begotten by man, and to the surrender of their children's lives... Voluntary offering by the parents was essential for the sacrifice to succeed; even the first-born or, indeed, the only child of the family was surrendered. Parents would hush their children's cries by cuddling and kissing them, as the victim ought not to weep; and the sound of cries was drowned out by the noise of flutes and drums. Mothers, according to Plutarch,11126 stood by without tears or sobs; if they cried or sobbed, they would lose the honor of the act, and their children would still be sacrificed. Such sacrifices occurred either yearly or on designated days, or before significant undertakings, or during public disasters, to calm the gods' wrath."11127

In the worship of Astarte the prostitution of women, and of effeminate men, played the same part that child murder did in the worship of Baal. “This practice,” says Dr. Döllinger,11128 “so widely spread in the world of old, the delusion that no service more acceptable could be rendered a deity than that of unchastity, was deeply rooted in the Asiatic mind. Where the deity was in idea sexual, or where two deities in chief, one a male and the other a female, stood in juxtaposition, there the sexual relation appeared as founded upon the essence of the deity itself, and the instinct and its satisfaction as that in men which most corresponded with the deity. Thus lust itself became a service of the gods; and, as the fundamental idea of sacrifice is that of the immediate or substitutive surrender of a man’s self to the deity, so the woman could do the goddess no better service than by prostitution. Hence it was the custom [in some places] that a maiden before her marriage should prostitute herself once in the temple of the goddess;11129 and this was regarded as the same in kind with the offering of the first-fruits of the field.” Lucian, a heathen and an eye-witness, tells us11130—“I saw at Byblus the grand temple of the Byblian Venus, in which are accomplished the orgies relating to Adonis; and I learnt the nature of the orgies. For the Byblians say that the wounding of Adonis by the boar took place in their country; and, in memory of the accident, they year by year beat their breasts, and utter lamentations, and go through the orgies, and hold a great mourning throughout the land. When the weeping is ended, first of all, they make to Adonis the offerings usually made to a corpse; after which, on the next day, they feign that he has come to life again, and hold a procession [of his image] in the open air. But previously they shave their heads, like the Egyptians when an Apis dies; and if any woman refuse to do so, she must sell her beauty during one day to all who like. Only strangers, however, are permitted to make the purchase, and the money paid is expended on a sacrifice which is offered to the goddess.” “In this way,” as Dr. Döllinger goes on to say, “they went so far at last as to contemplate the abominations of unnatural lust as a homage rendered to the deity, and to exalt it into a regular cultus. The worship of the goddess [Ashtoreth] at Aphaca in the Lebanon was specially notorious in this respect."11131 Here, according to Eusebius, was, so late as the time of Constantine the Great, a temple in which the old Phoenician rites were still retained. “This,” he says, “was a grove and a sacred enclosure, not situated, as most temples are, in the midst of a city, and of market-places, and of broad streets, but far away from either road or path, on the rocky slopes of Libanus. It was dedicated to a shameful goddess, the goddess Aphrodite. A school of wickedness was this place for all such profligate persons as had ruined their bodies by excessive luxury. The men there were soft and womanish—men no longer; the dignity of their sex they rejected; with impure lust they thought to honour the deity. Criminal intercourse with women, secret pollutions, disgraceful and nameless deeds, were practised in the temple, where there was no restraining law, and no guardian to preserve decency."11132

In the worship of Astarte, the prostitution of women and effeminate men served the same role as child sacrifice did in the worship of Baal. “This practice,” says Dr. Döllinger, 11128 “was widespread in the ancient world; the belief that no service was more acceptable to a deity than unchastity was deeply ingrained in the Asiatic mindset. Where the deity was viewed as sexual, or where two primary deities, one male and one female, were placed in contrast, the sexual relationship appeared to be based on the very essence of the deity, with human instinct and its satisfaction being the most aligned with the divine. Thus, lust itself became a service to the gods; just as the core idea of sacrifice involves the immediate or substitutive surrender of oneself to a deity, a woman could serve the goddess no better than through prostitution. Consequently, it was customary [in some areas] for a maiden to prostitute herself at least once in the temple of the goddess before marriage; 11129 and this was seen as equivalent to offering the first fruits from the harvest.” Lucian, a pagan and eyewitness, tells us 11130—“I saw in Byblus the grand temple of the Byblian Venus, where the rituals for Adonis take place, and I learned about the nature of these rituals. The Byblians claim that Adonis was wounded by a boar in their country; in memory of this event, they beat their breasts, wail, perform the rituals, and hold a great mourning throughout the land every year. Once the mourning ends, they first make offerings to Adonis as though he were a corpse; then, the next day, they pretend he has come back to life and hold a procession [of his image] in the open air. Before this, though, they shave their heads like the Egyptians do when an Apis dies; and if any woman refuses to do so, she must sell her beauty for one day to anyone who wishes to buy it. However, only strangers are allowed to make the purchase, and the money made is used for a sacrifice to the goddess.” “In this way,” as Dr. Döllinger continues, “they eventually considered the horrors of unnatural lust as homage to the deity, elevating it to a regular form of worship. The worship of the goddess [Ashtoreth] at Aphaca in Lebanon was especially notorious for this.” 11131 Here, according to Eusebius, there was, as late as the time of Constantine the Great, a temple where the old Phoenician rites were still practiced. “This,” he states, “was a grove and a sacred area not located, as most temples are, in the middle of a city, markets, or major streets, but far away from any road or path, on the rocky slopes of Libanus. It was dedicated to a shameful goddess, Aphrodite. This place served as a school of vice for all those who had destroyed their bodies through excessive indulgence. The men there were soft and effeminate—not truly men; they rejected the dignity of their gender, thinking they could honor the deity with impure lust. Criminal acts with women, secret sins, disgraceful and nameless deeds occurred in the temple, where there were no laws to restrain them and no guardians to uphold decency.” 11132

One fruit of this system was the extraordinary institution of the Galli. The Galli were men, who made themselves as much like women as they could, and offered themselves for purposes of unnatural lust to either sex. Their existence may be traced in Israel and Judah,11133 as well as in Syria and Phoenicia.11134 At great festivals, under the influence of a strong excitement, amid the din of flutes and drums and wild songs, a number of the male devotees would snatch up swords or knives, which lay ready for the purpose, throw off their garments, and coming forward with a loud shout, proceed to castrate themselves openly. They would then run through the streets of the city, with the mutilated parts in their hands, and throw them into the houses of the inhabitants, who were bound in such case to provide the thrower with all the apparel and other gear needful for a woman.11135 This apparel they thenceforth wore, and were recognised as attached to the worship of Astarte, entitled to reside in her temples, and authorised to take part in her ceremonies. They joined with the priests and the sacred women at festival times in frenzied dances and other wild orgies, shouting, and cutting themselves on the arms, and submitting to be flogged one by another.11136 At other seasons they “wandered from place to place, taking with them a veiled image or symbol of their goddess, and clad in women’s apparel of many colours, and with their faces and eyes painted in female fashion, armed with swords and scourges, they threw themselves by a wild dance into bacchanalian ecstasy, in which their long hair was draggled through the mud. They bit their own arms, and then hacked themselves with their swords, or scourged themselves in penance for a sin supposed to have been committed against the goddess. In these scenes, got up to aid the collection of money, by long practice they contrived to cut themselves so adroitly as not to inflict on themselves any very serious wounds."11137

One outcome of this system was the unique institution of the Galli. The Galli were men who tried to adopt a feminine appearance as much as possible and offered themselves for the sake of unnatural desires to anyone, regardless of gender. Their presence can be found in Israel and Judah,11133 as well as in Syria and Phoenicia.11134 During major festivals, fueled by intense excitement and the sounds of flutes, drums, and lively songs, some male devotees would grab swords or knives that were provided for this purpose, remove their clothing, and boldly approach to castrate themselves in public. They would then run through the city streets, holding their severed parts, and throw them into the homes of residents, who were required to provide the thrower with all the clothes and accessories they needed to live as women.11135 From that point on, they wore these garments and were recognized as devoted to the worship of Astarte, entitled to live in her temples and participate in her ceremonies. They joined the priests and sacred women during festivals in frenzied dances and wild celebrations, shouting, cutting themselves on the arms, and taking turns whipping each other.11136 At other times, they “wandered from place to place, carrying a veiled image or symbol of their goddess, dressed in colorful women’s clothing, with their faces and eyes painted in a feminine style, armed with swords and whips. They would engage in wild dances, losing themselves in bacchanalian ecstasy, dragging their long hair through the mud. They bit their own arms and then cut themselves with swords or whipped themselves as penance for sins believed to be committed against the goddess. In these performances, organized to help raise funds, they had honed their skills over time to inflict cuts on themselves without causing serious injury."11137

It is difficult to estimate the corrupting effect upon practice and morals of a religious system which embraced within it so many sensual and degrading elements. Where impurity is made an essential part of religion, there the very fountain of life is poisoned, and that which should have been “a savour of life unto life”—a cleansing and regenerating influence—becomes “a savour of death unto death”—an influence leading on to the worst forms of moral degradation. Phoenician religion worked itself out, and showed its true character, in the first three centuries after our era, at Aphaca, at Hierapolis, and at Antioch, where, in the time of Julian, even a Libanius confessed that the great festival of the year consisted only in the perpetration of all that was impure and shameless, and the renunciation of every lingering spark of decency.11138

It’s hard to gauge the damaging impact on practice and morals of a religious system that includes so many lustful and degrading aspects. When impurity becomes a core part of religion, it poisons the very source of life, turning what should be “a savor of life unto life”—a purifying and revitalizing force—into “a savor of death unto death”—a force that leads to severe moral decay. The Phoenician religion revealed its true nature in the first three centuries after our era, at places like Aphaca, Hierapolis, and Antioch, where, in the time of Julian, even Libanius admitted that the biggest festival of the year was nothing but a celebration of all things indecent and shameful, abandoning any remnants of decency.11138

A vivid conception of another world, and of the reality of a life after death, especially if connected with a belief in future rewards and punishments, might have done much, or at any rate something, to counteract the effect upon morals and conduct of the degrading tenets and practices connected with the Astarte worship; but, so far as appears, the Phoenicians had a very faint and dim conception of the life to come, and neither hoped for happiness, nor feared misery in it. Their care for the preservation of their bodies after death, and the provision which in some cases they are seen to have made for them,11139 imply a belief that death was not the end of everything, and a few vague expressions in inscriptions upon tombs point to a similar conviction;11140 but the life of the other world seems to have been regarded as something imperfect and precarious11141—a sort of shadowy existence in a gloomy Sheôl, where was neither pleasure nor pain, neither suffering nor enjoyment, but only quietness and rest. The thought of it did not occupy men’s minds, or exercise any perceptible influence over their conduct. It was a last home, whereto all must go, acquiesced in, but neither hoped for nor dreaded. A Phoenician’s feelings on the subject were probably very much those expressed by Job in his lament:—11142

A clear idea of another world and the reality of life after death, especially if tied to a belief in future rewards and punishments, could have helped counteract the negative impact of the degrading beliefs and practices associated with the worship of Astarte; however, the Phoenicians seemed to have only a vague and unclear idea of the afterlife, with neither hope for happiness nor fear of misery in it. Their efforts to preserve their bodies after death and the provisions they made for them in some cases suggest a belief that death wasn't the end of everything, and a few unclear phrases in tomb inscriptions hint at a similar belief; but the afterlife seems to have been viewed as something imperfect and uncertain—a kind of shadowy existence in a dreary Sheôl, where there was neither pleasure nor pain, suffering nor joy, just quiet and rest. This idea didn’t occupy people's thoughts or noticeably affect their behavior. It was a final destination that everyone had to accept, but they neither hoped for nor feared it. A Phoenician’s feelings about it were likely very similar to those expressed by Job in his lament:—

     “Why died I not from the womb? Why gave I not up the ghost at my
         birth?
     Why did the knees prevent me? or why the breasts that I should
          suck?
     For now should I have lain still and been quiet;
     I should have slept, and then should I have been at rest;
     I should have been with the kings and councillors of the earth,
     Who rebuilt for themselves the cities that were desolate.
     I should have been with the princes that had much gold,
     And that filled their houses with silver . . .
     There they that are wicked cease from troubling,
     There they that are weary sink to rest;
     There the prisoners are in quiet together,
     And hear no longer the voice of the oppressor:
     There are both the great and small, and the servant is freed from
     his master.”
 
     “Why didn’t I die at birth? Why didn’t I take my last breath when I came into the world?  
     Why were there knees to hold me back? Or why were there breasts to nurse me?  
     Because of that, I could have been still and quiet;  
     I could have slept and found my peace;  
     I could have been with the kings and counselors of the earth,  
     Who rebuilt their ruined cities.  
     I could have been with the wealthy princes,  
     Who filled their homes with silver . . .  
     There, the wicked cease to trouble others,  
     There, the weary find rest;  
     There, prisoners are peaceful together,  
     And no longer hear the voice of their oppressor:  
     There, both great and small are, and the servant is free from  
     their master.”

Still their religion, such as it was, had a great hold upon the Phoenicians. Parents gave to their children, almost always, religious names, recognising each son and daughter as a gift from heaven, or placing them under the special protection of the gods generally, or of some single divinity. It was piety, an earnest but mistaken piety, which so often caused the parent to sacrifice his child—the very apple of his eye and delight of his heart—that so he might make satisfaction for the sins which he felt in his inmost soul that he had committed. It was piety that filled the temples with such throngs, that brought for sacrifice so many victims, that made the worshipper in every difficulty put up a vow to heaven, and caused the payment of the vows in such extraordinary profusion. At Carthage alone there have been found many hundreds of stones, each one of which records the payment of a vow;11143 while other sites have furnished hundreds or even thousands of ex votos—statues, busts, statuettes, figures of animals, cylinders, seals, rings, bracelets, anklets, ear-rings, necklaces, ornaments for the hair, vases, amphoræ, oenochoæ, pateræ, jugs, cups, goblets, bowls, dishes, models of boats and chariots—indicative of an almost unexampled devotion. A single chamber in the treasury of Curium produced more than three hundred articles in silver and silver-gilt;11144 the temple of Golgi yielded 228 votive statues;11145 sites in Sardinia scarcely mentioned in antiquity have sufficed to fill whole museums with statuettes, rings, and scarabs. If the Phoenicians did not give evidence of the depth of their religious feeling by erecting, like most nations, temples of vast size and magnificence, still they left in numerous places unmistakable proof of the reality of their devotion to the unseen powers by the multiplicity, and in many cases the splendour,11146 of their votive offerings.

Still, their religion, whatever form it took, had a strong influence on the Phoenicians. Parents almost always gave their children religious names, recognizing each son and daughter as a gift from heaven or placing them under the special protection of the gods in general, or of a specific deity. It was piety—an earnest but misguided piety—that often led parents to sacrifice their child, the very apple of their eye and joy of their heart, to atone for perceived sins they felt deeply within themselves. This piety filled the temples with crowds, brought countless victims for sacrifice, and made worshippers in every difficulty promise offerings to heaven, leading to an extraordinary abundance of fulfilled vows. At Carthage alone, many hundreds of stones have been found, each recording a vow's payment;11143 while other sites yielded hundreds or even thousands of ex votos—statues, busts, statuettes, animal figures, cylinders, seals, rings, bracelets, anklets, earrings, necklaces, hair ornaments, vases, amphorae, oenochoae, paterae, jugs, cups, goblets, bowls, dishes, and models of boats and chariots—demonstrating an almost unparalleled devotion. A single chamber in the treasury of Curium yielded more than three hundred silver and silver-gilt items;11144 the temple of Golgi produced 228 votive statues;11145 sites in Sardinia, barely mentioned in ancient texts, have filled entire museums with statuettes, rings, and scarabs. While the Phoenicians did not showcase their religious fervor by constructing, like most cultures, large and magnificent temples, they left clear evidence of their devotion to the unseen powers through the sheer number and, in many instances, the splendor,11146 of their votive offerings.





CHAPTER XII—DRESS, ORNAMENTS, AND SOCIAL HABITS

     Dress of common men—Dress of men of the upper classes—
     Treatment of the hair and beard—Male ornaments—Supposed
     priestly costume—Ordinary dress of women—Arrangement of
     their hair—Female ornaments—Necklaces—Bracelets—Ear-
     rings—Ornaments for the hair—Toilet pins—Buckles—A
     Phoenician lady’s toilet table—Freedom enjoyed by
     Phoenician women—Active habits of the men—Curious agate
     ornament—Use in furniture of bronze and ivory.
     Clothing of regular men—Clothing of upper-class men— 
     Hair and beard grooming—Men's accessories—Assumed 
     priestly attire—Everyday clothing of women— 
     Hairstyling—Women's accessories—Necklaces— 
     Bracelets—Earrings—Hair ornaments— 
     Toilet pins—Buckles—A Phoenician woman’s vanity table— 
     Freedom experienced by Phoenician women— 
     Men's active lifestyles—Interesting agate decoration— 
     Use of bronze and ivory in furniture.

The dress of the Phoenician men, especially of those belonging to the lower orders, consisted, for the most part, of a single close-fitting tunic, which reached from the waist to a little above the knee.0121 The material was probably either linen or cotton, and the simple garment was perfectly plain and unornamented, like the common shenti of the Egyptians. On the head was generally worn a cap of one kind or another, sometimes round, more often conical, occasionally shaped like a helmet. The conical head-dresses seem to have often ended in a sort of top-knot or button, which recalls the head-dress of a Chinese Mandarin.

The clothing of Phoenician men, especially those from lower classes, mostly consisted of a single, fitted tunic that went from the waist to just above the knee.0121 The fabric was likely linen or cotton, and the simple garment was plain and unadorned, resembling the common shenti of the Egyptians. On their heads, they usually wore a cap of some sort, sometimes round, more often conical, and occasionally shaped like a helmet. The conical headpieces often seemed to end in a kind of top-knot or button, similar to the headwear of a Chinese Mandarin.

Where the men were of higher rank, the shenti was ornamented. It was patterned, and parted towards the two sides, while a richly adorned lappet, terminating in uræi, fell down in front.0122 The girdle, from which it depended, was also patterned, and the shenti thus arranged was sometimes a not inelegant garment. In addition to the shenti, it was common among the upper classes to wear over the bust and shoulders a close-fitting tunic with short sleeves,0123 like a modern “jersey;” and sometimes two garments were worn, an inner robe descending to the feet, and an outer blouse or shirt, with sleeves reaching to the elbow.0124 Occasionally, instead of this outer blouse, the man of rank has a mantle thrown over the left shoulder, which falls about him in folds that are sufficiently graceful.0125 The conical cap with a top-knot is, with persons of this class, the almost universal head-dress.

Where the men held higher ranks, the shenti was decorated. It featured patterns and split open at the sides, with a richly adorned lappet, ending in uræi, that hung down in front.0122 The girdle, from which it hung, was also patterned, and the shenti arranged this way was sometimes quite an elegant garment. In addition to the shenti, it was common among the upper classes to wear a tight-fitting tunic over the bust and shoulders with short sleeves,0123 similar to a modern "jersey;" and sometimes two garments were worn, an inner robe that reached the feet, and an outer blouse or shirt, with sleeves extending to the elbow.0124 Occasionally, instead of this outer blouse, a man of rank would have a mantle draped over the left shoulder, falling in graceful folds around him.0125 The conical cap with a top-knot is, for people of this class, the almost universal headwear.

Great attention seems to have been paid to the hair and beard. Where no cap is worn, the hair clings closely to the head in a wavy compact mass, escaping however from below the wreath or diadem, which supplies the place of a cap, in one or two rows of crisp, rounded curls.0126 The beard has mostly a strong resemblance to that affected by the Assyrians, and familiar to us from their sculptures. It is arranged in three, four, or five rows of small tight curls,0127 and extends from ear to ear around the cheeks and chin. Sometimes, however, in lieu of the many rows, we find one row only, the beard falling in tresses, which are curled at the extremity.0128 There is no indication of the Phoenicians having cultivated mustachios.

A lot of attention seems to have been given to the hair and beard. When there’s no cap worn, the hair lies close to the head in a smooth, wavy mass, but escapes from underneath the wreath or diadem, which acts as a substitute for a cap, in one or two rows of tight, rounded curls.0126 The beard mostly looks similar to that worn by the Assyrians, familiar from their sculptures. It’s styled in three, four, or five rows of small, tight curls,0127 and goes from ear to ear around the cheeks and chin. However, sometimes instead of multiple rows, there’s just one row, with the beard falling in strands that are curled at the ends.0128 There's no evidence that the Phoenicians had mustaches.

For ornaments the male Phoenicians wore collars, which were sometimes very elaborate, armlets, bracelets, and probably finger-rings. The collars resembled those of the Egyptians, being arranged in three rows, and falling far over the breast.0129 The armlets seem to have been plain, consisting of a mere twist of metal, once, twice, or thrice around the limb.1210 The royal armlets of Etyander, king of Paphos, are single twists of gold, the ends of which only just overlap: they are plain, except for the inscription, which reads Eteadoro to Papo basileos, or “The property of Etyander, king of Paphos."1211 Men’s bracelets were similar in character. The finger-rings were either of gold or silver, and generally set with a stone, which bore a device, and which the wearer used as a seal.1212

For decorations, the male Phoenicians wore collars that were sometimes very ornate, along with armlets, bracelets, and likely finger rings. The collars were similar to those of the Egyptians, arranged in three rows and extending far over the chest.0129 The armlets appeared to be simple, made of a single twist of metal wrapped once, twice, or three times around the arm.1210 The royal armlets of Etyander, king of Paphos, are single twists of gold with ends that barely overlap: they are plain except for the inscription that says Eteadoro to Papo basileos, or “The property of Etyander, king of Paphos."1211 Men's bracelets were similar in style. The finger rings were made of either gold or silver, and generally featured a stone that had a design on it, which the wearer used as a seal.1212

The most elaborate male costume which has come down to us is that of a figure found at Golgi, and believed to represent a high priest of Ashtoreth. The conical head-dress is divided into partitions by narrow stripes, which, beginning at its lower edge, converge to a point at top. This point is crowned by the representation of a calf’s or bull’s head. The main garment is a long robe reaching from the neck to the feet, “worn in much the same manner as the peplos on early Greek female figures.” Round the neck of the robe are two rows of stars painted in red, probably meant to represent embroidery. A little below the knee is another band of embroidery, from which the robe falls in folds or pleats, which gather closely around the legs. Above the long robe is worn a mantle, which covers the right arm and shoulder, and thence hangs down below the right knee, passing also in many folds from the shoulder across the breast, and thence, after a twist around the left arm, falling down below the left knee. The treatment of the hair is remarkable. Below the rim of the cap is the usual row of crisp curls; but besides these, there depend from behind the ears on either side of the neck three long tresses. The feet of the figure are naked. The right hand holds a cup by its foot between the middle and fore-fingers, while the left holds a dove with wings outspread.1213

The most detailed male costume that we have is that of a figure found at Golgi, which is thought to represent a high priest of Ashtoreth. The conical headdress is divided into sections by narrow stripes that start at the lower edge and meet at a point on top. This point is topped with a representation of a calf's or bull's head. The main garment is a long robe that reaches from the neck to the feet, "worn in a way similar to the peplos on early Greek female figures." Around the neck of the robe are two rows of stars painted in red, likely intended to represent embroidery. Just below the knee is another band of embroidery, from which the robe hangs in folds or pleats that gather closely around the legs. Over the long robe, there is a mantle that covers the right arm and shoulder, draping down below the right knee, and falling in many folds from the shoulder across the chest, then twisting around the left arm and falling down below the left knee. The way the hair is styled is notable. Below the edge of the cap is the usual row of tight curls; in addition to these, there are three long tresses hanging down from behind the ears on either side of the neck. The figure's feet are bare. The right hand holds a cup by its foot between the middle and forefingers, while the left hand holds a dove with its wings spread.1213

Women were, for the most part, draped very carefully from head to foot. The nude figures which are found abundantly in the Phoenician remains1214 are figures of goddesses, especially of Astarte, who were considered not to need the ornament, or the concealment of dress. Human female figures are in almost every case covered from the neck to the feet, generally in garments with many folds, which, however, are arranged very variously. Sometimes a single robe of the amplest dimensions seems to envelop the whole form, which it completely conceals with heavy folds of drapery.1215 The long petticoat is sleeved, and gathered into a sinus below the breasts, about which it hangs loosely. Sometimes, on the contrary, the petticoat is perfectly plain, and has no folds.1216 Occasionally a second garment is worn over the gown or robe, which covers the left shoulder and the lap, descending to the knees, or somewhat lower.1217 The waist is generally confined by a girdle, which is knotted in front.1218 There are a few instances in which the feet are enclosed in sandals.1219

Women were mostly covered from head to toe with great care. The nude figures found frequently in Phoenician remains are depictions of goddesses, especially Astarte, who were thought to not need adornment or the concealment of clothing. Human female figures are usually covered from the neck to the feet, typically in garments with many folds, though arranged in various ways. Sometimes a single, large robe wraps around the entire form, completely hiding it in heavy folds of fabric. The long petticoat has sleeves and gathers under the breasts, hanging loosely around them. Other times, the petticoat is completely plain and has no folds. Occasionally, a second garment is worn over the gown or robe, covering the left shoulder and the lap, reaching the knees or a bit lower. The waist is usually cinched with a girdle, which is knotted in front. There are a few cases where the feet are covered with sandals.

The hair of women is sometimes concealed under a cap, but generally it escapes from such confinement, and shows itself below the cap in great rolls, or in wavy masses, which flow off right and left from a parting over the middle of the forehead.1220 Tresses are worn occasionally: these depend behind either ear in long loose curls, which fall upon the shoulders.1221 Female heads are mostly covered with a loose hood, or cap; but sometimes the hair is merely encircled by a band or bands, above and below which it ripples freely.1222

The hair of women is sometimes hidden under a cap, but usually it escapes that confinement and shows itself below the cap in big curls or wavy strands that flow to the sides from a parting in the middle of the forehead.1220 Occasionally, long loose curls hang behind either ear, cascading over the shoulders.1221 Most women wear a loose hood or cap, but sometimes the hair is simply surrounded by one or more bands, above and below which it flows freely.1222

Phoenician women were greatly devoted to the use of personal ornaments. It was probably from them that the Hebrew women of Isaiah’s time derived the “tinkling ornaments of the feet, the cauls, the round tires like the moon, the chains, the bracelets, and the mufflers, the bonnets and the ornaments of the legs, and the head-bands, and the tablets, and the ear-rings, the rings and nose-jewels, the changeable suits of apparel, and the mantles, and the wimples, and the crisping pins, the glasses, and the fine linen, and the hoods, and the vails,"1223 which the prophet denounces so fiercely. The excavations made on Phoenician sites have yielded in abundance necklaces, armlets, bracelets, pendants to be worn as lockets, ear-rings, finger-rings, ornaments for the hair, buckles or brooches, seals, buttons, and various articles of the toilet such as women delight in.

Phoenician women were very dedicated to wearing personal ornaments. It was likely from them that Hebrew women during Isaiah’s time got the “jingly ornaments for their feet, the hairnets, the round necklaces like the moon, the chains, the bracelets, and the headscarves, the bonnets and the leg ornaments, the headbands, the tablets, the earrings, the rings and nose rings, the fancy outfits, the cloaks, the wraps, the styling pins, the mirrors, the fine linen, the hoods, and the veils,” 1223 which the prophet strongly criticizes. Excavations at Phoenician sites have uncovered a wealth of necklaces, armlets, bracelets, lockets, earrings, finger rings, hair ornaments, buckles or brooches, seals, buttons, and various beauty items that women enjoy.

Women wore, it appears, three or four necklaces at the same time, one above the other.1224 A string of small beads or pearls would closely encircle the neck just under the chin. Below, where the chest begins, would lie a second string of larger beads, perhaps of gold, perhaps only of glass, while further down, as the chest expands, would be rows of still larger ornaments, pendants in glass, or crystal, or gold, or agate modelled into the shape of acorns, or pomegranates, or lotus flowers, or cones, or vases, and lying side by side to the number of fifty or sixty. Several of the necklaces worn by the Cypriote ladies have come down to us. One is composed of a row of one hundred and three gold beads, alternately round and oval, to the oval ones of which are attached pendants, also in gold, representing alternately the blossom and bud of the lotus plant, except in one instance. The central bead of all has as its pendant a human head and bust, modelled in the Egyptian style, with the hair falling in lappets on either side of the face, and with a broad collar upon the shoulders and the breast.1225 Another consists of sixty-four gold beads, twenty-two of which are of superior size to the rest, and of eighteen pendants, shaped like the bud of a flower, and delicately chased.1226 There are others where gold beads are intermixed with small carnelian and onyx bugles, while the pendants are of gold, like the beads; or where gold and rock-crystal beads alternate, and a single crystal vase hangs as pendant in the middle; or where alternate carnelian and gold beads have as pendant a carnelian cone, a symbol of Astarte.1227 Occasionally the sole material used is glass. Necklaces have been found composed entirely of long oval beads of blue or greenish-blue glass; others where the colour of the beads is a dark olive;1228 others again, where all the component parts are of glass, but the colours and forms are greatly varied. In a glass necklace found at Tharros in Sardinia, besides beads of various sizes and hues, there are two long rough cylinders, four heads of animals, and a human head as central ornament. “Taken separately, the various elements of which this necklace is composed have little value; neither the heads of the animals, nor the bearded human face, perhaps representing Bacchus, are in good style; the cylinders and rounded beads which fill up the intermediate spaces between the principal objects are of very poor execution; but the mixture of whites, and greys, and yellows, and greens, and blues produces a whole which is harmonious and gay."1229

Women seemed to wear three or four necklaces at once, layering them on top of each other. A string of small beads or pearls would snugly circle the neck just below the chin. Below that, near where the chest starts, would lie a second string of larger beads, possibly made of gold or just glass, while as you move further down, there would be rows of even larger ornaments—pendants made of glass, crystal, gold, or agate shaped like acorns, pomegranates, lotus flowers, cones, or vases, often numbering around fifty or sixty in total. Several necklaces worn by Cypriote women have survived. One features a row of one hundred and three gold beads, alternating between round and oval shapes. The oval beads have pendants in gold that alternate between a bloom and a bud of the lotus plant, except for one instance where the centerpiece of the necklace features a pendant of a human head and bust designed in the Egyptian style, complete with hair falling in lappets on either side of the face, and a broad collar on the shoulders and chest. Another necklace includes sixty-four gold beads, twenty-two of which are larger than the others, along with eighteen delicately chased pendants shaped like flower buds. There are others that mix gold beads with small carnelian and onyx bugles, with pendants made of gold, like the beads; or with alternating gold and rock-crystal beads, featuring a single crystal vase as a pendant in the middle; or with alternating carnelian and gold beads, complemented by a carnelian cone pendant, symbolizing Astarte. Sometimes, necklaces are made entirely of glass. Some have been found with long oval beads of blue or greenish-blue glass; others have darker olive beads; and yet others consist entirely of glass but with a wide variety of colors and shapes. In a glass necklace discovered in Tharros, Sardinia, there are beads of different sizes and colors, along with two long rough cylinders, four animal heads, and a human head as the central decoration. “Taken individually, the various elements of this necklace don’t hold much value; the animal heads and the bearded human face, possibly representing Bacchus, aren't stylistically appealing; the cylinders and rounded beads filling the gaps between the main items are poorly made; but the mix of whites, grays, yellows, greens, and blues creates a cohesive and cheerful whole."

Perhaps the most elegant and tasteful necklace of all that have been discovered is the one made of a thick solid gold cord, very soft and elastic, which is figured on the page opposite.1230 At either extremity is a cylinder of very fine granulated work, terminating in one case in a lion’s head of good execution, in the other surmounted by a simple cap. The lion’s mouth holds a ring, while the cap supports a long hook, which seems to issue from a somewhat complicated knot, entangled wherein is a single light rosette. “In this arrangement, in the curves of the thin wire, which folds back upon itself again and again, there is an air of ease, an apparent negligence, which is the very perfection of technical skill."1231

Perhaps the most elegant and stylish necklace of all that have been found is the one made of a thick solid gold cord, very soft and flexible, which is illustrated on the opposite page.1230 At each end is a cylinder with fine granulated work, ending in one case with a lion’s head that's skillfully crafted, and in the other topped with a simple cap. The lion’s mouth holds a ring, while the cap supports a long hook, which appears to come from a somewhat intricate knot, entangled with a single light rosette. “In this design, the curves of the thin wire, which wraps back on itself repeatedly, convey a sense of ease, an apparent casualness, which is the very essence of technical mastery."1231

The bracelets worn by the Phoenician ladies were of many kinds, and frequently of great beauty. Some were bands of plain solid gold, without ornament of any kind, very heavy, weighing from 200 to 300 grammes each.1232 Others were open, and terminated at either extremity in the head of an animal. One, found by General Di Cesnola at Curium in Cyprus,1233 exhibited at the two ends heads of lions, which seemed to threaten each other. The execution of the heads left nothing to be desired. Some others, found in Phoenicia Proper, in a state of extraordinary preservation, were of similar design, but, in the place of lions’ heads, exhibited the heads of bull, with very short horns.1234 A third type aimed at greater variety, and showed the head of a wild goat at one end, and that of a ram at the other.1235 In a few instances, the animal representation appears at one extremity of the bracelet only, as in a specimen from Camirus, whereof the workmanship is unmistakably Phoenician, which has a lion’s head at one end, and at the other tapers off, like the tail of a serpent.1236

The bracelets worn by Phoenician women came in many styles and were often very beautiful. Some were simple bands of solid gold, heavy and weighing between 200 to 300 grams each.1232 Others were open and ended in the heads of animals. One, discovered by General Di Cesnola at Curium in Cyprus,1233 featured lion heads at each end that appeared to threaten each other. The craftsmanship of the heads was exceptional. Some other bracelets, found in Phoenicia Proper and in excellent condition, had a similar design, but instead of lion heads, they had bull heads with very short horns.1234 A third type offered more variety, showing a wild goat head at one end and a ram head at the other.1235 In a few cases, the animal depiction was present at only one end of the bracelet, like in a piece from Camirus, which displays unmistakably Phoenician work, featuring a lion’s head at one end and tapering off like a serpent's tail at the other.1236

A pair of bracelets in the British Museum, said to have come from Tharros, consist of plain thin circlets of gold, with a ball of gold in the middle. The ball is ornamented with spirals and projecting knobs, which must have been uncomfortable to the wearer, but are said not to be wanting in elegance.1237

A pair of bracelets in the British Museum, thought to be from Tharros, features simple thin gold circles with a gold ball in the center. The ball is decorated with spirals and raised knobs, which would likely have been uncomfortable for the wearer, yet are considered quite elegant.1237

There are other Phoenician bracelets of an entirely different character. These consist of broad flat bands, which fitted closely to the wrist, and were fastened round it by means of a clasp. Two, now in the Museum of New York, are bands of gold about an inch in width, ornamented externally with rosettes, flowers, and other designs in high relief, on which are visible in places the remains of a blue enamel.1238 Another is composed of fifty-four large-ribbed gold beads, soldered together by threes, and having for centre a gold medallion, with a large onyx set in it, and with four gold pendants.1239 A third bracelet of the kind, said to have been found at Tharros, consists of six plates, united by hinges, and very delicately engraved with patterns of a thoroughly Phoenician character, representing palms, volutes, and flowers.1240

There are other Phoenician bracelets that are quite different. These are made of wide, flat bands that fit closely around the wrist and are secured with a clasp. Two of them, now in the Museum of New York, are gold bands about an inch wide, decorated on the outside with rosettes, flowers, and other designs in high relief, with traces of blue enamel visible in some areas.1238 Another one has fifty-four large-ribbed gold beads connected in groups of three, featuring a gold medallion at the center, with a large onyx set in it, along with four gold pendants.1239 A third bracelet of this type, reportedly found at Tharros, consists of six plates linked by hinges and is intricately engraved with designs that are distinctly Phoenician, including palms, scrolls, and flowers.1240

But it is in their earrings that the Phoenician ladies were most curious and most fanciful. They present to us, as MM. Perrot and Chipiez note, “an astonishing variety."1241 Some, which must have been very expensive, are composed of many distinct parts, connected with each other by chains of an elegant pattern. One of the most beautiful specimens was found by General Di Cesnola in Cyprus.1242 There is a hook at top, by which it was suspended. Then follows a medallion, where the workmanship is of singular delicacy. A rosette occupies the centre; around it are a set of spirals, negligently arranged, and enclosed within a chain-like band, outside of which is a double beading. From the medallion depend by finely wrought chains five objects. The central chain supports a human head, to which is attached a conical vase, covered at top: on either side are two short chains, terminating in rings, from which hang small nondescript pendants: beyond are two longer chains, with small vases or bottles attached. Another, found in Sardinia, is scarcely less complicated. The ring which pierced the ear forms the handle of a kind of basket, which is covered with lines of bead-work: below, attached by means of two rings, is the model of a hawk with wings folded; below the hawk, again attached by a couple of rings, is a vase of elegant shape, decorated with small bosses, lozenges, and chevrons.1243 Other ear-rings have been found similar in type to this, but simplified by the omission of the bird, or of the basket.1244

But it's the earrings that the Phoenician ladies were most innovative and imaginative with. They showcase, as noted by MM. Perrot and Chipiez, “an astonishing variety."1241 Some, which must have been quite pricey, are made up of multiple distinct parts, connected by elegantly designed chains. One of the most stunning pieces was discovered by General Di Cesnola in Cyprus.1242 It has a hook at the top for suspension, followed by a medallion showcasing exceptionally delicate craftsmanship. A rosette sits at the center, surrounded by a set of spirals arranged casually, enclosed by a band that resembles a chain, and outside of which is a double beading. From the medallion hang five objects connected by finely crafted chains. The central chain supports a human head, which has a conical vase attached on top; on either side are two short chains ending in rings, from which hang small, nondescript pendants; beyond them are two longer chains with small vases or bottles attached. Another piece found in Sardinia is almost as intricate. The ring that goes through the ear acts as the handle of a kind of basket, adorned with bead-work lines; below it, attached by two rings, is a model of a hawk with its wings folded; beneath the hawk, again joined by a couple of rings, is an elegantly shaped vase decorated with small bosses, lozenges, and chevrons.1243 Other similar earrings have been found, but they simplify the design by omitting the bird or the basket.1244

An entirely different type is that furnished by an ear-ring in the Museum of New York brought from Cyprus, where the loop of the ornament rises from a sort of horse-shoe, patterned with bosses and spirals, and surrounded by a rough edging of knobs, standing at a little distance one from another.1245 Other forms found also in Cyprus are the ear-ring with the long pendant, which has been called “an elongated pear,"1246 ornamented towards the lower end with small blossoms of flowers, and terminating in a minute ball, which recalls the “drops” that are still used by the jewellers of our day; the loop which supports a crux ansata;1247 that which has attached to it a small square box, or measure containing a heap of grain, thought to represent wheat;1248 and those which support fruit of various kinds.1249 An ear-ring of much delicacy consists of a twisted ring, curved into a hook at one extremity, and at the other ending in the head of a goat, with a ring attached to it, through which the hook passes.1250 Another, rather curious than elegant, consists of a double twist, ornamented with lozenges, and terminating in triangular points finely granulated.1251

A completely different type is the ear-ring displayed in the Museum of New York, which came from Cyprus. The loop of this piece rises from a sort of horseshoe, decorated with bumps and spirals, and is surrounded by a rough edge of knobs spaced apart.1245 Other forms found in Cyprus include the ear-ring with a long pendant, referred to as “an elongated pear,”1246 embellished at the lower end with small flower blossoms and finishing with a tiny ball, reminiscent of the “drops” still used by today's jewelers; the loop that holds a crux ansata;1247 one that features a small square box or measure filled with a pile of grain, believed to symbolize wheat;1248 and those that carry various types of fruit.1249 An ear-ring with delicate design consists of a twisted ring, bent into a hook at one end, and at the other, it ends in the head of a goat, with a ring connected to it, through which the hook passes.1250 Another, more interesting than elegant, features a double twist, decorated with diamonds, and ends in finely granulated triangular points.1251

Ornaments more or less resembling this last type of ear-ring, but larger and coarser, have given rise to some controversy, having been regarded by some as ear-rings, by others as fastenings for the dress, and by a third set of critics as ornaments for the hair. They consist of a double twist, sometimes ornamented at one end only, sometimes at both. A lion’s or a griffin’s head crowns usually the principal end; round the neck is a double or triple collar, and below this a rosette, very carefully elaborated. In one instance two griffins show themselves side by side, exhibiting their heads, their chests, their wings, and their fore-paws or hands; between them is an ornament like that which commonly surmounts Phoenician stelæ; and below this a most beautiful rosette.1252 The fashioning shows that the back of the ornament was not intended to be seen, and favours the view that it was to be placed where a mass of hair would afford the necessary concealment.

Ornaments that look somewhat like this last type of earring, but larger and rougher, have sparked some debate. Some people see them as earrings, others as dress fasteners, and a third group of critics views them as hair ornaments. They feature a double twist, sometimes decorated at one end only, sometimes at both. Typically, a lion’s or a griffin’s head crowns the main end; around the neck is a double or triple collar, and below that is a very detailed rosette. In one example, two griffins stand side by side, showing their heads, chests, wings, and fore-paws or hands; between them is an ornament similar to what is usually found on Phoenician stelæ; below this is a stunning rosette. The design indicates that the back of the ornament wasn't meant to be seen, supporting the idea that it was intended to be placed where a mass of hair would cover it up.

The Phoenician ladies seem also to have understood the use of hair-pins, which were from two to three inches long, and had large heads, ribbed longitudinally, and crowned with two smaller balls, one above the other.1253 The material used was either gold or silver.

The Phoenician women also appeared to know how to use hairpins, which were about two to three inches long and featured large, ribbed heads with two smaller balls stacked on top of each other.1253 The material was either gold or silver.

To fasten their dresses, the Phoenician ladies used fibulæ or buckles of a simple character. Brooches set with stones have not at present been found on Phoenician sites; but in certain cases the fibulæ show a moderate amount of ornament. Some have glass beads strung on the pin that is inserted into the catch; others have the rounded portion surmounted by the figure of a horse or of a bird.1254 Most fibulæ are in bronze; but one, found in the treasury of Curium, and now in the Museum of New York, was of gold.1255 This, however, was most probably a votive offering.

To fasten their dresses, Phoenician women used simple fibulæ or buckles. So far, brooches set with stones haven't been discovered at Phoenician sites; however, some fibulæ do show a bit of ornamentation. Some have glass beads strung on the pin that goes into the catch; others feature a rounded part topped with the figure of a horse or a bird.1254 Most fibulæ are made of bronze, but one found in the treasury of Curium, which is now in the Museum of New York, was made of gold.1255 This was likely a votive offering.

It is impossible at present to reproduce the toilet table of a Phoenician lady. We may be tolerably sure, however, that certain indispensable articles would not be lacking. Circular mirrors, either of polished metal, or of glass backed by a plate of tin or silver, would undoubtedly have found their place on them, together with various vessels for holding perfumes and ointments. A vase in rock crystal, discovered at Curium, with a funnel and cover in gold, the latter attached by a fine gold chain to one of its handles,1256 was doubtless a fine lady’s favourite smelling bottle. Various other vessels in silver, of a small size,1257 as basins and bowls beautifully chased, tiny jugs, alabasti, ladles, &c., had also the appearance of belonging rather to the toilet table than to the plate-basket. Some of the alabasti would contain kohl or stibium, some salves and ointments, others perhaps perfumed washes for the complexion. Among the bronze objects found,1258 some may have been merely ornaments, others stands for rings, bracelets, and the like. One terra-cotta vase from Dali seems made for holding pigments,1259 and raises the suspicion that Phoenician, or at any rate Cyprian, beauties were not above heightening their charms by the application of paint.

It’s impossible to recreate the vanity table of a Phoenician woman right now. However, we can be pretty sure that certain essential items wouldn’t be missing. Circular mirrors, either made of polished metal or glass backed with a sheet of tin or silver, would definitely have had a spot there, along with various containers for holding perfumes and ointments. A rock crystal vase found at Curium, with a gold funnel and cover, the latter attached by a fine gold chain to one of its handles,1256 was likely a favorite perfume bottle of an elegant lady. Various other small silver items,1257 like beautifully engraved basins and bowls, tiny jugs, alabaster pieces, ladles, etc., seemed to belong more to the vanity table than to a dishware set. Some of the alabaster containers would hold kohl or stibium, some salves and ointments, and others perhaps scented washes for the face. Among the bronze objects found,1258 some may have just been decorative, while others served as holders for rings, bracelets, and similar items. One terra-cotta vase from Dali appears designed for holding pigments,1259 suggesting that Phoenician, or at least Cyprian, beauties were not above enhancing their looks with makeup.

Women in Phoenicia seem to have enjoyed considerable freedom. They are represented as banqueting in the company of men, sometimes sitting with them on the same couch, sometimes reclining with them at the same table.1260 Occasionally they delight their male companion by playing upon the lyre or the double pipe,1261 while in certain instances they are associated in bands of three, who perform on the lyre, the double pipe, and the tambourine.1262 They take part in religious processions, and present offerings to the deities.1263 The positions occupied in history by Jezebel and Dido fall in with these indications, and imply a greater approach to equality between the sexes in Phoenicia than in Oriental communities generally.

Women in Phoenicia appeared to have a lot of freedom. They're shown enjoying banquets with men, sometimes sitting on the same couch or reclining at the same table.1260 Sometimes they entertain their male companions by playing the lyre or the double pipe,1261 and at times they come together in groups of three, performing with the lyre, the double pipe, and the tambourine.1262 They also participate in religious processions and make offerings to the gods.1263 The historical figures of Jezebel and Dido reflect this and suggest that there was a greater sense of equality between the genders in Phoenicia compared to other Oriental societies.

The men were, for Orientals, unusually hardy and active. In only one instance is there any appearance of the use of the parasol by a Phoenician.1264 Sandals are infrequently worn; neck, chest, arms, and legs are commonly naked. The rough life of seamen hardened the greater number; others hunted the wild ox and the wild boar1265 in the marshy plains of the coast tract, and in the umbrageous dells of Lebanon. Even the lion may have been affronted in the great mountain, and if we are unable to describe the method of its chase in Phoenicia, the reason is that the Phoenician artists have, in their representations of lion hunts, adopted almost exclusively Assyrian models.1266 The Phoenician gift of facile imitation was a questionable advantage, since it led the native artists continually to substitute for sketches at first hand of scenes with which they were familiar, conventional renderings of similar scenes as depicted by foreigners.

The men were, for Easterners, unusually tough and active. There’s only one instance of a Phoenician using a parasol. Sandals are rarely worn; necks, chests, arms, and legs are usually bare. The rough life of sailors toughened most of them; others hunted wild oxen and wild boars in the marshy coastal plains and the shaded valleys of Lebanon. Even the lion may have felt challenged in the great mountains, and while we can't describe how they hunted it in Phoenicia, it’s because the Phoenician artists mostly used Assyrian models for their lion hunt depictions. The Phoenician ability to easily imitate was a questionable benefit, as it caused native artists to often replace firsthand sketches of familiar scenes with conventional representations of similar scenes created by foreigners.

An ornament found in Cyprus, the intention of which is uncertain, finds its proper place in the present chapter, though we cannot attach it to any particular class of objects. It consists of a massive knob of solid agate, with a cylinder of the same both above and below, through which a rod, or bar, must have been intended to pass. Some archæologists see in it the top of a sceptre;1267 others, the head of a mace;1268 but there is nothing really to prove its use. We might imagine it the adornment of a throne or chair of state, or the end of a chariot pole, or a portion of the stem of a candelabrum. Antiquity has furnished nothing similar with which to compare it; and we only say of it, that, whatever was its purpose, so large and so beautiful a mass of agate has scarcely been met with elsewhere.1269 The cutting is such as to show very exquisitely the veining of the material.

An ornament found in Cyprus, whose purpose is unclear, belongs in this chapter, even though we can't classify it into any specific category of objects. It features a large knob made of solid agate, with a cylinder of the same material above and below it, suggesting it was designed for a rod or bar to pass through. Some archaeologists interpret it as the top of a scepter;1267 others see it as the head of a mace;1268 but there's no real evidence to confirm its use. One might imagine it as an ornament for a throne or state chair, the end of a chariot pole, or part of a candelabrum's stem. There’s nothing from ancient times that’s similar enough for comparison; we can only note that, regardless of its original purpose, such a large and beautiful piece of agate is rarely found elsewhere.1269 The carving highlights the exquisite veining of the material.

Bronze objects in almost infinite variety have been found on Phoenician sites,1270 but only a few of them can have been personal ornaments. They comprise lamps, bowls, vases, jugs, cups, armlets, anklets, daggers, dishes, a horse’s bit, heads and feet of animals, statuettes, mirrors, fibulæ, buttons, &c. Furniture would seem to have been largely composed of bronze, which sometimes formed its entire fabric, though generally confined to the ornamentation. Ivory was likewise employed in considerable quantities in the manufacture of furniture,1271 to which it was applied as an outer covering, or veneer, either plain, or more generally carved with a pattern or with figures. The “ivory house” of Ahab1272 was perhaps so called, not so much from the application of the precious material to the doors and walls, as from its employment in the furniture. There is every probability that it was the construction of Phoenician artists.

Bronze items in almost endless varieties have been discovered at Phoenician sites,1270 but only a handful of them could have been personal accessories. They include lamps, bowls, vases, jugs, cups, armlets, anklets, daggers, dishes, a horse bit, animal heads and feet, statuettes, mirrors, fibulas, buttons, etc. Furniture likely consisted mostly of bronze, which sometimes made up its entire structure, though it was usually limited to decoration. Ivory was also used in significant amounts for furniture,1271 either as an outer covering or veneer, which was typically plain or more often carved with patterns or figures. The “ivory house” of Ahab1272 may have been named as such not just for the use of the expensive material on the doors and walls, but primarily for its use in the furniture. It is highly likely that it was created by Phoenician craftsmen.





CHAPTER XIII—PHOENICIAN WRITING, LANGUAGE, AND LITERATURE

     The Phoenician alphabet—Its wide use—Its merits—Question
     of its origin—Its defects—Phoenician writing and language—
     Resemblance of the language to Hebrew—In the vocabulary—
     In the grammar—Points of difference between Phoenician and
     Hebrew—Scantiness of the literature—Phoenician history of
     Philo Byblius—Extracts—Periplus of Hanno—Phoenician
     epigraphic literature—Inscription of Esmunazar—Inscription
     of Tabnit—Inscription of Jehav-melek—Marseilles
     inscription—Short inscriptions on votive offerings and
     tombs—Range of Phoenician book-literature.
     The Phoenician alphabet—Its widespread use—Its advantages—The question of its origin—Its shortcomings—Phoenician writing and language—Similarity of the language to Hebrew—In vocabulary—In grammar—Differences between Phoenician and Hebrew—Limited literature—Phoenician history of Philo Byblius—Extracts—Periplus of Hanno—Phoenician epigraphic literature—Inscription of Esmunazar—Inscription of Tabnit—Inscription of Jehav-melek—Marseilles inscription—Short inscriptions on votive offerings and tombs—Range of Phoenician book literature.

The Phoenician alphabet, like the Hebrew, consisted of twenty-two characters, which had, it is probable, the same names with the Hebrew letters,0131 and were nearly identical in form with the letters used anciently by the entire Hebrew race. The most ancient inscription in the character which has come down to us is probably that of Mesha,0132 the Moabite king, which belongs to the ninth century before our era. The next in antiquity, which is of any considerable length, is that discovered recently in the aqueduct which brings the water into the pool of Siloam,0133 which dates probably from the time of Hezekiah, ab. B.C. 727-699. Some short epigraphs on Assyrian gems, tablets, and cylinders belong apparently to about the same period. The series of Phoenician and Cilician coins begins soon after this, and continues to the time of the Roman supremacy in Western Asia. The soil of Phoenicia Proper, and of the various countries where the Phoenicians established settlements or factories, as Cyprus, Malta, Sicily, Sardinia, Southern Gaul, Spain, and North Africa, has also yielded a large crop of somewhat brief legends, the “inscription of Marseilles"0134 being the most important of them. Finally there have been found within the last few years, in Phoenicia itself, near Byblus and Sidon, the three most valuable inscriptions of the entire series—those of Jehavmelek, Esmunazar and Tabnit—which have enabled scholars to place the whole subject on a scientific basis.

The Phoenician alphabet, like the Hebrew, had twenty-two characters, which probably shared the same names as the Hebrew letters, 0131, and were nearly identical in shape to the letters used by the ancient Hebrew people. The oldest inscription in this script that we have is likely that of Mesha, 0132, the Moabite king, dating back to the ninth century BC. The next oldest significant inscription was recently found in the aqueduct that supplies water to the pool of Siloam, 0133, which probably dates from the time of Hezekiah, around 727-699 BC. A few short writings on Assyrian gems, tablets, and cylinders also seem to come from about the same period. A series of Phoenician and Cilician coins starts shortly after this and continues until the Roman dominance in Western Asia. The land of Phoenicia Proper, as well as various regions where the Phoenicians set up settlements or trading posts, including Cyprus, Malta, Sicily, Sardinia, Southern Gaul, Spain, and North Africa, has also produced many short inscriptions, with the “inscription of Marseilles” 0134 being the most significant among them. Finally, in recent years, three of the most valuable inscriptions from the entire collection—those of Jehavmelek, Esmunazar, and Tabnit—have been found in Phoenicia itself, near Byblus and Sidon, allowing scholars to approach the subject from a more scientific perspective.

It is now clear that the same, or nearly the same, alphabet was in use from a very early date over the greater part of Western Asia—in Phoenicia, Moab, Judæa, Samaria, Lycia, Caria, Phrygia, &c.—that it was adopted, with slight alterations only, by the Etruscans and the Greeks, and that from them it was passed on to the nations of modern Europe, and acquired a quasi-universality. The invention of this alphabet was, by the general consent of antiquity, ascribed to the Phoenicians;0135 and though, if their claim to priority of discovery be disputed, it is impossible to prove it, their practical genius and their position among the nations of the earth are strong subsidiary arguments in support of the traditions.

It is now clear that a similar, or almost identical, alphabet was used from very early on across most of Western Asia—in places like Phoenicia, Moab, Judea, Samaria, Lycia, Caria, Phrygia, etc.—and that it was adopted by the Etruscans and the Greeks with only minor changes. From them, it spread to the nations of modern Europe and became almost universal. The invention of this alphabet was, by general agreement in ancient times, credited to the Phoenicians; and although their claim to being the first to discover it may be disputed and is difficult to prove, their practical ingenuity and their prominent role among the nations are strong supporting arguments for this tradition.

The Phoenician alphabet, or the Syrian script, as some call it,0136 did not obtain its general prevalence without possessing some peculiar merits. Its primary merit was that of simplicity. The pictorial systems of the Egyptians and the Hittites required a hand skilled in drawing to express them; the cuneiform syllabaries of Babylonia, Assyria, and Elam needed an extraordinary memory to grasp the almost infinite variety in the arrangement of the wedges, and to distinguish each group from all the rest; even the Cypriote syllabary was of awkward and unnecessary extent, and was expressed by characters needlessly complicated. The Phoenician inventor, whoever he was, reduced letters to the smallest possible number, and expressed them by the simplest possible forms. Casting aside the idea of a syllabary, he reduced speech to its ultimate elements, and set apart a single sign to represent each possible variety of articulation, or rather each variety of which he was individually cognisant. How he fixed upon his signs, it is difficult to say. According to some, he had recourse to one or other of previously existing modes of expressing speech, and merely simplified the characters which he found in use. But there are two objections to this view. First, there is no known set of characters from which the early Phoenician can be derived with any plausability. Resemblances no doubt may be pointed out here and there, but taking the alphabet as a whole, and comparing it with any other, the differences will always be quite as numerous and quite as striking as the similarities. For instance, the writer of the article on the “Alphabet” in the “Encyclopædia Britannica” (1876) derives the Phoenician letters from letters used in the Egyptian hieratic writing,0137 but his own table shows a marked diversity in at least eleven instances, a slight resemblance in seven or eight, a strong resemblance in no more than two or three. Derivation from the Cypriote forms has been suggested by some; but here again eight letters are very different, if six or seven are similar. Recently, derivation from the Hittite hieroglyphs has been advocated,0138 but the alleged instances of resemblance touch nine characters only out of the twenty-two. And real resemblance is confined to three or four. Secondly, no theory of derivation accounts for the Phoenician names of their letters, which designate objects quite different from those represented by the Egyptian hieroglyphs, and equally different from those represented by the Hittite letters. For instance, the Egyptian a is the ill-drawn figure of an eagle, the Phoenician alef has the signification of “ox;” the b of the Egyptians is a hastily drawn figure of a crane, the Phoenician beth means “a house.”

The Phoenician alphabet, or the Syrian script, as some call it, 0136 did not become widely used without having certain unique advantages. Its main advantage was its simplicity. The pictorial writing of the Egyptians and Hittites needed skilled artists to create them; the cuneiform syllabaries of Babylonia, Assyria, and Elam required an incredible memory to understand the nearly endless variations in the wedge formations and to tell each grouping apart; even the Cypriote syllabary was unwieldy and overly complex, featuring unnecessarily complicated characters. The Phoenician inventor, whoever he was, reduced the number of letters to the smallest possible amount and represented them with the simplest possible shapes. Abandoning the concept of a syllabary, he distilled language down to its basic components and assigned a single symbol to represent each possible version of speech, or rather each version he was aware of. How he established his symbols is hard to determine. Some suggest that he turned to existing writing systems for inspiration and simply simplified the characters he encountered. However, there are two main issues with this perspective. First, there's no known system of characters from which the early Phoenician alphabet can plausibly be derived. While similarities can certainly be pointed out, when looking at the alphabet in its entirety and comparing it to any other, the differences are just as numerous and striking as the similarities. For example, the author of the article on the “Alphabet” in the “Encyclopædia Britannica” (1876) traces the Phoenician letters back to those used in Egyptian hieratic writing, 0137 but his own comparison shows significant variation in at least eleven instances, minor similarities in seven or eight, and strong similarities in no more than two or three. Some have suggested derivation from Cypriote forms, but again, eight letters are very different, though six or seven are similar. Recently, a link to Hittite hieroglyphs has been proposed, 0138 but the supposed similarities only touch on nine characters out of the twenty-two, and real similarities are confined to just three or four. Secondly, no derivation theory explains the Phoenician names of their letters, which represent objects that are quite different from those depicted by the Egyptian hieroglyphs, and equally different from those represented by the Hittite letters. For instance, the Egyptian a is a poorly drawn figure of an eagle, while the Phoenician alef means “ox;” the Egyptian b is a quickly sketched figure of a crane, and the Phoenician beth translates to “a house.”

On the whole, it seems most probable that the Phoenicians began with their own hieroglyphical system, selecting an object to represent the initial sound of its name, and at first drawing that object, but that they very soon followed the Egyptian idea of representing the original drawing in a conventional way, by a few lines, straight or curved. Their hieroglyphic alphabet which is extant is an alphabet in the second stage, corresponding to the Egyptian hieratic, but not derived from it. Having originally represented their alef by an ox’s head, they found a way of sufficiently indicating the head by three lines {...}, which marked the horns, the ears, and the face. Their beth was a house in the tent form; their gimel a camel, represented by its head and neck; their daleth a door, and so on. The object intended is not always positively known; but, where it is known, there is no difficulty in tracing the original picture in the later conventional sign.

Overall, it seems most likely that the Phoenicians started with their own hieroglyphic system, choosing an object to represent the first sound of its name and initially drawing that object. However, they quickly adopted the Egyptian method of representing the original drawing in a simplified way, using a few straight or curved lines. The hieroglyphic alphabet that still exists is in its second stage, similar to the Egyptian hieratic, but not directly derived from it. Initially, they represented their alef with an ox's head, but later, they simplified it to three lines {...} that indicated the horns, ears, and face. Their beth looked like a tent-shaped house; their gimel was a camel shown by its head and neck; their daleth represented a door, and so forth. The intended object isn't always clearly identified; however, when it is known, tracing the original image in the later simplified sign is straightforward.

The Phoenician alphabet was not without its defects. The most remarkable of these was the absence of any characters expressive of vowel sounds. The Phoenician letters are, all of them, consonants; and the reader is expected to supply the vowel sounds for himself. There was not even any system of pointing, so far as we know, whereby, as in Hebrew and Arabic, the proper sounds were supplied. Again, several letters were made to serve for two sounds, as beth for both b and v, pe for both p and f, shin for both s and sh, and tau for both t and th. There were no forms corresponding to the sounds j or w. On the other hand, there was in the alphabet a certain amount of redundancy. Tsade is superfluous, since it represents, not a simple elemental sound, but a combination of two sounds, t and s. Hence the Greeks omitted it, as did also the Oscans and the Romans. There is redundancy in the two forms for k, namely kaph and koph; in the two for t, namely teth and tau; and in the two for s, namely samech and shin. But no alphabet is without some imperfections, either in the way of excess or defect; and perhaps we ought to be more surprised that the Phoenician alphabet has not more faults than that it falls so far short of perfection as it does.

The Phoenician alphabet had its flaws. The most significant was that it didn't include any characters for vowel sounds. All the Phoenician letters were consonants, leaving readers to fill in the vowel sounds themselves. There wasn't even a system of diacritics, like in Hebrew and Arabic, to indicate the correct sounds. Additionally, some letters represented two sounds, such as beth for both b and v, pe for both p and f, shin for both s and sh, and tau for both t and th. There were no characters for the sounds j or w. On the flip side, the alphabet included some redundancy. Tsade is unnecessary since it represents a combination of two sounds, t and s. This led the Greeks, Oscans, and Romans to exclude it. There’s also redundancy with the two forms for k, which are kaph and koph; the two for t, teth and tau; and the two for s, samech and shin. However, no alphabet is without some imperfections, whether excessive or deficient, and we might be more surprised that the Phoenician alphabet isn’t more flawed than that it has so many shortcomings.

The writing of the Phoenicians was, like that of the majority of the Semitic nations, from right to left. The reverse order was entirely unknown to them, whether employed freely as an alternative, as in Egypt, or confined, as in Greece, to the alternate lines. The words were, as a general rule, undivided, and even in some instances were carried over the end of one line into the beginning of another. Still, there are examples where a sign of separation occurs between each word and the next;0139 and the general rule is, that the words do not run over the line. In the later inscriptions they are divided, according to the modern fashion, by a blank space;1310 but there seems to have been an earlier practice of dividing them by small triangles or by dots.

The Phoenicians wrote from right to left, like most Semitic nations. They were completely unfamiliar with writing in the opposite direction, whether it was used freely as an option like in Egypt or limited to alternate lines like in Greece. Generally, the words were unbroken, and in some cases, they overflowed from the end of one line to the start of another. However, there are instances where a separation mark appears between each word;0139 and the general rule is that words do not spill over the line. In later inscriptions, words are separated in the modern way by a blank space;1310 but it seems that earlier, they were divided by small triangles or dots.

The language of the Phoenicians was very close indeed to the Hebrew, both as regards roots and as regards grammatical forms. The number of known words is small, since not only are the inscriptions few and scanty, but they treat so much of the same matters, and run so nearly in the same form, that, for the most part, the later ones contain nothing new but the proper names. Still they make known to us a certain number of words in common use, and these are almost always either identical with the Hebrew forms, or very slightly different from them, as the following table will demonstrate:—

The language of the Phoenicians was very similar to Hebrew, both in terms of roots and grammatical structures. The number of known words is limited because the inscriptions are few and sparse, and they often cover the same topics and are presented in almost the same way. As a result, later inscriptions usually only add new proper names. However, they do reveal a number of commonly used words, which are almost always identical to Hebrew forms or only slightly different, as shown in the following table:—

     Phoenician                 Hebrew                  English
     Ab {...}                  {...}                   father
     Aben {...}                {...}                   stone
     Adon {...}                {...}                   lord
     Adam {...}                {...}                   man
     Aleph {...}               {...}                   an ox
     Akh {...}                 {...}                   brother
     Akhar {...}               {...}                   after
     Am {...}                  {...}                   mother
     Anak {...}                {...}                   I
     Arets {...}               {...}                   earth, land
     Ash {...}                 {...}                   who, which
     Barak {...}               {...}                   to bless
     Bath {...}                {...}                   daughter
     Ben {...}                 {...}                   son
     Benben {...}              {...}                   grandson
     Beth {...}                {...}                   house, temple
     Ba’al {...}               {...}                   lord, citizen
     Ba’alat {...}             {...}                   lady, mistress
     Barzil {...}              {...}                   iron
     Dagan {...}               {...}                   corn
     Deber {...}               {...}                   to speak, say
     Daleth {...}              {...}                   door
     Zan {...}                 {...}                   this
     Za {...}                  {...}                   this
     Zereng {...}              {...}                   seed, race
     Har {...}                 {...}                   mountain
     Han {...}                 {...}                   grace, favour
     Haresh {...}              {...}                   carpenter
     Yom {...}                 {...}                   day, also sea
     Yitten {...}              {...}                   to give
     Ish {...}                 {...}                   man
     Ishath {...}              {...}                   woman, wife
     Kadesh {...}              {...}                   holy
     Kol {...}                 {...}                   every, all
     Kol {...}                 {...}                   voice
     Kohen {...}               {...}                   priest
     Kohenath {...}            {...}                   priestess
     Kara {...}                {...}                   to call
     Lechem {...}              {...}                   bread
     Makom {...}               {...}                   a place
     Makar {...}               {...}                   a seller
     Malakath {...}            {...}                   work
     Melek {...}               {...}                   king
     Mizbach {...}             {...}                   altar
     Na’ar {...}               {...}                   boy, servant
     Nehusht {...}             {...}                   brass
     Nephesh {...}             {...}                   soul
     Nadar {...}               {...}                   to vow
     ‘Abd {...}                {...}                   slave, servant
     ‘Am {...}                 {...}                   people
     ‘Ain {...}                {...}                   eye, fountain
     ‘Ath {...}                {...}                   time
     ‘Olam {...}               {...}                   eternity
     Pen {...}                 {...}                   face
     Per {...}                 {...}                   fruit
     Pathach {...}             {...}                   door
     Rab {...}                 {...}                   lord, chief
     Rabbath {...}             {...}                   lady
     Rav {...}                 {...}                   rain, irrigation
     Rach {...}                {...}                   spirit
     Rapha {...}               {...}                   physician
     Shamam {...}              {...}                   the heavens
     Shemesh {...}             {...}                   the sun
     Shamang {...}             {...}                   to hear
     Shenath {...}             {...}                   a year
     Shad {...}                {...}                   a field
     Sha’ar {...}              {...}                   a gate
     Shalom {...}              {...}                   peace
     Shem {...}                {...}                   a name
     Shaphat {...}             {...}                   a judge
     Sopher {...}              {...}                   a scribe
     Sakar {...}               {...}                   memory
     Sar {...}                 {...}                   a prince
     Tsedek {...}              {...}                   just
```
     Phoenician                 Hebrew                  English
     Ab {...}                  {...}                   father
     Aben {...}                {...}                   stone
     Adon {...}                {...}                   lord
     Adam {...}                {...}                   man
     Aleph {...}               {...}                   an ox
     Akh {...}                 {...}                   brother
     Akhar {...}               {...}                   after
     Am {...}                  {...}                   mother
     Anak {...}                {...}                   I
     Arets {...}               {...}                   earth, land
     Ash {...}                 {...}                   who, which
     Barak {...}               {...}                   to bless
     Bath {...}                {...}                   daughter
     Ben {...}                 {...}                   son
     Benben {...}              {...}                   grandson
     Beth {...}                {...}                   house, temple
     Ba’al {...}               {...}                   lord, citizen
     Ba’alat {...}             {...}                   lady, mistress
     Barzil {...}              {...}                   iron
     Dagan {...}               {...}                   corn
     Deber {...}               {...}                   to speak, say
     Daleth {...}              {...}                   door
     Zan {...}                 {...}                   this
     Za {...}                  {...}                   this
     Zereng {...}              {...}                   seed, race
     Har {...}                 {...}                   mountain
     Han {...}                 {...}                   grace, favour
     Haresh {...}              {...}                   carpenter
     Yom {...}                 {...}                   day, also sea
     Yitten {...}              {...}                   to give
     Ish {...}                 {...}                   man
     Ishath {...}              {...}                   woman, wife
     Kadesh {...}              {...}                   holy
     Kol {...}                 {...}                   every, all
     Kol {...}                 {...}                   voice
     Kohen {...}               {...}                   priest
     Kohenath {...}            {...}                   priestess
     Kara {...}                {...}                   to call
     Lechem {...}              {...}                   bread
     Makom {...}               {...}                   a place
     Makar {...}               {...}                   a seller
     Malakath {...}            {...}                   work
     Melek {...}               {...}                   king
     Mizbach {...}             {...}                   altar
     Na’ar {...}               {...}                   boy, servant
     Nehusht {...}             {...}                   brass
     Nephesh {...}             {...}                   soul
     Nadar {...}               {...}                   to vow
     ‘Abd {...}                {...}                   slave, servant
     ‘Am {...}                 {...}                   people
     ‘Ain {...}                {...}                   eye, fountain
     ‘Ath {...}                {...}                   time
     ‘Olam {...}               {...}                   eternity
     Pen {...}                 {...}                   face
     Per {...}                 {...}                   fruit
     Pathach {...}             {...}                   door
     Rab {...}                 {...}                   lord, chief
     Rabbath {...}             {...}                   lady
     Rav {...}                 {...}                   rain, irrigation
     Rach {...}                {...}                   spirit
     Rapha {...}               {...}                   physician
     Shamam {...}              {...}                   the heavens
     Shemesh {...}             {...}                   the sun
     Shamang {...}             {...}                   to hear
     Shenath {...}             {...}                   a year
     Shad {...}                {...}                   a field
     Sha’ar {...}              {...}                   a gate
     Shalom {...}              {...}                   peace
     Shem {...}                {...}                   a name
     Shaphat {...}             {...}                   a judge
     Sopher {...}              {...}                   a scribe
     Sakar {...}               {...}                   memory
     Sar {...}                 {...}                   a prince
     Tsedek {...}              {...}                   just
```

The Phoenician numerals, so far as they are known to us, are identical, or nearly identical, with the Hebrew. ’Ahad {...} is “one;” shen {...}, “two;” shalish {...}, “three;” arba {...}, “four;” hamesh {...}, “five;” eshman {...}, “eight;” ’eser {...}, “ten;” and so on. Numbers were, however, by the Phoenicians ordinarily expressed by signs, not words—the units by perpendicular lines: | for “one,” || for “two,” ||| for “three,” and the like; the tens by horizontal ones, either simple, {...}, or hooked at the right end, {...}; twenty by a sign resembling a written capital n, {...}; one hundred by a sign still more complicated, {...}.

The Phoenician numerals, as far as we know, are the same, or nearly the same, as the Hebrew. ’Ahad {...} means “one;” shen {...} means “two;” shalish {...} means “three;” arba {...} means “four;” hamesh {...} means “five;” eshman {...} means “eight;” ’eser {...} means “ten;” and so on. However, the Phoenicians usually represented numbers with signs rather than words—the units with vertical lines: | for “one,” || for “two,” ||| for “three,” and so on; the tens with horizontal lines, either simple, {...}, or with a hook at the right end, {...}; twenty with a symbol that looks like a written capital n, {...}; and one hundred with an even more complex sign, {...}.

The grammatical inflexions, the particles, the pronouns, and the prepositions are also mostly identical. The definite article is expressed, as in Hebrew, by h prefixed. Plurals are formed by the addition of m or th. The prefix eth {...} marks the accusative. There is a niphal conjugation, formed by prefixing n. The full personal pronouns are anak {...} = “I” (compare Heb. {...}); hu {...}, “he” (compare Heb. {...}); hi {...}, “she” (compare Heb. {...}); anachnu, “we” (compare Heb. {...}); and the suffixed pronouns are -i, “me, my;” -ka, “thee, thy;” -h (pronounced as -oh or -o), “him, his” (compare Heb. {...}); -n “our,” perhaps pronounced nu; and -m, “their, them,” pronounced om or um (compare Heb. {...}). Vau prefixed means “and;” beth prefixed “in;” kaph prefixed “as;” lamed prefixed “of” or “to;” ’al {...} is “over;” ki {...} “because;” im {...}, “if;” hazah, zath, or za {...}, “this” (compare Heb. {...}); and ash {...}, “who, which” (compare Heb. {...}). Al {...} and lo {...} are the negatives (compare Heb. {...}). The redundant use of the personal pronoun with the relative is common.

The grammatical endings, particles, pronouns, and prepositions are mostly the same. The definite article is indicated, like in Hebrew, by h at the beginning. Plurals are created by adding m or th. The prefix eth {...} signals the accusative case. There's a niphal conjugation that is formed by adding n. The full personal pronouns are anak {...} = “I” (compare Heb. {...}); hu {...}, “he” (compare Heb. {...}); hi {...}, “she” (compare Heb. {...}); anachnu, “we” (compare Heb. {...}); and the suffixed pronouns are -i, “me, my;” -ka, “you, your;” -h (pronounced as -oh or -o), “him, his” (compare Heb. {...}); -n, “our,” possibly pronounced nu; and -m, “their, them,” pronounced om or um (compare Heb. {...}). Vau prefixed means “and;” beth prefixed means “in;” kaph prefixed means “as;” lamed prefixed means “of” or “to;” ’al {...} means “over;” ki {...} means “because;” im {...}, “if;” hazah, zath, or za {...}, “this” (compare Heb. {...}); and ash {...}, “who, which” (compare Heb. {...}). Al {...} and lo {...} are the negatives (compare Heb. {...}). Using the personal pronoun with the relative is common.

Still, Phoenician is not mere Hebrew; it has its own genius, its idioms, its characteristics. The definite article, so constantly recurring in Hebrew, is in Phoenician, comparatively speaking, rare. The quiescent letters, which in Hebrew ordinarily accompany the long vowels, are in Phoenician for the most part absent. The employment of the participle for the definite tenses of the verb is much more common in Phoenician than in Hebrew, and the Hebrew prefix m is wanting. The ordinary termination of feminine singular nouns is -th, not -h. Peculiar forms occur, as ash for asher, ’amath for ’am (“people”), zan for zah (“this”), &c. Words which in Hebrew are confined to poetry pass among the Phoenicians into ordinary use, as pha’al ({...}, Heb. {...}), “to make,” which replaces the Hebrew {...}.1311

Still, Phoenician is not just Hebrew; it has its own flair, its idioms, and its unique traits. The definite article, which appears frequently in Hebrew, is relatively rare in Phoenician. The quiescent letters that usually accompany long vowels in Hebrew are mostly absent in Phoenician. The use of the participle for definite verb tenses is much more common in Phoenician than in Hebrew, and the Hebrew prefix m is missing. The typical ending for feminine singular nouns is -th, not -h. Unique forms appear, such as ash for asher, ’amath for ’am (“people”), zan for zah (“this”), etc. Words that are limited to poetry in Hebrew become commonplace among the Phoenicians, like pha’al ({...}, Heb. {...}), “to make,” which replaces the Hebrew {...}.1311

“It is strange,” says M. Renan, “that the people to which all antiquity attributes the invention of writing, and which has, beyond all doubted, transmitted it to the entire civilised world, has scarcely left us any literature."1312 Certainly it is difficult to give the name of literature either to the fragments of so-called Phoenician works preserved to us in Greek translations, or to the epigraphic remains of actual Phoenician writing which have come down to our day. The works are two, and two only, viz. the pretended “Phoenician History” of Sanchoniathon, and the “Periplus” of Hanno. Of the former, it is perhaps sufficient to say that we have no evidence of its genuineness. Philo of Byblus, who pretends that he translated it from a Phoenician original, though possibly he had Phoenician blood in his veins, was a Greek in language, in temperament, and in tone of thought, and belonged to the Greece which is characterised by Juvenal as “Græcia mendax.” It is impossible to believe that the Euemerism in which he indulges, and which was evidently the motive of his work, sprang from the brain of Sanchoniathon nine hundred years before Euemerus existed. One is tempted to suspect that Sanchoniathan himself was a myth—an “idol of the cave,” evolved out of the inner consciousness of Philo. Philo had a certain knowledge of the Phoenician language, and of the Phoenician religious system, but not more than he might have gained by personal communication with the priests of Byblus and Aphaca, who maintained the old worship in, and long after, his day. It is not clear that he drew his statements from any ancient authorities, or from books at all. So far as the extant fragments go, a smattering of the language, a very moderate acquaintance with the religion, and a little imagination might readily have produced them.

“It’s strange,” says M. Renan, “that the people credited by all of antiquity with inventing writing, and who unquestionably passed it on to the entire civilized world, have left us almost no literature.”1312 Certainly, it’s hard to consider the fragments of so-called Phoenician works preserved in Greek translations or the epigraphic remains of actual Phoenician writing as literature. There are only two works: the so-called “Phoenician History” of Sanchoniathon and the “Periplus” of Hanno. Regarding the former, it’s probably enough to say that we have no evidence proving its authenticity. Philo of Byblus, who claims to have translated it from a Phoenician original, though he might have had Phoenician ancestry, was Greek in language, temperament, and thought, belonging to the kind of Greece that Juvenal describes as “Græcia mendax.” It’s hard to believe that the Euhemerism he engages in, which was clearly the motivation behind his work, originated from Sanchoniathon’s mind nine hundred years before Euhemerus existed. One might suspect that Sanchoniathon himself was a myth—an “idol of the cave,” created from Philo’s own consciousness. Philo had some knowledge of the Phoenician language and religion, but only to the extent he might have gained through personal interactions with the priests of Byblus and Aphaca, who upheld the old worship during and long after his time. It’s unclear whether he based his statements on any ancient sources or even any books at all. Based on the existing fragments, a basic understanding of the language, a moderate knowledge of the religion, and a bit of creativity could have easily produced them.

A few extracts from the remains must be given to justify this judgement:—“The beginning of all things,” Philo says,1313 “was a dark and stormy air, or a dark air and a turbid chaos, resembling Erebus; and these were at first unbounded, and for a long series of ages had no limit. But after a time this wind became enamoured of its own first principles, and an intimate union took place between them, a connection which was called Desire {pothos}: and this was the beginning of the creation of all things. But it (i.e. the Desire) had no consciousness of its own creation: however, from its embrace with the wind was generated Môt, which some call watery slime, and others putrescence of watery secretion. And from this sprang all the seed of creation, and the generation of the universe. And first there were certain animals without sensation, from which intelligent animals were produced, and these were called ‘Zopher-Sêmin,’ i.e. ‘beholders of the heavens;’ and they were made in the shape of an egg, and from Môt shone forth the sun, and the moon, and the lesser and the greater stars. And when the air began to send forth light, by the conflagration of land and sea, winds were produced, and clouds, and very great downpours, and effusions of the heavenly waters. And when these were thus separated, and carried, through the heat of the sun, out of their proper places, and all met again in the air, and came into collision, there ensued thunderings and lightnings; and through the rattle of the thunder, the intelligent animals, above mentioned, were woke up, and, startled by the noise, began to move about both in the sea and on the land, alike such as were male and such as were female. All these things were found in the cosmogony of Taaut (Thoth), and in his Commentaries, and were drawn from his conjectures, and from the proofs which his intellect discovered, and which he made clear to us.”

A few excerpts from the remains must be given to justify this judgment:—"The beginning of all things," Philo says, "was a dark and stormy atmosphere, or a dark atmosphere and a chaotic turmoil, resembling Erebus; and these were initially limitless and, for a very long time, had no boundaries. But after a while, this wind became infatuated with its own original principles, and an intimate connection formed between them, which was called Desire {pothos}: and this marked the start of the creation of everything. However, it (i.e. the Desire) was unaware of its own creation: nonetheless, from its embrace with the wind, Môt was generated, which some describe as watery slime, and others as the decay of watery secretion. From this emerged all the seeds of creation and the generation of the universe. First, there were certain animals without sensation, from which intelligent animals were produced, and these were called 'Zopher-Sêmin,' meaning 'beholders of the heavens;' and they were shaped like an egg, and from Môt emerged the sun, the moon, and the greater and lesser stars. And when the atmosphere began to emit light, through the conflagration of land and sea, winds were created, along with clouds, and very heavy downpours, and outpourings of the heavenly waters. When these were thus separated and carried, through the heat of the sun, out of their rightful places, and all collided again in the air, thunder and lightning occurred; and through the sound of the thunder, the intelligent animals mentioned above were awakened, and startled by the noise, they began to move both in the sea and on land, both males and females. All these things were found in the cosmogony of Taaut (Thoth), and in his Commentaries, drawn from his speculations and the evidence his intellect uncovered, which he made clear to us."

Again, “From the wind, Colpia, and his wife Bahu (Heb. {...}), which is by interpretation ‘Night,’ were born Æon and Protogonus, mortal men so named; of whom one, viz. Æon, discovered that life might be sustained by the fruits of trees. Their immediate descendants were called Genos and Genea, who lived in Phoenicia, and in time of drought stretched forth their hands to heaven towards the sun; for him they regarded as the sole Lord of Heaven, and called him Baal-samin, which means ‘Lord of Heaven’ in the Phoenician tongue, and is equivalent to Zeus in Greek. And from Genos, son of Æon and Protogonus, were begotten mortal children, called Phôs, and Pyr, and Phlox (i.e. Light, Fire, and Flame). These persons invented the method of producing fire by rubbing two pieces of wood together, and taught men to employ it. They begat sons of surprising size and stature, whose names were given to the mountains whereof they had obtained possession, viz. Casius, and Libanus, and Antilibanus, and Brathy. From them were produced Memrumus and Hypsuranius, who took their names from their mothers, women in those days yielding themselves without shame to any man whom they happened to meet. Hypsuranius lived at Tyre, and invented the art of building huts with reeds and rushes and the papyrus plant. He quarrelled with his brother, Usôus, who was the first to make clothing for the body out of the skins of the wild beasts which he slew. On one occasion, when there was a great storm of rain and wind, the trees in the neighbourhood of Tyre so rubbed against each other that they took fire, and the whole forest was burnt; whereupon Usôus took a tree, and having cleared it of its boughs, was the first to venture on the sea in a boat. He also consecrated two pillars to Fire and Wind, and worshipped them, and poured upon them the blood of the animals which he took by hunting. And when the two brothers were dead, those who remained alive consecrated rods to their memory, and continued to worship the pillars, and to hold a festival in their honour year by year."1314

Again, “From the wind, Colpia, and his wife Bahu (Heb. {...}), which means ‘Night,’ were born Æon and Protogonus, two mortal men. Æon discovered that life could be sustained by the fruits of trees. Their immediate descendants were called Genos and Genea, who lived in Phoenicia. During times of drought, they stretched out their hands to heaven towards the sun, believing him to be the sole Lord of Heaven, calling him Baal-samin, which means ‘Lord of Heaven’ in Phoenician, and is equivalent to Zeus in Greek. From Genos, son of Æon and Protogonus, were born mortal children named Phôs, Pyr, and Phlox (meaning Light, Fire, and Flame). These individuals invented the method of creating fire by rubbing two pieces of wood together and taught people how to use it. They had sons of remarkable size and stature, whose names were given to the mountains they possessed: Casius, Libanus, Antilibanus, and Brathy. From them came Memrumus and Hypsuranius, who took their names from their mothers, women who at that time freely engaged with any man they encountered. Hypsuranius lived in Tyre and invented the technique of building huts from reeds, rushes, and the papyrus plant. He argued with his brother, Usôus, who was the first to make clothing from the skins of the wild animals he hunted. One time, during a fierce storm of rain and wind, the trees near Tyre rubbed against each other and caught fire, burning down the entire forest. After that, Usôus took a tree, stripped it of its branches, and was the first to venture out to sea in a boat. He also dedicated two pillars to Fire and Wind, worshipped them, and poured the blood of the animals he hunted over them. When the two brothers died, those who survived consecrated rods in their memory, continued to worship the pillars, and held a festival in their honor every year.”1314

Once more—“It was the custom among the ancients, in times of great calamity and danger, for the rulers of the city or nation to avert the ruin of all by sacrificing to the avenging deities the best beloved of their children as the price of redemption; and such as were thus devoted were offered with mystic ceremonies. Kronus, therefore, who was called El by the Phoenicians, and who, after his death, was deified and attached to the planet which bears his name, having an only son by a nymph of the country, who was called Anobret, took his son, whose name was Ieoud, which means ‘only son’ in Phoenician, and when a great danger from war impended over the land, adorned him with the ensigns of royalty, and, having prepared an altar for the purpose, voluntarily sacrificed him."1315

Once again—“In ancient times, during periods of great disaster and danger, it was common for the leaders of a city or nation to avert total destruction by sacrificing their most beloved children to the vengeful gods as a price for redemption. Those who were chosen for this sacrifice were offered through special rituals. Kronus, known as El by the Phoenicians, who was deified after his death and associated with the planet named after him, had an only son with a nymph from the region named Anobret. He took his son, Ieoud, which means ‘only son’ in Phoenician, and when a great threat from war loomed over the land, he dressed him in royal symbols and, having prepared an altar for the occasion, voluntarily sacrificed him.”1315

It will be seen from these extracts that the literary value of Philo’s work was exceedingly small. His style is complicated and confused; his matter, for the most part, worthless, and his mixture of Greek, Phoenician, and Egyptian etymologies absurd. If we were bound to believe that he translated a real Phoenician original, and that that original was a fair specimen of Phoenician literary talent, the only conclusion to which we could come would be, that the literature of the nation was beneath contempt.

It’s clear from these excerpts that the literary value of Philo’s work is quite minimal. His style is complicated and confusing; his content is mostly worthless, and his blend of Greek, Phoenician, and Egyptian word origins is ridiculous. If we had to believe that he translated a genuine Phoenician original and that original was a decent example of Phoenician literary talent, the only conclusion we could reach would be that the literature of the nation is not worth considering.

But the “Periplus” of Hanno will lead us to modify this judgment. It is so short a work that we venture to give it entire from the translation of Falconer,1316 with a few obvious corrections.

But Hanno's “Periplus” will make us rethink this judgment. It’s such a brief piece that we dare to present it in full from Falconer’s translation, with a few obvious corrections.

The voyage of Hanno, King of the Carthaginians, round the parts of Libya beyond the Pillars of Hercules, which he deposited in the Temple of Kronos.

The journey of Hanno, King of the Carthaginians, around the regions of Libya beyond the Pillars of Hercules, which he placed in the Temple of Kronos.

“It was decreed by the Carthaginians that Hanno should undertake a voyage beyond the Pillars of Hercules, and there found Liby-Phoenician cities. He sailed accordingly with sixty ships of fifty oars each, and a body of men and women, to the number of thirty thousand, and provisions, and other necessaries.

“It was decided by the Carthaginians that Hanno would go on a voyage beyond the Pillars of Hercules to establish Liby-Phoenician cities. He set sail with sixty ships, each with fifty oars, and a total of thirty thousand men and women, along with supplies and other essentials."

“When we had weighed anchor, and passed the Pillars, and sailed beyond them for two days, we founded the first city, which we named Thymiaterium. Below it lay an extensive plain. Proceeding thence towards the west, we came to Soloeis, a promontory of Libya thickly covered with trees, where we erected a temple to Neptune (Poseidon), and again proceeded for the space of half a day towards the east, until we arrived at a lake lying not far from the sea, and filled with abundance of large reeds. Here elephants and a great number of other wild animals were feeding.

“When we set sail and passed the Pillars, sailing beyond them for two days, we established the first city, which we called Thymiaterium. Below it was a vast plain. Continuing westward, we reached Soloeis, a treed promontory of Libya, where we built a temple to Neptune (Poseidon). We then traveled east for half a day until we reached a lake not far from the sea, filled with an abundance of large reeds. Here, elephants and many other wild animals were grazing.”

“Having passed the lake about a day’s sail, we founded cities near the sea, called Caricon-Teichos, and Gytta, and Acra, and Melitta, and Arambys. Thence we came to the great river Lixus, which flows from Libya. On its banks the Lixitæ, a wandering tribe, were feeding flocks, amongst whom we continued some time on friendly terms. Beyond the Lixitæ dwelt the inhospitable Ethiopians, who pasture a wild country intersected by large mountains, from which they say the river Lixus flows. In the neighbourhood of the mountains lived the Troglodytes, men of various appearances, whom the Lixitæ described as swifter in running than horses. Having procured interpreters from them, we coasted along a desert country towards the south for two days; and thence again proceeded towards the east the course of a day. Here we found in the recess of a certain bay a small island, having a circuit of five stadia, where we settled a colony, and called it Cerne. We judged from our voyage that this place lay in a direct line with Carthage; for the length of our voyage from Carthage to the Pillars was equal to that from the Pillars to Cerne. We then came to a cape, which we reached by sailing up a large river called Chrete. The lake had three islands larger than Cerne; from which, proceeding a day’s sail, we came to the extremity of the lake. This was overhung by huge mountains, inhabited by savage men, clothed in skins of wild beasts, who drove us away by throwing stones, and hindered us from landing. Sailing thence, we came to another river, that was deep and broad, and full of crocodiles and river horses (hippopotami), whence returning back, we came again to Cerne. Thence we sailed towards the south for twelve days, coasting along the shore, the whole of which is inhabited by Ethiopians, who would not wait our approach, but fled from us. Their language was unintelligible, even to the Lixitæ who were with us. On the last day we approached some large mountains covered with trees, the wood of which was sweet-scented and variegated. Having sailed by these mountains for two days, we came to an immense opening of the sea; on each side of which, towards the continent, was a plain; from which we saw by night fire arising at intervals, either more or less.

“After sailing past the lake for about a day, we established cities near the sea, named Caricon-Teichos, Gytta, Acra, Melitta, and Arambys. From there, we arrived at the great river Lixus, which flows from Libya. Along its banks, the Lixitæ, a nomadic tribe, were grazing their flocks, and we maintained friendly relations with them for some time. Beyond the Lixitæ lived the unfriendly Ethiopians, who roamed a wild land marked by large mountains, which they say is where the river Lixus originates. Near these mountains resided the Troglodytes, men of diverse appearances, who the Lixitæ claimed could run faster than horses. After getting interpreters from them, we sailed along a desolate area to the south for two days, and then headed east for another day. There, we discovered a small island in the bay, measuring about five stadia around, where we established a colony and named it Cerne. Based on our journey, we estimated that this location was in a straight line with Carthage, as the distance we traveled from Carthage to the Pillars was the same as from the Pillars to Cerne. Next, we arrived at a cape that we reached by navigating up a large river called Chrete. The lake had three islands larger than Cerne; after a day's sail from there, we reached the lake's farthest point. This area was dominated by massive mountains, inhabited by fierce men dressed in animal skins, who drove us away by throwing stones and prevented us from landing. After sailing from there, we encountered another deep and wide river filled with crocodiles and hippos; returning to Cerne, we sailed south for twelve days, skirting the coast, which was entirely inhabited by Ethiopians who would not wait for us but instead ran away. Their language was so foreign that even the Lixitæ accompanying us could not understand it. On the last day, we approached large, tree-covered mountains with fragrant and varied wood. After sailing past these mountains for two days, we reached a vast opening in the sea, flanked by a plain on each side leading to the continent; at night, we could see fires dotting the landscape at intervals, sometimes more, sometimes less."

“Having taken in water there, we sailed forward during five days near the land, until we came to a large bay, which our interpreter informed us was called ‘the Western Horn.’ In this was a large island, and in the island a salt-water lake, and in this another island, where, when we had landed, we could discover nothing in the daytime except trees; but in the night we saw many fires burning, and heard the sound of pipes, cymbals, drums, and confused shouting. We were then afraid, and our diviners ordered us to abandon the island. Sailing quickly away thence, we passed by a country burning with fires and perfumes; and streams of fire supplied thence fell into the sea. The country was untraversable on account of the heat. So we sailed away quickly from there also, being much terrified; and, passing on for four days, we observed at night a country full of flames. In the middle was a lofty fire, larger than the rest, which seemed to touch the stars. When day came, we discovered it to be a huge hill, called ‘the Chariot of the Gods.’ On the third day after our departure thence, after sailing by streams of fire, we arrived at a bay, called ‘the Southern Horn;’ at the bottom of which lay an island like the former one, having a lake, and in the lake another island full of savage people, far the greater part of whom were women, whose bodies were hairy, and whom our interpreters called ‘gorillæ.’ Though we pursued the men, we could not catch any of them; but all escaped us, climbing over the precipices, and defending themselves with stones. Three women were, however, taken; but they attacked their conductors with their teeth and nails, and could not be prevailed upon to accompany us. So we killed them, and flayed them, and brought their skins with us to Carthage. We did not sail further on, our provisions failing us.”

“After taking on water there, we sailed along the coast for five days until we reached a large bay, which our interpreter told us was called ‘the Western Horn.’ Inside the bay was a large island, and on that island was a saltwater lake, and in this lake was another island. When we landed, we could only see trees during the day, but at night we saw many fires burning and heard the sounds of pipes, cymbals, drums, and confused shouting. We became frightened, and our diviners told us to leave the island. We quickly sailed away from there, passing by a land filled with fires and perfumes; streams of fire flowed from there into the sea. The heat made the land unapproachable. So we hurried away from there too, feeling quite scared, and after sailing for four days, we saw at night a land full of flames. In the center was a towering fire, larger than the others, that seemed to reach the stars. When morning came, we realized it was a huge hill, called ‘the Chariot of the Gods.’ On the third day after leaving there, after sailing past streams of fire, we arrived at a bay known as ‘the Southern Horn’; at the bottom of this bay was an island similar to the first one, with a lake, and in the lake another island inhabited by savage people, mostly women, whose bodies were hairy, and whom our interpreters referred to as ‘gorillæ.’ Although we tried to catch the men, none were caught; they all escaped by climbing the cliffs and defending themselves with stones. We did manage to capture three women, but they fought against their captors with their teeth and nails and refused to come with us. So we killed them, skinned them, and brought their skins back to Carthage. We did not sail any further because our supplies were running low.”

The style of this short work, though exceedingly simple and inartificial, is not without its merits. It has the directness, the perspicuity, and the liveliness of Cæsar’s Commentaries or of the Duke of Wellington’s Despatches. Montesquieu1317 says of it:—“Hanno’s Voyage was written by the very man who performed it. His recital is not mingled with ostentation. Great commanders write their actions with simplicity, because they receive more honour from facts than words.” If we may take the work as a specimen of the accounts which Phoenician explorers commonly gave of their travels in unknown regions, we must regard them as having set a pattern which modern travellers would do well to follow. Hanno gives us facts, not speculations—the things which he has observed, not those of which he has dreamt; and he delivers his facts in the fewest possible words, and in the plainest possible way. He does not cultivate flowers of rhetoric; he does not unduly spin out his narrative. It is plain that he is especially bent on making his meaning clear, and he succeeds in doing so.

The style of this short work, while very simple and unrefined, has its own merits. It has the straightforwardness, clarity, and liveliness of Caesar's Commentaries or the Duke of Wellington's Dispatches. Montesquieu says about it:—“Hanno’s Voyage was written by the very man who experienced it. His account is not mixed with bragging. Great leaders write about their actions simply, because they earn more respect from facts than from words.” If we consider this work as an example of the accounts that Phoenician explorers usually provided of their journeys into unknown areas, we should see them as setting a standard that modern travelers would do well to emulate. Hanno presents us with facts, not theories—what he has seen, not what he has imagined; and he shares these facts in the fewest words and the clearest manner possible. He does not indulge in ornate language; he does not unnecessarily elongate his narrative. It is clear that he is especially focused on making his point clear, and he succeeds in doing so.

The epigraphic literature of the Phoenicians, which M. Renan considers to supply fairly well the almost complete loss of their books,1318 scarcely deserves to be so highly rated. It consists at present of five or six moderately long, and some hundreds of exceedingly short, inscriptions; the longer ones being, all of them, inscribed on stones, the shorter on stones, vases, pateræ, gems, coins, and the like. The longest of all is that engraved on the sarcophagus of Esmunazar, king of Sidon, discovered near the modern Saida in the year 1855, and now in the museum of the Louvre. This has a length of twenty-two long lines, and contains 298 words.1319 It is fairly legible throughout; and the sense is, for the most part, fairly well ascertained, though the meaning of some passages remains still more or less doubtful. The following is the translation of M. Renan:—

The Phoenicians' epigraphic literature, which M. Renan thinks fills in for the nearly total loss of their books, doesn't really deserve such high praise. Right now, it consists of five or six moderately long inscriptions and several hundred short ones; the longer texts are all carved on stone, while the shorter ones are found on stones, vases, platters, gems, coins, and similar items. The longest is the inscription on the sarcophagus of Esmunazar, king of Sidon, which was discovered near modern Saida in 1855 and is now in the Louvre Museum. It has twenty-two long lines and contains 298 words. It is mostly legible, and the meaning is generally understood, although some sections are still somewhat unclear. Here’s M. Renan's translation:—

“In the month of Bul (October), in the fourteenth year of the reign of King Esmunazar, king of the Sidonians, son of King Tabnit, king of the Sidonians, King Esmunazar, king of the Sidonians, spake, saying—I am snatched away before my time, the child of a few days, the orphan son of a widow; and lo! I am lying in this coffin, and in this tomb, in the place which I have built. I adjure every royal personage and every man whatsoever, that they open not this my chamber, and seek not for treasures there, since there are here no treasures, and that they remove not the coffin from my chamber, nor build over this my chamber any other funeral chamber. Even if men speak to thee, listen not to their words; since every royal personage and every other man who shall open this funeral chamber, or remove the coffin from this my chamber, or build anything over this chamber—may they have no funeral chamber with the departed, nor be buried in tombs, nor have any son or descendant to succeed to their place; but may the Holy Gods deliver them into the hand of a mighty king who shall reign over them, and destroy the royal personage or the man who shall open this my funeral chamber, or remove this coffin, together with the offspring of the royal personage or other man, and let them not have either root below, or any fruit above, or glory among such as live beneath the sun. Since I am snatched away before my time, the child of a few days, the orphan son of a widow, even I.

“In the month of Bul (October), in the fourteenth year of King Esmunazar's reign, king of the Sidonians, son of King Tabnit, king of the Sidonians, King Esmunazar said: I have been taken from this life too soon, just a child and the orphan son of a widow; and here I lie in this coffin, in this tomb, in the place I built. I urge every royal person and every person in general not to enter this chamber or look for treasures here, as there are none, and not to move the coffin from my chamber, or construct any other burial chamber over mine. Even if others try to persuade you, do not listen to them; for every royal person and anyone who dares to enter this burial chamber, or move this coffin, or build anything over it—may they never find resting place with the departed, nor have a proper burial, nor have a son or legacy to take their place; but may the Holy Gods hand them over to a powerful king who will reign over them, and may they be destroyed along with their kin by whoever opens this chamber or moves this coffin, with no roots below or fruits above, nor any honor among those who live under the sun. For I have been taken from this life too soon, just a child and the orphan son of a widow, even I.”

“For I am Esmunazar, king of the Sidonians, the son of King Tabnit, king of the Sidonians, and the grandson of Esmunazar, king of the Sidonians, and my mother is Am-Ashtoreth, priestess of our lady Ashtoreth, the queen, the daughter of King Esmunazar, king of the Sidonians—and it is we who have built the temples of the gods, the temple of Ashtoreth in Sidon on the shore of the sea, and have placed Ashtoreth in her temple to glorify her; and we too have built the temple of Esmun, and set the sacred grove, En Yidlal, in the mountain, and made him (Esmun) dwell there to glorify him; and it is we who have built temples to the [other] deities of the Sidonians, in Sidon on the shore of the sea, as the temple of Baal-Sidon, and the temple of Asthoreth, who bears the name of Baal. And for this cause has the Lord of Kings given us Dor and Joppa, and the fertile cornlands which are in the plains of Sharon, as a reward for the great things which I have done, and added them to the boundaries of the land, that they may belong to the Sidonians for ever. I adjure every royal personage, and every man whatsoever, that they open not this my chamber, nor empty my chamber, nor build aught over this my chamber, nor remove the coffin from this my chamber, lest the Holy Gods deliver them up, and destroy the royal personage, or the men [who shall do so], and their offspring for ever."1320

“For I am Esmunazar, king of the Sidonians, the son of King Tabnit, king of the Sidonians, and the grandson of Esmunazar, king of the Sidonians, and my mother is Am-Ashtoreth, priestess of our lady Ashtoreth, the queen, the daughter of King Esmunazar, king of the Sidonians—and it is we who have built the temples of the gods, the temple of Ashtoreth in Sidon on the shore of the sea, and have placed Ashtoreth in her temple to honor her; and we too have built the temple of Esmun and set the sacred grove, En Yidlal, in the mountain, making him (Esmun) dwell there to glorify him; and it is we who have built temples for the other deities of the Sidonians in Sidon on the sea shore, such as the temple of Baal-Sidon and the temple of Ashtoreth, who is known as Baal. And because of this, the Lord of Kings has granted us Dor and Joppa, and the fertile lands in the plains of Sharon, as a reward for the great things I have accomplished, adding them to the borders of the land so that they may belong to the Sidonians forever. I urge every royal figure and every person not to enter my chamber, not to empty it, not to build anything over it, and not to move the coffin from my chamber, lest the Holy Gods bring ruin upon them and destroy the royal person or the individuals who do so, and their descendants forever.”1320

The inscription on the tomb of Tabnit, Esmunazar’s father, found near Beyrout in 1886, is shorter, but nearly to the same effect. It has been thus translated:—“I, Tabnit, priest of Ashtoreth, and king of Sidon, lying in this tomb, say—I adjure every man, when thou shalt come upon this sepulchre, open not my chamber, and trouble me not, for there is not with me aught of silver, nor is there with me aught of gold, there is not with me anything whatever of spoil, but only I myself who lie in this sepulchre. Open not my chamber, and trouble me not; for it would be an abomination in the sight of Ashtoreth to do such an act. And if thou shouldest open my chamber, and trouble me, mayest thou have no posterity all thy life under the sun, and no resting-place with the departed."1321

The inscription on the tomb of Tabnit, Esmunazar’s father, found near Beirut in 1886, is shorter but nearly conveys the same message. It has been translated as follows:—“I, Tabnit, priest of Ashtoreth and king of Sidon, lying in this tomb, say—I warn anyone who comes upon this grave, do not open my chamber, and do not disturb me, for I have no silver with me, nor any gold, nothing of value, just myself lying in this tomb. Do not open my chamber, and do not disturb me; for it would be a disgrace in the eyes of Ashtoreth to do such a thing. And if you open my chamber and disturb me, may you have no descendants throughout your life under the sun, and no resting place with the dead.”1321

A stelé of a Byblian king, Jehavmelek, probably somewhat more ancient than these,1322 bears an inscription of a different kind, since it is attached to a votive offering and not to a sepulchre. The king represents himself in a bas-relief as making an offering to Beltis or Ashtoreth, and then appends an epigraph, which runs to fifteen long lines,1323 and is to the following effect:—“I am Jehavmelek, king of Gebal, the son of Jahar-baal, and the grandson of Adom-melek, king of Gebal, whom lady Beltis of Gebal has made king of Gebal; and I invoke my lady Beltis of Gebal, because she has heard my voice. And I have made for my lady Beltis of Gebal the brazen altar which is in this temple, and the golden carving which is in front of this my carving, and the uræus of gold which is in the middle of the stone over the golden carving. And I have made this portico, with its columns, and the capitals that are upon the columns, and the roof of the temple also, I, Jehavmelek, king of Gebal, have made for my lady Beltis of Gebal, because, whenever I have invoked my lady Beltis of Gebal, she has heard my voice, and been good to me. May Beltis of Gebal bless Jehavmelek, king of Gebal, and grant him life, and prolong his days and his years over Gebal, because he is a just king; and may the lady Beltis of Gebal obtain him favour in the sight of the Gods, and in the sight of the people of foreign lands, for ever! Every royal personage and every other man who shall make additions to this altar, or to this golden carving, or to this portico, I, Jehavmelek, king of Gebal, set may face against him who shall so do, and I pray my lady Beltis of Gebal to destroy that man, whoever he be, and his seed after him."1324

A stelé of a Byblian king, Jehavmelek, likely a bit older than these, 1322 has a different kind of inscription because it’s linked to a votive offering instead of a tomb. The king depicts himself in a bas-relief making an offering to Beltis or Ashtoreth, and adds an inscription consisting of fifteen long lines, 1323 that says: “I am Jehavmelek, king of Gebal, the son of Jahar-baal, and the grandson of Adom-melek, king of Gebal, whom lady Beltis of Gebal has made king of Gebal; and I call upon my lady Beltis of Gebal because she has heard my voice. I have made for my lady Beltis of Gebal the bronze altar in this temple, the golden carving in front of this carving, and the golden uræus in the center of the stone over the golden carving. I have built this portico, including its columns, the capitals on the columns, and the roof of the temple; I, Jehavmelek, king of Gebal, have built these for my lady Beltis of Gebal, because whenever I have called upon my lady Beltis of Gebal, she has heard me and been good to me. May Beltis of Gebal bless Jehavmelek, king of Gebal, grant him life, and prolong his days and years over Gebal, as he is a just king; and may lady Beltis of Gebal give him favor in the eyes of the gods and in the eyes of people from foreign lands, forever! Anyone, whether royal or not, who adds to this altar, or to this golden carving, or to this portico, I, Jehavmelek, king of Gebal, will oppose them, and I pray my lady Beltis of Gebal to destroy that person, whoever they may be, and their descendants after them." 1324

The inscription of Marseilles, if it had been entire, would have been as valuable and interesting as any of these; but, unfortunately, its twenty-one lines are in every case incomplete, being broken off, or else illegible, towards the left. It appears to have been a decree emanating from the authorities of Carthage, and prescribing the amount of the payments to be made in connection with the sacrifices and officials of a temple of Baal which may have existed either at Marseilles or at Carthage itself. To translate it is impossible without a vast amount of conjecture; but M. Renan’s version1325 seems to deserve a place in the present collection.

The inscription from Marseilles, if it had been complete, would have been as valuable and interesting as any of these; but unfortunately, its twenty-one lines are incomplete, being cut off, or illegible on the left side. It seems to have been a decree from the authorities of Carthage, outlining the payments to be made for the sacrifices and officials of a temple of Baal that may have existed either in Marseilles or in Carthage itself. Translating it is impossible without a lot of guesswork; however, M. Renan’s version1325 seems worth including in this collection.

INSCRIPTION OF MARSEILLES

Marseille Inscription

“The temple of Baal . . . Account of the payments fixed by those set over the payments, in the time of our lords, Halats-Baal, the Suffes, the son of Abd-Tanith, the son of Abd-Esmun, and of Halats-Baal, the Suffes, the son of Abd-Esmun, the son of Halts-Baal, and of their colleagues:—For an ox, whether as burnt sacrifice, or expiatory offering, or thank offering, to the priests [shall be given] ten [shekels] of silver on account of each; and, if it be a burnt sacrifice, they shall have besides this payment three hundred weight of the flesh; and if the sacrifice be expiatory, [they shall have] the fat and the additions, and the offerer of the sacrifice shall have the skin, and the entrails, and the feet, and the rest of the flesh. For a calf without horns and entire, or for a ram, whether as burnt sacrifice, or expiatory offering, or thank offering, to the priests [shall be given] five [shekels] of silver on account of each; and if it be a burnt sacrifice, they shall have, besides this payment, a hundred weight and a half of the flesh; and if the sacrifice be expiatory, they shall have the fat and the additions, and the skin, and entrails, and feet, and the rest of the flesh shall be given to the offerer of the sacrifice. For a he-goat, or a she-goat, whether as a burnt sacrifice, or expiatory offering, or thank offering, to the priests [shall be given] one [shekel] and two zers of silver on account of each; and if it be an expiatory sacrifice, they shall have, besides this payment, the fat and the additions; and the skin, and entrails, and feet, and the rest of the flesh shall be given to the offerer of the sacrifice. For a sheep, or a kid, or a fawn (?), whether as burnt sacrifice, or expiatory offering, or thank offering, to the priests [shall be given] three-fourths of a shekel of silver and . . . zers, on account of each; and if it be an expiatory sacrifice, they shall have, besides this payment, the fat and the additions; and the skin, and the entrails, and the feet, and the rest of the flesh [13shall be given] to the offerer of the sacrifice. For a bird, domestic or wild, whether as thank offering, or for augury, or for divination, to the priests [shall be given] three-fourths of a shekel of silver and two zers on account of each, and the flesh shall be for the offerer of the sacrifice. For a bird, or for the holy first-fruits, or for the offering of a cake, or for an offering of oil, to the priests [shall be given] ten zers of silver on account of each, and . . . In every expiatory sacrifice that shall be offered before the deities, to the priests [shall be given] the fat and the additions, and in the sacrifice of . . . For a meat offering, or for milk, or for fat, or for any sacrifice which any man shall offer as an oblation, to the priests [there shall be given] . . . For every offering that a man shall offer who is poor in sheep, or poor in birds, [there shall be given] to the priests nothing at all. Every native, and every inhabitant, and every feaster at the table of the gods, and all the men who sacrifice . . . those men shall make a payment for every sacrifice, according to that which is prescribed in [this] writing . . . Every payment which is not prescribed in this tablet shall be made proportionally to the rate fixed by those set over the payments in the time of our lords, Halats-Baal, the son of Abd-Tanith, and Halats-Baal, the son of Abd-Esmun, and their colleagues. Every priest who takes a payment beyond the amount prescribed in this tablet shall be fined . . . And every offerer of a sacrifice who shall not pay [the amount] prescribed, beyond the payment which [is here fixed, he shall pay] . . .”

The temple of Baal . . . Summary of the payments established by those in charge of the payments during the time of our leaders, Halats-Baal, the Suffes, the son of Abd-Tanith, the son of Abd-Esmun, and Halats-Baal, the Suffes, the son of Abd-Esmun, the son of Halts-Baal, and their colleagues:—For an ox, whether as a burnt offering, a purification offering, or a thank offering, the priests shall receive ten shekels of silver for each one; if it’s a burnt offering, they shall also receive three hundred weight of the flesh; and if the sacrifice is for purification, they shall receive the fat and other parts, and the person offering the sacrifice shall keep the skin, entrails, feet, and the rest of the flesh. For a calf without horns or a ram, whether as a burnt offering, a purification offering, or a thank offering, the priests shall be given five shekels of silver for each; if it’s a burnt offering, they shall also receive a hundred and fifty weight of the flesh; and if the sacrifice is for purification, they shall take the fat and other parts, and the skin, entrails, feet, and the rest of the flesh shall go to the person offering the sacrifice. For a he-goat or a she-goat, whether as a burnt offering, a purification offering, or a thank offering, the priests shall receive one shekel and two zers of silver for each; and if it’s a purification sacrifice, they shall receive, in addition to this payment, the fat and other parts; the skin, entrails, feet, and the rest of the flesh shall be given to the one offering the sacrifice. For a sheep, or a kid, or a fawn (?), whether as a burnt offering, a purification offering, or a thank offering, the priests shall receive three-quarters of a shekel of silver and . . . zers for each; if it’s a purification sacrifice, they shall get the fat and other parts as well; the skin, entrails, feet, and the rest of the flesh shall be given to the person making the sacrifice. For a bird, whether domestic or wild, as a thank offering, for augury, or for divination, the priests shall receive three-quarters of a shekel of silver and two zers for each, and the flesh shall go to the person offering the sacrifice. For a bird, for the holy first-fruits, for a cake offering, or for an oil offering, the priests shall receive ten zers of silver for each, and . . . For every purification sacrifice offered before the deities, the priests shall receive the fat and other parts, and in the sacrifice of . . . For a grain offering, or for milk, or for fat, or for any offering made by a person as an oblation, the priests shall receive . . . For every offering made by someone who is poor in sheep or birds, the priests shall receive nothing at all. Every native, every resident, every guest at the table of the gods, and all men who sacrifice . . . shall pay for every sacrifice according to what is specified in [this] document . . . Every payment not specified in this tablet shall be made proportionally to the rate set by those in charge of the payments during the time of our lords, Halats-Baal, son of Abd-Tanith, and Halats-Baal, son of Abd-Esmun, and their colleagues. Any priest who accepts a payment above the amount specified in this tablet shall be fined . . . And any offerer of a sacrifice who does not pay the prescribed amount, beyond what is specified here, shall pay . . .

Of the shorter inscriptions of the Phoenicians, by far the greater number were attached either to votive offerings or to tombs. Some hundreds have been found of both classes, but they are almost wholly without literary merit, being bald and jejune in the extreme, and presenting little variety. The depositor of a votive offering usually begins by mentioning the name and title, or titles, of the deity to whom he dedicates it. Then he appends his own name, with the names of his father and grandfather. Occasionally, but rarely, he describes his offering, and states the year in which it was set up. Finally, he asks the deity to bless him. The following are examples:—

Of the shorter inscriptions from the Phoenicians, the majority were linked to either votive offerings or tombs. Several hundred of each type have been discovered, but they lack literary value, being very plain and devoid of interest, and showing little variety. The person making a votive offering usually starts by mentioning the name and title, or titles, of the deity to whom it's dedicated. Then, they include their own name, along with the names of their father and grandfather. Sometimes, but rarely, they describe their offering and mention the year it was established. Lastly, they ask the deity to bless them. Here are some examples:—

INSCRIPTION OF UM-EL-AWAMID

INSCRIPTION OF UM-EL-AWAMID

“To the lord Baal-Shamaïm, [the vow] which was vowed by Abdelim, son of Mattan, son of Abdelim, son of Baal-Shomar, of the district of Laodicea. This gateway and doors did I make in fulfilment of it. I built it in the 180th year of the Lord of Kings, and in the 143rd year of the people of Tyre, that it might be to me a memorial and for a good name beneath the feet of my lord, Baal-Shamaïm, for ever. May he bless me!”1326

“To the lord Baal-Shamaïm, [the vow] that was made by Abdelim, son of Mattan, son of Abdelim, son of Baal-Shomar, from the region of Laodicea. I created this gateway and doors to fulfill that vow. I built it in the 180th year of the Lord of Kings, and in the 143rd year of the people of Tyre, as a memorial for myself and to have a good reputation at the feet of my lord, Baal-Shamaïm, forever. May he bless me!”1326

INSCRIPTION ON A CIPPUS FROM CARTHAGE

INSCRIPTION ON A CIPPUS FROM CARTHAGE

“To the lady Tanith, and to our master, the lord Baal-Hammon; the offerer is Abd-Melkarth, the Suffes, son of Abd-Melkarth, son of Hanno."1327

“To the lady Tanith, and to our master, the lord Baal-Hammon; the one making the offering is Abd-Melkarth, the Suffes, son of Abd-Melkarth, son of Hanno."1327

INSCRIPTION ON A CIPPUS FOUND IN MALTA

INSCRIPTION ON A CIPPUS FOUND IN MALTA

“To our lord Melkarth, the lord of Tyre. The offerer is thy servant, Abd-Osiri, and my brother, Osiri-Shomar, both [of us] sons of Osiri-Shomar, the son of Abd-Osiri. In hearing their voice, may he bless them."1328

“To our lord Melkarth, the lord of Tyre. The person offering this is your servant, Abd-Osiri, and my brother, Osiri-Shomar, both of us sons of Osiri-Shomar, the son of Abd-Osiri. May he bless them as he hears their voices."1328

INSCRIPTION ON A MARBLE ALTAR, BROUGHT FROM LARNAKA

INSCRIPTION ON A MARBLE ALTAR, BROUGHT FROM LARNAKA

“On the sixth day of the month Bul, in the twenty-first year of King Pumi-yitten, king of Citium and Idalium, and Tamasus, son of King Melek-yitten, king of Citium and Idalium, this altar and these two lions were given by Bodo, priest of Reseph-hets, son of Yakun-shalam, son of Esmunadon, to his lord Reseph-hets. May he bless [him]."1329

“On the sixth day of the month Bul, in the twenty-first year of King Pumi-yitten, king of Citium and Idalium, and Tamasus, son of King Melek-yitten, king of Citium and Idalium, this altar and these two lions were given by Bodo, priest of Reseph-hets, son of Yakun-shalam, son of Esmunadon, to his lord Reseph-hets. May he bless [him]."1329

INSCRIPTION ON A MARBLE TABLET FOUND IN CYPRUS

INSCRIPTION ON A MARBLE TABLET FOUND IN CYPRUS

“On the seventh day of the month . . . in the thirty-first year of the Lord of Kings, Ptolemæus, son of Ptolemæus . . . which was the fifty-seventh year of the Citians, when Amarat-Osiri, daughter of . . . son of Abd-Susim, of Gad’ath, was canephora of Asinoë Philadelphus, these statues were set up by Bathshalun, daughter of Maryichai, son of Esmunadon, to the memory of his grandsons, Esmunadon, Shallum, and Abd-Reseph, the three sons of Maryichai, son of Esmunadon, according to the vow which their father, Maryichai, vowed, when he was still alive, to their lord, Reseph-Mikal. May he bless them!”1330

“On the seventh day of the month . . . in the thirty-first year of the Lord of Kings, Ptolemæus, son of Ptolemæus . . . which was the fifty-seventh year of the Citians, when Amarat-Osiri, daughter of . . . son of Abd-Susim, of Gad’ath, was canephora of Asinoë Philadelphus, these statues were set up by Bathshalun, daughter of Maryichai, son of Esmunadon, to commemorate his grandsons, Esmunadon, Shallum, and Abd-Reseph, the three sons of Maryichai, son of Esmunadon, following the vow their father, Maryichai, made while he was still alive, to their lord, Reseph-Mikal. May he bless them!”1330

There is a little more variety in the inscriptions on tombstones. The great majority, indeed, are extremely curt and dry, containing scarcely anything beyond the name of the person who is buried in the tomb, or that together with the name of the person by whom the monument is erected; e.g. “To Athad, the daughter of Abd-Esmun, the Suffes, and wife of Ger-Melkarth, the son of Ben-hodesh, the son of Esmunazar"1331; or “This monument I, Menahem, grandson of Abd-Esmun, have erected to my father, Abd-Shamash, son of Abd-Esmun"1332; or “I, Abd-Osiri, the son of Abd-Susim, the son of Hur, have erected this monument, while I am still alive, to myself, and to my wife, Ammat-Ashtoreth, daughter of Taam, son of Abd-melek, [and have placed it] over the chamber of my tomb, in perpetuity."1333 But, occasionally, we get a glimpse, beyond the mere dry facts, into the region of thought; as where the erector of a monument appends to the name of one, whom we may suppose to have been a miser, the remark, that “the reward of him who heaps up riches is contempt;"1334 or where one who entertains the hope that his friend is happier in another world than he was upon earth, thus expresses himself—“In memory of Esmun. After rain, the sun shines forth;"1335 or, again, where domestic affection shows itself in the declaration concerning the departed—“When he entered into the house that is so full [of guests], there was grief for the memory of the sage, the man that was hard as adamant, that bore calamities of every sort, that was a widower through the death of my mother, that was like a pellucid fountain, and had a name pure from crime. Erected in affection by me his son to my father."1336

There’s a bit more variety in the inscriptions on tombstones. Most of them are very brief and straightforward, mostly just including the name of the person buried or the name of the person who put up the monument; for example, “To Athad, daughter of Abd-Esmun, the Suffes, and wife of Ger-Melkarth, son of Ben-hodesh, son of Esmunazar"1331; or “This monument I, Menahem, grandson of Abd-Esmun, have built for my father, Abd-Shamash, son of Abd-Esmun"1332; or “I, Abd-Osiri, son of Abd-Susim, son of Hur, have built this monument while I am still alive, for myself and my wife, Ammat-Ashtoreth, daughter of Taam, son of Abd-melek, [and have placed it] over the chamber of my tomb, forever."1333 But sometimes, we get a glimpse beyond the dry facts into thoughtful expressions; like when the person who built a monument adds a note about someone we might assume was a miser, saying that “the reward of him who hoards wealth is scorn;"1334 or when someone hopes that his friend is happier in the afterlife than he was on earth, expressing it like this—“In memory of Esmun. After rain, the sun shines brightly;"1335 or again, when family love is shown in the sentiment about the deceased—“When he entered the house that is so full [of guests], there was sadness for the memory of the wise man, the one who was tough as stone, who faced every challenge, who lost my mother to death, who was like a clear fountain, and had a name without guilt. Created in love by me, his son, for my father."1336

With respect to the extent and range of the Phoenician book literature, the little that can be gathered from the notices remaining to us in the Greek and Roman writers is the following. In Phoenicia Proper there were historical writers at least from the time of Hiram, the contemporary of David, who wrote the annals of their country in a curt dry form somewhat resembling that of Kings and Chronicles.1337 The names of the kings and the length of their reigns were carefully recorded, together with some of the more remarkable events belonging to each reign; but there was no attempt at the philosophy of history, nor at the graces of composition. In some places, especially at Sidon, philosophy and science were to a certain extent cultivated. Mochus, a Sidonian, wrote a work on the atomic theory at a very early date, though scarcely, as Posidonius maintained,1338 one anterior to the Trojan war. Later on, the Sidonian school specially affected astronomy and arithmetic, in which they made so much progress that the Greeks acknowledged themselves their debtors in those branches of knowledge.1339 It is highly probable, though not exactly capable of proof, that the Tyrian navigators from a very remote period embodied in short works the observations which they made in their voyages, on the geography, hydrography, ethology, and natural history of the counties, which were visited by them. Hanno’s “Periplus” may have been composed on a model of these earlier treatises, which at a later date furnished materials to Marinus for his great work on geography. It was, however, in the Phoenician colony of Carthage that authorship was taken up with most spirit and success. Hiempsal, Hanno, Mago, Hamilcar, and others, composed works, which the Romans valued highly, on the history, geography, and “origines” of Africa, and also upon practical agriculture.1340 Mago and Hamilcar were regarded as the best authorities on the latter subject both by the Greeks and Romans, and were followed, among the Greeks by Mnaseas and Paxamus,1341 among the Romans by Varro and Columella.1342 So highly was the work of Mago, which ran to twenty-eight books, esteemed, that, on the taking of Carthage, it was translated into Latin by order of the Roman Senate.1343 After the fall of Carthage, Tyre and Sidon once more became seats of learning; but the Phoenician language was discarded, and Greek adopted in its place. The Tyrian, Sidonian, Byblian and Berytian authors, of whom we hear, bear Greek names:1344 and it is impossible to say whether they belonged, in any true sense, to the Phoenician race. Philo of Byblus and Marinus of Tyre are the only two authors of this later period who held to Phoenician traditions, and, presumably, conveyed on to later ages Phoenician ideas and accumulations. If neither literature nor science gained much from the work of the former, that of the latter had considerable value, and, as the basis of the great work of Ptolemy, must ever hold an honourable place in the history of geographical progress.

Regarding the scope and variety of Phoenician literature, the little we can gather from the remaining mentions in Greek and Roman texts is as follows. In Phoenicia itself, there were historical writers at least since the time of Hiram, a contemporary of David, who wrote the annals of their land in a brief, straightforward style similar to that of the Books of Kings and Chronicles.1337 The names of the kings and the lengths of their reigns were carefully recorded, along with notable events from each reign; however, there was no effort to explore the philosophy of history or to enhance the writing style. In some areas, especially Sidon, philosophy and science were somewhat developed. Mochus, a Sidonian, wrote a work on atomic theory at a very early time, although, as Posidonius claimed,1338 it was hardly before the Trojan war. Later, the Sidonian school focused on astronomy and arithmetic, making such advancements that the Greeks acknowledged their debt to them in those fields of knowledge.1339 It is highly likely, though not definitively proven, that Tyrian navigators, from very early times, compiled brief accounts of their observations on the geography, hydrography, ethnology, and natural history of the regions they visited. Hanno's "Periplus" may have been modeled after these earlier treatises, which later provided materials for Marinus's major work on geography. However, it was in the Phoenician colony of Carthage where authorship flourished with the most energy and success. Hiempsal, Hanno, Mago, Hamilcar, and others produced works on the history, geography, and origins of Africa, as well as practical agriculture, which were highly valued by the Romans.1340 Mago and Hamilcar were regarded as the top authorities on agriculture by both Greeks and Romans, and were followed by Mnaseas and Paxamus among Greeks,1341 and by Varro and Columella among Romans.1342 Mago's work, which extended to twenty-eight books, was so esteemed that, after Carthage was captured, it was translated into Latin at the command of the Roman Senate.1343 After the fall of Carthage, Tyre and Sidon once again became centers of learning, but the Phoenician language was replaced by Greek. The authors from Tyre, Sidon, Byblos, and Berytus we hear about have Greek names:1344 and it is impossible to determine whether they truly belonged to the Phoenician race. Philo of Byblus and Marinus of Tyre are the only two authors from this later period who preserved Phoenician traditions and, presumably, passed down Phoenician ideas and knowledge to later generations. While earlier literature and science did not benefit much from the work of the former, the latter provided considerable value and, as the foundation for Ptolemy's major work, will always have an honored place in the history of geographical progress.





CHAPTER XIV—POLITICAL HISTORY





1. Phoenicia, before the establishment of the hegemony of Tyre.

     Separate autonomy of the Phoenician cities—No marked
     predominance of any one or more of them during the Egyptian
     period, B.C. 1600-1350—A certain pre-eminence subsequently
     acquired by Aradus and Sidon—Sidonian territorial
     ascendancy—Great proficiency of Sidon in the arts—Sidon’s
     war with the Philistines—Her early colonies—Her advances
     in navigation—Her general commercial honesty—Occasional
     kidnapping—Stories of Io and Eumæus—Internal government—
     Relations with the Israelites.
     Separate independence of the Phoenician cities—No significant dominance of any one or more of them during the Egyptian period, B.C. 1600-1350—A certain pre-eminence later gained by Aradus and Sidon—Sidonian territorial dominance—Great skill of Sidon in the arts—Sidon's conflict with the Philistines—Her early settlements—Her progress in navigation—Her overall business integrity—Occasional kidnappings—Stories of Io and Eumaeus—Internal governance—Relations with the Israelites.

When the Phoenician immigrants, in scattered bands, and at longer or shorter intervals, arrived upon the Syrian coast, and finding it empty occupied it, or wrested it from its earlier possessors, there was a decided absence from among them of any single governing or controlling authority; a marked tendency to assert and maintain separate rule and jurisdiction. Sidon, the Arkite, the Arvadite, the Zemarite, are separately enumerated in the book of Genesis;0141 and the Hebrews have not even any one name under which to comprise the commercial people settled upon their coast line,0142 until we come to Gospel times, when the Greeks have brought the term “Syro-Phoenician” into use.0143 Elsewhere we hear of “them of Sidon,” “them of Tyre,"0144 “the Giblites,"0145 “the men of Arvad,"0146 “the Arkites,” “the Sinites,” “the Zemarites,"0147 “the inhabitants of Accho, of Achzib, and Aphek,"0148 but never of the whole maritime population north of Philistia under any single ethnic appellation. And the reason seems to be, that the Phoenicians, even more than the Greeks, affected a city autonomy. Each little band of immigrants, as soon as it had pushed its way into the sheltered tract between the mountains and the sea, settled itself upon some attractive spot, constructed habitations, and having surrounded its habitations with walls, claimed to be—and found none to dispute the claim—a distinct political entity. The conformation of the land, so broken up into isolated regions by strong spurs from Lebanon and Bargylus, lent additional support to the separatist spirit, and the absence in the early times of any pressure of danger from without permitted its free indulgence without entailing any serious penalty. It is difficult to say at what time the first settlements took place; but during the period of Egyptian supremacy over Western Asia, under the eighteenth and nineteenth dynasties (ab. B.C. 1600-1350), we seem to find the Phoenicians in possession of the coast tract, and their cities severally in the enjoyment of independence and upon a quasi-equality. Tyre, Sidon, Gebal, Aradus, Simyra, Sarepta, Berytus, and perhaps Arka, appear in the inscriptions of Thothmes III,0149 and in the “Travels of a Mohar,"1410 without an indication of the pre-eminence, much less the supremacy, of any one of them. The towns pursued their courses independently one of another, submitting to the Egyptians when hard pressed, but always ready to reassert themselves, and never joining, so far as appears, in any league or confederation, by which their separate autonomy might have been endangered. During this period no city springs to any remarkable height of greatness or prosperity; material progress is, no doubt, being made by the nation; but it is not very marked, and it does not excite any particular attention.

When the Phoenician immigrants arrived on the Syrian coast in scattered groups at various times, they found it empty and settled there, either taking it over or pushing out those who lived there before. There was a clear lack of any single governing authority among them; instead, they showed a strong preference for maintaining their own separate rule and jurisdiction. Sidon, the Arkite, the Arvadite, and the Zemarite are listed individually in the book of Genesis; and the Hebrews didn't even have one name to refer to the commercial people settled along their coastline until the Gospels, when the Greeks started using the term “Syro-Phoenician.” We also hear about “them of Sidon,” “them of Tyre,” “the Giblites,” “the men of Arvad,” “the Arkites,” “the Sinites,” “the Zemarites,” “the inhabitants of Accho, Achzib, and Aphek,” but never of the entire maritime population north of Philistia under any single ethnic name. The reason for this seems to be that the Phoenicians, even more than the Greeks, favored city autonomy. Each small group of immigrants, after navigating into the sheltered area between the mountains and the sea, settled in an appealing spot, built homes, and, having surrounded these homes with walls, claimed to be—without anyone contesting the claim—a distinct political entity. The landscape, fragmented into isolated regions by the formidable mountain ranges of Lebanon and Bargylus, further encouraged this spirit of separation. Moreover, in the early days, there was little external threat, allowing this autonomy to flourish without severe consequences. It's hard to pinpoint when the first settlements established, but during the period of Egyptian dominance over Western Asia, under the eighteenth and nineteenth dynasties (around 1600-1350 B.C.), it seems the Phoenicians occupied the coastal area, with their cities enjoying independence and a sort of equality. Tyre, Sidon, Gebal, Aradus, Simyra, Sarepta, Berytus, and perhaps Arka appear in the inscriptions of Thothmes III, as well as in the “Travels of a Mohar,” without any sign of one city being more prominent or dominant than the others. The towns operated independently of each other, yielding to the Egyptians when pressured but always ready to assert their independence again, and, as far as we can tell, never forming any alliance or confederation that could compromise their autonomy. During this time, no city rose to remarkable heights of greatness or prosperity; while material progress was happening for the nation, it was neither very pronounced nor particularly noteworthy.

But with the decline of the Egyptian power, which sets in after the death of the second Rameses, a change takes place. External pressure being removed, ambitions begin to develop themselves. In the north Aradus (Arvad), in the south Sidon, proceed to exercise a sort of hegemony over several neighbouring states. Sidon becomes known as “Great Zidon."1411 Not content with her maritime ascendancy, which was already pushing her into special notice, she aspired to a land dominion, and threw out offshoots from the main seat of her power as far as Laish, on the head-waters of the Jordan.1412 It was her support, probably, which enabled the inhabitants of such comparatively weak cities as Accho and Achzib and Aphek to resist the invasion of the Hebrews, and maintain themselves, despite all attempts made to reduce them.1413 At the same time she gradually extended her influence over the coast towns in her neighbourhood, as Sarepta, Heldun, perhaps Berytus, Ecdippa, and Accho. The period which succeeds that of Egyptian preponderance in Western Asia may be distinguished as that of Sidonian ascendancy, or of such ascendancy slightly modified by an Aradian hegemony in the north over the settlements intervening between Mount Casius and the northern roots of Lebanon.1414 During this period Sidon came to the front, alike in arts, in arms, and in navigation. Her vessels were found by the earliest Greek navigators in all parts of the Mediterranean into which they themselves ventured, and were known to push themselves into regions where no Greek dared to follow them. Under her fostering care Phoenician colonisation had spread over the whole of the Western Mediterranean, over the Ægean, and into the Propontis. She had engaged in war with the powerful nation of the Philistines, and, though worsted in the encounter, had obtained a reputation for audacity. By her wonderful progress in the arts, her citizens had acquired the epithet of {poludaidaloi},1415 and had come to be recognised generally as the foremost artificers of the world in almost every branch of industry. Sidonian metal-work was particularly in repute. When Achilles at the funeral of Patroclus desired to offer as a prize to the fastest runner the most beautiful bowl that was to be found in all the world, he naturally chose one which had been deftly made by highly-skilled Sidonians, and which Phoenician sailors had conveyed in one of their hollow barks across the cloud-shadowed sea.1416 When Menelaus proposed to present Telemachus, the son of his old comrade Odysseus, with what was at once the most beautiful and the most valuable of all his possessions, he selected a silver bowl with a golden rim, which in former days he had himself received as a present from Phædimus, the Sidonian king.1417 The sailors who stole Eumæus from Ortygia, and carried him across the sea to Ithica, obtained their prize by coming to his father’s palace, and bringing with them, among other wares,

But after the decline of Egyptian power following the death of the second Rameses, things began to change. With outside pressures gone, ambitions started to emerge. In the north, Aradus (Arvad), and in the south, Sidon, began to exert a kind of dominance over several neighboring states. Sidon became known as “Great Zidon." Not satisfied with her maritime dominance, which was already gaining her special attention, she aspired to land control and expanded her influence from her main center of power all the way to Laish, near the headwaters of the Jordan. It was likely her support that allowed the inhabitants of relatively weak cities like Accho, Achzib, and Aphek to resist the invasion of the Hebrews and stay strong despite various attempts to conquer them. At the same time, she gradually increased her influence over nearby coastal towns like Sarepta, Heldun, and possibly Berytus, Ecdippa, and Accho. The period that follows Egyptian dominance in Western Asia can be recognized as the time of Sidonian influence, or slightly modified by Aradian control in the north over the settlements between Mount Casius and the northern foothills of Lebanon. During this time, Sidon rose to prominence in art, warfare, and navigation. Her ships were seen by the earliest Greek navigators all over the Mediterranean and were known to venture into areas no Greek dared to explore. Under her guidance, Phoenician colonization spread throughout the entire Western Mediterranean, the Aegean, and into the Propontis. She had fought against the powerful Philistines and, although defeated, earned a reputation for bravery. Thanks to her remarkable advancements in the arts, her citizens earned the title of {poludaidaloi}, and became widely recognized as the best craftsmen in nearly every industry. Sidonian metalwork was especially esteemed. When Achilles wanted to reward the fastest runner at Patroclus's funeral with the most beautiful bowl in the world, he naturally picked one meticulously crafted by highly skilled Sidonians, which Phoenician sailors had transported in one of their hollow ships across the misty sea. When Menelaus chose to give Telemachus, the son of his old friend Odysseus, what was both the most beautiful and the most valuable of all his possessions, he selected a silver bowl with a golden rim that he had received as a gift from Phædimus, the Sidonian king. The sailors who took Eumæus from Ortygia and brought him across the sea to Ithaca got their prize by going to his father's palace and bringing with them, among other goods,

     . . . a necklace of fine gold to sell,
     With bright electron linked right wondrously and well.1418
     . . . a necklace of fine gold to sell,  
     With bright electron connected beautifully and perfectly.1418

Sidon’s pre-eminence in the manufacture, the dyeing, and the embroidery of textile fabrics was at the same time equally unquestionable. Hecuba, being advised to offer to Athêné, on behalf of her favourite son, the best and loveliest of all the royal robes which her well-stored dress-chamber could furnish—

Sidon's dominance in the production, dyeing, and embroidery of textiles was just as undeniable. Hecuba was advised to offer Athêné, for the sake of her favorite son, the finest and most beautiful of all the royal robes that her well-stocked wardrobe could provide—

     She to her fragrant wardrobe bent her way,
     Where her rich veils in beauteous order lay;
     Webs by Sidonian virgins finely wrought,
     From Sidon’s woofs by youthful Paris brought,
     When o’er the boundless main the adulterer led
     Fair Helen from her home and nuptial bed;
     From these she chose the fullest, fairest far,
     With broidery bright, and blazing as a star.1419
     She made her way to her fragrant wardrobe,  
     Where her beautiful veils were neatly arranged;  
     Fabrics finely crafted by Sidonian maidens,  
     Brought from Sidon by youthful Paris,  
     When across the endless sea the seducer took  
     Fair Helen from her home and wedding bed;  
     From these, she chose the fullest and fairest,  
     With bright embroidery, shining like a star.1419

Already, it would seem, the precious shell-fish, on which Phoenicia’s commerce so largely rested in later times, had been discovered; and it was the dazzling hue of the robe which constituted its especial value. Sidon was ultimately eclipsed by Tyre in the productions of the loom; and the unrivalled dye has come down to us, and will go down to all future ages, as “Tyrian purple;” but we may well believe that in this, as in most other matters on which prosperity and success depended, Tyre did but follow in the steps of her elder sister Sidon, perfecting possibly the manufacture which had been Sidon’s discovery in the early ages. According to Scylax of Cadyanda, Dor was a Sidonian colony.1420 Geographically it belonged rather to Philistia than to Phoenicia; but its possession of large stores of the purple fish caused its sudden seizure and rapid fortification at a very remote date, probably by the Phoenicians of Sidon.1421 It is quite possible that this aggression may have provoked that terrible war to which reference has already been made, between the Philistines under the hegemony of Ascalon and the first of the Phoenician cities. Ascalon attacked the Sidonians by land, blockaded the offending town, and after a time compelled a surrender; but the defenders had a ready retreat by sea, and, when they could no longer hold out against their assailants, took ship, and removed themselves to Tyre, which at the time was probably a dependency.1422

It seems that the valuable shellfish, which later became the backbone of Phoenicia’s trade, had already been found; the bright color of the fabric made from it was what made it so special. Sidon eventually faded in comparison to Tyre in textile production; the incredible dye is still known today and will be recognized for generations to come as “Tyrian purple.” However, it’s likely that Tyre was simply building on the foundation laid by its older sister Sidon, possibly refining the craft that Sidon had discovered long ago. According to Scylax of Cadyanda, Dor was a colony of Sidon. Geographically, it was more associated with Philistia than Phoenicia, but the abundance of purple fish led to its quick takeover and fortification by the Phoenicians from Sidon at a very early date. It’s possible that this aggressive move sparked the fierce war already mentioned, between the Philistines, led by Ascalon, and the primary Phoenician cities. Ascalon launched an attack on the Sidonians from land, surrounded the troublesome town, and eventually forced a surrender; however, the defenders had a quick escape via the sea, and when they could no longer withstand the siege, they boarded ships and relocated to Tyre, which at that time was probably still dependent on Sidon.

In navigation also and colonisation Sidon took the lead. According to some, she was the actual founder of Aradus, which was said to have owed its origin to a body of Sidonian exiles, who there settled themselves.1423 Not much reliance, however, can be placed on this tradition, which first appears in a writer of the Augustan age. With more confidence we may ascribe to Sidon the foundation of Citium in Cyprus, the colonisation of the islands in the Ægean, and of those Phoenician settlements in North Africa which were anterior to the founding of Carthage. It has even been supposed that the Sidonians were the first to make a settlement at Carthage itself,1424 and that the Tyrian occupation under Dido was a recolonisation of an already occupied site. Anyhow, Sidon was the first to explore the central Mediterranean, and establish commercial relations with the barbarous tribes of the mid-African coast, Cabyles, Berbers, Shuloukhs, Tauriks, and others. She is thought to claim on a coin to be the mother-city of Melita, or Malta, as well as of Citium and Berytus;1425 and, if this claim be allowed, we can scarcely doubt that she was also the first to plant colonies in Sicily. Further than this, it would seem, Sidonian enterprise did not penetrate. It was left for Tyre to discover the wealth of Southern Spain, to penetrate beyond the Straits of Gibraltar, and to affront the perils of the open ocean.

In navigation and colonization, Sidon took the lead. Some say it was the actual founder of Aradus, which is believed to have been founded by a group of Sidonian exiles who settled there. Not much trust can be placed in this tradition, which first appeared in a writer from the Augustan age. With greater confidence, we can credit Sidon with founding Citium in Cyprus, colonizing the islands in the Aegean, and establishing Phoenician settlements in North Africa that predated the founding of Carthage. Some even suggest that the Sidonians were the first to settle in Carthage itself, and that the Tyrian occupation under Dido was a recolonization of an already occupied site. Regardless, Sidon was the first to explore the central Mediterranean and establish trade relations with the various tribes along the mid-African coast, including the Cabyles, Berbers, Shuloukhs, Tauriks, and others. She is thought to claim on a coin to be the mother-city of Melita, or Malta, as well as Citium and Berytus; and if this claim is accepted, we can hardly doubt that she was also the first to establish colonies in Sicily. Beyond this, it seems Sidonian exploration did not extend further. It was left to Tyre to discover the riches of Southern Spain, to venture beyond the Straits of Gibraltar, and to face the dangers of the open ocean.

But, within the sphere indicated, Sidonian rovers traversed all parts of the Great Sea, penetrated into every gulf, became familiar sights to the inhabitants of every shore. From timid sailing along the coast by day, chiefly in the summer season, when winds whispered gently, and atmospheric signs indicated that fair weather had set in, they progressed by degrees to long voyages, continued both by night and day,1426 from promontory to promontory, or from island to island, sometimes even across a long stretch of open sea, altogether out of sight of land, and carried on at every season of the year except some few of special danger. To Sidon is especially ascribed the introduction of the practice of sailing by night,1427 which shortened the duration of voyages by almost one-half, and doubled the number of trips that a vessel could accomplish in the course of a year. For night sailing the arts of astronomy and computation had to be studied;1428 the aspect of the heavens at different seasons had to be known; and among the shifting constellations some fixed point had to be found by which it would be safe to steer. The last star in the tail of the Little Bear—the polar star of our own navigation books—was fixed upon by the Phoenicians, probably by the Sidonians, for this purpose,1429 and was practically employed as the best index of the true north from a remote period. The rate of a ship’s speed was, somehow or other, estimated; and though it was long before charts were made, or the set of currents taken into account, yet voyages were for the most part accomplished with very tolerable accuracy and safety. An ample commerce grew up under Sidonian auspices. After the vernal equinox was over a fleet of white-winged ships sped forth from the many harbours of the Syrian coast, well laden with a variety of wares—Phoenician, Assyrian, Egyptian1430—and made for the coasts and islands of the Levant, the Ægean, the Propontis, the Adriatic, the mid-Mediterranean, where they exchanged the cargoes which they had brought with them for the best products of the lands whereto they had come. Generally, a few weeks, or at most a month or two, would complete the transfer the of commodities, and the ships which left Sidon in April or May would return about June or July, unload, and make themselves ready for a second voyage. But sometimes, it appears, the return cargo was not so readily procured, and vessels had to remain in the foreign port, or roadstead, for the space of a whole year.1431

But, within the indicated area, Sidonian traders traveled across all parts of the Great Sea, ventured into every bay, and became familiar sights to the people of every shoreline. They started off by cautiously sailing along the coast during the day, mostly in the summer when the winds were gentle and the weather looked good. Gradually, they began to take longer trips, sailing both day and night, from promontory to promontory or from island to island, and sometimes even across long stretches of open sea, far from land, sailing at all times of the year except during a few particularly dangerous periods. The practice of sailing at night is especially credited to Sidon, which reduced the duration of voyages by almost half and doubled the number of trips a ship could make in a year. To sail at night, sailors had to learn astronomy and calculations; they needed to understand the night sky at different times of the year and find a fixed point among the moving constellations for safe navigation. The last star in the tail of the Little Bear—the polar star we use in navigation today—was chosen by the Phoenicians, likely by the Sidonians, for this purpose, and was used as a reliable guide to true north from ancient times. The speed of a ship was somehow estimated, and even though it took a long time before charts were created or ocean currents were considered, most voyages were completed with reasonable accuracy and safety. A robust trade network flourished under Sidonian leadership. After the spring equinox, a fleet of ships with white sails would set out from the various ports along the Syrian coast, heavily loaded with a variety of goods—Phoenician, Assyrian, Egyptian—and head to the coasts and islands of the Levant, the Aegean, the Propontis, the Adriatic, and the central Mediterranean, where they would trade their cargoes for the best products of the regions they visited. Typically, the exchange of goods would take a few weeks, or at most a month or two, and ships departing from Sidon in April or May would return around June or July, unload, and prepare for a second voyage. However, sometimes it seems that returning cargo was not so easily obtained, and ships had to stay in the foreign port or anchorage for a whole year.

The behaviour of the traders must, on the whole, have been such as won the respect of the nations and tribes wherewith they traded. Otherwise, the markets would soon have been closed against them, and, in lieu of the peaceful commerce which the Phoenicians always affected, would have sprung up along the shores of the Mediterranean a general feeling of distrust and suspicion, which would have led on to hostile encounters, surprises, massacres, and then reprisals. The entire history of Phoenician commerce shows that such a condition of things never existed. The traders and their customers were bound together by the bonds of self-interest, and, except in rare instances, dealt by each other fairly and honestly. Still, there were occasions when, under the stress of temptation, fair-dealing was lost sight of, and immediate prospect of gain was allowed to lead to the commission of acts destructive of all feeling of security, subversive of commercial morals, and calculated to effect a rupture of commercial relations, which it may often have taken a long term of years to re-establish. Herodotus tells us that, at a date considerably anterior to the Trojan war, when the ascendancy over the other Phoenician cities must certainly have belonged to Sidon, an affair of this kind took place on the coast of Argolis, which was long felt by the Greeks as an injury and an outrage. A Phoenician vessel made the coast near Argos, and the crew, having effected a landing, proceeded to expose their merchandise for sale along the shore, and to traffic with the natives, who were very willing to make purchases, and in the course of five or six days bought up almost the entire cargo. At length, just as the traders were thinking of re-embarking and sailing away, there came down to the shore from the capital a number of Argive ladies, including among them a princess, Io, the daughter of Inachus, the Argive king. Hereupon, the trafficking and the bargaining recommenced; goods were produced suited to the taste of the new customers; and each strove to obtain what she desired most at the least cost. But suddenly, as they were all intent upon their purchases, and were crowding round the stern of the ship, the Phoenicians, with a general shout, rushed upon them. Many—the greater part, we are told—made their escape; but the princess, and a certain number of her companions, were seized and carried on board. The traders quickly put to sea, and hoisting their sails, hurried away to Egypt.1432

The behavior of the traders must have generally earned the respect of the nations and tribes they dealt with. Otherwise, the markets would have quickly closed off to them, and instead of the peaceful trade the Phoenicians usually engaged in, there would have been a widespread sense of distrust and suspicion along the Mediterranean shores, leading to hostile encounters, ambushes, massacres, and reprisals. The entire history of Phoenician trade shows that this kind of situation never occurred. The traders and their customers were connected by mutual self-interest and, except in rare cases, treated each other fairly and honestly. However, there were times when, under the weight of temptation, fair dealing was forgotten, and the lure of quick profit led to actions that destroyed feelings of security, undermined commercial ethics, and risked severing business ties, which could take many years to repair. Herodotus tells us that, long before the Trojan War, when Sidon likely held dominance over other Phoenician cities, an incident occurred on the coast of Argolis that the Greeks long considered an injury and outrage. A Phoenician ship reached the coast near Argos, and the crew landed and set up their merchandise for sale along the shore, trading with the locals, who were eager to buy. Over the course of five or six days, they sold nearly the entire cargo. Just as the traders were preparing to leave, a group of Argive women, including Princess Io, the daughter of King Inachus of Argos, came down to the shore. Trading resumed; goods tailored to the new customers were presented, and each woman tried to get what she wanted for the lowest price. But suddenly, while everyone was focused on their purchases and crowding around the back of the ship, the Phoenicians shouted and rushed at them. Many—most, in fact—managed to escape, but the princess and several of her companions were captured and taken on board. The traders quickly set sail, hoisting their sails as they hurried away to Egypt.1432

Another instance of kidnapping, accomplished by art rather than by force, is related to us by Homer.1433 Eumæus, the swineherd of Ulysses, was the son of a king, dwelling towards the west, in an island off the Sicilian coast. A Phoenician woman, herself kidnapped from Sidon by piratical Taphians, had the task of nursing and tending him assigned to her, and discharged it faithfully until a great temptation befell her. A Sidonian merchant-ship visited the island, laden with rich store of precious wares, and proceeded to open a trade with the inhabitants, in the course of which one of the sailors seduced the Phoenician nurse, and suggested that when the vessel left, she should allow herself to be carried off in it. The woman, whose parents were still alive at Sidon, came into the scheme, and being apprised of the date of the ship’s departure, stole away from the palace unobserved, taking with her three golden goblets, and also her master’s child, the boy of whom she had charge. It was evening, and all having been prepared beforehand, the nurse and child were hastily smuggled on board, the sails were hoisted, and the ship was soon under weigh. The wretched woman died ere the voyage was over, but the boy survived, and was carried by the traders to Ithaca, and there sold for a good sum to Laërtes.

Another incident of kidnapping, done through cunning rather than force, is recounted by Homer. Eumæus, the swineherd of Ulysses, was the son of a king who lived on an island off the Sicilian coast. A Phoenician woman, who had been taken from Sidon by piratical Taphians, was assigned to nurse and take care of him, and she did her job well until a significant temptation arose. A Sidonian merchant ship came to the island, filled with valuable goods, and started trading with the locals. During this time, one of the sailors seduced the Phoenician nurse and suggested that when the ship departed, she should let herself be taken along. The woman, whose parents were still alive in Sidon, agreed to the plan, and knowing when the ship was leaving, she quietly slipped away from the palace, taking with her three golden goblets, as well as the child in her care. It was evening, and everything had been prepared ahead of time, so the nurse and child were quickly snuck on board, the sails were raised, and the ship was soon set to sail. The unfortunate woman died before the journey ended, but the boy survived and was taken by the traders to Ithaca, where he was sold for a good price to Laërtes.

It is not suggested that these narratives, in the form in which they have come down to us, are historically true. There may never have been an “Io, daughter of Inachus,” or an “Eumæus, son of Ctesius Ormenides,” or an island, “Syria called by name, over against Ortygia,” or even a Ulysses or a Laërtes. But the tales could never have grown up, have been invented, or have gained acceptance, unless the practice of kidnapping, on which they are based, had been known to be one in which the Phoenicians of the time indulged, at any rate occasionally. We must allow this blot on the Sidonian escutcheon, and can only plead, in extenuation of their offence, first, the imperfect morality of the age, and secondly, the fact that such deviations from the line of fair-dealing and honesty on the part of the Sidonian traders must have been of rare occurrence, or the flourishing and lucrative trade, which was the basis of all the glory and prosperity of the people, could not possibly have been established. Successful commerce must rest upon the foundation of mutual confidence; and mutual confidence is impossible unless the rules of fair dealing are observed on both sides, if not invariably, yet, at any rate, so generally that the infraction of them is not contemplated on either side as anything but the remotest contingency.

It’s not suggested that these stories, as they have come down to us, are historically true. There may never have been an “Io, daughter of Inachus,” or an “Eumæus, son of Ctesius Ormenides,” or an island “Syria called by name, over against Ortygia,” or even a Ulysses or a Laërtes. But these tales couldn’t have emerged, been created, or gained acceptance unless the practice of kidnapping, which they’re based on, was known to be something the Phoenicians sometimes engaged in. We have to acknowledge this stain on the reputation of Sidon, and we can only argue, to soften the blow, firstly that the morality of the time was imperfect, and secondly that such deviations from fair dealing and honesty by Sidonian traders had to be rare, otherwise the thriving and profitable trade that supported the glory and prosperity of the people could never have been established. Successful commerce must be built on mutual trust; and mutual trust is impossible unless the rules of fair dealing are followed by both sides, if not all the time, then generally enough that breaking them is seen by neither side as anything other than an unlikely event.

Of the internal government of Sidon during this period no details have come down to us. Undoubtedly, like all the Phoenician cities in the early times,1434 she had her own kings; and we may presume, from the almost universal practice in ancient times, and especially in the East,1435 that the monarchy was hereditary. The main duties of the king were to lead out the people to battle in time of war, and to administer justice in time of peace.1436 The kings were in part supported, in part held in check, by a powerful aristocracy—an aristocracy which, we may conjecture, had wealth, rather than birth, as its basis. It does not appear that any political authority was possessed by the priesthood, nor that the priesthood was a caste, as in India, and (according to some writers) in Egypt. The priestly office was certainly not attached by any general custom to the person of the kings, though kings might be priests, and were so occasionally.1437

We don’t have any details about the government of Sidon during this time. Like other Phoenician cities in the early days, she likely had her own kings, and we can assume that, following the common practice in ancient times, particularly in the East, the monarchy was hereditary. The king's main responsibilities were to lead the people into battle during wartime and to administer justice in peacetime. The kings were partly supported and partly checked by a powerful aristocracy, which we can guess was based more on wealth than on noble birth. It doesn’t seem that the priesthood had any political power or that it functioned as a caste, like in India or, according to some writers, in Egypt. The priesthood was certainly not traditionally linked to the kings, although kings could be priests and sometimes were.

We do not distinctly hear of Sidon has having been engaged in any war during the period of her ascendancy, excepting that with the Philistines. Still as “the Zidonians” are mentioned among the nations which “oppressed Israel” in the time of the Judges,1438 we must conclude that differences arose between them and their southern neighbours in some portion of this period, and that, war having broken out between them, the advantage rested with Sidon. The record of “Judges” is incomplete, and does not enable us even to fix the date of the Sidonian “oppression.” We can only say that it was anterior to the judgeship of Jephthah, and was followed, like the other “oppressions,” by a “deliverance.”

We don’t specifically hear about Sidon being involved in any wars during its rise to power, except for the conflict with the Philistines. However, since “the Zidonians” are mentioned among the nations that “oppressed Israel” during the time of the Judges, we can conclude that issues arose between them and their southern neighbors at some point during this period, and when war broke out, Sidon had the upper hand. The account in “Judges” is incomplete and doesn’t allow us to pinpoint the exact time of the Sidonian oppression. We can only say it occurred before Jephthah’s judgeship and was eventually followed, like the other oppressions, by a “deliverance.”

The war with the Philistines brought the period of Sidonian ascendancy to an end, and introduces us to the second period of Phoenician history, or that of the hegemony of Tyre. The supposed date of the change is B.C. 1252.1439

The war with the Philistines marked the end of Sidonian dominance and leads us into the second period of Phoenician history, which is the era of Tyre's control. The estimated date for this transition is 1252 B.C.1439





2. Phoenicia under the hegemony of Tyre (B.C. 1252-877)

     Influx of the Sidonian population raises Tyre to the first
     place among the cities (about B.C. 1252)—First notable
     result, the colonisation of Gades (B.C. 1130)—Other
     colonies of about this period—Extension of Phoenician
     commerce—Tyre ruled by kings—Abi-Baal—Hiram—Hiram’s
     dealings with Solomon—His improvement of his own capital—
     His opinion of “the land of Cabul”—His joint trade with the
     Israelites—His war with Utica—Successors of Hiram—Time of
     disturbance—Reign of Ithobal—of Badezor—of Matgen—of
     Pygmalion—Founding of Carthage—First contact of Phoenicia
     with Assyria—Submission of Phoenicia, B.C. 877.
     The influx of the Sidonian population elevates Tyre to the top position among the cities (around B.C. 1252)—The first significant outcome is the colonization of Gades (B.C. 1130)—Other colonies from this time period—Growth of Phoenician trade—Tyre is ruled by kings—Abi-Baal—Hiram—Hiram’s interactions with Solomon—His enhancements to his own capital—His views on “the land of Cabul”—His joint trade with the Israelites—His conflict with Utica—Hiram’s successors—A time of unrest—Reign of Ithobal—of Badezor—of Matgen—of Pygmalion—The founding of Carthage—The first interaction between Phoenicia and Assyria—The submission of Phoenicia, B.C. 877.

Tyre was noted as a “strong city” as early as the time of Joshua,1440 and was probably inferior only to Sidon, or to Sidon and Aradus, during the period of Sidonian ascendancy. It is mentioned in the “Travels of a Mohar” (about B.C. 1350) as “a port, richer in fish than in sands."1441 The tradition was, that it acquired its predominance and pre-eminence from the accession of the Sidonian population, which fled thither by sea, when no longer able to resist the forces of Ascalon.1442 We do not find it, however, attaining to any great distinction or notoriety, until more than a century later, when it distinguishes itself by the colonisation of Gades (about B.C. 1130), beyond the Pillars of Hercules, on the shores of the Atlantic. We may perhaps deduce from this fact, that the concentration of energy caused by the removal to Tyre of the best elements in the population of Sidon gave a stimulus to enterprise, and caused longer voyages to be undertaken, and greater dangers to be affronted by the daring seamen of the Syrian coast than had ever been ventured on before. The Tyrian seamen were, perhaps, of a tougher fibre than the Sidonian, and the change of hegemony is certainly accompanied by a greater display of energy, a more adventurous spirit, a wider colonisation, and a more wonderful commercial success, than characterise the preceding period of Sidonian leadership and influence.

Tyre was recognized as a “strong city” as early as the time of Joshua, 1440 and was likely only surpassed by Sidon, or by Sidon and Aradus, during the time when Sidon was in control. It is mentioned in the “Travels of a Mohar” (around 1350 B.C.) as “a port, richer in fish than in sand.” 1441 The local tradition suggests that it gained its prominence from Sidonians fleeing by sea when they could no longer resist the forces of Ascalon. 1442 However, it doesn't seem to achieve significant recognition until more than a century later, when it stands out for colonizing Gades (around 1130 B.C.) beyond the Pillars of Hercules, along the Atlantic coast. We might infer from this that the influx of Sidon's best population sparked energy and entrepreneurship in Tyre, leading to longer sea voyages and greater challenges faced by the adventurous sailors from the Syrian coast than ever before. The Tyrian sailors were perhaps hardier than those from Sidon, and this shift in power is clearly marked by a greater display of energy, a more adventurous spirit, extensive colonization, and remarkable commercial success, surpassing the prior era of Sidon's leadership and influence.

The settlements planted by Tyre in the first burst of her colonising energy seem to have been, besides Gades, Thasos, Abdera, and Pronectus towards the north, Malaca, Sexti, Carteia, Belon, and a second Abdera in Spain, together with Caralis in Sardinia,1443 Tingis and Lixus on the West African coast, and in North Africa Hadrumetum and the lesser Leptis.1444 Her aim was to throw the meshes of her commerce wider than Sidon had ever done, and so to sweep into her net a more abundant booty. It was Tyre which especially affected “long voyages,"1445 and induced her colonists of Gades to explore the shores outside the Pillars of Hercules, northwards as far as Cornwall and the Scilly Isles, southwards to the Fortunate Islands, and north-eastwards into the Baltic. It is, no doubt, uncertain at what date these explorations were effected, and some of them may belong to the later hegemony of Tyre, ab. B.C. 600; but the forward movement of the twelfth century seems to have been distinctly Tyrian, and to have been one of the results of the new position in which she was placed by the sudden collapse of her elder sister, Sidon.

The settlements established by Tyre during its early wave of colonization included, besides Gades, Thasos, Abdera, and Pronectus in the north, Malaca, Sexti, Carteia, Belon, and a second Abdera in Spain, as well as Caralis in Sardinia, Tingis and Lixus on the West African coast, and in North Africa Hadrumetum and the lesser Leptis. Her goal was to expand her trade networks further than Sidon ever had, aiming to gather a more substantial wealth. Tyre was particularly known for its “long voyages” and encouraged its colonists from Gades to explore the coasts beyond the Pillars of Hercules, as far north as Cornwall and the Scilly Isles, south to the Fortunate Islands, and northeast into the Baltic. It is, of course, unclear when these explorations took place, and some may have occurred during the later dominance of Tyre, around 600 B.C.; however, the advances of the twelfth century appear to have been distinctly Tyrian and were likely a result of the new circumstances brought about by the sudden decline of its older sister, Sidon.

According to some,1446 Tyre, during the early period of her supremacy, was under the government of shôphetim, or “judges;” but the general usage of the Phoenician cities makes against this supposition. Philo in his “Origines of Phoenicia” speaks constantly of kings,1447 but never of judges. We hear of a king, Abd-Baal, at Berytus1448 about B.C. 1300. Sidonian kings are mentioned in connection with the myth of Europa.1449 The cities founded by the Phoenicians in Cyprus are always under monarchical rule.1450 Tyre itself, when its history first presents itself to us in any detail, is governed by a king.1451 All that can be urged on the other side is, that we know of no Tyrian king by name until about B.C. 1050; and that, if there had been earlier kings, it might have been expected that some record of them would have come down to us. But to argue thus is to ignore the extreme scantiness and casual character of the notices which have reached us bearing upon the early Phoenician history. No writer has left us any continuous history of Phoenicia, even in the barest outline.1452 Native monumental annals are entirely wanting. We depend for the early times upon the accident of Jewish monarchs having come into contact occasionally with Phoenician ones, and on Jewish writers having noted the occasions in Jewish histories. Scripture and Josephus alone furnish our materials for the period now under consideration, and the materials are scanty, fragmentary, and sadly wanting in completeness.

According to some, Tyre, during the early period of its dominance, was governed by judges; however, the common practice among Phoenician cities contradicts this idea. Philo in his “Origines of Phoenicia” consistently refers to kings, but never to judges. We know of a king, Abd-Baal, at Berytus around 1300 B.C. Sidonian kings are mentioned in connection with the myth of Europa. The cities established by the Phoenicians in Cyprus were always under monarchical rule. Tyre itself, when its history first comes to light in detail, is ruled by a king. The only argument against this is that we don’t know of any Tyrian king by name until around 1050 B.C.; and if there had been earlier kings, we would expect some record of them to exist. But to argue this way ignores the extreme lack of information and the random nature of the accounts we have about early Phoenician history. No author has provided us with a continuous history of Phoenicia, even in the simplest form. Native monumental records are completely absent. We rely on the chance encounters of Jewish monarchs with Phoenician ones, as well as on Jewish writers documenting these events in their histories. Scripture and Josephus are our only sources for the period in question, and the materials are limited, incomplete, and sadly lacking in thoroughness.

It is towards the middle of the eleventh century B.C. that these materials become available. About the time when David was acclaimed as king by the tribe of Judah at Hebron, a Phoenician prince mounted the throne of Tyre, by name Abibalus, or Abi-Baal.1453 We do not know the length of his reign; but, while the son of Jesse was still in the full vigour of life, Abi-Baal was succeeded on the Tyrian throne by his son, Hiram or Hirôm, a prince of great energy, of varied tastes, and of an unusually broad and liberal turn of mind. Hiram, casting his eye over the condition of the states and kingdoms which were his neighbours, seems to have discerned in Judah and David a power and a ruler whose friendship it was desirable to cultivate with a view to the establishment of very close relations. Accordingly, it was not long after the Jewish monarch’s capture of the Jebusite stronghold on Mount Zion that the Tyrian prince sent messengers to him to Jerusalem, with a present of “timber of cedars,” and a number of carpenters, and stone-hewers, well skilled in the art of building.1454 David accepted their services, and a goodly palace soon arose on some part of the Eastern hill, of which cedar from Lebanon was the chief material,1455 and of which Hiram’s workmen were the constructors. At a later date David set himself to collect abundant and choice materials for the magnificent Temple which Solomon his son was divinely commissioned to build on Mount Moriah to Jehovah; and here again “the Zidonians and they of Tyre,” or the subjects of Hiram, “brought much cedar wood to David."1456 The friendship continued firm to the close of David’s reign;1457 and when Solomon succeeded his father as king of Israel and lord of the whole tract between the middle Euphrates and Egypt, the bonds were drawn yet closer, and an alliance concluded which placed the two powers on terms of the very greatest intimacy. Hiram had no sooner heard of Solomon’s accession than he sent an embassy to congratulate him;1458 and Solomon took advantage of the opening which presented itself to announce his intention of building the Temple which his father had designed, and to request Hiram’s aid in the completion of the work. Copies of letters which passed between the two monarchs were preserved both in the Tyrian and the Jewish archives, and the Tyrian versions are said to have been still extant in the public record office of the city in the first century of the Christian era.1459 These documents ran as follows:—

It was around the middle of the eleventh century B.C. that these materials became available. About the time when David was made king by the tribe of Judah at Hebron, a Phoenician prince named Abibalus, or Abi-Baal, took the throne of Tyre.1453 We don't know how long he ruled; however, while the son of Jesse was still in his prime, Abi-Baal was succeeded on the Tyrian throne by his son, Hiram, a dynamic prince with diverse interests and a notably broad and liberal mindset. Hiram seemed to realize, by observing the states and kingdoms around him, that Judah and David represented a powerful ally worth cultivating for a strong partnership. So, it wasn’t long after the Jewish king seized the Jebusite stronghold on Mount Zion that the Tyrian prince sent messengers to him in Jerusalem with a gift of "cedar timber," along with skilled carpenters and stoneworkers.1454 David accepted their help, and a beautiful palace soon rose on part of the Eastern hill, predominantly made of cedar from Lebanon,1455 built by Hiram’s workers. Later on, David focused on gathering ample and quality materials for the magnificent Temple that his son Solomon was chosen by God to build on Mount Moriah for Jehovah; once again, "the Zidonians and people of Tyre," or Hiram's subjects, "brought a lot of cedar wood to David."1456 Their friendship remained strong until the end of David’s reign;1457 and when Solomon succeeded his father as king of Israel and ruler over the land between the middle Euphrates and Egypt, their ties were even tighter, culminating in an alliance that united the two powers closely. As soon as Hiram learned of Solomon’s ascendance, he sent an envoy to congratulate him;1458 and Solomon seized the opportunity to inform Hiram of his plans to build the Temple his father had envisioned and to request Hiram’s assistance in its construction. Copies of the letters exchanged between the two kings were kept in both the Tyrian and Jewish archives, with the Tyrian versions reportedly still available in the public record office of the city in the first century of the Christian era.1459 These documents read as follows:—

“Solomon to King Hiram [sends greeting]:—Know that my father David was desirous of building a temple to God, but was prevented by his wars and his continual expeditions; for he did not rest from subduing his adversaries, until he had made every one of them tributary to him. And now I for my part return thanks to God for the present time of peace, and having rest thereby I purpose to build the house; for God declared to my father that it should be built by me. Wherefore I beseech thee to send some of thy servants with my servants to Mount Lebanon, to cut wood there, for none among us can skill to hew timber like unto the Sidonians. And I will pay the wood-cutters their hire at whatsoever rate thou shalt determine.”

“Solomon to King Hiram [sends greeting]:—I want you to know that my father David wanted to build a temple for God, but his wars and constant battles got in the way; he didn’t stop fighting his enemies until he made them all pay tribute to him. Now, I thank God for this time of peace, and since I have some rest, I plan to build the temple because God told my father that I would be the one to do it. Therefore, I kindly ask you to send some of your servants with my servants to Mount Lebanon to cut down wood, as no one here can cut timber like the Sidonians. I will pay the woodcutters whatever you decide.”

“King Hiram to King Solomon [sends greeting]:—Needs must I praise God, that hath given thee to sit upon thy father’s throne, seeing that thou art a wise man, and possessed of every virtue. And I, rejoicing at these things, will do all that thou hast desired of me. I will by my servants cut thee in abundance timber of cedar and timber of cypress, and will bring them down to the sea, and command my servants to construct of them a float, or raft, and navigate it to whatever point of thy coast thou mayest wish, and there discharge them; after which thy servants can carry them to Jerusalem. But be it thy care to provide me in return with a supply of food, whereof we are in want as inhabiting an island."1460

“King Hiram to King Solomon [sends greeting]:—I must praise God for allowing you to sit on your father's throne, given that you are a wise man and have every virtue. I, delighted by this, will do everything you’ve asked of me. I will have my servants cut plenty of cedar and cypress timber for you, bring it down to the sea, and instruct my servants to build a float or raft from it and navigate it to whatever point on your coast you want, and then unload there; after that, your servants can take it to Jerusalem. But please ensure that you provide me with a supply of food, as we are in need of it living on an island.”1460

The result was an arrangement by which the Tyrian monarch furnished his brother king with timber of various kinds, chiefly cedar, cut in Lebanon, and also with a certain number of trained artificers, workers in metal, carpenters, and masons, while the Israelite monarch on his part made a return in corn, wine, and oil, supplying Tyre, while the contract lasted, with 20,000 cors of wheat, the same quantity of barley, 20,000 baths of wine, and the same number of oil, annually.1461 Phoenicia always needed to import supplies of food for its abundant population,1462 and having an inexhaustible store of timber in Lebanon, was glad to find a market for it so near. Thus the arrangement suited both parties. The hillsides of Galilee and the broad and fertile plains of Esdraelon and Sharon produced a superabundance of wheat and barley, whereof the inhabitants had to dispose in some quarter or other, and the highlands of Sumeria and Judæa bore oil and wine far beyond the wants of those who cultivated them. What Phoenicia lacked in these respects from the scantiness of its cultivable soil, Palestine was able and eager to supply; while to Phoenicia it was a boon to obtain, not only a market for her timber, but also employment for her surplus population, which under ordinary circumstances was always requiring to be carried off to distant lands, from the difficulty of supporting itself at home.

The outcome was an agreement where the Tyrian king provided his brother, the Israelite king, with various types of timber, mainly cedar from Lebanon, along with a number of skilled workers—metalworkers, carpenters, and masons. In return, the Israelite king supplied Tyre with 20,000 cors of wheat, 20,000 cors of barley, 20,000 baths of wine, and the same amount of oil every year, while the agreement was in place. Phoenicia consistently needed to import food for its large population, and since it had an endless supply of timber from Lebanon, it was pleased to find a nearby market for it. This deal worked out well for both sides. The Galilee hills and the rich, expansive plains of Esdraelon and Sharon produced an excess of wheat and barley that the residents needed to sell somewhere. Additionally, the highlands of Samaria and Judea produced more oil and wine than the locals could use. Palestine was able and willing to provide what Phoenicia lacked due to its limited arable land, while Phoenicia benefited from not only a market for its timber but also job opportunities for its surplus population, which typically needed to migrate far away due to the challenges of sustaining itself at home.

A still greater advantage was it to the rude Judæans to get the assistance of their civilised and artistic neighbours in the design and execution, both of the Temple itself and of all those accessories, which in ancient times a sacred edifice on a large scale was regarded as requiring. The Phoenicians, and especially the Tyrians, had long possessed, both in their home and foreign settlements, temples of some pretension, and Hiram had recently been engaged in beautifying and adorning, perhaps in rebuilding, some of these venerable edifices at Tyre.1463 A Phoenician architectural style had thus been formed, and Hiram’s architects and artificers would be familiar with constructive principles and ornamental details, as well as with industrial processes, which are very unlikely to have been known at the time to the Hebrews. The wood for the Jewish Temple was roughly cut, and the stones quarried, by Israelite workmen;1464 but all the delicate work, whether in the one material or the other, was performed by the servants of Hiram. Stone-cutters from Gebal (Byblus) shaped and smoothed the “great stones, costly stones” employed in the substructions of the “house;"1465 Tyrian carpenters planed and polished the cedar planks used for the walls, and covered them with representations of cherubs and palms and gourds and opening flowers.1466 The metallurgists of Sidon probably supplied the cherubic figures in the inner sanctuary,1467 as well as the castings for the doors,1468 and the bulk of the sacred vessels. The vail which separated between the “Holy Place” and the Holy of Holies—a marvellous fabric of blue, and purple, and crimson, and white, with cherubim wrought thereon1469—owed its beauty probably to Tyrian dyers and Tyrian workers in embroidery. The master-workman lent by the Tyrian monarch to superintend the entire work—an extraordinary and almost universal genius—“skilful to work in gold and in silver, in brass, in iron, in stone, and in timber; in purple, in blue, in fine linen, and in crimson; also to grave any manner of graving"1470—who bore the same name with the king,1471 was the son of an Israelite mother, but boasted a Tyrian father,1472 and was doubtless born and bred up at Tyre. Under his special direction were cast in the valley of the Jordan, between Succoth and Zarthan,1473 those wonderful pillars, known as Jachin and Boaz, which have already been described, and which seem to have had their counterparts in the sacred edifices both of Phoenicia and Cyprus.1474 To him also is specially ascribed the “molten sea,” standing on twelve oxen,1475 which was perhaps the most artistic of all the objects placed within the Temple circuit, as are also the lavers upon wheels,1476 which, if less striking as works of art, were even more curious.

A significant advantage for the rough Judæans was receiving help from their cultured and artistic neighbors in designing and building both the Temple and all the necessary accessories that a large sacred structure was thought to need in ancient times. The Phoenicians, particularly the Tyrians, had long had notable temples in both their home and overseas settlements, and Hiram had recently been working on beautifying, decorating, and possibly rebuilding some of these ancient buildings in Tyre. A Phoenician architectural style had emerged, and Hiram’s architects and craftspeople were likely familiar with construction techniques, decorative details, and industrial processes that the Hebrews probably didn’t know about at the time. The wood for the Jewish Temple was roughly cut and the stones quarried by Israelite laborers; however, all the intricate work in both materials was done by Hiram's workers. Stonecutters from Gebal (Byblus) shaped and smoothed the “great stones, costly stones” used in the foundation of the “house;” Tyrian carpenters planed and polished the cedar planks for the walls, adorning them with images of cherubs, palm trees, gourds, and blooming flowers. The metalworkers from Sidon likely provided the cherubic figures in the inner sanctuary, the castings for the doors, and most of the sacred vessels. The veil separating the “Holy Place” from the Holy of Holies—a stunning fabric of blue, purple, crimson, and white, with cherubs woven into it—was probably made beautiful by Tyrian dyers and embroiderers. The master craftsman sent by the Tyrian king to oversee the entire project—an extraordinary and universally talented individual—“skilled in working with gold, silver, brass, iron, stone, and timber; in purple, blue, fine linen, and crimson; also able to carve any kind of engraving”—who shared the same name as the king, was the son of an Israelite mother and a Tyrian father, and was likely born and raised in Tyre. Under his direct supervision, the remarkable pillars known as Jachin and Boaz were cast in the valley of the Jordan, between Succoth and Zarthan, which have already been mentioned and seem to have had counterparts in the sacred buildings of both Phoenicia and Cyprus. He is also notably credited with the “molten sea,” standing on twelve oxen, which might have been the most artistic object within the Temple complex, along with the lavers on wheels, which, while less visually striking as art, were even more intriguing.

The partnership established between the two kingdoms in connection with the building and furnishing of the Jewish Temple, which lasted for seven years,1477 was further continued for thirteen more1478 in connection with the construction of Solomon’s palace. This palace, like an Assyrian one, consisted of several distinct edifices. “The chief was a long hall which, like the Temple, was encased in cedar; whence probably its name, ‘The House of the Forest of Lebanon.’ In front of it ran a pillared portico. Between this portico and the palace itself was a cedar porch, sometimes called the Tower of David. In this tower, apparently hung over the walls outside, were a thousand golden shields, which gave to the whole place the name of the Armoury. With a splendour that outshone any like fortress, the tower with these golden targets glittered far off in the sunshine like the tall neck, as it was thought, of a beautiful bride, decked out, after the manner of the East, with strings of golden coins. This porch was the gem and centre of the whole empire; and was so much thought of that a smaller likeness to it was erected in another part of the precinct for the queen. Within the porch itself was to be seen the king in state. On a throne of ivory, brought from Africa or India, the throne of many an Arabian legend, the kings of Judah were solemnly seated on the day of their accession. From its lofty seat, and under that high gateway, Solomon and his successors after him delivered their solemn judgments. That ‘porch’ or ‘gate of justice’ still kept alive the likeness of the old patriarchal custom of sitting in judgment at the gate; exactly as the ‘Gate of Justice’ still recalls it to us at Granada, and the Sublime Porte—‘the Lofty Gate’—at Constantinople. He sate on the back of a golden bull, its head turned over its shoulder, probably the ox or bull of Ephraim; under his feet, on each side of the steps, were six golden lions, probably the lions of Judah. This was ‘the seat of Judgment.’ This was ‘the throne of the House of David.’”1479

The partnership formed between the two kingdoms for the construction and furnishing of the Jewish Temple lasted for seven years, 1477 and continued for an additional thirteen years 1478 to build Solomon’s palace. This palace, similar to an Assyrian one, was made up of several distinct buildings. “The main feature was a long hall that, like the Temple, was lined with cedar; hence its name, ‘The House of the Forest of Lebanon.’ In front of it was a colonnaded porch. Between this porch and the palace itself was a cedar vestibule, sometimes referred to as the Tower of David. In this tower, seemingly suspended over the walls outside, hung a thousand golden shields, leading to the entire place being called the Armoury. With a splendor that surpassed any fortress, the tower with these golden shields sparkled in the sunshine like the elegant neck, as it was believed, of a beautiful bride adorned, in the Eastern style, with strands of golden coins. This porch was the jewel and centerpiece of the entire empire; it was so esteemed that a smaller replica was built in another area of the precinct for the queen. Within the porch itself, the king could be seen in state. Seated on an ivory throne, brought from Africa or India—the throne of many Arabian legends—the kings of Judah were formally enthroned on the day of their accession. From this elevated position, under the grand gateway, Solomon and his successors issued their solemn rulings. That ‘porch’ or ‘gate of justice’ preserved the tradition of the old patriarchal custom of judging at the gate; just as the ‘Gate of Justice’ reminds us at Granada, and the Sublime Porte—‘the Lofty Gate’—at Constantinople. He sat on the back of a golden bull, its head turned over its shoulder, probably representing the ox or bull of Ephraim; under his feet, on each side of the steps, were six golden lions, likely symbolizing the lions of Judah. This was ‘the seat of Judgment.’ This was ‘the throne of the House of David.’” 1479

We have dwelt the longer upon these matters because it is from the lengthy and elaborate descriptions which the Hebrew writers give of these Phoenician constructions at Jerusalem that we must form our conceptions, not only of the state of Phoenician art in Hiram’s time, but also of the works wherewith he adorned his own capital. He came to the throne at the age of nineteen,1480 on the decease of his father, and immediately set to work to improve, enlarge, and beautify the city, which in his time claimed the headship of, at any rate, all Southern Phoenicia. He found Tyre a city built on two islands, separated the one from the other by a narrow channel, and so cramped for room that the inhabitants had no open square, or public place, on which they could meet, and were closely packed in overcrowded dwellings.1481 The primary necessity was to increase the area of the place; and this Hiram effected, first, by filling up the channel between the two islands with stone and rubbish, and so gaining a space for new buildings, and then by constructing huge moles or embankments towards the east, and towards the south, where the sea was shallowest, and thus turning what had been water into land. In this way he so enlarged the town that he was able to lay out a “wide space” (Eurychôrus)1482 as a public square, which, like the Piazza di San Marco at Venice, became the great resort of the inhabitants for business and pleasure. Having thus provided for utility and convenience, he next proceeded to embellishment and ornamentation. The old temples did not seem to him worthy of the renovated capital; he therefore pulled them down and built new ones in their place. In the most central part of the city1483 he erected a fane for the worship of Melkarth and Ashtoreth, probably retaining the old site, but constructing an entirely new building—the building which Herodotus visited,1484 and in which Alexander insisted on sacrificing.1485 Towards the south-west,1486 on what had been a separate islet, he raised a temple to Baal, and adorned it with a lofty pillar of gold,1487 or at any rate plated with gold. Whether he built himself a new palace is not related; but as the royal residence of later times was situated on the southern shore,1488 which was one of Hiram’s additions to his capital, it is perhaps most probable that the construction of this new palace was due to him. The chief material which he used in his buildings was, as in Jerusalem, cedar. The substructions alone were of stone. They were probably not on so grand a scale as those of the Jewish Temple, since the wealth of Hiram, sovereign of a petty kingdom, must have fallen very far short of Solomon’s, ruler of an extensive empire.

We have spent extra time on these topics because it's from the detailed descriptions that the Hebrew writers provide of these Phoenician structures in Jerusalem that we need to form our ideas, not just about the level of Phoenician art during Hiram’s time, but also about the projects he used to embellish his own capital. He took the throne at nineteen, 1480 after his father passed away, and immediately got to work improving, expanding, and beautifying the city, which, during his reign, claimed to be the leading city of Southern Phoenicia. He found Tyre as a city built on two islands, separated by a narrow channel, and so cramped for space that the residents had no open square or public space to gather, living closely packed in overcrowded homes.1481 The main necessity was to increase the area of the city; Hiram achieved this first by filling in the channel between the two islands with stones and debris, creating space for new buildings, and then by building massive moles or embankments towards the east and south, where the water was shallowest, effectively transforming water into land. This way, he expanded the town enough to lay out a “wide space” (Eurychôrus)1482 as a public square, which, like the Piazza di San Marco in Venice, became a popular gathering place for the residents for business and leisure. After ensuring utility and convenience, he then focused on decorative aspects. The old temples didn’t seem worthy of the refurbished capital; he therefore demolished them and constructed new ones in their place. In the city's most central spot 1483, he built a temple dedicated to Melkarth and Ashtoreth, likely keeping the old location but creating an entirely new structure—the same building that Herodotus visited,1484 and where Alexander insisted on making sacrifices.1485 To the south-west,1486 on what had been a separate islet, he erected a temple for Baal, adorned with a tall pillar of gold,1487 or at least covered in gold. It’s not mentioned whether he built himself a new palace; however, since the royal residence in later times was located on the southern shore,1488 which was one of Hiram’s expansions to his capital, it’s likely that the new palace was his construction. The main material he used for his buildings was cedar, similar to what was used in Jerusalem. The foundations were made of stone. They were probably not as grand as those of the Jewish Temple, as Hiram's wealth, being the ruler of a small kingdom, likely fell far short of Solomon’s, who ruled an expansive empire.

At the close of the twenty years during which Hiram had assisted Solomon in his buildings, the Israelite monarch deemed it right to make his Tyrian brother some additional compensation beyond the corn, and wine, and oil with which, according to his contract, he had annually supplied him. Accordingly, he voluntarily ceded to him a district of Galilee containing twenty cities, a portion of the old inheritance of Asher,1489 conveniently near to Accho, of which Hiram was probably lord, and not very remote from Tyre. The tract appears to have been that where the modern Kabûl now stands, which is a rocky and bare highland,1490—part of the outlying roots of Lebanon—overlooking the rich plain of Akka or Accho, and presenting a striking contrast to its fertility. Hiram, on the completion of the cession, “came out from Tyre to see the cities which Solomon had given him,” and was disappointed with the gift. “What cities are these,” he said, “which thou hast given me, my brother? And he called them the land of Cabul”—“rubbish” or “offscourings”—to mark his disappointment.1491

At the end of the twenty years during which Hiram had helped Solomon with his buildings, the Israelite king thought it was right to give his Tyrian brother some extra payment beyond the grain, wine, and oil he had supplied annually as per their agreement. So, he willingly gave him a region in Galilee that included twenty cities, part of the former inheritance of Asher, conveniently close to Accho, which Hiram was likely in charge of, and not far from Tyre. This area seems to be where modern Kabûl is located, a rocky and barren highland—part of the outer roots of Lebanon—overlooking the fertile plain of Akka or Accho and providing a striking contrast to its richness. Once the transfer was complete, Hiram “came out from Tyre to see the cities which Solomon had given him,” and he was disappointed by the gift. “What cities are these,” he asked, “that you have given me, my brother? And he called them the land of Cabul”—“rubbish” or “offscourings”—to express his disappointment.

But this passing grievance was not allowed in any way to overshadow, or interfere with, the friendly alliance and “entente cordiale” (to use a modern phrase) which existed between the two nations. Solomon, according to one authority,1492 paid a visit to Tyre, and gratified his host by worshipping in a Sidonian temple. According to another,1493 Hiram gave him in marriage, as a secondary wife, one of his own daughters—a marriage perhaps alluded to by the writer of Kings when he tells us that “King Solomon loved many strange women together with the daughter of Pharaoh, women of the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Zidonians, and Hittites."1494 The closest commercial relations were established between the two countries, and the hope of them was probably one of the strongest reasons which attracted both parties to the alliance. The Tyrians, on their part, possessed abundant ships; their sailors had full “knowledge of the sea,"1495 and the trade of the Mediterranean was almost wholly in their hands. Solomon, on his side, being master of the port of Ezion-Geber on the Red Sea, had access to the lucrative traffic with Eastern Africa, Arabia, and perhaps India, which had hitherto been confined to the Egyptians and the Arabs. He had also, by his land power, a command of the trade routes along the Coele-Syrian valley, by Aleppo, and by Tadmor, which enabled him effectually either to help or to hinder the Phoenician land traffic. Thus either side had something to gain from the other, and a close commercial union might be safely counted on to work for the mutual advantage of both. Such a union, therefore, took place. Hiram admitted Solomon to a participation in his western traffic; and the two kings maintained a conjoint “navy of Tarshish,"1496 which, trading with Spain and the West coast of Africa, brought to Phoenicia and Palestine “once in three years” many precious and rare commodities, the chief of them being “gold, and silver, ivory, and apes, and peacocks.” Spain would yield the gold and the silver, for the Tagus brought down gold,1497 and the Spanish silver-mines were the richest in the world.1498 Africa would furnish in abundance the ivory and the apes; for elephants were numerous in Mauritania,1499 and on the west coast,14100 in ancient times; and the gorilla14101 and the Barbary ape are well-known African products. Africa may also have produced the “peacocks,” if tukkiyim are really “peacocks,” though they are not found there at the present day. Or the tukkiyim may have been Guinea-fowl—a bird of the same class with the peacock.

But this minor grievance didn't overshadow or interfere with the friendly alliance and “entente cordiale” (to use a modern term) between the two nations. Solomon, according to one source, 1492 visited Tyre and pleased his host by worshipping in a Sidonian temple. According to another source, 1493 Hiram gave him one of his daughters as a secondary wife—possibly referenced by the writer of Kings when it says that “King Solomon loved many foreign women along with the daughter of Pharaoh, women of the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Zidonians, and Hittites.” 1494 The two countries established close commercial ties, and this hope for trade was likely one of the strongest reasons that drew both sides into the alliance. The Tyrians, for their part, had plenty of ships; their sailors had complete “knowledge of the sea,” 1495 and Mediterranean trade was largely in their control. Solomon, meanwhile, controlled the port of Ezion-Geber on the Red Sea, giving him access to the lucrative trade routes with Eastern Africa, Arabia, and possibly India, which had previously been dominated by the Egyptians and Arabs. Through his land power, he also commanded the trade routes along the Coele-Syrian valley, by Aleppo and Tadmor, allowing him to effectively either support or disrupt Phoenician land trade. So, both sides had something to gain from the other, and a close commercial union was likely to benefit both. This union took shape, with Hiram allowing Solomon to participate in his western trade; the two kings maintained a joint “navy of Tarshish,” 1496 which traded with Spain and the west coast of Africa, bringing to Phoenicia and Palestine “once every three years” various precious and rare goods, the main ones being “gold, silver, ivory, apes, and peacocks.” Spain would provide gold and silver, as the Tagus River brought down gold, 1497 and the Spanish silver mines were the richest in the world. 1498 Africa would supply plenty of ivory and apes, as elephants were numerous in Mauritania, 1499 and on the west coast, 14100 in ancient times; the gorilla 14101 and the Barbary ape are well-known African products. Africa may also have provided the “peacocks,” if tukkiyim really refers to “peacocks,” although they are not found there today. Or the tukkiyim may have been Guinea-fowl—a bird in the same category as the peacock.

In return, Solomon opened to Hiram the route to the East by way of the Red Sea. Solomon, doubtless by the assistance of shipwrights furnished to him from Tyre, “made a navy of ships at Ezion-Geber, which is beside Eloth, on the shore of the Red Sea, in the land of Edom,"14102 and the sailors of the two nations conjointly manned the ships, and performed the voyage to Ophir, whence they brought gold, and “great plenty of almug-trees,” and precious stones.14103 The position of Ophir has been much disputed, but the balance of argument is in favour of the theory which places it in Arabia, on the south-eastern coast, a little outside the Straits of Bab-el-Mandeb.14104 It is possible that the fleet did not confine itself to trade with Ophir, but, once launched on the Indian Ocean, proceeded along the Atlantic coast to the Persian Gulf and the peninsula of Hindustan. Or Ophir may have been an Arab emporium for the Indian trade, and the merchants of Syria may have found there the Indian commodities, and the Indian woods,14105 which they seem to have brought back with them to their own country. A most lucrative traffic was certainly established by the united efforts of the two kings; and if the lion’s share of the profit fell to Solomon and the Hebrews,14106 still the Phoenicians and Hiram must have participated to some considerable extent in the gains made, or the arrangement would not have continued.

In exchange, Solomon opened the route to the East for Hiram through the Red Sea. With help from shipbuilders provided by Tyre, Solomon “built a fleet of ships at Ezion-Geber, which is near Eloth, on the shore of the Red Sea, in the land of Edom,"14102 and sailors from both nations worked together to man the ships and make the journey to Ophir, where they brought back gold, “a large quantity of almug trees,” and precious stones.14103 The exact location of Ophir has been debated, but most evidence suggests it was in Arabia, on the southeastern coast, just outside the Straits of Bab-el-Mandeb.14104 It's possible that the fleet didn’t just trade with Ophir; after launching into the Indian Ocean, they could have traveled along the Atlantic coast to the Persian Gulf and the Indian subcontinent. Alternatively, Ophir might have been an Arab trading hub for Indian goods, where merchants from Syria could have sourced Indian products and woods,14105 which they likely brought back to their homeland. A highly profitable trade network was certainly established through the collaborative efforts of the two kings; and while Solomon and the Hebrews likely received the majority of the profits,14106 the Phoenicians and Hiram must have also benefited significantly, or else the partnership wouldn't have lasted.

It is thought that Hiram was engaged in one war of some importance. Menander tells us, according to the present text of Josephus,14107 that the “Tityi” revolted from him, and refused any longer to pay him tribute, whereupon he made an expedition against them, and succeeded in compelling them to submit to his authority. As the “Tityi” are an unknown people, conjecture has been busy in suggesting other names,14108 and critics are now of the opinion that the original word used by Menander was not “Tityi,” but “Itykæi.” The “Itykæi” are the people of Utica: and, if this emendation be accepted,14109 we must regard Hiram as having had to crush a most important and dangerous rebellion. Utica, previously to the foundation of Carthage, was by far the most important of all the mid-African colonies, and her successful revolt would probably have meant to Tyre the loss of the greater portion, if not the whole, of those valuable settlements. A rival to her power would have sprung up in the West, which would have crippled her commerce in that quarter, and checked her colonising energy. She would have suffered thus early more than she did four hundred years later by the great development of the power of Carthage; would have lost a large portion of her prestige; and have entered on the period of her decline when she had but lately obtained a commanding position. Hiram’s energy diverted these evils: he did not choose that his kingdom should be dismembered, if he could anyhow help it; and, offering a firm and strenuous opposition to the revolt, he succeeded in crushing it, and maintaining the unity of the empire.

It is believed that Hiram was involved in a significant war. Menander states, as noted in the current text of Josephus, that the “Tityi” revolted against him and refused to pay him tribute any longer. In response, he launched an expedition against them and successfully forced them to acknowledge his authority. Since the “Tityi” are an unknown group, speculation has suggested other names, and critics now think that the original term used by Menander was not “Tityi,” but “Itykæi.” The “Itykæi” refer to the people of Utica, and if this revision is accepted, we must see Hiram as having to suppress a very significant and dangerous rebellion. Before Carthage was founded, Utica was by far the most crucial of all the mid-African colonies, and its successful revolt would likely have meant that Tyre lost most, if not all, of those valuable settlements. A rival to its power would have emerged in the West, crippling its commerce in that region and hindering its colonization efforts. Tyre would have experienced losses early on, much more than it did four hundred years later due to the rise of Carthage's power; it would have lost a significant part of its prestige and started its decline just as it had recently achieved a prominent position. Hiram’s determination prevented these disasters: he was unwilling to allow his kingdom to be torn apart, and by firmly and vigorously opposing the revolt, he succeeded in quelling it and maintaining the empire's unity.

The brilliant reign of Hiram, which covered the space of forty-three years, was not followed, like that of Solomon, by any immediate troubles, either foreign or domestic. He had given his people, either at home or abroad, constant employment; he had consulted their convenience in the enlargement of his capital; he had enriched them, and gratified their love of adventure, by his commercial enterprises; he had maintained their prestige by rivetting their yoke upon a subject state; he had probably pleased them by the temples and other public buildings with which he had adorned and beautified their city. Accordingly, he went down to the grave in peace; and not only so, but left his dynasty firmly established in power. His son, Baal-azar or Baleazar, who was thirty-six years of age, succeeded him, and held the throne for seven years, when he died a natural death.14110 Abd-Ashtoreth (Abdastartus), the fourth monarch of the house, then ascended the throne, at the age of twenty, and reigned for nine years before any troubles broke out. Then, however, a time of disturbance supervened. Four of his foster-brothers conspired against Abd-Ashtoreth, and murdered him. The eldest of them seized the throne, and maintained himself upon it for twelve years, when Astartus, perhaps a son of Baal-azar, became king, and restored the line of Hiram. He, too, like his predecessor, reigned twelve years, when his brother, Aserymus, succeeded him. Aserymus, after ruling for nine years, was murdered by another brother, Pheles, who, in his turn, succumbed to a conspiracy headed by the High Priest, Eth-baal, or Ithobal.14111 Thus, while the period immediately following the death of Hiram was one of tranquillity, that which supervened on the death of Abd-Astartus, Hiram’s grandson, was disturbed and unsettled. Three monarchs met with violent deaths within the space of thirty-four years, and the reigning house was, at least, thrice changed during the same interval.

The impressive reign of Hiram, which lasted for forty-three years, didn't face any immediate troubles, foreign or domestic, like Solomon did. He provided his people, both locally and abroad, with constant work; he considered their needs while expanding his capital; he enriched them and satisfied their adventurous spirit through his trade ventures; he upheld their status by tightening their control over a subject state; and he likely won their favor by the temples and public buildings that beautified their city. As a result, he passed away peacefully and left his dynasty firmly in power. His son, Baal-azar, who was thirty-six years old, took over and ruled for seven years until he died of natural causes. Abd-Ashtoreth (Abdastartus), the fourth king from the dynasty, then took the throne at age twenty and reigned for nine years without any issues. However, a time of unrest soon followed. Four of his foster brothers plotted against Abd-Ashtoreth and killed him. The oldest among them claimed the throne and held on to it for twelve years until Astartus, probably a son of Baal-azar, became king and restored Hiram's line. He also reigned for twelve years before his brother, Aserymus, succeeded him. Aserymus ruled for nine years before being murdered by another brother, Pheles, who was soon killed in a conspiracy led by the High Priest, Eth-baal, or Ithobal. While the time right after Hiram's death was peaceful, the period following Abd-Astartus's death, Hiram’s grandson, was marked by chaos. Three kings were violently killed within thirty-four years, and the ruling house changed at least three times during that period.

At length with Ithobal a more tranquil time was reached. Ithobal, or Eth-baal, was not only king, but also High Priest of Ashtoreth, and thus united the highest sacerdotal with the highest civil authority. He was a man of decision and energy, a worthy successor of Hiram, gifted like him with wide-reaching views, and ambitious of distinction. One of his first acts was to ally himself with Ahab, King of Israel, by giving him his daughter, Jezebel, in marriage,14112 thus strengthening his land dominion, and renewing the old relations of friendship with the Hebrew people. Another act of vigour assigned to him is the foundation of Botrys, on the Syrian coast, north of Gebal, perhaps a defensive movement against Assyria.14113 Still more enterprising was his renewal of the African colonisation by his foundation of Aüza in Numidia,14114 which became a city of some importance. Ithobal’s reign lasted, we are told, thirty-two years. He was sixty-eight years of age at his death, and was succeeded by his son, who is called Badezor, probably a corruption of Balezor, or Baal-azar14115—the name given by Hiram to his son and successor. Of Badezor we know nothing, except that he reigned six years, and was succeeded by his son Matgen, perhaps Mattan,14116 a youth of twenty-three.

Eventually, a more peaceful time came with Ithobal. Ithobal, or Eth-baal, was not only king but also the High Priest of Ashtoreth, consolidating the highest religious and civil authority. He was a decisive and energetic man, a worthy successor to Hiram, like him possessing broad visions, and eager for distinction. One of his first actions was to form an alliance with Ahab, King of Israel, by marrying his daughter, Jezebel, to him, thus strengthening his territorial rule and renewing old friendships with the Hebrew people. Another significant achievement attributed to him is the establishment of Botrys on the Syrian coast, north of Gebal, possibly as a defensive strategy against Assyria. Even more ambitious was his revival of African colonization through the founding of Aüza in Numidia, which became a notable city. Ithobal's reign lasted, we are told, thirty-two years. He died at sixty-eight and was succeeded by his son, called Badezor, likely a variation of Balezor, or Baal-azar—the name given by Hiram to his son and successor. We know nothing about Badezor except that he reigned for six years before being succeeded by his son Matgen, possibly Mattan, a young man of twenty-three.

With Matgen, or Mattan, whichever be the true form of the name, the internal history of Tyre becomes interesting. It appears that two parties already existed in the state, one aristocratic, and the other popular.14117 Mattan, fearing the ascendancy of the popular party, married his daughter, Elisa, whom he intended for his successor, to her uncle and his own brother, Sicharbas, who was High Priest of Melkarth, and therefore possessed of considerable authority in his own person. Having effected this marriage, and nominated Elisa to succeed him, Mattan died at the early age of thirty-two, after a reign of only nine years.14118 Besides his daughter, he had left behind him a son, Pygmalion, who, at his decease, was but eight or nine years old. This child the democratic party contrived to get under their influence, proclaimed him king, young as he was, and placed him upon the throne. Elisa and her husband retired into private life, and lived in peace for seven years, but Pygmalion, being then grown to manhood, was not content to leave them any longer unmolested. He murdered Sicharbas, and endeavoured to seize his riches. But the ex-Queen contrived to frustrate his design, and having possessed herself of a fleet of ships, and taken on board the greater number of the nobles, sailed away, with her husband’s wealth untouched, to Cyprus first, and then to Africa.14119 Here, by agreement with the inhabitants, a site was obtained, and the famous settlement founded, which became known to the Greeks as “Karchêdon,” and to the Romans as “Carthago,” or Carthage. Josephus places this event in the hundred and forty-fourth year after the building of the Temple of Solomon,14120 or about B.C. 860. This date, however, is far from certain.

With Matgen, or Mattan, whichever is the correct version of the name, the history of Tyre becomes intriguing. It seems that two factions already existed in the state, one aristocratic and the other popular.14117 Mattan, concerned about the rise of the popular faction, married his daughter, Elisa, who he intended to be his successor, to her uncle and his own brother, Sicharbas, the High Priest of Melkarth, who thus held significant power. After orchestrating this marriage and naming Elisa as his successor, Mattan died at the young age of thirty-two, having only ruled for nine years.14118 In addition to his daughter, he left behind a son, Pygmalion, who was only eight or nine years old at the time of his death. The democratic faction managed to gain influence over the child, declared him king despite his youth, and placed him on the throne. Elisa and her husband withdrew into private life and enjoyed seven years of peace, but once Pygmalion reached manhood, he was not satisfied to leave them undisturbed. He murdered Sicharbas and tried to seize his wealth. However, the ex-Queen managed to thwart his plan and, having secured a fleet of ships and gathered many nobles on board, sailed away, with her husband’s riches intact, first to Cyprus and then to Africa.14119 There, in agreement with the locals, they obtained a site and founded the famous settlement known to the Greeks as “Karchêdon” and to the Romans as “Carthago,” or Carthage. Josephus places this event in the one hundred forty-fourth year after the construction of the Temple of Solomon,14120 which would be around 860 B.C. However, this date is far from certain.

It appears to have been in the reign of Ithobal that the first contact took place between Phoenicia and Assyria. About B.C. 885, a powerful and warlike monarch, by name Asshur-nazir-pal, mounted the throne of Nineveh, and shortly engaged in a series of wars towards the south, the east, the north, and the north-west.14121 In the last-named direction he crossed the Euphrates at Carchemish (Jerablus), and, having overrun the country between that river and the Orontes, he proceeded to pass this latter stream also, and to carry his arms into the rich tract which lay between the Orontes and the Mediterranean. “It was a tract,” says M. Maspero,14122 “opulent and thickly populated, at once full of industries and commercial; the metals, both precious and ordinary, gold, silver, copper, tin (?), iron, were abundant; traffic with Phoenicia supplied it with the purple dye, and with linen stuffs, with ebony and with sandal-wood. Asshur-nazir-pal’s attack seems to have surprised the chief of the Hittites in a time of profound peace. Sangar, King of Carchemish, allowed the passage of the Euphrates to take place without disputing it, and opened to the Assyrians the gates of his capital. Lubarna, king of Kunulua, alarmed at the power of the enemy, and dreading the issue of a battle, came to terms with him, consenting to make over to him twenty talents of gold, a talent of silver, two hundred talents of tin, a hundred of iron, 2,000 oxen, 10,000 sheep, a thousand garments of wool or linen, together with furniture, arms, and slaves beyond all count. The country of Lukhuti resisted, and suffered the natural consequences—all the cities were sacked, and the prisoners crucified. After this exploit, Asshur-nazir-pal occupied both the slopes of Mount Lebanon, and then descended to the shores of the Mediterranean. Phoenicia did not await his arrival to do him homage: the kings of Tyre, Sidon, Gebal, and Arvad, ‘which is in the midst of the sea,’ sent him presents. The Assyrians employed their time in cutting down cedar trees in Lebanon and Amanus, together with pines and cypresses, which they transported to Nineveh to be used in the construction of a temple to Ishtar.”

It seems that during Ithobal's reign, the first contact happened between Phoenicia and Assyria. Around 885 B.C., a powerful and aggressive king named Asshur-nazir-pal took the throne in Nineveh and soon got involved in a series of wars to the south, east, north, and northwest. In the northwest, he crossed the Euphrates at Carchemish (Jerablus) and, after conquering the land between that river and the Orontes, he also crossed the Orontes to invade the fertile area between the Orontes and the Mediterranean. “It was an area,” notes M. Maspero, “wealthy and densely populated, rich in industry and trade; precious and common metals like gold, silver, copper, tin (?), and iron were plentiful; trade with Phoenicia provided it with purple dye, linen goods, ebony, and sandalwood.” Asshur-nazir-pal’s assault seemed to catch the leader of the Hittites off guard during a time of deep peace. Sangar, the King of Carchemish, allowed the Assyrians to cross the Euphrates without a fight and opened the gates of his city. Lubarna, the king of Kunulua, frightened by the enemy's power and fearing the outcome of a battle, made a deal with him, agreeing to give him twenty talents of gold, a talent of silver, two hundred talents of tin, a hundred of iron, 2,000 oxen, 10,000 sheep, a thousand garments made of wool or linen, along with countless furniture, weapons, and slaves. The land of Lukhuti resisted and faced severe consequences—all the cities were looted, and the captured people were crucified. After this campaign, Asshur-nazir-pal occupied both sides of Mount Lebanon and then descended to the Mediterranean coast. Phoenicia didn’t wait for him to come and pay tribute: the kings of Tyre, Sidon, Gebal, and Arvad, ‘which is in the midst of the sea,’ sent him gifts. The Assyrians spent their time cutting down cedar trees in Lebanon and Amanus, along with pines and cypresses, which they transported to Nineveh for building a temple to Ishtar.

The period of the Assyrian subjection, which commenced with this attack on the part of Asshur-nazir-pal, will be the subject of the next section. It only remains here briefly to recapitulate the salient points of Phoenician history under Tyre’s first supremacy. In the first place, it was a time of increased daring and enterprise, in which colonies were planted upon the shores of the Atlantic Ocean, and trade extended to the remote south, the more remote north, and the still more remote north-east, to the Fortunate Islands, the Cassiterides, and probably the Baltic. Secondly, it was a time when the colonies on the North African coast were reinforced, strengthened, and increased in number; when the Phoenician yoke was rivetted on that vast projection into the Mediterranean which divides that sea into two halves, and goes far to give the power possessing it entire command of the Mediterranean waters. Thirdly, it was a time of extended commerce with the East, perhaps the only time when Phoenician merchant vessels were free to share in the trade of the Red Sea, to adventure themselves in the Indian Ocean, and to explore the distant coasts of Eastern Africa, Southern Arabia, Beloochistan, India and Ceylon. Fourthly, it was a time of artistic vigour and development, when Tyre herself assumed that aspect of splendour and magnificence which thenceforth characterised her until her destruction by Alexander, and when she so abounded in æsthetic energy and genius that she could afford to take the direction of an art movement in a neighbouring country, and to plant her ideas on that conspicuous hill which for more than a thousand years drew the eyes of men almost more than any other city of the East, and was only destroyed because she was felt by Rome to be a rival that she could not venture to spare. Finally, it was a time when internal dissensions, long existing, came to a head, and the state lost, through a sudden desertion, a considerable portion of its strength, which was transferred to a distant continent, and there steadily, if not rapidly, developed itself into a power, not antagonistic indeed, but still, by the necessity of its position, a rival power—a new commercial star, before which all other stars, whatever their brightness had been, paled and waned—a new factor in the polity of nations, whereof account had of necessity to be taken; a new trade-centre, which could not but supersede to a great extent all former trade-centres, and which, however unwillingly, as it rose, and advanced, and prospered, tended to dim, obscure, and eclipse the glories of its mother-city.

The period of Assyrian control, which started with Asshur-nazir-pal's assault, will be covered in the next section. For now, let's briefly summarize the key points of Phoenician history during Tyre's initial dominance. First, this was a time of boldness and exploration, where colonies were established along the Atlantic coast, and trade expanded to the far south, the even farther north, and the distant northeast, reaching the Fortunate Islands, the Cassiterides, and likely the Baltic Sea. Second, it was a time when the colonies on the North African coast were bolstered, strengthened, and increased in number; during which the Phoenician control solidified over the large peninsula in the Mediterranean that separates the sea into two halves, granting whoever possessed it full command of these waters. Third, it was a time of extensive trade with the East, possibly the only time when Phoenician merchant ships were free to engage in Red Sea trade, venture into the Indian Ocean, and explore the distant shores of East Africa, Southern Arabia, Beloochistan, India, and Ceylon. Fourth, it was a vibrant period of artistic growth and development, when Tyre flourished with grandeur and magnificence that marked her until her destruction by Alexander. She was so rich in aesthetic energy and creativity that she could lead an art movement in a neighboring region and share her ideas on a prominent hill that captured the attention of men for over a thousand years, only to be destroyed because Rome viewed her as an unbeatable rival. Finally, it was a time when long-standing internal conflicts reached a breaking point, and the state suffered a sudden loss of strength as a considerable portion transferred to a distant continent, where it gradually and steadily evolved into a power that, while not hostile, inevitably became a rival—a new commercial force that overshadowed all others, diminishing their brilliance and emerging as a new element in international politics, compelling recognition; a new trade center that largely supplanted previous centers, and although reluctantly, as it rose, advanced, and thrived, it inevitably diminished the glory of its mother city.





3. Phoenicia during the period of its subjection to Assyria (B.C.

877-635)

877-635

     Phoenicia conquered by the Assyrians (about B.C. 877)—
     Peaceful relations established (about B.C. 839)—Time of
     quiet and prosperity—Harsh measures of Tiglath-pileser II.
     (about B.C. 740)—Revolt of Simyra—Revolt of Tyre under
     Elulæus—Wars of Elulæus with Shalmaneser IV. and with
     Sennacherib—Reign of Abdi-Milkut—His war with Esarhaddon—
     Accession of Baal—His relations with Esarhaddon and Asshur-
     bani-pal—Revolt and reduction of Arvad, Hosah, and Accho—
     Summary.
     Phoenicia conquered by the Assyrians (around 877 B.C.)—
     Peaceful relations established (around 839 B.C.)—A time of
     calm and prosperity—Harsh actions by Tiglath-pileser II
     (around 740 B.C.)—Revolt of Simyra—Revolt of Tyre under
     Elulæus—Wars of Elulæus with Shalmaneser IV and with
     Sennacherib—Reign of Abdi-Milkut—His war with Esarhaddon—
     Accession of Baal—His relations with Esarhaddon and Asshur-
     bani-pal—Revolt and reduction of Arvad, Hosah, and Accho—
     Summary.

The first contact of Phoenicia with Assyria took place, as above observed, in the reign of Asshur-nazir-pal, about the year B.C. 877. The principal cities, on the approach of the great conquering monarch, with his multitudinous array of chariots, his clouds of horse, and his innumerable host of foot soldiers, made haste to submit themselves, sought to propitiate the invader by rich gifts, and accepted what they hoped might prove a nominal subjection. Arvad, which, as the most northern, was the most directly threatened, Gebal, Sidon, and even the comparatively remote Tyre, sent their several embassies, made their offerings, and became, in name at any rate, Assyrian dependencies. But the real subjection of this country was not effected at this time, nor without a struggle. Asshur-nazir-pal’s yoke lay lightly upon his vassals, and during the remainder of his long reign—from B.C. 877 to B.C. 860—he seems to have desisted from military expeditions,14123 and to have exerted no pressure on the countries situated west of the Euphrates. It was not until the reign of his son and successor, Shalmaneser II., that the real conquest of Syria and Phoenicia was taken in hand, and pressed to a successful issue by a long series of hard-fought campaigns and bloody battles. From his sixth to his twenty-first year Shamaneser carried on an almost continuous war in Syria,14124 where his adversaries were the monarchs of Damascus and Hamath, and “the twelve kings beside the sea, above and below,"14125 one of whom is expressly declared to have been “Mattan-Baal of Arvad."14126 It was not until the year B.C. 839 that this struggle was terminated by the submission of the monarchs engaged in it to their great adversary, and the firm establishment of a system of “tribute and taxes."14127 The Phoenician towns agreed to pay annually to the Assyrian monarch a certain fixed sum in the precious metals, and further to make him presents from time to time of the best products of their country. Among these are mentioned “skins of buffaloes, horns of buffaloes, clothing of wool and linen, violet wool, purple wool, strong wood, wood for weapons, skins of sheep, fleeces of shining purple, and birds of heaven."14128

The first interaction between Phoenicia and Assyria happened in the reign of Asshur-nazir-pal, around 877 B.C. As the powerful conquering king approached with his vast army of chariots, cavalry, and countless infantry, the main cities hurried to submit. They sought to win over the invader with lavish gifts, hoping for a form of nominal subjugation. Arvad, being the northernmost city and most directly threatened, along with Gebal, Sidon, and even the relatively distant Tyre, sent embassies, made offerings, and became, at least in name, Assyrian vassals. However, true subjugation of this region didn’t occur at that time, nor without resistance. Asshur-nazir-pal’s rule was not oppressive to his vassals, and during the rest of his lengthy reign—from 877 B.C. to 860 B.C.—he seems to have refrained from military campaigns and did not impose pressure on the territories west of the Euphrates. It wasn’t until his son and successor, Shalmaneser II., took the throne that the real conquest of Syria and Phoenicia was undertaken and successfully achieved through a series of tough campaigns and bloody battles. From his sixth to his twenty-first year, Shalmaneser waged almost continuous war in Syria, where his opponents included the kings of Damascus and Hamath, and “the twelve kings beside the sea, above and below," one of whom was specifically named “Mattan-Baal of Arvad." It wasn’t until 839 B.C. that this conflict ended with the submission of the competing monarchs to their formidable enemy and the firm establishment of a system of “tribute and taxes." The Phoenician towns agreed to pay the Assyrian king a fixed annual amount in precious metals and also promised to present him with occasional gifts of their finest products. These included “buffalo skins, buffalo horns, clothing made of wool and linen, violet wool, purple wool, strong timber, wood for weaponry, sheep skins, shining purple fleeces, and birds of the sky."

The relations of Phoenicia towards the Assyrian monarchy continued to be absolutely peaceful for above a century. The cities retained their native monarchs, their laws and institutions, their religion, and their entire internal administration. So long as they paid the fixed tribute, they appear not to have been interfered with in any way. It would seem that their trade prospered. Assyria had under her control the greater portion of those commercial routes across the continent of Asia,14129 which it was of the highest importance to Phoenicia to have open and free from peril. Her caravans could traverse them with increased security, now that they were safeguarded by a power whereof she was a dependency. She may even have obtained through Assyria access to regions which had been previously closed to her, as Media, and perhaps Persia. At any rate Tyre seems to have been as flourishing in the later times of the Assyrian dominion as at almost any other period. Isaiah, in denouncing woe upon her, towards the close of the dominion, shows us what she had been under it:—

The relationship between Phoenicia and the Assyrian monarchy was completely peaceful for over a century. The cities kept their local kings, laws, institutions, religion, and overall internal administration. As long as they paid the required tribute, they seemed to have been left alone. It looks like their trade thrived. Assyria controlled most of the trade routes across the continent of Asia, which were extremely important for Phoenicia to keep open and safe. Their caravans could travel these routes with greater safety now that they were protected by a power to which they were connected. They might have even gained access to regions like Media and possibly Persia that were previously closed off to them because of Assyria. At any rate, Tyre appeared to be as prosperous during the later period of Assyrian rule as it was at nearly any other time. Isaiah, in foretelling doom for her towards the end of this rule, shows us what she had become under it:—

     Be silent (he says), ye inhabitants of the island,
     Which the merchants of Zidon, that pass over the sea, have
          replenished.
     The corn of the Nile, on the broad waters,
     The harvest of the River, has been her revenue:
     She has been the mart of nations . . .
     She was a joyful city,
     Her antiquity was of ancient days . . .
     She was a city that dispensed crowns;
     Her merchants were princes,
     And her traffickers the honourable of the earth.14130
     Be quiet (he says), you people of the island,
     Which the traders from Zidon, who travel across the sea, have
          filled with goods.
     The grain from the Nile, on the wide waters,
     The harvest from the River, has been her income:
     She has been the marketplace of nations . . .
     She was a happy city,
     Her history stretches back to ancient times . . .
     She was a city that awarded crowns;
     Her merchants were like royalty,
     And her traders were the esteemed of the earth.14130

A change in the friendly feelings of the Phoenician cities towards Assyria first began after the rise of the Second or Lower Assyrian Empire, which was founded, about B.C. 745, by Tiglath-pileser II.14131 Tiglath-pileser, after a time of quiescence and decay, raised up Assyria to be once more a great conquering power, and energetically applied himself to the consolidation and unification of the empire. It was the Assyrian system, as it was the Roman, to absorb nations by slow degrees—to begin by offering protection and asking in return a moderate tribute; then to draw the bonds more close, to make fresh demands and enforce them; finally, to pick a quarrel, effect a conquest, and absorb the country, leaving it no vestige of independence. Tiglath-pileser began this process of absorption in Northern Syria about the year B.C. 740. He rearranged the population in the various towns, taking from some and giving to others,14132 adding also in most cases an Assyrian element, appointing Assyrian governors,14133 and requiring of the inhabitants “the performance of service like the Assyrians."14134 Among the places thus treated between the years B.C. 740 and B.C. 738, we find the Phoenician cities of Zimirra, or Simyra, and Arqa, or Arka. Zimirra was in the plain between the sea and Mount Bargylus, not very far from the island of Aradus, whereof it was a dependency. Arqa was further to the south, beyond the Eleutherus, and belonged properly to Tripolis, if Tripolis had as yet been founded, or else to Botrys. Both of them were readily accessible from the Orontes valley along the course of the Eleutherus, and, being weak, could offer no resistance. Tiglath-pileser carried out his plans, rearranged the populations, and placed the cities under Assyrian governors responsible to himself. There was no immediate outbreak; but the injury rankled. Within twenty years Zimirra joined a revolt, to which Hamath, Arpad, Damascus, and Samaria were likewise parties, and made a desperate attempt to shake off the Assyrian yoke.14135 The attempt failed, the revolt was crushed, and Zimirra is heard of no more in history.

A change in the friendly feelings of the Phoenician cities towards Assyria first began after the rise of the Second or Lower Assyrian Empire, which was founded around 745 B.C. by Tiglath-pileser II.14131 Tiglath-pileser, after a period of stagnation and decline, revived Assyria as a powerful conquering force and devoted himself to consolidating and unifying the empire. The Assyrian approach, similar to that of the Romans, was to gradually absorb nations—starting by offering protection in exchange for a moderate tribute; then tightening the bonds, making new demands, and enforcing them; and finally provoking a conflict, achieving conquest, and completely annexing the territory, leaving no trace of independence. Tiglath-pileser initiated this absorption process in Northern Syria around 740 B.C. He reorganized the populations in various towns, redistributing people by taking from some and giving to others,14132 often adding an Assyrian element and appointing Assyrian governors,14133 while requiring the inhabitants to "perform service like the Assyrians."14134 Among the locations affected between 740 and 738 B.C. were the Phoenician cities of Zimirra, or Simyra, and Arqa, or Arka. Zimirra was situated in the plain between the sea and Mount Bargylus, not far from the island of Aradus, which it relied on. Arqa was located further south, beyond the Eleutherus, and was considered part of Tripolis, if Tripolis had already been established, or otherwise belonged to Botrys. Both cities were easily reachable from the Orontes valley via the Eleutherus and, being weak, could offer no resistance. Tiglath-pileser executed his plans, reorganized the populations, and placed the cities under Assyrian governors accountable to him. There was no immediate uprising; however, the resentment lingered. Within twenty years, Zimirra joined a revolt along with Hamath, Arpad, Damascus, and Samaria, making a desperate attempt to shake off the Assyrian control.14135 The attempt failed, the revolt was suppressed, and Zimirra fades from historical records.

But this was not the worst. The harsh treatment of Simyra and Arka, without complaint made or offence given, after a full century of patient and quiet submission, aroused a feeling of alarm and indignation among the Phoenician cities generally, which could not fail to see in what had befallen their sisters a foreshadowing of the fate that they had to expect one day themselves. Beginning with the weakest cities, Assyria would naturally go on to absorb those which were stronger, and Tyre herself, the “anointed cherub,"14136 could look for no greater favour than, like Ulysses in the cave of Polyphemus, to be devoured last. Luliya, or Elulæus, the king of Tyre at the time,14137 endeavoured to escape this calamity by gathering to himself a strength which would enable him to defy attack. He contrived to establish his dominion over almost the whole of Southern Phoenicia—over Sidon, Accho, Ecdippa, Sarepta, Hosah, Bitsette, Mahalliba, &c.14138—and at the same time over the distant Cyprus,14139 where the Cittæans, or people of Citium, held command of the island. After a time the Cittæans revolted from him, probably stirred up by the Assyrians. But Elulæus, without delay, led an expedition into Cyprus, and speedily put down the rebellion. Hereupon the Assyrian king of the time, Shalmaneser IV., the successor and probably the son of Tiglath-pileser II., led a great expedition into the west about B.C. 727, and “overran all Syria and Phoenicia."14140 But he was unable to make any considerable impression. Tyre and Aradus were safe upon their islands; Sidon and the other cities upon the mainland, were protected by strong and lofty walls. After a single campaign, the Great King found it necessary to offer terms of peace, which proved acceptable, and the belligerents parted towards the close of the year, without any serious loss or gain on either side.14141

But this wasn't the worst. The harsh treatment of Simyra and Arka, endured without complaint or offense after a full century of patient and quiet submission, sparked alarm and outrage among the Phoenician cities, which couldn't help but see in what happened to their sisters a sign of the fate that they themselves would one day face. Starting with the weakest cities, Assyria would naturally aim to absorb the stronger ones next, and Tyre herself, the “anointed cherub,"14136 could only hope for no greater favor than, like Ulysses in the cave of Polyphemus, to be the last to be devoured. Luliya, or Elulæus, the king of Tyre at that time,14137 tried to avoid this disaster by gathering strength to resist attacks. He managed to establish control over nearly all of Southern Phoenicia—over Sidon, Accho, Ecdippa, Sarepta, Hosah, Bitsette, Mahalliba, etc.14138—and also over distant Cyprus,14139 where the Cittæans, or people of Citium, ruled the island. Eventually, the Cittæans revolted against him, likely incited by the Assyrians. But Elulæus quickly launched a military campaign into Cyprus and swiftly suppressed the rebellion. Shortly after, the Assyrian king at the time, Shalmaneser IV., who was the successor and probably the son of Tiglath-pileser II., led a major campaign into the west around B.C. 727, and “overran all Syria and Phoenicia."14140 However, he was unable to make a significant impact. Tyre and Aradus were secure on their islands; Sidon and the other cities on the mainland were protected by strong, tall walls. After just one campaign, the Great King found it necessary to propose terms of peace, which were accepted, and the warring parties separated at the end of the year without any serious loss or gain on either side.14141

It seemed necessary to adopt some different course of action. Shalmaneser had discovered during his abortive campaign that there were discords and jealousies among the various Phoenician cities; that none of them submitted without repugnance to the authority of Tyre, and that Sidon especially had an ancient ground of quarrel with her more powerful sister, and always cherished the hope of recovering her original supremacy. He had seen also that the greater number of the Phoenician towns, if he chose to press upon them with the full force of his immense military organisation, lay at his mercy. He had only to invest each city on the land side, to occupy its territory, to burn its villas, to destroy its irrigation works, to cut down its fruit trees, to interfere with its water-supply, and in the last instance to press upon it, to batter down its walls, to enter its streets, slaughter its population, or drive it to take refuge in its ships,14142 and he could become absolute master of the whole Phoenician mainland. Only Tyre and Aradus could escape him. But might not they also be brought into subjection by the naval forces which their sister cities, once occupied, might be compelled to furnish, and to man, or, at any rate, to assist in manning? Might not the whole of Phoenicia be in this way absorbed into the empire? The prospect was pleasing, and Shalmaneser set to work to convert the vision into a reality. By his emissaries he stirred up the spirit of disaffection among the Tyrian subject towns, and succeeded in separating from Tyre, and drawing over to his own side, not only Sidon and Acre and their dependencies, but even the city of Palæ-Tyrus itself,14143 or the great town which had grown up opposite the island Tyre upon the mainland. The island Tyre seems to have been left without support or ally, to fight her own battle singly. Shalmaneser called upon his new friends to furnish him with a fleet, and they readily responded to the call, placing their ships at his disposal to the number of sixty, and supplying him further with eight hundred skilled oarsmen, not a sufficient number to dispense with Assyrian aid, but enough to furnish a nucleus of able seamen for each vessel. The attack was then made. The Assyro-Phoenician fleet sailed in a body from some port on the continent, and made a demonstration against the Island City, which they may perhaps have expected to frighten into a surrender. But the Tyrians were in no way alarmed. They knew, probably, that their own countrymen would not fight with very much zeal for their foreign masters, and they despised, undoubtedly, the mixed crews, half skilled seamen, half tiros and bunglers, which had been brought against them. Accordingly they thought it sufficient to put to sea with just a dozen ships—one to each five of the enemy, and making a sudden attack with these upon the adverse fleet, they defeated it, dispersed it, and took five hundred prisoners. Shalmaneser saw that he had again miscalculated; and, despairing of any immediate success, drew off his ships and his troops, and retired to his own country. He left behind him, however, on the mainland opposite the island Tyre, a certain number of his soldiers, with orders to prevent the Tyrians from obtaining, according to their ordinary practice, supplies of water from the continent. Some were stationed at the mouth of the river Leontes (the Litany), a little to the north of Tyre, a perennial stream bringing down a large quantity of water from Coele-Syria and Lebanon; others held possession of the aqueducts on the south, built to convey the precious fluid across the plain from the copious springs of Ras el Ain14144 to the nearest point of the coast opposite the city. The continental water supply was thus effectually cut off; but the Tyrians were resolute, and made no overtures to the enemy. For five years, we are told,14145 they were content to drink such water only as could be obtained in their own island from wells sunk in the soil, which must have been brackish, unwholesome, and disagreeable. At the end of that time a revolution occurred at Nineveh. Shalmaneser lost his throne (B.C. 722), and a new dynasty succeeding, amid troubles of various kinds, attention was drawn away from Tyre to other quarters; and Elulæus was left in undisturbed possession of his island city for nearly a quarter of a century.

It seemed necessary to take a different approach. Shalmaneser had found out during his failed campaign that there were conflicts and rivalries among the various Phoenician cities; that none of them willingly accepted the authority of Tyre, and that Sidon in particular held a longstanding grudge against its more powerful sister, always hoping to regain its former dominance. He also saw that most of the Phoenician towns, if he decided to unleash the full might of his enormous military force, were vulnerable. He just needed to surround each city from the land, occupy its territory, burn its villas, destroy its irrigation systems, cut down its fruit trees, disrupt its water supply, and ultimately pressure it until he could break down its walls, enter its streets, slaughter its inhabitants, or force them to flee to their ships, and he could become the absolute ruler of the entire Phoenician mainland. Only Tyre and Aradus could possibly escape him. But couldn’t they also be brought under control by the naval forces that the sister cities, once conquered, might have to provide or assist with? Couldn’t all of Phoenicia be thus absorbed into his empire? The idea was appealing, and Shalmaneser set out to turn that vision into reality. Through his envoys, he stirred up discontent among the Tyrian subject towns, managing to separate Sidon and Acre and their dependencies from Tyre and even winning over the city of Palæ-Tyrus itself, or the large town that had developed across from island Tyre on the mainland. The island Tyre appeared to be left alone, forced to fight its own battles. Shalmaneser called on his new allies to supply him with a fleet, and they quickly responded, providing him with sixty ships and an additional eight hundred skilled rowers—though not enough to go without Assyrian support, it was sufficient to create a core of capable sailors for each vessel. The attack was launched. The Assyro-Phoenician fleet sailed together from a continent port and staged an offensive against the island city, perhaps hoping to intimidate it into surrender. However, the Tyrians were not at all frightened. They likely understood that their own countrymen wouldn’t fight very hard for their foreign rulers, and they certainly looked down on the mixed crews of half-skilled sailors and inexperienced ones sent against them. Thus, they deemed it sufficient to set sail with just a dozen ships—one for every five of the enemy—and launched a surprise attack on the opposing fleet, defeating it, scattering it, and capturing five hundred prisoners. Shalmaneser realized he had miscalculated again; despondent after his immediate failure, he withdrew his ships and soldiers back to his homeland. Nevertheless, he left a certain number of his soldiers on the mainland opposite island Tyre, with orders to prevent the Tyrians from obtaining, as was their usual practice, water supplies from the mainland. Some were stationed at the mouth of the river Leontes (the Litany), just north of Tyre, a consistent stream bringing a large volume of water from Coele-Syria and Lebanon; others secured the aqueducts to the south, built to carry precious water across the plain from the plentiful springs of Ras el Ain to the nearest point of the coast opposite the city. Thus, the mainland water supply was effectively cut off; but the Tyrians were determined and made no offers to the enemy. For five years, we are told, they were content to drink only the water that could be sourced from wells dug in their own island, which must have been brackish, unhealthy, and unpleasant. At the end of that period, a political upheaval happened in Nineveh. Shalmaneser lost his throne (B.C. 722), and a new dynasty took over amidst various troubles, causing attention to shift away from Tyre to other regions; Elulæus was thus left in unchallenged control of his island city for nearly twenty-five years.

It appears that, during this interval, Elulæus rebuilt the power which Shalmaneser had shattered and brought low, repossessing himself of Cyprus, or, at any rate, of some portion of it,14146 and re-establishing his authority over all those cities of the mainland which had previously acknowledged subjection to him. These included Sidon, Bit-sette, Sarepta, Mahalliba, Hosah, Achzib or Ecdippa, and Accho (Acre). There is some ground for thinking that he transferred his own residence to Sidon,14147 perhaps for the purpose of keeping closer watch upon the town which he most suspected of disaffection. The policy of Sargon seems to have been to leave Phoenicia alone, and content himself with drawing the tribute which the cities were quite willing to pay in return for Assyrian protection. His reign lasted from B.C. 722 to B.C. 705, and it was not until Sennacherib, his son and successor, had been seated for four years upon the throne that a reversal of this policy took place, and war à outrance was declared against the Phoenician king, who had ventured to brave, and had succeeded in baffling, Assyria more than twenty years previously. Sennacherib entertained grand designs of conquest in this quarter, and could not allow the example of an unpunished and triumphant rebellion to be flaunted in the eyes of a dozen other subject states, tempting them to throw off their allegiance. He therefore, as soon as affairs in Babylonia ceased to occupy him, marched the full force of the empire towards the west, and proclaimed his intention of crushing the Phoenician revolt, and punishing the audacious rebel who had so long defied the might of Assyria. The army which he set in motion must have numbered more than 200,000 men;14148 its chariots were numerous,14149 its siege-train ample and well provided.14150 Such terror did it inspire among those against whom it was directed that Elulæus was afraid even to await attack, and, while Sennacherib was still on his march, took ship and removed himself to the distant island of Cyprus,14151 where alone he could feel safe from pursuit and capture. But, though deserted by their sovereign, his towns seem to have declined to submit themselves. No great battle was fought; but severally they took arms and defended their walls. Sennacherib tells us that he took one after another—“by the might of the soldiers of Asshur his lord"14152—Great Sidon, Lesser Sidon, Bit-sette, Zarephath or Sarepta, Mahalliba, Hosah, Achzib or Ecdippa, and Accho—“strong cities, fortresses, walled and enclosed, Luliya’s castles."14153 He does not claim, however, to have taken Tyre, and we may conclude that the Island City escaped him. But he made himself master of the entire tract upon the continent which had constituted Luliya’s kingdom, and secured its obedience by placing over it a new king, in whom he had confidence, a certain Tubaal14154 (Tob-Baal), probably a Phoenician. At the same time he rearranged the yearly tribute which the cities had to pay to Assyria,14155 probably augmenting it, as a punishment for the long rebellion.

It seems that during this time, Elulæus rebuilt the power that Shalmaneser had destroyed and lowered, reclaiming Cyprus, or at least part of it, 14146 and re-establishing his control over all the mainland cities that had previously acknowledged him. These included Sidon, Bit-sette, Sarepta, Mahalliba, Hosah, Achzib or Ecdippa, and Accho (Acre). There's some evidence to suggest he moved his main residence to Sidon, 14147 likely to keep a closer eye on the town he suspected of being disloyal. Sargon's strategy seemed to involve leaving Phoenicia alone and just collecting tribute that the cities were eager to pay for Assyrian protection. His reign lasted from 722 BC to 705 BC, and it wasn't until Sennacherib, his son and successor, had been on the throne for four years that this policy changed, leading to a full-scale war against the Phoenician king who had previously resisted Assyria over twenty years before. Sennacherib had grand plans for conquest in this region and couldn't let an example of an unpunished and successful rebellion serve as a temptation for other subject states to challenge their loyalty. Therefore, as soon as things calmed down in Babylonia, he marched the full force of the empire westward, announcing his goal of crushing the Phoenician revolt and punishing the bold rebel who had long defied Assyrian power. The army he mobilized likely numbered over 200,000 men; 14148 it had many chariots, 14149 and a well-supplied siege train. 14150 The fear it instilled was so great that Elulæus was too scared to wait for an attack, and while Sennacherib was still advancing, he boarded a ship and fled to the faraway island of Cyprus, 14151 where he could feel safe from being pursued and caught. However, even without their ruler, his towns seemed unwilling to surrender. There was no major battle; instead, they took up arms and defended their walls one by one. Sennacherib reports that he captured them one after another—“by the might of the soldiers of Asshur his lord” 14152—Great Sidon, Lesser Sidon, Bit-sette, Zarephath or Sarepta, Mahalliba, Hosah, Achzib or Ecdippa, and Accho—“strong cities, fortresses, walled and enclosed, Luliya’s castles.” 14153 However, he does not claim to have taken Tyre, so we can assume the Island City escaped him. But he took complete control of the land that had been Luliya’s kingdom and secured its loyalty by installing a new king he trusted, a certain Tubaal 14154 (Tob-Baal), likely a Phoenician. At the same time, he reorganized the annual tribute the cities were required to pay to Assyria, 14155 likely increasing it as punishment for the prolonged rebellion.

We hear nothing more of Phoenicia during the reign of Sennacherib, except that, shortly after his conquest of the tract about Sidon, he received tribute, not only from the king whom he had just set over that town, but also from Uru-melek, king of Gebal (Byblus), and Abd-ilihit, king of Arvad.14156 The three towns represent, probably, the whole of Phoenicia, Aradus at this time exercising dominion over the northern tract, or that extending from Mount Casius to the Eleutherus, Gebal or Byblus over the central tract from the Eleutherus to the Tamyras, and Sidon, in the temporary eclipse of Tyre, ruling the southern tract from the Tamyrus to Mount Carmel. It appears further,14157 that at some date between this tribute-giving (B.C. 701) and the death of Sennacherib (B.C. 681) Tubaal must have been succeeded in the government of Sidon by Abdi-Milkut, or Abd-Melkarth14158 ({...}), but whether this change was caused by a revolt, or took place in the ordinary course, Tubaal dying and being succeeded by his son, is wholly uncertain.

We hear nothing more about Phoenicia during Sennacherib's reign, except that shortly after he conquered the area around Sidon, he received tribute not only from the king he had just installed in that city but also from Uru-melek, king of Gebal (Byblus), and Abd-ilihit, king of Arvad.14156 The three cities likely represent all of Phoenicia, with Aradus at this time controlling the northern region, stretching from Mount Casius to the Eleutherus, Gebal or Byblus overseeing the central region from the Eleutherus to the Tamyras, and Sidon, amid Tyre's temporary decline, ruling the southern area from the Tamyrus to Mount Carmel. It also appears,14157 that at some point between this tribute period (B.C. 701) and Sennacherib’s death (B.C. 681), Tubaal must have been succeeded in the leadership of Sidon by Abdi-Milkut, or Abd-Melkarth14158 ({...}), but whether this change was due to a revolt or simply followed the regular succession with Tubaal dying and being succeeded by his son remains completely uncertain.

All that we know is that Esarhaddon, on his accession, found Abd-Melkarth in revolt against his authority. He had formed an alliance with a certain Sanduarri, king of Kundi and Sizu,14159 a prince of the Lebanon, and had set up as independent monarch, probably during the time of the civil way which was waged between Esarhaddon and two of his brothers who disputed his succession after they had murdered his father.14160 As soon as this struggle was over, and the Assyrian monarch found himself free to take his own course, he proceeded at once (B.C. 680) against these two rebels. Both of them tried to escape him. Abd-Melkarth, quitting his capital, fled away by sea, steering probably either for Aradus or for Cyprus. Sanduarri took refuge in his mountain fastnesses. But Esarhaddon was not to be baffled. He caused both chiefs to be pursued and taken. “Abd-Melkarth,” he says,14161 “who from the face of my solders into the middle of the sea had fled, like a fish from out of the sea, I caught, and cut off his head . . . Sanduarri, who took Abd-Melkarth for his ally, and to his difficult mountains trusted, like a bird from the midst of the mountains, I caught and cut off his head.” Sidon was very severely punished. Esarhaddon boasts that he swept away all its subject cities, uprooted its citadel and palace, and cast the materials into the sea, at the same time destroying all its habitations. The town was plundered, the treasures of the palace carried off, and the greater portion of the population deported to Assyria. The blank was filled up with “natives of the lands and seas of the East”—prisoners taken in Esarhaddon’s war with Babylon and Elam, who, like the Phoenicians themselves at a remote time, exchanged a residence on the shores of the Persian Gulf for one on the distant Mediterranean. An Assyrian general was placed as governor over the city, and its name changed from Sidon to “Ir-Esarhaddon.”

All we know is that when Esarhaddon became king, he found Abd-Melkarth rebelling against him. Abd-Melkarth had teamed up with Sanduarri, the king of Kundi and Sizu, a prince from Lebanon, and had established himself as an independent ruler, likely during the civil war between Esarhaddon and two of his brothers who contested his claim after they murdered their father. Once that conflict ended, and Esarhaddon was free to act, he immediately set out (B.C. 680) against the two rebels. Both attempted to flee. Abd-Melkarth left his capital and escaped by sea, likely heading to either Aradus or Cyprus. Sanduarri found refuge in his mountain strongholds. But Esarhaddon wouldn’t be deterred. He had both leaders hunted down and captured. “Abd-Melkarth,” he claimed, “who fled from my soldiers to the middle of the sea like a fish escaping from the water, I caught and beheaded... Sanduarri, who considered Abd-Melkarth his ally and trusted in his difficult mountains, I caught like a bird from among the mountains and cut off his head.” Sidon faced harsh retaliation. Esarhaddon bragged that he eliminated all its subordinate cities, destroyed its fortress and palace, and dumped the rubble into the sea, while also demolishing all its dwellings. The town was looted, the palace's treasures were taken, and most of the population was exiled to Assyria. The gap was filled with “natives from the lands and seas of the East”—prisoners captured in Esarhaddon’s war against Babylon and Elam, who, much like the ancient Phoenicians, traded life on the shores of the Persian Gulf for one on the far-off Mediterranean. An Assyrian general was appointed governor of the city, and it was renamed from Sidon to “Ir-Esarhaddon.”

It seems to have been in the course of the same year that Esarhaddon held one of those courts, or durbars, in Syria, which all subject monarchs were expected to attend, and whereat it was the custom that they should pay homage to their suzerain. Hither flocked almost all the neighbouring monarchs14162—Manasseh, king of Judah, Qavus-gabri, king of Ammon, Zilli-bel, king of Gaza, Mitinti of Askelon, Ikasamsu of Ekron, Ahimelek of Ashdod, together with twelve kings of the Cyprians, and three Phoenician monarchs, Baal, king of Tyre, Milki-asaph, king of Gebal, and Mattan-baal, king of Arvad. Tribute was paid, home rendered, and after a short sojourn at the court, the subject-monarchs were dismissed. The foremost position in Esarhaddon’s list is occupied by “Baal, king of Tyre;” and this monarch appears to have been received into exceptional favour. He had perhaps been selected by Esarhaddon to rule Southern Phoenicia on the execution of Abd-Melkarth. At any rate, he enjoyed for some time the absolute confidence and high esteem of his suzerain. If we may venture to interpret a mutilated inscription,14163 he furnished Esarhaddon with a fleet, and manned it with his own sailors. Certainly, he received from Esarhaddon a considerable extension of his dominions. Not only was his authority over Accho recognised and affirmed, but the coast tract south of Carmel, as far as Dor, the important city Gebal, and the entire region of Lebanon, were placed under his sovereignty.14164 The date assigned to these events is between B.C. 680 and B.C. 673. It was in this latter year that the Assyrian monarch resolved on an invasion of Egypt. For fifty years the two countries had been watching each other, counteracting each other’s policy, lending support to each other’s enemies, coming into occasional collision the one with the other, not, however, as principals, but as partakers in other persons’ quarrels. Now, at length there was to be an end of subterfuge and pretences. Esarhaddon, about B.C. 673, resolved to attempt the conquest of Egypt. He “set his face to go to the country of Magan and Milukha."14165 He let his intention be generally known. No doubt he called on his subject allies for contingents of men, if not for supplies of money. To Tyre he must naturally have looked for no niggard or grudging support. What then must have been his disgust and rage at finding that, at the critical moment, Tyre had gone over to the enemy? Notwithstanding the favours heaped on him by his suzerain, “Baal, king of Tyre, to Tirhakah, king of Ethiopia, his country entrusted, and the yoke of Asshur threw off and made defiance."14166 Esarhaddon was too strongly bent on his Egyptian expedition to be diverted from it by this defection; but in the year B.C. 672, as he marched through Syria and Palestine on his way to attack Tirhakah, he sent a detachment against Tyre, with orders to his officers to repeat the tactics of Shalmaneser, by occupying points of the coast opposite to the island Tyre, and “cutting off the supplies of food and water."14167 Baal was by this means greatly distressed, and it would seem that within a year or two he made his submission, surrendering either to Esarhaddon or to his son Asshur-bani-pal, in about the year of the latter’s accession (B.C. 668). It is surprising to find that he was not deposed from his throne; but as the circumstances seem to have been such as made it imperative on the Assyrian king to condone minor offences in order to accomplish a great enterprise—the restoration of the Assyrian dominion over the Nile valley. Esarhaddon had effected the conquest of Egypt in about the year B.C. 670, and had divided the country into twenty petty principalities;14168 but within a year his yoke had been thrown off, his petty princes expelled, and Tirhakah reinstated as sole monarch over the “Two Regions."14169 It was the determination of Asshur-bani-pal, on becoming king, to strain every nerve and devote his utmost energy to the re-conquest of the ancient kingdom, so lightly won and so lightly lost by his father. Baal’s perfidy was thus forgiven or overlooked. A great expedition was prepared. The kings of Phoenicia, Palestine, and Cyprus were bidden once more to assemble, to bring their tribute, and pay homage to their suzerain as he passed on his way at the head of his forces towards the land of the Pharaohs. Baal came, and again holds the post of honour;14170 with him were the king of Judah—doubtless Manasseh, but the name is lost—the kings of Edom, Moab, Gaza, Askelon, Ekron, Gebal, Arvad, Paphos, Soli, Curium, Tamassus, Ammochosta, Lidini, and Aphrodisias, with probably those also of Ammon, Ashdod, Idalium, Citium, and Salamis.14171 Each in turn prostrated himself at the foot of the Great Monarch, paid homage, and made profession of fidelity. Asshur-bani-pal then proceeded on his way, and the kings returned to their several governments.

It seems that in the same year, Esarhaddon held one of those courts, or durbars, in Syria, where all subject kings were expected to attend to pay tribute to their overlord. Almost all the neighboring kings showed up—Manasseh, king of Judah, Qavus-gabri, king of Ammon, Zilli-bel, king of Gaza, Mitinti of Askelon, Ikasamsu of Ekron, Ahimelek of Ashdod, along with twelve kings from Cyprus and three Phoenician rulers: Baal, king of Tyre; Milki-asaph, king of Gebal; and Mattan-baal, king of Arvad. Tribute was given, and after a short stay at the court, the subject kings were dismissed. Baal, king of Tyre, is listed first by Esarhaddon, indicating he was favored. He might have been chosen by Esarhaddon to govern Southern Phoenicia after Abd-Melkarth was executed. In any case, he held Esarhaddon’s full trust and admiration for a time. If we can interpret a damaged inscription,14163 he provided Esarhaddon with a fleet and manned it with his sailors. Clearly, he received a considerable increase in his territory. His authority over Accho was recognized, and the coastal area south of Carmel, extending to Dor, the significant city of Gebal, and the entire region of Lebanon, was placed under his control.14164 These events are dated between 680 BC and 673 BC. It was in 673 BC that the Assyrian king decided to invade Egypt. For fifty years, the two nations had been watching each other, undermining each other’s policies, supporting each other's enemies, and occasionally clashing, but not as direct opponents—merely involving themselves in others' disputes. Now, it was time to stop the deception and pretenses. In 673 BC, Esarhaddon made up his mind to conquer Egypt. He "set his sights on the land of Magan and Milukha."14165 He announced his plans widely. He certainly called upon his subject allies for troops, if not money. Naturally, he expected Tyre to support him generously. Imagine his disgust and anger when he discovered that Tyre had switched sides at such a crucial moment! Despite the favors Esarhaddon showed him, “Baal, king of Tyre, entrusted his land to Tirhakah, king of Ethiopia, and threw off the yoke of Asshur, making a defiant stand."14166 Esarhaddon was too focused on his Egyptian campaign to be distracted by this betrayal, but in 672 BC, as he marched through Syria and Palestine to confront Tirhakah, he sent a group against Tyre with orders for his officers to use Shalmaneser's tactics: occupying strategic coastal points near the island of Tyre and "cutting off food and water supplies."14167 This caused significant distress for Baal, and it seems that within a year or two, he submitted either to Esarhaddon or to his son Asshur-bani-pal, around the time of the latter’s accession (668 BC). It’s surprising that he wasn’t deposed, but the situation required the Assyrian king to overlook minor offenses to achieve a major goal—the restoration of Assyrian power over the Nile Valley. Esarhaddon managed to conquer Egypt around 670 BC and divided the country into twenty small principalities;14168 however, within a year, his control was lost, his local rulers expelled, and Tirhakah restored as the sole ruler over the “Two Regions."14169 When Asshur-bani-pal became king, he was determined to make every effort and devote all his energy to reclaiming the ancient kingdom that had been so easily won and lost by his father. Baal's betrayal was thus forgiven or overlooked. A significant campaign was prepared. The kings of Phoenicia, Palestine, and Cyprus were summoned once more to gather, bring tribute, and pay homage to their ruler as he led his forces toward the land of the Pharaohs. Baal attended and once again took the place of honor;14170 with him were the king of Judah—likely Manasseh, though the name is lost—along with the kings of Edom, Moab, Gaza, Askelon, Ekron, Gebal, Arvad, Paphos, Soli, Curium, Tamassus, Ammochosta, Lidini, and Aphrodisias, as well as potentially those from Ammon, Ashdod, Idalium, Citium, and Salamis.14171 Each of them bowed down before the Great Monarch, paid respect, and pledged their loyalty. Asshur-bani-pal then continued on his way, and the kings returned to their respective realms.

It is about four years after this, B.C. 664, that we find Baal attacked and punished by the Assyrian monarch. The subjugation of Egypt had been in the meantime, though not without difficulty, completed. Asshur-bani-pal’s power extended from the range of Niphates to the First Cataract. Whether during the course of the four years’ struggle, by which the reconquest of Egypt was effected, the Tyrian prince had given fresh offence to his suzerain, or whether it was the old offence, condoned for a time but never forgiven, that was now avenged, is not made clear by the Assyrian Inscriptions. Asshur-bani-pal simply tells us that, in his third expedition, he proceeded against Baal, king of Tyre, dwelling in the midst of the sea, who his royal will disregarded, and did not listen to the words of his lips. “Towers round him,” he says, “I raised, and over his people I strengthened the watch; on sea and land his forts I took; his going out I stopped. Water and sea-water, to preserve their lives, their mouths drank. By a strong blockade, which removed not, I besieged them; their works I checked and opposed; to my yoke I made them submissive. The daughter proceeding from his body, and the daughters of his brothers, for concubines he brought to my presence. Yahi-milki, his son, the glory of the country, of unsurpassed renown, at once he sent forward, to make obeisance to me. His daughter, and the daughters of his brothers, with their great dowries, I received. Favour I granted him, and the son proceeding from his body, I restored, and gave him back."14172 Thus Baal once more escaped the fate he must have expected. Asshur-bani-pal, who was far from being of a clement disposition, suffered himself to be appeased by the submission made, restored Baal to his favour, and allowed him to retain possession of his sovereignty.

It was about four years later, in 664 B.C., that Baal was attacked and punished by the Assyrian king. Meanwhile, the conquest of Egypt was completed, though not without challenges. Asshur-bani-pal's power stretched from the Niphates mountain range to the First Cataract. It’s unclear from the Assyrian inscriptions whether the Tyrian prince had offended his overlord again during the four-year struggle for Egypt's reconquest, or if it was an old grievance that had been overlooked but never truly forgiven. Asshur-bani-pal simply states that, in his third campaign, he launched an attack on Baal, king of Tyre, who lived in the middle of the sea, who ignored his royal will and didn't listen to his commands. “I built towers around him,” he notes, “and strengthened the watch over his people; I seized his forts on land and sea; I blocked his exits. They drank water and saltwater to stay alive. I besieged them with a strong blockade that never lifted; I countered their efforts and made them submit to my rule. The daughter born to him and the daughters of his brothers were brought to me as concubines. Yahi-milki, his son, the pride of the country, renowned above all, I had sent immediately to show me respect. I accepted his daughter and the daughters of his brothers, along with their large dowries. I granted him favor, restored his son, and gave him back.” 14172 Thus, Baal avoided the fate he likely expected. Asshur-bani-pal, who was not known for his mercy, allowed himself to be pacified by the submission, restored Baal to his good graces, and permitted him to keep his power.

Another Phoenician monarch also was, about the same time, threatened and pardoned. This was Yakinlu, the king of Arvad, probably the son and successor of Mattan-Baal, the contemporary of Esarhaddon.14173 He is accused of having been wanting in submission to Asshur-bani-pal’s fathers;14174 but we may regard it as probable that his real offence was some failure in his duties towards Asshur-bani-pal himself. Either he had openly rebelled, and declared himself independent, or he had neglected to pay his tribute, or he had given recent offence in some other way. The Phoenician island kings were always more neglectful of their duties than others, since it was more difficult to punish them. Assyria did not even now possess any regular fleet, and could only punish a recalcitrant king of Arvad or Tyre by impressing into her service the ships of some of the Phoenician coast-towns, as Sidon, or Gebal, or Accho. These towns were not very zealous in such a service, and probably did not maintain strong navies, having little use for them. Thus Yakinlu may have expected that his neglect, whatever it was, would be overlooked. But Asshur-bani-pal was jealous of his rights, and careful not to allow any of them to lapse by disuse. He let his displeasure be known at the court of Yakinlu, and very shortly received an embassy of submission. Like Baal, Yakinlu sent a daughter to take her place among the great king’s secondary wives, and with her he sent a large sum of money, in the disguise of a dowry.14175 The tokens of subjection were accepted, and Yakinlu was allowed to continue king of Arvad. When, not long afterwards, he died,14176 and his ten sons sought the court of Nineveh to prefer their claims to the succession, they were received with favour. Azi-Baal, the eldest, was appointed to the vacant kingdom, while his nine brothers were presented by Asshur-bani-pal with “costly clothing, and rings."14177

Another Phoenician king was also, around the same time, threatened and pardoned. This was Yakinlu, the king of Arvad, likely the son and successor of Mattan-Baal, who was a contemporary of Esarhaddon.14173 He was accused of not being submissive to Asshur-bani-pal’s ancestors;14174 however, it seems more likely that his real offense was some failure in his duties towards Asshur-bani-pal himself. He either openly rebelled and declared his independence, neglected to pay his tribute, or offended in some other way. The Phoenician island kings were usually more neglectful of their duties than others, as punishing them was more challenging. Assyria didn’t even have a regular fleet at this time and could only punish a rebellious king of Arvad or Tyre by commandeering ships from some Phoenician coastal towns, like Sidon, Gebal, or Accho. These towns weren’t very enthusiastic about such service and likely didn’t maintain strong navies since they had little use for them. So, Yakinlu may have thought that his neglect, whatever it was, would be overlooked. But Asshur-bani-pal was protective of his rights and careful not to let any of them go unused. He made his displeasure known at Yakinlu’s court, and soon received a delegation of submission. Like Baal, Yakinlu sent a daughter to take her place among the great king’s secondary wives, along with a large sum of money disguised as a dowry.14175 The signs of submission were accepted, and Yakinlu was allowed to remain king of Arvad. When he died not long after,14176 his ten sons came to the court of Nineveh to present their claims to the throne, and they were welcomed favorably. Azi-Baal, the oldest, was appointed to the vacant kingdom, while his nine brothers were given “expensive clothes and rings" by Asshur-bani-pal.14177

Two other revolts of two other Phoenician towns belong to a somewhat later period. On his return from an expedition against Arabia, about B.C. 645, Asshur-bani-pal found that Hosah, a small place in the vicinity of Tyre,14178 and Accho, famous as Acre in later times, had risen in revolt against their Assyrian governors, refused their tribute, and asserted independence.14179 He at once besieged, and soon captured, Hosah. The leaders of the rebellion he put to death; the plunder of the town, including the images of its gods, and the bulk of its population, he carried off into Assyria. The people of Accho, he says, he “quieted.” It is a common practice of conquerors “to make a solitude and call it peace.” Asshur-bani-pal appears to have punished Accho, first by a wholesale massacre, and then by the deportation of all its remaining inhabitants.

Two other revolts from two Phoenician towns happened a bit later. On his way back from a campaign against Arabia, around 645 B.C., Asshur-bani-pal discovered that Hosah, a small area near Tyre, and Accho, later known as Acre, had revolted against their Assyrian rulers, refused to pay tribute, and claimed independence. He immediately laid siege to Hosah and soon took it over. He executed the leaders of the rebellion and took the loot from the town, including its gods' images and most of its population, back to Assyria. As for Accho, he claimed he “quieted” the people there. It’s a common tactic among conquerors “to make a solitude and call it peace.” Asshur-bani-pal seems to have punished Accho first with a large-scale massacre and then by deporting all the remaining inhabitants.

It is evident from this continual series of revolts and rebellions that, however mild had been the sway of Assyria over her Phoenician subjects in the earlier times, it had by degrees become a hateful and a grinding tyranny. Commercial states, bent upon the accumulation of wealth, do not without grave cause take up arms and affront the perils of war, much less do so when their common sense must tell them that success is almost absolutely hopeless, and that failure will bring about their destruction. The Assyrians were a hard race. Such tenderness as they ever showed to any subject people was, we may be sure, in every case dictated by policy. While their power was unsettled, while they feared revolts, and were uncertain as to their consequences, their attitude towards their dependents was conciliating. When they became fully conscious of the immense preponderance of power which they wielded, and of the inability of the petty states of Asia to combine against them in any firm league, they grew careless and confident, reckless of giving offence, ruder in their behaviour, more grasping in their exactions, more domineering, more oppressive. Prudence should perhaps have counselled the Phoenician cities to submit, to be yielding and pliant, to cultivate the arts of the parasite and the flatterer; but the people had still a rough honesty about them. It was against the grain to flatter or submit themselves; constant voyages over wild seas in fragile vessels kept up their manhood; constant encounters with pirates, cannibals, and the rudest possible savages made them brave and daring; exposure to storm, and cold, and heat braced their frames; the nautical life developed and intensified in them a love of freedom. The Phoenician of Assyrian times was not to be coaxed into accepting patiently the lot of a slave. Suffer as he might by his revolts, they won him a certain respect; it is likely that they warded off many an indignity, many an outrage. The Assyrians knew that his endurance could not be reckoned on beyond a certain point, and they knew that in his death-throes he was dangerous. The Phoenicians probably suffered considerably less than the other subject nations under Assyrian rule; and the maritime population, which was the salt of the people, suffered least of all, since it was scarcely ever brought into contact with its nominal rulers.

It’s clear from this ongoing series of uprisings and revolts that, although Assyria's rule over its Phoenician subjects was relatively mild in earlier times, it gradually turned into a loathed and oppressive tyranny. Commercial states, focused on building their wealth, don’t take up arms and risk the dangers of war without a serious reason, and they certainly wouldn’t do so when they know that success is nearly impossible and that failure could lead to their destruction. The Assyrians were a tough people. Any kindness they ever showed to their subject nations was likely driven by strategy. When their power was uncertain and they were worried about rebellions and their consequences, they were more accommodating toward their dependents. But once they recognized their overwhelming power and the inability of the smaller states of Asia to unite against them, they became careless and confident, reckless in their actions, more rude, more demanding, and more oppressive. It might have been wise for the Phoenician cities to submit, to be compliant, and to adopt the ways of the sycophant and the flatterer; however, the people had a rough honesty about them. It went against their nature to flatter or submit; constant voyages over treacherous seas in fragile ships helped maintain their courage, while encounters with pirates, cannibals, and the most savage individuals made them brave and bold. Exposure to storms, cold, and heat toughened them up; their life at sea fueled their love of freedom. The Phoenician during Assyrian rule wouldn't be easily persuaded to accept the status of a slave. Despite the suffering from their revolts, they earned a certain respect; it's likely that their actions prevented many indignities and abuses. The Assyrians knew that the Phoenician's endurance had its limits, and they understood that when pushed to the brink, he was dangerous. The Phoenicians probably experienced less suffering than other subject nations under Assyrian control, with the maritime population, the core of the people, enduring the least since they rarely came into contact with their nominal rulers.





4. Phoenicia during its struggles with Babylon and Egypt (about B.C.

635-527)

635-527

     Decline of Assyria—Scythic troubles—Fall of Nineveh—Union
     of the Phoenician cities under Tyre—Invasion of Syria by
     Neco—Battle of Megiddo—Submission of Phoenicia to Neco—
     Tyrian colony at Memphis—Conquest of Phoenicia by
     Nebuchadnezzar—Reign of Ithobal II. at Tyre—He revolts
     from Nebuchadnezzar but is reduced to subjection—Decline of
     Tyre—General weakness of Phoenicia under Babylon.
     Decline of Assyria—Scythian troubles—Fall of Nineveh—Union of the Phoenician cities under Tyre—Invasion of Syria by Neco—Battle of Megiddo—Submission of Phoenicia to Neco—Tyrian colony at Memphis—Conquest of Phoenicia by Nebuchadnezzar—Reign of Ithobal II. at Tyre—He revolts from Nebuchadnezzar but is brought back under control—Decline of Tyre—General weakness of Phoenicia under Babylon.

It is impossible to fix the year in which Phoenicia became independent of Assyria. The last trace of Assyrian interference, in the way of compulsion, with any of the towns belongs to B.C. 645, when she severely punished Hosah and Accho. The latest sign of her continued domination is found in B.C. 636, when the Assyrian governor of a Phoenician town, Zimirra, appears in the list of Eponyms.14180 It must have been very soon after this that the empire became involved in those troubles and difficulties which led on to its dissolution. According to Herodotus,14181 Cyaxares, king of Media, laid siege to Nineveh in B.C. 633, or very soon afterwards. His attack did not at once succeed; but it was almost immediately followed by the irruption into South-western Asia of Scythic hordes from beyond the Caucasus, which overran country after country, destroying and ravaging at their pleasure.14182 The reality of this invasion is now generally admitted. “It was the earliest recorded,” says a modern historian, “of those movements of the northern populations, hid behind the long mountain barrier, which, under the name of Himalaya, Caucasus, Taurus, Hæmus, and the Alps, has been reared by nature between the civilised and uncivilised races of the old world. Suddenly, above this boundary, appeared those strange, uncouth, fur-clad forms, hardly to be distinguished from their horses and their waggons, fierce as their own wolves or bears, sweeping towards the southern regions, which seemed to them their natural prey. The successive invasions of Parthians, Turks, Mongols in Asia, of Gauls, Goths, Vandals, Huns in Europe, have, it is well said, ‘illustrated the law, and made us familiar with its operations. But there was a time in history before it had come into force, and when its very existence must have been unsuspected. Even since it began to operate, it has so often undergone prolonged suspension that the wisest may be excused if they cease to bear it in mind, and are as much startled when a fresh illustration of it occurs, as if the like had never happened before.‘14183 No wonder that now, when the veil was for the first time rent asunder, all the ancient monarchies of the South—Assyria, Babylon, Media, Egypt, even Greece and Asia Minor—stood aghast at the spectacle of these savage hordes rushing down on the seats of luxury and power."14184 Assyria seems to have suffered from the attack almost as much as any other country. The hordes probably swarmed down from Media through the Zagros passes into the most fruitful portion of the empire—the flat country between the mountains and the Tigris. Many of the old cities, rich with the accumulated stores of ages, were besieged, and perhaps taken, and their palaces wantonly burnt by the barbarous invaders. The tide then swept on. Wandering from district to district, plundering everywhere, settling nowhere, the clouds of horse passed over Mesopotamia, the force of the invasion becoming weaker as it spread itself, until in Syria it reached its term through the policy of the Egyptian king, Psamatik I. That monarch bribed the nomads to advance no further,14185 and from this time their power began to wane. Their numbers must have been greatly thinned in the long course of battles, sieges, and skirmishes wherein they were engaged year after year; they suffered also through their excesses;14186 and perhaps through intestine dissensions. At last they recognised that their power was broken. Many bands probably returned across the Caucasus into the Steppe country. Others submitted and took service under the native rulers of Asia.14187 Great numbers were slain, and, except in a province of Armenia, which thenceforward became known as Sacasêné,14188 and perhaps in one Syrian town, which acquired the name of Scythopolis,14189 the invaders left no permanent trace of their brief but terrible inroad.

It’s impossible to pinpoint when Phoenicia became independent from Assyria. The last instance of Assyrian interference through coercive means in any of the towns dates back to 645 B.C., when they harshly punished Hosah and Accho. The final sign of their ongoing control appears in 636 B.C., when the Assyrian governor of a Phoenician town, Zimirra, is listed among the Eponyms.14180 It must have been shortly after this that the empire got caught up in troubles that ultimately led to its collapse. According to Herodotus,14181 Cyaxares, the king of Media, laid siege to Nineveh in 633 B.C. or soon after. His attack didn’t succeed right away; however, it was quickly followed by the invasion of Scythian hordes from beyond the Caucasus, who swept through region after region, pillaging and destroying as they pleased.14182 The reality of this invasion is now widely accepted. “It was the earliest recorded,” says a modern historian, “of those movements of northern populations, hidden behind the long mountain range that nature has created between the civilized and uncivilized races of the old world, known by names like Himalaya, Caucasus, Taurus, Hæmus, and the Alps. Suddenly, above this boundary, appeared those strange, rough, fur-clad figures, hardly distinguishable from their horses and wagons, fierce as their own wolves or bears, rushing towards the southern areas, which seemed to them their natural prey. The successive invasions of Parthians, Turks, and Mongols in Asia, and of Gauls, Goths, Vandals, and Huns in Europe, have well illustrated this law and made us familiar with its workings. But there was a time in history before it became active, and when its very existence must have been unsuspected. Even since it began to operate, it has frequently been suspended for long periods, so the wisest people may be excused for forgetting it, and can be just as surprised when a new instance occurs as if it had never happened before.”14183 No wonder now, when the veil was torn for the first time, that all the ancient monarchies of the South—Assyria, Babylon, Media, Egypt, even Greece and Asia Minor—were shocked to see these savage hordes rushing down into the centers of wealth and power."14184 Assyria seemed to suffer from the invasion nearly as much as any other region. The hordes probably flooded down from Media through the Zagros passes into the most fertile areas of the empire—the flatlands between the mountains and the Tigris. Many of the old cities, rich with accumulated resources, were besieged, and perhaps captured, and their palaces were ruthlessly burned by the barbaric invaders. The tide then flowed onward. Roaming from district to district, plundering everywhere but settling nowhere, the horsemen moved over Mesopotamia, with the strength of the invasion diminishing as it spread, until it reached its limit in Syria due to the actions of the Egyptian king, Psamatik I. That monarch bribed the nomads to go no further,14185 and from that point onward, their power began to decline. Their numbers must have been significantly reduced during the long series of battles, sieges, and skirmishes they engaged in year after year; they also suffered from their excesses;14186 and perhaps through internal conflicts. Eventually, they realized that their power was shattered. Many groups likely returned across the Caucasus into the Steppe country. Others surrendered and served under the local rulers of Asia.14187 A large number were killed, and, apart from a region in Armenia, which thereafter became known as Sacasêné,14188 and possibly one Syrian town that got the name Scythopolis,14189 the invaders left no lasting mark from their brief but brutal invasion.

The shock of the Scythian irruption cannot but have greatly injured and weakened Assyria. The whole country had been ravaged and depopulated; the provinces had been plundered, many of the towns had been taken and sacked, the palaces of the old kings had been burnt,14190 and all the riches that had not been hid away had been lost. Assyria, when the Scythian wave had passed, was but the shadow of her former self. Her prestige was gone, her armed force must have been greatly diminished, her hold upon the provinces, especially the more distant ones, greatly weakened. Phoenicia is likely to have detached herself from Assyria at latest during the time that the Scyths were dominant, which was probably from about B.C. 630 to B.C. 610. When Assyrian protection was withdrawn from Syria, as it must have been during this period, and when every state and town had to look solely to itself for deliverance from a barbarous and cruel enemy, the fiction of a nominal dependence on a distant power could scarcely be maintained. Without any actual revolt, the Phoenician cities became their own masters, and the speedy fall of Assyria before the combined attack of the Medes and Babylonians,14191 after the Scythians had withdrawn, prevented for some time any interference with their recovered independence.

The shock from the Scythian invasion must have seriously harmed and weakened Assyria. The entire country had been devastated and depopulated; the provinces had been looted, many towns had been captured and destroyed, the palaces of the former kings had been burned, and all the wealth that wasn't hidden away had been lost. After the Scythian wave had subsided, Assyria was just a shadow of its former self. Its prestige was gone, its military force was likely greatly reduced, and its control over the provinces, especially the more distant ones, was significantly weakened. Phoenicia probably separated from Assyria at the latest during the time when the Scythians were dominant, which was likely from around 630 B.C. to 610 B.C. When Assyrian protection was lifted from Syria, as it must have been during this time, and when every state and town had to rely solely on themselves for protection against a brutal enemy, the idea of being nominally dependent on a distant power could hardly be maintained. Without any actual revolt, the Phoenician cities became independent, and the swift collapse of Assyria under the combined assault of the Medes and Babylonians, after the Scythians had retreated, temporarily prevented any interference with their regained independence.

A double danger, however, impended. On the one side Egypt, on the other Babylon, might be confidently expected to lay claim to the debatable land which nature had placed between the seats of the great Asiatic and the great African power, and which in the past had almost always been possessed by the one or the other of them. Egypt was the nearer of the two, and probably seemed the most to be feared. She had recently fallen under the power of an enterprising native monarch, who had already, before the fall of Assyria, shown that he entertained ambitious designs against the Palestinian towns, having begun attacks upon Ashdod soon after he ascended the throne.14192 Babylon was, comparatively speaking, remote and had troublesome neighbours, who might be expected to prevent her from undertaking distant expeditions. It was clearly the true policy for Phoenicia to temporise, to enter into no engagements with either Babylon or Egypt, to strengthen her defences, to bide her time, and, so far as possible, to consolidate herself. Something like a desire for consolidation would seem to have come over the people; and Tyre, the leading city in all but the earliest times, appears to have been recognised as the centre towards which other states must gravitate, and to have risen to the occasion. If there ever was such a thing as a confederation of all the Phoenician cities, it would seem to have been at this period. Sidon forgot her ancient rivalry, and consented to furnish the Tyrian fleet with mariners.14193 Arvad gave not only rowers to man the ships, but also men-at-arms to help in guarding the walls.14194 The “ancients of Gebal” lent their aid in the Tyrian dockyards.14195 The minor cities cannot have ventured to hold aloof. Tyre, as the time approached for the contest which was to decide whether Egypt or Babylon should be the great power of the East, appears to have reached the height of her strength, wealth, and prosperity. It is now that Ezekial says of her—“O Tyrus, thy heart is lifted up, and thou hast said, I am a God, I sit in the seat of God in the midst of the seas—Behold, thou art wiser than Daniel, there is no secret that they can hide from thee: from thy wisdom and with thine understanding hast thou gotten thee riches, and hast gotten gold and silver into thy treasures: by thy great wisdom and by thy traffick thou hast increased thy riches, and thy heart is lifted up because of thy riches"14196; and again, “O thou that are situated at the entry of the sea, which art the merchant of the peoples unto many isles, thus saith the Lord God, Thou, O Tyre, hast said, I am perfect in beauty. Thy borders are in the heart of the sea; thy builders have perfected thy beauty. They have made all thy planks of fir-trees from Senir; they have taken from Lebanon cedars to make masts for thee; of the oaks of Bashan have they made thine oars; they have made thy benches of ivory, inlaid in boxwood, from the isles of Kittim . . . The ships of Tarshish were thy caravans for thy merchandise; and thou wast replenished, and made very glorious in the heart of the sea."14197

A double danger was looming. On one side, Egypt, and on the other, Babylon, could be expected to lay claim to the disputed land that nature had placed between the powerful Eastern and African empires, which had almost always been controlled by one or the other in the past. Egypt was closer and seemed the more formidable threat. She had recently come under the rule of an ambitious native king who had already, before Assyria's fall, shown his ambitions against the Palestinian cities, starting attacks on Ashdod shortly after he took the throne.14192 Babylon was relatively far away and had difficult neighbors that might hinder her from launching distant campaigns. It was clearly wise for Phoenicia to hold back, to avoid commitments to either Babylon or Egypt, to strengthen her defenses, to wait for the right moment, and to consolidate her position as much as possible. There seemed to be a growing desire for unity among the people; and Tyre, the leading city throughout most of history, appears to have been recognized as the focal point that other states looked to, stepping up to the challenge. If there ever was a confederation of all the Phoenician cities, it seems to have been during this time. Sidon set aside her ancient rivalry and agreed to provide the Tyrian fleet with sailors.14193 Arvad contributed not only rowers for the ships but also soldiers to aid in protecting the walls.14194 The “elders of Gebal” offered their help in the Tyrian shipyards.14195 The smaller cities couldn’t have chosen to stay out of it. As the moment approached for the confrontation that would determine whether Egypt or Babylon would dominate the East, Tyre seems to have reached the peak of her strength, wealth, and prosperity. It is now that Ezekiel remarks about her—“O Tyre, your heart is lifted up, and you have said, I am a God, I sit in the seat of God in the midst of the seas—Behold, you are wiser than Daniel, there is no secret that can be hidden from you: from your wisdom and understanding you have obtained riches, and gathered gold and silver into your treasures: by your great wisdom and by your commerce you have increased your wealth, and your heart is lifted up because of your riches"14196; and again, “O you who are at the gateway to the sea, the merchant of the nations to many isles, thus says the Lord God, You, O Tyre, have said, I am perfect in beauty. Your borders are in the heart of the sea; your builders have perfected your beauty. They have made all your planks from fir trees of Senir; they have taken cedars from Lebanon to make masts for you; they have fashioned your oars from the oaks of Bashan; they have made your benches of ivory, inlaid with boxwood from the isles of Kittim . . . The ships of Tarshish were your caravans for trade; and you were filled and exceedingly glorious in the heart of the sea."14197

The first to strike of the two great antagonists was Egypt. Psamatik I., who was advanced in years at the time of Assyria’s downfall,14198 died about B.C. 610, and was succeeded by a son still in the full vigour of life, the brave and enterprising Neco. Neco, in B.C. 608, having made all due preparations, led a great expedition into Palestine,14199 with the object of bringing under his dominion the entire tract between the River of Egypt (Wady el Arish) and the Middle Euphrates. Already possessed of Ashdod14200 and perhaps also of Gaza14201 and Askelon,14202 he held the keys of Syria, and could have no difficulty in penetrating along the coast route, through the rich plain of Sharon, to the first of the mountain barriers which are interposed between the Nile and the Mesopotamian region. His famous fleet14203 would support him along the shore, at any rate as far Carmel; and Dor and Accho would probably be seized, and made into depôts for his stores and provisions. The powerful Egyptian monarch marching northward with his numerous and well-disciplined army, partly composed of native troops, partly of mercenaries from Asia Minor, Greeks and Carians, probably did not look to meet with any opposition, till, somewhere in Northern Syria, he should encounter the forces of Babylonia, which would of course be moved westward to meet him. What then must have been his surprise when he found the ridge connecting Carmel with the highland of Samaria occupied by a strong body of troops, and his further progress barred by a foe who had appeared to him too insignificant to be taken into account? Josiah, the Jewish monarch of the time, grandson of Manasseh and great-grandson of Hezekiah, who, in the unsettled state of Western Asia, had united under his dominion the entire country of the twelve tribes,14204 had quitted Jerusalem, and thrown himself across the would-be conqueror’s path in the strong and well-known position of Megiddo. Here, in remote times, had the great Thothmes met and defeated the whole force of Syria and Mesopotamia under the king of Kadesh;14205 here had Deborah and Barak, the son of Abinoam, utterly destroyed the mighty army of Jabin, king of Canaan, under Sisera.14206 Here now the gallant, if rash, Judæan king elected to take his stand, moved either by a sense of duty, because he regarded himself as a Babylonian feudatory, or simply determined to defend the Holy Land against any heathen army that, without permission, trespassed on it. In vain did Neco seek to induce Josiah to retire and leave the way open, by assuring him that he had no hostile intentions against Judæa, but was marching on Carchemish by the Euphrates, there to contend with the Babylonians.14207 The Jewish king persisted in his rash enterprise, and Neco was forced to brush him from his path. His seasoned and disciplined troops easily overcame the hasty levies of Josiah; and Josiah himself fell in the battle.

The first to attack of the two great rivals was Egypt. Psamatik I, who was older at the time of Assyria’s collapse, died around 610 B.C. He was succeeded by his son, the brave and ambitious Neco, who was still full of life. In 608 B.C., after making all the necessary preparations, Neco led a major campaign into Palestine, aiming to bring under his rule the entire area between the River of Egypt (Wady el Arish) and the Middle Euphrates. Already in possession of Ashdod and possibly also Gaza and Askelon, he controlled access to Syria and could easily advance along the coastal route through the fertile plain of Sharon to the first mountain barriers between the Nile and Mesopotamia. His renowned fleet would support him along the coast, at least as far as Carmel, and he likely planned to capture Dor and Accho, turning them into supply depots. The powerful Egyptian king, marching north with his well-trained army—made up of both local troops and mercenaries from Asia Minor, Greeks, and Carians—probably expected no resistance until he encountered Babylonia's forces moving westward to face him in Northern Syria. So he must have been shocked to find the ridge connecting Carmel with the highlands of Samaria occupied by a strong contingent of troops, blocking his path from a foe he had thought too insignificant to consider. Josiah, the Jewish king at the time, grandson of Manasseh and great-grandson of Hezekiah, had united the entire territory of the twelve tribes under his rule amid the instability in Western Asia. He left Jerusalem and placed himself in the way of the would-be conqueror at the well-known stronghold of Megiddo. In ancient times, Thothmes had met and defeated the forces of Syria and Mesopotamia led by the king of Kadesh there; it was also the place where Deborah and Barak, the son of Abinoam, had completely destroyed the impressive army of Jabin, king of Canaan, led by Sisera. Now, the brave yet reckless Judean king chose to stand his ground, either driven by duty as a Babylonian vassal or determined to defend the Holy Land against any invading army that entered without authorization. In vain, Neco tried to persuade Josiah to back down and clear the way, insisting he had no hostile intentions toward Judea and was marching to Carchemish by the Euphrates to engage the Babylonians there. The Jewish king remained resolute in his reckless endeavor, and Neco was compelled to push him aside. His experienced and disciplined forces easily defeated Josiah's hastily assembled troops, and Josiah himself was killed in the battle.

We have no details with respect to the remainder of the expedition. Neco, no doubt, pressed forward through Galilee and Coele-Syria towards the Euphrates. Whether he had to fight any further battles we are not informed. It is certain that he occupied Carchemish,14208 and made it his headquarters, but whether it submitted to him, or was besieged and taken, is unknown. All Syria, Phoenicia, and Palestine were overrun, and became temporarily Egyptian possessions.14209 But Phoenicia does not appear to have been subdued by force. Tyrian prosperity continued, and the terms on which Phoenicia stood towards Egypt during the remainder of Neco’s reign were friendly. Phoenicians at Neco’s request accomplished the circumnavigation of Africa;14210 and we may suspect that it was Neco who granted to Tyre the extraordinary favour of settling a colony in the Egyptian capital, Memphis.14211 Probably Phoenicia accepted at the hands of Neco the same sort of position which she had at first occupied under Assyria, a position, as already explained, satisfactory to both parties.

We don't have any details about the rest of the expedition. Neco, without a doubt, pushed through Galilee and Coele-Syria towards the Euphrates. We're not informed if he had to fight any more battles. It's certain that he took control of Carchemish, making it his headquarters, but whether it surrendered to him or was besieged and captured is unknown. All of Syria, Phoenicia, and Palestine were overrun and temporarily became Egyptian territories. However, Phoenicia doesn't seem to have been conquered by force. Tyre continued to thrive, and the relationship between Phoenicia and Egypt during the rest of Neco's reign was friendly. At Neco's request, the Phoenicians completed the circumnavigation of Africa; and we can suspect that it was Neco who allowed Tyre the special privilege of establishing a colony in the Egyptian capital, Memphis. Likely, Phoenicia accepted a similar status from Neco as it initially had under Assyria, a situation that, as previously explained, was satisfactory for both sides.

But the glory and prosperity which Egypt had thus acquired were very short-lived. Within three years Babylonia asserted herself. In B.C. 605, the crown prince, Nebuchadnezzar, acting on behalf of his father, Nabopolassar, who was aged and infirm,14212 led the forces of Babylon against the audacious Pharaoh, who had dared to affront the “King of kings,” “the Lord of Sumir and Accad,” had taken him off his guard, and deprived him of some of his fairest provinces. Babylonia, under Nabopolassar and Nebuchadnezzar, was no unworthy successor of the mighty power which for seven hundred years had held the supremacy of Western Asia. Her citizens were as brave; her armies as well disciplined; her rulers as bold, as sagacious, and as unsparing. Habakkuk’s description of a Babylonian army belongs to about this date, and is probably drawn from the life—“Lo, I raise up the Chaldæans, that bitter and hasty nation, which shall march through the breadth of the land, to possess the dwelling-places that are not theirs. They are terrible and dreadful; from them shall proceed judgment and captivity; their horses are swifter than leopards, and are more fierce than the evening wolves; and their horsemen shall spread themselves, and their horsemen shall come from far; they shall fly as the eagle that hasteth to eat. They shall come all for violence; their faces shall sup as the east wind, and they shall gather the captivity as the sand. And they shall scoff at kings, and princes shall be a scorn unto them; they shall derive every stronghold; for they shall heap dust, and take it."14213 Early in the year B.C. 605 the host of Nebuchadnezzar appeared on the right bank of the Euphrates, moving steadily along its reaches, and day by day approaching nearer and nearer to the great fortress in and behind which lay the army of Neco, well ordered with shield and buckler, its horses harnessed, and its horsemen armed with spears that had been just furbished, and protected by helmets and brigandines.14214 One of the “decisive battles of the world” was impending. If Egypt conquered, Oriental civilisation would take the heavy immovable Egyptian type; change, advance, progress would be hindered; sacerdotalism in religion, conventionalism in art, pure unmitigated despotism in government would generally prevail; all the throbbing life of Asia would receive a sudden and violent check; Semitism would be thrust back; Aryanism, just pushing itself to the front, would shrink away; the monotonous Egyptian tone of thought and life would spread, like a lava stream, over the manifold and varied forms of Asiatic culture; crushing them out, concealing them, making them as though they had never been. The victory of Babylon, on the other hand, would mean room for Semitism to develop itself, and for Aryanism to follow in its wake; fresh stirs of population and of thought in Asia; further advances in the arts; variety, freshness, growth; the continuance of the varied lines of Oriental study and investigation until such time as would enable Grecian intellect to take hold of them, sift them, and assimilate whatever in them was true, valuable, and capable of expansion.

But the glory and prosperity that Egypt had gained were very short-lived. Within three years, Babylonia made its presence known. In 605 B.C., the crown prince, Nebuchadnezzar, acting on behalf of his father, Nabopolassar, who was old and frail, led the Babylonian forces against the bold Pharaoh, who had dared to challenge the “King of kings,” “the Lord of Sumir and Accad.” He caught him off guard and took some of his best provinces. Babylonia, under Nabopolassar and Nebuchadnezzar, was a worthy successor to the great power that had dominated Western Asia for seven hundred years. Its citizens were just as brave; its armies were just as well-disciplined; its rulers were just as bold, wise, and relentless. Habakkuk’s description of a Babylonian army belongs around this time and is likely based on real life: “Look, I raise up the Chaldeans, that bitter and hasty nation, which shall march through the breadth of the land to possess the dwellings that are not theirs. They are terrible and dreadful; from them proceeds judgment and captivity; their horses are swifter than leopards, and fiercer than evening wolves; their horsemen will spread out, and they will come from far; they will fly like eagles that rush to eat. They all come for violence; their faces are like the east wind, and they gather captives like sand. They scoff at kings, and princes are a joke to them; they will capture every stronghold; they will pile up dust and take it.” Early in 605 B.C., Nebuchadnezzar's army appeared on the right bank of the Euphrates, steadily moving along its banks and getting closer each day to the great fortress where Neco's well-ordered army lay, with shields and bucklers, horses harnessed, and horsemen armed with freshly polished spears, protected by helmets and armor. One of the “decisive battles of the world” was about to take place. If Egypt won, Oriental civilization would adopt the heavy, unchanging Egyptian style; change, advancement, and progress would be stifled; religious priesthoods, conformity in art, and pure, unrestrained despotism would prevail; the vibrant life of Asia would face a sudden and violent halt; Semitism would be pushed back; Aryanism, just starting to emerge, would retreat; the monotonous Egyptian way of thinking and living would spread like a lava flow, covering and extinguishing the diverse forms of Asian culture, making them seem as if they never existed. On the other hand, a Babylonian victory would provide space for Semitism to grow and for Aryanism to follow; it would spark new movements of population and thought in Asia; further advancements in the arts; diversity, freshness, and growth; the continuation of various lines of Eastern study and exploration until the time would come for Greek intellect to seize, analyze, and assimilate whatever was true, valuable, and capable of expansion.

We have no historical account of the great battle of Carchemish. Jeremiah, however, beholds it in vision. He sees the Egyptians “dismayed and turned away back—their mighty ones are beaten down, and are fled apace, and look not back, since fear is round about them."14215 He sees the “swift flee away,” and the “mighty men” attempting to “escape;” but they “stumble and fall toward the north by the river Euphrates."14216 “For this is the day of the Lord God of hosts, a day of vengeance, that He may avenge Him of His adversaries; and the sword devours, and it is satiate and made drunk with their blood, for the Lord God of hosts hath a sacrifice in the north country by the river Euphrates."14217 The “valiant men” are “swept away”—“many fall—yea, one falls upon another, and they say, Arise and let us go again to our own people, and to the land of our nativity from the oppressing sword."14218 Nor do the mercenaries escape. “Her hired men are in the midst of her, like fatted bullocks; for they also are turned back, and are fled away together; they did not stand because the day of their calamity was come upon them, and the time of their visitation."14219 The defeat was, beyond a doubt, complete, overwhelming. The shock of it was felt all over the Delta, at Memphis, and even at distant Thebes.14220 The hasty flight of the entire Egyptian host left the whole country open to the invading army. “Like a whirlwind, like a torrent, it swept on. The terrified inhabitants retired into the fortified cities,"14221 where for the time they were safe. Nebuchadnezzar did not stop to commence any siege. He pursued Neco up to the very frontier of Egypt, and would have continued his victorious career into the Nile valley, had not important intelligence arrested his steps. His aged father had died at Babylon while he was engaged in his conquests, and his immediate return to the capital was necessary, if he would avoid a disputed succession.14222 Thus matters in Syria had to be left in a confused and unsettled state, until such time as the Great King could revisit the scene of his conquests, and place them upon some definite and satisfactory footing.

We don't have any historical record of the great battle of Carchemish. However, Jeremiah sees it in a vision. He watches as the Egyptians are “dismayed and turning back—their strong leaders are defeated and fleeing quickly, not looking back, because fear surrounds them."14215 He sees the “swift fleeing away” and the “mighty men” trying to “escape,” but they “stumble and fall toward the north by the river Euphrates."14216 “For this is the day of the Lord God of hosts, a day of vengeance, so He can take revenge on His enemies; and the sword consumes, and it is filled and drunk with their blood, for the Lord God of hosts has a sacrifice in the northern country by the river Euphrates."14217 The “valiant men” are “swept away”—“many fall—yes, one falls on another, and they say, 'Let’s get up and go back to our own people and to the land of our birth to escape the oppressing sword.'"14218 The mercenaries don't escape either. “Her hired men are in the midst of her like fattened bulls; for they also have turned back and fled together; they didn't stand because the day of their disaster has come upon them, and the time of their reckoning."14219 The defeat was undoubtedly complete and overwhelming. The shock was felt throughout the Delta, at Memphis, and even at faraway Thebes.14220 The hasty flight of the entire Egyptian army left the whole country open to the invading forces. “Like a whirlwind, like a torrent, it swept on. The terrified inhabitants retreated into the fortified cities,"14221 where for now they were safe. Nebuchadnezzar didn’t take the time to lay siege anywhere. He pursued Neco all the way to the Egyptian border and would have continued his victorious advance into the Nile Valley if not for urgent news that halted him. His elderly father had died in Babylon while he was engaged in his conquests, and he needed to return to the capital quickly to avoid a disputed succession.14222 Consequently, the situation in Syria had to be left in a confused and unsettled state until the Great King could revisit the scene of his conquests and establish some definite and satisfactory order.

On the whole, the campaign had, apparently, the effect of drawing closer the links which united Phoenicia with Egypt.14223 Babylon had shown herself a fierce and formidable enemy, but had disgusted men more than she had terrified them. It was clear enough that she would be a hard mistress, a second and crueller Assyria. There was thus, on Nebuchadnezzar’s departure, a general gravitation of the Syrian and Palestinian states towards Egypt, since they saw in her the only possible protector against Babylon, and dreaded her less than they did the “bitter and hasty nation."14224 Neco, no doubt, encouraged the movement which tended at once to strengthen himself and weaken his antagonist; and the result was that, in the course of a few years, both Judæa and Phoenicia revolted from Nebuchadnezzar, and declared themselves independent. Phoenicia was still under the hegemony of Tyre, and Tyre had at its head an enterprising prince, a second Ithobal,14225 who had developed its resources to the uttermost, and was warmly supported by the other cities.14226 His revolt appears to have taken place in the year B.C. 598, the seventh year of Nebuchadnezzar.14227 Nebuchadnezzar at once marched against him in person. The sieges of Tyre, Sidon, and Jerusalem were formed. Jerusalem submitted almost immediately.14228 Sidon was taken after losing half her defenders by pestilence;14229 but Tyre continued to resist for the long space of thirteen years.14230 The continental city was probably taken first. Against this Nebuchadnezzar could freely employ his whole force—his “horses, his chariots, his companies, and his much people”—he could bring moveable forts close up to the walls, and cast up banks against them, and batter them with his engines, or undermine them with spade and mattock. When a breach was effected, he could pour his horse into the streets, and ride down all opposition. It is the capture of the continental city which Ezekiel describes when he says:14231 “Thus saith the Lord God: Behold, I will bring upon Tyrus Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, a king of kings, from the north, with horses and with chariots, and with horsemen, and companies, and much people. He shall slay with the sword thy daughters in the field; and he shall make a fort against thee, and cast a mount against thee, and lift up the buckler against thee. And he shall set engines of war against thy walls, and with his axes he shall break down thy towers. By reason of the abundance of his horses, their dust shall cover thee; thy walls shall shake at the noise of the horseman, and of the wheels and of the chariots, when he shall enter into thy gates, as men enter into a city wherein is made a breach. With the hoofs of his horses shall he tread down all thy streets: he shall slay thy people by the sword, and thy strong garrisons shall go down to the ground. And they shall make a spoil of thy riches, and make a prey of thy merchandise; and they shall break down thy walls, and destroy thy pleasant houses: and they shall lay thy stones and thy timber and thy dust in the midst of the water.” But the island city did not escape. When continental Phoenicia was reduced, it was easy to impress a fleet from maritime towns; to man it, in part with Phoenicians, in part with Babylonians, no mean sailors,14232 and then to establish a blockade of the isle. Tyre may more than once have crippled and dispersed the blockading squadron; but by a moderate expenditure fresh fleets could be supplied, while Tyre, cut off from Lebanon, would find it difficult to increase or renew her navy. There has been much question whether the island city was ultimately captured by Nebuchadnezzar or no; but even writers who take the negative view14233 admit that it must have submitted and owned the suzerainty of its assailant. The date of the submission was B.C. 585.

Overall, the campaign seemingly had the effect of tightening the connections between Phoenicia and Egypt. Babylon had proved to be a fierce and formidable enemy, but she instilled more disgust than fear in people. It was clear that she would be a tough ruler, a second and even harsher Assyria. Therefore, after Nebuchadnezzar left, there was a general shift of the Syrian and Palestinian states toward Egypt, as they saw her as the only possible protector against Babylon and feared her less than the "bitter and hasty nation." Neco undoubtedly encouraged this movement, which aimed to strengthen his position while weakening his adversary; as a result, within a few years, both Judea and Phoenicia revolted against Nebuchadnezzar and declared their independence. Phoenicia was still under the control of Tyre, which was led by an ambitious prince, a second Ithobal, who maximized its resources and received strong support from the other cities. His revolt seems to have taken place in the year 598 B.C., the seventh year of Nebuchadnezzar. Nebuchadnezzar immediately marched against him in person. Sieges were laid against Tyre, Sidon, and Jerusalem. Jerusalem surrendered almost right away. Sidon fell after losing half her defenders to a plague; however, Tyre continued to resist for a long thirteen years. The continental city was likely captured first. Against it, Nebuchadnezzar could freely use his entire force—his “horses, chariots, troops, and many people”—he could set up movable fortifications close to the walls, build siege ramps against them, batter them with his weapons, or tunnel beneath them with shovel and pick. When a breach was made, he could send his cavalry into the streets, trampling down all opposition. It’s the capture of the continental city that Ezekiel describes when he says: “Thus says the Lord God: Behold, I will bring upon Tyrus Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, a king of kings, from the north, with horses and chariots, and horsemen, and troops, and many people. He shall kill your daughters in the fields with the sword; and he shall build a fort against you, and raise a mound against you, and lift up a shield against you. He shall set up siege engines against your walls and break down your towers with his axes. Due to the abundance of his horses, their dust shall cover you; your walls shall shake at the noise of horsemen, and of the wheels and chariots when he enters your gates, like men enter a city that has been breached. With the hooves of his horses, he shall trample all your streets: he shall kill your people with the sword, and your strong garrisons shall fall to the ground. They shall plunder your riches and seize your merchandise; they shall tear down your walls and destroy your pleasant houses; they shall throw your stones and timber and dust into the midst of the water.” But the island city did not escape. Once continental Phoenicia was subdued, it was easy to gather a fleet from coastal towns; to crew it, partly with Phoenicians and partly with Babylonians, who were no less skilled sailors, and then to establish a blockade of the island. Tyre may have occasionally damaged and driven off the blockading squadron, but with a reasonable investment, new fleets could be sent, while Tyre, cut off from Lebanon, would struggle to build up or renew her navy. There has been much debate over whether the island city was ultimately captured by Nebuchadnezzar or not; however, even writers who argue against this acknowledge that it must have surrendered and accepted the rule of its attacker. The date of the submission was 585 B.C.

Thus Tyre, in B.C. 585, “fell from her high estate.” Ezekiel’s prophecies were fulfilled. Ithobal II., the “prince of Tyrus” of those prophecies,14234 whose “head had been lifted up,” and who had said in his heart, “I am a God, I sit in the seat of God, in the midst of the waters,” who deemed himself “wiser than Daniel,” and thought that no secret was hid from him, was “brought down to the pit,” “cast to the ground,” “brought to ashes upon the earth in the sight of all them that beheld him."14235 Tyre herself was “broken in the midst of the seas."14236 A blight fell upon her. For many years, Sidon, rather than Tyre, became once more the leading city of Phoenicia, was regarded as pre-eminent in naval skill,14237 and is placed before Tyre when the two are mentioned together.14238 Internal convulsion, moreover, followed upon external decline. Within ten years of the death of Ithobal, the monarchy came to an end by a revolution,14239 which substituted for Kings Suffetes or Shophetim, “judges,” officers of an inferior status, whose tenure of office was not very assured. Ecnibal, the son of Baslach, the first judge, held the position for no more than two months; Chelbes, the son of Abdæus, who followed him, ruled for ten months; Abbarus, a high priest, probably of Melkarth, for three months. Then, apparently to weaken the office, it was shared between two, as at Carthage, and Mytgon (perhaps Mattan), together with Ger-ashtoreth, the son of Abd-elim, judged Tyre for six years. But the partisans of monarchy were now recovering strength; and the reign of a king, Balator, was intruded at some point in the course of the six years’ judgeship. Judges were then abolished by a popular movement, and kings of the old stock restored. The Tyrians sent to Babylon for a certain Merbal, who must have been either a refugee or a hostage at the court of Neriglissar. He was allowed to return to Tyre, and, being confirmed in the sovereignty, reigned four years. His brother, Eirom, or Hiram, succeeded him, and was still upon the throne when the Empire of Babylon came to an end by the victory of Cyrus over Nabonidus (B.C. 538).

Thus Tyre, in B.C. 585, “fell from her high position.” Ezekiel’s prophecies came true. Ithobal II, the “prince of Tyre” mentioned in those prophecies, who had “lifted up his head,” and who thought to himself, “I am a God, I sit in the seat of God, in the middle of the waters,” who believed he was “wiser than Daniel,” and thought no secret could escape him, was “brought down to the pit,” “cast to the ground,” “reduced to ashes upon the earth in the sight of all who saw him.” Tyre herself was “broken in the midst of the seas.” A curse fell upon her. For many years, Sidon, instead of Tyre, became the leading city of Phoenicia, regarded as superior in naval skills, and is mentioned before Tyre when the two are talked about together. Internal strife soon followed external decline. Within ten years of Ithobal’s death, the monarchy ended in a revolution, which replaced kings with Suffetes or Shophetim, “judges,” who were lower-ranking officials with uncertain tenures. Ecnibal, the son of Baslach, the first judge, held the position for just two months; Chelbes, the son of Abdæus, who followed him, ruled for ten months; Abbarus, a high priest, probably of Melkarth, lasted three months. Then, seemingly to weaken the position, it was shared between two, like in Carthage, and Mytgon (possibly Mattan), along with Ger-ashtoreth, the son of Abd-elim, judged Tyre for six years. However, supporters of monarchy were regaining strength; and at some point during the six years of judgeship, a king named Balator was imposed. Judges were then abolished by a popular movement, and kings from the old lineage were restored. The Tyrians sent to Babylon for a guy named Merbal, who must have been a refugee or a hostage at the court of Neriglissar. He was allowed to return to Tyre, and, once confirmed as sovereign, ruled for four years. His brother, Eirom, or Hiram, succeeded him and was still on the throne when the Babylonian Empire ended with Cyrus's victory over Nabonidus (B.C. 538).

Phoenicia under the Babylonian rule was exceptionally weak. She had to submit to attacks from Egypt under Apries, which fell probably in the reign of Baal over Tyre, about B.C. 565. She had also to submit to the loss of Cyprus under Amasis,14240 probably about B.C. 540, or a little earlier, when the power of Babylon was rapidly declining. She had been, from first to last, an unwilling tributary of the Great Empire on the Lower Euphrates, and was perhaps not sorry to see that empire go down before the rising power of Persia. Under the circumstances she would view any chance as likely to advance her interests, and times of disturbance and unsettlement gave her the best chance of obtaining a temporary independence. From B.C. 538 to B.C. 528 or 527 she seems to have enjoyed one of these rare intervals of autonomy. Egypt, content with having annexed Cyprus, did not trouble her; Persia, engaged in wars in the far East,14241 made as yet no claim to her allegiance. In peace and tranquillity she pursued her commercial career, covered the seas with her merchant vessels, and the land-routes of trade with her caravans, repaired the damages inflicted by Nebuchadnezzar on her cities; maintained, if she did not even increase, her naval strength, and waited patiently to see what course events would take now that Babylon was destroyed, and a new and hitherto unknown power was about to assume the first position among the nations of the earth.

Phoenicia under Babylonian rule was very weak. She had to deal with attacks from Egypt under Apries, which likely happened during Baal's reign over Tyre, around 565 B.C. She also had to cope with losing Cyprus under Amasis, probably around 540 B.C. or a little earlier, when Babylon's power was quickly declining. Throughout this time, she had been an unwilling subject of the Great Empire on the Lower Euphrates and might not have been too upset to see that empire fall before the rising power of Persia. Given the situation, she would see any opportunity as a way to further her interests, and times of unrest provided her the best chance for temporary independence. From 538 to 528 or 527 B.C., she seemed to enjoy one of these rare periods of autonomy. Egypt, satisfied with having taken Cyprus, left her alone; Persia, busy with wars in the far East, made no claims on her loyalty yet. In peace and stability, she focused on her commercial pursuits, sent out her merchant vessels across the seas, and her caravans along land trade routes, repaired the damage Nebuchadnezzar had caused to her cities, maintained, if not increased, her naval strength, and patiently waited to see how events would unfold now that Babylon was gone and a new, previously unknown power was about to take a leading role among the nations of the world.





5. Phoenicia under the Persians (B.C. 528-333)

     Phoenicia not claimed by Cyrus—Submits willingly to
     Cambyses—Takes part in his invasion of Egypt—Refuses to
     proceed against Carthage—Exceptional privileges enjoyed by
     the Phoenicians under the Persians—Government system of
     Darius advantageous to them—Their conduct in the Ionian
     revolt—In the expeditions of Mardonius and Datis—In the
     great expedition of Xerxes—Interruption of the friendly
     relations between Phoenicia and Persia—Renewal of amity—
     Services rendered to Persia between B.C. 465 and 392—
     Amicable relations with Athens—Phoenicia joins in revolt of
     Evagoras—Supports Tachos, king of Egypt—Declares herself
     independent under Tennes—Conquered and treated with great
     severity of Ochus—Sidonian dynasty of the Esmunazars.
     Phoenicia was not taken by Cyrus—Willingly submitted to Cambyses—Participated in his invasion of Egypt—Refused to attack Carthage—Enjoyed exceptional privileges under the Persians—Darius' government system was beneficial for them—Their actions during the Ionian revolt—In the campaigns of Mardonius and Datis—In the major expedition of Xerxes—A break in friendly relations between Phoenicia and Persia—Restoration of friendship—Services provided to Persia between B.C. 465 and 392—Friendly ties with Athens—Phoenicia joined in the revolt of Evagoras—Supported Tachos, the king of Egypt—Declared independence under Tennes—Conquered and treated harshly by Ochus—The Sidonian dynasty of the Esmunazars.

The conquest of Babylon by Cyrus gave him, according to Oriental notions generally, a claim to succeed to the inheritance of the entire Babylonian empire; but the claim would remain dormant until it was enforced. The straggling character of the territory, which was shaped like a Greek {L}, ascending from Babylon along the course of the Euphrates to the Armenian mountains, and then descending along the line of the Mediterranean coast as far as Gaza or Raphia, rendered the enforcement of the claim a work of difficulty, more especially in the remote West, which was distant fifteen hundred miles from Persia Proper, and more than a thousand miles from Babylon. Cyrus, moreover, was prevented, first by wars in his immediate neighbourhood,14242 and later on by a danger upon his north-eastern frontier,14243 from taking the steps usually taken by a conqueror to establish his dominion in a newly-annexed region, and thus he neither occupied Syria with troops, nor placed it under the administration of Persian governors. The only step which, so far as we know, he took, implying that his authority reached so far, was the commission which he gave to Zerubbabel and the other chiefs of the Jewish nation to proceed from Babylonia to Judæa, and re-establish themselves, if they could, on the site of the destroyed Jerusalem.14244 The return from the Captivity which followed was in some sense the occupation of a portion of the extreme West by a Persian garrison, and may be viewed as a step intended to be “preparatory towards obtaining possession of the entire sea-coast;"14245 but it appears to have been an isolated movement, effected without active Persian support, and one whereby the neighbouring countries were only slightly affected.

The conquest of Babylon by Cyrus gave him a claim to inherit the entire Babylonian empire, according to Eastern views; however, this claim would remain inactive until he acted on it. The irregular shape of the territory, resembling a Greek {L}, extended from Babylon along the Euphrates to the Armenian mountains and then down the Mediterranean coast as far as Gaza or Raphia, made it challenging to enforce the claim, especially in the far West, which was fifteen hundred miles from Persia and over a thousand miles from Babylon. Cyrus was also held back, first by conflicts in nearby areas, 14242 and later by threats on his northeastern border, 14243 from taking the usual steps a conqueror would take to assert control over a newly-acquired region. As a result, he neither stationed troops in Syria nor appointed Persian governors to manage it. The only action he took that suggests his authority extended that far was commissioning Zerubbabel and other leaders of the Jewish people to travel from Babylonia to Judæa to re-establish themselves, if possible, at the site of the destroyed Jerusalem. 14244 The return from the Captivity was, in a way, the establishment of a Persian garrison in a part of the extreme West and might be seen as a step aimed at “preparing to gain control of the entire coastline;” 14245 but it seems to have been a singular action, carried out without active Persian support, and one that had only a minor impact on neighboring regions.

That Phoenicia retained her independence until the reign of Cambyses is distinctly implied, if not actually asserted, by Herodotus.14246 She saw without any displeasure the re-establishment in her neighbourhood of a nation with which her intercourse had always been friendly, and sometimes close and cordial. Tyre and Sidon vied with each other in their readiness to supply the returned exiles with the timber which they needed for the rebuilding of their temple and city; and once more, as in the days of Solomon, the Jewish axes were heard amid the groves of Lebanon, and the magnificent cedars of that favoured region were cut down, conveyed to the coast, and made into floats or rafts, which Phoenician mariners transported by sea to Joppa, the nearest seaport to Jerusalem.14247 In return, the Jews willingly rendered to the Phoenicians such an amount of corn, wine, and oil as was equivalent in value to the timber received from them,14248 and thus the relations between the two peoples were replaced on a footing which recalled the time of their closest friendship, nearly five hundred years previously.

That Phoenicia maintained her independence until the reign of Cambyses is clearly suggested, if not outright stated, by Herodotus.14246 She viewed the re-establishment of a neighboring nation with which she had always had friendly and sometimes close relationships without any discontent. Tyre and Sidon competed to provide the returned exiles with the timber they needed to rebuild their temple and city; and once again, as in the days of Solomon, the Jewish axes were heard in the groves of Lebanon, and the magnificent cedars from that favored region were cut down, transported to the coast, and made into floats or rafts, which Phoenician sailors then took by sea to Joppa, the closest seaport to Jerusalem.14247 In exchange, the Jews willingly provided the Phoenicians with enough corn, wine, and oil to match the value of the timber they received from them,14248 thus restoring the relationship between the two peoples to one reminiscent of their closest friendship nearly five hundred years earlier.

On the death of Cyrus, and the accession of his son Cambyses, B.C. 529, the tranquillity which South-western Asia had enjoyed since the time of the wars of Nebuchadnezzar came to an end. Cyrus had, it is said, designed an expedition against Egypt,14249 as necessary to round off his conquests, and Cambyses naturally inherited his father’s projects. He had no sooner mounted the throne than he commenced preparations for an attack upon the ancient kingdom of the Pharaohs, which, under the dynasty of the Psamatiks, had risen to something of its early greatness, and had been especially wealthy and prosperous under the usurper Amasis.14250 It was impossible to allow an independent and rival monarchy so close upon his borders, and equally impossible to shrink from an enterprise which had been carried to a successful issue both by Assyria and by Babylon. Persian prestige required the subjugation and absorption of a country which, though belonging geographically to Africa, was politically and commercially an integral part of that Western Asia over which Persia claimed a complete and absolute supremacy.

On the death of Cyrus and the rise of his son Cambyses in 529 B.C., the peace that Southwestern Asia had enjoyed since the wars of Nebuchadnezzar came to an end. It is said that Cyrus had planned an invasion of Egypt as a necessary step to complete his conquests, and Cambyses naturally took on his father's ambitions. As soon as he took the throne, he started preparing for an attack on the ancient kingdom of the Pharaohs, which had regained some of its former glory under the Psamatik dynasty and had become particularly wealthy and prosperous under the usurper Amasis. It was unacceptable to let a rival monarchy exist so close to his borders, and he couldn't back down from an endeavor that had been successfully carried out by both Assyria and Babylon. Persian prestige demanded the conquest and incorporation of a territory that, while geographically in Africa, was politically and commercially an essential part of the Western Asia that Persia claimed full and complete control over.

The march upon Egypt implied and required the occupation of the Mediterranean seaboard. No armies of any considerable size have ever attempted to traverse the almost waterless desert which separates the Lower Euphrates valley from the delta of the Nile. Light corps d’armée have no doubt occasionally passed from Circesium by way of Tadmor to Damascus, and vice versâ;14251 but the ordinary line of route pursued by conquerors follows the course of the Euphrates to Carchemish, then strikes across the chalky upland in the middle of which stands the city of Aleppo, and finally descends upon Egypt by way of the Orontes, the Coele-Syrian valley, and the plains of Sharon and Philistia.14252 This was undoubtedly the line followed by Cambyses,14253 and it necessarily brought him into contact with the Phoenicians. The contact was not an hostile one. It would have been madness on the part of the Phoenicians to have attempted any resistance to the vast host with which Cambyses, we may be sure, made his invasion, and it would have been folly on the part of Cambyses to employ force when he could better obtain his object by persuasion. It must have been a very special object with him to obtain the hearty co-operation of the Phoenician naval forces in the attack which he was meditating, since he would otherwise have had no fleet at all capable of coping with the fleet of Egypt. Neco had made Egypt a strong naval power;14254 Apries had contented for naval supremacy in the Eastern Mediterranean with Tyre;14255 Amasis had made an expedition by sea against Cyprus, had crushed whatever resistance the Cyprians were able to offer, had permanently occupied the island,14256 and added the Cyprian fleet to his own. Cambyses had as yet no ships, except such as he could procure from the Greek cities of Asia Minor, which were not likely to be very zealous in his service, since they had friends engaged upon the other side.14257 Accordingly, the Persian monarch seems to have made friendly overtures to the Phoenician states, which were received with favour, and led to an arrangement satisfactory to both parties. Phoenicia surrendered the independence which it was impossible for her to maintain, and placed her fleet at the disposal of Persia.14258 Persia spared her cities any occupation, imposed on her a light tribute, and allowed her that qualified independence which is implied in the retention of her native princes. From first to last under the Persian régime, Phoenician monarchs bear rule in the Phoenician cities,14259 and command the contingents which the cities furnish to any combined Persian fleet.

The march on Egypt meant and required the control of the Mediterranean coast. No large armies have ever tried to cross the nearly waterless desert separating the Lower Euphrates valley from the Nile delta. Light corps d’armée have occasionally traveled from Circesium via Tadmor to Damascus, and vice versa;14251 but the usual route taken by conquerors follows the Euphrates to Carchemish, then cuts across the chalky uplands where the city of Aleppo is located, and finally approaches Egypt via the Orontes, the Coele-Syrian valley, and the plains of Sharon and Philistia.14252 This was definitely the route Cambyses took,14253 which necessarily brought him into contact with the Phoenicians. This contact was not hostile. It would have been madness for the Phoenicians to resist the vast army Cambyses likely brought with him during his invasion, and it would have been foolish for Cambyses to use force when he could achieve his goal through negotiation. It must have been very important for him to gain the full cooperation of the Phoenician naval forces for the attack he was planning, as he otherwise wouldn’t have had a fleet that could compete with Egypt’s. Neco had made Egypt a strong naval power;14254 Apries had battled for naval supremacy in the Eastern Mediterranean against Tyre;14255 Amasis had led a naval expedition against Cyprus, defeated any resistance the Cypriots could muster, permanently occupied the island,14256 and added the Cyprian fleet to his own. At this point, Cambyses had no ships other than those he could obtain from the Greek cities of Asia Minor, which were unlikely to be very eager to help him since they had allies on the opposite side.14257 Therefore, it seems the Persian king reached out to the Phoenician states, who welcomed his overtures, leading to a mutually agreeable arrangement. Phoenicia gave up the independence it couldn't maintain and provided its fleet to Persia.14258 Persia spared her cities from occupation, imposed a light tribute, and allowed her a limited independence that came from keeping her native rulers. Throughout the entire Persian régime, Phoenician kings ruled the Phoenician cities,14259 and commanded the contingents the cities supplied to any combined Persian fleet.

The friendly arrangement concluded between Phoenicia and Persia was followed, very naturally, by a further accession to the Persian power. Cyprus, whose population was in great part Phoenician, had for centuries been connected politically in the closest manner with the Phoenician towns on the Asiatic mainland, especially with Tyre and Sidon. Her enslavement by Amasis must have been hateful to her, and she must have been only too glad to see an opportunity of shaking off the Egyptian yoke. Accordingly, no sooner did the Phoenicians of the mainland conclude the arrangement by which they became part and parcel of the Persian Empire than the Cyprians followed their example, and, revolting from Egypt, offered themselves of their own free will to Persia.14260 Cambyses, it is needless to say, readily accepted them as his subjects.

The friendly agreement made between Phoenicia and Persia naturally led to an expansion of Persian power. Cyprus, which had a largely Phoenician population, had been politically connected to the Phoenician cities on the Asian mainland, especially Tyre and Sidon, for centuries. Being enslaved by Amasis must have been unbearable for them, and they were likely eager to find an opportunity to break free from Egyptian rule. As soon as the Phoenicians on the mainland finalized their arrangement to join the Persian Empire, the Cyprians followed suit, revolting against Egypt and willingly offering themselves to Persia. Cambyses, of course, was quick to accept them as his subjects.

The invasion of Egypt could now be taken in hand with every prospect of a successful issue. The march of the land army along the shore would be supported by a parallel movement on the part of a powerful fleet, which would carry its provisions and its water, explore the country in front, and give notice of the movements of the enemy, and of the place where they proposed to make a stand in force. When Egypt was reached the fleet would command all the navigable mouths of the Nile, would easily establish a blockade of all ports, and might even mount the Nile and take a part in the siege of Memphis. It would seem that all these services were rendered to the Persian monarch by the great fleet which he had collected, of which the Phoenician ships were recognised as the main strength. The rapid conquest of Egypt was in this way much facilitated, and Cambyses within a twelvemonth found himself in possession of the entire country within its recognised limits of the Mediterranean and “the tower of Syêné."14261

The invasion of Egypt could now begin with a strong chance of success. The army would advance along the coast, supported by a powerful fleet that would bring supplies and water, scout the area ahead, and keep track of enemy movements and their positions for a major confrontation. Once they reached Egypt, the fleet would control all the navigable mouths of the Nile, easily establish a blockade of the ports, and might even move up the Nile to participate in the siege of Memphis. It was clear that all these tasks were carried out for the Persian king by the large fleet he had gathered, primarily made up of Phoenician ships, which were considered the backbone of the force. This made the swift conquest of Egypt much easier, and within a year, Cambyses found himself in control of the entire region defined by the Mediterranean and "the tower of Syêné."14261

But the Great King was not satisfied with a single, albeit a magnificent, achievement. He had accomplished in one short campaign what it took the Assyrians ten years, and Nebuchadnezzar eighteen years, to effect. But he now set his heart on further conquests. “He designed,” says Herodotus,14262 “three great expeditions. One was to be against the Carthaginians, another against the Ammonians, and a third against the long-lived Ethopians, who dwelt in that part of Lybia which borders upon the southern sea.” The expedition against the Carthaginians is the only one of the three which here concerns us: it was to be entrusted to the fleet. Instead of conducting, or sending, a land force along the seaboard of North Africa, which was probably known to be for the most part barren and waterless, Cambyses judged that it would be sufficient to dispatch his powerful navy against the Liby-Phoenician colony, which he supposed would submit or else be subjugated. But on broaching this plan to the leaders of the fleet he was met with a determined opposition. The Phoenicians positively refused to proceed against their own colonists. They urged that they were bound to the Carthaginians by most solemn oaths, and that it would be as wicked and unnatural for them to execute the king’s orders as for parents to destroy their own children.14263 It was a bold act to run counter to the will of a despotic monarch, especially of one so headstrong and impetuous as Cambyses. But the Phoenicians were firm, and the monarch yielded. “He did not like,” Herodotus says, “to force the war upon the Phoenicians, because they had surrendered themselves to the Persians, and because on the Phoenicians his entire sea-service depended.” He therefore allowed their opposition to prevail, and desisted from his proposed undertaking.14264

But the Great King wasn’t content with just one impressive achievement. He had done in one short campaign what the Assyrians took ten years and Nebuchadnezzar took eighteen years to accomplish. Yet, he set his sights on more conquests. “He planned,” says Herodotus, 14262 “three major expeditions. One was against the Carthaginians, another against the Ammonians, and a third against the long-lived Ethiopians, who lived in the part of Libya that borders the southern sea.” The expedition against the Carthaginians is the only one of the three that concerns us here: it was to be assigned to the navy. Instead of sending an army along the North African coast, which he likely knew was mostly barren and dry, Cambyses thought it would be enough to send his powerful navy against the Liby-Phoenician colony, assuming they would surrender or be conquered. But when he presented this plan to the fleet leaders, they strongly opposed it. The Phoenicians outright refused to attack their own colonists. They argued that they were bound to the Carthaginians by serious oaths, and it would be as wrong and unnatural for them to carry out the king’s orders as for parents to harm their own children. 14263 It was a bold move to go against the wishes of a tyrannical king, especially one as stubborn and impulsive as Cambyses. But the Phoenicians stood their ground, and the king relented. “He didn’t want,” Herodotus says, “to force the war on the Phoenicians because they had surrendered to the Persians, and his entire naval effort depended on them.” He thus let their resistance win out and backed down from his plans. 14264

This acquiescence in their wishes on the part of the Great King, and his abstinence from any attempt at compulsion, would seem to have paved the way for that thoroughly good understanding between the suzerain power and her dependency which characterises the relations of the two for the next century and a half, with the single exception of one short interval. “The navy of Phoenicia became a regular and very important part of the public power"14265 of the Persian state. Complete confidence was felt by their Persian masters in the fidelity, attachment, and hearty good-will of the Phoenician people. Exceptional favour was shown them. Not only were they allowed to maintain their native kings, their municipal administration, their national laws and religion, but they were granted exceptional honours and exceptional privileges and immunities. The Great King maintained a park and royal residence in some portion of Phoenicia,14266 probably in the vicinity of Sidon,14267 and no doubt allowed his faithful subjects to bask occasionally in the sunshine of his presence. When the internal organisation of the empire was taken in hand, and something approaching to a uniform system of government established for revenue purposes, though Phoenicia could not be excused from contributing to the taxation of the empire, yet the burden laid upon her seems to have been exceptionally light. United in a satrapy—the fifth—with Syria, Cyprus, and Palestine, and taxed according to her population rather than according to her wealth, she paid a share—probably not more than a third or a fourth—of 350 talents,14268 or an annual contribution to the needs of the empire amounting to no less than 30,000l. Persia, moreover, encouraged Phoenicia to establish an internal organisation of her own, and, under her suzerainty, Tyre, Sidon, and Aradus were united by federal bonds, and had a common council, which met at Tripolis, probably of three hundred members.14269 This council debated matters in which Phoenicia generally was interested, and, in times of disturbance, decided questions of peace and war.

This agreement with their wishes from the Great King and his choice not to impose any force seemed to pave the way for a strong connection between the ruling power and its dependency, which defined their relationship for the next century and a half, except for one brief period. “The navy of Phoenicia became a regular and very important part of the public power”14265 of the Persian state. The Persian rulers had complete trust in the loyalty, attachment, and genuine goodwill of the Phoenician people. They received special favor; not only were they allowed to keep their native kings, local government, national laws, and religion, but they were also given unique honors, privileges, and immunities. The Great King maintained a park and a royal residence somewhere in Phoenicia,14266 likely near Sidon,14267 and undoubtedly permitted his loyal subjects to enjoy occasional visits from him. When the internal organization of the empire was being organized, and a somewhat uniform system of governance was established for tax purposes, although Phoenicia wasn't exempt from contributing to the empire's taxes, the burden on her seems to have been particularly light. United in a satrapy—the fifth—with Syria, Cyprus, and Palestine, and taxed based on population rather than wealth, she likely paid a share—probably no more than a third or a fourth—of 350 talents,14268 which translates to an annual contribution to the empire of at least 30,000l. Moreover, Persia encouraged Phoenicia to develop its own internal organization, and under its suzerainty, Tyre, Sidon, and Aradus were connected by federal ties and had a common council that likely consisted of three hundred members, which met in Tripolis.14269 This council discussed issues of interest to Phoenicia as a whole and, during times of unrest, made decisions regarding peace and war.

The reign of Darius Hystaspis (B.C. 521-486), the successor of Cambyses upon the Persian throne, introduced several changes into the Persian governmental system which were of advantage to the Phoenicians. Darius united the most distant parts of his empire by postal routes, along which at moderate intervals were maintained post-houses, with relays of horses,14270 primarily for the use of the government, but at the service of the traveller or private trader when not needed for business of state. Phoenician commerce must have been much helped by these arrangements, which facilitated rapid communication, gave security to lines of route which had been previously infested with robbers, and provided resting-places for the companies of merchants and traders, not unlike the caravanserai of modern Turkey and Persia.

The rule of Darius Hystaspis (B.C. 521-486), who took over from Cambyses on the Persian throne, brought several changes to the Persian government that benefited the Phoenicians. Darius connected the farthest regions of his empire through postal routes, where post-houses with relay horses were regularly maintained—primarily for government use but available for travelers or private traders when not needed for state business. Phoenician trade likely thrived due to these setups, which allowed for quick communication, secured routes that had previously been plagued by robbers, and provided rest stops for groups of merchants and traders, similar to the caravanserai found in modern Turkey and Persia.

Darius also established throughout his vast empire a uniform coinage, based apparently on that which had previously prevailed in Lydia. His “darics,” as they were called by the Greeks, were, in the first instance, gold coins of a rude type, a little heavier than our sovereigns, weighing between 123 and 124 grains troy.14271 They bore the figure of an archer on the obverse, and on the reverse a very rough and primitive quadratum incusum. Darius must have coined them in vast abundance, since early in the reign of his successor a single individual of no great eminence had accumulated as many as 3,993,000 of them.14272 Subsequently to the introduction of the gold darics, a silver coinage was issued, originally (we are told) in Egypt by a Persian satrap called Aryandes,14273 but afterwards by the central government. The name of “daric” was extended to these coins also, which, however, were much larger and heavier than the gold coins, weighing as much as 235 grains, and corresponding to the Greek tetradrachm, and (nearly) to the Hebrew shekel. The establishment of this excellent circulating medium, and the wide extension which it almost immediately attained, must have given an enormous stimulus to trade, and have been found of the greatest convenience by the Phoenician merchants, who had no longer to carry with them the precious metal in bars or ingots, and to weigh their gold and silver in the balance in connection with every purchase that they made, but could effect both sales and purchases in the simple and commodious manner still in use among all civilised nations at the present day.

Darius also created a consistent currency throughout his vast empire, based on what had previously been used in Lydia. His coins, known as “darics” by the Greeks, were initially gold coins of a rough style, slightly heavier than our sovereigns, weighing between 123 and 124 grains troy.14271 They featured the image of an archer on one side and a very basic and primitive quadratum incusum on the other. Darius must have minted them in large quantities, as early in the rule of his successor, a single person of no significant status had collected as many as 3,993,000 of them.14272 After the gold darics were introduced, a silver currency was issued, originally (as we're told) in Egypt by a Persian governor named Aryandes,14273 but later by the central government. The term “daric” was also applied to these coins, which were much larger and heavier than the gold ones, weighing up to 235 grains, and corresponding to the Greek tetradrachm and (almost) to the Hebrew shekel. The introduction of this effective circulating medium, along with its rapid spread, must have significantly boosted trade and been extremely convenient for Phoenician merchants, who no longer had to carry precious metals in bars or ingots and weigh their gold and silver for every purchase they made. Instead, they could conduct both sales and purchases in the straightforward and convenient way that is still in use among all civilized nations today.

Under these circumstances we can well understand that the Phoenicians were thoroughly satisfied with the position which they occupied under the earlier Persian kings, and strove zealously to maintain and extend the empire to which they owed so much. Their fidelity was put to a crucial test after they had been subjects of Darius Hystaspis for a little more than twenty years, and had had about fourteen or fifteen years’ experience of the advantages of his governmental system. Aristagoras of Miletus, finding himself in a position of difficulty, had lighted up the flames of war in Asia Minor, and brought about a general revolt of the Greeks in those parts against the Persian power—a revolt which spread on from the Greeks to the native Asiatics, and in a short time embraced, not only Ionia and Æolis, but Caria, Caunus, and almost the whole of Cyprus.14274 The bulk of the Cyprian cities were Phoenician colonies, and the political connection between these cities and Phoenicia was so close and of such ancient date that the Phoenicians can scarcely have failed to be moved by their example and by their danger. A wave of sympathy might have been expected to sweep across the excitable people, and it would not have been surprising had they rushed headlong into rebellion with the same impetuosity as their Cyprian brethren. Had they done so the danger to Persia would have been very great, and the course of the world’s history might perhaps have been differently shaped. The junction of the Phoenician fleet with the navies of Cyprus, Ionia, Caria, and Æolis would have transferred the complete sovereignty of the Eastern Mediterranean to the side of the rebels.14275 The contagion of revolt would probably have spread. Lycia and Cilicia, always eager for independence,14276 would probably have joined the malcontents; Pamphylia, which lay between them, would have followed their example; the entire seaboard of Asia Minor and Syria would have been lost; Egypt would, most likely, have seen in the crisis her opportunity, and have avenged the cruelties and insults of Cambyses14277 by the massacre of her Persian garrison. Persia’s prosperity would have received a sudden check, from which it might never have recovered; Greece would have escaped the ordeal of the invasion of Xerxes; and the character of the struggle between Europe and Asia would have been completely altered.

Under these circumstances, it’s easy to see why the Phoenicians were completely satisfied with their status under the earlier Persian kings, and why they worked hard to maintain and expand the empire that had benefited them so much. Their loyalty faced a serious test after they had been subjects of Darius Hystaspis for a little over twenty years and had about fourteen or fifteen years of experience with his governmental system’s benefits. Aristagoras of Miletus, finding himself in a tough spot, ignited the flames of war in Asia Minor and triggered a widespread revolt among the Greeks in that region against Persian control—a revolt that spread from the Greeks to the native Asiatics, quickly engulfing not just Ionia and Æolis, but also Caria, Caunus, and nearly the entire island of Cyprus. The majority of the cities in Cyprus were Phoenician colonies, and the political ties between these cities and Phoenicia were so strong and historically deep that the Phoenicians would likely have been moved by the example and the peril of their situation. A wave of sympathy could have been expected to sweep through their passionate people, and it wouldn’t have been surprising if they had rushed into rebellion with the same intensity as their Cyprian counterparts. If they had, Persia would have faced significant danger, and the course of world history might have turned out very differently. The unification of the Phoenician fleet with the navies of Cyprus, Ionia, Caria, and Æolis would have handed complete control of the Eastern Mediterranean to the rebels. The spread of rebellion would probably have continued. Lycia and Cilicia, always hungry for independence, would likely have joined the dissenters; Pamphylia, situated between them, would have followed suit; the entire coastline of Asia Minor and Syria could have been lost; and Egypt would probably have seen this crisis as its chance to avenge the atrocities and insults of Cambyses by massacring her Persian garrison. Persia’s prosperity would have faced a sudden halt, from which it might never have bounced back; Greece would have avoided the ordeal of Xerxes’ invasion; and the dynamics of the struggle between Europe and Asia would have been completely transformed.

But the view which the Phoenicians took of their duties, or of their interests, led them to act differently. When the Persians, anxious to recover Cyprus, applied to the Phoenician cities for a naval force, to transport their army from Cilica to the island, and otherwise help them in the war, their request was at once complied with. Ships were sent to the Cilician coast without any delay;14278 the Persian land force was conveyed in safety across the strait and landed on the opposite shore; the ships then rounded Cape St. Andreas and anchored in the bay opposite Salamis, where the Ionian fleet was drawn up in defence of the town.14279 An engagement followed—the first, so far as we know, between Phoenicians and Greeks—wholly to the advantage of the latter.14280 No complaint, however, is made of any lukewarmness, or want of zeal, on the part of the Phoenicians, who seem to have been beaten in fair fight by an enemy whom they had perhaps despised. Their ill fortune did not lead to any very serious result, since the Persian land force defeated the Cyprians, and thus Persia once more obtained possession of the island.

But the way the Phoenicians viewed their responsibilities or interests made them act differently. When the Persians, eager to take back Cyprus, asked the Phoenician cities for a naval force to transport their army from Cilicia to the island and assist them in the war, they quickly agreed. Ships were sent to the Cilician coast without delay; the Persian land force was safely transported across the strait and landed on the other side; the ships then rounded Cape St. Andreas and anchored in the bay across from Salamis, where the Ionian fleet was positioned to defend the town. A battle followed—the first, as far as we know, between Phoenicians and Greeks—completely in favor of the latter. However, there were no complaints about any lack of enthusiasm or effort on the part of the Phoenicians, who seem to have been defeated in a fair fight by an enemy they perhaps underestimated. Their bad luck didn’t lead to any serious consequences, as the Persian land force defeated the Cyprians, allowing Persia to regain control of the island.

A year or two later the Phoenicians recovered their lost laurels. In B.C. 495 the Persians, having trampled out the flames of revolt in Cyprus, Caria, and Caunus, resolved on a great effort to bring the war to a close by attacking the Ionian Greeks in their own country, and crushing the head and front of the rebellion, which was the great and flourishing city of Miletus. Miletus lay on the southern shore of a deep bay—the Sinus Latmicus—which penetrated the western coast of Asia Minor in about Lat. 37º 30´, but which the deposits of the Mæander have now filled up.14281 North-west of the town, at the distance of about a mile, was the small island of Ladé, now a mere hillock on the flat alluvial plain. While the Persian land force advanced along the shore, and invested Milestus on the side towards the continent, a combined fleet of six hundred vessels14282 proceeded to block the entrance to the bay, and to threaten the doomed city from the sea. This fleet was drawn from four only of the countries subject to Persia—viz. Phoenicia, Cilicia, Cyprus, and Egypt—whereof Phoenicia, we are told, “showed the greatest zeal,"14283 and we may presume furnished by far the larger number of ships. On their arrival in Milesian waters the captains found a strong naval force collected to meet them, which rested upon the island of Ladé, and guarded the approaches to the town. Miletus had summoned to her aid the contingents of her various allies—Chios, Lesbos, Samos, Teos, Priene, Erythræ, Phocæa, Myus—and had succeeded in gathering together a fleet amounting to above three hundred and fifty vessels.14284 This time Phoenicia did not despise her foe. Before engaging, every effort was made to sow discord and dissension among the confederates, and induce the Greek captains to withdraw their squadrons, or at any rate to remain neutral in the battle.14285 Considerable effect was produced by these machinations; and when at last the attack was made, two of the principal of the Greek allies14286 drew off, and sailed homewards, leaving the rest of the confederates to their fate. Yet, notwithstanding this defection, the battle was stoutly contested by the ships which remained, especially those of the Chians,14287 and though a very decisive and complete victory was ultimately gained by the Phoenicians and their allies, the cost of the victory was great. Persia regained her naval supremacy in the Eastern Mediterranean; Phoenicia re-established her claim to be considered the great sea power of the time; but she lost a large number of her best vessels and seamen, and she was taught the lesson that, to cope with Greeks, she must have a vast superiority of force upon her side—a superiority of not much less than three to one.

A year or two later, the Phoenicians regained their lost glory. In 495 B.C., after extinguishing uprisings in Cyprus, Caria, and Caunus, the Persians decided to make a big push to end the war by attacking the Ionian Greeks in their homeland, aiming to crush the main hub of the rebellion, which was the prosperous city of Miletus. Miletus was situated on the southern shore of a deep bay—the Sinus Latmicus—near the western coast of Asia Minor at about latitude 37º 30´, although the sediments from the Mæander have since filled it in.14281 About a mile north-west of the town was the small island of Ladé, now just a mound on the flat alluvial plain. While the Persian land forces moved along the coast and surrounded Miletus from the land side, a combined fleet of six hundred ships14282 was dispatched to block the bay and threaten the besieged city from the sea. This fleet came from just four of the regions under Persian rule—Phoenicia, Cilicia, Cyprus, and Egypt—of which Phoenicia, it is said, “showed the greatest zeal,"14283 likely providing the bulk of the ships. When they arrived in the waters around Miletus, the captains found a strong naval force assembled to confront them, anchored at the island of Ladé and protecting the approaches to the city. Miletus had called for help from her various allies—Chios, Lesbos, Samos, Teos, Priene, Erythræ, Phocæa, Myus—and managed to gather a fleet of over three hundred and fifty ships.14284 This time, Phoenicia didn't underestimate her opponent. Before battle, every effort was made to create discord among the allies and encourage the Greek captains to withdraw their forces or at least remain neutral during the fight.14285 These tactics had a significant effect, and when the attack finally commenced, two of the main Greek allies14286 retreated and headed home, leaving the remaining allies to face the battle alone. Nevertheless, despite this defection, the remaining ships fought fiercely, especially those from Chios,14287 and while the Phoenicians and their allies ultimately achieved a decisive victory, it came at a high cost. Persia regained its naval dominance in the Eastern Mediterranean; Phoenicia reasserted its status as the era's major sea power; however, they lost a significant number of their best ships and sailors, learning the hard lesson that to effectively confront the Greeks, they needed a considerable advantage in numbers—ideally about three to one.

Miletus soon fell after the victory of Ladé, and the Phoenician fleet was then employed for some time in chastising the islanders who had taken part in the revolt, and in reducing various towns upon the European shores of the Hellespont, the Propontis, and the Bosphorus, including Perinthus, Selymbria, and Byzantium.14288 Miltiades, the destined hero of Marathon, narrowly escaped capture at the hands of the Phoenicians at this time, as he fled from his government in the Thracian Chersonese to Athens. The vessel which bore him just escaped into the harbour of Imbrus; but his son, Metiochus, who was on board a worse sailer, was less fortunate. The Phoenicians captured him, and, learning who he was, conveyed him to Darius at Susa, where he was well treated and became a naturalised Persian.14289

Miletus quickly fell after the victory at Ladé, and the Phoenician fleet was then used for a while to punish the islanders who had joined the revolt and to conquer various towns along the European coasts of the Hellespont, the Propontis, and the Bosphorus, including Perinthus, Selymbria, and Byzantium.14288 Miltiades, the future hero of Marathon, narrowly escaped being captured by the Phoenicians during this time as he fled from his post in the Thracian Chersonese to Athens. The ship that carried him barely made it into the harbor of Imbrus, but his son, Metiochus, who was on a slower vessel, was not so lucky. The Phoenicians captured him and, realizing who he was, took him to Darius in Susa, where he was treated well and became a naturalized Persian.14289

After the Ionian revolt had been completely put down and avenged, the states subject to Persia, and the Phoenicians among them, enjoyed a brief period of repose. But soon the restless spirit which possessed all the earlier Persian monarchs incited Darius to carry his warlike enterprises into “fresh fields and pastures new.” From the eastern coast of the Ægean Sea he looked out towards a land possessing every attraction that soil or clime could offer, fertile, rich in minerals, and with many excellent harbours, well watered, abounding in corn and wine and oil, in wooded hillsides, and in productive plains. According to Herodotus,14290 he had already explored the strength and weakness of the region by means of a commission of Persian nobles, who had surveyed all the shores of Greece from the decks of Phoenician ships. The result was that he coveted the possession of the land thus made known to him, and came to a fixed resolution that he would add it to his territories.

After the Ionian revolt was completely crushed and avenged, the states under Persian rule, including the Phoenicians, experienced a short period of peace. But soon the restless ambition that drove previous Persian kings pushed Darius to pursue military campaigns in “fresh fields and pastures new.” From the eastern coast of the Aegean Sea, he looked out toward a land that had every appeal a place could offer: fertile, rich in minerals, with many excellent harbors, well-watered, overflowing with grain, wine, and oil, and featuring wooded hills and productive plains. According to Herodotus,14290 he had already assessed the strengths and weaknesses of the area through a group of Persian nobles who had surveyed all the shores of Greece from Phoenician ships. The outcome was that he desired to possess this land and was determined to add it to his empire.

There were two modes by which Greece might be approached from Asia. Bridges of boats could be thrown across the Bosphorus or the Hellespont, mere salt rivers, scarcely more formidable than the streams of the Euphrates and the Tigris. In this way Europe could be invaded in force, and the army sent across the straits, could pursue its way along the shore till it reached the rich plains of Thessaly, and from Thessaly passed into Boetia, Attica, and the Peloponnese. Or a fleet, with a land force on board, might proceed from Asia Minor across the Ægean, where the numerous islands, scattered at short intervals, seemed to have been arranged by nature as stepping-stones, whereby the adventurous denizens of either continent might cross easily into the other; and a landing might be suddenly effected near the very heart of Greece without a tenth part of the trouble that must be taken if the other line of route were pursued. In either case the attendance of a fleet would be necessary. If the more circuitous route were pursued, a powerful squadron must attend the march of the army along the shore, to convey its supplies; if the direct route were preferred, a still larger fleet would be necessary for the conveyance, not only of the supplies, but of the army itself. Darius gave a trial to each of the two plans. In the year B.C. 492 he sent a fleet and army under Mardonius by way of the Hellespont and the European coast; but this expedition met with severe disasters, the fleet being shattered by a storm off Mount Athos, and the land force greatly damaged by a night attack on the part of the Thracians.14291 Two years later he dispatched the famous expedition under Datis and Artaphernes, which took its course through the islands, and landed perhaps 200,000 men on the plain of Marathon,14292 but being there defeated by Miltiades, returned hastily to Asia by the sea route. The fleets employed on both these occasions were numerous,14293 and appear to have been collected from several of the Persian maritime states;14294 the proportion which the several contingents bore one to another is not stated, but there can be little doubt that the Phoenicians contributed the greater number. We have no details of the conduct of the Phoenicians on either occasion, beyond a casual notice that in the expedition of Datis and Artaphernes one of their vessels plundered the temple of Delium on the Boeotian coast opposite Chalcis, carrying off from it an image of Apollo plated with gold.14295 The superstition of Datis deprived them of this valuable booty; but we may safely conclude from the anecdote that, while rendering service to Persia, the keen-witted mariners took care not to neglect their own material interests.

There were two ways for Greece to be approached from Asia. Bridges of boats could be built across the Bosphorus or the Hellespont, ordinary salt water rivers, not much more challenging than the streams of the Euphrates and the Tigris. This way, Europe could be invaded in strength, and the army sent across the straits could travel along the shore until it reached the fertile plains of Thessaly, and from Thessaly move into Boeotia, Attica, and the Peloponnese. Alternatively, a fleet, with a land force on board, could come from Asia Minor across the Aegean, where the many islands, spaced closely together, seemed to be set up by nature as stepping-stones, allowing daring people from either continent to easily cross into the other; and a landing could be quickly made near the very heart of Greece with much less effort than if the other route was taken. In either case, a fleet would be essential. If the longer route was chosen, a strong squadron must accompany the army’s march along the shore to carry its supplies; if the direct route was preferred, a much larger fleet would be needed for transporting not just the supplies, but the army itself. Darius tried both plans. In 492 B.C., he sent a fleet and army under Mardonius via the Hellespont and the European coast; however, this expedition suffered heavy losses, as the fleet was wrecked by a storm off Mount Athos, and the land force was badly hurt by a nighttime attack from the Thracians.14291 Two years later, he sent the well-known expedition under Datis and Artaphernes, which traveled through the islands and landed about 200,000 men on the plain of Marathon,14292 but there they were beaten by Miltiades and hastily returned to Asia by sea. The fleets used on both occasions were large,14293 and appear to have been gathered from several of the Persian coastal states;14294 the ratio of the various contingents is not mentioned, but it is likely that the Phoenicians provided the majority. We have no specifics about the Phoenicians’ actions during either instance, apart from a brief mention that in Datis and Artaphernes' expedition, one of their ships looted the temple of Delium on the Boeotian coast across from Chalcis, taking away an image of Apollo covered in gold.14295 Datis's superstition cost them this valuable prize; however, we can infer from the story that, while serving Persia, the clever sailors made sure not to neglect their own financial gain.

In the third and greatest of the expeditions conducted by Persia against Greece, the Phoenicians are found to have played a very important and prominent part. Even before the expedition commenced, a call was made upon them in connection with it for services of an unusual character. The loss of the fleet of Mardonius off Mount Athos induced Xerxes to determine on cutting a ship-canal through the isthmus which joins Athos to the mainland; and his passion for great and striking achievements caused him to project the construction of a double bridge of boats across the Hellespont. Phoenician technical skill was invoked for the furtherance of both objects. At Athos they worked in conjunction with the maritime states generally, but showed an amount of engineering knowledge far in advance of their fellow-labourers. The others attempted to give perpendicular sides to their portions of the excavation, but found the sides continually fall in, and so (as Herodotus observes) “had double labour."14296 The Phoenicians alone knew that the sides must be sloped at an angle, and, calculating the proper slope aright, performed their share of the task without mishap. At the Hellespont the Phoenicians had for co-partners the Egyptians only, and the two nations appear to have displayed an equal ability.14297 Cables were passed from shore to shore, made taut by capstans and supported by an almost continuous line of boats; planks were then laid upon the cables, and covered with brushwood, while a thick layer of earth was placed upon the top. A solid causeway was thus formed, which was guarded on either side by bulwarks of such a height that the horses which crossed the bridge could not see over them; and thus the cavalry and the sumpter beasts passed from one continent to the other without a suspicion that they had ever had anything but terra firma under them. The structure served its purpose, but was not found strong enough to defy even for a year the forces of the winds and waves. Before the return of Xerxes, towards the close of B.C. 480, the autumnal gales had broken it up; and the army which accompanied him had to re-cross the strait in a number of separate ships.14298

In the third and most significant of Persia's campaigns against Greece, the Phoenicians played a crucial and prominent role. Even before the campaign began, they were called upon to provide unusual services. After the loss of Mardonius's fleet off Mount Athos, Xerxes decided to cut a ship canal through the isthmus connecting Athos to the mainland, driven by his desire for grand and impressive achievements. He also planned to build a double bridge of boats across the Hellespont. Phoenician technical expertise was requested to accomplish both tasks. At Athos, they collaborated with various maritime states but demonstrated engineering skills far beyond their peers. While the others tried to create vertical sides for their sections of the excavation, they constantly collapsed, resulting in what Herodotus notes as “double labor." The Phoenicians understood that the sides needed to be sloped and, having calculated the correct angle, completed their part of the project without incident. At the Hellespont, the Phoenicians only worked alongside the Egyptians, and both nations seemed to show equal capability. Cables were stretched from one shore to the other, tightened with capstans and supported by a nearly continuous line of boats; planks were laid on the cables and covered with brushwood, topped with a thick layer of earth. This created a solid causeway, flanked by walls high enough that the horses crossing the bridge couldn't see over them, allowing both cavalry and pack animals to cross without realizing they were on anything other than solid ground. The structure fulfilled its purpose but wasn’t sturdy enough to withstand the forces of wind and waves even for a year. Before Xerxes returned, towards the end of 480 B.C., the autumn storms destroyed it, forcing the army to retreat across the strait on several separate ships.

The fleet which Xerxes collected to accompany his land army and take part in his great expedition amounted, it is said, to a total of 1207 vessels.14299 Of these the Phoenician triremes were at once the most numerous and the best. While Egypt furnished 200 ships, Cyprus 150, Cilicia, Ionia, and the Hellespontine Greeks 100 each, and the other maritime nations, all together, 257, Phoenicia singly contributed no fewer than 300.14300 The superiority of the Phoenician vessels was sufficiently shown, first by the regatta at Abydos, which was won by a Sidonian trireme;14301 next, by the preference of Xerxes for Phoenician over other vessels;14302 and, thirdly, by the position assigned them at Salamis, where care was taken to pit them against the Athenians,14303 who were recognised as superior at sea to all the other Greeks. If the Phoenician prowess and naval skill did not succeed in averting defeat from the Persians, we must ascribe it first to the narrowness of the seas in which they had to engage the enemy; and, secondly, to the still greater prowess and skill of their principal antagonists, the Athenians, the Eginetans, and the Corinthians.

The fleet that Xerxes assembled to support his land army and participate in his major campaign reportedly totaled 1,207 ships. Of these, the Phoenician triremes were not only the most numerous but also the best. Egypt contributed 200 ships, Cyprus 150, Cilicia, Ionia, and the Hellespontine Greeks each provided 100, while the other maritime nations collectively added 257 ships, with Phoenicia alone supplying 300. The superiority of the Phoenician vessels was evident, first demonstrated by the race at Abydos, which a Sidonian trireme won; next, by Xerxes' preference for Phoenician ships over others; and finally, by the specific role assigned to them at Salamis, where they were matched against the Athenians, who were acknowledged as superior at sea compared to all other Greeks. If the Phoenician skill and naval expertise didn't prevent a defeat for the Persians, we must attribute this primarily to the narrowness of the seas where they confronted the enemy and, secondarily, to the even greater skill and capability of their main opponents, the Athenians, Eginetans, and Corinthians.

In the naval combats at Artemisium, the Egyptians, according to Herodotus,14304 were considered to have borne off the palm on the Persian side; but Diodorus assigns that honour to the Sidonians.14305 At Salamis the brunt of the conflict fell on the Phoenician contingent, which began the battle,14306 and for some time forced the Athenian squadron to beat a retreat, but was ultimately overpowered and forced to take to flight, after suffering great losses. A large number of the ships were sunk; several were taken by the Greeks; comparatively few escaped from the battle without serious injury.14307 Xerxes, however, who from his silver-footed throne on Mount Ægaleos surveyed the scene,14308 but, amid the general turmoil and confusion, could ill distinguish the conduct of the several contingents, enraged at the loss of the battle, and regarding the Phoenicians as answerable for the unhappy result, since they formed the nucleus and chief strength of the fleet, laid the whole blame of the failure upon them, and, on some of the captains appearing before him to excuse themselves, had them beheaded upon the spot.14309 At the same time he also threatened the other Phoenician commanders with his vengeance, and so alarmed them that, according to Diodorus,14310 they quitted the fleet and sailed away to Asia.

In the naval battles at Artemisium, the Egyptians, according to Herodotus,14304 were seen as the ones who excelled on the Persian side; however, Diodorus credits that honor to the Sidonians.14305 At Salamis, the main force of the conflict fell on the Phoenician group, which initiated the battle,14306 and for a while pushed the Athenian squadron to retreat, but in the end, they were overpowered and forced to escape, suffering heavy losses. Many of the ships were sunk; several were captured by the Greeks; and relatively few managed to leave the battle without significant damage.14307 Xerxes, however, who from his silver-footed throne on Mount Ægaleos watched the scene,14308 found it hard to distinguish the performance of the different groups amid the chaos and confusion. Furious at the defeat and blaming the Phoenicians, who were the core and main strength of the fleet, he held them entirely responsible for the failure. When some of the captains came before him to defend themselves, he had them executed on the spot.14309 At the same time, he also threatened the other Phoenician commanders with his wrath, frightening them so much that, according to Diodorus,14310 they abandoned the fleet and sailed back to Asia.

This harsh and unjust treatment seems to have led to an estrangement between the Persians and the foremost of the naval nations subject to them, which lasted for fifteen years. The Persians naturally distrusted those whom they had injured, and were unwilling to call them in to their aid. The Phoenicians probably brooded over their wrongs, and abstained from volunteering an assistance which they were not asked to furnish. The war between Persia and Greece continued, and was transferred from Europe to Asia, but no Phoenicians are mentioned as taking part in it. The Phoenician ships retired from Samos on the approach of the Greek fleet under Leotychides.14311 No Phoenicians fought at Mycale. None are heard of as engaged at Sestos, or Byzantium, or Eïon, or Doriscus, or even Phaselis. It was not until—in B.C. 465—the war passed from the Ægean to the southern coast of Asia Minor, and their dependency, Cyprus, was threatened, that the Phoenicians again appeared upon the scene, and mustered in strength to the support of their Persian suzerain.

This harsh and unfair treatment seems to have caused a rift between the Persians and the top naval nations under their control, lasting for fifteen years. The Persians naturally mistrusted those they had harmed and were reluctant to seek their help. The Phoenicians likely sulked over their grievances and chose not to offer assistance that they weren’t asked for. The war between Persia and Greece continued and moved from Europe to Asia, but no Phoenicians are mentioned as participating. The Phoenician ships left Samos when the Greek fleet under Leotychides approached. No Phoenicians fought at Mycale. None are noted as being involved at Sestos, Byzantium, Eïon, Doriscus, or even Phaselis. It wasn't until—around 465 B.C.—when the war moved from the Aegean to the southern coast of Asia Minor and threatened their dependency, Cyprus, that the Phoenicians returned to the scene and gathered strength to support their Persian overlord.

The Persian fleet which fought at the Eurymedon is said to have consisted of three hundred and forty vessels, drawn from the three subject nations of the Phoenicians, the Cyprians, and the Cilicians.14312 It was under the command of Tithraustes, a son of Xerxes. Cimon, who led the fleet of the Athenians and their allies, attacked it with a force of 250 triremes, of which Athens had furnished the greater number. The battle was contested with extreme obstinacy on both sides; but at length the Athenians prevailed, and besides destroying a large number of the enemy’s vessels, took as many as a hundred with their crews on board. At the same time a land victory was gained over the Persian troops. The double exploit was regarded as one of the most glorious in the annals of Greece, and was commemorated at Delos by a tablet with the following inscription:—14313

The Persian fleet that fought at the Eurymedon reportedly had three hundred and forty ships, sourced from the three subject nations of the Phoenicians, the Cyprians, and the Cilicians.14312 It was led by Tithraustes, a son of Xerxes. Cimon, who commanded the fleet of the Athenians and their allies, attacked with a force of 250 triremes, of which Athens provided the majority. The battle was fiercely fought by both sides; however, in the end, the Athenians won and destroyed a significant number of enemy ships, capturing around a hundred with their crews onboard. At the same time, a land victory was achieved over the Persian troops. This double triumph was celebrated as one of the most glorious in Greek history and was memorialized at Delos with a tablet bearing the following inscription:—14313

     Since first the sea Europe from Asia severed,
     \    And Mars to rage ‘mid humankind began,
     Never was such a blow as this delivered
     \    On land and sea at once by mortal man.
     These heroes did to death a host of Medes
     \    Near Cyprus, and then captured with their crews
     \    Five score Phoenician vessels; at the news
     All Asia groaned, hard hit by such brave deeds.
     Since the sea first separated Europe from Asia,  
     And Mars began to rage among humankind,  
     There has never been a blow like this struck  
     On both land and sea by a mortal man.  
     These heroes killed a huge number of Medes  
     Near Cyprus, and then captured with their crews  
     One hundred Phoenician vessels; at the news  
     All Asia groaned, greatly affected by such brave acts.  

It is scarcely necessary to follow further in detail the services which Phoenicia rendered to Persia as her submissive and attached ally. For the space of about seventy-five years from the date of the engagement at the Eurymedon (B.C. 465-390), the Phoenicians continued to hold the first place among the Persian naval states, and to render their mistress effective help in all her naval enterprises. They protected Cyprus and Egypt from the Athenian attacks, bore their part in the war with Amyrtæus and Inaros, and more than once inflicted severe blows upon the Athenian navy.14314 It was his command of a Phoenician fleet amounting to nearly a hundred and fifty triremes which enabled Tissaphernes to play so influential a part in Asia Minor during the later years of the Peloponnesian war. It was the presence of their ships at Cnidus which, in B.C. 394, turned the scale between Athens and Sparta, enabling the Athenians to recover the naval supremacy which they had lost at Ægos-Potami. It was the appearance of a Phoenician fleet in Greek waters14315 which, in the following year, gave an opportunity to the Athenians to rebuild their “Long Walls,” alarmed Sparta for her own safety, and extorted from her fears—in B.C. 387—the agreement known as “the Peace of Antalcidas.” Persia owed to her Phoenician subjects the glory of recovering complete possession of Asia Minor, and of being accepted as a sort of final arbiter in the quarrels of the Grecian states. From B.C. 465 to B.C. 392 Phoenicia served Persia with rare fidelity, never hesitating to lend her aid, and never showing the least inclination to revolt.

It’s hardly necessary to go into more detail about the contributions that Phoenicia made to Persia as her loyal and devoted ally. For about seventy-five years from the time of the engagement at the Eurymedon (B.C. 465-390), the Phoenicians remained the top naval power among the Persian states and provided substantial support for all of Persia's naval endeavors. They defended Cyprus and Egypt from Athenian attacks, participated in the conflict with Amyrtæus and Inaros, and inflicted serious damage on the Athenian navy more than once.14314 It was Tissaphernes’ command of a Phoenician fleet consisting of nearly one hundred and fifty triremes that allowed him to play a significant role in Asia Minor during the later years of the Peloponnesian War. The presence of their ships at Cnidus in B.C. 394 tipped the balance between Athens and Sparta, allowing the Athenians to regain the naval dominance they had lost at Ægos-Potami. The arrival of a Phoenician fleet in Greek waters14315 the following year gave the Athenians a chance to rebuild their “Long Walls,” raised concerns for Sparta regarding her own safety, and forced her to agree—in B.C. 387—to what is known as “the Peace of Antalcidas.” Persia owed its Phoenician subjects the honor of regaining full control of Asia Minor and being recognized as a kind of final mediator in the disputes of the Greek states. From B.C. 465 to B.C. 392, Phoenicia served Persia with remarkable loyalty, always willing to help and showing no signs of wanting to rebel.

It was probably under these circumstances, when Athens owed the recovery of her greatness in no small measure to the Phoenicians, that those relations of friendship and intimacy were established between the two peoples of which we have evidence in several inscriptions. Phoenicians settled in Attica, particularly at Phalerum and the Piræus, and had their own places of worship and interment. Six sepulchral inscriptions have been found, either in Athens itself or at the Piræus,14316 five of them bilingual,14317 which mark the interment in Attic soil of persons whose nationality was Phoenician. They had monuments erected over them, generally of some pretension, which must have obtained as much respect as the native tombstones, since otherwise they could not have endured to our day. There is also at the Piræus an altar,14318 which a Phoenician must have erected and dedicated to a Phoenician god, whom he worshipped on Attic soil apparently without let or hindrance. The god’s name is given as “Askum-Adar,” a form which does not elsewhere recur, but which is thought to designate the god elsewhere called Sakon, who corresponded to the Grecian Hermes.14319 Moreover, there is evidence of the Phoenicians having worshipped two other deities in their Attic abodes, one a god who corresponded to the Greek Poseidon and the Roman Neptune, the other the Babylonian and Assyrian Nergal. Among the lost orations of Deniarchus was one delivered by that orator on the occasion of the suit between the people of Phalerum and the Phoenician inhabitants of the place with respect to the priesthood of Poseidon;14320 and a sepulchral monument at the Piræus was erected to Asepta, daughter of Esmun-sillem, of Sidon, by Itten-bel, son of Esmun-sibbeh, high priest of the god Nergal.14321 It appears further from the Greek inscription, edited by Böckh,14322 that about this time (B.C. 390-370) a decree was promulgated by the Council {bonle} of Athens whereby the relation of Proxenia was established between Strato (Abd-astartus), king of Sidon, and the Athenian people, and all Sidonians sojourning in Attica were exempted from the tax usually charged upon foreign settlers, from the obligation of the Choregia, and from all other contributions to the state.

It was likely during this time, when Athens owed a significant part of her resurgence to the Phoenicians, that friendly and close relations were formed between the two peoples, as shown by various inscriptions. Phoenicians settled in Attica, especially at Phalerum and the Piraeus, and had their own places of worship and burial. Six burial inscriptions have been discovered, either in Athens itself or at the Piraeus, five of which are bilingual, marking the burial in Attic land of individuals of Phoenician nationality. They had monuments erected in their honor, generally of considerable significance, which must have earned as much respect as local gravestones, as otherwise, they would not have lasted to this day. There is also an altar at the Piraeus, which a Phoenician must have built and dedicated to a Phoenician god, whom he worshipped in Attica apparently without any restrictions. The god’s name is given as “Askum-Adar,” a unique form that doesn’t appear elsewhere, but is believed to refer to the god known as Sakon, who was equivalent to the Greek Hermes. Additionally, there is evidence that the Phoenicians worshipped two other deities in their Attic homes, one being a god akin to the Greek Poseidon and Roman Neptune, and the other the Babylonian and Assyrian Nergal. Among the lost speeches of Deniarchus was one delivered by him regarding a dispute between the people of Phalerum and the Phoenician residents concerning the priesthood of Poseidon, and a burial monument at the Piraeus was erected to Asepta, daughter of Esmun-sillem of Sidon, by Itten-bel, son of Esmun-sibbeh, high priest of the god Nergal. Furthermore, it appears from the Greek inscription, edited by Böckh, that around this time (B.C. 390-370) a decree was issued by the Council of Athens establishing the relationship of Proxenia between Strato (Abd-astartus), king of Sidon, and the Athenian people, granting all Sidonians residing in Attica an exemption from the tax typically imposed on foreign settlers, the obligation of the Choregia, and all other contributions to the state.

The power of Persia began about this time to decline, and the Phoenicians seem to have wavered in their allegiance. In B.C. 406 or 405 Egypt shook off the Persian yoke, and established her independence under a native sovereign.14323 Soon afterwards, probably in B.C. 392 or 391, Evagoras, a Cypriot Greek, who claimed descent from Teucer, inaugurated a revolution at Salamis in Cyprus, where he slew the Phoenician monarch, Abdemon, who held his throne under Persia, and, himself mounting the throne, proceeded to reduce to subjection the whole island.14324 Vast efforts were made to crush him, but for ten years he defied the power of Persia, and maintained himself as an independent monarch.14325 Even when finally he made his submission, it was under an express stipulation that he should retain his royal dignity, and be simply bound to pay his tribute regularly, and to render such obedience as subject kings commonly paid to their suzerain.14326

The power of Persia started to decline around this time, and the Phoenicians seemed to hesitate in their loyalty. In 406 or 405 B.C., Egypt broke free from Persian control and established its independence under a local ruler. Soon after, likely in 392 or 391 B.C., Evagoras, a Greek from Cyprus who claimed to be a descendant of Teucer, sparked a revolution in Salamis, Cyprus. He killed the Phoenician king, Abdemon, who ruled under Persia, and took the throne for himself, aiming to conquer the entire island. Huge efforts were made to defeat him, but for ten years he resisted the power of Persia and maintained his status as an independent king. Even when he eventually submitted, it was with a specific agreement that he would keep his royal status, only required to pay his tribute on time and provide the usual obedience that vassal kings give to their overlords.

In the course of his resistance to Persia, it is beyond question that Evagoras received a certain amount of support from Phoenicia; but the circumstances under which the support was given was doubtful. According to Isocrates,14327 he equipped a large fleet, and attacked the Phoenicians on the mainland with so much vigour as even to take the great city of Tyre by assault; but Diodorus says nothing of the attack, and it is conjectured that the contagion of revolt, which certainly affected, more or less, Cyprus, Cilicia, Caria, and some of the Syrian Arabs,14328 spread also thus early to Phoenicia, and that “the surrender of Tyre was a voluntary defection."14329 In that case, we must view Phoenicia, or at any rate a portion of it, as having detached itself from Persia, about B.C. 390, sixty years before the final break-up of the Empire.

During his fight against Persia, it's clear that Evagoras got some support from Phoenicia, but the details of that support are uncertain. According to Isocrates, he built a large fleet and attacked the Phoenicians on the mainland so fiercely that he even captured the great city of Tyre; however, Diodorus doesn’t mention this attack, and it’s believed that the wave of rebellion that definitely reached parts of Cyprus, Cilicia, Caria, and some Syrian Arabs also spread to Phoenicia early on, suggesting that “the surrender of Tyre was a voluntary defection." In that case, we should consider Phoenicia, or at least part of it, as having separated from Persia around 390 B.C., sixty years before the total collapse of the Empire.

But the disaffection of Phoenicia does not become open and patent until about thirty years later. The decline of Persia had continued. In B.C. 375 an attempt to recover Egypt, for which a vast armament had been collected under Pharnabazus and Iphicrates, completely failed.14330 Nine years afterwards, in B.C. 366, the revolt of the satraps began. First Ariobarzanes, satrap of Phrygia, renounced his allegiance, and defended himself with success against Autophradutes, satrap of Lydia, and Mausolus, native king of Caria under Persia. Then Aspis, who held a part of Cappadocia, revolted and maintained himself by the help of the Pisidians, until he was overpowered by Datames. Next Datames himself, satrap of the rest of Cappadocia, understanding that the mind of the Persian king was poisoned against him, made a treaty with Ariobarzanes, and assumed an independent attitude in his own province. Finally, in B.C. 362, there seems to have been something like a general revolt of the western provinces, in which the satraps of Mysia, Phrygia, and Lydia, Mausolus prince of Caria, and the peoples of Lycia, Pisidia, Pamphylia, Cilicia, and Syria participated.14331 Then, if not earlier, Phoenicia openly threw in her lot with the disaffected;14332 refused her tribute like the others, and joined her forces with theirs. Nor, when the rebellion collapsed, did she at once return to her allegiance. When Tachos, native king of Egypt, in B.C. 361, having secured the services of Agesilaus and Chabrias, advanced boldly into Syria, with the object of enlarging his own dominions at the expense of Persia, he was received with favour by the Phoenicians, who were quite willing to form a portion of his empire. But the rebellion of Nectanebo forced Tachos to relinquish his projects,14333 and the dominion over the Phoenician cities seems to have reverted to Persia without any effort on her part.

But the discontent in Phoenicia doesn't become clear and obvious until around thirty years later. The decline of Persia continued. In 375 B.C., an attempt to regain Egypt, for which a large army had been gathered under Pharnabazus and Iphicrates, completely failed.14330 Nine years later, in 366 B.C., the revolt of the satraps began. First, Ariobarzanes, the satrap of Phrygia, declared his independence and successfully defended himself against Autophradutes, the satrap of Lydia, and Mausolus, the native king of Caria under Persia. Then Aspis, who controlled part of Cappadocia, revolted and held his ground with the help of the Pisidians until he was defeated by Datames. Next, Datames himself, the satrap of the rest of Cappadocia, realizing that the Persian king was turning against him, made a deal with Ariobarzanes and took an independent stance in his province. Finally, in 362 B.C., there seems to have been a sort of general revolt in the western provinces, involving the satraps of Mysia, Phrygia, and Lydia, Mausolus, the prince of Caria, and the people of Lycia, Pisidia, Pamphylia, Cilicia, and Syria.14331 Then, if not earlier, Phoenicia openly sided with the discontented;14332 refused to pay tribute like the others and joined forces with them. Furthermore, when the rebellion ended, she didn’t immediately return to her loyalty. When Tachos, the native king of Egypt, advanced boldly into Syria in 361 B.C. after securing the support of Agesilaus and Chabrias, aiming to expand his own territory at Persia's expense, he was welcomed by the Phoenicians, who were eager to be part of his empire. But the rebellion of Nectanebo forced Tachos to give up his plans,14333 and control over the Phoenician cities seemed to return to Persia without any effort on their part.

In this condition matters remained till about the year B.C. 351, when Sidon, feeling herself aggrieved by the conduct of the Persian authorities at Tripolis,14334 where the general assembly of the Phoenicians held its meetings, boldly raised the standard of revolt against Persia under Tennes, or Tabnit II., and induced the Phoenicians generally to declare themselves independent. Alliance was at once formed with the Egyptian king, Nekht-nebf, or Nectanebo II., who sent a body of 4,000 Greek mercenaries, under Mentor the Rhodian, to the aid of Tennes.14335 Hostilities commenced by the Phoenicians expelling or massacring the Persian garrisons, devastating the royal park or paradise, and burning the stores of forage collected for the use of the Persian cavalry.14336 An attempt made by two satraps—Belesys of Syria and Mazæus of Cilicia—to crush the revolt was completely defeated by Tennes, with the aid of Mentor and his Greeks, who gained a decisive victory over the satraps, and drove the Persians out of Phoenicia.14337 Cyprus then joined the rebels. The nine principal cities made common cause, expelled the Persians, and declared themselves free states, under their respective native kings.14338 Ochus, the Persian king, was at last roused to exert himself. Collecting an army of 300,000 foot and 30,000 horse, supported by 300 triremes and 500 transports or provision-ships,14339 he proceeded to the west in person, determined to inflict condign punishment on the rebels, and to recover to the empire, not only Cyprus and Phoenicia, but also the long-lost Egypt.

In this situation, things stayed the same until around 351 B.C. when Sidon, feeling wronged by the actions of the Persian authorities in Tripolis, where the general assembly of the Phoenicians met, boldly raised a revolt against Persia led by Tennes, or Tabnit II., and encouraged the Phoenicians to declare their independence. They quickly formed an alliance with the Egyptian king, Nekht-nebf, or Nectanebo II., who sent 4,000 Greek mercenaries, led by Mentor the Rhodian, to support Tennes. Hostilities began with the Phoenicians expelling or killing the Persian garrisons, destroying the royal park, and burning the supplies gathered for the Persian cavalry. An attempt by two satraps—Belesys of Syria and Mazæus of Cilicia—to crush the revolt was completely defeated by Tennes, with help from Mentor and his Greeks, who won a decisive victory over the satraps and drove the Persians out of Phoenicia. Cyprus then joined the rebels. The nine main cities united, expelled the Persians, and declared themselves free states under their own native kings. Ochus, the Persian king, was finally motivated to take action. Gathering an army of 300,000 infantry and 30,000 cavalry, supported by 300 triremes and 500 transport or supply ships, he personally headed west, determined to punish the rebels and reclaim not only Cyprus and Phoenicia but also the long-lost Egypt.

Tennes, on his part, had done his best in the way of preparations for defence. He had collected a fleet of above a hundred ships—triremes and quinqueremes,14340 the latter now heard of for the first time in Asiatic warfare. He had strengthened the fortifications of Sidon, surrounding the town with a triple ditch of great width and depth, and considerably raising the height of the walls.14341 He had hired Greek mercenaries to the number of six thousand, raising thus the number in his service to ten thousand in all, had armed and drilled the most active and athletic of the citizens, and had collected vast stores of provisions, armour, and weapons. But the advance of the Persian monarch at the head of so large a force filled Tennes with dismay and despair. Successful resistance was, he thought, impossible; and with a selfishness and a cowardice that must ever make him rank among the most infamous of men, he resolved, if possible, to purchase his own pardon of the King by delivering to his vengeance the entire body of his fellow-countrymen. Accordingly, after handing over to him a hundred of the principal citizens, who were immediately transfixed with javelins, he concerted measures with Mentor for receiving the Persians within the walls. While the arrangements were proceeding, five hundred of the remaining citizens issued forth from one of the gates of the town, with boughs of supplication, as a deputation to implore the mercy of Ochus, but only to suffer the same fate as their fellow-townsmen. The Persians were then received within the walls; but the citizens, understanding what their fate was to be, resolved to anticipate it. They had already burnt their ships, to prevent any desertion. Now they shut themselves up, with their wives and children, in their houses, and applying the torch to their dwellings lighted up a general conflagration. More than forty thousand persons perished in the flames. Ochus sold the ruins at a high price to speculators, who calculated on reimbursing themselves by the treasures which they might dig out from among the ashes. As for Tennes, it is satisfactory to find that a just vengeance overtook him. The treachery which he had employed towards others was shown also to himself. Ochus, who had given him a solemn promise that he would spare his life, no sooner found that there was nothing more to be gained by letting him live, than he relentlessly put him to death.14342

Tennes had done all he could to prepare for defense. He gathered a fleet of over a hundred ships—triremes and quinqueremes, the latter now making their first appearance in warfare in Asia. He reinforced the fortifications of Sidon, surrounding the city with a wide and deep triple ditch, and raised the walls significantly. He hired six thousand Greek mercenaries, bringing his total forces to ten thousand. He armed and trained the most active citizens and stockpiled a large amount of food, armor, and weapons. However, the approach of the Persian king with such a massive army filled Tennes with fear and hopelessness. He thought successful resistance was impossible and, driven by selfishness and cowardice that would forever mark him as one of the most notorious traitors, decided to try to buy his pardon from the king by betraying his fellow countrymen to the king's wrath. Accordingly, after handing over a hundred of the main citizens, who were immediately killed with javelins, he worked out a plan with Mentor to let the Persians enter the city. As the arrangements were being made, five hundred of the remaining citizens went out through one of the town's gates, carrying branches as a gesture of supplication, to plead for mercy from Ochus, only to face the same fate as their fellow townsfolk. The Persians were welcomed inside the walls, but the citizens, realizing their impending doom, decided to take action first. They had already burned their ships to stop any chance of fleeing. Now, they locked themselves in their homes with their wives and children, set their houses on fire, and started a widespread blaze. Over forty thousand people died in the flames. Ochus sold the ruins for a high price to speculators, who hoped to profit by digging through the ashes for treasure. As for Tennes, it is satisfying to note that he faced just retribution. The betrayal he used against others was returned to him. Ochus, who had sworn to spare his life, quickly decided there was no benefit in keeping him alive and ruthlessly had him killed.

No further resistance was made by the Phoenician cities. Ochus marched on against Egypt and effected its reconquest.14343 The Cyprian revolt was put down by the Prince of Caria, Istricus.14344 A calm, prelude to the coming storm, settled down upon Persia; and Phoenicia participated in the general tranquillity. The various communities, exhausted by their recent efforts, and disappointed with the result, laid aside their political aspirations, and fell back upon their commercial instincts. Trade once more flourished. Sidon rose again from her ashes, and recovered a certain amount of prosperity. She held the coast from Leontopolis to Ornithonpolis, and possessed also the dependency of Dor;14345 but she had lost Sarepta to Tyre,14346 which stepped into the foremost place among the cities on her fall, and retained it until destroyed by Alexander. The other towns which still continued to be of some importance were Aradus, and Gebal or Byblus. These cities, like Tyre and Sidon, retained their native kings,14347 who ruled their several states with little interference from the Persians. The line of monarchs may be traced at Sidon for five generations, from the first Esmunazar, who probably reigned about B.C. 460-440, through three generations and four kings, to the second Strato, the contemporary of Alexander.14348 The first Esmunazar was succeeded by his son, Tabnit, about B.C. 440. Tabnit married his sister, Am-Ashtoreth, priestess of Ashtoreth, and had issue, two sons, Esmunazar II., whose tomb was found near Sidon by M. de Vogüé in the year 1855, and Strato I. Esmunazar II. is thought to have died about B.C. 400, and to have been succeeded by his brother Strato, the Proxenus of Athens, who reigned till B.C. 361. On Strato’s death, his son, the second Tabnit—known to the Greeks as Tennes—mounted the throne, and reigned till B.C. 345, when he was put to death by Ochus. A second Strato, the son of Tennes, then became king, and retained his sovereignty till after the battle of Issus14349 (B.C. 333).

No further resistance was shown by the Phoenician cities. Ochus advanced into Egypt and successfully reclaimed it.14343 The Prince of Caria, Istricus, suppressed the Cyprian revolt.14344 A calm, setting the stage for the upcoming storm, settled over Persia, and Phoenicia joined in the general peace. The various communities, drained from their recent efforts and disheartened by the outcomes, put aside their political ambitions and reverted to their commercial instincts. Trade once again thrived. Sidon rose from its ruins and regained some prosperity. It controlled the coast from Leontopolis to Ornithonpolis and also had the dependency of Dor;14345 however, it lost Sarepta to Tyre,14346 which took the lead among the cities after Sidon's decline and held it until it was destroyed by Alexander. The other towns that remained significant were Aradus and Gebal or Byblus. Like Tyre and Sidon, these cities maintained their native kings,14347 who governed their individual states with minimal interference from the Persians. The line of kings in Sidon can be traced for five generations, starting with the first Esmunazar, who likely ruled around 460-440 B.C., through three generations and four kings, to the second Strato, who was a contemporary of Alexander.14348 The first Esmunazar was succeeded by his son, Tabnit, around 440 B.C. Tabnit married his sister, Am-Ashtoreth, the priestess of Ashtoreth, and had two sons: Esmunazar II., whose tomb was discovered near Sidon by M. de Vogüé in 1855, and Strato I. Esmunazar II. is believed to have died around 400 B.C. and was succeeded by his brother Strato, the Proxenus of Athens, who ruled until 361 B.C. After Strato’s death, his son, the second Tabnit—known to the Greeks as Tennes—ascended to the throne and ruled until 345 B.C., when he was killed by Ochus. A second Strato, the son of Tennes, then became king and held his rule until after the battle of Issus14349 (333 B.C.).





6. Phoenicia in the time of Alexander the Great (B.C. 333-323)

     Alexander’s invasion of Asia—Preparations made to resist
     it, insufficient—What should have been done—Movements of
     Memnon in B.C. 333—His death—Paralysis of the Persian
     fleet—Attack on Phoenicia after Issus—Submission of all
     the cities but Tyre—Siege of Tyre—Fall of the city—Cruel
     treatment of the inhabitants.
     Alexander's invasion of Asia—Preparations made to resist it were insufficient—What should have been done—Movements of Memnon in B.C. 333—His death—Paralysis of the Persian fleet—Attack on Phoenicia after Issus—Submission of all the cities except Tyre—Siege of Tyre—Fall of the city—Cruel treatment of the inhabitants.

The invasion of Asia by Alexander the Great, though it found the Persians unready, was by no means of the nature of a surprise. The design had been openly proclaimed by Philip in the year B.C. 338, when he forced the Grecian States to appoint him generalissimo of their armies, which he promised to lead to the conquest of the East.14350 Darius Codomannus had thus ample warning of what he had to expect, and abundant opportunity to make the fullest preparations for defence. During the years B.C. 338 and 337, while Philip was still alive, he did do something towards organising defensive measures, collected troops and ships, and tried to foment discontent and encourage anti-Macedonian movements in Greece.14351 But the death of Philip by the dagger of Pausanias caused him most imprudently to relax his efforts, to consider the danger past, and to suspend the operations, which he had commenced, until he should see whether Alexander had either the will or the power to carry into effect his father’s projects. The events of the years B.C. 336 and 335, the successes of Alexander in Thrace, Illyria, and Boeotia,14352 woke him from his fool’s paradise to some sense of the realities of the situation. In B.C. 335 the preparations for defence were resumed. Orders were issued to the satraps of Phrygia and Lydia to draw together their troops towards the north-western corner of Asia Minor, and to take the offensive against the Macedonian force which had crossed the straits before Philip’s death. The Persian garrisons in this quarter were strongly reinforced with troops of a good quality, drawn from the remoter provinces of the empire, as from Persia Proper, Media, Hyrcania, and Bactria. Notice was given to the Phoenicians to prepare a considerable fleet, and hold it in readiness for active service. Above all, Memnon the Rhodian was given a command on the Asiatic seaboard, and entrusted with a body of five thousand Greek mercenaries, which he was empowered to use at his discretion.14353

The invasion of Asia by Alexander the Great, while it caught the Persians off guard, was not exactly a surprise. Philip made his intentions clear back in 338 B.C. when he forced the Greek states to name him the commander of their armies, which he promised to lead in the conquest of the East.14350 Darius Codomannus had ample warning of what was coming and had plenty of chances to make thorough preparations for defense. In 338 and 337 B.C., while Philip was still alive, he did take some steps toward organizing defense, gathering troops and ships, and trying to stir up unrest and support anti-Macedonian movements in Greece.14351 However, after Philip was assassinated by Pausanias, Darius foolishly let his efforts slide, thinking the danger had passed, and paused his plans until he could see if Alexander had the desire or ability to follow through on his father's agenda. The events of 336 and 335 B.C., including Alexander's victories in Thrace, Illyria, and Boeotia,14352 jolted him out of his naive optimism and made him aware of the real situation. In 335 B.C., preparations for defense were restarted. Orders were sent to the satraps of Phrygia and Lydia to gather their troops in the north-western corner of Asia Minor and take the offensive against the Macedonian forces that had crossed the straits before Philip's death. The Persian garrisons in that area were strengthened with high-quality troops from the more distant provinces, including Persia Proper, Media, Hyrcania, and Bactria. The Phoenicians were notified to prepare a substantial fleet and keep it ready for action. Most importantly, Memnon the Rhodian was given command of the Asiatic coastline and assigned a group of five thousand Greek mercenaries to use as he saw fit.14353

But these steps, though in the right direction, were quite inadequate under the circumstances. Everything that was possible should have been done to prevent Alexander from crossing to Asia in force. The fleet should not only have been commanded to hold itself in readiness, but should have been brought up. Four hundred or five hundred vessels,14354 from Phoenicia, Cyprus, Egypt, Lycia, and Cilicia, should have been moved into the northern Egean and the Propontis, and have kept watch on every Grecian port. Alexander was unable to muster for the transport of his army across the Straits a larger number than 160 triremes.14355 Persia should have met them with a fleet three times as large. Had Memnon been given from the first a free hand at sea, instead of satrapial power on land, it is quite conceivable that the invasion of Asia by Alexander might have proved as abortive an enterprise as the contemplated invasion of England by Napoleon.

But these steps, while in the right direction, were clearly not enough given the circumstances. Everything possible should have been done to stop Alexander from launching a strong attack on Asia. The fleet should not only have been ordered to be ready, but should have been mobilized as well. Four hundred or five hundred ships, 14354 from Phoenicia, Cyprus, Egypt, Lycia, and Cilicia, should have been moved into the northern Aegean and the Sea of Marmara, keeping an eye on every Greek port. Alexander could only gather about 160 triremes for transporting his army across the Straits.14355 Persia should have confronted them with a fleet three times that size. If Memnon had been given full control at sea from the beginning, instead of just governing land, it’s entirely possible that Alexander's invasion of Asia could have ended up as unsuccessful as Napoleon's intended invasion of England.

As it was, the fleet of Persia, composed mainly of Phoenician vessels, did not appear in the northern Egean waters until some weeks after Alexander had transported his grand army into Asia, and fought at the Granicus, so that when it arrived it was of comparatively little service. Too late even to save Miletus, it had to be a tame spectator of the siege and capture of that important town.14356 It was then withdrawn to Halicarnassus, where its presence greatly helped the defence, but not to the extent of wholly baffling the besiegers. Halicarnassus fell, like Miletus, after a while, being entered from the land side; but the fleet saved the troops, the stores, and the inhabitants.14357

As it turned out, the Persian fleet, mainly made up of Phoenician ships, didn’t show up in the northern Aegean until a few weeks after Alexander had moved his large army into Asia and fought at the Granicus. By the time it arrived, it was relatively useless. It was too late to save Miletus and had to watch as that important city was besieged and captured. 14356 The fleet was then pulled back to Halicarnassus, where its presence significantly aided the defense, but it couldn’t completely deter the attackers. Halicarnassus eventually fell, just like Miletus, being taken from the land side, but the fleet managed to save the troops, supplies, and residents.14357

During the early part of the ensuing year, B.C. 333, while Alexander was engaged in conquering the interior of Asia Minor, the Persian fleet under Memnon at last took the aggressive, and, advancing northwards, employed itself in establishing Persian influence over the whole of the Egean, and especially in reducing the important islands of Chios and Lesbos.14358 Memnon was now in full command. Fortune smiled on him; and it seemed more than probable that the war would be, at least partially, transferred into Greece, where the Spartans only waited for Memnon’s appearance to commence an anti-Macedonian movement. The presence of a powerful fleet in Greek waters, and Memnon’s almost unlimited command of Persian gold, might in a short time have raised such a flame in Greece as to necessitate Alexander’s return in order to extinguish it.14359 The invasion of Asia might have been arrested in mid course; Alexander might have proved as powerless as Agesilaus to effect any great change in the relations of the two continents; but, at the critical moment, the sudden and unexpected death of the Rhodian chief cast all these hopes to the ground,14360 and deprived Persia of her last chance of baffling the invader.

During the early part of the next year, 333 BC, while Alexander was busy conquering the interior of Asia Minor, the Persian fleet under Memnon finally took the initiative. They moved north and worked on establishing Persian influence over the entire Aegean, especially aiming to take control of the important islands of Chios and Lesbos.14358 Memnon was now fully in charge. Luck was on his side, and it seemed highly likely that the war would at least partly shift to Greece, where the Spartans were just waiting for Memnon’s arrival to start an anti-Macedonian movement. The presence of a strong fleet in Greek waters, along with Memnon’s nearly unlimited access to Persian wealth, could have sparked a significant uprising in Greece, necessitating Alexander's return to put it out.14359 The invasion of Asia might have been halted midway; Alexander could have found himself as powerless as Agesilaus to make any significant changes in the relations between the two continents. However, at this critical moment, the sudden and unexpected death of the Rhodian leader dashed all these hopes,14360 leaving Persia without its last chance to thwart the invader.

Thus, first by mismanagement and then by an unhappy accident, the Phoenicians were precluded from rendering Persia any effective service in the time of her great necessity. Wiser than Napoleon, Alexander would not contest the sovereignty of the seas with the great naval power of the day, and he even, when he once felt himself strongly lodged in Asia, disbanded his naval force,14361 that so it might be impossible for disaster at sea to tarnish his prestige. He was convinced that Asia could be won by the land force which he had been permitted to disembark on its shores, and probably anticipated the transfer of naval supremacy which almost immediately followed on the victory of Issus. The complete defeat of the great army of Codomannus, and its retirement on the Euphrates,14362 left the entire seaboard of Syria and Phoenicia open to him. He resolved at once to take advantage of the opportunity, and to detach from Persia the three countries of Phoenicia, Egypt, and Cyprus. If he could transfer to himself the navies of these powers, his maritime supremacy would be incontestable. He would render his communications with Macedonia absolutely secure. He would have nothing to fear from revolt or disturbance at home, however deeply he might plunge into the Asiatic continent. If the worst happened to him in Asia, he would have assured himself a safe return.

Thus, first due to poor management and then by an unfortunate accident, the Phoenicians couldn't provide Persia with any meaningful support when it was most needed. Unlike Napoleon, Alexander wouldn't challenge the naval dominance of the day, and once he felt firmly established in Asia, he even disbanded his naval force, 14361 so that no disaster at sea could damage his reputation. He believed that he could conquer Asia with the land forces he had sent ashore and likely expected that naval control would soon follow the victory at Issus. The complete defeat of the massive army of Codomannus, which retreated to the Euphrates, 14362 opened up the entire coastline of Syria and Phoenicia to him. He decided immediately to take advantage of this opportunity and to separate the three regions of Phoenicia, Egypt, and Cyprus from Persia. If he could gain control of the navies of these powers, his naval supremacy would be undeniable. This would ensure secure communication with Macedonia. He wouldn't have to worry about uprisings or disturbances at home, no matter how far he ventured into Asia. Even in the worst-case scenario in Asia, he would have guaranteed himself a safe return.

Accordingly, no sooner was the retreat of Darius upon the line of the Euphrates, and his abandonment of Syria, ascertained, than Alexander, after despatching a detachment of his army to Damascus, marched in person into Phoenicia.14363 The Phoenicians were placed between two dangers. On the one hand, Alexander might ravage their territory, capture and pillage their cities, massacre or sell for slaves the greater portion of their citizens, and destroy their very existence as a people; on the other hand, Darius held as hostages for their fidelity the crews and captains of their triremes, which formed a portion of his fleet, and had on board a large number of their chief men, and even some of their kings.14364 It was impossible, however, to temporise; a choice had necessarily to be made; and when Alexander entered Phoenicia, the cities, in almost every case, decided on submitting to him. First Strato, the son of Ger-astartus, king of Aradus, who was serving on board the Phoenician contingent to the Persian fleet, went out to meet Alexander, and surrendered into his hands the four cities of Aradus, Marathus, Sigon, and Mariamme.14365 Then Byblus, whose king was also absent with the fleet, opened its gates to the Macedonians.14366 Next Sidon, mindful of her recent wrongs, sent envoys to invite Alexander’s approach, and joyfully embraced his cause.14367 Even Tyre nominally made submission, and declared itself ready to obey Alexander’s commands;14368 and the transfer of Phoenicia to the side of Alexander might have been made without bloodshed, had the Macedonian monarch been content to leave their island city, which was their true capital, and their pride and glory, unmolested. But Alexander could not brook anything that in any degree savoured of opposition to his will. When therefore, on his expressing a wish to sacrifice to Melkarth in their island town, the Tyrians declined to receive him within the walls, and suggested that his pious design might be sufficiently accomplished by his making his intended offering in Palæ-Tyrus, where there was a temple of the same god, which was older (they said) and more venerable than their own, Alexander’s pride was touched, and he became violently enraged.14369 Dismissing the envoys with angry threats, he at once began preparations for an attack upon the town.

As soon as Darius retreated to the Euphrates and gave up Syria, Alexander sent part of his army to Damascus and personally marched into Phoenicia.14363 The Phoenicians faced two threats. On one side, Alexander could devastate their land, capture and loot their cities, massacre or enslave many of their people, and threaten their existence as a culture. On the other side, Darius had their navy crews and captains held as hostages, which were part of his fleet, and he had many of their prominent citizens and even some kings aboard.14364 However, there was no time to negotiate; they had to choose a side, and when Alexander arrived in Phoenicia, most cities decided to submit to him. First, Strato, the son of Ger-astartus, king of Aradus and part of the Phoenician fleet, went to meet Alexander and surrendered the four cities of Aradus, Marathus, Sigon, and Mariamme.14365 Then Byblus, whose king was also with the fleet, opened its gates to the Macedonians.14366 Next, Sidon, remembering its recent grievances, sent envoys to welcome Alexander and embraced his cause with joy.14367 Even Tyre formally submitted, declaring its readiness to follow Alexander’s commands;14368 and the transfer of Phoenicia to Alexander could have happened without violence if he had allowed their island city, their true capital, to remain untouched. But Alexander couldn’t tolerate any hint of defiance. When he expressed a desire to sacrifice to Melkarth in their island city, the Tyrians refused to let him in and suggested he could offer in Palæ-Tyrus, where there was an older, more revered temple of the same god. This insulted Alexander’s pride, and he became extremely angry.14369 He dismissed the envoys with threats and immediately began preparing to attack the city.

The Tyrians have been accused of extreme rashness and folly in not making an unqualified submission to the demands preferred by Alexander,14370 but the reproach scarcely appears to be deserved. They had on previous occasions resisted for years the entire power of Assyria, and of Babylon; they naturally deemed themselves only assailable by sea; their fortifications were of immense strength; and they possessed a navy much superior to any of which Alexander could boast at the time when he threatened them. Their own vessels were eighty in number; those of their kinsmen upon the continent were likewise eighty; Cyprus, which for centuries had been closely allied with them, and which was more than half Phoenician in blood, could furnish a hundred and twenty; Carthage, if she chose, could send to their aid, without any difficulty, as many as two hundred.14371 Alexander had never been able to collect from the Greek states which owned his sway a fleet of more than one hundred and sixty sail; and, having disbanded this fleet, he could not readily have mustered from the cities and countries accessible to him, exclusive of Cyprus and Phoenicia, so many as a hundred.14372 The Tyrians, when they took their resolution to oppose Alexander, had a right to expect that their kindred would either assist them, or at any rate not serve against them, and that thus they would be sure to maintain their supremacy at sea. As for Alexander’s design to join the island Tyre to the continent by means of a mole, they cannot have had the slightest suspicion of it, since no work of the kind had ever previously been accomplished, or even attempted; for the demonstration of Xerxes against Salamis was not seriously intended.14373 They naturally counted on the struggle being entirely by sea, and may well have thought that on their own element they would not be worsted. Even if the continental towns forsook them and went over to the enemy, why might they not do as they had done in Shalmaneser’s time, defeat their unnatural countrymen, and retain their naval supremacy? Moreover, if they made a gallant fight, might not Persia be expected to second their efforts? Would she not attack Alexander from the flanks of Lebanon, intercept his supplies, cut off his foragers, and make his position untenable; the Tyrians could scarcely anticipate that Persia would sit with folded hands, a calm spectator of a seven months’ siege, and do absolutely nothing.

The Tyrians have been criticized for being extremely reckless and foolish by not fully surrendering to Alexander's demands, but this criticism doesn’t seem justified. They had previously fought against the full power of Assyria and Babylon for years; they reasonably believed they could only be attacked by sea. Their fortifications were incredibly strong, and they had a navy much better than anything Alexander could boast at the time he threatened them. They had eighty ships of their own; their mainland relatives also had eighty; Cyprus, which had been allied with them for centuries and was more than half Phoenician in blood, could provide a hundred and twenty; and Carthage could easily send as many as two hundred to support them if needed. Alexander had never been able to gather a fleet of more than one hundred and sixty from the Greek states under his control; and after disbanding this fleet, he wouldn’t have easily been able to assemble more than a hundred from the cities and areas accessible to him, excluding Cyprus and Phoenicia. The Tyrians, when they decided to resist Alexander, had every reason to expect that their allies would either help them or at least not fight against them, which would ensure they maintained their dominance at sea. As for Alexander’s plan to connect the island of Tyre to the continent with a causeway, they couldn’t have suspected it at all, since no one had ever attempted such a project before; after all, Xerxes’ demonstration against Salamis was never taken seriously. They naturally assumed the fight would be entirely on the sea and likely believed they wouldn’t be defeated there. Even if the continental towns abandoned them and joined the enemy, why couldn’t they repeat what they did in Shalmaneser’s time, defeat their unloyal countrymen, and keep their naval power? Moreover, if they put up a strong resistance, couldn’t Persia be expected to support their efforts? Wouldn’t Persia attack Alexander from the flanks of Lebanon, cut off his supplies, disrupt his foragers, and make his position impossible? The Tyrians could hardly anticipate that Persia would just sit back, watch a seven-month siege unfold, and do absolutely nothing.

Having determined on resistance to the demands of Alexander, the Tyrians lost no time in placing their city in a position to resist attack. They summoned their king, Azemilcus, from the Persian fleet, and required him to hasten home with the entire squadron which he commanded.14374 They collected triremes and lighter vessels from various quarters. They distributed along the walls of the city upon every side a number of engines of war, constructed to hurl darts and stones, and amply provided them with missiles.14375 The skilled workmen and engineers resident in the town were called upon not merely to furnish additional engines of the old type, but to exercise their ingenuity in devising new and unheard of structures.14376 They armed all the young and vigorous among the people, and appointed them their several stations at the walls. Finally, to diminish the number of mouths to be fed, and to save themselves from distracting cares, they sent away to Carthage a number of their aged men, their women, and their children, who were readily received and supported by the rich and friendly colonists.14377

Having decided to resist Alexander's demands, the Tyrians quickly prepared their city for an attack. They called their king, Azemilcus, from the Persian fleet and urged him to return with his entire squadron. They gathered triremes and smaller ships from different places. They set up several war machines along the city walls on all sides, built to launch darts and stones, and supplied them with plenty of missiles. The skilled workers and engineers in the town were asked not only to provide more traditional war machines but also to use their creativity to design new and innovative structures. They armed all the young and healthy members of the community and assigned them to various posts along the walls. Lastly, to reduce the number of mouths to feed and avoid unnecessary worries, they sent some of their elderly, women, and children to Carthage, where they were gladly received and supported by the wealthy and friendly colonists.

Meantime Alexander had taken his resolution. Either recollecting what Xerxes had threatened to do at Salamis, or prompted merely by his own inventive genius, he determined on the construction of a great mole, or embankment, which should be carried out from the Asiatic mainland across the half-mile of channel to the very walls of the recalcitrant city, and should thus join the island to the Syrian shore. The width of the embankment he fixed at two plethra, or nearly seventy yards.14378 Material for the construction was abundant. The great city of Palæ-Tyrus was close at hand, partly in ruins, and with many of the houses deserted by their inhabitants. Its walls would furnish abundance of stone, mortar, and rubble. Behind Palæ-Tyrus lay the flanks of Lebanon, cultivated in orchards, while beyond were its dense and inexhaustible forests of fir, pine, and cedar. Human labour could be obtained to almost any extent, for the neighbourhood was populous, and Alexander’s authority acknowledged by all. Accordingly the work, once commenced, for a while made fair progress. Piles were cut in the mountain, which were driven with much ease into the soft mud of the channel, which was shallow near the shore,14379 and completely under the control of the Macedonians, since the Tyrian vessels could not approach it for fear of sticking in the ooze. Between the piles, towards the edge of the mole, were sunk stones, trunks of trees, and material of the more solid character, while the central part was filled up with rubble and rubbish of every sort and kind. Still, the operation was toilsome and tedious, even from the first, while the further that the mole was advanced into the sea, the more difficult and dangerous became its construction. The channel deepened gradually from a few feet towards the shore to eighteen or twenty,14380 as it approached the island. The Tyrians in their vessels were soon able to act. In small boats at first, and afterwards in their triremes, they attacked and annoyed the workmen, perpetually hindered their work, and occasionally destroyed portions of it.14381 Damage was also inflicted by the wind and waves; and the rate of progress became, in consequence, exceedingly slow. A strong current set through the channel, and this was continually working its way among the interstices of the mole, washing holes in its sides and face, and loosening the interior of the structure. When a storm arose, the surf broke over the top of the work, and did even greater damage, carrying portions of the outer casing into the sea.

In the meantime, Alexander had made his decision. Whether he remembered Xerxes' threats at Salamis or was just inspired by his own brilliance, he decided to build a massive mole, or embankment, stretching from the Asian mainland across the half-mile channel straight to the walls of the defiant city, effectively linking the island to the Syrian shore. He set the width of the embankment at two plethra, or nearly seventy yards. The materials for construction were plentiful. The great city of Palæ-Tyrus was nearby, partly in ruins and with many houses abandoned. Its walls would provide plenty of stone, mortar, and rubble. Behind Palæ-Tyrus were the foothills of Lebanon, full of orchards, and further beyond were dense, endless forests of fir, pine, and cedar. Labor could be easily sourced since the area was populated, and Alexander’s authority was recognized by all. Once the work began, it made good progress for a time. Piles were cut from the mountains and driven easily into the soft mud of the shallow channel near the shore, which was entirely under Macedonian control, as Tyrian boats couldn't approach for fear of getting stuck in the mud. Between the piles, near the edge of the mole, stones, tree trunks, and sturdier materials were sunk, while the center was packed with rubble and all sorts of debris. However, the work was labor-intensive and slow from the start, and as the mole extended further into the sea, the construction became more challenging and dangerous. The channel gradually deepened from a few feet near the shore to eighteen or twenty as it neared the island. The Tyrians soon began to take action. Initially using small boats and later their triremes, they attacked and disrupted the workers, consistently hindering progress and occasionally destroying parts of it. Damage was also caused by the wind and waves; as a result, the rate of progress became extremely slow. A strong current flowed through the channel, continually working its way through the gaps in the mole, creating holes in its sides and loosening the structure's interior. When a storm hit, the waves crashed over the top of the work, causing even more damage and washing away parts of the outer casing into the sea.

To meet the assaults of the Tyrian ships upon the work, the Macedonians constructed two movable towers, well protected against torches and weapons by curtains made of raw hides,14382 and advancing these upon the surface of the mole to the points most threatened, discharged from the engines which the towers contained darts and stones of a large size against the Tyrian sailors. Thus protected, the workmen were able to make sensible progress, and the Tyrians began to fear that, unless they could destroy the towers, the mole would ere long be completed. For the accomplishment of their purpose, they resolved to employ a fire-ship.14383 Selecting one of the largest of their horse-transports, they stowed the hold with dry brushwood and other combustible materials; and erecting on the prow two masters, each with a projecting arm, attached to either a cauldron, filled with bitumen and sulphur, and with every sort of material apt to kindle and nourish flame. By loading the stern of the transport with stones of a large size, they succeeded in depressing it and correspondingly elevating the prow, which was thus prepared to glide over the smooth surface of the mole and bring itself into contact with the towers. In the fore part of the ship were deposited a quantity of torches, resin, and other combustibles. Watching an opportunity when the wind blew strongly from the seaward straight upon the mole, they towed the vessel at their best speed in the direction of the towers, set it on fire, and then, loosing their hawsers, allowed it to dash itself upon the work. The prow slid over the top a certain distance and then stopped. The arms projecting from the masts broke off at the sudden check,14384 and scattered the contents of the cauldrons around. The towers caught fire and were at once in a blaze. The Macedonians found it impossible to extinguish the flames, since the Tyrian triremes, drawing close to the mole, prevented approach by flights of arrows and other missiles. “At the same time, the full naval force of the city, both ships and little boats, was sent forth to land men at once on all parts of the mole. So successful was this attack, that all the Macedonian engines were burnt—the outer woodwork which kept the mole together was torn up in many places—and a large part of the structure came to pieces."14385 A heavy sea, moreover, accompanied the gale of wind which had favoured the conflagration, and penetrating the loosened work, carried the whole into deep waters.14386

To defend against the attacks from the Tyrian ships, the Macedonians built two movable towers, well-protected from torches and weapons by curtains made of raw hides, and moved them along the surface of the mole to the most threatened areas. They launched large darts and stones from the engines inside the towers at the Tyrian sailors. With this protection, the workers made noticeable progress, and the Tyrians began to worry that if they didn't destroy the towers, the mole would soon be completed. To achieve their goal, they decided to use a fire ship. They selected one of their largest horse-transports, filled the hold with dry brushwood and other flammable materials, and erected two masts on the prow, each with a projecting arm attached to a cauldron filled with bitumen, sulfur, and anything else that could catch fire easily. By loading the back of the transport with large stones, they managed to lower it and raise the prow, which was now ready to glide over the smooth surface of the mole and collide with the towers. In the front part of the ship, they placed a bunch of torches, resin, and additional flammable items. When they saw an opportunity with a strong wind blowing from the sea directly onto the mole, they towed the vessel as fast as they could toward the towers, set it on fire, and then released their ropes, letting it crash into the construction. The prow slid over the top for a short distance before stopping. The arms extending from the masts broke off with the sudden stop and scattered the cauldron contents everywhere. The towers ignited immediately and were engulfed in flames. The Macedonians couldn't extinguish the fire because the nearby Tyrian triremes kept them at bay with showers of arrows and other projectiles. At the same time, the full naval force of the city, consisting of both ships and small boats, was deployed to land men all over the mole. This attack was so effective that all the Macedonian engines were burned, the outer woodwork holding the mole together was torn up in many areas, and a large part of the structure fell apart. A heavy sea further worsened the situation, along with the strong wind that had aided the fire, and it flooded the weakened structures, dragging everything into deep waters.

Alexander had now seriously to consider what course he should take. Hitherto his attempt had proved an entire failure. Should he relinquish it? To do so would be to acknowledge himself baffled and defeated, to tarnish the prestige which he held so dear, and to cripple the plans that he had formed against Persia. It was simply impossible that Alexander, being the man he was, should so act. No—he must persevere—he must confront and overcome his difficulties—he must repair the damages that he had suffered, restore his lost works, and carry them out on a larger scale, and with more skill than before. He gave orders therefore for an enlargement and alteration of the mole, which he no longer carried across the strait in a direct line, but inclined to the south-west,14387 so that it might meet the force of the prevalent wind, instead of exposing its flank to the violent gusts. He also commanded the construction of fresh towers and fresh engines, stronger and more in number than the former ones.14388 But this alone would not, he felt, be enough. His designs had been frustrated hitherto solely from the fact that the Tyrians were masters of the sea; and it was plain to him that, so long as this state of things remained unaltered, it was next to impossible that he should succeed. The great desideratum—the one condition of success—was the possession of a powerful fleet. Such a fleet must be either built or collected. Leaving therefore the restoration of the mole and the engines to his generals, Alexander went in person to Sidon, and there set himself to gather together as large a fleet as he could. Most opportunely it happened that, either shortly before Alexander’s arrival or immediately afterwards, the ships of Sidon, Aradus, and Byblus, which had been serving with the Persian naval force in the Ægean, had been required by their respective commanders to proceed homewards, and, to the number of eighty, had sailed into the harbour of Sidon.14389 The kings had, in fact, deserted the Persian cause on hearing that their cities had submitted to Alexander, and readily placed their respective squadrons at his disposal. Further contingents were received from other quarters—from Rhodes ten triremes, from the seaports of Lycia the same number, from Soli and Mallus three, from Macedonia a single penteconter.14390 The number of the vessels was thus brought up to one hundred and four; but even with such a fleet it would have been rash to engage the Tyrian navy; and Alexander would probably have had to build an additional squadron had he not received, suddenly and unexpectedly, the adhesion of the princes of Cyprus. Cyprus, being an island, was as yet in no danger, and might have been expected at least to remain neutral until the fate of Tyre was decided; but, for reasons that history has not recorded, the petty kings of the island about this time—some months after the battle of Issus—resolved to desert Persia, to detach themselves wholly from Tyre, and to place their navy at the disposal of the Macedonians.14391 The number of their triremes amounted to 120; and Alexander, having now under his command a fleet of 224 sail, could no longer feel any doubt of being able to wrest the supremacy at sea from the unfortunate Tyrians.

Alexander now had to seriously consider what path to take. Up until now, his efforts had been a complete failure. Should he give it up? Doing so would mean admitting he was stumped and defeated, ruining the prestige he valued so much, and undermining the plans he had made against Persia. It was simply impossible for someone like Alexander to act that way. No—he needed to keep going—he had to face and overcome his challenges—he had to fix the damage he had suffered, recover his lost works, and execute them on a larger scale and with more skill than before. He therefore ordered the enlargement and modification of the mole, which he no longer carried straight across the strait but instead at a south-west angle, so it could withstand the force of the prevailing wind rather than exposing its side to strong gusts. He also commanded the construction of new towers and new engines, stronger and in greater numbers than the previous ones. But he felt that this alone would not be enough. His plans had been thwarted mainly because the Tyrians had control of the sea; and it was clear to him that as long as this situation remained unchanged, it was nearly impossible for him to succeed. The critical requirement—the one condition for success—was having a powerful fleet. Such a fleet had to either be built or gathered. So, leaving the restoration of the mole and the engines to his generals, Alexander went personally to Sidon and set out to assemble as large a fleet as he could. Fortunately, it happened that, either just before Alexander's arrival or right after, the ships from Sidon, Aradus, and Byblus, which had been with the Persian naval force in the Aegean, had been ordered by their captains to return home, and to the count of eighty, they sailed into the harbor of Sidon. The kings had, in fact, abandoned the Persian cause upon hearing that their cities had surrendered to Alexander and readily offered their fleets to him. Additional reinforcements came from elsewhere—from Rhodes ten triremes, from the coastal towns of Lycia the same number, from Soli and Mallus three, and from Macedonia a single penteconter. This brought the total number of vessels to one hundred and four; but even with such a fleet, it would have been reckless to take on the Tyrian navy; and Alexander likely would have had to build another squadron had he not suddenly and unexpectedly gained the support of the princes of Cyprus. Cyprus, being an island, was not yet in danger and could have been expected to remain neutral until the outcome of Tyre was determined; however, for reasons that history hasn’t recorded, the petty kings of the island, a few months after the battle of Issus, decided to abandon Persia, entirely cut ties with Tyre, and offer their navy to the Macedonians. Their triremes totaled 120, and now that Alexander had a fleet of 224 ships under his command, he could no longer doubt that he would be able to take control of the sea from the unfortunate Tyrians.

Accordingly, after allowing his ships a period of eleven days for nautical practice, and placing on board a number of his bravest soldiers,14392 Alexander sailed out from Sidon at the head of his entire fleet, and made straight for Tyre in order of battle. He himself in person commanded the right wing, the post of danger, since it held the open sea, and had under him the bulk of the Cyprian ships, with their commanders. Pnytagoras of Salamis and Craterus led the left wing, which was composed mainly of the vessels furnished by the Phoenician towns upon the mainland, and held its course at no great distance from the shore. The Tyrians, who had received no intelligence from without, saw with astonishment the great fleet, nearly three times as large as their own,14393 bearing down upon them in orderly array, and challenging them to the combat. They had not now the spirit of ancient times, when no disparity of force dismayed them. Surprised and alarmed, they resolved to decline a battle, to remain within their ports, and to use their ships for blocking the entrances. Alexander, advancing from the north, when he saw the mouth of the Sidonian harbour, which faced northwards, strongly guarded, did not attempt to force it, but anchored his vessels outside, and established a blockade, the maintenance of which he entrusted to the Cyprian squadron. The next day he ordered the Phoenician ships to proceed southwards, and similarly block and watch the southern or Egyptian harbour.14394 For himself, he landed upon the mole, and pitching his tent near the south-western corner, there established himself.14395

Accordingly, after giving his ships eleven days for nautical practice and loading them with some of his bravest soldiers, Alexander set sail from Sidon at the head of his entire fleet, heading straight for Tyre in battle formation. He personally commanded the right wing, which was the most exposed position since it faced the open sea, and he had most of the Cyprian ships and their commanders under his command. Pnytagoras of Salamis and Craterus led the left wing, primarily made up of ships provided by the Phoenician towns along the mainland, keeping close to the shore. The Tyrians, who had received no outside information, were astonished to see the massive fleet—almost three times the size of their own—approaching in orderly formation and challenging them to battle. They no longer had the spirit of the past when they were undeterred by differences in strength. Surprised and worried, they decided to avoid battle, stay in their ports, and use their ships to block the entrances. As Alexander approached from the north and saw that the entrance to the Sidonian harbor, which faced north, was strongly guarded, he didn’t try to force his way in. Instead, he anchored his ships outside and set up a blockade, which he assigned to the Cyprian squadron. The next day, he instructed the Phoenician ships to head south and also block and monitor the southern or Egyptian harbor. As for himself, he landed on the mole, set up his tent near the southwestern corner, and established his position there.

The mole had not advanced very much during his absence. Vast efforts had been made to re-establish it, but they had not been attended with any great success.14396 Whole trees, torn up by the roots, and with their branches still adhering to them, had been dragged to the water’s edge, and then precipitated into the strait;14397 a layer of stones and mud had been placed upon them, to solidify them into a mass; on the top of this other trees had been placed, and the former process repeated. But the Tyrians had met the new tactics with new methods. They had employed divers to attach hooks to the boughs where they projected into the sea, and by sheer force had dragged the trees out from the superincumbent mass, bringing down in this way large portions of the structure.14398 But with Alexander’s coming, and the retirement of the Tyrian fleet, all this was altered. Alexander’s workmen were no longer impeded, except from the town, and in a short time the mole was completed across the channel and carried up to the very foot of the defences. The new towers, which had replaced the burnt ones, were brought up close to the walls, and plied the new machines which Cyprian and Phoenician engineers had constructed for their new master.14399 The battering of the wall began. Engines moreover of a large size were placed on horse-transports furnished by Sidon, and on the heavier and clumsier of the triremes, and with these attacks were made upon the town in various places, all round the circuit of the walls, which, if they did nothing else, served to distract the attention of the defenders. To meet such assailants the Tyrians had let down huge blocks of stone into the sea, which prevented the approach of the ships, and hindered those on board from using the battering ram. These blocks the Macedonians endeavoured to weigh up and remove by means of cranes; but their vessels were too unsteady for the purpose, whereupon they proceeded to anchor them. The Tyrians went out in boats well protected, and passing under the stems and sterns of the vessels, cut the cables, whereupon the Macedonians kept an armed watch upon the cables in boats of their own, which the Tyrians did not venture to attack. They were not, however, without resource even yet, since they contrived still to cut the cables by means of divers. At last the Macedonians bethought themselves of using chains for cables instead of ropes; these could not be cut, and the result was that at length they succeeded in dragging the stones away and obtaining access to the foot of the walls wherever they pleased.14400

The mole hadn’t progressed much during his absence. A lot of effort went into rebuilding it, but there wasn’t much success. Whole trees, uprooted with their branches still attached, had been dragged to the water’s edge and thrown into the strait; a layer of stones and mud had been added to solidify them into one mass; then more trees were placed on top, and the process was repeated. But the Tyrians countered these new tactics with their own methods. They sent divers to attach hooks to the branches that extended into the sea, and with sheer force, they pulled the trees out from the mass, taking down large sections of the structure in the process. However, with Alexander’s arrival and the retreat of the Tyrian fleet, everything changed. Alexander’s workers faced no further obstacles, except from the town, and soon the mole was completed across the channel, reaching right up to the defenses. The new towers, replacing the destroyed ones, were positioned close to the walls, using new machines built by Cyprian and Phoenician engineers for their new leader. The battering of the wall began. Additionally, large engines were placed on horse transports supplied by Sidon and on the heavier triremes, and attacks were made on the town in various spots around the circuit of the walls, which, if nothing else, distracted the defenders. To counter these attackers, the Tyrians lowered huge stone blocks into the sea to block the ships' approach and prevent those onboard from using the battering ram. The Macedonians tried to lift and remove these blocks with cranes, but their ships were too unstable for that, so they began to anchor them instead. The Tyrians used well-protected boats to approach and cut the cables from beneath the vessels, prompting the Macedonians to keep watch on the cables in their own boats, which the Tyrians didn’t dare to attack. However, the Tyrians still had some tricks up their sleeve, as they managed to cut the cables with divers. Eventually, the Macedonians came up with the idea of using chains for the cables instead of ropes; these couldn’t be cut, and as a result, they finally succeeded in removing the stones and gaining access to the base of the walls whenever they wanted.

Under these circumstances, threatened on every side, and feeling almost at the last gasp, the Tyrians resolved on a final desperate effort. They would make a bold attempt to recover the command of the sea. As the Macedonian fleet was divided, part watching the Sidonian and part the Egyptian harbour, they could freely select to contend with which portion they preferred. Their choice fell upon the Cyprian contingent, which was stationed to the north of the mole, keeping guard on the “Portus Sidonius.” This they determined to attack, and to take, if possible, by surprise. Long previously they had spread sails along the mouth of the harbour, to prevent their proceedings inside it from being overlooked.14401 They now prepared a select squadron of thirteen ships—three of them quinqueremes, three quadriremes, and seven triremes—and silently placing on board their best sailors and the best and bravest of their men-at-arms, waited till the hour of noon, when the Cyprian crews would be taking their mid-day meal, and Alexander might be expected, according to his general habit, to have retired to his tent on the opposite side of the mole. When noon came, still in deep silence, they issued from the harbour in single file, each crew rowing gently without noise or splash, or a word spoken, either by the boatswains or by anyone else. In this way they came almost close to the Cyprians without being perceived: then suddenly the boatswains gave out their cry, and the men cheered, and all pulled as hard as they could, and with splash and dash they drove their ships against the enemy’s, which were inert, lying at anchor, some empty, others hurriedly taking their crews on board. The ships of three Cyprian kings—Pnytagoras, king of Salamis, Androcles, king of Amathus, and Pasicrates, king of Curium14402—were at once run down and sunk.14403 Many others were disabled; the rest fled, pursued by the Tyrians, and sought to reach the shore. All would probably have been lost, had not Alexander returned from his tent earlier than usual, and witnessed the Tyrian attack. With his usual promptitude, he at once formed his plan. As only a portion of the Cyprian fleet had maintained the blockade, while the remainder of their ships were lying off the north shore of the mole with their crews disembarked, he set to work to man these, and sent them off, as each was got ready, to station themselves at the mouth of the harbour, and prevent any more of the Tyrian vessels from sallying forth. He then hurried to the southern side of the mole, where the Greco-Phoenician squadron kept guard, and manning a certain number of the vessels,14404 sailed with them round the western shore of the island into the northern bay, where the Tyrians and the remnant of the Cyprian fleet were still contending. Those in the city perceived the movement, and made every effort to signal it to their sailors, but in vain. The noise and uproar of the battle prevented them from hearing until it was too late. It was not till Alexander had entered the northern bay that they understood, and turned and fled, pursued by his ships, which captured or disabled the greater number. The crews, however, and the men-at-arms, escaped, since they threw themselves overboard, and easily swam into the harbour.14405

Under these conditions, surrounded and feeling nearly defeated, the Tyrians decided to make one last desperate attempt. They were determined to take control of the sea once more. Since the Macedonian fleet was split, with some watching the Sidonian harbor and others watching the Egyptian harbor, they had the option to engage whichever section they wished. They chose to confront the Cyprian ships stationed north of the mole, guarding the “Portus Sidonius.” They planned to attack and, if possible, surprise them. Long before this, they had set up sails at the mouth of the harbor to hide their activities inside it. They then organized a special squadron of thirteen ships—three quinqueremes, three quadriremes, and seven triremes—carefully loading their best sailors and the bravest of their warriors. They waited until noon when the Cyprian crews would be having their lunch, and Alexander was likely to be in his tent on the opposite side of the mole. At noon, still in complete silence, they quietly left the harbor in a single line, each crew rowing gently, making no noise or splash, and not saying a word. They got close to the Cyprians without being noticed, and then suddenly the boatswains shouted, the men cheered, and they all paddled as hard as they could, crashing their ships into the enemies, who were still anchored—some empty, others hastily loading their crews. The ships belonging to the three Cyprian kings—Pnytagoras of Salamis, Androcles of Amathus, and Pasicrates of Curium—were quickly attacked and sunk. Many other ships were damaged; the rest fled in panic toward the shore. Most would have likely been lost if Alexander hadn’t come back from his tent earlier than usual and seen the Tyrian assault. Acting quickly, he devised a plan. Since only part of the Cyprian fleet was maintaining the blockade while the rest of their ships were at the north shore with their crews offloaded, he manned those ships and sent them, as they were ready, to block the harbor entrance, preventing more Tyrian vessels from escaping. He then rushed to the southern side of the mole, where the Greco-Phoenician squadron was on guard, and manned several vessels, sailing with them around the western shore of the island into the northern bay, where the Tyrians and what was left of the Cyprian fleet were still fighting. Those in the city noticed the movement and tried to signal their sailors, but it was too late. The chaos of the battle made it impossible for them to hear until it was already over. It wasn’t until Alexander entered the northern bay that they realized what was happening and turned to flee, chased by his ships, which captured or disabled most of them. However, the crews and soldiers managed to escape by jumping overboard and swimming easily into the harbor.

This was the last attempt of the Tyrians by sea. They were now invested on every side, and hopelessly shut up within their defences. Still, however, they made a desperate resistance. On the side of the mole the Macedonians, having brought up their towers and battering-ram close to the wall, attacked it with much vigour, hurling against it great masses of stone, and by constant flights of darts and arrows driving the defenders from the battlements.14406 At the same time the battering-rams were actively plied, and every effort made to effect a breach. But the Tyrians deadened the blows of the rams and the force of the stones by letting down from the walls leathern bags filled with sea-weed at the points assailed;14407 while, by wheels which were set in rapid motion, they intercepted the darts and javelins wherewith they were attacked, and broke them or diverted them from their intended courses.14408 When boarding-bridges were thrown from the towers to the top of the walls, and an attempt was made to pass troops into the town across them, they flung grappling hooks among the soldiers on the bridges, which caught in their bodies and lacerated them, or dragged their shields from their hands, or sometimes hauled them bodily into the air, and then dashed them against the wall or against the ground.14409 Further, they made ready masses of red-hot metal, and hurled them against the towers and the scaling-parties.14410 They also heated sand over fires and poured it from the battlements on all who approached the foot of the wall; this, penetrating between the armour and the skin, inflicted such intolerable pain that the sufferers were forced to tear off their coats of mail, whereupon they were easily transfixed by arrows or long lances.14411 With scythes they cut the ropes and thongs by means of which the rams were worked;14412 and at last, armed with hatchets, they sprang from the battlements upon the Macedonian boarding-bridges, and in a hand-to-hand combat defeated and drove back their assailants.14413 Finally, when, despite of all their efforts, the outer wall began to give way, they constructed an inner wall to take its place, broader and stronger than the other.14414

This was the last sea attempt by the Tyrians. They were now surrounded on all sides and trapped within their defenses. Still, they fought back fiercely. On the side of the mole, the Macedonians moved their towers and battering rams up close to the wall and attacked with great energy, throwing large stones at it and relentlessly shooting darts and arrows to push the defenders off the battlements. 14406 At the same time, they worked the battering rams vigorously, trying to break through. But the Tyrians dampened the impact of the rams and the force of the stones by dropping leather bags filled with seaweed from the walls at the points of attack; 14407 meanwhile, with rapidly spinning wheels, they intercepted the darts and javelins being fired at them, either breaking them or redirecting them away from their targets. 14408 When boarding bridges were thrown from the towers to the tops of the walls, and an attempt was made to send troops into the city across them, the defenders threw grappling hooks among the soldiers on the bridges, which caught in their bodies and tore them apart, yanked their shields from their hands, or even pulled them right into the air and slammed them against the wall or the ground. 14409 Additionally, they prepared masses of red-hot metal and hurled them at the towers and attacking groups. 14410 They also heated sand over fires and poured it from the battlements onto anyone who approached the wall’s base; this sand got between the armor and skin, causing such unbearable pain that the victims were forced to rip off their mail, leaving them vulnerable to arrows or long lances. 14411 They used scythes to cut the ropes and straps that operated the rams; 14412 and finally, armed with hatchets, they leaped from the battlements onto the Macedonian boarding bridges, defeating and driving back their attackers in close combat. 14413 Ultimately, when despite all their efforts the outer wall began to crumble, they built a new inner wall to replace it, one that was wider and stronger than the original. 14414

Alexander, after a time, became convinced that his endeavours to take the city from the mole were hopeless, and turned his attention to the sea defences, north and south of the mole, which were far less strong than those which he had hitherto been attacking.14415 He placed his best engines and his boarding-bridges upon ships, and proceeded to batter the sea walls in various places. On the south side, near the Egyptian harbour, he found a weak place, and concentrating his efforts upon it, he succeeded in effecting a large breach.14416 He then gave orders for a general assault.14417 The two fleets were commanded to force simultaneously the entrances to the two harbours; other vessels to make demonstrations against the walls at all approachable points; the army collected on the mole to renew its assaults; while he himself, with his trustiest soldiers, delivered the main attack at the southern breach.14418 Two vessels were selected for the purpose. On one, which was that of Coenus, he embarked a portion of the phalanx; on the other, which was commanded by Admetus, he placed his bodyguard, himself accompanying it. The struggle was short when once the boarding-bridges were thrown across and rested on the battered wall. Fighting under the eye of their king, the Macedonians carried all before them, though not without important losses. Admetus himself, who was the first to step on to the wall, received a spear thrust, and was slain.14419 But the soldiers who were following close behind him maintained their footing, and in a little time got possession of several towers, with the spaces between them. Alexander was among the foremost of those who mounted the breach,14420 and was for a while hotly engaged in a hand-to-hand fight with the enemy. When those who resisted him were slain or driven off, he directed his troops to seize the royal palace, which abutted on the southern wall, and through it make their entrance into the town.14421

Alexander eventually became convinced that trying to take the city from the mole was pointless, so he shifted his focus to the sea defenses, both north and south of the mole, which were much weaker than those he had been attacking. He put his best engines and boarding bridges on ships, and began to attack the sea walls in various locations. On the south side, near the Egyptian harbor, he discovered a vulnerability, and by concentrating his efforts there, he managed to create a large breach. He then ordered a general assault. Both fleets were instructed to simultaneously force their way into the two harbors; other vessels were to distract the walls at all accessible points; the army gathered on the mole to renew its attacks; while he himself, with his most trusted soldiers, led the main attack at the southern breach. Two ships were chosen for this purpose. On one, which belonged to Coenus, he boarded a portion of the phalanx; on the other, commanded by Admetus, he placed his bodyguard, accompanying it himself. The fight was quick once the boarding bridges were thrown across and rested on the battered wall. Under the watchful eye of their king, the Macedonians pushed forward, though not without significant losses. Admetus, who was the first to step onto the wall, was struck by a spear and killed. However, the soldiers right behind him held their ground and soon captured several towers and the spaces between them. Alexander was among the first to climb the breach, and for a while, he was engaged in a fierce hand-to-hand fight with the enemy. When those resisting him were either killed or driven off, he commanded his troops to seize the royal palace that stuck out from the southern wall, and through it, enter the town.

Meanwhile, the Greco-Phoenician fleet on the south side of the mole had burst the boom and other obstacles by which the Egyptian harbour was closed, and, attacking the ships within, had disabled some, and driven the rest ashore, thus gaining possession of the southern port and a ready access to the adjacent portion of the city.14422 The Cyprians, moreover, on the north, had forced their way into the Sidonian harbour, which had no boom, and obtained an entrance into the town on that quarter.14423 The defences were broken through in three places, and it might have been expected that resistance would have ceased. But the gallant defenders still would not yield. A large body assembled at the Agenorium, or temple of Agenor, and there made a determined stand, which continued till Alexander himself attacked them with his bodyguard, and slew almost the entire number. Others, mounting upon the roofs of the houses, flung down stones and missiles of all kinds upon the Macedonians in the street. A portion shut themselves up in their homes and perished by their own hands. In the streets and squares there was a terrible carnage. The Macedonians were infuriated by the length of the siege, the stubbornness of the resistance, and the fact that the Tyrians had in the course of the siege publicly executed, probably by way of sacrifice, a number of their prisoners upon the walls. Those who died with arms in their hands are reckoned at eight thousand;14424 two thousand more, who had been made prisoners, were barbarously crucified by command of Alexander round the walls of the city.14425 None of the adult free males were spared, except the few who had taken refuge with Azemilcus the king in the temple of Melkarth, which Alexander professed greatly to revere, and a certain number whom the Sidonians, touched at last with pity, concealed on board their triremes. The women, the children, and the slaves, to the number of thirty thousand,14426 were sold to the highest bidder.

Meanwhile, the Greco-Phoenician fleet on the south side of the mole had broken through the boom and other barriers that had shut off the Egyptian harbor. They attacked the ships inside, damaging some and forcing the rest to the shore, thus taking control of the southern port and gaining direct access to the nearby part of the city.14422 The Cyprians, on the north side, had forced their way into the Sidonian harbor, which had no boom, and gained entry into the town from that side.14423 The defenses were breached in three places, and it might have been expected that the resistance would end. But the brave defenders still refused to give up. A large group gathered at the Agenorium, or temple of Agenor, and made a determined stand that lasted until Alexander himself attacked them with his bodyguard and killed almost all of them. Others climbed onto the roofs of the houses, throwing stones and missiles of all kinds at the Macedonians in the streets. Some locked themselves in their homes and ended their own lives. The streets and squares were filled with horrific bloodshed. The Macedonians were enraged by the length of the siege, the stubbornness of the defense, and the fact that the Tyrians had publicly executed several of their prisoners on the walls, likely as a form of sacrifice, during the siege. The number of those who died fighting is estimated at eight thousand;14424 two thousand more, who had been captured, were brutally crucified by Alexander's orders around the city walls.14425 None of the adult free males were spared, except for a few who had sought refuge with King Azemilcus in the temple of Melkarth, which Alexander claimed to greatly revere, and a certain number who were hidden by the Sidonians, moved by pity, aboard their triremes. The women, children, and slaves, totaling thirty thousand,14426 were sold to the highest bidder.

Having worked his will, and struck terror, as he hoped, into the hearts of all who might be thinking of resisting him, Alexander concluded the Tyrian episode of his career by a religious ceremony.14427 Entering the city from the mole in a grand procession, accompanied by his entire force of soldiers, fully armed and arrayed, while his fleet also played its part in the scene, he proceeded to the temple of Melkarth in the middle of the town, and offered his much desired sacrifice to Hercules. A gymnastic contest and a torch race formed a portion of the display. To commemorate his victory, he dedicated and left in the temple the battering-ram which had made the first impression on the southern wall, together with a Tyrian vessel, used in the service of the god, which he had captured when he bore down upon the city from Sidon with his fleet. Over the charred and half-ruined remnants of the city, into which he had introduced a certain number of colonists, chiefly Carians,14428 he placed as ruler a member of a decayed branch of the royal family, a certain Abd-elonim, whom the Greeks called Ballonymos.14429

Having achieved his goals and instilled fear, as he intended, in the hearts of anyone considering resistance, Alexander wrapped up the Tyrian chapter of his career with a religious ceremony. 14427 Entering the city from the mole in a grand procession, accompanied by his entire force of soldiers, fully armed and in formation, while his fleet also took part in the event, he proceeded to the temple of Melkarth in the center of town and offered his long-desired sacrifice to Hercules. A gymnastic competition and a torch race were part of the celebration. To commemorate his victory, he dedicated and placed in the temple the battering-ram that had first breached the southern wall, along with a Tyrian vessel used in the service of the god, which he had captured when he attacked the city from Sidon with his fleet. Over the charred and partially ruined remnants of the city, where he had settled a number of colonists, mainly Carians, 14428 he appointed as ruler a member of a diminished branch of the royal family, a man named Abd-elonim, who the Greeks called Ballonymos. 14429





7. Phoenicia under the Greeks (B.C. 323-65)

     The Phoenicians faithful subjects of Alexander—At his death
     Phoenicia falls, first to Laomedon, then to Ptolemy Lagi—Is
     held by the Ptolemies for seventy years—Passes willingly,
     B.C. 198, under the Seleucidæ—Relations with the Seleucid
     princes and with the Jews—Hellenisation of Phoenicia—
     Continued devotion of the Phoenicians generally to trade and
     commerce—Material prosperity of Phoenicia.
     The Phoenicians, loyal subjects of Alexander—After his death, Phoenicia is taken first by Laomedon and then by Ptolemy Lagi—It remains under the Ptolemies for seventy years—In 198 B.C., it willingly passes to the Seleucid dynasty—Relations with the Seleucid princes and with the Jews—Hellenization of Phoenicia—The Phoenicians' ongoing commitment to trade and commerce—Material prosperity of Phoenicia.

Phoenicia continued faithful to Alexander during the remainder of his career. Phoenician vessels were sent across the Ægean to the coast of the Peloponnese to maintain the Macedonian interest in that quarter.14430 Large numbers of the mercantile class accompanied the march of his army for the purposes of traffic. A portion of these, when Alexander reached the Hydaspes and determined to sail down the course of the Indus to the sea, were drafted into the vessels which he caused to be built,14431 descended the river, and accompanied Nearchus in his voyage from Patala to the Persian Gulf. Others still remained with the land force, and marched with Alexander himself across the frightful deserts of Beloochistan, where they collected the nard and myrrh, which were almost its only products, and which were produced in such abundance as to scent the entire region.14432 On Alexander’s return to Babylon, Phoenicia was required to supply him with additional vessels, and readily complied with the demand. A fleet of forty-eight ships—two of them quinqueremes, four quadriremes, twelve triremes, and thirty pentaconters, or fifty-oared galleys—was constructed on the Phoenician coast, carried in fragments to Thapsacus on the Euphrates, and there put together and launched on the stream of the Euphrates, down which it sailed to Babylon.14433 Seafaring men from Phoenicia and Syria were at the same time enlisted in considerable numbers, and brought to Alexander at his new capital to man the ships which he was building there, and also to supply colonists for the coasts of the Persian Gulf and the islands scattered over its surface.14434 Alexander, among his many projects, nourished an intention of adding to his dominions, at any rate, the seaboard of Arabia, and understood that for this purpose he must establish in the Persian Gulf a great naval power, such as Phoenicia alone out of all the countries under his dominion was able to furnish. His untimely death brought all these schemes to an end, and plunged the East into a sea of troubles.

Phoenicia remained loyal to Alexander throughout the rest of his career. Phoenician ships were sent across the Aegean to the coast of the Peloponnese to support Macedonian interests in that area.14430 Many traders followed his army to engage in commerce. Some of them, when Alexander reached the Hydaspes and decided to sail down the Indus River to the sea, were enlisted onto the ships he ordered to be built,14431 traveled down the river, and joined Nearchus on his journey from Patala to the Persian Gulf. Others stayed with the land troops and marched with Alexander himself across the harsh deserts of Beloochistan, where they gathered nard and myrrh, which were basically the only products available, and which grew in such abundance that they perfumed the entire region.14432 When Alexander returned to Babylon, Phoenicia was asked to provide him with more ships and quickly agreed. A fleet of forty-eight ships—two quinqueremes, four quadriremes, twelve triremes, and thirty pentaconters, or fifty-oared galleys—was built on the Phoenician coast, transported in pieces to Thapsacus on the Euphrates, and then assembled and launched on the river, sailing down to Babylon.14433 Seafarers from Phoenicia and Syria were also recruited in large numbers and brought to Alexander at his new capital to crew the ships being constructed there and to provide settlers for the coasts of the Persian Gulf and the islands scattered across it.14434 Among his many plans, Alexander aimed to expand his territory to include at least the coastline of Arabia, understanding that to do so, he needed to establish a strong naval force in the Persian Gulf, which only Phoenicia, out of all the lands under his rule, could provide. His premature death put an end to all these plans and threw the East into chaos.

In the division of Alexander’s empire, which followed upon his death, Phoenicia was at first assigned, together with Syria, to Laemedon, and the two formed together a separate satrapy.14435 But, after the arrangement of Triparadisus (B.C. 320), Ptolemy Lagi almost immediately attacked Laemedon, dispossessed him of his government, and attached it to his own satrapy of Egypt.14436 Six years later (B.C. 314), attacked in his turn by Antigonus, Ptolemy was forced to relinquish his conquests,14437 none of which offered much resistance excepting Tyre. Tyre, though no more than eighteen years had elapsed since its desolation by Alexander, had, like the fabled phoenix, risen again from its ruins, and through the recuperative energy of commerce had attained almost to its previous wealth and prosperity.14438 Its walls had been repaired, and it was defended by its Egyptian garrison with pertinacity. Antigonus, who was master of the Phoenician mainland, established dockyards at Sidon, Byblus, and Tripolis, set eight thousand sawyers and labourers to cut down timber in Lebanon, and called upon the kings of the coast towns to build him a fleet with the least possible delay.14439 His orders were carried out, and Tyre was blockaded by sea and land for the space of fifteen months, when the provisions failed and the town was forced to surrender itself.14440 The garrison marched out with the honours of war, and Phoenicia became an appendage of the empire (for such it was) of Antigonus.

In the division of Alexander’s empire after his death, Phoenicia was initially assigned, along with Syria, to Laemedon, forming a separate satrapy. But, following the arrangement of Triparadisus (B.C. 320), Ptolemy Lagi quickly attacked Laemedon, took over his governorship, and incorporated it into his own satrapy of Egypt. Six years later (B.C. 314), Ptolemy was attacked by Antigonus, forcing him to give up his conquests, most of which offered little resistance except for Tyre. Just eighteen years after its destruction by Alexander, Tyre had risen again from its ruins, like the legendary phoenix, and thanks to a revival in trade, it had nearly regained its former wealth and prosperity. Its walls had been rebuilt, and the Egyptian garrison defended it fiercely. Antigonus, who controlled the Phoenician mainland, established shipyards at Sidon, Byblus, and Tripolis, set eight thousand sawyers and laborers to cut down timber in Lebanon, and called on the kings of the coastal towns to quickly build a fleet for him. His orders were executed, and Tyre was besieged by land and sea for fifteen months until the food supply ran out and the city had to surrender. The garrison marched out with the honors of war, and Phoenicia became a part of Antigonus’s empire (which is what it was).

From Antigonus Phoenicia passed to his son Demetrius, who maintained his hold on it, with some vicissitudes of fortune, till B.C. 287, when it once more passed under the dominion of Ptolemy Lagi.14441 From this time it was an Egyptian dependency for nearly seventy years, and flourished commercially, if it not distinguish itself by warlike exploits. The early Ptolemies were mild and wise rulers. They encouraged commerce, literature, and art. So far as was possible they protected their dominions from external attack, put down brigandage, and ruled with equity and moderation. It was not until the fourth prince of the house of Lagus, Philopator, mounted the throne (B.C. 222) that the character of their rule changed for the worse, and their subjects began to have reason to complain of them. The weakness and profligacy of Philopater14442 tempted Antiochus III. to assume the aggressive, and to disturb the peace which had now for some time subsisted between Syria and Egypt, the Lagidæ and the Seleucidæ. In B.C. 219 he drove the Egyptians out of Seleucia, the port of Antioch,14443 and being joined by Theodotus, the Egyptian governor of the Coelesyrian province, invaded that country and Phoenicia, took possession of Tyre and Accho, which was now called Ptolemaïs, and threatened Egypt with subjugation.14444 Phoenicia once more became the battle-field between two great powers, and for the next twenty years the cities were frequently taken and re-taken. At last, in B.C. 198, by the victory of Antiochus over Scopas,14445 and the surrender of Sidon, Phoenicia passed, with Coelesyria, into the permanent possession of the Seleucidæ, and, though frequently reclaimed by Egypt, was never recovered.

From Antigonus, Phoenicia passed to his son Demetrius, who maintained control over it, facing various ups and downs, until B.C. 287, when it came under the rule of Ptolemy Lagi. From this time, it was an Egyptian territory for nearly seventy years, thriving commercially, even if it didn't make a name for itself in military conquests. The early Ptolemies were gentle and wise rulers. They promoted trade, literature, and art. As much as possible, they safeguarded their realm from outside threats, fought against banditry, and governed with fairness and moderation. It wasn’t until the fourth king of the Lagus dynasty, Philopator, took the throne (B.C. 222) that their rule started to decline, and their subjects began to have reasons to complain. The weakness and excesses of Philopator tempted Antiochus III to take aggressive actions and disrupt the peace that had existed for some time between Syria and Egypt, the Lagids and the Seleucids. In B.C. 219, he expelled the Egyptians from Seleucia, the port of Antioch, and with the support of Theodotus, the Egyptian governor of the Coelesyrian province, he invaded that region and Phoenicia, capturing Tyre and Accho, now called Ptolemaïs, and posed a threat of conquest to Egypt. Phoenicia once again became the battleground between two major powers, and for the next twenty years, the cities changed hands frequently. Finally, in B.C. 198, after Antiochus's victory over Scopas, and the surrender of Sidon, Phoenicia, along with Coelesyria, fell into the permanent ownership of the Seleucids, and despite being claimed by Egypt many times, it was never regained.

The change of rulers was, on the whole, in consonance with the wishes and feelings of the Phoenicians. Though Alexandria may not have been founded with the definite intention of depressing Tyre, and raising up a commercial rival to her on the southern shore of the Mediterranean;14446 yet the advantages of the situation, and the interests of the Lagid princes, constituted her in a short time an actual rival, and an object of Phoenician jealousy. Phoenicia had been from a remote antiquity14447 down to the time of Alexander, the main, if not the sole, dispenser of Egyptian products to Syria, Asia Minor, and Europe. With the foundation of Alexandria this traffic passed out of her hands. It may be true that what she lost in this way was “more than compensated by the new channels of eastern traffic which Alexander’s conquests opened to her, by the security given to commercial intercourse by the establishment of a Greek monarchy in the ancient dominions of the Persian kings, and by the closer union which now prevailed between all parts of the civilised world."14448 But the balance of advantage and disadvantage does not even now always reconcile traders to a definite and tangible loss; and in the ruder times of which we are writing it was not to be expected that arguments of so refined and recondite a character should be very sensibly felt. Tyre and Sidon recognised in Alexandria a rival from the first, and grew more and more jealous of her as time went on. She monopolised the trade in Egyptian commodities from her foundation. In a short time she drew to herself, not only the direct Egyptian traffic, but that which her rulers diverted from other quarters, and drew to Egypt by the construction of harbours, and roads with stations and watering places.14449 Much of the wealth that had previously flowed into Phoenicia was, in point of fact, diverted to Egypt, and especially to Alexandria, by the judicious arrangements of the earlier Lagid princes. Phoenicia, therefore, in attaching herself to the Seleucidæ, felt that she was avenging a wrong, and though materially she might not be the gainer, was gratified by the change in her position.

The change of rulers largely aligned with the wishes and feelings of the Phoenicians. Although Alexandria may not have been established specifically to undermine Tyre and create a commercial competitor on the southern shore of the Mediterranean;14446 the location’s advantages and the interests of the Lagid princes quickly made it a real rival and a source of Phoenician jealousy. Phoenicia had been the primary, if not the only, distributor of Egyptian goods to Syria, Asia Minor, and Europe for a very long time14447 up until the time of Alexander. With the founding of Alexandria, this trade slipped from her control. It might be true that what she lost in this regard was “more than compensated by the new channels of eastern traffic which Alexander’s conquests opened to her, by the security given to commercial intercourse by the establishment of a Greek monarchy in the ancient dominions of the Persian kings, and by the closer union which now prevailed between all parts of the civilized world."14448 However, the overall advantage and disadvantage does not always convince traders to accept a clear and tangible loss; and during the rough times we are discussing, it was unrealistic to expect that such sophisticated arguments would be noticeably felt. Tyre and Sidon recognized Alexandria as a rival from the beginning and grew increasingly jealous of her over time. She monopolized the trade in Egyptian goods from her inception. Before long, she attracted not only the direct Egyptian trade but also that which her rulers redirected from other areas, bringing it to Egypt through the creation of harbors, roads with stations, and watering places.14449 A significant portion of the wealth that had once flowed into Phoenicia was, in fact, redirected to Egypt, particularly to Alexandria, due to the smart arrangements made by the early Lagid princes. Therefore, Phoenicia, by aligning itself with the Seleucids, felt that it was avenging a wrong, and although it might not gain materially, it was pleased with the change in its position.

The Seleucid princes on their part regarded the Phoenicians with favour, and made a point of conciliating their affections by personal intercourse with them, and by the grant of privileges. At the quinquennial festival instituted by Alexander ere he quitted Tyre, which was celebrated in the Greek fashion with gymnastic and musical contests, the Syrian kings were often present in person, and took part in the festivities.14450 They seem also to have visited the principal cities at other times, and to have held their court in them for many days together.14451 With their consent and permission, the towns severally issued their own coins, which bore commonly legends both in Greek and in Phoenician, and had sometimes Greek, sometimes Phoenician emblems.14452 Both Aradus and Tyre were allowed the privilege of being asylums,14453 from which political refugees could not be demanded by the sovereign.

The Seleucid princes viewed the Phoenicians positively and made an effort to win their favor through personal interactions and by granting privileges. At the five-year festival established by Alexander before he left Tyre, which featured Greek-style gymnastic and musical competitions, the Syrian kings often attended in person and participated in the celebrations.14450 They also seemed to visit the main cities at other times and held their court there for many days.14451 With their approval, the towns minted their own coins, which typically featured inscriptions in both Greek and Phoenician, and sometimes included Greek or Phoenician symbols.14452 Both Aradus and Tyre were granted the privilege of being sanctuaries,14453 where political refugees could not be demanded by the ruler.

The Phoenicians in return served zealously on board the Syro-Macedonian fleet, and showed their masters all due respect and honour.14454 They were not afraid, however, of asserting an independence of thought and judgment, even in matters where the kings were personally concerned. On one occasion, when Antiochus Epiphanes was holding his court at Tyre, a cause of the greatest importance was brought before him for decision by the authorities at Jerusalem. The high-priest of the time, Menelaus, who had bought the office from the Syrian king, was accused of having plundered the Temple of a number of its holy vessels, and of having sold them for his own private advantage. The Sanhedrim, who prosecuted Menelaus, sent three representatives to Tyre, to conduct the case, and press the charges against him. The evidence was so clear that the High Priest saw no chance of an acquittal, except by private interest. He therefore bribed an influential courtier, named Ptolemy, the son of a certain Dorymenes, to intercede with Antiochus on his behalf, and, if possible, obtain his acquittal. The affair was not one of much difficulty. Justice was commonly bought and sold at the Syro-Macedonian Court, and Antiochus readily came into the views of Ptolemy, and pronounced the High Priest innocent. He thought, however, that in so grave a matter some one must be punished, and, as he had acquitted Menelaus, he could only condemn his accusers. These unfortunates suffered death at his hands, whereon the Tyrians, compassionating their fate, and to mark their sense of the iniquity of the sentence, decreed to give them an honourable burial. The historian who relates the circumstance evidently feels that it was a bold and courageous act, very creditable to the Tyrian people.14455

The Phoenicians, in return, served enthusiastically on the Syro-Macedonian fleet and showed their leaders the respect and honor they deserved. However, they weren’t afraid to express their own opinions and judgments, even in matters that personally involved the kings. Once, when Antiochus Epiphanes was holding his court in Tyre, an important case was brought to him by the authorities from Jerusalem. The high priest at the time, Menelaus, who had purchased his position from the Syrian king, was accused of stealing several holy vessels from the Temple and selling them for his own profit. The Sanhedrin, who were prosecuting Menelaus, sent three representatives to Tyre to handle the case and push the charges against him. The evidence was so overwhelming that the High Priest realized he had no chance of acquittal unless through private interests. He therefore bribed a powerful courtier named Ptolemy, son of a certain Dorymenes, to plead with Antiochus on his behalf and try to secure his acquittal. The situation wasn’t too difficult; justice was often bought and sold at the Syro-Macedonian Court, and Antiochus quickly sided with Ptolemy, declaring the High Priest innocent. However, he felt that in such a serious matter, someone had to be punished, so since he had acquitted Menelaus, he could only condemn his accusers. These unfortunate men were executed, and the Tyrians, feeling sympathy for their plight and recognizing the injustice of the sentence, decided to give them a respectful burial. The historian recounting this event clearly views it as a bold and courageous act that reflects well on the Tyrian people.

It is not always, however, that we can justly praise the conduct of the Phoenicians at this period. Within six years of the time when the Tyrians showed themselves at once so courageous and so compassionate, the nation generally was guilty of complicity in a most unjust and iniquitous design. Epiphanes, having driven the Jews into rebellion by a most cruel religious persecution, and having more than once suffered defeat at their hands, resolved to revenge himself by utterly destroying the people which had provoked his resentment.14456 Called away to the eastern provinces by a pressing need, he left instructions with his general, Lysias, to invade Judæa with an overwhelming force, and, after crushing all resistance, to sell the surviving population—men, women, and children—for slaves. Lysias, in B.C. 165, marched into Judæa, accompanied by a large army, with the full intention of carrying out to the letter his master’s commands. In order to attract purchasers for the multitude whom he would have to sell, he made proclamation that the rate of sale should be a talent for ninety, or less than 3l. a head,14457 while at the same he invited the attendance of the merchants from all “the cities of the sea-coast,” who must have been mainly, if not wholly, Phoenicians. The temptation was greater than Phoenician virtue could resist. The historian tells us that “the merchants of the country, hearing the fame of the Syrians, took silver and gold very much, with servants, and came into the Syrian camp to buy the children of Israel for money."14458 The result was a well-deserved disappointment. The Syrian army suffered complete defeat at the hands of the Jews, and had to beat a hasty retreat; the merchants barely escaped with their lives. As for the money which they had brought with them for the purchase of the captives, it fell into the hands of the victorious Jews, and formed no inconsiderable part of the booty which rewarded their valour.14459

It is not always fair to praise the behavior of the Phoenicians during this time. Within six years of when the Tyrians demonstrated both bravery and compassion, the nation as a whole was involved in a very unjust and wicked plan. Epiphanes, having pushed the Jews into rebellion through brutal religious persecution and suffering several defeats against them, decided to take revenge by completely destroying the people who had angered him. Called away to the eastern provinces due to an urgent need, he instructed his general, Lysias, to invade Judea with a massive force and, after crushing all resistance, to sell the remaining population—men, women, and children—as slaves. In 165 B.C., Lysias marched into Judea with a large army, fully intending to follow his master’s orders to the letter. To attract buyers for the large number of people he intended to sell, he announced that the selling price would be a talent for ninety, or less than £3 per head, while also inviting merchants from all “the cities of the sea-coast,” who must have mostly been, if not entirely, Phoenicians. The lure was too strong for Phoenician ethics to resist. The historian tells us that “the merchants of the country, hearing the fame of the Syrians, took silver and gold very much, with servants, and came into the Syrian camp to buy the children of Israel for money." The outcome was a well-deserved disappointment. The Syrian army suffered a complete defeat at the hands of the Jews and had to retreat in a hurry; the merchants barely escaped with their lives. As for the money they had brought for purchasing the captives, it fell into the hands of the victorious Jews and made up a significant part of the spoils that rewarded their bravery.

After this, we hear but little of any separate action on the part of the Phoenicians, or of any Phoenician city, during the Seleucid period. Phoenicia became rapidly Hellenised; and except that they still remained devoted to commercial pursuits, the cities had scarcely any distinctive character, or anything that marked them out as belonging to a separate nationality. Greek legends became more frequent upon the coins; Greek names were more and more affected, especially by the upper classes; the men of letters discarded Phoenician as a literary language, and composed the works, whereby they sought to immortalize their names, in Greek. Greek philosophy was studied in the schools of Sidon;14460 and at Byblus Phoenician mythology was recast upon a Greek type. At the same time Phoenician art conformed itself more and more closely to Greek models, until all that was rude in it, or archaic, or peculiar, died out, and the productions of Phoenician artists became mere feeble imitations of second-rate Greek patterns.

After this, we hear very little about any separate actions by the Phoenicians or any Phoenician city during the Seleucid period. Phoenicia quickly became Hellenized; and aside from their continued focus on commerce, the cities hardly had any distinctive character or anything that set them apart as belonging to a separate nationality. Greek legends became more common on coins; Greek names were increasingly adopted, especially by the upper classes; writers abandoned Phoenician as a literary language and created their works, which they hoped would make them famous, in Greek. Greek philosophy was studied in the schools of Sidon;14460 and at Byblus, Phoenician mythology was reshaped in a Greek style. Meanwhile, Phoenician art increasingly conformed to Greek models, until all that was rough, archaic, or unique faded away, and the works of Phoenician artists became weak imitations of second-rate Greek styles.

The nation gave itself mainly to the pursuit of wealth. The old trades were diligently plied. Tyre retained its pre-eminence in the manufacture of the purple dye; and Sidon was still unrivalled in the production of glass. Commerce continued to enrich the merchant princes, while at the same time it provided a fairly lucrative employment for the mass of the people. A new source of profit arose from the custom, introduced by the Syro-Macedonians, of farming the revenue. In Phoenicia, as in Syria generally, the taxes of each city were let out year by year to some of the wealthiest men of the place,14461 who collected them with extreme strictness, and made over but a small proportion of the amount to the Crown. Large fortunes were made in this way, though occasionally foreigners would step in, and outbid the Phoenician speculators,14462 who were not content unless they gained above a hundred per cent. on each transaction. Altogether, Phoenicia may be pronounced to have enjoyed much material prosperity under the Seleucid princes, though, in the course of the civil wars between the different pretenders to the Crown, most of the cities had, from time to time, to endure sieges. Accho especially, which had received from the Lagid princes the name of Ptolemaïs, and was now the most important and flourishing of the Phoenician towns, had frequently to resist attack, and was more than once taken by storm.14463

The nation primarily focused on acquiring wealth. The traditional trades were worked hard. Tyre remained the leading producer of purple dye, and Sidon still dominated glass production. Commerce continued to enrich wealthy merchants while also providing relatively good jobs for the majority of the population. A new way to profit emerged from the practice, introduced by the Syro-Macedonians, of farming out tax collection. In Phoenicia, much like elsewhere in Syria, the taxes of each city were leased annually to some of the richest locals, who collected them very strictly and paid only a small portion to the Crown. Large fortunes were made this way, although sometimes outsiders would come in and outbid the Phoenician entrepreneurs, who weren't satisfied unless they made over a hundred percent profit on each deal. Overall, Phoenicia can be said to have experienced significant material prosperity under the Seleucid rulers, although during the civil wars among various claimants to the throne, most cities frequently had to withstand sieges. Accho, in particular, which was named Ptolemaïs by the Lagid princes and was now the most important and thriving Phoenician city, often had to fend off attacks and was captured by force more than once.





8. Phoenicia under the Romans (B.C. 65-A.D. 650)

     Syria made a Roman province, B.C. 65—Privileges granted by
     Rome to the Phoenician cities—Phoenicia profits by the
     Roman suppression of piracy, but suffers from Parthian
     ravages—The Phoenicians offend Augustus and lose their
     favoured position, but recover it under later emperors—
     Mention of the Phoenician cities in the New Testament—
     Phoenicia accepts Christianity—Phoenician bishops at the
     early Councils—Phoenician literature at this date—Works of
     Antipater, Apollonius, Philo, Hermippus, Marinus, Maximus,
     and Porphyry—School of law at Berytus—Survival of the
     Phoenician commercial spirit—Survival of the religion—
     Summary.
     Syria became a Roman province in 65 B.C.—Privileges granted by Rome to the Phoenician cities—Phoenicia benefits from Rome's fight against piracy but suffers due to Parthian invasions—The Phoenicians upset Augustus and lose their favored status, but regain it under later emperors—Mention of the Phoenician cities in the New Testament—Phoenicia embraces Christianity—Phoenician bishops at the early Councils—Phoenician literature from this time—Works by Antipater, Apollonius, Philo, Hermippus, Marinus, Maximus, and Porphyry—Law school at Berytus—Continued Phoenician commercial spirit—Endurance of the religion—Summary.

The kingdom of the Seleucidæ came to an end through its own internal weakness and corruption. In B.C. 83 their subjects, whether native Asiatics or Syro-Macedonians, were so weary of the perpetual series of revolts, civil wars, and assassinations that they invited Tigranes, the king of the neighbouring Armenia, to step in and undertake the government of the country.14464 Tigranes ruled from B.C. 83 till B.C. 69, when he was attacked by the Romans, to whom he had given just cause of offence by his conduct in the Mithridatic struggle. Compelled by Lucullus to relinquish Syria, he retired to his own dominions, and was succeeded by the last Seleucid prince, Antiochus Asiaticus, who reigned from B.C. 69 to B.C. 65. Rome then at length came forward, and took the inheritance to which she had become entitled a century and a quarter earlier by the battle of Magnesia, and which she could have occupied at any moment during the interval, had it suited her purpose. The combat with Mithridates had forced her to become an Asiatic power; and having once overcome her repugnance to being entangled in Asiatic politics, she allowed her instinct of self-aggrandizement to have full play, and reduced the kingdom of the Seleucidæ into the form of a Roman province.14465

The kingdom of the Seleucids ended due to its own internal weaknesses and corruption. In 83 B.C., their subjects, whether native Asians or Syro-Macedonians, were so tired of the constant revolts, civil wars, and assassinations that they invited Tigranes, the king of neighboring Armenia, to take over the governance of the country. Tigranes ruled from 83 B.C. until 69 B.C., when he was attacked by the Romans, who had just cause for offense due to his actions in the Mithridatic conflict. Forced by Lucullus to give up Syria, he returned to his own territory and was succeeded by the last Seleucid prince, Antiochus Asiaticus, who reigned from 69 B.C. to 65 B.C. Rome finally stepped in and took the territory it had been entitled to a century and a quarter earlier after the battle of Magnesia, which it could have occupied at any time during that period if it had suited its interests. The conflict with Mithridates had forced Rome to become an Asian power; and having overcome its reluctance to get involved in Asian politics, it allowed its self-interest to take over, reducing the kingdom of the Seleucids to a Roman province.

The province, which retained the name of Syria, and was placed under a proconsul,14466 whose title was “Præses Syriæ,” extended from the flanks of Amanus and Taurus to Carmel and the sources of the Jordan, and thus included Phoenicia. The towns, however, of Tripolis, Sidon, and Tyre were allowed the position of “free cities,” which secured them an independent municipal government, under their own freely elected council and chief magistates. These privileges, conferred by Pompey, were not withdrawn by Julius Cæsar, when he became master of the Roman world; and hence we find him addressing a communication respecting Hyrcanus to the “Magistates, Council, and People of Sidon."14467 A similar regard was shown for Phoenician vested rights by Anthony, who in B.C. 36, when his infatuation for Cleopatra was at its height, and he agreed to make over to her the government of Palestine and of Coelesyria, as far as the river Eleutherus, especially exempted from her control, despite her earnest entreaties, the cities of Tyre and Sidon.14468 Anthony also wrote more than one letter to the “Magistates, Council, and People of Tyre,” in which he recognised them as “allies” of the Roman people rather than subjects.14469

The province, still called Syria, was governed by a proconsul, 14466 with the title “Præses Syriæ,” and stretched from the sides of Amanus and Taurus to Carmel and the sources of the Jordan, including Phoenicia. However, the cities of Tripolis, Sidon, and Tyre were granted “free city” status, which gave them independent municipal governments led by their own elected council and chief magistrates. These privileges, given by Pompey, weren't taken away by Julius Cæsar when he became the ruler of the Roman world; thus, we see him addressing a message about Hyrcanus to the “Magistrates, Council, and People of Sidon.” 14467 Anthony also showed similar respect for Phoenician rights when, in B.C. 36, at the height of his obsession with Cleopatra, he agreed to give her control over the governance of Palestine and Coelesyria up to the river Eleutherus, explicitly exempting the cities of Tyre and Sidon from her rule, despite her urgent pleas. 14468 Anthony also wrote several letters to the “Magistrates, Council, and People of Tyre,” recognizing them as “allies” of the Roman people rather than subjects. 14469

So far the Phoenicians would seem to have gained rather than lost by exchanging the dominion of Syria for that of Rome. They gained also greatly by the strictness with which Rome kept the police of the Eastern Mediterranean. For many years previously to B.C. 67 their commerce had been preyed upon to an enormous extent by the piratical fleets, which, issuing from the creeks and harbours of Western Cilicia and Pamphylia, spread terror on every side,14470 and made the navigation of the Levant and Ægean as dangerous as it had been in the days anterior to Minos.14471 Pompey, in that year, completely destroyed the piratical fleets, attacked the pirates in their lairs, and cleared them out from every spot where they had established themselves. Voyages by sea became once more as safe as travels by land; and a vigilant watch being kept on all the coasts and islands, piracy was never again permitted to gather strength, or become a serious evil. The Phoenician merchants could once more launch their trading vessels on the Mediterranean waters without fear of their suffering capture, and were able to insure their cargoes at a moderate premium.

So far, it seems the Phoenicians have gained more than they lost by trading the control of Syria for that of Rome. They also benefited significantly from how strictly Rome enforced law and order in the Eastern Mediterranean. For many years prior to 67 B.C., their trade had been heavily targeted by pirate fleets that came from the bays and ports of Western Cilicia and Pamphylia, spreading fear everywhere and making sailing in the Levant and Aegean as dangerous as it had been before the time of Minos. In that year, Pompey completely destroyed the pirate fleets, attacked the pirates in their hideouts, and drove them out from all the places they had taken over. Sea travel became as safe as land travel again, and with a close watch kept on all the coasts and islands, piracy was never allowed to regain strength or become a major problem. Phoenician merchants were once again able to send their trading ships into the Mediterranean without the fear of being captured and could insure their cargoes at reasonable rates.

But their connection with Rome exposed the Phoenicians to some fresh, and terrible, perils. The great attack of Crassus on Parthia in the year B.C. 53 had bitterly exasperated that savage and powerful kingdom, which was quite strong enough to retaliate, under favourable circumstances, upon the mighty mistress of the West, and to inflict severe sufferings upon Rome’s allies, subjects, and dependencies. After a preliminary trial of strength14472 in the years B.C. 522 and 51, Pacorus, the son of Orodes, in B.C. 40, crossed the Euphrates in force, defeated the Romans under Decidius Saxa, and carried fire and sword over the whole of the Syrian presidency.14473 Having taken Apamea and Antioch, he marched into Phoenicia, ravaged the open country, and compelled all the towns, except Tyre, to surrender. Tyre, notwithstanding the mole constructed by Alexander, which joined it to the continent, was still regarded as impregnable, unless invested both by sea and land; on which account Pacorus, as he had no naval force, relinquished the idea of capturing it.14474 But all the other cities either gave themselves up or were taken, and the conquest of Phoenicia being completed, the Parthian prince proceeded to occupy Palestine. Jerusalem fell into his hands, and for three years the entire tract between the Taurus range and Egypt was lost to Rome, and formed a portion of the Parthian Empire. What hardships, what insults, what outrages the Phoenicians had to endure during this interval we do not know, and can only conjecture; but the conduct of the Parthians at Jerusalem14475 makes it probable that the inhabitants of the conquered districts generally had much cause for complaint. However, the time of endurance did not last very long; in the third year from the commencement of the invasion the fortune of war turned against the assailants. Rome, under Ventidius, recovered her lost laurels. Syria was reoccupied, and the Parthians driven across the Euphrates, never again to pass it.14476

But their connection with Rome exposed the Phoenicians to new and terrible dangers. Crassus's major attack on Parthia in 53 B.C. had deeply angered that fierce and powerful kingdom, which was strong enough to retaliate, under the right conditions, against the mighty master of the West, causing severe suffering for Rome’s allies, subjects, and dependencies. After a preliminary test of strength in 522 and 51 B.C., Pacorus, the son of Orodes, crossed the Euphrates with a large force in 40 B.C., defeated the Romans under Decidius Saxa, and unleashed devastation across the entire Syrian region. After capturing Apamea and Antioch, he advanced into Phoenicia, ravaging the countryside and forcing all the cities, except Tyre, to surrender. Tyre, despite the causeway built by Alexander that connected it to the mainland, was still considered impregnable unless attacked from both land and sea; because Pacorus had no naval forces, he abandoned the idea of capturing it. But all the other cities either surrendered or were taken, and with the conquest of Phoenicia complete, the Parthian prince moved to occupy Palestine. Jerusalem fell to him, and for three years, the entire area between the Taurus Mountains and Egypt was lost to Rome and became part of the Parthian Empire. We can only guess at the hardships, insults, and outrages the Phoenicians suffered during this time; however, the behavior of the Parthians in Jerusalem makes it likely that the inhabitants of the conquered areas generally had plenty of reasons to complain. Nevertheless, the period of suffering didn’t last very long; in the third year following the invasion, the tide of war turned against the invaders. Rome, under Ventidius, regained her lost glory. Syria was reoccupied, and the Parthians were driven back across the Euphrates, never to cross it again.

In the struggle (which soon followed these events) between Antony and Augustus, Phoenicia had the misfortune to give offence to the latter. The terms on which they stood with Antony, and the protection which he had afforded to their cities against the greed of Cleopatra, naturally led them to embrace his cause; and it should scarcely have been regarded as a crime in them that they did so with ardour. But Augustus, who was certainly not clement by nature, chose to profess himself deeply aggrieved by the preference which they had shown for his rival, and, when he personally visited the East in B.C. 20, inflicted a severe punishment on two at least of the cities. Dio Cassius can scarcely be mistaken when he says that Tyre and Sidon were “enslaved”—i.e. deprived of freedom—by Augustus,14477 who must certainly have revoked the privilege originally granted by Pompey. Whether the privilege was afterwards restored is somewhat uncertain; but there is distinct evidence that more than one of the later emperors was favourably disposed to Rome’s Phoenician subjects. Claudius granted to Accho the title and status of a Roman colony;14478 while Hadrian allowed Tyre to call herself a “metropolis."14479

In the conflict that soon followed these events between Antony and Augustus, Phoenicia unfortunately offended the latter. The way they were aligned with Antony and the protection he had provided their cities against Cleopatra's greed naturally led them to support him; it shouldn’t have been seen as wrong for them to do so passionately. However, Augustus, who was certainly not forgiving by nature, claimed to be deeply hurt by their support for his rival. When he visited the East in 20 B.C., he punished at least two of their cities severely. Dio Cassius is likely correct when he states that Tyre and Sidon were “enslaved”—meaning they lost their freedom—by Augustus, who must have revoked the privilege originally granted by Pompey. It’s somewhat uncertain whether that privilege was later restored, but there is clear evidence that several subsequent emperors were favorable towards Rome's Phoenician subjects. Claudius granted Accho the title and status of a Roman colony; while Hadrian allowed Tyre to call itself a “metropolis."

Two important events have caused Tyre and Sidon to be mentioned in the New Testament. Jesus Christ, in the second year of his ministry, “arose and went” from Galilee “into the borders of Tyre and Sidon,” and there wrought a miracle at the earnest request of a “Syro-Phoenician woman."14480 And Herod Agrippa, the grandson of Herod the Great, when at Cæsarea in A.D. 44, received an embassy from “them of Tyre and Sidon,” with whom he was highly offended, and “made an oration” to the ambassadors.14481 In this latter place the continued semi-independence of Tyre and Sidon seems to be implied. Agrippa is threatening them with war, while they “desire peace.” “Their country” is spoken of as if it were distinct from all other countries. We cannot suppose that the Judæan prince would have ventured to take up this attitude if the Phoenician cities had been fully incorporated into the Roman State, since in that case quarrelling with them would have been quarrelling with Rome, a step on which even Agrippa, with all his pride and all his rashness, would scarcely have ventured. It is probable, therefore, that either Tiberius or Claudius had revoked the decree of Augustus, and re-invested the Phoenician cities with the privilege whereof the first of the emperors had deprived them.

Two significant events have led to Tyre and Sidon being mentioned in the New Testament. Jesus Christ, during his second year of ministry, “rose and went” from Galilee “into the borders of Tyre and Sidon,” and there performed a miracle at the urgent request of a “Syro-Phoenician woman."14480 And Herod Agrippa, the grandson of Herod the Great, when in Cæsarea in A.D. 44, received a delegation from “them of Tyre and Sidon,” with whom he was very displeased, and “made a speech” to the ambassadors.14481 In this latter case, the ongoing semi-independence of Tyre and Sidon seems to be indicated. Agrippa is threatening them with war, while they “desire peace.” “Their country” is referred to as if it were separate from all other lands. We can't assume that the Judean prince would have adopted this position if the Phoenician cities had been fully integrated into the Roman Empire, since in that scenario, quarrelling with them would mean quarrelling with Rome, a risky move that even Agrippa, with all his pride and recklessness, would likely avoid. Thus, it’s likely that either Tiberius or Claudius had overturned Augustus's decree and restored the Phoenician cities their lost privileges.

Not long after this, about A.D. 57, we have evidence that the great religious and social movement of the age had swept the Phoenician cities within its vortex, and that, in some of them at any rate, Christian communities had been formed, which were not ashamed openly to profess the new religion. The Gospel was preached in Phoenicia14482 as early as A.D. 41. Sixteen years later, when St. Paul, on his return from his third missionary journey, landed at Tyre, and proceeded thence to Ptolemaïs, he found at both places “churches,” or congregations of Christians, who received him kindly, ministered to his wants, prayed with him, and showed a warm interest in his welfare.14483 These communities afterwards expanded. By the end of the second century after Christ Tyre was the seat of a bishopric, which held an important place among the Syrian Sees. Several Tyrian bishops of the second, third, and fourth centuries are known to us, as Cassius (ab. A.D. 198), Marinus (A.D. 253), Methodius (A.D. 267-305), Tyrannion (A.D. 310), and Paulinus (A.D. 328). Early in the fourth century (B.C. 335) Tyre was the seat of a synod or council, called to consider charges made against the great Athanasius,14484 who was taxed with cruelty, impiety, and the use of magical arts. As the bishops who assembled belonged chiefly to the party of Arius, the judgment of the council condemned Athanasius, and deprived him of his see. On appeal the decision was reversed; Athanasius was reinstated,14485 and advanced; the cause with which he had identified himself triumphed; and the Synod of Tyre being pronounced unorthodox, the Tyrian church, like that of Antioch, sank in the estimation of the Church at large.

Not long after this, around A.D. 57, there's evidence that the significant religious and social movement of the time had swept through the Phoenician cities, and that, at least in some of them, Christian communities had formed, which weren't shy about openly professing the new faith. The Gospel was preached in Phoenicia14482 as early as A.D. 41. Sixteen years later, when St. Paul returned from his third missionary journey and landed in Tyre, then went to Ptolemaïs, he found “churches,” or groups of Christians, in both places who welcomed him warmly, took care of his needs, prayed with him, and showed genuine concern for his well-being.14483 These communities later grew. By the end of the second century after Christ, Tyre had become the center of a bishopric that held an important position among the Syrian Sees. Several bishops from Tyre in the second, third, and fourth centuries are known to us, including Cassius (around A.D. 198), Marinus (A.D. 253), Methodius (A.D. 267-305), Tyrannion (A.D. 310), and Paulinus (A.D. 328). Early in the fourth century (B.C. 335), Tyre hosted a synod or council to address accusations against the renowned Athanasius,14484 who was accused of cruelty, impiety, and using magical practices. Since most of the bishops who gathered were from the group of Arius, the council condemned Athanasius and removed him from his position. Upon appeal, the decision was overturned; Athanasius was reinstated,14485 and promoted; the cause he had aligned himself with succeeded; and the Synod of Tyre was deemed unorthodox, leading to the Tyrian church, like that of Antioch, falling out of favor with the broader Church.

Tyre also made herself obnoxious to the Christian world in another way. In the middle of the third century she produced the celebrated philosopher, Porphyry,14486 who, of all the literary opponents of Christianity, was the most vigorous and the most successful. Porphyry appears to have been a Phoenician by descent. His original name was Malchus—i.e. Melek or Malik, “king.” To disguise his Asiatic origin, and ingratiate himself with the literary class of the day, who were chiefly Greeks or Grecised Romans, he took the Hellenic and far more sonorous appellation of Porphyrius, which he regarded as a sort of synonym, since purple was the royal colour. He early gave himself to the study of philosophy, and was indefatigable in his efforts to acquire knowledge and learning of every kind. In Asia, probably at Tyre itself, he attended the lectures of Origen; at Athens he studied under Apollonius and Longinus; in Rome, whereto he ultimately gravitated, he attached himself to the Neo-Platonic school of Plotinus. His literary labours, which were enormous, had for their general object the establishment of that eclectic system which Ammonius Saccas, Plotinus, Jamblichus, and others had elaborated, and were endeavouring to impose upon the world as constituting at once true religion and true philosophy. He was of a constructive rather than a destructive turn of mind. Still, he thought it of great importance, and a necessity of the times, that he should write a book against the Christians, whose opinions were, he knew, making such progress as raised the suspicion that they would prevail over all others, and in a short time become universal. This polemical treatise ran to fifteen books, and “exhibited considerable acquaintance with both the Jewish and the Christian scriptures."14487 It is now lost, but its general character is well known from the works of Eusebius, Jerome, and others. The style was caustic and trenchant. An endeavour was made to show that both the historical scriptures of the Old Testament and the Gospels and Acts in the New were full of discrepancies and contradictions. The history and antiquities of the Jews, as put forth in the Bible, were examined, and declared to be unworthy of credit. A special attack was made on the genuineness and authenticity of the book of Daniel, which was pronounced to be the work of a contemporary of Antiochus Epiphanes, who succeeded in palming off upon his countrymen his own crude production as the work of the venerated sage and prophet. Prevalent modes of interpreting scripture were passed under review, and the allegorical exegesis of Origen was handled with especial severity. The work is said to have produced a vast effect, especially among the upper classes, whose conversion to Christianity it tended greatly to check and hinder. Answers to the book, or to particular portions of it, were published by Eusebius of Cæsarea, by Apollinaris, and by Methodius, Bishop of Tyre; but these writers had neither the learning nor the genius of their opponent, and did little to counteract the influence of his work on the upper grades of society.14488

Tyre also made itself unwelcome to the Christian world in another way. In the middle of the third century, it gave rise to the famous philosopher, Porphyry, who, of all the literary critics of Christianity, was the most vigorous and the most effective. Porphyry seems to have been of Phoenician descent. His original name was Malchus—meaning Melek or Malik, “king.” To hide his Asian roots and win favor with the literary crowd of the time, who were mostly Greeks or Romanized Greeks, he adopted the Greek name Porphyrius, which he saw as a sort of synonym since purple was the royal color. He dedicated himself early on to studying philosophy and worked tirelessly to gain knowledge and learning of all types. In Asia, likely in Tyre itself, he attended Origen's lectures; in Athens, he studied under Apollonius and Longinus; and in Rome, where he ultimately settled, he joined the Neo-Platonic school of Plotinus. His extensive literary work aimed to establish the eclectic system created by Ammonius Saccas, Plotinus, Jamblichus, and others, and to promote it as both true religion and true philosophy. He had a constructive mindset rather than a destructive one. Still, he felt it was very important, and a necessity of the times, to write a book against the Christians, whose views were gaining traction, raising the concern that they might overshadow all others and soon become universal. This polemical work comprised fifteen books and “showed considerable familiarity with both the Jewish and Christian scriptures.”14487 It is now lost, but its overall nature is well-known from the writings of Eusebius, Jerome, and others. The style was sharp and incisive. He attempted to demonstrate that both the historical scriptures of the Old Testament and the Gospels and Acts of the New Testament were filled with discrepancies and contradictions. The history and traditions of the Jews as presented in the Bible were scrutinized and deemed untrustworthy. A specific attack was launched against the authenticity of the book of Daniel, which was said to be authored by a contemporary of Antiochus Epiphanes who managed to pass off his own rough work as the creation of the esteemed sage and prophet. Popular methods of interpreting scripture were reviewed, with Origen's allegorical approach receiving particular criticism. The work is said to have had a significant impact, especially among the upper classes, whose conversion to Christianity it greatly impeded. Responses to the book, or to certain sections of it, were published by Eusebius of Caesarea, Apollinaris, and Methodius, Bishop of Tyre; however, these authors lacked the knowledge and talent of their adversary and did little to diminish the influence of his work on the higher levels of society.14488

The literary importance of the Phoenician cities under the Romans is altogether remarkable. Under Augustus and Tiberius—especially from about B.C. 40 to A.D. 20—Sidon was the seat of a philosophical school, in which the works of Aristotle were studied and explained,14489 perhaps to some extent criticised.14490 Strabo attended this school for a time in conjunction with two other students, named Boëthus and Diodotus. Tyre had even previously produced the philosophers, Antipater, who was intimate with the younger Cato, and Apollonius, who wrote a work about Zeno, and formed a descriptive catalogue of the authors who had composed books on the subject of the philosophy of the Stoics.14491 Strabo goes so far as to say that philosophy in all its various aspects might in his day be better studied at Tyre and Sidon than anywhere else.14492 A little later we find Byblus producing the semi-religious historian, Philo, who professed to reveal to the Greeks the secrets of the ancient Phoenician mythology, and who, whatever we may think of his judgment, was certainly a man of considerable learning. He was followed by his pupil, Hermippus, who was contemporary with Trajan and Hadrian, and obtained some reputation as a critic and grammarian.14493 About the same time flourished Marinus, the writer on geography, who was a Tyrian by birth, and “the first author who substituted maps, mathematically constructed according to latitude and longitude, for the itinerary charts” of his predecessors.14494 Ptolemy of Pelusium based his great work entirely upon that of Marinus, who is believed to have utilised the geographical and hydrographical accumulations of the old Phoenician navigators, besides availing himself of the observations of Hipparchus, and of the accounts given of their travels by various Greek and Roman authors. Contemporary with Marinus was Paulus, a native of Tyre, who was noted as a rhetorician, and deputed by his city to go as their representative to Rome and plead the cause of the Tyrians before Hadrian.14495 A little later we hear of Maximus, who flourished under Marcus Aurelius and Commodus (ab. A.D. 160-190), a Tyrian, like Paulus, and a rhetorician and Platonic philosopher.14496 The literary glories of Tyre culminated and terminated with Porphyry, of whose works we have already given an account.

The literary significance of the Phoenician cities during Roman times is truly remarkable. Under Augustus and Tiberius—especially from around 40 B.C. to A.D. 20—Sidon became home to a philosophical school that studied and explained the works of Aristotle, and perhaps even critiqued them. Strabo attended this school for a time along with two other students, Boëthus and Diodotus. Tyre had already produced philosophers like Antipater, who was close to the younger Cato, and Apollonius, who wrote about Zeno and created a descriptive catalog of the authors who wrote about Stoic philosophy. Strabo even claimed that during his time, philosophy in all its various forms could be better studied in Tyre and Sidon than anywhere else. Shortly after, Byblus produced the semi-religious historian Philo, who claimed to uncover the secrets of ancient Phoenician mythology for the Greeks, and despite our opinions on his judgment, he was undeniably quite learned. He was followed by his student, Hermippus, who lived during the reigns of Trajan and Hadrian and gained some recognition as a critic and grammarian. Around the same period, Marinus, a geographer from Tyre, emerged as “the first author to replace the itinerary charts of his predecessors with maps mathematically constructed according to latitude and longitude.” Ptolemy of Pelusium based his significant work entirely on Marinus's, who is thought to have drawn on the geographical and hydrographical knowledge of ancient Phoenician navigators, as well as the observations of Hipparchus and the travel accounts from various Greek and Roman writers. Contemporaneous with Marinus was Paulus, a Tyrian noted for his rhetoric, who was sent by his city to represent them in Rome and advocate for the Tyrians before Hadrian. A bit later, we learn about Maximus, who thrived under Marcus Aurelius and Commodus (around A.D. 160-190), also a Tyrian, and a rhetorician and Platonic philosopher. The literary achievements of Tyre peaked and concluded with Porphyry, whose works we have already discussed.

Towards the middle of the third century after Christ a school of law and jurisprudence arose at Berytus, which attained high distinction, and is said by Gibbon14497 to have furnished the eastern provinces of the empire with pleaders and magistrates for the space of three centuries (A.D. 250-550). The course of education at Berytus lasted five years, and included Roman Law in all its various forms, the works of Papinian being especially studied in the earlier times, and the same together with the edicts of Justinian in the later.14498 Pleaders were forced to study either at Berytus, or at Rome, or at Constantinople,14499 and, the honours and emoluments of the profession being large, the supply of students was abundant and perpetual. External misfortune, and not internal decay, at last destroyed the school, the town of Berytus being completely demolished by an earthquake in the year A.D. 551. The school was then transferred to Sidon, but appears to have languished on its transplantation to a new soil and never to have recovered its pristine vigour or vitality.

Towards the middle of the third century AD, a law and jurisprudence school was established in Berytus, which gained significant recognition. Gibbon14497 noted that it provided the eastern provinces of the empire with lawyers and magistrates for three centuries (AD 250-550). The educational program in Berytus lasted five years and covered Roman Law in all its forms, with a particular focus on the works of Papinian during the earlier years, and the same alongside the edicts of Justinian later on.14498 Aspiring lawyers had to study either in Berytus, Rome, or Constantinople,14499 and with generous rewards and benefits in the profession, there was a constant and plentiful supply of students. Ultimately, it was external disasters, not internal decline, that led to the school's demise, as Berytus was completely destroyed by an earthquake in AD 551. The school was then moved to Sidon, but it seemed to struggle in its new location and never regained its former strength or energy.

It is difficult to decide how far these literary glories of the Phoenician cities reflect any credit on the Phoenician race. Such a number of Greeks settled in Syria and Phoenicia under the Seleucidæ that to be a Tyrian or a Sidonian in the Græco-Roman period furnished no evidence at all of a man having any Phoenician blood in his veins. It will have been observed that the names of the Tyrian, Sidonian, and Berytian learned men and authors of the time—Antipater, Apollonius, Boëthus, Diodotus, Philo, Hermippus, Marinus, Paulus, Maximus, Porphyrius—are without exception either Latin or Greek. The language in which the books were written was universally Greek, and in only one or two cases is there reason to suppose that the authors had any knowledge of the Phoenician tongue. The students at Berytus between A.D. 250 and 550 were probably, in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred, Greeks or Romans. Phoenician nationality had, in fact, almost wholly disappeared in the Seleucid period. The old language ceased to be spoken, and though for some time retained upon the coins together with a Greek legend,14500 became less frequent as time went on, and soon after the Christian era disappeared altogether. It is probable that, as a spoken language, Phoenician had gone out of use even earlier.14501

It’s tough to figure out how much the literary achievements of the Phoenician cities actually reflect positively on the Phoenician people. A significant number of Greeks settled in Syria and Phoenicia during the Seleucid era, so identifying as a Tyrian or a Sidonian in the Greco-Roman period didn’t necessarily mean someone had Phoenician ancestry. You’ll notice that the names of learned men and authors from Tyre, Sidon, and Berytus during that time—like Antipater, Apollonius, Boëthus, Diodotus, Philo, Hermippus, Marinus, Paulus, Maximus, and Porphyrius—are all either Latin or Greek. The language of the books was predominantly Greek, and in only a couple of instances is there any evidence that the authors knew the Phoenician language. Most of the students at Berytus between A.D. 250 and 550 were likely Greeks or Romans—basically, 99 out of 100. Phoenician identity had nearly vanished during the Seleucid period. The old language stopped being spoken, and while it was still found on coins alongside Greek inscriptions for some time, it became less common as the years went by and eventually disappeared entirely after the Christian era. It’s likely that Phoenician had already fallen out of use as a spoken language even earlier.

In two respects only did the old national spirit survive, and give indication that, even in the nation’s “ashes,” there still lived some remnant of its “wonted fires.” Tyre and Sidon were great commercial centres down to the time of the Crusades, and quite as rich, quite as important, quite as flourishing, commercially, as in the old days of Hiram and Ithobal. Mela14502 speaks of Sidon in the second century after Christ as “still opulent.” Ulpian,14503 himself a Tyrian by descent, calls Tyre in the reign of Septimus Severus “a most splendid colony.” A writer of the age of Constantine says of it: “The prosperity of Tyre is extraordinary. There is no state in the whole of the East which excels it in the amount of its business. Its merchants are persons of great wealth, and there is no port where they do not exercise considerable influence."14504 St. Jerome, towards the end of the fourth century, speaks of Tyre as “the noblest and most beautiful of all the cities of Phoenicia,"14505 and as “an emporium for the commerce of almost the whole world."14506 During the period of the Crusades, “Tyre retained its ancient pre-eminence among the cities of the Syrian coast, and excited the admiration of the warriors of Europe by its capacious harbours, its wall, triple towards the land and double towards the sea, its still active commerce, and the beauty and fertility of the opposite shore.” The manufactures of purple and of glass were still carried on. Tyre was not reduced to insignificance until the Saracenic conquest towards the close of the thirteenth century of our era, when its trade collapsed, and it became “a rock for fishermen to spread their nets upon."14507

In only two ways did the old national spirit persist, showing that even in the nation's "ashes," there was still some remnant of its "once vibrant fires." Tyre and Sidon remained major commercial hubs right up to the Crusades, just as wealthy, important, and prosperous as in the days of Hiram and Ithobal. Mela14502 mentions Sidon in the second century after Christ as “still rich.” Ulpian,14503 a Tyrian by descent, describes Tyre during the reign of Septimus Severus as “a very splendid colony.” A writer from the time of Constantine notes: “The prosperity of Tyre is remarkable. There is no state in the whole of the East that surpasses it in business volume. Its merchants are very wealthy, and there's no port where they don't have considerable influence."14504 St. Jerome, toward the end of the fourth century, calls Tyre “the noblest and most beautiful of all the cities of Phoenicia,"14505 and “a trading center for almost the entire world."14506 During the Crusades, “Tyre maintained its historical prominence among the cities of the Syrian coast, impressing European warriors with its large harbors, triple walls facing landward and double walls facing the sea, ongoing commerce, and the beauty and fertility of the opposite shore.” The production of purple dye and glass continued. Tyre didn't lose its significance until the Saracenic conquest near the end of the thirteenth century, when its trade collapsed, and it became “a rock for fishermen to spread their nets upon."14507

The other respect in which the vitality of the old national spirit displayed itself was in the continuance of the ancient religion. While Christianity was adopted very generally by the more civilised of the inhabitants, and especially by those who occupied the towns, there were shrines and fanes in the remote districts, and particularly in the less accessible parts of Lebanon, where the old rites were still in force, and the old orgies continued to be carried on, just as in ancient times, down to the reign of Constantine. The account of the licentious worship of Ashtoreth at Aphaca, which has been already quoted from Eusebius, belongs to the fourth century after our era, and shows the tenacity with which a section of the Phoenicians, not withstanding their Hellenisation in language, in literature, and in art, clung to the old barbarous and awful cult, which had come down to them by tradition from their fathers. A similar worship at the same time maintained itself on the other side of the Lebanon chain in Heliopolis, or Baalbek, where the votaries of impurity allowed their female relatives, even their wives and their daughters, to play the harlot as much as they pleased.14508 Constantine exerted himself to put down and crush out these iniquities, but it is more than probable that, in the secret recesses of the mountain region, whither government officials would find it hard to penetrate, the shameful and degrading rites still found a refuge, rooted as they were in the depraved affections of the common people, to a much later period.

The other way the old national spirit showed its vitality was through the continuation of the ancient religion. While Christianity was widely adopted by the more civilized inhabitants, especially those in the towns, there were shrines and temples in remote areas, particularly in the harder-to-reach parts of Lebanon, where the old rituals were still practiced, and the old wild celebrations continued just as they had in ancient times, right up to the reign of Constantine. The account of the debased worship of Ashtoreth at Aphaca, which has already been quoted from Eusebius, belongs to the fourth century AD and highlights the stubbornness with which a portion of the Phoenicians, despite their Hellenization in language, literature, and art, clung to the old savage and horrific cult, passed down from their ancestors. A similar worship also persisted at the same time on the other side of the Lebanon mountain range in Heliopolis, or Baalbek, where the followers of immorality allowed their female relatives, including their wives and daughters, to engage in prostitution as much as they wanted. Constantine worked hard to suppress and eliminate these sins, but it's highly likely that in the hidden corners of the mountainous regions, where government officials would struggle to reach, the shameful and degrading rituals continued to find a safe haven, deeply rooted in the corrupt desires of the common people, for a long time.

The mission of the Phoenicians, as a people, was accomplished before the subjection to Rome began. Under the Romans they were still ingenious, industrious, intelligent. But in the earlier times they were far more than this. They were the great pioneers of civilisation. Intrepid, inventive, enterprising, they at once made vast progress in the arts themselves, and carried their knowledge, their active habits, and their commercial instincts into the remotest regions of the old continent. They exercised a stimulating, refining, and civilising influence wherever they went. North and south and east and west they adventured themselves amid perils of all kinds, actuated by the love of adventure more than by the thirst for gain, conferring benefits, spreading knowledge, suggesting, encouraging, and developing trade, turning men from the barbarous and unprofitable pursuits of war and bloodshed to the peaceful occupations of productive industry. They did not aim at conquest. They united the various races of men by the friendly links of mutual advantage and mutual dependence, conciliated them, softened them, humanised them. While, among the nations of the earth generally, brute force was worshipped as the true source of power and the only basis of national repute, the Phoenicians succeeded in proving that as much could be done by arts as by arms, as great glory and reputation gained, as real a power built up, by the quiet agencies of exploration, trade, and commerce, as by the violent and brutal methods of war, massacre, and ravage. They were the first to set this example. If the history of the world since their time has not been wholly one of the potency in human affairs of “blood and iron,” it is very much owing to them. They, and their kinsmen of Carthage, showed mankind what a power might be wielded by commercial states. The lesson has not been altogether neglected in the past. May the writer be pardoned if, in the last words of what is probably his last historical work, he expresses a hope that, in the future, the nations of the earth will more and more take the lesson to heart, and vie with each other in the arts which made Phoenicia great, rather than in those which exalted Rome, her oppressor and destroyer?

The mission of the Phoenicians as a people was completed before they fell under Roman control. Even under the Romans, they remained clever, hardworking, and intelligent. However, in earlier times, they were much more than that. They were the great pioneers of civilization. Brave, creative, and ambitious, they made significant advancements in the arts and spread their knowledge, active habits, and commercial instincts to the farthest corners of the old continent. They had a stimulating, refining, and civilizing impact wherever they traveled. They explored north, south, east, and west, facing all kinds of dangers, driven by a love for adventure more than a desire for profit, offering benefits, spreading knowledge, encouraging trade, and guiding people away from the brutal and unproductive pursuits of war towards peaceful and productive work. They didn’t seek conquest. They brought different races together through mutual benefits and interdependence, easing tensions, softening hostility, and humanizing societies. While brute force was generally celebrated as the true source of power and the foundation of national reputation among the world's nations, the Phoenicians demonstrated that much could be achieved through art as well as through arms, gaining great glory and reputation, and building real power through the quiet efforts of exploration, trade, and commerce, rather than through violent and brutal acts of war, massacre, and destruction. They were the first to set this example. If the history of the world since their time hasn't solely centered on the influence of “blood and iron,” it’s largely due to them. They and their relatives in Carthage showed humanity the power that could be wielded by commercial states. This lesson hasn’t been entirely forgotten throughout history. May the writer be forgiven if, in the closing words of what is likely his last historical work, he expresses a hope that in the future the nations of the earth will increasingly embrace this lesson and compete with each other in the arts that made Phoenicia great, rather than in those that glorified Rome, her oppressor and destroyer?





FOOTNOTES





PREFACE

01 (return)
[ Die Phönizier, und das phönizische Alterthum, by F. C. Movers, in five volumes, Berlin, 1841-1856.]

01 (return)
[ The Phoenicians and Phoenician Antiquity, by F. C. Movers, in five volumes, Berlin, 1841-1856.]

02 (return)
[ History and Antiquities of Phoenicia, by John Kenrick, London, 1855.]

02 (return)
[ History and Antiquities of Phoenicia, by John Kenrick, London, 1855.]

03 (return)
[ Histoire de l’Art dans l’Antiquité, par MM. Perrot et Chipiez, Paris, 1881-7, 4 vols.]

03 (return)
[ The History of Art in Antiquity, by Perrot and Chipiez, Paris, 1881-7, 4 vols.]

04 (return)
[ Will of William Camden, Clarencieux King-of-Arms, founder of the “Camden Professorship,” 1662.]

04 (return)
[ Will of William Camden, Clarencieux King-of-Arms, founder of the “Camden Professorship,” 1662.]

I—THE LAND

I—THE LAND

11 (return)
[ See Eckhel, Doctr. Num. Vet. p. 441.]

11 (return)
[ See Eckhel, Doctr. Num. Vet. p. 441.]

12 (return)
[ {’H ton ‘Aradion paralia}, xvi. 2, § 12.]

12 (return)
[ {‘H ton ‘Aradion paralia}, xvi. 2, § 12.]

13 (return)
[ Pomp. Mel. De Situ Orbis, i. 12.]

13 (return)
[ Pomp. Mel. De Situ Orbis, i. 12.]

14 (return)
[ The tract of white sand (Er-Ramleh) which forms the coast-line of the entire shore from Rhinocolura to Carmel is said to be gradually encroaching, fresh sand being continually brought by the south-west wind from Egypt. “It has buried Ascalon, and in the north, between Joppa and Cæsaræa, the dunes are said to be as much as three miles wide and 300 feet high” (Grove, in Smith’s Dict. of the Bible, ii. 673).]

14 (return)
[ The stretch of white sand (Er-Ramleh) that makes up the coastline from Rhinocolura to Carmel is believed to be slowly advancing, with new sand constantly being carried by the southwest wind from Egypt. “It has covered Ascalon, and to the north, between Joppa and Cæsaræa, the dunes are reportedly as wide as three miles and reach heights of 300 feet” (Grove, in Smith’s Dict. of the Bible, ii. 673).]

15 (return)
[ See Cant. ii. 1; Is. xxxiii. 9; xxxv. 2; lxv. 10.]

15 (return)
[ See Cant. ii. 1; Is. xxxiii. 9; xxxv. 2; lxv. 10.]

16 (return)
[ Stanley, Sinai and Palestine, p. 254.]

16 (return)
[ Stanley, Sinai and Palestine, p. 254.]

17 (return)
[ The Kaneh derives its name from this circumstance, and may be called “the River of Canes.”]

17 (return)
[ The Kaneh gets its name from this fact, and can be referred to as “the River of Canes.”]

18 (return)
[ Robinson, Biblical Researches, iii. 28, 29.]

18 (return)
[ Robinson, Biblical Researches, iii. 28, 29.]

19 (return)
[ Grove, l.s.c.]

19 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Grove, l.s.c.]

110 (return)
[ Stanley, Sinai and Palestine, p. 260.]

110 (return)
[ Stanley, Sinai and Palestine, p. 260.]

111 (return)
[ Lynch found it eighteen yards in width in April 1848 (The Jordan and the Dead Sea, p. 64). He found the Belus twice as wide and twice as deep as the Kishon.]

111 (return)
[ Lynch discovered it was eighteen yards wide in April 1848 (The Jordan and the Dead Sea, p. 64). He found the Belus to be twice as wide and twice as deep as the Kishon.]

112 (return)
[ A more particular description of these fountains will be given in the description of the city of Tyre, with which they were very closely connected.]

112 (return)
[ A more detailed description of these fountains will be provided in the description of the city of Tyre, as they were closely linked.]

113 (return)
[ Robinson, Biblical Researches, iii. 410.]

113 (return)
[ Robinson, Biblical Researches, iii. 410.]

114 (return)
[ Robinson, iii. 415.]

114 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Robinson, iii. 415.]

115 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 414. Compare Renan, Mission de Phénicie, pp. 524, 665.]

115 (return)
[Same source, p. 414. See also Renan, Mission de Phénicie, pp. 524, 665.]

116 (return)
[ Robinson, iii. 420.]

116 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Robinson, iii. 420.]

117 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 353.]

117 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 353.]

118 (return)
[ See Edrisi (traduction de Joubert), i. 355; D’Arvieux, Mémoires, ii. 33; Renan, pp. 352, 353.]

118 (return)
[ See Edrisi (translation by Joubert), i. 355; D’Arvieux, Memoirs, ii. 33; Renan, pp. 352, 353.]

119 (return)
[ Gesenius, Thesaurus, p. 247.]

119 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Gesenius, Thesaurus, p. 247.]

120 (return)
[ Renan, pp. 59, 60.]

120 (return)
[ Renan, pp. 59, 60.]

121 (return)
[ Kenrick (Phoenicia, p. 8), who quotes Burckhardt (Syria, p. 161), and Chesney (Euphrates Expedition, i. 450).]

121 (return)
[ Kenrick (Phoenicia, p. 8), quoting Burckhardt (Syria, p. 161) and Chesney (Euphrates Expedition, i. 450).]

122 (return)
[ Renan, p. 59:—“C’est un immense tapis de fleurs.”]

122 (return)
[ Renan, p. 59:—"It's an enormous carpet of flowers."]

123 (return)
[ Mariti, Travels, ii. 131 (quoted by Kenrick, p. 22).]

123 (return)
[ Mariti, Travels, ii. 131 (quoted by Kenrick, p. 22).]

124 (return)
[ Strabo, xvi. 2, § 27.]

124 (return)
[ Strabo, xvi. 2, § 27.]

125 (return)
[ Stanley, Sinai and Palestine, p. 344.]

125 (return)
[ Stanley, Sinai and Palestine, p. 344.]

126 (return)
[ Martineau, Eastern Life, p. 539.]

126 (return)
[ Martineau, Eastern Life, p. 539.]

127 (return)
[ Van de Velde, Travels, i. 317, 318. Compare Porter, Giant Cities of Bashan, p. 236.]

127 (return)
[ Van de Velde, Travels, i. 317, 318. Compare Porter, Giant Cities of Bashan, p. 236.]

128 (return)
[ Ritter, Erdkunde, xvi. 31.]

128 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ritter, Geography, xvi. 31.]

129 (return)
[ Grove, in Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible, i. 278.]

129 (return)
[ Grove, in Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible, i. 278.]

130 (return)
[ Walpole’s Ansayrii, iii. 156.]

130 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Walpole’s Ansayrii, iii. 156.]

131 (return)
[ The derivation of Lebanon from “white,” is generally admitted. (see Gesenius, Thesaurus, p. 369; Buxtorf, Lexicon, p. 1119; Fürst, Concordantia, p. 588.)]

131 (return)
[ It's widely accepted that the name Lebanon comes from the word for “white.” (see Gesenius, Thesaurus, p. 369; Buxtorf, Lexicon, p. 1119; Fürst, Concordantia, p. 588.)]

132 (return)
[ Stanley, Sinai and Palestine, p. 395.]

132 (return)
[ Stanley, Sinai and Palestine, p. 395.]

133 (return)
[ Tristram, The Land of Israel, p. 634.]

133 (return)
[ Tristram, The Land of Israel, p. 634.]

134 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 7.]

134 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, p. 7.]

135 (return)
[ Porter, in Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible, ii. 86.]

135 (return)
[ Porter, in Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible, ii. 86.]

136 (return)
[ Ibid. Compare Nat. Hist. Review, No. v. p. 11.]

136 (return)
[Same source. See Nat. Hist. Review, No. v. p. 11.]

137 (return)
[ See Tristram, Land of Israel, pp. 625-629.]

137 (return)
[ See Tristram, Land of Israel, pp. 625-629.]

138 (return)
[ See Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 626.]

138 (return)
[ See Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 626.]

139 (return)
[ Porter, in Dictionary of the Bible, ii. 86.]

139 (return)
[ Porter, in Dictionary of the Bible, ii. 86.]

140 (return)
[ Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 621.]

140 (return)
[ Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 621.]

141 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 600. Compare Porter, in Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible, ii. 87.]

141 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 600. Compare Porter, in Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible, ii. 87.]

142 (return)
[ Such outlets are common in Greece, where they are called Katavothra. They probably also occur in Asia Minor.]

142 (return)
[ These types of outlets are common in Greece, where they are known as Katavothra. They likely exist in Asia Minor as well.]

143 (return)
[ Burckhardt, Travels in Syria, p. 10; Chesney, Euphrates Expedition, i. 398.]

143 (return)
[ Burckhardt, Travels in Syria, p. 10; Chesney, Euphrates Expedition, i. 398.]

144 (return)
[ Tristram, p. 600.]

144 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Tristram, p. 600.]

145 (return)
[ Porter, Handbook for Syria, p. 571; Robinson, Later Researches, p. 423.]

145 (return)
[ Porter, Handbook for Syria, p. 571; Robinson, Later Researches, p. 423.]

146 (return)
[ Tristram, p. 594.]

146 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Tristram, p. 594.]

147 (return)
[ Robinson, Biblical Researches, iii. 409.]

147 (return)
[ Robinson, Biblical Researches, iii. 409.]

148 (return)
[ Burckhardt, Travels in Syria, p. 161; Chesney, Euphrates Expedition, i. 450; Walpole’s Ansayrii, iii. 49.]

148 (return)
[ Burckhardt, Travels in Syria, p. 161; Chesney, Euphrates Expedition, i. 450; Walpole’s Ansayrii, iii. 49.]

149 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 116.]

149 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 116.]

150 (return)
[ Porter, Giant Cities of Bashan, p. 289.]

150 (return)
[ Porter, Giant Cities of Bashan, p. 289.]

151 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 288.]

151 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, p. 288.]

152 (return)
[ Walpole’s Ansayrii, iii. 44.]

152 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Walpole’s Ansayrii, iii. 44.]

153 (return)
[ Porter, Giant Cities, p. 292; Robinson, Later Researches, p. 605; Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 297.]

153 (return)
[ Porter, Giant Cities, p. 292; Robinson, Later Researches, p. 605; Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 297.]

154 (return)
[ Maundrell, Travels, pp. 57, 58; Porter, Giant Cities, p. 284; Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 283.]

154 (return)
[ Maundrell, Travels, pp. 57, 58; Porter, Giant Cities, p. 284; Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 283.]

155 (return)
[ Porter, p. 283.]

155 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Porter, p. 283.]

156 (return)
[ Porter, p. 284.]

156 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Porter, p. 284.]

157 (return)
[ Robinson, Later Researches, p. 45.]

157 (return)
[ Robinson, Later Researches, p. 45.]

158 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 43.]

158 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, p. 43.]

159 (return)
[ Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 44.]

159 (return)
[ Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 44.]

160 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 20.]

160 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 20.]

161 (return)
[ See the Transactions of the Society of Bibl. Archæology, vol. vii.; and compare Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 14; Robinson, Later Researches, pp. 617-624.]

161 (return)
[ See the Transactions of the Society of Bibl. Archaeology, vol. vii.; and compare Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 14; Robinson, Later Researches, pp. 617-624.]

162 (return)
[ Walpole’s Ansayrii, iii. 6.]

162 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Walpole’s Ansayrii, iii. 6.]

163 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 34. Compare Renan, Mission de Phénicie, who calls the pass over the spur “un véritable casse-cou sur des roches inclinées” (p. 150).]

163 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 34. Compare Renan, Mission de Phénicie, who describes the pass over the ridge as “a real danger on sloped rocks” (p. 150).]

164 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 16.]

164 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 16.]

165 (return)
[ Robinson, Biblical Researches, iii. 432.]

165 (return)
[ Robinson, Biblical Researches, vol. 3, p. 432.]

II—CLIMATE AND PRODUCTIONS

II—CLIMATE AND PRODUCTIONS

21 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 32.]

21 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 32.]

22 (return)
[ Grove, in Smith’s Dict. of the Bible, ii. 693.]

22 (return)
[ Grove, in Smith’s Dict. of the Bible, ii. 693.]

23 (return)
[ Kenrick, l.s.c.]

23 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Kenrick, l.s.c.]

24 (return)
[ See Canon Tristram’s experiences, Land of Israel, pp. 96-115.]

24 (return)
[ See Canon Tristram’s experiences, Land of Israel, pp. 96-115.]

25 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 94, 95.]

25 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 94, 95.]

26 (return)
[ Kenrick, p. 34.]

26 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Kenrick, p. 34.]

27 (return)
[ Walpole’s Ansayrii, p. 76.]

27 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Walpole’s Ansayrii, p. 76.]

28 (return)
[ Kenrick, p. 33.]

28 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Kenrick, p. 33.]

29 (return)
[ Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 95.]

29 (return)
[ Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 95.]

210 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 409.]

210 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Same source, p. 409.]

211 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 31.]

211 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, p. 31.]

212 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 34.]

212 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ibid. p. 34.]

213 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 596.]

213 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Ibid. p. 596.]

214 (return)
[ Hooker, in Dictionary of the Bible, ii. 684.]

214 (return)
[ Hooker, in Dictionary of the Bible, ii. 684.]

215 (return)
[ Hooker, in Dictionary of the Bible, p. 683.]

215 (return)
[ Hooker, in Dictionary of the Bible, p. 683.]

216 (return)
[ Dr. Hooker says:—“Q. pseudococcifera is perhaps the commonest plant in all Syria and Palestine, covering as a low dense bush many square miles of hilly country everywhere, but rarely or never growing on the plains. It seldom becomes a large tree, except in the valleys of the Lebanon.” Walpole found it on Bargylus (Ansayrii, iii. 137 et sqq.); Tristram on Lebanon, Land of Israel, pp. 113, 117.]

216 (return)
[ Dr. Hooker says:—“Q. pseudococcifera is probably the most common plant throughout Syria and Palestine, spreading as a low dense bush over many square miles of hilly terrain everywhere, but it rarely or never grows on the plains. It seldom grows into a large tree, except in the valleys of Lebanon.” Walpole found it on Bargylus (Ansayrii, iii. 137 et sqq.); Tristram on Lebanon, Land of Israel, pp. 113, 117.]

217 (return)
[ Hooker, in Dict. of the Bible, ii. 684. Compare Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 113.]

217 (return)
[ Hooker, in Dict. of the Bible, ii. 684. Compare Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 113.]

218 (return)
[ Ibid.]

218 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source.]

219 (return)
[ See Walpole, Ansayrii, iii. 222, 236; Tristram, Land of Israel, pp. 622, 623; Robinson, Later Researches, p. 607.]

219 (return)
[ See Walpole, Ansayrii, iii. 222, 236; Tristram, Land of Israel, pp. 622, 623; Robinson, Later Researches, p. 607.]

220 (return)
[ Walpole, iii. 433; Robinson, Later Researches, p.. 614.]

220 (return)
[ Walpole, iii. 433; Robinson, Later Researches, p.. 614.]

221 (return)
[ Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 6.]

221 (return)
[ Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 6.]

222 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 111; Walpole, Ansayrii, iii. 166; Hooker, in Dict. of the Bible, ii. 683.]

222 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 111; Walpole, Ansayrii, iii. 166; Hooker, in Dict. of the Bible, ii. 683.]

223 (return)
[ Walpole says that Ibrahim Pasha cut down as many as 500,000 Aleppo pines in Casius (Ansayrii, iii. 281), and that it would be quite feasible to cut down 500,000 more.]

223 (return)
[Walpole mentions that Ibrahim Pasha chopped down around 500,000 Aleppo pines in Casius (Ansayrii, iii. 281), and that it would be totally doable to cut down another 500,000.]

224 (return)
[ Hooker, in Dict. of the Bible, ii. 684; and compare Tristram, Land of Israel, pp. 16, 88.]

224 (return)
[Hooker, in Dict. of the Bible, ii. 684; and see Tristram, Land of Israel, pp. 16, 88.]

225 (return)
[ Robinson, Biblical Researches, iii. 383, 415.]

225 (return)
[ Robinson, Biblical Researches, iii. 383, 415.]

226 (return)
[ Ezek. xxxi. 3.]

226 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ezek. 31:3]

227 (return)
[ Ibid. xxvii. 5. The Hebrew erez probably covered other trees besides the actual cedar, as the Aleppo pine, and perhaps the juniper. The pine would have been more suited for masts than the cedar.]

227 (return)
[ Ibid. xxvii. 5. The Hebrew erez likely referred to various trees in addition to the actual cedar, such as the Aleppo pine and possibly the juniper. The pine would have been more suitable for masts compared to the cedar.]

228 (return)
[ 1 Kings vi. 9, 10, 15, 18, &c.; vii. 1-7.]

228 (return)
[ 1 Kings 6:9, 10, 15, 18, etc.; 7:1-7.]

229 (return)
[ Records of the Past, i. 104. ll. 78, 79; iii. 74, ll. 88-90; p. 90, l. 9; &c. Compare Layard, Nineveh and Babylon, pp. 356, 357.]

229 (return)
[ Records of the Past, i. 104. ll. 78, 79; iii. 74, ll. 88-90; p. 90, l. 9; &c. Compare Layard, Nineveh and Babylon, pp. 356, 357.]

230 (return)
[ Joseph, Bell. Jud., v. 5, § 2.]

230 (return)
[ Joseph, Bell. Jud., v. 5, § 2.]

231 (return)
[ Plin. H. N., xiii. 5; xvi. 40.]

231 (return)
[ Plin. H. N., xiii. 5; xvi. 40.]

232 (return)
[ Compare the arguments of Canon Tristram, Land of Israel, pp. 631, 632.]

232 (return)
[ Check out the points made by Canon Tristram, Land of Israel, pp. 631, 632.]

233 (return)
[ Walpole, Ansayrii, pp. 123, 227.]

233 (return)
[ Walpole, Ansayrii, pp. 123, 227.]

234 (return)
[ Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 621.]

234 (return)
[ Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 621.]

235 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 13, 38, &c.]

235 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 13, 38, &c.]

236 (return)
[ Hooker, in Dictionary of the Bible, ii. 684.]

236 (return)
[ Hooker, in Dictionary of the Bible, ii. 684.]

237 (return)
[ Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 82; compare Hooker, l.s.c.]

237 (return)
[ Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 82; see Hooker, l.s.c.]

238 (return)
[ This is Dr. Hooker’s description. Canon Tristram says of the styrax at the eastern foot of Carmel, that “of all the flowering shrubs it is the most abundant,” and that it presents to the eye “one sheet of pure white blossom, rivalling the orange in its beauty and its perfume” (Land of Israel, p. 492).]

238 (return)
[ This is Dr. Hooker’s description. Canon Tristram mentions the styrax at the eastern foot of Carmel, stating that “of all the flowering shrubs, it is the most abundant,” and that it offers “a sheet of pure white blossoms, rivaling the orange in its beauty and fragrance” (Land of Israel, p. 492).]

239 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 596.]

239 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ibid. p. 596.]

240 (return)
[ Walpole, Ansayrii, iii. 298.]

240 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Walpole, Ansayrii, iii. 298.]

241 (return)
[ Tristram, pp. 16, 28, &c.; Robinson, Biblical Researches, iii. 438.]

241 (return)
[ Tristram, pp. 16, 28, &c.; Robinson, Biblical Researches, iii. 438.]

242 (return)
[ The “terraced vineyards of Esfia” on Carmel are noted by Canon Tristram (Land of Israel, p. 492). Walpole speaks of vineyards on Bargylus (Ansaryii, iii. 165). The vine-clad slopes of the Lebanon attract notice from all Eastern travellers.]

242 (return)
[ Canon Tristram mentions the “terraced vineyards of Esfia” on Carmel in his book (Land of Israel, p. 492). Walpole talks about vineyards on Bargylus in his work (Ansaryii, iii. 165). The vine-covered slopes of Lebanon catch the attention of all Eastern travelers.]

243 (return)
[ Quoted by Dr. Hooker, in Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible, ii. 684, 685.]

243 (return)
[ Quoted by Dr. Hooker, in Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible, ii. 684, 685.]

244 (return)
[ Deut. xxxiii. 24.]

244 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Deut. 33:24.]

245 (return)
[ Tristram, Land of Israel, pp. 7, 16, 17; Walpole, Ansayrii, iii. 147, 177.]

245 (return)
[ Tristram, Land of Israel, pp. 7, 16, 17; Walpole, Ansayrii, iii. 147, 177.]

246 (return)
[ Tristram, p. 492; Stanley, Sinai and Palestine, p. 347.]

246 (return)
[ Tristram, p. 492; Stanley, Sinai and Palestine, p. 347.]

247 (return)
[ Hooker, in Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible, ii. 685.]

247 (return)
[ Hooker, in Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible, ii. 685.]

248 (return)
[ Tristram, pp. 622, 633; Walpole, Ansayrii, iii. 446; Robinson, Later Researches, p. 607.]

248 (return)
[ Tristram, pp. 622, 633; Walpole, Ansayrii, iii. 446; Robinson, Later Researches, p. 607.]

249 (return)
[ Tristram, pp. 17, 38; Walpole, Ansayrii, iii. 32, 294, 373.]

249 (return)
[ Tristram, pp. 17, 38; Walpole, Ansayrii, iii. 32, 294, 373.]

250 (return)
[ Robinson, Bibl. Researches, iii. 419, 431, 438, &c.]

250 (return)
[ Robinson, Bibl. Researches, iii. 419, 431, 438, &c.]

251 (return)
[ Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 28.]

251 (return)
[ Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 28.]

252 (return)
[ Hasselquist, Reise, p. 188.]

252 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Hasselquist, Travel, p. 188.]

253 (return)
[ Ansayrii, i. 66.]

253 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ansayrii, 1. 66.]

254 (return)
[ Tristram, l.s.c.]

254 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Tristram, l.s.c.]

255 (return)
[ Hooker, in Dictionary of the Bible, ii. 685.]

255 (return)
[ Hooker, in Dictionary of the Bible, ii. 685.]

256 (return)
[ Reise, l.s.c.]

256 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Travel, l.s.c.]

257 (return)
[ Mémoires, i. 332.]

257 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Memoirs, i. 332.]

258 (return)
[ Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 493.]

258 (return)
[ Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 493.]

259 (return)
[ Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 82.]

259 (return)
[ Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 82.]

260 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 59; Hooker, in Dictionary of the Bible, ii. 687; Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 493.]

260 (return)
[ Renan, Mission of Phoenicia, p. 59; Hooker, in Dictionary of the Bible, ii. 687; Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 493.]

261 (return)
[ Tristram, Land of Israel, l.s.c.]

261 (return)
[ Tristram, Land of Israel, l.s.c.]

262 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 82.]

262 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Ibid. p. 82.]

263 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 596. Compare Walpole’s Ansayrii, iii. 443.]

263 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 596. Compare Walpole’s Ansayrii, iii. 443.]

264 (return)
[ Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 102.]

264 (return)
[ Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 102.]

265 (return)
[ Tristram, Land of Israel, pp. 61, 599.]

265 (return)
[ Tristram, Land of Israel, pp. 61, 599.]

266 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 38, 626, &c. Dr. Robinson notices the cultivation of the potato high up in Lebanon; but he observed it only in two places (Later Researches, pp. 586, 596).]

266 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 38, 626, &c. Dr. Robinson notes that potatoes are grown high up in Lebanon, but he only saw them in two locations (Later Researches, pp. 586, 596).]

267 (return)
[ It can scarcely be doubted that Phoenicia contained anciently two other land animals of considerable importance, viz. the lion and the deer. Lions, which were common in the hills of Palestine (1 Sam. xvii. 34; 1 Kings xiii. 24; xx. 36; 2 Kings xvii. 25, 26) and frequented also the Philistine plain (Judg. xiv. 5), would certainly not have neglected the lowland of Sharon, which was in all respects suited for their habits. Deer, which still inhabit Galilee (Tristram, Land of the Israel, pp. 418, 447), are likely, before the forests of Lebanon were so greatly curtailed, to have occupied most portions of it (See Cant. ii. 9, 17; viii. 14). To these two Canon Tristram would add the crocodile (Land of Israel, p. 103), which he thinks must have been found in the Zerka for that river to have been called “the Crocodile River” by the Greeks, and which he is inclined to regard as still a denizen of the Zerka marshes. But most critics have supposed that the animal from which the Zerka got its ancient name was rather some large species of monitor.]

267 (return)
[ It's hard to deny that ancient Phoenicia had two other significant land animals, namely the lion and the deer. Lions were common in the hills of Palestine (1 Sam. xvii. 34; 1 Kings xiii. 24; xx. 36; 2 Kings xvii. 25, 26) and also roamed the Philistine plain (Judg. xiv. 5), so they surely wouldn't have missed the lowlands of Sharon, which were well-suited to their habits. Deer, which still live in Galilee (Tristram, Land of the Israel, pp. 418, 447), likely occupied most of the area before the forests of Lebanon were significantly reduced (See Cant. ii. 9, 17; viii. 14). Canon Tristram would also note the crocodile (Land of Israel, p. 103), suggesting it must have been in the Zerka for the river to be referred to as "the Crocodile River" by the Greeks, and he believes it may still exist in the Zerka marshes. However, most critics think that the animal giving the Zerka its ancient name was probably a large species of monitor.]

268 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 36.]

268 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 36.]

269 (return)
[ See his article on Lebanon in Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible, ii. 87.]

269 (return)
[Check out his article on Lebanon in Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible, ii. 87.]

270 (return)
[ Land of Israel, p. 447.]

270 (return)
[ Land of Israel, p. 447.]

271 (return)
[ Houghton, in Smith’s Dict. of the Bible, ad voc. BEAR, iii. xxv.]

271 (return)
[ Houghton, in Smith’s Dict. of the Bible, ad voc. BEAR, iii. xxv.]

272 (return)
[ Dict. of the Bible, ii. 87.]

272 (return)
[ Dictionary of the Bible, ii. 87.]

273 (return)
[ Land of Israel, p. 116. Compare Porter’s Giant Cities of Bashan, p. 236.]

273 (return)
[ Land of Israel, p. 116. See Porter’s Giant Cities of Bashan, p. 236.]

274 (return)
[ Cant. iv. 8; Is. xi. 6; Jer. v. 6; xiii. 23; Hos. xiii. 7; Hab. i. 8.]

274 (return)
[ Cant. iv. 8; Is. xi. 6; Jer. v. 6; xiii. 23; Hos. xiii. 7; Hab. i. 8.]

275 (return)
[ Land of Israel, l.s.c.]

275 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Israel, l.s.c.]

276 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 83.]

276 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ibid. p. 83.]

277 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 115.]

277 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, p. 115.]

278 (return)
[ Walpole’s Ansayrii, iii. 23.]

278 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Walpole’s Ansayrii, iii. 23.]

279 (return)
[ Houghton, in Smith’s Dict. of the Bible, ad voc. CONEY (iii. xliii.); Tristram, Land of Israel, pp. 62, 84, 89.]

279 (return)
[ Houghton, in Smith’s Dict. of the Bible, ad voc. CONEY (iii. xliii.); Tristram, Land of Israel, pp. 62, 84, 89.]

280 (return)
[ Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 106.]

280 (return)
[ Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 106.]

281 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 88, 89.]

281 (return)
[ Same source, pages 88, 89.]

282 (return)
[ Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 83.]

282 (return)
[ Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 83.]

283 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 55.]

283 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Ibid. p. 55.]

284 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 103. Compare Walpole, Ansayrii, iii. 34, 188, and Lortet, La Syrie d’aujourd’hui, pp. 58, 61.]

284 (return)
[ Same as above, p. 103. See also Walpole, Ansayrii, iii. 34, 188, and Lortet, La Syrie d’aujourd’hui, pp. 58, 61.]

285 (return)
[ Hist. Nat. ix. 36.]

285 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Nat. Hist. ix. 36.]

286 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 239. There are representations of the Buccunum in Forbes and Hanley’s British Mollusks, vol. iv. pl. cii. Nos. 1, 2, 3.]

286 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 239. You can find images of the Buccunum in Forbes and Hanley’s British Mollusks, vol. iv. pl. cii. Nos. 1, 2, 3.]

287 (return)
[ Kenrick, p. 239.]

287 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Kenrick, p. 239.]

288 (return)
[ Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 51.]

288 (return)
[ Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 51.]

289 (return)
[ Wilksinson, in Rawlinson’s Herodotus, ii. 347, note 2.]

289 (return)
[ Wilksinson, in Rawlinson’s Herodotus, ii. 347, note 2.]

290 (return)
[ Canon Tristram writs: “Among the rubbish thrown out in the excavations made at Tyre were numerous fragments of glass, and whole ‘kitchen middens’ of shells, crushed and broken, the owners of which had once supplied the famous Tyrian purple dye. All these shells were of one species, the Murex brandaris” (Land of Israel, p. 51).]

290 (return)
[ Canon Tristram writes: “Among the debris discarded during the excavations at Tyre were many fragments of glass, along with whole 'kitchen middens' of shells, crushed and broken, from the owners that once produced the renowned Tyrian purple dye. All these shells were from one species, the Murex brandaris” (Land of Israel, p. 51).]

291 (return)
[ Porter, in Dict. of the Bible, ii. 87.]

291 (return)
[ Porter, in Dict. of the Bible, ii. 87.]

292 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 37.]

292 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 37.]

293 (return)
[ Tristram, p. 634.]

293 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Tristram, p. 634.]

294 (return)
[ Grove, in Dict. of the Bible, i. 279.]

294 (return)
[ Grove, in Dict. of the Bible, i. 279.]

III—THE PEOPLE—ORIGIN AND CHARACTERISTICS

III—THE PEOPLE—ORIGIN AND CHARACTERISTICS

31 (return)
[ Histoire des Languages Sémitiques, p. 22.]

31 (return)
[ History of Semitic Languages, p. 22.]

32 (return)
[ Rhet. iii. 8.]

32 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Rhet. iii. 8.]

33 (return)
[ Deutsch, Literary Remains, p. 160.]

33 (return)
[ German, Literary Remains, p. 160.]

34 (return)
[ Renan, Hist. des Langues Sémitiques, pp. 5, 14.]

34 (return)
[ Renan, Hist. des Langues Sémitiques, pp. 5, 14.]

35 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 16.]

35 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, p. 16.]

36 (return)
[ Deutsch, Literary Remains, p. 305.]

36 (return)
[ German, Literary Remains, p. 305.]

37 (return)
[ Ibid.]

37 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source.]

38 (return)
[ Ancient Monarchies, i. 275; Deutsch, p. 306.]

38 (return)
[ Ancient Monarchies, i. 275; Deutsch, p. 306.]

39 (return)
[ Herod. i. 2; vii. 89.]

39 (return)
[ Herod. i. 2; vii. 89.]

310 (return)
[ Strab. xvi. 3, § 4.]

310 (return)
[ Strab. xvi. 3, § 4.]

311 (return)
[ Hist. Philipp. xviii. 3, § 2.]

311 (return)
[ Hist. Philipp. xviii. 3, § 2.]

312 (return)
[ Ancient Monarchies, i. 14.]

312 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ancient Monarchies, i. 14.]

313 (return)
[ Renan, Histoire des Langues Sémitiques, p. 183.]

313 (return)
[ Renan, History of Semitic Languages, p. 183.]

314 (return)
[ Deutsch, Literary Remains, pp. 162, 163.]

314 (return)
[ Deutsch, Literary Remains, pp. 162, 163.]

315 (return)
[ Herod. vi. 47:—{’Oros mega anestrammenon en te zetesei}.]

315 (return)
[ Herod. vi. 47:—{’Oros mega anestrammenon en te zetesei}.]

316 (return)
[ On this imaginary “monsters,” see Herod. vi. 44.]

316 (return)
[ For this imaginary “monsters,” see Herod. vi. 44.]

317 (return)
[ Ibid. iv. 42.]

317 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, iv. 42.]

318 (return)
[ Herod. vii. 85.]

318 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Herod. VII. 85.]

319 (return)
[ Ibid. ii. 112.]

319 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, ii. 112.]

320 (return)
[ 1 Kings xi. 1.]

320 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[1 Kings 11:1.]

321 (return)
[ Ibid. xvi. 31.]

321 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, xvi. 31.]

322 (return)
[ Ezra iii. 7.]

322 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ezra 3:7]

323 (return)
[ Is. xxiii. 15-18.]

323 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Is. 23:15-18.]

324 (return)
[ Mark vii. 26-30.]

324 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Mark 7:26-30.]

325 (return)
[ Acts xii. 20.]

325 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Acts 12:20.]

326 (return)
[ Herod. iv. 196.]

326 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. iv. 196.]

327 (return)
[ Herod, i. 1:—{Perseon oi Lagioi}.]

327 (return)
[ Herod, i. 1:—{Perseon oi Lagioi}.]

328 (return)
[ Ibid. ii. 190.]

328 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Ibid. 2.190.]

329 (return)
[ Ibid. ii. 4, 99, 142.]

329 (return)
[ Ibid. ii. 4, 99, 142.]

330 (return)
[ Ibid. i. 1; iv. 42; vi. 47; vii. 23, 44, 96.]

330 (return)
[Same as above i. 1; iv. 42; vi. 47; vii. 23, 44, 96.]

331 (return)
[ As they do of being indebted to the Babylonians and the Egyptians for astronomical and philosophic knowledge.]

331 (return)
[ As they feel grateful to the Babylonians and the Egyptians for their contributions to astronomy and philosophy.]

332 (return)
[ Deutsch, Literary Remains, p. 163.]

332 (return)
[ German, Literary Remains, p. 163.]

333 (return)
[ Ibid.]

333 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Ibid.]

334 (return)
[ Compare the representation of Egyptian ships in Dümichen’s Voyage d’une Reine Egyptienne (date about B.C. 1400) with the far later Phoenician triremes depicted by Sennacherib (Layard, Monuments of Nineveh, second series, pl. 71).]

334 (return)
[ Compare the depiction of Egyptian ships in Dümichen’s Voyage d’une Reine Egyptienne (around 1400 B.C.) with the much later Phoenician triremes shown by Sennacherib (Layard, Monuments of Nineveh, second series, pl. 71).]

335 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, pp. 100, 101.]

335 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, pp. 100, 101.]

336 (return)
[ The Cypriot physiognomy is peculiar. (See Di Cesnola’s Cyprus, pp. 123, 129, 131, 132, 133, 141, &c.)]

336 (return)
[ The Cypriot appearance is unique. (See Di Cesnola’s Cyprus, pp. 123, 129, 131, 132, 133, 141, & c.)]

337 (return)
[ Herod. vii. 90.]

337 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. vii. 90.]

338 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 68, note 3.]

338 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 68, note 3.]

IV—THE CITIES

IV—THE CITIES

41 (return)
[ The nearest approach to such a period is the time a little preceding Nebuchadnezzar’s siege, when Sidon, Byblus, and Aradus all appear as subject to Tyre (Ezek. xxvii. 8-11).]

41 (return)
[ The closest time to this period is just before Nebuchadnezzar’s siege, when Sidon, Byblus, and Aradus all seem to be under Tyre’s control (Ezek. xxvii. 8-11).]

42 (return)
[ 1 Kings xvii. 9-24.]

42 (return)
[ 1 Kings xvii. 9-24.]

43 (return)
[ 1 Macc. xv. 37.]

43 (return)
[ 1 Macc. xv. 37.]

44 (return)
[ Gen. x. 15.]

44 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Gen. 10:15]

45 (return)
[ Josh. xix. 29.]

45 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Josh. xix. 29.]

46 (return)
[ Ibid. verse 28.]

46 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, verse 28.]

47 (return)
[ See Hom. Il. vii. 290; xxiii. 743; Od. iv. 618; xiv. 272, 285; xvi. 117, 402, 424.]

47 (return)
[ See Hom. Il. vii. 290; xxiii. 743; Od. iv. 618; xiv. 272, 285; xvi. 117, 402, 424.]

48 (return)
[ Hist. Philipp. xviii. 3, § 2.]

48 (return)
[ Hist. Philipp. xviii. 3, § 2.]

49 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 460.]

49 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 460.]

410 (return)
[ Steph, Byz. ad voc.]

410 (return)
[ Steph, Byz. ad voc.]

411 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, pl. lxvii.]

411 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, pl. lxvii.]

412 (return)
[ Scylax, Periplus, § 104. This work belongs to the time of Philip, Alexander’s father.]

412 (return)
[ Scylax, Periplus, § 104. This work is from the era of Philip, Alexander’s father.]

413 (return)
[ See Renan, Mission de Phénicie, pl. lxii.]

413 (return)
[ See Renan, Mission de Phénicie, pl. lxii.]

414 (return)
[ The inscription on the sarcophagus of Esmunazar. (See Records of the Past, ix. 111-114, and the Corp. Inscr. Semit., i. 13-20.)]

414 (return)
[ The inscription on the sarcophagus of Esmunazar. (See Records of the Past, ix. 111-114, and the Corp. Inscr. Semit., i. 13-20.)]

415 (return)
[ The name “Palæ-Tyrus” is first found in Strabo (xvi. 2, § 24).]

415 (return)
[ The name “Palæ-Tyrus” is first mentioned by Strabo (xvi. 2, § 24).]

416 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 347.]

416 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 347.]

417 (return)
[ Plin. H. N. v. 17.]

417 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Plin. H. N. v. 17.]

418 (return)
[ Renan (Mission de Phénicie, p. 552) gives the area as 576,508 square metres.]

418 (return)
[ Renan (Mission de Phénicie, p. 552) states that the area is 576,508 square meters.]

419 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 21.]

419 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 21.]

420 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 560.]

420 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 560.]

421 (return)
[ So Bertou (Topographie de Tyr, p. 14), and Kenrick (Phoenicia, p. 352).]

421 (return)
[ So Bertou (Topographie de Tyr, p. 14), and Kenrick (Phoenicia, p. 352).]

422 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 560.]

422 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 560.]

423 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 351.]

423 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 351.]

424 (return)
[ See the fragments of Dius and Menander, preserved by Josephus (Contr. Ap. i. § 17, 18), and compare Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 24. It is quite uncertain what Phoenician deity is represented by “Agenor.”]

424 (return)
[ Check out the fragments of Dius and Menander, as noted by Josephus (Contr. Ap. i. § 17, 18), and compare with Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 24. It's unclear which Phoenician god is referred to as “Agenor.”]

425 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 559.]

425 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 559.]

426 (return)
[ Ibid.]

426 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source.]

427 (return)
[ Ibid.]

427 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source.]

428 (return)
[ Strab. xvi. 2, § 23.]

428 (return)
[ Strab. xvi. 2, § 23.]

429 (return)
[ Menand, ap. Joseph. l.s.c.]

429 (return)
[ Menand, cited in Joseph. l.s.c.]

430 (return)
[ Strab. l.s.c.]

430 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Strab. l.s.c.]

431 (return)
[ Eight thousand are said to have been killed in the siege, and 30,000 sold when the place was taken. (Arrian, Exp. Alex. l.s.c.) A certain number were spared.]

431 (return)
[ It's reported that eight thousand were killed during the siege, and 30,000 were sold when the city fell. (Arrian, Exp. Alex. l.s.c.) Some were spared.]

432 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 552.]

432 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 552.]

433 (return)
[ Plin. H. N. v. 17.]

433 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Plin. H. N. v. 17.]

434 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 348.]

434 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 348.]

435 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 22.]

435 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 22.]

436 (return)
[ See Capt. Allen’s Dead Sea, ii. 179.]

436 (return)
[ See Capt. Allen’s Dead Sea, ii. 179.]

437 (return)
[ See Capt. Allen’s Dead Sea, ii. 179.]

437 (return)
[See Capt. Allen’s Dead Sea, ii. 179.]

438 (return)
[ Strabo, xvi. 2, § 13.]

438 (return)
[ Strabo, xvi. 2, § 13.]

439 (return)
[ Allen, Dead Sea, l.s.c.]

439 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Allen, Dead Sea, l.s.c.]

440 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 180.]

440 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Ibid. p. 180.]

441 (return)
[ See the woodcut, and compare Renan, Mission de Phénicie, planches, pl. ii.; and Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art dans l’Antiquité, iii. 25.]

441 (return)
[ Check out the woodcut and compare it with Renan, Mission de Phénicie, plates, pl. ii.; and Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art dans l’Antiquité, iii. 25.]

442 (return)
[ Allen, Dead Sea, ii. 180.]

442 (return)
[ Allen, Dead Sea, ii. 180.]

443 (return)
[ Ibid.]

443 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source.]

444 (return)
[ Strab. xvi. 2, § 13.]

444 (return)
[ Strab. xvi. 2, § 13.]

445 (return)
[ Strab. xvi. 2, § 13. See also Lucret. De Rer. Nat. vi. 890.]

445 (return)
[ Strab. xvi. 2, § 13. See also Lucret. De Rer. Nat. vi. 890.]

446 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 42.]

446 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 42.]

447 (return)
[ Strab. xvi. 2, § 12.]

447 (return)
[ Strab. xvi. 2, § 12.]

448 (return)
[ Fr. ii. 7. Philo, however, makes “Brathu” a mountain.]

448 (return)
[ Fr. ii. 7. Philo, however, refers to “Brathu” as a mountain.]

449 (return)
[ See Records of the Past, iii. 19, 20.]

449 (return)
[ See Records of the Past, iii. 19, 20.]

450 (return)
[ Mission de Phénicie, pp. 58-61.]

450 (return)
[ Mission de Phénicie, pp. 58-61.]

451 (return)
[ Strab. l.s.c.]

451 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Strab. l.s.c.]

452 (return)
[ Ibid.]

452 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source.]

453 (return)
[ Gen. x. 18.]

453 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Gen. 18:18]

454 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, p. 123, 1. 2.]

454 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, p. 123, 1. 2.]

455 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 115. And compare the map.]

455 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 115. And compare the map.]

456 (return)
[ Carnus is identified by M. Renan with the modern Carnoun, on the coast, three miles north of Tortosa (Mission, p. 97).]

456 (return)
[ M. Renan connects Carnus with the present-day Carnoun, located three miles north of Tortosa on the coast (Mission, p. 97).]

457 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, p. 114, l. 104.]

457 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, p. 114, l. 104.]

458 (return)
[ Josh. xiii. 5; 1 Kings v. 18.]

458 (return)
[ Josh. xiii. 5; 1 Kings v. 18.]

459 (return)
[ Arr. Exp. Alex. ii. 15.]

459 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Arr. Exp. Alex. ii. 15.]

460 (return)
[ Strab. xvi. 2, § 18.]

460 (return)
[ Strab. xvi. 2, § 18.]

461 (return)
[ Fragm. ii. 8, § 17.]

461 (return)
[ Fragm. ii. 8, § 17.]

462 (return)
[ Corp. Inscr. Sem., i. 3 (pl 1); Philo-Bybl. Fr. ii. 8, § 25.]

462 (return)
[ Corp. Inscr. Sem., i. 3 (pl 1); Philo-Bybl. Fr. ii. 8, § 25.]

463 (return)
[ Strab. l.s.c.]

463 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Strab. l.s.c.]

464 (return)
[ Allen, Dead Sea, ii. 164.]

464 (return)
[ Allen, Dead Sea, ii. 164.]

465 (return)
[ Ibid.]

465 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source.]

466 (return)
[ Strab. xvi. 2, § 15.]

466 (return)
[ Strab. xvi. 2, § 15.]

467 (return)
[ See G. Smith’s Eponym Canon, pp. 123, 132, 148.]

467 (return)
[ See G. Smith’s Eponym Canon, pp. 123, 132, 148.]

468 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 9.]

468 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 9.]

469 (return)
[ Burckhardt, Travels in Syria, p. 162.]

469 (return)
[ Burckhardt, Travels in Syria, p. 162.]

470 (return)
[ Scylax, Peripl., § 104; Diod. Sic. xvi. 41; Pomp. Mel. i. 12.]

470 (return)
[ Scylax, Peripl., § 104; Diod. Sic. xvi. 41; Pomp. Mel. i. 12.]

471 (return)
[ Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 633; Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art dans l’Antiquité, iii. 56.]

471 (return)
[ Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 633; Perrot et Chipiez, History of Art in Antiquity, iii. 56.]

472 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 57, 59.]

472 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 57, 59.]

473 (return)
[ Allen, Dead Sea, ii. 152.]

473 (return)
[ Allen, Dead Sea, ii. 152.]

474 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 295.]

474 (return)
[ Renan, Mission of Phoenicia, p. 295.]

475 (return)
[ Lucian, De Dea Syra, § 9.]

475 (return)
[ Lucian, De Dea Syra, § 9.]

476 (return)
[ Philo. Bybl. Fr. ii. 8, § 25.]

476 (return)
[ Philo. Bybl. Fr. ii. 8, § 25.]

477 (return)
[ Stephen of Byzantium calls it {polin thoinikes ek mikrae megalen}. Strabo says that it was rebuilt by the Romans (xvi. 2, § 19).]

477 (return)
[ Stephen of Byzantium calls it {polin thoinikes ek mikrae megalen}. Strabo mentions that it was rebuilt by the Romans (xvi. 2, § 19).]

478 (return)
[ Phocas, Descr. Urbium, § 5.]

478 (return)
[ Phocas, Descr. Urbium, § 5.]

479 (return)
[ Cellarius, Geograph. ii. 378.]

479 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Cellarius, Geograph. ii. 378.]

480 (return)
[ Gen. x. 17.]

480 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Gen. 10:17.]

481 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, pp. 120, l. 25; 123, l. 2.]

481 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, pp. 120, l. 25; 123, l. 2.]

482 (return)
[ Josh. xix. 29.]

482 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Josh. 19:29.]

483 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, p. 132, l. 10.]

483 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, p. 132, l. 10.]

484 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, p. 132, l. 10; 148, l. 103.]

484 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, p. 132, l. 10; 148, l. 103.]

485 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, pp. 20, 21.]

485 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, pp. 20, 21.]

486 (return)
[ This seems to be the true meaning of Strab. xvi. 2, § 25; sub init.]

486 (return)
[ This appears to be the true meaning of Strab. xvi. 2, § 25; at the beginning.]

487 (return)
[ Josh. vii. 23.]

487 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Josh. 7:23]

488 (return)
[ Ibid. xvii. 11.]

488 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Same source, xvii. 11.]

489 (return)
[ 1 Kings iv. 11.]

489 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[1 Kings 4:11.]

490 (return)
[ Ancient Monarchies, ii. 132.]

490 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ancient Monarchies, ii. 132.]

491 (return)
[ Steph. Byz. ad voc. DORA.]

491 (return)
[ Steph. Byz. at the entry. DORA.]

492 (return)
[ Hieronym. Epit. Paulæ (Opp. i. 223).]

492 (return)
[ Hieronym. Epit. Paulæ (Opp. i. 223).]

493 (return)
[ Josh. xix. 47.]

493 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Josh. 19:47.]

494 (return)
[ 1 Macc. x. 76.]

494 (return)
[ 1 Macc. x. 76.]

495 (return)
[ Jonah i. 3.]

495 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Jonah 1:3]

496 (return)
[ 2 Chron. ii. 16.]

496 (return)
[ 2 Chron. ii. 16.]

497 (return)
[ Ezra iii. 7.]

497 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ezra 3:7]

498 (return)
[ See Capt. Allen’s Dead Sea, ii. 188.]

498 (return)
[ See Capt. Allen’s Dead Sea, ii. 188.]

499 (return)
[ Eustah. ad Dionys. Perieg. l. 915.]

499 (return)
[ Eustah. to Dionys. Perieg. l. 915.]

4100 (return)
[ Compare the Heb. “Ramah” and “Ramoth” from {...}, “to be high.”]

4100 (return)
[ Compare the Heb. “Ramah” and “Ramoth” from {...}, “to be high.”]

4101 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 3.]

4101 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 3.]

4102 (return)
[ Gesenius, Monumenta Scripture Linguæque, Phoeniciæ, p. 271.]

4102 (return)
[ Gesenius, Monumenta Scripture Linguæque, Phoeniciæ, p. 271.]

4103 (return)
[ Allen, Dead Sea, ii. 189.]

4103 (return)
[ Allen, Dead Sea, ii. 189.]

4104 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art, iii. 23.]

4104 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iii. 23.]

4105 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 23-25.]

4105 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 23-25.]

4106 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art dans l’Antiquité, iii. 25, 26.]

4106 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art in Antiquity, iii. 25, 26.]

4107 (return)
[ The Phoenicians held Dor and Joppa during the greater part of their existence as a nation, but the tract between them, and that between Dor and Carmel—the plain of Sharon—shows no trace of their occupation.]

4107 (return)
[The Phoenicians controlled Dor and Joppa for most of their time as a nation, but the area between them, as well as the land between Dor and Carmel—the plain of Sharon—doesn't show any signs of their presence.]

V—THE COLONIES

V—THE COLONIES

51 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 71.]

51 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 71.]

52 (return)
[ Gen. x. 4. Compare Joseph. Ant. Jud. i. 6.]

52 (return)
[ Gen. x. 4. Compare Joseph. Ant. Jud. i. 6.]

53 (return)
[ Kenrick, p. 72.]

53 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Kenrick, p. 72.]

54 (return)
[ The two plains are sometimes regarded as one, which is called that of Mesaoria; but they are really distinct, being separated by high ground in Long. 33º nearly.]

54 (return)
[The two plains are sometimes considered one, known as Mesaoria; however, they are actually separate, divided by high ground at Long. 33º nearly.]

55 (return)
[ Ælian, Hist. Ann. v. 56.]

55 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ælian, Hist. Ann. v. 56.]

56 (return)
[ Strab. xiv. 6, § 5.]

56 (return)
[ Strab. xiv. 6, § 5.]

57 (return)
[ Theophrastus, Hist. Plant. v. 8.]

57 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Theophrastus, History of Plants v. 8.]

58 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, Introduction, p. 7.]

58 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, Introduction, p. 7.]

59 (return)
[ The copper of Cyprus became known as {khalkos Kuprios} or {Æs Cyprium}, then as cyprium or cyprum, finally as “copper,” “kupfer,” “cuivre,” &c.]

59 (return)
[ The copper from Cyprus became known as {khalkos Kuprios} or {Æs Cyprium}, then as cyprium or cyprum, and finally as “copper,” “kupfer,” “cuivre,” etc.]

510 (return)
[ Ezek. xxvii. 6.]

510 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Ezek. 27:6]

511 (return)
[ Compare Ammianus—“Tanta tamque multiplici fertilitate abundat rerum omnium Cyprus, ut, nullius externi indigens adminiculi, indigenis viribus a fundamento ipso carinæ ad supremos ipsos carbasos ædificet onerariam navem, omnibusque armamentis instructam mari committat” (xiv. 8, § 14).]

511 (return)
[ Compare Ammianus—“Cyprus is so rich and fertile in every way that it doesn't need any outside help; its native resources can build a cargo ship from the very bottom all the way up to the sails, fully equipped to set sail on the sea” (xiv. 8, § 14).]

512 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 49.]

512 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 49.]

513 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 75.]

513 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 75.]

514 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, pp. 65-117.]

514 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, pp. 65-117.]

515 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 68, 83.]

515 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 68, 83.]

516 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art, iii. 215.]

516 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iii. 215.]

517 (return)
[ Ibid.]

517 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source.]

518 (return)
[ {Polis Kuprou arkhaiotate}.]

518 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ {Polis Kuprou ancient}.]

519 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 294.]

519 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 294.]

520 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 254-281.]

520 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, pp. 254-281.]

521 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 294.]

521 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 294.]

522 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 378.]

522 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, p. 378.]

523 (return)
[ Strabo, xiv. 6, § 3; Steph. Byz. ad voc. CURIUM.]

523 (return)
[ Strabo, xiv. 6, § 3; Steph. Byz. ad voc. CURIUM.]

524 (return)
[ Herod. v. 113.]

524 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. v. 113.]

525 (return)
[ Apollodor. Biblioth. iii. 14, § 13.]

525 (return)
[ Apollodor. Biblioth. iii. 14, § 13.]

526 (return)
[ Virg. Æn. i. 415-417; Tacit. Ann. iii. 62; Hist. ii. 2; Strab. xiv. 6, § 3.]

526 (return)
[ Virg. Æn. i. 415-417; Tacit. Ann. iii. 62; Hist. ii. 2; Strab. xiv. 6, § 3.]

527 (return)
[ Ps. lxxvi. 2.]

527 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ps. 76:2.]

528 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 201.]

528 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 201.]

529 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 198, and Map.]

529 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 198, and Map.]

530 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, p. 139, l. 23.]

530 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, p. 139, l. 23.]

531 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 144, l. 22.]

531 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 144, l. 22.]

532 (return)
[ On the copper-mines of Tamasus, see Strab. xiv. 6, § 5; and Steph. Byz. ad voc.]

532 (return)
[ For information on the copper mines of Tamasus, see Strabo XIV. 6, § 5; and Stephanus of Byzantium, under the appropriate section.]

533 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, ll.s.c.]

533 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Eponym Canon, ll.s.c.]

534 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 228.]

534 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 228.]

535 (return)
[ Plut. Vit. Solon. § 26.]

535 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Plut. Life of Solon. § 26.]

536 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xiv. 98, § 2.]

536 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xiv. 98, § 2.]

537 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 231.]

537 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 231.]

538 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 74.]

538 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 74.]

539 (return)
[ Gen. x. 4.]

539 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Gen. x. 4.]

540 (return)
[ Gesenius, Mon. Script. Linquæque Phoeniciæ, p. 278.]

540 (return)
[ Gesenius, Mon. Script. Linquæque Phoeniciæ, p. 278.]

541 (return)
[ Strab. xiv. 5, § 3.]

541 (return)
[ Strab. xiv. 5, § 3.]

542 (return)
[ Ibid. xiv. 3, § 9. Mt. Solyma, now Takhtalu, is the most striking mountain of these parts. Its bald summit rises to the height of 4,800 feet above the Mediterranean (Beaufort, Karamania, p. 57).]

542 (return)
[Ibid. xiv. 3, § 9. Mt. Solyma, now Takhtalu, is the most prominent mountain in this region. Its bare peak reaches an elevation of 4,800 feet above the Mediterranean (Beaufort, Karamania, p. 57).]

543 (return)
[ Strab. xiv. 3, § 8, sub fin.]

543 (return)
[ Strab. xiv. 3, § 8, sub fin.]

544 (return)
[ Beaufort, Karamania, p. 31.]

544 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Beaufort, Karamania, p. 31.]

545 (return)
[ Herod. iii. 90; vii. 77; Strab. xiii. 4, § 15; Steph. Byz. ad. voc.]

545 (return)
[ Herod. iii. 90; vii. 77; Strab. xiii. 4, § 15; Steph. Byz. ad. voc.]

546 (return)
[ Beaufort, Karamania, p. 56.]

546 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Beaufort, Karamania, p. 56.]

547 (return)
[ Strab. xiv. 3, § 9.]

547 (return)
[ Strab. xiv. 3, § 9.]

548 (return)
[ Beaufort, pp. 59, 60.]

548 (return)
[ Beaufort, pp. 59, 60.]

549 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 70.]

549 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ibid. p. 70.]

550 (return)
[ As Corinna and Basilides (see Athen. Deipnos, iv. 174).]

550 (return)
[ As Corinna and Basilides (see Athen. Deipnos, iv. 174).]

551 (return)
[ Ap. Phot. Bibliothec. p. 454.]

551 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ap. Phot. Bibliothec. p. 454.]

552 (return)
[ Ap. Athen. Deipn. viii. 361.]

552 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ap. Athen. Deipn. viii. 361.]

553 (return)
[ Dict. Cret. i. 18; iv. 4.]

553 (return)
[ Dict. Cret. i. 18; iv. 4.]

554 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, pp. 80, 81.]

554 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, pp. 80, 81.]

555 (return)
[ Aristid. Orat. § 43.]

555 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Aristid. Orat. § 43.]

556 (return)
[ Acts xxvii. 12.]

556 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Acts 27:12.]

557 (return)
[ Steph. Byz. ad voc.]

557 (return)
[ Steph. Byz. ad voc.]

558 (return)
[ Herod. iv. 151.]

558 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Herod. IV. 151.]

559 (return)
[ Heb. {...}, Copt. labo, &c.]

559 (return)
[ Heb. {...}, Copt. labo, &c.]

560 (return)
[ Steph. Byz. ad voc. {KUTHERA}; Festus, ad voc. MELOS.]

560 (return)
[ Steph. Byz. ad voc. {KUTHERA}; Festus, ad voc. MELOS.]

561 (return)
[ Kenrick, p. 96.]

561 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Kenrick, p. 96.]

562 (return)
[ Steph. Byz. ad voc. {MEMBLIAROS}.]

562 (return)
[ Steph. Byz. ad voc. {MEMBLIAROS}.]

563 (return)
[ Heraclid. Pont. ap. Steph. Byz. ad voc.]

563 (return)
[ Heraclid. Pont. ap. Steph. Byz. ad voc.]

564 (return)
[ Herod. iv. 147.]

564 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. iv. 147.]

565 (return)
[ Thucyd. i. 8.]

565 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Thucyd. i. 8.]

566 (return)
[ Herod. iii. 57; Pausan. x. 11.]

566 (return)
[ Herod. iii. 57; Pausan. x. 11.]

567 (return)
[ Tournefort, Voyages, i. 136.]

567 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Tournefort, Voyages, i. 136.]

568 (return)
[ Plin, H. N. iv. 12. Compare Steph. Byz. ad voc. {KUTHERA}.]

568 (return)
[ Plin, H. N. iv. 12. Compare Steph. Byz. ad voc. {KUTHERA}.]

569 (return)
[ Theophrast. Hist. Plant. iv. 2; Plin. H. N. xxxv. 15.]

569 (return)
[ Theophrastus. History of Plants. iv. 2; Pliny. Natural History. xxxv. 15.]

570 (return)
[ Strab. x. 5, § 16.]

570 (return)
[ Strab. x. 5, § 16.]

571 (return)
[ Ibid. § 19, ad fin.]

571 (return)
[ Ibid. § 19, at end.]

572 (return)
[ Herod. ii. 44.]

572 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. ii. 44.]

573 (return)
[ Ibid. vi. 47.]

573 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ibid. vi. 47.]

574 (return)
[ Hesych. ad voc. {KABEIROI}; Steph. Byz. ad voc. {IMBROS}; Strab. vii. Fr. 51.]

574 (return)
[ Hesych. at the word {KABEIROI}; Steph. Byz. at the word {IMBROS}; Strab. vii. Fr. 51.]

575 (return)
[ Strab. xiv. 5, § 28; Plin. H. N. vii. 56.]

575 (return)
[ Strab. xiv. 5, § 28; Plin. H. N. vii. 56.]

576 (return)
[ Strab. x. 1, § 8.]

576 (return)
[ Strab. x. 1, § 8.]

577 (return)
[ Herod. v. 57; Strab. ix. 2, § 3; Pausan. ix. 25, § 6, &c.]

577 (return)
[ Herod. v. 57; Strab. ix. 2, § 3; Pausan. ix. 25, § 6, &c.]

578 (return)
[ Steph. Byz. ad voc. {PRONEKTOS}; Scymn. Ch. l. 660.]

578 (return)
[ Steph. Byz. ad voc. {PRONEKTOS}; Scymn. Ch. l. 660.]

579 (return)
[ Apollon. Rhod. ii. l. 178; Euseb. Præp. Ev. p. 115; Schol. ad Apollon. Rhod. l.s.c.; Steph. Byz. ad voc. {SESAMOS}.]

579 (return)
[ Apollon. Rhod. ii. l. 178; Euseb. Præp. Ev. p. 115; Schol. ad Apollon. Rhod. l.s.c.; Steph. Byz. ad voc. {SESAMOS}.]

580 (return)
[ So Kenrick, Phoenicia, pp. 91, 92.]

580 (return)
[ So Kenrick, Phoenicia, pp. 91, 92.]

581 (return)
[ Utica was said to have been founded 287 years before Carthage (Aristot. De Ausc. Mir. § 146). Carthage was probably founded about B.C. 850.]

581 (return)
[ Utica was claimed to have been established 287 years before Carthage (Aristot. De Ausc. Mir. § 146). Carthage was likely founded around 850 B.C.]

582 (return)
[ Thucyd. vi. 2.]

582 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Thucyd. vi. 2.]

583 (return)
[ Strab. xvii. 3, § 13.]

583 (return)
[ Strab. xvii. 3, § 13.]

584 (return)
[ See the chart opposite, and the description in the Géographie Universelle, xi. 271, 272.]

584 (return)
[ See the chart on the opposite page, and the description in the Géographie Universelle, xi. 271, 272.]

585 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 270.]

585 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, p. 270.]

586 (return)
[ Plin. H. N. v. 4, § 23; Géographie Universelle, xi. 157.]

586 (return)
[ Plin. H. N. v. 4, § 23; Géographie Universelle, xi. 157.]

587 (return)
[ Géograph. Univ. xi. 275.]

587 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Geography. Univ. xi. 275.]

588 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 274.]

588 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Same source, p. 274.]

589 (return)
[ Géograph. Univ. xi. 413, 414.]

589 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Geography. Univ. xi. 413, 414.]

590 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 410, 411.]

590 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 410, 411.]

591 (return)
[ See Davis’s Carthage, pp. 128-130; and compare the woodcut in the Géograph. Univ. xi. 259.]

591 (return)
[ See Davis’s Carthage, pp. 128-130; and check out the woodcut in the Géograph. Univ. xi. 259.]

592 (return)
[ Beulé, Fouilles à Carthage, quoted in the Géograph. Univ. xi. 258.]

592 (return)
[ Beulé, Excavations in Carthage, quoted in the Universal Geography xi. 258.]

593 (return)
[ “Adrymes” is the Greek name (Strab. xvii. 3, § 16), Adrumetum or Hadrumetum, the Roman one (Sall. Bell. Jugurth. § 19; Liv. xxx. 29; Plin. H. N. v. 4, § 25).]

593 (return)
[ “Adrymes” is the Greek name (Strab. xvii. 3, § 16), Adrumetum or Hadrumetum, the Roman name (Sall. Bell. Jugurth. § 19; Liv. xxx. 29; Plin. H. N. v. 4, § 25).]

594 (return)
[ Géograph. Univ. xi. 227, 228.]

594 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Geography. Univ. xi. 227, 228.]

595 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 227, note.]

595 (return)
[Same source, p. 227, note.]

596 (return)
[ Géographie Universelle, xi. 224.]

596 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Universal Geography, xi. 224.]

597 (return)
[ Géograph. Univ. xi. 84.]

597 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Univ. Geography xi. 84.]

598 (return)
[ Strabo, xvii. 3, § 18.]

598 (return)
[ Strabo, xvii. 3, § 18.]

599 (return)
[ See Della Cella, Narrative, p. 37, E. T.; Beechey, Narrative, p. 51.]

599 (return)
[ See Della Cella, Narrative, p. 37, E. T.; Beechey, Narrative, p. 51.]

5100 (return)
[ Herod. iv. 198. Compare Ovid. Pont. ii. 7, 25.]

5100 (return)
[ Herod. iv. 198. Compare Ovid. Pont. ii. 7, 25.]

5101 (return)
[ See the chart in the Géographie Universelle, xi. 223.]

5101 (return)
[See the chart in the Géographie Universelle, xi. 223.]

5102 (return)
[ Strab. xvii. 3, § 12.]

5102 (return)
[ Strab. xvii. 3, § 12.]

5103 (return)
[ See Daux, Recherches sur les Emporia Phéniciens, pp. 256-258; and compare Pl. viii.]

5103 (return)
[ See Daux, Research on Phoenician Trading Posts, pp. 256-258; and compare Pl. viii.]

5104 (return)
[ At Utica, Carthage, and elsewhere.]

5104 (return)
[ At Utica, Carthage, and other places.]

5105 (return)
[ Daux, Recherches, pp. 169-171; Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art dans l’Antiquité, iii. 400-402.]

5105 (return)
[ Daux, Research, pp. 169-171; Perrot and Chipiez, A History of Art in Antiquity, iii. 400-402.]

5106 (return)
[ Thucyd. vi. 2.]

5106 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Thucyd. vi. 2.]

5107 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art, iii. 336.]

5107 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iii. 336.]

5108 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xiv. 68.]

5108 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xiv. 68.]

5109 (return)
[ Gesenius, Monumenta Phoenicia, pp. 297, 298, and Tab. 39, xii. A, B.]

5109 (return)
[ Gesenius, Monumenta Phoenicia, pp. 297, 298, and Tab. 39, xii. A, B.]

5110 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art, iii. 330.]

5110 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iii. 330.]

5111 (return)
[ Polyb. i. 55.]

5111 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Polyb. i. 55.]

5112 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art, iii. 331. Compare the accompanying woodcut.]

5112 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iii. 331. See the accompanying woodcut.]

5113 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 334; Woodcuts, No. 242 and 243.]

5113 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iii. 334; Woodcuts, No. 242 and 243.]

5114 (return)
[ Marsala, whose wine is so well known, occupies a site on the coast at a short distance.]

5114 (return)
[ Marsala, famous for its wine, is located on the coast, not far away.]

5115 (return)
[ Géographie Universelle, i. 552.]

5115 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Universal Geography, i. 552.]

5116 (return)
[ Géographie Universelle, i. p. 551.]

5116 (return)
[ Universal Geography, i. p. 551.]

5117 (return)
[ See Gesenius, Monumenta Phoenicia, pp. 288-290, and Tab. 38, ix. Mahanath corresponds to the Greek {skenai} and the Roman castra. Compare the Israelite “Mahanaim.”]

5117 (return)
[ See Gesenius, Monumenta Phoenicia, pp. 288-290, and Tab. 38, ix. Mahanath is equivalent to the Greek {skenai} and the Roman castra. Compare with the Israelite “Mahanaim.”]

5118 (return)
[ Serra di Falco, Antichità di Sicilia, v. 60, 67.]

5118 (return)
[ Serra di Falco, Antiquities of Sicily, v. 60, 67.]

5119 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 187-189.]

5119 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iii. 187-189.]

5120 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 426.]

5120 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, p. 426.]

5121 (return)
[ Géographie Universelle, i. 571.]

5121 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Universal Geography, i. 571.]

5122 (return)
[ Gesenius, Monumenta Phoenicia, p. 298.]

5122 (return)
[ Gesenius, Monumenta Phoenicia, p. 298.]

5123 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. v. 12.]

5123 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. v. 12.]

5124 (return)
[ See the Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum, vol. i. No. 132.]

5124 (return)
[ See the Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum, vol. i. No. 132.]

5125 (return)
[ Gesenius, Mon. Phoen. Tab. 40, xiv.]

5125 (return)
[ Gesenius, Mon. Phoen. Tab. 40, xiv.]

5126 (return)
[ For an account of these buildings, called by the natives “Giganteja,” see Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art, iii. 297, 298.]

5126 (return)
[ For information about these buildings, referred to by the locals as “Giganteja,” check out Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art, iii. 297, 298.]

5127 (return)
[ Ibid.]

5127 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source.]

5128 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 299.]

5128 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, p. 299.]

5129 (return)
“Malte, l’île de miel” (Géogr. Univ. i. 576).]

5129 (return)
“Malta, the island of honey” (Geogr. Univ. i. 576).]

5130 (return)
[ {Kunidia, a kalousi Melitaia} (Strab. vi. 2, § 11, sub fin.).]

5130 (return)
[ {Kunidia, a kalousi Melitaia} (Strab. vi. 2, § 11, sub fin.).]

5131 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art, iv. 2.]

5131 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iv. 2.]

5132 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xiv. 63, § 4; 77, § 6; xxi. 16, &c.]

5132 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xiv. 63, § 4; 77, § 6; xxi. 16, &c.]

5133 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, l.s.c. Compare the Géographie Universelle, i. 599, 600.]

5133 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, l.s.c. See the Géographie Universelle, i. 599, 600.]

5134 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 233; La Marmora, Voyage en Sardaigne, ii. 171-341.]

5134 (return)
[Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 233; La Marmora, Journey to Sardinia, ii. 171-341.]

5135 (return)
[ Strabo calls the town Sulchi ({Soulkhoi}, v. 2, § 7).]

5135 (return)
[ Strabo refers to the town as Sulchi ({Soulkhoi}, v. 2, § 7).]

5136 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 231, 232, 253, &c.]

5136 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 231, 232, 253, &c.]

5137 (return)
[ None of the classical geographers mentions the place excepting Ptolemy, who calls it “Tarrus” (Geograph. iii. 3).]

5137 (return)
[None of the classical geographers mention the place except for Ptolemy, who refers to it as “Tarrus” (Geograph. iii. 3).]

5138 (return)
[ See Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art, iii. 231-236, and 418-421.]

5138 (return)
[See Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iii. 231-236, and 418-421.]

5139 (return)
[ Herod. i. 166.]

5139 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. i. 166.]

5140 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 116; Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 46, 186.]

5140 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 116; Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 46, 186.]

5141 (return)
[ Géographie Universelle, i. 800.]

5141 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Universal Geography, i. 800.]

5142 (return)
[ Strab. iii. 5, § 1.]

5142 (return)
[ Strab. iii. 5, § 1.]

5143 (return)
[ Kenrick, p. 118; Géogr. Univ. i. 795.]

5143 (return)
[ Kenrick, p. 118; Géogr. Univ. i. 795.]

5144 (return)
[ “Un admirable port natured divisé par des ilôts et des péninsules en cales et en bassins secondairs; tous les avantages se trouvent réunis dans ce bras de mer” (Géographie Universelle, i. 808).]

5144 (return)
[ “An amazing harbor shaped by islands and peninsulas into docks and secondary basins; all the benefits are gathered in this arm of the sea” (Géographie Universelle, i. 808).]

5145 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 801.]

5145 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ibid. p. 801.]

5146 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 799.]

5146 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, p. 799.]

5147 (return)
[ {Phoinikike to skhemati} (Strab. iii. 4, § 2).]

5147 (return)
[ {Phoenician to the scheme} (Strab. iii. 4, § 2).]

5148 (return)
[ {Phoinikon ktisma} (ib. iii. 4, § 3).]

5148 (return)
[ {Phoinikon ktisma} (ib. iii. 4, § 3).]

5149 (return)
[ Gesenius, Mon. Phoen. pp. 308-310; Tab. 40, xvi.]

5149 (return)
[ Gesenius, Mon. Phoen. pp. 308-310; Tab. 40, xvi.]

5150 (return)
[ Strab. iii. 4, § 2.]

5150 (return)
[ Strab. iii. 4, § 2.]

5151 (return)
[ Ibid.]

5151 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source.]

5152 (return)
[ Ibid. iii. 4, § 6.]

5152 (return)
[ Ibid. iii. 4, § 6.]

5153 (return)
[ Three hundred, according to some writers (Ibid. xvii. 3, § 3).]

5153 (return)
[ Three hundred, according to some authors (Ibid. xvii. 3, § 3).]

5154 (return)
[ Plin. H. N. xix. 4.]

5154 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Plin. H. N. xix. 4.]

5155 (return)
[ Gesenius, Mon. Phoen. pp. 309, 310.]

5155 (return)
[ Gesenius, Mon. Phoen. pp. 309, 310.]

5156 (return)
[ Géograph. Univ. xi. 710-713.]

5156 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Geography Univ. xi. 710-713.]

5157 (return)
[ Strab. ii. 3, § 4; Hanno, Peripl. § 6; Scylax, Peripl. § 112.]

5157 (return)
[ Strab. ii. 3, § 4; Hanno, Peripl. § 6; Scylax, Peripl. § 112.]

5158 (return)
[ See Géograph. Univer. xi. 714.]

5158 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ See Geography Universal. xi. 714.]

5159 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art, iii. 337.]

5159 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iii. 337.]

5160 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 339.]

5160 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ibid. p. 339.]

5161 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 341.]

5161 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ibid. p. 341.]

5162 (return)
[ See Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 118; Dyer, in Smith’s Dict. of Greek and Roman Geography, ii. 1106.]

5162 (return)
[ See Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 118; Dyer, in Smith’s Dict. of Greek and Roman Geography, ii. 1106.]

5163 (return)
[ Scymn. Ch. ll. 100-106; Strabo, iii. 2, § 11; Mela, De Situ Orbis, ii. 6; Plin. H. N. iv. 21; Fest. Avien. Descriptio Orbis, l. 610; Pausan. vi. 19.]

5163 (return)
[ Scymn. Ch. ll. 100-106; Strabo, iii. 2, § 11; Mela, De Situ Orbis, ii. 6; Plin. H. N. iv. 21; Fest. Avien. Descriptio Orbis, l. 610; Pausan. vi. 19.]

5164 (return)
[ Stesichorus, Fragmenta (ed. Bergk), p. 636; Strab. l.s.c.]

5164 (return)
[ Stesichorus, Fragments (ed. Bergk), p. 636; Strab. l.s.c.]

5165 (return)
[ Scymn. Ch. l.s.c.]

5165 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Scymn. Ch. l.s.c.]

5166 (return)
[ See Herod. i. 163.]

5166 (return)
[ See Herod. i. 163.]

5167 (return)
[ 1 Kings x. 22.]

5167 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[1 Kings 10:22.]

5168 (return)
[ Strab. iii. 2, § 8; Géograph. Univ. i. 741-745.]

5168 (return)
[ Strab. iii. 2, § 8; Géograph. Univ. i. 741-745.]

5169 (return)
[ Strab. iii. 2, § 11.]

5169 (return)
[ Strab. iii. 2, § 11.]

5170 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 119.]

5170 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 119.]

5171 (return)
[ Strab. iii. 2, § 7.]

5171 (return)
[ Strab. iii. 2, § 7.]

5172 (return)
[ Aristoph. Ran. l. 476; Jul. Pollux, vi. 63.]

5172 (return)
[ Aristoph. Ran. l. 476; Jul. Pollux, vi. 63.]

5173 (return)
[ Vell. Paterc. i. 2.]

5173 (return)
[ Vell. Paterc. i. 2.]

5174 (return)
[ Géograph. Univ. i. 756-758.]

5174 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Geography. Univ. i. 756-758.]

5175 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 758.]

5175 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, p. 758.]

5176 (return)
[ Strab. iii. 5, § 5; Diod. Sic. v. 20; Scymn. Ch. 160; Mela, iii. 6, § 1; Plin. H. N. v. 19; &c.]

5176 (return)
[ Strab. iii. 5, § 5; Diod. Sic. v. 20; Scymn. Ch. 160; Mela, iii. 6, § 1; Plin. H. N. v. 19; &c.]

5177 (return)
[ Gesen. Mon. Phoen. pp. 304, 370.]

5177 (return)
[ Gesen. Mon. Phoen. pp. 304, 370.]

5178 (return)
[ Strabo, iii. 5, § 3.]

5178 (return)
[ Strabo, iii. 5, § 3.]

5179 (return)
[ See the Géographie Universelle, i. 759.]

5179 (return)
[ See the Géographie Universelle, i. 759.]

5180 (return)
[ The name is to be connected with the words Baal, Belus, Baalath, &c. There was a river “Belus,” in Phoenicia Proper.]

5180 (return)
[ The name is linked to the words Baal, Belus, Baalath, etc. There was a river called “Belus” in Phoenicia Proper.]

5181 (return)
[ Gesenius, Monumenta Phoenicia, pp. 311, 312.]

5181 (return)
[ Gesenius, Monumenta Phoenicia, pp. 311, 312.]

5182 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 311.]

5182 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ibid. p. 311.]

5183 (return)
[ I.e. towards the north-east, in the Propontis and the Euxine.]

5183 (return)
[That is, toward the northeast, in the Sea of Marmara and the Black Sea.]

VI—ARCHITECTURE

VI—ARCHITECTURE

61 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art dans l’Antiquité, iii. 101.]

61 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art in Antiquity, iii. 101.]

62 (return)
[ See Renan, Mission de Phoenicie, p. 92, and Planches, pl. 12.]

62 (return)
[ See Renan, Mission de Phoenicie, p. 92, and Planches, pl. 12.]

63 (return)
[ Ibid.]

63 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source.]

64 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, pp. 62-68.]

64 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, pp. 62-68.]

65 (return)
[ Ibid. Planches, pl. 10.]

65 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Ibid. Plates, pl. 10.]

66 (return)
[ 1 Kings v. 17, 18.]

66 (return)
[ 1 Kings v. 17, 18.]

67 (return)
[ Our Work in Palestine, p. 115. Warren, Recovery of Jerusalem, i. 121.]

67 (return)
[ Our Work in Palestine, p. 115. Warren, Recovery of Jerusalem, i. 121.]

68 (return)
[ See the Corpus. Inscr. Semit. Pars I. Planches, pl. 29, No. 136.]

68 (return)
[ See the Corpus. Inscr. Semit. Part I. Plates, plate 29, No. 136.]

69 (return)
[ As at Sidon in the pier wall, and at Aradus in the remains of the great wall of the town.]

69 (return)
[ Like in Sidon at the pier wall, and in Aradus at the remnants of the town's great wall.]

610 (return)
[ M. Renan has found reason to question the truth of this view. Bevelling, he thinks, may have begun with the Phoenicians; but it became a general feature of Palestinian and Syrian architecture, being employed in Syria as late as the middle ages. The enclosure of the mosque at Hebron and the great wall of Baalbek are bevelled, but are scarcely Phoenician.]

610 (return)
[M. Renan has found reasons to doubt this perspective. He believes that beveling might have started with the Phoenicians, but it became a widespread element in Palestinian and Syrian architecture, used in Syria even into the Middle Ages. The enclosure of the mosque at Hebron and the massive wall of Baalbek are beveled, but are hardly Phoenician.]

611 (return)
[ See Renan, Mission de Phénicie, Planches, pl. vi.]

611 (return)
[ See Renan, Mission de Phénicie, Planches, pl. vi.]

612 (return)
[ Compare the enclosure of the Haram at Jerusalem, the mosque at Hebron, and the temples at Baalbek (Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art, iii. 105, No. 42; iv. 274, No. 139, and p. 186, No. 116).]

612 (return)
[ Compare the enclosure of the Haram in Jerusalem, the mosque in Hebron, and the temples in Baalbek (Perrot et Chipiez, History of Art, iii. 105, No. 42; iv. 274, No. 139, and p. 186, No. 116).]

613 (return)
[ See Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 108, 299, &c.]

613 (return)
[ See Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 108, 299, etc.]

614 (return)
[ Renan, Mission, p. 822.]

614 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Renan, Mission, p. 822.]

615 (return)
[ See Renan, Mission, pp. 62-68; and compare Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art, iii. 242, 243.]

615 (return)
[ See Renan, Mission, pp. 62-68; and compare Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art, iii. 242, 243.]

616 (return)
[ See Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 64.]

616 (return)
[ See Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 64.]

617 (return)
[ See Renan, Mission de Phénicie, pp. 63, 64.]

617 (return)
[ See Renan, Mission de Phénicie, pp. 63, 64.]

618 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 65.]

618 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, p. 65.]

619 (return)
[ See the volume of Plates published with the Mission, pl. ix. fig 1.]

619 (return)
[ See the volume of Plates published with the Mission, pl. ix. fig 1.]

620 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 110; pl. xxxv. fig. 20; xxxvi. fig. 7; xxxvii. figs. 10, 11; Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art, iii. pp. 124, 428, 533, &c.]

620 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 110; pl. xxxv. fig. 20; xxxvi. fig. 7; xxxvii. figs. 10, 11; Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art, iii. pp. 124, 428, 533, &c.]

621 (return)
[ Renan, Mission, Planches, pl. ix. fig. 3.]

621 (return)
[ Renan, Mission, Planches, pl. ix. fig. 3.]

622 (return)
[ See Perrot et Chipie, Histoire de l’Art, iii. 253, No. 193; p. 310, No. 233.]

622 (return)
[ See Perrot and Chipie, History of Art, iii. 253, No. 193; p. 310, No. 233.]

623 (return)
[ See the author’s History of Ancient Egypt, i. 237.]

623 (return)
[ See the author’s History of Ancient Egypt, i. 237.]

624 (return)
[ Mission de Phénicie, pp. 64, 65.]

624 (return)
[ Mission de Phénicie, pp. 64, 65.]

625 (return)
[ See Di Cesnola’s Cyprus, pp. 210-212.]

625 (return)
[ See Di Cesnola’s Cyprus, pp. 210-212.]

626 (return)
[ The temple of Solomon was mainly of wood; that of Golgi (Athiénau) was, it is thought, of crude brick (Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 139).]

626 (return)
[ The temple of Solomon was mostly made of wood; the one in Golgi (Athiénau) is believed to have been built with rough bricks (Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 139).]

627 (return)
[ See the plan in Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art, iii. 267, No. 200. Explorations are now in progress, which, it is hoped, may reveal more completely the plan of the building.]

627 (return)
[ See the plan in Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iii. 267, No. 200. Explorations are currently underway, which we hope will provide a more complete understanding of the building's layout.]

628 (return)
[ As being the most important temple in the island.]

628 (return)
[As the most important temple on the island.]

629 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 211.]

629 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 211.]

630 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 210.]

630 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, p. 210.]

631 (return)
[ Ibid.]

631 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source.]

632 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 269.]

632 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 269.]

633 (return)
[ In M. Gerhard’s plan two circular ponds or reservoirs are marked, of which General Di Cesnola found no trace.]

633 (return)
[In M. Gerhard’s plan, there are two circular ponds or reservoirs indicated, but General Di Cesnola could not find any sign of them.]

634 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 211.]

634 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 211.]

635 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 322.]

635 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 322.]

636 (return)
[ As Di Cesnola, and Ceccaldi.]

636 (return)
[ As Di Cesnola and Ceccaldi.]

637 (return)
[ Ceccaldi, as quoted by Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 275.]

637 (return)
[ Ceccaldi, as mentioned by Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 275.]

638 (return)
[ Ceccaldi, Monuments Antiques de Cypre, pp. 47, 48.]

638 (return)
[ Ceccaldi, Antique Monuments of Cyprus, pp. 47, 48.]

639 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 139.]

639 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 139.]

640 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 149; Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art, iii. 274; Ceccaldi, l.s.c.]

640 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 149; Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art, iii. 274; Ceccaldi, l.s.c.]

641 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, p. 139.]

641 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, p. 139.]

642 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 140.]

642 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Ibid. p. 140.]

643 (return)
[ Ibid. Compare Perrot et Chipiez, l.s.c.]

643 (return)
[ Ibid. See Perrot and Chipiez, l.s.c.]

644 (return)
[ The only original account of this crypt is that of General Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pp. 303-305.]

644 (return)
[ The only original account of this crypt is from General Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pp. 303-305.]

645 (return)
[ Mephitic vapours prevented the workmen from continuing their excavations.]

645 (return)
[Foul fumes stopped the workers from continuing their digging.]

646 (return)
[ The length of this room was twenty feet, the breadth nineteen feet, and the height fourteen feet (Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 304).]

646 (return)
[ This room was twenty feet long, nineteen feet wide, and fourteen feet high (Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 304).]

647 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art, iii. 285.]

647 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iii. 285.]

648 (return)
[ See the woodcut representing a portion of the old wall of Aradus, which is taken from M. Renan’s Mission, Planches, pl. 2.]

648 (return)
[ See the woodcut showing a part of the old wall of Aradus, which is taken from M. Renan’s Mission, Planches, pl. 2.]

649 (return)
[ In some of the ruder walls, as in those of Banias and Eryx, even this precaution is not observed. See Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art, iii. 328, 334.]

649 (return)
[ In some of the rougher walls, like those in Banias and Eryx, even this precaution isn't taken. See Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art, iii. 328, 334.]

650 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xxxii. 14.]

650 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xxxii. 14.]

651 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 21, § 3.]

651 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 21, § 3.]

652 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 331, 332, 339.]

652 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iii. 331, 332, 339.]

653 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. pp. 333, 334.]

653 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iii. pp. 333, 334.]

654 (return)
[ See his Recherches sur l’origine et l’emplacement des Emporia Phéniciens, pl. 8.]

654 (return)
[ See his Research on the Origin and Location of Phoenician Trading Posts, pl. 8.]

655 (return)
[ Compare Renan, Mission de Phénicie, pls. 7, 16, 18, &c.; and Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 224.]

655 (return)
[ Compare Renan, Mission de Phénicie, pls. 7, 16, 18, &c.; and Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 224.]

656 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 256, 260; Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 219-221.]

656 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 256, 260; Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 219-221.]

657 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 255.]

657 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 255.]

658 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pp. 255, 256.]

658 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pp. 255, 256.]

659 (return)
[ See Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 260; and compare Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 219, No. 155.]

659 (return)
[ See Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 260; and compare Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 219, No. 155.]

660 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, p. 259.]

660 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, p. 259.]

661 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 224.]

661 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 224.]

662 (return)
[ See Ross, Reisen nach Cypern, pp. 187-189; and Archäologische Zeitung for 1851, pl. xxviii. figs. 3 and 4.]

662 (return)
[ See Ross, Traveling to Cyprus, pp. 187-189; and Archaeological Journal for 1851, pl. xxviii. figs. 3 and 4.]

663 (return)
[ They are not shown in Ross’s representation, but appear in Di Cesnola’s.]

663 (return)
[ They're not included in Ross's depiction, but they do show up in Di Cesnola's.]

664 (return)
[ See Sir C. Newton’s Halicarnassus, pls. xviii. xix.]

664 (return)
[See Sir C. Newton’s Halicarnassus, pls. xviii. xix.]

665 (return)
[ 1 Macc. xiii. 27-29.]

665 (return)
[ 1 Macc. xiii. 27-29.]

666 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 80.]

666 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 80.]

667 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 81.]

667 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 81.]

668 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 82, 85.]

668 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 82, 85.]

669 (return)
[ See Robinson, Researches in Palestine, iii. 385.]

669 (return)
[ See Robinson, Researches in Palestine, iii. 385.]

670 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 599.]

670 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 599.]

671 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez remark that “the general aspect of the edifice recalls that of the great tombs at Amrith;” and conclude that, “if the tomb does not actually belong to the time of Solomon’s contemporary and ally, at any rate it is anterior to the Greco-Roman period” (Hist. de l’Art, iii. 167).]

671 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez point out that “the overall appearance of the building resembles that of the large tombs at Amrith;” and they conclude that, “even if the tomb doesn’t actually date back to the time of Solomon’s contemporary and ally, it is definitely earlier than the Greco-Roman period” (Hist. de l’Art, iii. 167).]

672 (return)
[ See the section of the building in Renan’s Mission, Planches, pl. xlviii.]

672 (return)
[ See the section of the building in Renan’s Mission, Planches, pl. xlviii.]

673 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 71.]

673 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 71.]

674 (return)
[ Ibid. Planches, pl. 13.]

674 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Ibid. Plates, p. 13.]

675 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 72.]

675 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Ibid. p. 72.]

676 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art, iii. 153.]

676 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iii. 153.]

677 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, pp. 71-73.]

677 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, pp. 71-73.]

678 (return)
[ “Ce que ce tombeau offre de tout à fait particulier c’est que l’entrée du caveau, ou, pour mieux dire, l’escalier qui y conduit, est couvert, dans sa partie antérieure, par un énorme bloc régulièrement taillé en dos d’âne et supporté par une assise de grosses pierres” (Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 154).]

678 (return)
[ “What makes this tomb so unique is that the entrance to the vault, or, to put it more accurately, the staircase that leads to it, is covered in its front part by a massive block shaped like a back of a donkey and supported by a base of large stones” (Perrot and Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 154).]

679 (return)
[ Mark xvi. 3, 4.]

679 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Mark 16:3, 4.]

680 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 334.]

680 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iii. 334.]

681 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 126, No. 68.]

681 (return)
[Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iii. 126, No. 68.]

682 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pp. 211, 301.]

682 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pp. 211, 301.]

683 (return)
[ See Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art, iii. 129-134.]

683 (return)
[ See Perrot et Chipiez, History of Art, iii. 129-134.]

684 (return)
[ Mission de Phénicie, p. 822.]

684 (return)
[ Mission de Phénicie, p. 822.]

685 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 822.]

685 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 822.]

686 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 829.]

686 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 829.]

VII—ÆSTHETIC ART

VII—Aesthetic Art

71 (return)
[ See Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 404, and compare pp. 428 and 437.]

71 (return)
[ See Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 404, and compare pp. 428 and 437.]

72 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pp. 129-157, &c.]

72 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pp. 129-157, etc.]

73 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 510.]

73 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 510.]

74 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 513: “Les figures semblent avoir été taillées non dans des blocs prismatiques, mais dans de la pierre débitée en carrière, sous forme de dalles épaisses.”]

74 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 513: “The figures appear to have been carved not from prism-shaped blocks, but from stone that was extracted from a quarry, in the form of thick slabs.”]

75 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, p. 150.]

75 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, p. 150.]

76 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 149, 150.]

76 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 149, 150.]

77 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, p. 157.]

77 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, p. 157.]

78 (return)
[ So both Di Cesnola (l.s.c) and Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 565.]

78 (return)
[ So both Di Cesnola (l.s.c) and Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 565.]

79 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. Nos. 349, 385, 405, &c.; Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pp. 133, 149, 157.]

79 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iii. Nos. 349, 385, 405, etc.; Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pp. 133, 149, 157.]

710 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 519, No. 353.]

710 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 519, No. 353.]

711 (return)
[ Ibid. Nos. 323, 342, 368. Occasionally an arm is placed across the breast without anything being clasped (Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pp. 131, 240).]

711 (return)
[ Ibid. Nos. 323, 342, 368. Sometimes an arm is placed across the chest without holding anything (Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pp. 131, 240).]

712 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Nos. 299, 322, 373.]

712 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, Nos. 299, 322, 373.]

713 (return)
[ Ibid. Nos. 291, 321, 379, 380.]

713 (return)
[ Same as above. Nos. 291, 321, 379, 380.]

714 (return)
[ Ibid. Nos. 381, 382.]

714 (return)
[ Same source. Nos. 381, 382.]

715 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Nos. 306, 345, 349, &c.]

715 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, Nos. 306, 345, 349, etc.]

716 (return)
[ See Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pp. 141, 230, 243, &c.]

716 (return)
[See Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pp. 141, 230, 243, etc.]

717 (return)
[ Compare Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 530, No. 358; p. 533, No. 359; and Di Cesnola, pp. 131, 154, &c.]

717 (return)
[ Compare Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 530, No. 358; p. 533, No. 359; and Di Cesnola, pp. 131, 154, &c.]

718 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, pp. 129, 145; Perrot et Chipiez, pp. 527, 545.]

718 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, pp. 129, 145; Perrot et Chipiez, pp. 527, 545.]

719 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, pp. 149, 151, 161, &c.]

719 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, pp. 149, 151, 161, etc.]

720 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 201, No. 142; p. 451, No. 323; p. 598, No. 409. The best dove is that in the hand of a priest represented by Di Cesnola (Cyprus, p. 132).]

720 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iii. 201, No. 142; p. 451, No. 323; p. 598, No. 409. The best dove is the one held by a priest shown by Di Cesnola (Cyprus, p. 132).]

721 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 114.]

721 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 114.]

722 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 331; Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 203, and Pl. ii. opp. p. 582.]

722 (return)
[ Same source, p. 331; Perrot and Chipiez, vol. iii, p. 203, and Plate ii, opposite p. 582.]

723 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 136; Ceccaldi, Rev. Arch. vol. xxiv. pl. 21.]

723 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 136; Ceccaldi, Rev. Arch. vol. xxiv. pl. 21.]

724 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, p. 137.]

724 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, p. 137.]

725 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 133.]

725 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, p. 133.]

726 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 110-114.]

726 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ibid. pp. 110-114.]

727 (return)
[ See the Story of Assyria, p. 403; and compare Ancient Monarchies, i. 395, 493.]

727 (return)
[ See the Story of Assyria, p. 403; and compare Ancient Monarchies, vol. 1, 395, 493.]

728 (return)
[ See Story of Assyria, l.s.c.; and for the classical practice, which was identical, compare Lipsius, Antiq. Lect. iii.]

728 (return)
[ See Story of Assyria, l.s.c.; and for the classical practice, which was identical, compare Lipsius, Antiq. Lect. iii.]

729 (return)
[ So it is in a garden that Asshurbani-pal and his queen regale themselves (Ancient Monarchies, i. 493). Compare Esther i. 7.]

729 (return)
[ So it is in a garden that Asshurbani-pal and his queen enjoy themselves (Ancient Monarchies, i. 493). Compare Esther i. 7.]

730 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 620.]

730 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iii. 620.]

731 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pp. 259-267.]

731 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pp. 259-267.]

732 (return)
[ Di Cesnola is in favour of Melkarth (p. 264); MM. Perrot and Chipiez of Bes (Hist. de l’Art, iii. 610). Individually, I incline to Esmun.]

732 (return)
[ Di Cesnola supports Melkarth (p. 264); MM. Perrot and Chipiez favor Bes (Hist. de l’Art, iii. 610). Personally, I lean towards Esmun.]

733 (return)
[ See Di Cesnola, Pl. vi.; Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 450, 555, 557; Nos. 321, 379, 380, 381, and 382.]

733 (return)
[ See Di Cesnola, Pl. vi.; Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 450, 555, 557; Nos. 321, 379, 380, 381, and 382.]

734 (return)
[ Herod. iii. 37.]

734 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. iii. 37.]

735 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez see in it the travels of the deceased in another world (Hist. de l’Art, iii. 612); but they admit that at first sight one would be tempted to regard it as the representation of an historical event, as the setting forth of a prince for war, or his triumphant return.]

735 (return)
[Perrot and Chipiez interpret it as the journey of the deceased in the afterlife (Hist. de l’Art, iii. 612); however, they acknowledge that at first glance, one might easily see it as depicting a historical event, such as a prince preparing for battle or celebrating his victorious return.]

736 (return)
[ A similar crest was used by the Persians (Ancient Monarchies, iii. 180, 234), and the Lycians (Fellows’s Lycia, pl. xxi. oop. p. 173).]

736 (return)
[ A similar emblem was used by the Persians (Ancient Monarchies, iii. 180, 234), and the Lycians (Fellows’s Lycia, pl. xxi. oop. p. 173).]

737 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art, iii. 609-611.]

737 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iii. 609-611.]

738 (return)
[ See the Journal le Bachir for June 8, 1887, published at Beyrout.]

738 (return)
[ See the Journal le Bachir for June 8, 1887, published in Beirut.]

739 (return)
[ 1 Kings vii. 14; 2 Chron. ii. 14.]

739 (return)
[ 1 Kings 7:14; 2 Chronicles 2:14.]

740 (return)
[ 1 Kings vii. 21.]

740 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[1 Kings 7:21.]

741 (return)
[ “In the porch” (1 Kings vii. 21); “before the house,” “before the temple” (2 Chron. iii. 15, 17).]

741 (return)
[ “On the porch” (1 Kings vii. 21); “in front of the house,” “in front of the temple” (2 Chron. iii. 15, 17).]

742 (return)
[ 1 Kings vii. 15, 16.]

742 (return)
[ 1 Kings 7:15, 16.]

743 (return)
[ Jer. lii. 21.]

743 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Jer. 52:21.]

744 (return)
[ 1 Kings vii. 17, 20.]

744 (return)
[ 1 Kings 7:17, 20.]

745 (return)
[ Ibid. verse 20; 2 Chron. iv. 13; Jer. lii. 23.]

745 (return)
[ Same as above, verse 20; 2 Chronicles 4:13; Jeremiah 52:23.]

746 (return)
[ 1 Kings vii. 22.]

746 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[1 Kings 7:22.]

747 (return)
[ See Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, vol. iv. Pls. vi. and vii. opp. pp. 318 and 320.]

747 (return)
[ See Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, vol. iv. Pls. vi. and vii. opp. pp. 318 and 320.]

748 (return)
[ 1 Kings vii. 23.]

748 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[1 Kings 7:23.]

749 (return)
[ Ibid. vv. 23-25.]

749 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, vv. 23-25.]

750 (return)
[ See the representation in Perrot et Chipiez, iv. 327, No. 172.]

750 (return)
[ See the depiction in Perrot and Chipiez, vol. 4, p. 327, No. 172.]

751 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iv. 328.]

751 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, vol. iv. 328.]

752 (return)
[ 1 Kings vii. 27-39.]

752 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ 1 Kings 7:27-39.]

753 (return)
[ Ibid. verse 38.]

753 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Ibid. v. 38.]

754 (return)
[ Ibid. verse 29.]

754 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same verse 29.]

755 (return)
[ See the woodcut in Perrot et Chipiez, iv. 331, No. 173; and compare 1 Kings vii. 31.]

755 (return)
[ See the woodcut in Perrot et Chipiez, iv. 331, No. 173; and compare 1 Kings vii. 31.]

756 (return)
[ 1 Kings vii. 36.]

756 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[1 Kings 7:36.]

757 (return)
[ 1 Kings vii. 33.]

757 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ 1 Kings 7:33.]

758 (return)
[ Ibid. v. 40. Compare 2 Chron. iv. 16.]

758 (return)
[Same source, vol. 40. See also 2 Chronicles 4:16.]

759 (return)
[ See Di Cesnola’s Cyprus, Pls. xxi. and xxx.]

759 (return)
[ See Di Cesnola’s Cyprus, Pls. xxi. and xxx.]

760 (return)
[ A single statue in bronze, of full size, or larger than life, is said to have been exhumed in Cyprus in 1836 (Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 514); but it has not reached our day.]

760 (return)
[ A single bronze statue, either life-sized or larger, is reported to have been dug up in Cyprus in 1836 (Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 514); however, it has not survived to the present day.]

761 (return)
[ See the works of La Marmora (Voyage en Sardaigne), Cara (Relazione sugli idoli sardo-fenici), and Perrot et Chipiez (Hist. de l’Art, iv. 65-89).]

761 (return)
[ Check out the works of La Marmora (Journey in Sardinia), Cara (Report on the Sardinian-Phoenician Idols), and Perrot and Chipiez (History of Art, iv. 65-89).]

762 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iv. 65, 66.]

762 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, iv. 65, 66.]

763 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 67, 69, 88.]

763 (return)
[ Same source, pages 67, 69, 88.]

764 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 67, 70, 89.]

764 (return)
[ Same source, pages 67, 70, 89.]

765 (return)
[ Ibid. 52, 74, 75, 87, &c.]

765 (return)
[ Ibid. 52, 74, 75, 87, &c.]

766 (return)
[ See Di Cesnola, Cyprus, Pl. iv. opp. p. 84.]

766 (return)
[ See Di Cesnola, Cyprus, Pl. iv. opp. p. 84.]

767 (return)
[ Ibid. opp. p. 345.]

767 (return)
[ Ibid. opp. p. 345.]

768 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 337.]

768 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, p. 337.]

769 (return)
[ Monumenti di cere antica, Pl. x. fig. 1.]

769 (return)
[ Ancient Wax Monuments, Pl. x. fig. 1.]

770 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 77.]

770 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 77.]

771 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, Pl. xi. opp. p. 114.]

771 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, Pl. xi. opp. p. 114.]

772 (return)
[ In the museum of the Varvakeion. (See Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 782-785.)]

772 (return)
[In the Varvakeion museum. (See Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 782-785.)]

773 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 783, No. 550.]

773 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 783, No. 550.]

774 (return)
[ Compare the author’s History of Ancient Egypt, i. 362.]

774 (return)
[ Compare the author’s History of Ancient Egypt, i. 362.]

775 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 779, No. 548.]

775 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 779, No. 548.]

776 (return)
[ See Ancient Monarchies, i. 392.]

776 (return)
[ See Ancient Monarchies, i. 392.]

777 (return)
[ See Clermont-Ganneau, Imagerie Phénicienne, p. xiii.]

777 (return)
[ See Clermont-Ganneau, Imagerie Phénicienne, p. xiii.]

778 (return)
[ See Clermont-Ganneau, Ima. Phénicienne, Pls. ii. iv. and vi. Compare Longpérier, Musée Napoléon III., Pl. x.; Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 329; Pl. xix. opp. p. 276; Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 777, 789; Nos. 547 and 552.]

778 (return)
[ See Clermont-Ganneau, Ima. Phénicienne, Pls. ii. iv. and vi. Compare Longpérier, Musée Napoléon III., Pl. x.; Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 329; Pl. xix. opp. p. 276; Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 777, 789; Nos. 547 and 552.]

779 (return)
[ Clermont-Ganneau, Pl. i. at end of volume; Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 759, No. 543.]

779 (return)
[ Clermont-Ganneau, Pl. i. at the end of the volume; Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 759, No. 543.]

780 (return)
[ L’Imagerie Phénicienne, p. 8.]

780 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ The Phoenician Imagery, p. 8.]

781 (return)
[ Helbig, Bullettino dell’ Instituto di Corrispondenza archeologica, 1876, p. 127.]

781 (return)
[ Helbig, Bullettino dell’ Instituto di Corrispondenza archeologica, 1876, p. 127.]

782 (return)
[ L’Imagerie Phénicienne, p. 8.]

782 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ The Phoenician Imagery, p. 8.]

783 (return)
[ L’Imagerie Phénicienne, pp. xi, xiii, and 18-39.]

783 (return)
[ The Phoenician Imagery, pp. xi, xiii, and 18-39.]

784 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 151.]

784 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, p. 151.]

785 (return)
[ L’Imagerie Phénicienne, pp. 150-156. It is fatal to M. Clermont-Ganneau’s idea—1. That the hunter in the outer scene has no dog; 2. That the dress of the charioteer is wholly unlike that of the fugitive attacked by the dog; and 3. That M. Clermont-Ganneau’s explanation accounts in no way for the medallion’s central and main figure.]

785 (return)
[ The Phoenician Imagery, pp. 150-156. This is a serious blow to M. Clermont-Ganneau’s theory—1. The hunter in the outer scene doesn't have a dog; 2. The outfit of the charioteer is completely different from that of the fleeing person being attacked by the dog; and 3. M. Clermont-Ganneau’s explanation does not explain at all the central and main figure of the medallion.]

786 (return)
[ “Les formes et les mouvements des chevaux sont indiqués avec beaucoup du sûreté et de justesse” (ibid. p. 6).]

786 (return)
[ "The shapes and movements of the horses are described with great accuracy and precision" (ibid. p. 6).]

787 (return)
[ So Mr. C. W. King in his appendix to Di Cesnola’s Cyprus, p. 387. He supports his view by Herod. vii. 69.]

787 (return)
[ So Mr. C. W. King in his appendix to Di Cesnola’s Cyprus, p. 387. He backs up his opinion with Herod. vii. 69.]

788 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 632.]

788 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 632.]

789 (return)
[ Compare the cylinder of Darius Hystaspis (Ancient Monarchies, iii. 227) and another engraved on the same page.]

789 (return)
[ Compare the cylinder of Darius Hystaspis (Ancient Monarchies, iii. 227) and another engraved on the same page.]

790 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 635, note.]

790 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 635, note.]

791 (return)
[ Proceedings of the Society of Bibl. Archæology for 1883—4, p. 16.]

791 (return)
[ Proceedings of the Society of Bibl. Archæology for 1883—4, p. 16.]

792 (return)
[ See M. A. Di Cesnola’s Salaminia, Pls. xii. and xiii.]

792 (return)
[ See M. A. Di Cesnola’s Salaminia, Pls. xii. and xiii.]

793 (return)
[ See Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 639, No. 431.]

793 (return)
[ See Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 639, No. 431.]

794 (return)
[ These fluttering ends of ribbon are very common in the Persian representations. See Ancient Monarchies, iii. 351.]

794 (return)
[ These fluttering bits of ribbon are quite common in Persian art. See Ancient Monarchies, iii. 351.]

795 (return)
[ Ancient Monarchies, iii. pp. 203, 204, 208.]

795 (return)
[ Ancient Monarchies, iii. pp. 203, 204, 208.]

796 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 630.]

796 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 630.]

797 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 635-639. Green serpentine is the most usual material (C. W. King, in Di Cesnola’s Cyprus, p. 387).]

797 (return)
[ Same source, pp. 635-639. Green serpentine is the most common material (C. W. King, in Di Cesnola’s Cyprus, p. 387).]

798 (return)
[ King, in Di Cesnola’s Cyprus, p. 388.]

798 (return)
[ King, in Di Cesnola’s Cyprus, p. 388.]

799 (return)
[ Pl. xxxvi. a.]

799 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Pl. xxxvi. a.]

7100 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 277.]

7100 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 277.]

7101 (return)
[ See De Vogüé’s Mélanges d’Archéologie Orientale, pl. v.]

7101 (return)
[ See De Vogüé’s Mélanges d’Archéologie Orientale, pl. v.]

7102 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 631.]

7102 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 631.]

7103 (return)
[ See Di Cesnola’s Cyprus, pl. xxvi. (top line).]

7103 (return)
[ See Di Cesnola’s Cyprus, pl. xxvi. (top line).]

7104 (return)
[ See Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 645.]

7104 (return)
[ See Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 645.]

7105 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 646.]

7105 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Ibid. p. 646.]

7106 (return)
[ De Vogüé, Mélanges, p. 111.]

7106 (return)
[ De Vogüé, Mélanges, p. 111.]

7107 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 651.]

7107 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iii. 651.]

7108 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 652.]

7108 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, p. 652.]

7109 (return)
[ See Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pl. xxxvi. fig. 8.]

7109 (return)
[ See Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pl. xxxvi. fig. 8.]

7110 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 646.]

7110 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 646.]

7111 (return)
[ Herod. vii. 61.]

7111 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. vii. 61.]

7112 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pl. xxxv. fig. a.]

7112 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pl. xxxv. fig. a.]

7113 (return)
[ Herod. v. 113.]

7113 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. v. 113.]

7114 (return)
[ That of Canon Spano. (See Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 655, note 1.)]

7114 (return)
[ That of Canon Spano. (See Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 655, note 1.)]

7115 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 656, 657, Nos. 466, 467, 468.]

7115 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 656, 657, Nos. 466, 467, 468.]

7116 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iii. p. 655.]

7116 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, iii. p. 655.]

7117 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 656, Nos. 464, 465.]

7117 (return)
[Same source, p. 656, Nos. 464, 465.]

7118 (return)
[ See the author’s History of Ancient Egypt, ii. 47, 54, 70.]

7118 (return)
[ Check out the author’s History of Ancient Egypt, ii. 47, 54, 70.]

7119 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 657, 658, Nos. 471-476.]

7119 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 657, 658, Nos. 471-476.]

7120 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 655:—“La couleur parait y avoir été employée d’une manière discrète; elle servait à faire ressortir certains détails.”]

7120 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 655:—“The color seems to have been used discreetly; it served to highlight certain details.”]

7121 (return)
[ Ross, Reisen auf den griechischen Inseln, iv. 100.]

7121 (return)
[ Ross, Travels in the Greek Islands, iv. 100.]

7122 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 666:—“On obtenait ainsi un ensemble qui, malgré la rapidité du travail, ne manquait pas de gaieté, d’harmonie et d’agrément.”]

7122 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 666:—“This resulted in a collection that, despite the quick pace of the work, was filled with cheerfulness, harmony, and charm.”]

7123 (return)
[ See Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pp. 65, 71, 91, 181, &c.; and Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 686, 691, 699, &c.]

7123 (return)
[ See Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pp. 65, 71, 91, 181, etc.; and Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 686, 691, 699, etc.]

7124 (return)
[ Cyprus, pl. xxix. (p. 333).]

7124 (return)
[ Cyprus, pl. xxix. (p. 333).]

7125 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 704.]

7125 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 704.]

VIII—INDUSTRIAL ART AND MANUFACTURES

VIII—INDUSTRIAL ART AND MANUFACTURING

81 (return)
[ Ezek. xxvii. 18.]

81 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ezek. 27:18.]

82 (return)
[ Ibid. xxvii. 21.]

82 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, xxvii. 21.]

83 (return)
[ See Herod. ii. 182, and compare the note of Sir G. Wilkinson on that passage in Rawlinson’s Herodotus, ii. 272.]

83 (return)
[ See Herod. ii. 182, and check Sir G. Wilkinson's note on that passage in Rawlinson’s Herodotus, ii. 272.]

84 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 246.]

84 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 246.]

85 (return)
[ Ibid.]

85 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source.]

86 (return)
[ Hom. Il. vi. 289; Od. xv. 417; Æsch. Suppl. ll. 279-284; Lucan, Phars. x. 142, &c.]

86 (return)
[ Hom. Il. vi. 289; Od. xv. 417; Æsch. Suppl. ll. 279-284; Lucan, Phars. x. 142, &c.]

87 (return)
[ Ex. xxvi. 36, xxviii. 39.]

87 (return)
[ Ex. xxvi. 36, xxviii. 39.]

88 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art, iii. 877.]

88 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iii. 877.]

89 (return)
[ Smyth, Mediterranean Sea, pp. 205-207.]

89 (return)
[ Smyth, Mediterranean Sea, pp. 205-207.]

810 (return)
[ Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 51.]

810 (return)
[ Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 51.]

811 (return)
[ Lortet, La Syrie d’aujourd’hui, p. 103.]

811 (return)
[ Lortet, Syria Today, p. 103.]

812 (return)
[ See Phil. Transactions, xv. 1,280.]

812 (return)
[ See Phil. Transactions, xv. 1,280.]

813 (return)
[ Wilksinson, in Rawlinson’s Herodotus, ii. 347.]

813 (return)
[ Wilksinson, in Rawlinson’s Herodotus, ii. 347.]

814 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 258.]

814 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 258.]

815 (return)
[ See Jul. Pollux, Onomasticon, i. 4, § 45.]

815 (return)
[ See Jul. Pollux, Onomasticon, i. 4, § 45.]

816 (return)
[ This is the case with almost all the refuse shells found in the “kitchen middens” (as they have been called) on the Syrian coast. See Lortet, La Syrie d’aujourd’hui, p. 103).]

816 (return)
[ This is true for almost all the discarded shells found in the "kitchen middens" (as they have been referred to) along the Syrian coast. See Lortet, La Syrie d’aujourd’hui, p. 103).]

817 (return)
[ See Réaumur, quoted by Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 256.]

817 (return)
[ See Réaumur, referenced by Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 256.]

818 (return)
[ Plin. H. N. ix. 38.]

818 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Plin. H. N. ix. 38.]

819 (return)
[ See Grimaud de Caux’s paper in the Revue de Zoologie for 1856, p. 34; and compare Lortet, La Syrie d’aujourd’hui, p. 102.]

819 (return)
[ See Grimaud de Caux’s paper in the Revue de Zoologie from 1856, p. 34; and compare Lortet, La Syrie d’aujourd’hui, p. 102.]

820 (return)
[ Ibid.]

820 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source.]

821 (return)
[ Lortet, La Syrie d’aujourd’hui, p. 127.]

821 (return)
[ Lortet, Modern Syria, p. 127.]

822 (return)
[ Plin. H. N. xxxii. 22.]

822 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Plin. H. N. xxxii. 22.]

823 (return)
[ Ibid. ix. 37-39.]

823 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Same source, pp. 37-39.]

824 (return)
[ For the tints producible, see a paper by M. Lacaze-Duthiers, in the Annales des Sciences Naturelles for 1859, Zoologie, 4me. série, xii. 1-84.]

824 (return)
[ For the colors that can be produced, see a paper by M. Lacaze-Duthiers, in the Annales des Sciences Naturelles from 1859, Zoology, 4th series, vol. xii, pp. 1-84.]

825 (return)
[ Plin. H. N. ix. 41.]

825 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Plin. H. N. ix. 41.]

826 (return)
[ Ibid. ix. 39:—“Cornelius Nepos, qui divi Augusti principatu obiit. Me, inquit, juvene violacea purpura vigebat, cujus libra denariis centum venibat.”]

826 (return)
[ Ibid. ix. 39:—“Cornelius Nepos, who died during the reign of Emperor Augustus, said, ‘When I was a young man, I was thriving in a deep purple toga, which cost a hundred denarii.’”]

827 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 242. Compare Pliny, H. N. ix. 38:—“Laus summa in colore sanguinis concreti.”]

827 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 242. Compare Pliny, H. N. ix. 38:—“The highest praise is in the color of dried blood.”]

828 (return)
[ Hist. Nat. xxxvi. 65.]

828 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Hist. Nat. xxxvi. 65.]

829 (return)
[ Wilkinson, in Rawlinson’s Herodotus, ii. 82. Similar representations occur in tombs near the Pyramids.]

829 (return)
[Wilkinson, in Rawlinson’s Herodotus, ii. 82. Similar depictions appear in tombs near the Pyramids.]

830 (return)
[ Wilksinson, Manners and Customs, iii. 88.]

830 (return)
[ Wilksinson, Manners and Customs, iii. 88.]

831 (return)
[ Herod. ii. 86-88.]

831 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. ii. 86-88.]

832 (return)
[ Plin. H. N. v 19; xxxvi. 26, &c.]

832 (return)
[ Plin. H. N. v 19; xxxvi. 26, &c.]

833 (return)
[ Lortet, La Syrie d’aujourd’hui, p. 113.]

833 (return)
[ Lortet, Modern Syria, p. 113.]

834 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 127.]

834 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, p. 127.]

835 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 735, note 2.]

835 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iii. 735, note 2.]

836 (return)
[ Plin. H. N. xxxvi. 26.]

836 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Plin. H. N. xxxvi. 26.]

837 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 739.]

837 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 739.]

838 (return)
[ See Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art, iii. 734-744.]

838 (return)
[ See Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iii. 734-744.]

839 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Histore de l’Art, iii. pl. viii. No. 2 (opp. p. 740).]

839 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iii. pl. viii. No. 2 (opposite p. 740).]

840 (return)
[ Ibid. pl. vii. No. 1 (opp. p. 734).]

840 (return)
[ Ibid. pl. vii. No. 1 (opp. p. 734).]

841 (return)
[ Herod. ii. 44.]

841 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. ii. 44.]

842 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 745, and pl. x.]

842 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iii. 745, and pl. x.]

843 (return)
[ Ibid.]

843 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source.]

844 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 746, No. 534.]

844 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 746, No. 534.]

845 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 739, 740.]

845 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 739, 740.]

846 (return)
[ See Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art, iii. 740, 741.]

846 (return)
[ See Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iii. 740, 741.]

847 (return)
[ The British Museum has a mould which was found at Camirus, intended to give shape to glass earrings. It is of a hard greenish stone, apparently a sort of breccia.]

847 (return)
[ The British Museum has a mold that was discovered at Camirus, designed to shape glass earrings. It is made of a tough, greenish stone, seemingly a type of breccia.]

848 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 745.]

848 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 745.]

849 (return)
[ Strabo, iii. 5, § 11.]

849 (return)
[ Strabo, iii. 5, § 11.]

850 (return)
[ Scylax, Periplus, § 112.]

850 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Scylax, Periplus, § 112.]

851 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art, iii. 669. (Compare Renan Mission de Phénicie, pl. xxi.)]

851 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iii. 669. (See Renan The Mission of Phoenicia, pl. xxi.)]

852 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 670. The vase is figured on p. 670, No. 478.]

852 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 670. The vase is illustrated on p. 670, No. 478.]

853 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 68. Compare Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 671, No. 479.]

853 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 68. See Perrot and Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 671, No. 479.]

854 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, l.s.c.]

854 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, l.s.c.]

855 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, appendix, p. 408.]

855 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, appendix, p. 408.]

856 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 685, No. 485.]

856 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 685, No. 485.]

857 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 102. Compare Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 675, No. 483.]

857 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 102. Compare Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 675, No. 483.]

858 (return)
[ So Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 332, and Mr. Murray, of the British Museum, ibid., appendix, pp. 401, 402.]

858 (return)
[ So Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 332, and Mr. Murray, of the British Museum, ibid., appendix, pp. 401, 402.]

859 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 693-695.]

859 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iii. 693-695.]

860 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pp. 394, 402, and pl. xlii. fig. 4.]

860 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pp. 394, 402, and pl. xlii. fig. 4.]

861 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 698.]

861 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iii. 698.]

862 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 676, No. 484; p. 691, No. 496; and p. 697, No. 505.]

862 (return)
[Same source, p. 676, No. 484; p. 691, No. 496; and p. 697, No. 505.]

863 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 730.]

863 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ibid. p. 730.]

864 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 282, and pl. xxx.]

864 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 282, and pl. xxx.]

865 (return)
[ Ibid.]

865 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source.]

866 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 866-868. Compare Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pl. x.]

866 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iii. 866-868. See Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pl. x.]

867 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pp. 335, 336, and pls. iv. and xxx.; Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 831, 862, 863, &c.]

867 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pp. 335, 336, and pls. iv. and xxx.; Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 831, 862, 863, &c.]

868 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, l.s.c.; Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 864.]

868 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, l.s.c.; Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 864.]

869 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pl. xx.]

869 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pl. xx.]

870 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iv. 15, 66-68, 70; Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 203.]

870 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, iv. 15, 66-68, 70; Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 203.]

871 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 870, 871.]

871 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 870, 871.]

872 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 867, No. 633.]

872 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 867, No. 633.]

873 (return)
[ Ibid. iv. 94.]

873 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, p. 94.]

874 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iv. 94, No. 91.]

874 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, iv. 94, No. 91.]

875 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 67, No. 53.]

875 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 67, No. 53.]

876 (return)
[ Ibid. iii. 862, No. 629.]

876 (return)
[ Ibid. iii. 862, No. 629.]

877 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iii. p. 863.]

877 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iii. p. 863.]

878 (return)
[ De Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 336.]

878 (return)
[ De Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 336.]

879 (return)
[ See Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 133, Nos. 80, 81.]

879 (return)
[ See Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 133, Nos. 80, 81.]

880 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, p. 335.]

880 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, p. 335.]

881 (return)
[ See Ezek. xxvii. 12; Strab. iii. 2, § 8.]

881 (return)
[ See Ezek. 27:12; Strabo 3.2 § 8.]

882 (return)
[ Plutarch, Vit. Alex. Magni, § 32.]

882 (return)
[ Plutarch, Life of Alexander the Great, § 32.]

883 (return)
[ Ceccaldi, Monumens Antiques de Cyprus, p. 138; Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 282; Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 874.]

883 (return)
[ Ceccaldi, Ancient Monuments of Cyprus, p. 138; Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 282; Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iii. 874.]

884 (return)
[ Plutarch, Vit. Demetrii, § 21.]

884 (return)
[ Plutarch, Life of Demetrius, § 21.]

885 (return)
[ Hom. Il. xi. 19-28.]

885 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Hom. Il. 11. 19-28.]

886 (return)
[ 2 Chron. ii. 14. Iron, in the shape of nails and rings, has been found in several graves in Phoenicia Proper, where the coffin seems to have been of wood (Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 866).]

886 (return)
[ 2 Chron. ii. 14. Iron, in the form of nails and rings, has been discovered in various graves in Phoenicia Proper, where the coffin appears to have been made of wood (Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 866).]

887 (return)
[ Strab. iii. 5, § 11.]

887 (return)
[ Strab. iii. 5, § 11.]

888 (return)
[ Ezek. xxvii. 12.]

888 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Ezekiel 27:12.]

889 (return)
[ See Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iv. 80.]

889 (return)
[ See Perrot and Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iv. 80.]

890 (return)
[ Ibid. iii. 815, No. 568.]

890 (return)
[ Ibid. iii. 815, No. 568.]

891 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 427, and pl. lx. fig. 1; Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 177, No. 123.]

891 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 427, and pl. lx. fig. 1; Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 177, No. 123.]

IX—SHIPS, NAVIGATION, AND COMMERCE

IX—SHIPS, NAVIGATION, AND TRADE

91 (return)
[ Plin. H. N. vii. 56.]

91 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Plin. H. N. vii. 56.]

92 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 517, No. 352.]

92 (return)
[Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iii. 517, No. 352.]

93 (return)
[ Layard, Nineveh and its Remains, ii. 383.]

93 (return)
[ Layard, Nineveh and its Remains, ii. 383.]

94 (return)
[ Compare the practice of the Egyptians (Rosellini, Monumenti Storici, pl. cxxxi.)]

94 (return)
[ Compare the practice of the Egyptians (Rosellini, Monumenti Storici, pl. cxxxi.)]

95 (return)
[ See Mionnet, Déscript. de Médailles, vol. vii. pl. lxi. fig. 1; Gesenius, Ling. Scripturæque Phoen. Monumenta, pl. 36, fig. G; Layard, Nineveh and its Remains, ii. 378.]

95 (return)
[ See Mionnet, Descriptive Catalog of Medals, vol. vii. pl. lxi. fig. 1; Gesenius, Language and Phoenician Scripture Monuments, pl. 36, fig. G; Layard, Nineveh and Its Remains, ii. 378.]

96 (return)
[ Layard, Monuments of Nineveh, first series, pl. 71; Nineveh and its Remains, l.s.c.]

96 (return)
[ Layard, Monuments of Nineveh, first series, pl. 71; Nineveh and its Remains, l.s.c.]

97 (return)
[ So Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 34.]

97 (return)
[ So Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iii. 34.]

98 (return)
[ See Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pl. xlv.]

98 (return)
[ See Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pl. xlv.]

99 (return)
[ Herod. iii. 136.]

99 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. III. 136.]

910 (return)
[ In later times there must have been more sails than one, since Xenophon describes a Phoenician merchant ship as sailing by means of a quantity of rigging, which implies several sails (Xen. OEconom. § 8).]

910 (return)
[Later on, there must have been more than one sail, since Xenophon describes a Phoenician merchant ship as sailing with a lot of rigging, which suggests multiple sails (Xen. OEconom. § 8).]

911 (return)
[ Scylax. Periplus, § 112.]

911 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Scylax. Periplus, § 112.]

912 (return)
[ Thucyd. i. 13.]

912 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Thucyd. 1. 13.]

913 (return)
[ Herod. l.s.c.]

913 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Herod. l.s.c.]

914 (return)
[ See Herod. vii. 89-94.]

914 (return)
[ See Herod. vii. 89-94.]

915 (return)
[ Ibid. vii. 44.]

915 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, p. 44.]

916 (return)
[ Ibid. vii. 100.]

916 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, p. 100.]

917 (return)
[ Xen. OEconom. § 8, pp. 11-16 (Ed. Schneider).]

917 (return)
[ Xen. OEconom. § 8, pp. 11-16 (Ed. Schneider).]

918 (return)
[ Herodotus (iii. 37) says they were at the prow of the ship; but Suidas (ad voc.) and Hesychius (ad voc.) place them at the stern. Perhaps there was no fixed rule.]

918 (return)
[ Herodotus (iii. 37) says they were at the front of the ship; but Suidas (ad voc.) and Hesychius (ad voc.) say they were at the back. There might not have been a strict rule.]

919 (return)
[ The {pataikoi} of the Greeks probably representes the Hebrew {...}, which is from {...}, “insculpere,” and is applied in Scripture to “carved work” of any kind. (See 1 Kings vi. 29; Ps. lxxiv. 6; &c.) Some, however, derive the word from the Egyptian name Phthah, or Ptah. (See Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 235.)]

919 (return)
[ The {pataikoi} of the Greeks likely represents the Hebrew {...}, which comes from {...}, “insculpere,” and is used in Scripture to mean “carved work” of any kind. (See 1 Kings vi. 29; Ps. lxxiv. 6; &c.) Some, however, believe the word comes from the Egyptian name Phthah, or Ptah. (See Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 235.)]

920 (return)
[ Manilius, i. 304-308.]

920 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Manilius, i. 304-308.]

921 (return)
[ Strab. Geograph. xv.]

921 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Strab. Geography xv.]

922 (return)
[ Tarshish (Tartessus) was on the Atlantic coast, outside the Straits.]

922 (return)
[ Tarshish (Tartessus) was located on the Atlantic coast, beyond the Straits.]

923 (return)
[ Ezek. xxvii.]

923 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ezekiel 27.]

924 (return)
[ Signified by one of its chief cities, Haran (now Harran).]

924 (return)
[Represented by one of its main cities, Haran (currently known as Harran).]

925 (return)
[ Signified by “the house of Togarmarh” (verse 14).]

925 (return)
[Represented by “the house of Togarmarh” (verse 14).]

926 (return)
[ Ionia, Cyprus, and Hellas are the Greek correspondents of Javan, Chittim, and Elishah, Chittim representing Citium, the capital of Cyprus.]

926 (return)
[ Ionia, Cyprus, and Greece are the Greek equivalents of Javan, Chittim, and Elishah, with Chittim representing Citium, the capital of Cyprus.]

927 (return)
[ Spain is intended by “Tarshish” (verse 12) == Tartessus, which was a name given by the Phoenicians to the tract upon the lower Bætis (Guadalquivir).]

927 (return)
[ Spain refers to “Tarshish” (verse 12) == Tartessus, a name the Phoenicians used for the area along the lower Bætis (Guadalquivir).]

928 (return)
[ See the Speaker’s Commentary, ad loc.]

928 (return)
[ See the Speaker’s Commentary, ad loc.]

929 (return)
[ Strab. xv. 3, § 22.]

929 (return)
[ Strab. xv. 3, § 22.]

930 (return)
[ Minnith appears as an Ammonite city in the history of Jephthah (Judg. xi. 33).]

930 (return)
[ Minnith is mentioned as an Ammonite city in the story of Jephthah (Judg. xi. 33).]

931 (return)
[ Herod. ii. 37, 182; iii. 47.]

931 (return)
[ Herod. ii. 37, 182; iii. 47.]

932 (return)
[ See Rawlinson’s Herodotus, ii. 157; History of Ancient Egypt, i. 509; Rosellini, Mon. Civili, pls. 107-109.]

932 (return)
[ See Rawlinson’s Herodotus, ii. 157; History of Ancient Egypt, i. 509; Rosellini, Mon. Civili, pls. 107-109.]

933 (return)
[ See Herod. iii. 107; History of Ancient Egypt, ii. 222-224.]

933 (return)
[ See Herod. iii. 107; History of Ancient Egypt, ii. 222-224.]

934 (return)
[ That these were Arabian products appears from Herod. iii. 111, 112. They may be included in the “chief of all spices,” which Tyre obtained from the merchants of Sheba and Raamah (Ezek. xxvii. 22).]

934 (return)
[ It's clear that these were Arabian products, as noted by Herodotus in book iii, sections 111 and 112. They can be categorized under the "chief of all spices," which Tyre acquired from the merchants of Sheba and Raamah (Ezekiel 27:22).]

935 (return)
[ Arabia has no ebony trees, and can never have produced elephants.]

935 (return)
[ Arabia doesn't have ebony trees and has never been able to produce elephants.]

936 (return)
[ See Ezek. xxvii. 23, 24. Canneh and Chilmad were probably Babylonian towns.]

936 (return)
[ See Ezek. 27:23, 24. Canneh and Chilmad were probably Babylonian towns.]

937 (return)
[ Upper Mesopotamia is indicated by one of its chief cities, Haran (Ezek. xxvii. 23).]

937 (return)
[Upper Mesopotamia is represented by one of its main cities, Haran (Ezek. xxvii. 23).]

938 (return)
[ Ezek. xxvii. 6. Many objects in ivory have been found in Cyprus.]

938 (return)
[ Ezek. xxvii. 6. Numerous ivory items have been discovered in Cyprus.]

939 (return)
[ Ibid. verse 7. The Murex brandaris is still abundant on the coast of Attica, and off the island of Salamis (Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 881).]

939 (return)
[ Ibid. verse 7. The Murex brandaris is still plentiful along the coast of Attica and near the island of Salamis (Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 881).]

940 (return)
[ Strab. iii. 2, § 8-12; Diod. Sic. v. 36; Plin. H. N. iii. 3.]

940 (return)
[ Strab. iii. 2, § 8-12; Diod. Sic. v. 36; Plin. H. N. iii. 3.]

941 (return)
[ See Gen. xxxvii. 28.]

941 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[See Gen. 37:28.]

942 (return)
[ Isaiah xxi. 13.]

942 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Isaiah 21:13.]

943 (return)
[ Ibid. lx. 6.]

943 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ibid. 60. 6.]

944 (return)
[ Ibid. verses 6, 7.]

944 (return)
[ Ibid. verses 6, 7.]

945 (return)
[ Heeren, Asiatic Nations, ii. 93, 100, 101.]

945 (return)
[ Heeren, Asiatic Nations, ii. 93, 100, 101.]

946 (return)
[ 1 Kings v. 11; 2 Chr. ii. 10.]

946 (return)
[ 1 Kings 5:11; 2 Chronicles 2:10.]

947 (return)
[ Ezek. xxvii. 17.]

947 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ezek. 27:17.]

948 (return)
[ Ezra iii. 7.]

948 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ezra 3:7]

949 (return)
[ Acts xii. 20.]

949 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Acts 12:20.]

950 (return)
[ 2 Chron. l.s.c.; Ezra l.s.c.; Ezek. xxvii. 6, 17.]

950 (return)
[ 2 Chron. l.s.c.; Ezra l.s.c.; Ezek. xxvii. 6, 17.]

951 (return)
[ Ezek. l.s.c.]

951 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ezek. l.s.c.]

952 (return)
[ Gen. xxxvii. 28.]

952 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Gen. 37:28.]

953 (return)
[ Strab. xvi. 2, § 41.]

953 (return)
[ Strab. xvi. 2, § 41.]

954 (return)
[ Ezek. xxvii. 18.]

954 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Ezekiel 27:18]

955 (return)
[ Strab. xv. 3, § 22.]

955 (return)
[ Strab. xv. 3, § 22.]

956 (return)
[ So Heeren (As. Nat. ii. 118). But there is a Helbon a little to the north of Damascus, which is more probably intended.]

956 (return)
[ So Heeren (As. Nat. ii. 118). However, there is a Helbon just north of Damascus, which is more likely what is meant.]

957 (return)
[ Ibid.]

957 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Ibid.]

958 (return)
[ See Amos, iii. 12, where some translate “the children of Israel that dwell in Samaria in the corner of a bed, and upon a damask couch.”]

958 (return)
[ See Amos, iii. 12, where some translate “the people of Israel who live in Samaria on the edge of a bed, and on a damask couch.”]

959 (return)
[ Ezek. xxvii. 16.]

959 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ezek. 27:16.]

960 (return)
[ The Hebrew terms for Syria {...} and Edom {...} are constantly confounded by the copyists, and we must generally look to the context to determine which is the true reading.]

960 (return)
[ The Hebrew terms for Syria {...} and Edom {...} are often mixed up by the scribes, and we usually need to rely on the context to figure out which one is correct.]

961 (return)
[ Herod. i. 1.]

961 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. i. 1.]

962 (return)
[ Ibid. ii. 112.]

962 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Ibid. II. 112.]

963 (return)
[ Ch. xxvii. 7.]

963 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ch. 27. 7.]

964 (return)
[ Egyptian pottery, scarabs, seals, figures of gods, and amulets, are common on most Phoenician sites. The Sidonian sarcophagi, including that of Esmunazar, are of an Egyptian stone.]

964 (return)
[ Egyptian pottery, scarabs, seals, statues of gods, and amulets are commonly found at most Phoenician sites. The Sidonian sarcophagi, including that of Esmunazar, are made from Egyptian stone.]

965 (return)
[ Herod. iii. 5, 6.]

965 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Herod. iii. 5, 6.]

966 (return)
[ Ibid. iii. 107; Strab. xvi. 4, § 19; Diod. Sic. ii. 49.]

966 (return)
[ Ibid. iii. 107; Strab. xvi. 4, § 19; Diod. Sic. ii. 49.]

967 (return)
[ Theophrast. Hist. Plant. ix. 4.]

967 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Theophrastus. History of Plants. ix. 4.]

968 (return)
[ Wilkinson, in the author’s Herodotus, iii. 497, note 6; Heeren, As. Nat. ii. 95.]

968 (return)
[ Wilkinson, in the author’s Herodotus, iii. 497, note 6; Heeren, As. Nat. ii. 95.]

969 (return)
[ Is. lx. 7; Her. xlix. 29.]

969 (return)
[ Is. lx. 7; Her. xlix. 29.]

970 (return)
[ Ezek. xxvii. 21.]

970 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Ezekiel 27:21.]

971 (return)
[ Ezek. xxvii. 20.]

971 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ezek. xxvii. 20.]

972 (return)
[ Ex. xxvi. 7; xxxvi. 14.]

972 (return)
[ Ex. xxvi. 7; xxxvi. 14.]

973 (return)
[ Ezek. xxvii. 15, 19-22.]

973 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ezek. 27:15, 19-22.]

974 (return)
[ See Heeren, Asiatic Nations, ii. 96.]

974 (return)
[See Heeren, Asiatic Nations, ii. 96.]

975 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 99, 100.]

975 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 99, 100.]

976 (return)
[ Gerrha, Sanaa, and Mariaba were flourishing towns in Strabo’s time, and probably during several centuries earlier.]

976 (return)
[ Gerrha, Sanaa, and Mariaba were thriving towns in Strabo’s era, and likely during many centuries before that.]

977 (return)
[ Ezek. xxvii. 23, 24.]

977 (return)
[ Ezek. xxvii. 23, 24.]

978 (return)
[ Herod. i. 1.]

978 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. i. 1.]

979 (return)
[ See Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pls. xxxi.-xxxiii.; A. Di Cesnola, Salaminia, ch. xii.; Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 636-639.]

979 (return)
[ See Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pls. xxxi.-xxxiii.; A. Di Cesnola, Salaminia, ch. xii.; Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 636-639.]

980 (return)
[ Layard, Monuments of Nineveh, 2nd series, pls. 57-67; Nineveh and Babylon, pp. 183-187.]

980 (return)
[ Layard, Monuments of Nineveh, 2nd series, pls. 57-67; Nineveh and Babylon, pp. 183-187.]

981 (return)
[ Ezek. xxvii. 23.]

981 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ezek. 27:23.]

982 (return)
[ So Heeren translates (As. Nat. ii. 123).]

982 (return)
[ So Heeren translates (As. Nat. ii. 123).]

983 (return)
[ Ezek. xxvii. 14.]

983 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Ezek. 27:14]

984 (return)
[ Strab. xi. 14, § 9:—{’Estin ippobotos sphodra e khora}.]

984 (return)
[ Strab. xi. 14, § 9:—{There is a place that is very suitable for horseback riding}.]

985 (return)
[ Ibid.]

985 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source.]

986 (return)
[ 1 Kings i. 33; Esth. viii. 10, 14.]

986 (return)
[ 1 Kings 1:33; Esther 8:10, 14.]

987 (return)
[ Ezek. xxvii. 13.]

987 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Ezekiel 27:13.]

988 (return)
[ Xen. Anab. iv. 1, § 6.]

988 (return)
[ Xen. Anab. iv. 1, § 6.]

989 (return)
[ Hom. Od. xv. 415-484; Herod. i. 1.]

989 (return)
[ Hom. Od. xv. 415-484; Herod. i. 1.]

990 (return)
[ Joel iii. 6.]

990 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Joel 3:6 ]

991 (return)
[ Ezek. xxvii. 13.]

991 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Ezek. 27:13.]

992 (return)
[ Herod. v. 5.]

992 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. v. 5.]

993 (return)
[ Herod. ii. 32.]

993 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Herod. ii. 32.]

994 (return)
[ Ibid. iv. 183.]

994 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ibid. iv. 183.]

995 (return)
[ Ibid.]

995 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source.]

996 (return)
[ Ibid. iv. 181-184. Compare Heeren, African Nations, ii. pp. 202-235.]

996 (return)
[ Ibid. iv. 181-184. Compare Heeren, African Nations, ii. pp. 202-235.]

997 (return)
[ No doubt some of these may have been imparted by the Cyprians themselves, and others introduced by the Egyptians when they held Cyprus; but they are too numerous to be accounted for sufficiently unless by a continuous Phoenician importation.]

997 (return)
[It's likely that some of these were shared by the Cyprians themselves, while others were brought in by the Egyptians when they controlled Cyprus; but there are too many to be explained adequately without considering ongoing Phoenician imports.]

998 (return)
[ Especially Etruria, which was advanced in civilisation and the arts, while Rome was barely emerging from barbarism.]

998 (return)
[ Especially Etruria, which was advanced in civilization and the arts, while Rome was just starting to emerge from barbarism.]

999 (return)
[ 2 Chron. ii. 14.]

999 (return)
[ 2 Chron. ii. 14.]

9100 (return)
[ Dennis, Cities and Cemeteries of Etruria, ii. 204, 514; Gerhard, Etruskische Spiegel, passim.]

9100 (return)
[ Dennis, Cities and Cemeteries of Etruria, ii. 204, 514; Gerhard, Etruskische Spiegel, passim.]

9101 (return)
[ Schliemann, Mycenæ, Pls. 357-519.]

9101 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Schliemann, Mycenae, Pls. 357-519.]

9102 (return)
[ Ezek. xxvii. 12; Plin. H. N. xxxiv. 16; &c.]

9102 (return)
[ Ezek. xxvii. 12; Plin. H. N. xxxiv. 16; &c.]

9103 (return)
[ Strabo, iii. 5, § 11.]

9103 (return)
[ Strabo, iii. 5, § 11.]

9104 (return)
[ Ibid. In Roman times the pigs of tin were brought to the Isle of Wight by the natives, thence transported across the Channel, and conveyed through Gaul to the mouth of the Rhône (Diod. Sic. v. 22).]

9104 (return)
[ Ibid. In ancient Rome, the tin pigs were brought to the Isle of Wight by the locals, then shipped across the Channel and transported through Gaul to the mouth of the Rhône (Diod. Sic. v. 22).]

9105 (return)
[ Heeren, Asiatic Nations, ii. 80.]

9105 (return)
[ Heeren, Asiatic Nations, ii. 80.]

9106 (return)
[ Hom. Od. xv. 460. Some doubt, however, if amber is here intended.]

9106 (return)
[ Hom. Od. xv. 460. Some question whether amber is meant here.]

9107 (return)
[ Scylax, Periplus, § 112.]

9107 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Scylax, Periplus, § 112.]

9108 (return)
[ Herod. iv. 196.]

9108 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. iv. 196.]

9109 (return)
[ These forests (spoken of by Diodorus, v. 19) have now to a great extent been cleared away, though some patches still remain, especially in the more western islands of the group. The most remarkable of the trees is the Pinus canariensis.]

9109 (return)
[ These forests (mentioned by Diodorus, v. 19) have largely been cleared, although some areas still exist, particularly in the more western islands of the group. The most notable tree is the Pinus canariensis.]

9110 (return)
[ Pliny, H. N. vi. 32, sub fin.]

9110 (return)
[ Pliny, H. N. vi. 32, sub fin.]

9111 (return)
[ Pliny, l.s.c. The breed is now extinct.]

9111 (return)
[ Pliny, l.s.c. The breed no longer exists.]

9112 (return)
[ The savagery of the ancient inhabitants of the mainland is strongly marked in the narrative of Hanno (Periplus, passim).]

9112 (return)
[ The brutality of the ancient people living on the mainland is clearly evident in Hanno's account (Periplus, passim).]

9113 (return)
[ As Heeren (As. Nat. ii. 71, 75, 239).]

9113 (return)
[ As Heeren (As. Nat. ii. 71, 75, 239).]

9114 (return)
[ Ezek. xxvii. 15, 20, 23.]

9114 (return)
[ Ezek. 27:15, 20, 23.]

9115 (return)
[ See 1 Kings x. 22; 2 Chr. ix. 21.]

9115 (return)
[ See 1 Kings 10:22; 2 Chronicles 9:21.]

9116 (return)
[ 1 Kings ix. 26, 27.]

9116 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[1 Kings 9:26-27.]

9117 (return)
[ Ibid. x. 11; 2 Chr. ix. 10.]

9117 (return)
[ Ibid. x. 11; 2 Chr. ix. 10.]

9118 (return)
[ Gen. x. 29. Compare Twistleton, in Dr. Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible, vol. ii. ad voc. OPHIR.]

9118 (return)
[ Gen. x. 29. Compare Twistleton, in Dr. Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible, vol. ii. ad voc. OPHIR.]

9119 (return)
[ Ps. lxxii. 15; Ezek. xxvii. 22; Strab. xvi. 4, § 18; Diod. Sic. ii. 50.]

9119 (return)
[ Ps. lxxii. 15; Ezek. xxvii. 22; Strab. xvi. 4, § 18; Diod. Sic. ii. 50.]

9120 (return)
[ Ezel. l.s.c.; Strab. xvi. 4, § 20.]

9120 (return)
[ Ezel. l.s.c.; Strab. xvi. 4, § 20.]

9121 (return)
[ There are no sufficient data for determining what tree is intended by the almug or algum tree. The theory which identifies it with the “sandal-wood” of India has respectable authority in its favour, but cannot rise beyond the rank of a conjecture.]

9121 (return)
[ There isn't enough information to figure out which tree is referred to as the almug or algum tree. The idea that it refers to the “sandalwood” from India has some credible support, but it remains just a theory.]

9122 (return)
[ If Scylax of Cadyanda could sail, in the reign of Darius Hystaspis, from the mouth of the Indus to the Gulf of Suez (Herod. iv. 44), there could have been no great difficulty in the Phoenicians accomplishing the same voyage in the opposite direction some centuries earlier.]

9122 (return)
[If Scylax of Cadyanda could sail, during Darius Hystaspis's reign, from the mouth of the Indus to the Gulf of Suez (Herod. iv. 44), then it wouldn't have been too hard for the Phoenicians to make the same trip in the opposite direction several centuries earlier.]

X—MINING

X—MINING

101 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. v. 35, § 2.]

101 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. v. 35, § 2.]

102 (return)
[ Brugsch, History of Egypt, i. 65; Birch, Ancient Egypt, p. 65.]

102 (return)
[ Brugsch, History of Egypt, i. 65; Birch, Ancient Egypt, p. 65.]

103 (return)
[ Deut. viii. 7-9.]

103 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Deut. 8:7-9.]

104 (return)
[ Plin. H. N. xxxiv. 2:—“In Cypro proma æris inventio.” The story went, that Cinryas, the Paphian king, who gave Agamemnon his breastplate of steel, gold, and tin (Hom. Il. xii. 25), invented the manufacture of copper, and also invented the tongs, the hammer, the lever, and the anvil (Plin. H. N. vii. 56, § 195).]

104 (return)
[ Plin. H. N. xxxiv. 2:—“In Cyprus, the first discovery of copper.” The story goes that Cinyras, the king of Paphos, who gave Agamemnon his breastplate made of steel, gold, and tin (Hom. Il. xii. 25), invented the process of making copper and also created the tongs, hammer, lever, and anvil (Plin. H. N. vii. 56, § 195).]

105 (return)
[ Strab. xiv. 6, § 5; Steph. Byz. ad voc. {Tamasos}.]

105 (return)
[Strab. xiv. 6, § 5; Steph. Byz. ad voc. {Tamasos}.]

106 (return)
[ See the Dictionary of Gk. and Rom. Geography, i. 729.]

106 (return)
[ See the Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography, i. 729.]

107 (return)
[ Ross, Inselnreise, iv. 157, 161.]

107 (return)
[ Ross, Inselnreise, iv. 157, 161.]

108 (return)
[ Plin. H. N. l.s.c.]

108 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Plin. H. N. l.s.c.]

109 (return)
[ Herod. vi. 47.]

109 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. vi. 47.]

1010 (return)
[ Plin. H. N. vi. 56; Strab. xiv. 5, § 28.]

1010 (return)
[ Plin. H. N. vi. 56; Strab. xiv. 5, § 28.]

1011 (return)
[ See the description of Thasos in the Géographie Universelle, i. 142.]

1011 (return)
[ See the description of Thasos in the Géographie Universelle, i. 142.]

1012 (return)
[ Herod. vii. 112; Aristot. De Ausc. Mir. § 42; Thuc. iv. 105; Diod. Sic. xvi. 8; App. Bell. Civ. iv. 105; Justin, viii. 3; Plin. H. N. vii. 56, &c.]

1012 (return)
[ Herod. vii. 112; Aristot. De Ausc. Mir. § 42; Thuc. iv. 105; Diod. Sic. xvi. 8; App. Bell. Civ. iv. 105; Justin, viii. 3; Plin. H. N. vii. 56, &c.]

1013 (return)
[ Col. Leake speaks of one silver mine as still being worked (Northern Greece, iii. 161).]

1013 (return)
[ Col. Leake mentions one silver mine that is still in operation (Northern Greece, iii. 161).]

1014 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iv. 99.]

1014 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iv. 99.]

1015 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 100, note.]

1015 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 100, note.]

1016 (return)
[ Plin. H. N. xxxiii. 4, § 21.]

1016 (return)
[ Plin. H. N. xxxiii. 4, § 21.]

1017 (return)
[ Ibid. xxxiii. 4, § 23.]

1017 (return)
[ Ibid. xxxiii. 4, § 23.]

1018 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. v. 35, § 1.]

1018 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. v. 35, § 1.]

1019 (return)
[ Plin. H. N. xxxiii. 6, § 31.]

1019 (return)
[ Plin. H. N. xxxiii. 6, § 31.]

1020 (return)
[ Ibid. § 96.]

1020 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source § 96.]

1021 (return)
[ Strab. iii. 2, § 8; Diod. Sic. v. 36, § 2.]

1021 (return)
[ Strab. iii. 2, § 8; Diod. Sic. v. 36, § 2.]

1022 (return)
[ Ap. Strab. iii. 2, § 9. Compare Diod. Sic. v. 38, § 4.]

1022 (return)
[ Ap. Strab. iii. 2, § 9. Compare Diod. Sic. v. 38, § 4.]

1023 (return)
[ Strab. l.s.c.]

1023 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Strab. l.s.c.]

1024 (return)
[ Plin. H. N. xxxiv. 16, § 156.]

1024 (return)
[ Plin. H. N. xxxiv. 16, § 156.]

1025 (return)
[ Plin. H. N. xxxiv. 16, § 158 and § 165.]

1025 (return)
[ Plin. H. N. xxxiv. 16, § 158 and § 165.]

1026 (return)
[ Polyb. xxxiv. 5, § 11; Plin. H. N. xxxiv. 16, § 158.]

1026 (return)
[ Polyb. xxxiv. 5, § 11; Plin. H. N. xxxiv. 16, § 158.]

1027 (return)
[ Plin. xxxiv. 18, § 173.]

1027 (return)
[ Plin. xxxiv. 18, § 173.]

1028 (return)
[ Ibid. § 159.]

1028 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source § 159.]

1029 (return)
[ Ibid. xxxiv. 17, § 164.]

1029 (return)
[ Ibid. xxxiv. 17, § 164.]

1030 (return)
[ Quicksilver is still among the products of the Spanish mines, where its presence is noted by Pliny (H. N. xxxiii. 6, § 99).]

1030 (return)
[Quicksilver is still among the products of the Spanish mines, where Pliny notes its presence (H. N. xxxiii. 6, § 99).]

1031 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. v. 36, § 2.]

1031 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. v. 36, § 2.]

1032 (return)
[ Ibid. {Kai plagias kai skolias diaduseis poikilos metallourgountes}.]

1032 (return)
[ Ibid. {You will spread various skills through different methods of metalworking.}]

1033 (return)
[ Pliny says “flint,” but this can scarcely have been the material. (See Plin. H. N. xxxiii. 4, § 71.)]

1033 (return)
[ Pliny says “flint,” but this was probably not the material. (See Plin. H. N. xxxiii. 4, § 71.)]

1034 (return)
[ Ibid. § 70.]

1034 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ibid. § 70.]

1035 (return)
[ Ibid. § 73.]

1035 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source § 73.]

1036 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. v. 37, § 3.]

1036 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. v. 37, § 3.]

1037 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. v. 37, § 3. Compare Strab. iii. 2, § 9.]

1037 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. v. 37, § 3. Compare Strab. iii. 2, § 9.]

1038 (return)
[ Plin. H. N. xxxiii. 4, § 69.]

1038 (return)
[ Plin. H. N. xxxiii. 4, § 69.]

1039 (return)
[ Ibid.]

1039 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source.]

1040 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 263.]

1040 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 263.]

1041 (return)
[ Diod. Soc. v. 38, § 1.]

1041 (return)
[ Diod. Soc. v. 38, § 1.]

1042 (return)
[ Kenrick thinks that the Carthaginians “introduced the practice of working the mines by slave labour” (Phoenicia, l.s.c.); but to me the probability appears to be the other way.]

1042 (return)
[ Kenrick believes that the Carthaginians “started the practice of mining using slave labor” (Phoenicia, l.s.c.); but I think it's more likely the opposite.]

1043 (return)
[ See Wilkinson, in the author’s Herodotus, ii. 504.]

1043 (return)
[ See Wilkinson, in the author's Herodotus, ii. 504.]

1044 (return)
[ Herod. iii. 96.]

1044 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. iii. 96.]

XI—RELIGION

XI—RELIGION

0111 (return)
[ Renan, Histoire des Langues Sémitiques, p. 5.]

0111 (return)
[ Renan, History of Semitic Languages, p. 5.]

0112 (return)
[ Ithobal, father of Jezebel, was High Priest of Ashtoreth (Menand. Ephes. Fr. 1). Amastarte, the mother of Esmunazar II. (Records of the Past, ix. 113) was priestess of the same deity.]

0112 (return)
[ Ithobal, the father of Jezebel, was the High Priest of Ashtoreth (Menand. Ephes. Fr. 1). Amastarte, the mother of Esmunazar II. (Records of the Past, ix. 113) was a priestess of the same goddess.]

0113 (return)
[ As figures of Melkarth, or Esmun, or dedications to Baal, as lord of the particular city issuing it.]

0113 (return)
[ As representations of Melkarth, or Esmun, or offerings to Baal, as the deity of the specific city producing it.]

0114 (return)
[ Herod. iii. 37.]

0114 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. iii. 37.]

0115 (return)
[ For the fragments of the work which remain, see the Fragmenta Historicum Græcorum of C. Müller, iii. 561-571. Its value has been much disputed, but seems to the present writer only slight.]

0115 (return)
[ For the remaining fragments of the work, check out the Fragmenta Historicum Græcorum by C. Müller, iii. 561-571. Its value has been heavily debated, but it seems to the current author to be only somewhat limited.]

0116 (return)
[ Compare Max Müller, Science of Religion, p. 177 et seqq.]

0116 (return)
[ Compare Max Müller, Science of Religion, p. 177 and following.]

0117 (return)
[ Gen. xiv. 18-22.]

0117 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Gen. 14:18-22.]

0118 (return)
[ Philo Bybl. Fr. 1, § 5.]

0118 (return)
[ Philo Bybl. Fr. 1, § 5.]

0119 (return)
[ Records of the Past, iv. 109, 113.]

0119 (return)
[ Records of the Past, iv. 109, 113.]

1110 (return)
[ Gen. vi. 5.]

1110 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Gen. 6:5.]

1111 (return)
[ Ps. cxxxix. 2.]

1111 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ps. 139:2.]

1112 (return)
[ Max Müller, Chips from a German Workshop, i. 28.]

1112 (return)
[ Max Müller, Chips from a German Workshop, i. 28.]

1113 (return)
[ Philo Bybl. Fr. 1, § 5. Compare the Corpus Ins. Semit. vol. i. p. 29.]

1113 (return)
[ Philo Bybl. Fr. 1, § 5. Compare the Corpus Ins. Semit. vol. i. p. 29.]

1114 (return)
[ See Renan, Mission de Phénicie, pl. xxxii.; Gesenius, Linguæ Scripturæque Phoeniciæ Monumenta, Tab. xxi.]

1114 (return)
[ See Renan, Mission de Phénicie, pl. xxxii.; Gesenius, Linguæ Scripturæque Phoeniciæ Monumenta, Tab. xxi.]

1115 (return)
[ 2 Kings xxiii. 5. Compare verse 11.]

1115 (return)
[ 2 Kings 23:5. Compare verse 11.]

1116 (return)
[ Gesenius, Monumenta Phoenicia, p. 96.]

1116 (return)
[ Gesenius, Monumenta Phoenicia, p. 96.]

1117 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 276-278.]

1117 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, pp. 276-278.]

1118 (return)
[ See Döllinger’s Judenthum und Heidenthum, i. 425; E. T.]

1118 (return)
[ See Döllinger’s Judaism and Paganism, i. 425; E. T.]

1119 (return)
[ Döllinger, Judenthum und Heidenthum, i. 425, E. T. Compare Gesenius, Mon. Phoen. Tab. xxiii.]

1119 (return)
[ Döllinger, Judaism and Paganism, i. 425, E. T. Compare Gesenius, Monuments of Phoenicia Tab. xxiii.]

1120 (return)
[ Herod. ii. 44; Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 77.]

1120 (return)
[ Herod. ii. 44; Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 77.]

1121 (return)
[ Judg. ii. 11; iii. 7; x. 6, &c.]

1121 (return)
[ Judg. ii. 11; iii. 7; x. 6, &c.]

1122 (return)
[ 2 Kings i. 2.]

1122 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[2 Kings 1:2.]

1123 (return)
[ Strab. iii. 5, § 5.]

1123 (return)
[ Strab. iii. 5, § 5.]

1124 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iv. 113.]

1124 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iv. 113.]

1125 (return)
[ 2 Kings iii. 2.]

1125 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ 2 Kings 3:2.]

1126 (return)
[ See the representation in Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 73.]

1126 (return)
[ See the representation in Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 73.]

1127 (return)
[ Döllinger, Judenthum und Heidenthum, i. 427.]

1127 (return)
[ Döllinger, Judaism and Paganism, i. 427.]

1128 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 77.]

1128 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 77.]

1129 (return)
[ Gen. xiv. 5.]

1129 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Gen. 14:5]

1130 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 419, 450, 555, &c.]

1130 (return)
[Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 419, 450, 555, etc.]

1131 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 554.]

1131 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Ibid. p. 554.]

1132 (return)
[ Curtius, in the Archäologische Zeitung for 1869, p. 63.]

1132 (return)
[ Curtius, in the Archaeological Journal for 1869, p. 63.]

1133 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 303.]

1133 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 303.]

1134 (return)
[ Menand. Ephes. Fr. 1.]

1134 (return)
[ Menand. Ephes. Fr. 1.]

1135 (return)
[ See Philo Bybl. Fe. ii. 8, § 14; {’Ilon ton kai Kronon}. Damascius ap. Phot. Bibl. p. 1050.]

1135 (return)
[ See Philo Bybl. Fe. ii. 8, § 14; {’Ilon ton kai Kronon}. Damascius in Phot. Bibl. p. 1050.]

1136 (return)
[ Philo. Bybl. Fr. ii. 8, § 17.]

1136 (return)
[ Philo. Bybl. Fr. ii. 8, § 17.]

1137 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xx. 14.]

1137 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xx. 14.]

1138 (return)
[ Philo Bybl. Fr. ii. 8, § 25.]

1138 (return)
[ Philo Bybl. Fr. ii. 8, § 25.]

1139 (return)
[ Ibid. Fr. iv.]

1139 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Ibid. Fr. iv.]

1140 (return)
[ Ibid. Fr. ii. 8, § 14-19.]

1140 (return)
[ Ibid. Fr. ii. 8, § 14-19.]

1141 (return)
[ Karth or Kartha, is probably the root of Carthage, Carthagena, Carteia, &c., as Kiriath is of Kiriathaim, Kiriath-arba, Kiriath-arim, &c.]

1141 (return)
[ Karth or Kartha, is likely the origin of Carthage, Carthagena, Carteia, etc., just as Kiriath is the source of Kiriathaim, Kiriath-arba, Kiriath-arim, etc.]

1142 (return)
[ Melicertes is the son of Demaroüs and the grandson of Uranus; Baal-samin is a god who stands alone, “without father, without mother, without descent.”]

1142 (return)
[ Melicertes is the son of Demaroüs and the grandson of Uranus; Baal-samin is a god who exists independently, “without father, without mother, without ancestry.”]

1143 (return)
[ See Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 567, 577, 578; Gesenius, Mon. Phoen. Tab. xxxvii. I.]

1143 (return)
[ See Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 567, 577, 578; Gesenius, Mon. Phoen. Tab. xxxvii. I.]

1144 (return)
[ Herod. ii. 44.]

1144 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. ii. 44.]

1145 (return)
[ Ibid.]

1145 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source.]

1146 (return)
[ Strab. iii. 5, § 4-6.]

1146 (return)
[Strab. iii. 5, § 4-6.]

1147 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 575.]

1147 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iii. 575.]

1148 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 574.]

1148 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ibid. p. 574.]

1149 (return)
[ Strab. iii. 5, § 5.]

1149 (return)
[ Strab. iii. 5, § 5.]

1150 (return)
[ Sil. Ital. iii. 18-20.]

1150 (return)
[ Sil. Ital. iii. 18-20.]

1151 (return)
[ Ibid. iii. 21-27.]

1151 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ibid. III. 21-27.]

1152 (return)
[ 1 Sam. v. 2-5; 1 Mac. x. 18.]

1152 (return)
[ 1 Sam. v. 2-5; 1 Mac. x. 18.]

1153 (return)
[ Philo Bybl. Fr. ii. 8, § 14.]

1153 (return)
[ Philo Bybl. Fr. ii. 8, § 14.]

1154 (return)
[ Ibid. § 20.]

1154 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Same source § 20.]

1155 (return)
[ Layard, Ninev. and Bab. p. 343; Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 323.]

1155 (return)
[ Layard, Ninev. and Bab. p. 343; Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 323.]

1156 (return)
[ See 2 Sam. viii. 3, and 1 Kings xv. 18, where the names Hadad-ezer and Ben-hadad suggest at any rate the worship of Hadad.]

1156 (return)
[ See 2 Sam. viii. 3, and 1 Kings xv. 18, where the names Hadad-ezer and Ben-hadad imply, at the very least, the worship of Hadad.]

1157 (return)
[ Macrob. Saturnalia, i. 23.]

1157 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Macrob. Saturnalia, i. 23.]

1158 (return)
[ So Macrobius, l.s.c. Compare the representations of the Egyptian Sun-God, Aten, in the sculpures of Amenhotep IV. (See the Story of Egypt, in G. Putnam’s Series, p. 225.)]

1158 (return)
[ So Macrobius, l.s.c. Compare the depictions of the Egyptian Sun-God, Aten, in the sculptures of Amenhotep IV. (See the Story of Egypt, in G. Putnam’s Series, p. 225.)]

1159 (return)
[ The h in “Hadad” is he ({...}), but in chad it is heth ({...}). The derivation also leaves the reduplication of the

1159 (return)
[ The h in “Hadad” is he ({...}), but in chad it is heth ({...}). The derivation also leaves the reduplication of the

1160 (return)
[ Philo Bybl. Fr. ii. 24, § 1.]

1160 (return)
[ Philo Bybl. Fr. ii. 24, § 1.]

1161 (return)
[ Zech. xii. 11.]

1161 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Zech. 12:11]

1162 (return)
[ 1 Kings i. 18; 2 Kings v. 18.]

1162 (return)
[ 1 Kings i. 18; 2 Kings v. 18.]

1163 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 311.]

1163 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 311.]

1164 (return)
[ Ezek. viii. 14.]

1164 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Ezek. 8:14.]

1165 (return)
[ The Adonis myth is most completely set forth by the Pseudo-Lucian, De Dea Syra, § 6-8.]

1165 (return)
[ The Adonis myth is described most thoroughly by Pseudo-Lucian in De Dea Syra, § 6-8.]

1166 (return)
[ Philo Bybl. Fr. ii. 8, § 11.]

1166 (return)
[ Philo Bybl. Fr. ii. 8, § 11.]

1167 (return)
[ Ibid.]

1167 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source.]

1168 (return)
[ “King of Righteousness” and “Lord of Righteousness” are the interpretations usually given; but “Zedek is my King” and “Zedek is my Lord” would be at least equally admissible.]

1168 (return)
[ “King of Righteousness” and “Lord of Righteousness” are the common translations; however, “Zedek is my King” and “Zedek is my Lord” would also be equally acceptable.]

1169 (return)
[ Berytus was under the protection of the Cabeiri generally (Philo Bybl. ii. 8, § 25) and of Esmun in particular. Kenrick says that he had a temple there (Phoenicia, p. 327).]

1169 (return)
[ Berytus was generally protected by the Cabeiri (Philo Bybl. ii. 8, § 25) and specifically by Esmun. Kenrick mentions that there was a temple dedicated to him there (Phoenicia, p. 327).]

1170 (return)
[ Cyprian inscriptions contain the names of Bar-Esmun, Abd-Esmun, and Esmun-nathan; Sidonian ones those of two Esmun-azars. Esmun’s temple at Carthage was celebrated (Strab. xvii. 14; Appian, viii. 130). His worship in Sardinia is shown by votive offerings (Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 308).]

1170 (return)
[Cyprian inscriptions include the names of Bar-Esmun, Abd-Esmun, and Esmun-nathan; Sidonian inscriptions feature two Esmun-azars. Esmun's temple in Carthage was famous (Strab. xvii. 14; Appian, viii. 130). His worship in Sardinia is evidenced by votive offerings (Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 308).]

1171 (return)
[ Ap. Phot. Bibliothec. Cod. ccxlii. p. 1074.]

1171 (return)
[ Ap. Phot. Bibliothec. Cod. ccxlii. p. 1074.]

1172 (return)
[ Pausan. viii. 23.]

1172 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Pausan. viii. 23.]

1173 (return)
[ The name Astresmunim, “herb of Esmun,” given by Dioscorides (iv. 71) to the solanum, which was regarded as having medicinal qualities, is the nearest approach to a proof that the Phoenicians themselves connected Esmun with the healing art.]

1173 (return)
[ The name Astresmunim, “herb of Esmun,” given by Dioscorides (iv. 71) to the solanum, which was considered to have medicinal properties, is the closest indication that the Phoenicians associated Esmun with the practice of healing.]

1174 (return)
[ Philo Bybl. Fr. ii. 8, § 11.]

1174 (return)
[ Philo Bybl. Fr. ii. 8, § 11.]

1175 (return)
[ Herod. ii. 51; Kenrick, Egypt, Appendix, pp. 264-287.]

1175 (return)
[ Herod. ii. 51; Kenrick, Egypt, Appendix, pp. 264-287.]

1176 (return)
[ Philo Bybl. l.s.c.]

1176 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Philo Bybl. l.s.c.]

1177 (return)
[ Herod. iii. 37; Suidas ad voc. {pataikos}; Hesych. ad voc. {Kabeiroi}.]

1177 (return)
[ Herod. iii. 37; Suidas ad voc. {pataikos}; Hesych. ad voc. {Kabeiroi}.]

1178 (return)
[ Strab. x. 3, § 7.]

1178 (return)
[ Strab. x. 3, § 7.]

1179 (return)
[ Gen. ix. 22; x. 6. Compare the author’s Herodotus, iv. 239-241.]

1179 (return)
[ Gen. ix. 22; x. 6. Compare the author’s Herodotus, iv. 239-241.]

1180 (return)
[ Herod. iii. 37.]

1180 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. iii. 37.]

1181 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 65, 78, &c.]

1181 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, Hist. of Art, iii. 65, 78, &c.]

1182 (return)
[ Gesenius, Mon. Phoen. Tab. xxxix.]

1182 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Gesenius, Mon. Phoen. Tab. xxxix.]

1183 (return)
[ Berger, La Phénicie, p. 24; Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 70.]

1183 (return)
[ Berger, La Phénicie, p. 24; Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 70.]

1184 (return)
[ Pausan. ix. 12; Nonnus, Dionysiac. v. 70; Steph. Byz. ad voc. {’Ogkaiai}; Hesych. ad voc. {’Ogka}; Scholiast. ad Pind. Ol. ii. &c.]

1184 (return)
[ Pausan. ix. 12; Nonnus, Dionysiac. v. 70; Steph. Byz. ad voc. {’Ogkaiai}; Hesych. ad voc. {’Ogka}; Scholiast. ad Pind. Ol. ii. &c.]

1185 (return)
[ As Stephen and Hesychius.]

1185 (return)
[ As Stephen and Hesychius.]

1186 (return)
[ Philo Bybl. Fr. ii. § 24.]

1186 (return)
[ Philo Bybl. Fr. ii. § 24.]

1187 (return)
[ The “Oncæan” gate at Thebes is said to have taken its name from her.]

1187 (return)
[ The “Oncæan” gate at Thebes is believed to have been named after her.]

1188 (return)
[ Gesen. Mon. Phoen. p. 113.]

1188 (return)
[ Gesen. Mon. Phoen. p. 113.]

1189 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 168-177.]

1189 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ibid. pp. 168-177.]

1190 (return)
[ Prosper, Op. iii. 38; Augustine, De Civ. Dei, ii. 3.]

1190 (return)
[ Prosper, Op. iii. 38; Augustine, De Civ. Dei, ii. 3.]

1191 (return)
[ Gesen. Mon. Ph. Tab. ix.]

1191 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Gesen. Mon. Ph. Tab. ix.]

1192 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 168.]

1192 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ibid. p. 168.]

1193 (return)
[ Apul. Metamorph. xi. 257.]

1193 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Apul. Metamorph. xi. 257.]

1194 (return)
[ Gesen. Mon. Ph. Tab. xvi.]

1194 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Gesen. Mon. Ph. Tab. xvi.]

1195 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 115-118.]

1195 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Ibid. pp. 115-118.]

1196 (return)
[ See the author’s History of Ancient Egypt, i. 400.]

1196 (return)
[ See the author’s History of Ancient Egypt, i. 400.]

1197 (return)
[ See the Fragments of Philo Bybl. Fr. ii. 8, § 19.]

1197 (return)
[ See the Fragments of Philo Bybl. Fr. ii. 8, § 19.]

1198 (return)
[ Ibid. § 25.]

1198 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ibid. § 25.]

1199 (return)
[ See Sir H. Rawlinson’s Essay on the Religion of the Babylonians and Assyrians, in the author’s Herodotus, i. 658.]

1199 (return)
[ See Sir H. Rawlinson’s Essay on the Religion of the Babylonians and Assyrians, in the author’s Herodotus, i. 658.]

11100 (return)
[ So Gesenius, Mon. Phoen. p. 402; Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 301, and others.]

11100 (return)
[ So Gesenius, Mon. Phoen. p. 402; Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 301, and others.]

11101 (return)
[ There seems also to have been a tendency to increase the number of the gods by additions, of which the foreign origin is, at any rate, “not proven.” Among the deities brought into notice by the later Phoenicians are—1. Zephon, an equivalent of the Egyptian Typhon, but probably a god of Phoenician origin (Ex. xiv. 2); 2. Sad or Tsad, sometimes apparently called Tsadam; 3. Sakon or Askun, a name which forms perhaps the first element in Sanchon-iathon (= Sakon-yithan); 4. Elat, a goddess, a female form of El, perhaps equivalent to the Arabian Alitta (Herod. i. 131) or Alilat (ibid. iii. 8); 5. ‘Aziz, a god who was perhaps common to the Phoenicians with the Syrians, since Azizus is said to have been “the Syrian Mars;” and 6. Pa’am {...}, a god otherwise unknown. (See the Corpus Inscr. Semit. i. 122, 129, 132, 133, 144, 161, 197, 333, 404, &c.)]

11101 (return)
[ There seems to have been a trend to increase the number of gods by adding more, although the foreign origins are, at best, “not proven.” Some of the deities highlighted by the later Phoenicians include—1. Zephon, similar to the Egyptian Typhon, but likely of Phoenician origin (Ex. xiv. 2); 2. Sad or Tsad, sometimes referred to as Tsadam; 3. Sakon or Askun, a name that might be the first part of Sanchon-iathon (= Sakon-yithan); 4. Elat, a goddess and female counterpart of El, possibly equivalent to the Arabian Alitta (Herod. i. 131) or Alilat (ibid. iii. 8); 5. ‘Aziz, a god likely shared by the Phoenicians and Syrians since Azizus is said to have been “the Syrian Mars;” and 6. Pa’am {...}, a god otherwise unknown. (See the Corpus Inscr. Semit. i. 122, 129, 132, 133, 144, 161, 197, 333, 404, & c.)]

11102 (return)
[ Gesenius, Mon. Phoen. pp. 96, 110, &c.; Corpus Ins. Semit. Fasc. ii. pp. 154, 155.]

11102 (return)
[ Gesenius, Mon. Phoen. pp. 96, 110, &c.; Corpus Ins. Semit. Fasc. ii. pp. 154, 155.]

11103 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 99 and Tab. xl. A.]

11103 (return)
[Same source, p. 99 and Tab. xl. A.]

11104 (return)
[ Steph. Byz. ad voc. {’Amathous}.]

11104 (return)
[ Steph. Byz. ad voc. {’Amathous}.]

11105 (return)
[ Lucian, De Dea Syra, § 7.]

11105 (return)
[ Lucian, On the Syrian Goddess, § 7.]

11106 (return)
[ Plut. De Is. et Osir. § 15, 16; Steph. Byz. l.s.c.; Gesen. Mon. Phoen. pp. 96, 110.]

11106 (return)
[ Plut. On Isis and Osiris. § 15, 16; Steph. Byz. l.s.c.; Gesen. Phoenician Monuments. pp. 96, 110.]

11107 (return)
[ Gesen. Mon. Phoen. Tab. xxi.]

11107 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Gesen. Mon. Phoen. Tab. xxi.]

11108 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 168, 174, 175, 177.]

11108 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 168, 174, 175, 177.]

11109 (return)
[ Ibid. Tab. xxi.]

11109 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, Tab. xxi.]

11110 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 197, 202, 205.]

11110 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 197, 202, 205.]

11111 (return)
[ Ibid. Tab. xxi. and Tab. xxiii.]

11111 (return)
[Same source. Table 21 and Table 23.]

11112 (return)
[ Lucian, De Dea Syria, § 54.]

11112 (return)
[ Lucian, On the Goddess of Syria, § 54.]

11113 (return)
[ Clermont-Ganneau, in the Journal Asiatique, Série vii. vol. xi. 232, 444.]

11113 (return)
[ Clermont-Ganneau, in the Journal Asiatique, Series vii. vol. xi. 232, 444.]

11114 (return)
[ Lucian, § 42.]

11114 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Lucian, § 42.]

11115 (return)
[ Ibid. Compare the 450 prophets of Baal at Samaria (1 Kings xviii. 19).]

11115 (return)
[Ibid. Compare the 450 prophets of Baal at Samaria (1 Kings 18:19).]

11116 (return)
[ Lucian, l.s.c.]

11116 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Lucian, l.s.c.]

11117 (return)
[ Ibid. Lucian’s direct testimony is conined to Hierapolis, but his whole account seems to imply the closest possible connection between the Syrian and Phoenician religious usages.]

11117 (return)
[ Ibid. Lucian’s direct account is limited to Hierapolis, but his entire narrative suggests a very close connection between the religious practices of the Syrians and Phoenicians.]

11118 (return)
[ Lucian, § 49.]

11118 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Lucian, § 49.]

11119 (return)
[ Lucian, § 50: {’Aeidousi enthea kai ira asmata}.]

11119 (return)
[ Lucian, § 50: {’Ethereal melodies and passionate hymns}.]

11120 (return)
[ Gesenius, Scripturæ Linguæque Phoeniciæ Monumenta, Tab. 6, 9, 10, &c.; Corp. Ins. Semit. Tab. ix. 52; xxii. 116, 117; xxiii. 115 A, &c.]

11120 (return)
[ Gesenius, Scriptural and Linguistic Monuments of Phoenicia, Tab. 6, 9, 10, etc.; Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum, Tab. ix. 52; xxii. 116, 117; xxiii. 115 A, etc.]

11121 (return)
[ Gesen. Tab. 15, 16, 17, 21, &c.; Corp. Ins. Semit. Tab. xliii. 187, 240; liv. 352, 365, 367, 369, &c.]

11121 (return)
[ Gesen. Tab. 15, 16, 17, 21, etc.; Corp. Ins. Semit. Tab. xliii. 187, 240; liv. 352, 365, 367, 369, etc.]

11122 (return)
[ Revue Archéologique, 2me Série, xxxvii. 323.]

11122 (return)
[ Archaeological Review, 2nd Series, xxxvii. 323.]

11123 (return)
[ Jarchi on Jerem. vii. 31.]

11123 (return)
[ Jarchi on Jerem. vii. 31.]

11124 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xx. 14.]

11124 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xx. 14.]

11125 (return)
[ 2 Kings iii. 27; xvi. 3; xxi. 6; Micah vi. 7.]

11125 (return)
[ 2 Kings 3:27; 16:3; 21:6; Micah 6:7.]

11126 (return)
[ Plutarch, De Superstitione, § 13.]

11126 (return)
[ Plutarch, On Superstition, § 13.]

11127 (return)
[ Döllinger, Judenthum und Heidenthum, i. 427, E. T.]

11127 (return)
[ Döllinger, Judaism and Paganism, i. 427, E. T.]

11128 (return)
[ Judenthum und Heidenthum, book vi. § 4 (i. 428, 429 of N. Darnell’s translation).]

11128 (return)
[ Judaism and Paganism, book vi. § 4 (i. 428, 429 of N. Darnell’s translation).]

11129 (return)
[ Herod. i. 199; Strab. xvi. 1058; Baruch vi. 43.]

11129 (return)
[ Herod. i. 199; Strab. xvi. 1058; Baruch vi. 43.]

11130 (return)
[ De Dea Syra, § 6.]

11130 (return)
[ On the Goddess Syra, § 6.]

11131 (return)
[ Judenthum und Heidenthum, l.s.c. p. 429; Engl. Trans.]

11131 (return)
[ Judaism and Paganism, l.s.c. p. 429; Engl. Trans.]

11132 (return)
[ Euseb. Vit. Constantin. Magni, iii. 55, § 3.]

11132 (return)
[ Euseb. Life of Constantine the Great, iii. 55, § 3.]

11133 (return)
[ See 1 Kings xiv. 24; xv. 12; xxii. 46; 2 Kings xxiii. 7.]

11133 (return)
[ See 1 Kings 14:24; 15:12; 22:46; 2 Kings 23:7.]

11134 (return)
[ Lucian, De Dea Syra, § 50-52; Corp. Ins. Semit. vol. i. Fasc. 1, p. 92; Liv. xxix. 10, 14; xxxvi. 36; Juv. vi. 512; Ov. Fast. iv. 237; Mart. Ep. iii. 31; xi. 74; Plin. H. N. v. 32; xi. 49; xxxv. 13; Propert. ii. 18, l. 15; Herodian, § 11.]

11134 (return)
[ Lucian, On the Syrian Goddess, § 50-52; Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum vol. i. Fasc. 1, p. 92; Livy xxix. 10, 14; xxxvi. 36; Juvenal vi. 512; Ovid Fasti iv. 237; Martial Epigrams iii. 31; xi. 74; Pliny Natural History v. 32; xi. 49; xxxv. 13; Propertius ii. 18, l. 15; Herodian, § 11.]

11135 (return)
[ Lucian, § 51.]

11135 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Lucian, § 51.]

11136 (return)
[ Ibid. § 50.]

11136 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Same source § 50.]

11137 (return)
[ Döllinger, Judenthum und Heidenthum (i. 431; Engl. Tr.). Compare Senec. De Vita Beata, § 27; Lact. § 121.]

11137 (return)
[ Döllinger, Judaism and Paganism (i. 431; Engl. Tr.). Compare Seneca, On the Happy Life, § 27; Lactantius § 121.]

11138 (return)
[ Liban. Opera, xi. 456, 555; cxi. 333.]

11138 (return)
[ Lebanon. Opera, xi. 456, 555; cxi. 333.]

11139 (return)
[ Compare Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art, iii. 210, 232, 233, 236; Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pp. 66, 67, &c. In the anthropoeid sarcophagi, a hole is generally bored from the cavity of the ear right through the entire thickness of the stone, in order, apparently, that the corpse might hear the prayers addressed to it (Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 139).]

11139 (return)
[ Compare Perrot et Chipiez, History of Art, iii. 210, 232, 233, 236; Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pp. 66, 67, etc. In the anthropoid sarcophagi, a hole is usually drilled from the cavity of the ear all the way through the stone, seemingly so that the corpse could hear the prayers spoken to it (Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 139).]

11140 (return)
[ One of Esmunazar’s curses on those who should disturb his remains is a prayer that they may not be “held in honour among the Manes” (Corps. Ins. Semit. vol. i. Fasc. 1, p. 9). A funereal inscription translated by Gesenius (Mon. Phoen. p. 147) ends with the words, “After rain the sun shines forth.”]

11140 (return)
[ One of Esmunazar’s curses against anyone who disturbs his remains is a prayer that they may not be “honored among the Manes” (Corps. Ins. Semit. vol. i. Fasc. 1, p. 9). A burial inscription translated by Gesenius (Mon. Phoen. p. 147) concludes with the phrase, “After rain the sun shines forth.”]

11141 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 139.]

11141 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 139.]

11142 (return)
[ Job iii. 11-19.]

11142 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Job 3:11-19.]

11143 (return)
[ The compilers of the Corpus Ins. Smit. edit 256 of these, and then stop, fearing to weary the reader (i. 449).]

11143 (return)
[ The editors of the Corpus Ins. Smit. prepared 256 of these, then decided to stop, worried about tiring out the reader (i. 449).]

11144 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 325.]

11144 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 325.]

11145 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 146.]

11145 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, p. 146.]

11146 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pp. 306-334.]

11146 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pp. 306-334.]

XII—DRESS, ORNAMENTS, AND SOCIAL HABITS

XII—CLOTHING, ACCESSORIES, AND SOCIAL HABITS

0121 (return)
[ See also Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 233; Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 405, 447, 515, &c.]

0121 (return)
[ See also Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 233; Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 405, 447, 515, &c.]

0122 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 428, 527, 531, 533, 534, &c.]

0122 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 428, 527, 531, 533, 534, etc.]

0123 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 527, 545; Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 145.]

0123 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 527, 545; Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 145.]

0124 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, p. 538.]

0124 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, p. 538.]

0125 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 539, 547; Di Cesnola, pp. 143, 145, 149, 151, &c.]

0125 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 539, 547; Di Cesnola, pp. 143, 145, 149, 151, &c.]

0126 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, pp. 141, 145, 149, 151, 153, 240, 344.]

0126 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, pp. 141, 145, 149, 151, 153, 240, 344.]

0127 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 141, 143, 149; Perrot et Chipiez, pp. 511, 513, 531, &c.]

0127 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 141, 143, 149; Perrot et Chipiez, pp. 511, 513, 531, etc.]

0128 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, pp. 519, 523, &c.]

0128 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, pp. 519, 523, etc.]

0129 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 531, 533; Di Cesnola, pp. 129, 131, &c.]

0129 (return)
[Same source, pp. 531, 533; Di Cesnola, pp. 129, 131, etc.]

1210 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, pp. 527, 533, 539; Di Cesnola, pp. 129, 145, 154.]

1210 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, pp. 527, 533, 539; Di Cesnola, pp. 129, 145, 154.]

1211 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, p. 306.]

1211 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, p. 306.]

1212 (return)
[ Ibid. Pls. xlvi. and xlvii.; Perrot et Chipiez, pp. 205, 643, 837.]

1212 (return)
[Same source, pages 46 and 47; Perrot and Chipiez, pages 205, 643, 837.]

1213 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, p. 132.]

1213 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, p. 132.]

1214 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, pp. 64, 450, 555, 557; Di Cesnola, Pls vi. and xv.; also p. 275.]

1214 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, pp. 64, 450, 555, 557; Di Cesnola, Pls vi. and xv.; also p. 275.]

1215 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 431.]

1215 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, iii. 431.]

1216 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, pp. 202, 451, 554.]

1216 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, pp. 202, 451, 554.]

1217 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 473, 549; Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 230.]

1217 (return)
[ Same source, pp. 473, 549; Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 230.]

1218 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 549.]

1218 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 549.]

1219 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 189, 549, 565.]

1219 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 189, 549, 565.]

1220 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, 141, 190, 230.]

1220 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, 141, 190, 230.]

1221 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 141, 191.]

1221 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 141, 191.]

1222 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 141.]

1222 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, p. 141.]

1223 (return)
[ Is. iii. 18-23.]

1223 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Is. 3:18-23.]

1224 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, pp. 257, 450, 542, 563, 824.]

1224 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, pp. 257, 450, 542, 563, 824.]

1225 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pl. xxiii.; Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art, iii. 819, A.]

1225 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pl. xxiii.; Perrot et Chipiez, History of Art, iii. 819, A.]

1226 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, pl. xxii.; Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 819, B.]

1226 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, pl. xxii.; Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 819, B.]

1227 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, p. 315.]

1227 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, p. 315.]

1228 (return)
[ See plate x. in Perrot et Chipiez, iii. opp. p. 824.]

1228 (return)
[ See plate x. in Perrot et Chipiez, iii. opp. p. 824.]

1229 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 826, 827.]

1229 (return)
[Same source, pp. 826, 827.]

1230 (return)
[ Compare Di Cesnola, pl. xxv.; Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 826.]

1230 (return)
[ Compare Di Cesnola, pl. xxv.; Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 826.]

1231 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 826.]

1231 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 826.]

1232 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 311.]

1232 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 311.]

1233 (return)
[ Ibid. Compare Perrot et Chipiez, p. 832.]

1233 (return)
[Ibid. See Perrot and Chipiez, p. 832.]

1234 (return)
[ These bracelets are in Paris, in the collection of M. de Clercq (Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 832).]

1234 (return)
[ These bracelets are located in Paris, in M. de Clercq's collection (Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 832).]

1235 (return)
[ Ibid.]

1235 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source.]

1236 (return)
[ This bracelet is in silver, but the head of the lion has been gilded. It is now in the British Museum.]

1236 (return)
[ This bracelet is made of silver, but the lion's head has been gold-plated. It's currently housed in the British Museum.]

1237 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, p. 836; No. 604.]

1237 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, p. 836; No. 604.]

1238 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pp. 311, 312.]

1238 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pp. 311, 312.]

1239 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 312. Compare Perrot et Chipiez, p. 835.]

1239 (return)
[ Same as above, p. 312. See Perrot and Chipiez, p. 835.]

1240 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, l.s.c. (No. 603.)]

1240 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, l.s.c. (No. 603.)]

1241 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, p. 818: “Il y a dans les formes de ces boucles d’orielles une étonnante variété.”]

1241 (return)
[Perrot and Chipiez, p. 818: "There is an astonishing variety in the shapes of these earrings."]

1242 (return)
[ See his Cyprus, pl. xxv., and compare Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 819, fig. D.]

1242 (return)
[ See his Cyprus, pl. xxv., and compare Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 819, fig. D.]

1243 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, p. 821; No. 577.]

1243 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, p. 821; No. 577.]

1244 (return)
[ Ibid. Nos. 578, 579.]

1244 (return)
[ Ibid. Nos. 578, 579.]

1245 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, pl. xxvi.]

1245 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, pl. xxvi.]

1246 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, p. 823.]

1246 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, p. 823.]

1247 (return)
[ See Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 822; No. 582.]

1247 (return)
[ See Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 822; No. 582.]

1248 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 821, 822. Compare Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 297, and pl. xxvii.]

1248 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 821, 822. Compare Di Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 297, and pl. xxvii.]

1249 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, p. 823.]

1249 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, p. 823.]

1250 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, p. 310; Perrot et Chipiez, p. 818; No. 574.]

1250 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, p. 310; Perrot et Chipiez, p. 818; No. 574.]

1251 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, p. 818; No. 575.]

1251 (return)
[Perrot and Chipiez, p. 818; No. 575.]

1252 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, pl. xxviii.]

1252 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, pl. xxviii.]

1253 (return)
[ Ibid. pl. xxi.]

1253 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Same source, pl. xxi.]

1254 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, pp. 830, 831.]

1254 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, pp. 830, 831.]

1255 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, p. 831; No. 595.]

1255 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, p. 831; No. 595.]

1256 (return)
[ Di Csnola, p. 316.]

1256 (return)
[ Di Csnola, p. 316.]

1257 (return)
[ Ibid. pl. xxi (opp. p. 312).]

1257 (return)
[ Ibid. pl. xxi (opp. p. 312).]

1258 (return)
[ Ibid. pl. xxx.]

1258 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, page xxx.]

1259 (return)
[ Ibid. pl. ix.]

1259 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, plate ix.]

1260 (return)
[ Compare Di Cesnola, p. 149.]

1260 (return)
[ See Di Cesnola, p. 149.]

1261 (return)
[ Ibid. pl. x.]

1261 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Ibid. pl. x.]

1262 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 77; Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 783.]

1262 (return)
[Ibid. p. 77; Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 783.]

1263 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, p. 149.]

1263 (return)
[ Di Cesnola, p. 149.]

1264 (return)
[ Ibid. pl. xiv.]

1264 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, plate xiv.]

1265 (return)
[ Ibid. pl. x.]

1265 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ibid. pl. x.]

1266 (return)
[ See Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 769, 771, 789.]

1266 (return)
[See Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 769, 771, 789.]

1267 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 798.]

1267 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 798.]

1268 (return)
[ C. W. King, in Di Cesnola’s Cyprus, pp. 363, 364.]

1268 (return)
[ C. W. King, in Di Cesnola’s Cyprus, pp. 363, 364.]

1269 (return)
[ Mr. King says of it: “No piece of antique worked agate hitherto known equals in magnitude and curiosity the ornament discovered among the bronze and iron articles of the treasure. It is a sphere about six inches in diameter, black irregularly veined with white, having the exterior vertically scored with incised lines, imitating, as it were, the gadroons of a melon” (ibid. p. 363).]

1269 (return)
[ Mr. King remarks: “No piece of antique worked agate known so far matches the size and uniqueness of the ornament found among the bronze and iron items in the treasure. It’s a sphere about six inches in diameter, black with irregular white veins, featuring a surface marked with vertical incised lines that resemble the ridges of a melon” (ibid. p. 363).]

1270 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, Pls. xii. xiii.; Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pls. iv. and xxx.; and pp. 335, 336.]

1270 (return)
[ Renan, Mission de Phénicie, Pls. xii. xiii.; Di Cesnola, Cyprus, pls. iv. and xxx.; and pp. 335, 336.]

1271 (return)
[ Perrot et Chipiez, iii. 846-853.]

1271 (return)
[ Perrot and Chipiez, iii. 846-853.]

1272 (return)
[ 1 Kings xxii. 39.]

1272 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[1 Kings 22:39.]

XIII—PHOENICIAN WRITING, LANGUAGE, AND LITERATURE

XIII—PHOENICIAN WRITING, LANGUAGE, AND LITERATURE

0131 (return)
[ This follows from the fact that the Greeks, who tell us that they got their letters from the Phoenicians, gave them names only slightly modified from the Hebrew.]

0131 (return)
[ This comes from the fact that the Greeks, who say they got their letters from the Phoenicians, gave them names that were only slightly changed from the Hebrew.]

0132 (return)
[ See Dr. Ginsburg’s Moabite Stone, published in 1870.]

0132 (return)
[ See Dr. Ginsburg’s Moabite Stone, published in 1870.]

0133 (return)
[ See Quarterly Statement of the Palestine Exploration Fund for October 1881, pp. 285-287.]

0133 (return)
[ See Quarterly Statement of the Palestine Exploration Fund for October 1881, pp. 285-287.]

0134 (return)
[ Corp. Ins. Semit. i. 224-226.]

0134 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Corp. Ins. Semit. i. 224-226.]

0135 (return)
[ Herod. v. 58; Diod. Sic. v. 24; Plin. H. N. v. 12; vii. 56; Tacit. Ann. xi. 14; Euseb. Chron. Can. i. 13; &c.]

0135 (return)
[ Herod. v. 58; Diod. Sic. v. 24; Plin. H. N. v. 12; vii. 56; Tacit. Ann. xi. 14; Euseb. Chron. Can. i. 13; &c.]

0136 (return)
[ Capt. Conder, in the Quarterly Statement of the Palestine Exploration Fund, Jan. 1889, p. 17.]

0136 (return)
[ Capt. Conder, in the Quarterly Statement of the Palestine Exploration Fund, Jan. 1889, p. 17.]

0137 (return)
[ Encycl. Britann. i. 600 and 606.]

0137 (return)
[ Encycl. Britann. i. 600 and 606.]

0138 (return)
[ Conder, in Quarterly Statement, &c. l.s.c.]

0138 (return)
[ Conder, in Quarterly Statement, &c. l.s.c.]

0139 (return)
[ See Gesenius, Mon. Phoen. Tab. 19 and 20.]

0139 (return)
[ See Gesenius, Mon. Phoen. Tab. 19 and 20.]

1310 (return)
[ See the Corpus Ins. Semit. i. 3, 30, 73, &c.; Gesenius, Mon. Phoen. Tab. 29-33.]

1310 (return)
[ See the Corpus Ins. Semit. i. 3, 30, 73, etc.; Gesenius, Mon. Phoen. Tab. 29-33.]

1311 (return)
[ See on this entire subject Gesenius, Scripturæ Linguæque Phoeniciæ Monumenta, pp. 437-445; Movers, article on Phoenizien in the Cyclopädie of Ersch and Gruber; Renan, Histoire des Langues Sémitiques, pp. 189-192.]

1311 (return)
[ For more on this topic, see Gesenius, Scripturæ Linguæque Phoeniciæ Monumenta, pp. 437-445; Movers, article on Phoenizien in the Cyclopädie by Ersch and Gruber; Renan, Histoire des Langues Sémitiques, pp. 189-192.]

1312 (return)
[ Renan, Histoire, &c., p. 186.]

1312 (return)
[ Renan, History, &c., p. 186.]

1313 (return)
[ Philo Byblius, Fr. i.]

1313 (return)
[ Philo Byblius, Fr. i.]

1314 (return)
[ Philo Byblius, Fr. ii. § 5-8.]

1314 (return)
[ Philo Byblius, Fr. ii. § 5-8.]

1315 (return)
[ Ibid. Fr. v.]

1315 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ibid. Fr. v.]

1316 (return)
[ The Voyage of Hanno translated, and accompanied with the Greek Text, by Thomas Falconer, M.A., London, 1797.]

1316 (return)
[ The Voyage of Hanno translated, and accompanied with the Greek Text, by Thomas Falconer, M.A., London, 1797.]

1317 (return)
[ Quoted by Falconer in his second “Dissertation,” p. 67.]

1317 (return)
[Quoted by Falconer in his second “Dissertation,” p. 67.]

1318 (return)
[ See the Histoire des Langues Sémitiques (p. 186):—“Les monuments épigraphiques viennent heureusement combler en partie cette lacune.”]

1318 (return)
[ See the Histoire des Langues Sémitiques (p. 186):—“The epigraphic monuments help to partially fill this gap.”]

1319 (return)
[ See the Corpus Inscr. Semit. i. 13.]

1319 (return)
[ See the Corpus Inscr. Semit. i. 13.]

1320 (return)
[ Corpus Inscr. Semit. i. 20.]

1320 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Corpus Inscr. Semit. i. 20.]

1321 (return)
[ Story of Phoenicia, p. 269.]

1321 (return)
[ Story of Phoenicia, p. 269.]

1322 (return)
[ On the age of Jehavmelek, see M. Renan’s remarks in the Corpus Inscriptionum Semit. i. 8.]

1322 (return)
[ For details on the age of Jehavmelek, refer to M. Renan’s comments in the Corpus Inscriptionum Semit. i. 8.]

1323 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 3.]

1323 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, p. 3.]

1324 (return)
[ I have followed the translation of M. Renan (Corp. Ins. Semit. i. 8).]

1324 (return)
[ I've followed M. Renan's translation (Corp. Ins. Semit. i. 8).]

1325 (return)
[ See the Corpus Inscr. Semit. i. 226-236.]

1325 (return)
[ See the Corpus Inscr. Semit. i. 226-236.]

1326 (return)
[ See the Corp. Inscr. Sem. i. 30-32.]

1326 (return)
[ See the Corp. Inscr. Sem. i. 30-32.]

1327 (return)
[ Gesenius, Script. Linguæque Phoen. Monumenta, p. 177.]

1327 (return)
[ Gesenius, Script. Linguæque Phoen. Monumenta, p. 177.]

1328 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 96.]

1328 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, p. 96.]

1329 (return)
[ See the Corpus Inscr. Semit. i. 36-39.]

1329 (return)
[ See the Corpus Inscr. Semit. i. 36-39.]

1330 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 110-112.]

1330 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ibid. pp. 110-112.]

1331 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 69.]

1331 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, p. 69.]

1332 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 76.]

1332 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, p. 76.]

1333 (return)
[ See the Corpus Inscr. Semit. pp. 67, 68.]

1333 (return)
[ See the Corpus Inscr. Semit. pp. 67, 68.]

1334 (return)
[ Gesenius, Scripturæ Linguæque Phoen. Mon. p. 144.]

1334 (return)
[ Gesenius, Scripturæ Linguæque Phoen. Mon. p. 144.]

1335 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 147.]

1335 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Same source, p. 147.]

1336 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 187.]

1336 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, p. 187.]

1337 (return)
[ See the fragments of Dius and Menander, who followed the Tyrian historians (Joseph. Contr. Ap. i. 18).]

1337 (return)
[ Check out the excerpts from Dius and Menander, who were influenced by the Tyrian historians (Joseph. Contr. Ap. i. 18).]

1338 (return)
[ Ap. Strab. xvii. 2, § 22.]

1338 (return)
[ Ap. Strab. xvii. 2, § 22.]

1339 (return)
[ Ibid.]

1339 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Ibid.]

1340 (return)
[ See Sallust, Bell. Jugurth. § 17; Cic. De Orat. i. 58; Amm. Marc. xxii. 15; Solin. Polyhist. § 34.]

1340 (return)
[ See Sallust, Bell. Jugurth. § 17; Cic. De Orat. i. 58; Amm. Marc. xxii. 15; Solin. Polyhist. § 34.]

1341 (return)
[ Columella, xii. 4.]

1341 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Columella, xii. 4.]

1342 (return)
[ Ibid. i. 1, § 6.]

1342 (return)
[ Ibid. i. 1, § 6.]

1343 (return)
[ Plin. H. N. xviii. 3.]

1343 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Plin. H. N. xviii. 3.]

1344 (return)
[ As Antipater and Apollonius, Stoic philosophers of Tyre (Strab. l.s.c.), Boëthus and Diodotus, Peripatetics, of Sidon (ibid.), Philo of Byblus, Hermippus of Berytus, and others.]

1344 (return)
[ As Antipater and Apollonius, Stoic philosophers from Tyre (Strab. l.s.c.), Boëthus and Diodotus, Peripatetics from Sidon (ibid.), Philo from Byblus, Hermippus from Berytus, and others.]

XIV—POLITICAL HISTORY

XIV—Political History

0141 (return)
[ Gen. x. 15-18.]

0141 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Gen. 10:15-18.]

0142 (return)
[ “Canaanite” is used in a much wider sence, including all the Syrian nations between the coast line and the desert.]

0142 (return)
[ “Canaanite” refers to a broader definition, encompassing all the Syrian nations located between the coastline and the desert.]

0143 (return)
[ Mark vii. 26.]

0143 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Mark 7:26.]

0144 (return)
[ Ezra iii. 7.]

0144 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ezra 3:7]

0145 (return)
[ 1 Kings v. 18 (marginal rendering).]

0145 (return)
[ 1 Kings v. 18 (marginal rendering).]

0146 (return)
[ Ezek. xxvii. 11.]

0146 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ezek. 27:11.]

0147 (return)
[ Gen. x. 17, 18.]

0147 (return)
[ Gen. x. 17, 18.]

0148 (return)
[ Judg. i. 31.]

0148 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Judg. i. 31.]

0149 (return)
[ Brugsch, Hist. of Egypt, i. 222, et seq.]

0149 (return)
[ Brugsch, Hist. of Egypt, i. 222, et seq.]

1410 (return)
[ See Records of the Past, ii. 110, 111.]

1410 (return)
[ See Records of the Past, ii. 110, 111.]

1411 (return)
[ Josh. xi. 8; xix. 28.]

1411 (return)
[ Josh. xi. 8; xix. 28.]

1412 (return)
[ Judg. xviii. 7, 8.]

1412 (return)
[ Judg. xviii. 7, 8.]

1413 (return)
[ Ibid. i. 31.]

1413 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Same source, i. 31.]

1414 (return)
[ Ramantha (Laodicea) in later times claimed the rank of “Metropolis,” which implied a supremacy over other cities; but the real chief power of the north was Aradus.]

1414 (return)
[ Ramantha (Laodicea) in later times claimed to be a “Metropolis,” suggesting it was superior to other cities; however, the actual main power in the north was Aradus.]

1415 (return)
[ Hom. Il. xxiii. 743.]

1415 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Hom. The Iliad xxiii. 743.]

1416 (return)
[ Ibid. 743-748.]

1416 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Same source 743-748.]

1417 (return)
[ Hom. Od. iv. 613-619.]

1417 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Hom. Od. iv. 613-619.]

1418 (return)
[ Ibid. xv. 460 (Worsley’s translation).]

1418 (return)
[ Ibid. xv. 460 (Worsley’s translation).]

1419 (return)
[ Hom. Il. vi. 290-295 (Sotheby’s translation).]

1419 (return)
[ Hom. Il. vi. 290-295 (Sotheby’s translation).]

1420 (return)
[ Scylax, Periplus, § 104.]

1420 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Scylax, Periplus, § 104.]

1421 (return)
[ Cl. Julius, quoted by Stephen of Byzantium, ad voc. {DOROS}.]

1421 (return)
[ Cl. Julius, cited by Stephen of Byzantium, in reference to {DOROS}.]

1422 (return)
[ Justin, Hist. Philipp. xviii. 3.]

1422 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Justin, Hist. Philipp. xviii. 3.]

1423 (return)
[ Strab. xvi. ii. § 13.]

1423 (return)
[ Strab. xvi. ii. § 13.]

1424 (return)
[ Appian, De Rebus Punicus, § 1, &c.]

1424 (return)
[ Appian, De Rebus Punicus, § 1, &c.]

1425 (return)
[ Gesenius, Mon. Phoen. p. 267.]

1425 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Gesenius, Mon. Phoen. p. 267.]

1426 (return)
[ The Sidonian vessel which carries off Eumæus quits the Sicilian haven after sunset, and continues its voyage night and day without stopping—{’Exemar men onos pleomen nuktas te kai e mar} (Hom. Od. xv. 471-476).]

1426 (return)
[ The Sidonian ship that takes Eumæus leaves the Sicilian harbor after sunset and sails continuously day and night without pause—{’Exemar men onos pleomen nuktas te kai e mar} (Hom. Od. xv. 471-476).]

1427 (return)
[ Strabo, xvi. 2, § 24.]

1427 (return)
[ Strabo, xvi. 2, § 24.]

1428 (return)
[ Ibid.]

1428 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source.]

1429 (return)
[ Manilius, i. 304-309.]

1429 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Manilius, i. 304-309.]

1430 (return)
[ Herod. i. 1.]

1430 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. i. 1.]

1431 (return)
[ See Hom. Odyss. xv. 455.]

1431 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ See Hom. Odyss. xv. 455.]

1432 (return)
[ Herod. l.s.c.]

1432 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. l.s.c.]

1433 (return)
[ Hom. Odyss. xv. 403-484.]

1433 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Hom. Odyss. xv. 403-484.]

1434 (return)
[ Strabo, xvi. 2, § 14.]

1434 (return)
[ Strabo, xvi. 2, § 14.]

1435 (return)
[ We find hereditary monarchy among the Hittites (Records of the Past, iv. 28), at Tyre (Menand. ap. Joseph. Contr. Ap. i. 18), in Moab (Records, xi. 167), in Judah and Israel, in Syria (2 Kings, xiii. 24), in Ammon (2 Sam. x. 1), &c.]

1435 (return)
[ We find hereditary monarchy among the Hittites (Records of the Past, iv. 28), at Tyre (Menand. ap. Joseph. Contr. Ap. i. 18), in Moab (Records, xi. 167), in Judah and Israel, in Syria (2 Kings, xiii. 24), in Ammon (2 Sam. x. 1), etc.]

1436 (return)
[ 1 Sam. viii. 20.]

1436 (return)
[ 1 Sam. viii. 20.]

1437 (return)
[ When kings are priests, it is noted as exceptional. (See Menand. l.s.c.; Inscription of Tabnit, line 1.)]

1437 (return)
[ When kings act as priests, it is considered unusual. (See Menand. l.s.c.; Inscription of Tabnit, line 1.)]

1438 (return)
[ Judg. x. 12.]

1438 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Judg. 10:12]

1439 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 343.]

1439 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 343.]

1440 (return)
[ Josh. xix. 29.]

1440 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Josh. 19:29.]

1441 (return)
[ Records of the Past, ii. 111.]

1441 (return)
[ Records of the Past, ii. 111.]

1442 (return)
[ Justin, Hist. Phil. xviii. 3.]

1442 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Justin, Hist. Phil. 18.3.]

1443 (return)
[ Claudian, Bell. Gild. l. 120.]

1443 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Claudian, Bell. Gild. l. 120.]

1444 (return)
[ Solinus, Polyhist. § 29; Plin. H. N. v. 76.]

1444 (return)
[ Solinus, Polyhist. § 29; Plin. H. N. v. 76.]

1445 (return)
[ Herod. i. 1 ({nautiliai makrai}).]

1445 (return)
[ Herod. i. 1 ({long-distance sailors}).]

1446 (return)
[ Maspero, Histoire Ancienne des Peuples de l’Orient, p. 321.]

1446 (return)
[ Maspero, Ancient History of the Peoples of the East, p. 321.]

1447 (return)
[ See the fragments of Philo Byblius, passim.]

1447 (return)
[Check out the fragments of Philo Byblius, various locations.]

1448 (return)
[ Euseb. Præp. Ev. x. 9, § 12.]

1448 (return)
[ Euseb. Prep. Ev. x. 9, § 12.]

1449 (return)
[ Tatian, Adv. Græc. § 58.]

1449 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Tatian, Against the Greeks § 58.]

1450 (return)
[ Cinyras and Belus are both connected with Cyprus as kings. The Assyrians found kings there in all the cities (G. Smith, Eponym Canon. p. 139). So the Persians (Herod. v. 104-110).]

1450 (return)
[ Cinyras and Belus are both linked to Cyprus as kings. The Assyrians discovered kings in all the cities there (G. Smith, Eponym Canon. p. 139). The Persians did too (Herod. v. 104-110).]

1451 (return)
[ Dius, Fr. 2; Menand. Fr. 1.]

1451 (return)
[Dius, Fr. 2; Menand. Fr. 1.]

1452 (return)
[ Justin (xviii. 3) is scarcely an exception.]

1452 (return)
[ Justin (xviii. 3) is hardly an exception.]

1453 (return)
[ See the fragments of Dius and Menander above cited.]

1453 (return)
[Check out the excerpts from Dius and Menander mentioned above.]

1454 (return)
[ 1 Chr. xiv. 1.]

1454 (return)
[ 1 Chr. xiv. 1.]

1455 (return)
[ 2 Sam. vii. 2.]

1455 (return)
[ 2 Sam. vii. 2.]

1456 (return)
[ 1 Chr. xxii. 4.]

1456 (return)
[ 1 Chr. xxii. 4.]

1457 (return)
[ 1 Kings v. 1.]

1457 (return)
[ 1 Kings v. 1.]

1458 (return)
[ Joseph, Ant. Jud. viii. 2, § 6; 1 Kings, l.s.c.]

1458 (return)
[ Joseph, Ant. Jud. viii. 2, § 6; 1 Kings, l.s.c.]

1459 (return)
[ Ibid. viii. 2, § 8.]

1459 (return)
[ Ibid. viii. 2, § 8.]

1460 (return)
[ See Joseph. Ant. Jud. viii. 2, § 7, and compare the letters with their Hebrew counterparts in 1 Kings v. 3-6 and 7-9.]

1460 (return)
[ See Joseph. Ant. Jud. viii. 2, § 7, and compare the letters with their Hebrew counterparts in 1 Kings v. 3-6 and 7-9.]

1461 (return)
[ 1 Kings v. 10-12.]

1461 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[1 Kings 5:10-12.]

1462 (return)
[ Ezek. xxvii. 17; Acts xii. 20.]

1462 (return)
[ Ezek. 27:17; Acts 12:20.]

1463 (return)
[ Menander, Fr. 1.]

1463 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Menander, Fr. 1.]

1464 (return)
[ 1 Kings v. 15, 18; 2 Chr. ii. 18.]

1464 (return)
[ 1 Kings 5:15, 18; 2 Chronicles 2:18.]

1465 (return)
[ 1 Kings v. 17, 18.]

1465 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[1 Kings 5:17, 18.]

1466 (return)
[ Ibid. vi. 18, 29.]

1466 (return)
[ Ibid. vi. 18, 29.]

1467 (return)
[ Ibid. verses 23-28.]

1467 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ibid. vv. 23-28.]

1468 (return)
[ Ibid. verse 35.]

1468 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Ibid. v. 35.]

1469 (return)
[ 2 Chron. iii. 14.]

1469 (return)
[ 2 Chron. iii. 14.]

1470 (return)
[ Ibid. ii. 14.]

1470 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Ibid. II. 14.]

1471 (return)
[ 1 Kings vii. 13.]

1471 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[1 Kings 7:13.]

1472 (return)
[ 1 Kings vii. 14; 2 Chron. ii. 14.]

1472 (return)
[ 1 Kings 7:14; 2 Chronicles 2:14.]

1473 (return)
[ 1 Kings vii. 46.]

1473 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[1 Kings 7:46.]

1474 (return)
[ Menander, Fr. 1; Dius, Fr. 2; Philostrat. Vit. Apoll. v. 5; Sil. Ital. Bell. Pun. iii. 14, 22, 30.]

1474 (return)
[ Menander, Fr. 1; Dius, Fr. 2; Philostrat. Vit. Apoll. v. 5; Sil. Ital. Bell. Pun. iii. 14, 22, 30.]

1475 (return)
[ 1 Kings vii. 15-22.]

1475 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[1 Kings 7:15-22.]

1476 (return)
[ Ibid. verses 27-37.]

1476 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Ibid. verses 27-37.]

1477 (return)
[ Ibid. vi. 38.]

1477 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, vi. 38.]

1478 (return)
[ Ibid. vii. 1. Compare ix. 10.]

1478 (return)
[ Ibid. vii. 1. Compare ix. 10.]

1479 (return)
[ Stanley, Lectures on the Jewish Church, ii. 165-167.]

1479 (return)
[ Stanley, Lectures on the Jewish Church, ii. 165-167.]

1480 (return)
[ See the Fragment of Menander above quoted, where Hiram is said to have been fifty-three years old at his decease, and to have reigned thirty-four years.]

1480 (return)
[ See the Fragment of Menander mentioned above, where it's stated that Hiram was fifty-three years old at the time of his death and ruled for thirty-four years.]

1481 (return)
[ Strabo, xvi. 2, § 23.]

1481 (return)
[ Strabo, xvi. 2, § 23.]

1482 (return)
[ Menander, l.s.c.]

1482 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Menander, l.s.c.]

1483 (return)
[ So M. Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 369.]

1483 (return)
[ So M. Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 369.]

1484 (return)
[ Herod. ii. 44.]

1484 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. ii. 44.]

1485 (return)
[ Arrian, Exped. Alex. ii. 16, 24.]

1485 (return)
[ Arrian, Exped. Alex. ii. 16, 24.]

1486 (return)
[ So M. Renan, after careful examination (Mission, l.s.c.). The earlier opinion placed the smaller island, with its Temple of Baal, towards the north (Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 347).]

1486 (return)
[So M. Renan, after careful examination (Mission, l.s.c.). The earlier opinion placed the smaller island, with its Temple of Baal, toward the north (Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 347).]

1487 (return)
[ Menander, l.s.c.]

1487 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Menander, l.s.c.]

1488 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 23, sub fin.]

1488 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 23, sub fin.]

1489 (return)
[ Josh. xix. 27.]

1489 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Josh. 19:27.]

1490 (return)
[ See Robinson, Later Researches, pp. 87, 88.]

1490 (return)
[ See Robinson, Later Researches, pp. 87, 88.]

1491 (return)
[ 1 Kings ix. 10-13.]

1491 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[1 Kings 9:10-13.]

1492 (return)
[ Justin, Dial. c. Tryph. § 34.]

1492 (return)
[ Justin, Dial. c. Tryph. § 34.]

1493 (return)
[ Menand. ap. Clem. Alex. Strom. i. 386.]

1493 (return)
[Menand. ap. Clem. Alex. Strom. i. 386.]

1494 (return)
[ 1 Kings xi. 1.]

1494 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[1 Kings 11:1.]

1495 (return)
[ Ibid. ix. 27.]

1495 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, p. 27.]

1496 (return)
[ See 1 Kings x. 22. The distinctness of this navy from the one which brought gold from Ophir has been maintained by Dean Stanley (Lectures on the Jewish Church, ii. 156) and the Rev. J. Hammond (Pulpit Commentary, Comment on 1 Kings, p. 213), as well as by the present writer (Speaker’s Commentary, ii. pp. 545, 546).]

1496 (return)
[ See 1 Kings 10:22. The distinction between this navy and the one that brought gold from Ophir has been upheld by Dean Stanley (Lectures on the Jewish Church, ii. 156) and the Rev. J. Hammond (Pulpit Commentary, Comment on 1 Kings, p. 213), as well as by the current author (Speaker’s Commentary, ii. pp. 545, 546).]

1497 (return)
[ Mela. iii. 1; Plin. H. N. iv. 22, § 115; Catull. xx. 30, &c.]

1497 (return)
[ Mela. iii. 1; Plin. H. N. iv. 22, § 115; Catull. xx. 30, &c.]

1498 (return)
[ See Plin. H. N. iii. 3; xxxiii. 6; Polyb. x. 10; Strab. iii. 2, § 3 and 10.]

1498 (return)
[ See Plin. H. N. iii. 3; xxxiii. 6; Polyb. x. 10; Strab. iii. 2, § 3 and 10.]

1499 (return)
[ Herod. iv. 191; Plin. H. N. viii. 11.]

1499 (return)
[ Herod. iv. 191; Plin. H. N. viii. 11.]

14100 (return)
[ Hanno, Periplus, p. 6.]

14100 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Hanno, Periplus, p. 6.]

14101 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 13, 14.]

14101 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 13, 14.]

14102 (return)
[ 1 Kings ix. 26.]

14102 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[1 Kings 9:26.]

14103 (return)
[ 1 Kings x. 11.]

14103 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[1 Kings 10:11.]

14104 (return)
[ The case is excellently stated in Mr. Twistleton’s article on OPHIR in Dr. Smith’s Dictionry of the Bible, vol. ii.]

14104 (return)
[ The case is clearly presented in Mr. Twistleton’s article on OPHIR in Dr. Smith’s Dictionry of the Bible, vol. ii.]

14105 (return)
[ As almug or algum which is “the Hebraised form of a Deccan word for sandalwood” (Stanley, Lectures, ii. 157).]

14105 (return)
[ As almug or algum, which means “the Hebrew-influenced version of a Deccan word for sandalwood” (Stanley, Lectures, ii. 157).]

14106 (return)
[ 1 Kings ix. 28.]

14106 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[1 Kings 9:28.]

14107 (return)
[ Contr. Ap. i. 18.]

14107 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Contr. Ap. i. 18.]

14108 (return)
[ Kenrick argues in favour of {Kitioi} (Phoenicia, p. 357).]

14108 (return)
[ Kenrick supports {Kitioi} (Phoenicia, p. 357).]

14109 (return)
[ See Encycl. Britann. ad voc. PHOENICIA, xviii. 807.]

14109 (return)
[ See Encycl. Britannica entry on PHOENICIA, xviii. 807.]

14110 (return)
[ Menander, Fr. 2.]

14110 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Menander, Fr. 2.]

14111 (return)
[ Ibid.]

14111 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ibid.]

14112 (return)
[ 1 Kings xvi. 31.]

14112 (return)
[ 1 Kings xvi. 31.]

14113 (return)
[ The Assyrians probably found their way into Phoenicia through the gap in the mountain line between Bargylus and Lebanon. Botrys occupied a strong position between this gap and the southern Phoenician cities, Gebal, Sidon, and Tyre.]

14113 (return)
[ The Assyrians likely entered Phoenicia through the opening in the mountain range between Bargylus and Lebanon. Botrys held a strategic location between this gap and the southern Phoenician cities, Gebal, Sidon, and Tyre.]

14114 (return)
[ Menander, l.s.c. Aüza, which at a later date became Auzen, is mentioned by Tacitus (Ann. iv. 25) and Ptolemy (Geograph. iv. 2).]

14114 (return)
[ Menander, l.s.c. Aüza, which later became known as Auzen, is referenced by Tacitus (Ann. iv. 25) and Ptolemy (Geograph. iv. 2).]

14115 (return)
[ The Greek lamda, {L}, readily passes into delta {D}. Baal-azar is found as a Phoenician name in an inscription (Corp. Ins. Semit. i. 335, no. 256).]

14115 (return)
[ The Greek lambda, {L}, easily converts into delta {D}. Baal-azar appears as a Phoenician name in an inscription (Corp. Ins. Semit. i. 335, no. 256).]

14116 (return)
[ See Gesen. Mon. Phoen. p. 410. Mattan, “a gift,” was the name borne by Athaliah’s high priest of Baal (2 Kings xi. 18). It is found as an element in several Phoenician names, as Mattan-elim (Corp. Ins. Semit. i. 298, no. 194); Mattan-Baal (ibid. p. 309, no. 212), &c.]

14116 (return)
[ See Gesen. Mon. Phoen. p. 410. Mattan, meaning “a gift,” was the name of Athaliah’s high priest of Baal (2 Kings xi. 18). It's seen as a part of several Phoenician names, like Mattan-elim (Corp. Ins. Semit. i. 298, no. 194); Mattan-Baal (ibid. p. 309, no. 212), etc.]

14117 (return)
[ See Justin, Hist. Phil. xviii. 5.]

14117 (return)
[ See Justin, Hist. Phil. xviii. 5.]

14118 (return)
[ Menander, Fr. 1.]

14118 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Menander, Fr. 1.]

14119 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, pp. 363-367.]

14119 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, pp. 363-367.]

14120 (return)
[ Contr. Ap. i. 18.]

14120 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Contr. Ap. i. 18.]

14121 (return)
[ Ancient Monarchies, ii. 84-89.]

14121 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ancient Monarchies, ii. 84-89.]

14122 (return)
[ Histoire Ancienne, pp. 347, 348.]

14122 (return)
[ Ancient History, pp. 347, 348.]

14123 (return)
[ Ancient Monarchies, ii. 90-99.]

14123 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ancient Monarchies, ii. 90-99.]

14124 (return)
[ Ancient Monarchies, ii. 102-106; Eponym Canon, pp. 108-114.]

14124 (return)
[ Ancient Monarchies, ii. 102-106; Eponym Canon, pp. 108-114.]

14125 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, p. 112, l. 45.]

14125 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, p. 112, l. 45.]

14126 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 108, l. 93.]

14126 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 108, l. 93.]

14127 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 115, l. 14.]

14127 (return)
[Same source, p. 115, l. 14.]

14128 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 120, ll. 33-35.]

14128 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 120, ll. 33-35.]

14129 (return)
[ When Assyria became mistress of the Upper Syria, the Orontes valley, and the kingdom of Israel, she could have strangled the Phoenician land commerce at a moment’s notice.]

14129 (return)
[ When Assyria gained control over Upper Syria, the Orontes valley, and the kingdom of Israel, she could have easily crushed the Phoenician land trade at any moment.]

14130 (return)
[ Is. xxiii. 2-8.]

14130 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Is. 23:2-8.]

14131 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, p. 64.]

14131 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Eponym Canon, p. 64.]

14132 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, pp. 117-120.]

14132 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Eponym Canon, pp. 117-120.]

14133 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 123, ll. 1-5.]

14133 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 123, ll. 1-5.]

14134 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 120, l. 28.]

14134 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 120, l. 28.]

14135 (return)
[ In B.C. 720. (See Eponym Canon, p. 126, ll. 33-35.)]

14135 (return)
[ In 720 B.C. (See Eponym Canon, p. 126, ll. 33-35.)]

14136 (return)
[ Ezek. xxviii. 14.]

14136 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ezek. 28:14.]

14137 (return)
[ Menander ap. Joseph. Ant. Jud. ix. 14, § 2; Eponym Canon, p. 131.]

14137 (return)
[ Menander quoted in Josephus. Antiquities of the Jews ix. 14, § 2; Eponym Canon, p. 131.]

14138 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, p. 132.]

14138 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Eponym Canon, p. 132.]

14139 (return)
[ Menander, l.s.c.]

14139 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Menander, l.s.c.]

14140 (return)
[ Joseph, Ant. Jud. l.s.c. {’Epelthe polemon ten te Surian pasan kai Phoiniken}.]

14140 (return)
[ Joseph, Ant. Jud. l.s.c. {’Epelthe polemon ten te Surian pasan kai Phoiniken}.]

14141 (return)
[ Ibid.]

14141 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source.]

14142 (return)
[ A slab of Sennacherib’s represents the Assyrian army entering a city, probably Phoenician, at one end, while the inhabitants embark on board their ships at the other (Layard, Monuments of Nineveh, 1st series, pl. 71; Nin. and its Remains, ii. 384).]

14142 (return)
[ A slab of Sennacherib’s shows the Assyrian army entering a city, likely Phoenician, on one side, while the locals are boarding their ships on the other (Layard, Monuments of Nineveh, 1st series, pl. 71; Nin. and its Remains, ii. 384).]

14143 (return)
[ Menander, l.s.c.]

14143 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Menander, l.s.c.]

14144 (return)
[ Compare Perrot et Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 357, and Lortet, La Syrie d’aujourd’hui, p. 128.]

14144 (return)
[ Compare Perrot and Chipiez, Hist. de l’Art, iii. 357, and Lortet, La Syrie d’aujourd’hui, p. 128.]

14145 (return)
[ Menander, ut supra.]

14145 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Menander, as mentioned above.]

14146 (return)
[ This folows from his taking refuge there when attacked by Sennacherib (Eponym Canon, p. 136).]

14146 (return)
[ This follows from his seeking shelter there when Sennacherib attacked him (Eponym Canon, p. 136).]

14147 (return)
[ Since Sennacherib calls him persistently “king of Sidon” (ibid. p. 131, l. 2; p. 135, ll. 13, 17), not king of Tyre.]

14147 (return)
[ Since Sennacherib keeps referring to him as “king of Sidon” (ibid. p. 131, l. 2; p. 135, ll. 13, 17), not as the king of Tyre.]

14148 (return)
[ It was the same army which lost 185,000 men by miracle in one night (2 Kings xix. 35).]

14148 (return)
[ It was the same army that lost 185,000 men by miracle in one night (2 Kings xix. 35).]

14149 (return)
[ 2 Kings xix. 23.]

14149 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ 2 Kings 19:23.]

14150 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, p. 134, l. 11.]

14150 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, p. 134, l. 11.]

14151 (return)
[ Records of the Past, i. 35.]

14151 (return)
[ Records of the Past, i. 35.]

14152 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, p. 132.]

14152 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Eponym Canon, p. 132.]

14153 (return)
[ Ibid.]

14153 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source.]

14154 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, p. 132, l. 14; p. 136, ll. 14, 19. “Tubaal” is probably for Tob-baal, “Baal is good,” like “Tabrimon” for Tob-Rimmon, “Rimmon is good” (1 Kings xv. 18), and “Tabeal” for Tob- El, “God is good” (Is. vii. 6).]

14154 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, p. 132, l. 14; p. 136, ll. 14, 19. “Tubaal” likely refers to Tob-baal, meaning “Baal is good,” similar to “Tabrimon” for Tob-Rimmon, meaning “Rimmon is good” (1 Kings xv. 18), and “Tabeal” for Tob-El, meaning “God is good” (Is. vii. 6).]

14155 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, p. 132, ll. 15, 16.]

14155 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, p. 132, ll. 15, 16.]

14156 (return)
[ Ibid. ll. 19, 20.]

14156 (return)
[ Ibid. ll. 19, 20.]

14157 (return)
[ From the fact that Abd-Milkut is king of Sidon at the accession of Esarhaddon (Records of the Past, iii. 111).]

14157 (return)
[ The fact that Abd-Milkut is king of Sidon when Esarhaddon comes to power (Records of the Past, iii. 111).]

14158 (return)
[ Abd-Melkarth is one of the commonest of Phoenician names. It occurs, either fully, or in the contracted form of Bod-Melkarth, scores of times in the inscriptions of Carthage. The meaning is “servant of Melkarth.”]

14158 (return)
[ Abd-Melkarth is one of the most common Phoenician names. It appears, either in full or in the shortened form of Bod-Melkarth, many times in the inscriptions of Carthage. The meaning is “servant of Melkarth.”]

14159 (return)
[ Records of the Past, iii. 112.]

14159 (return)
[ Records of the Past, iii. 112.]

14160 (return)
[ Ancient Monarchies, ii. 186.]

14160 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ancient Monarchies, vol. ii, p. 186.]

14161 (return)
[ Rec. of the Past, iii. 111, 112.]

14161 (return)
[ Rec. of the Past, iii. 111, 112.]

14162 (return)
[ Eponym Canon pp. 139, 140.]

14162 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Eponym Canon pp. 139, 140.]

14163 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 140, Extract xxxviii. ll. 1-3.]

14163 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 140, Extract xxxviii. ll. 1-3.]

14164 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, p. 140, Ext. xxxviii. ll. 4-9.]

14164 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, p. 140, Ext. xxxviii. ll. 4-9.]

14165 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 141, Ext. xl.]

14165 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 141, Ext. xl.]

14166 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 142, ll. 12, 13.]

14166 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 142, ll. 12, 13.]

14167 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, p. 142, l. 14.]

14167 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, p. 142, l. 14.]

14168 (return)
[ See Ancient Monarchies ii. 193.]

14168 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ See Ancient Monarchies ii. 193.]

14169 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 195.]

14169 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, p. 195.]

14170 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, p. 143, Extr. xli. l. 3.]

14170 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, p. 143, Extr. xli. l. 3.]

14171 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, pp. 143, 144. Six names are lost between the eleventh line and the eighteenth. They may be supplied from the broken cylinder of Esarhaddon (Records of the Past, iii. 107, 108.)]

14171 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, pp. 143, 144. Six names are missing between the eleventh line and the eighteenth. They might be filled in from the damaged cylinder of Esarhaddon (Records of the Past, iii. 107, 108.)]

14172 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, pp. 144, 145, ll. 84-98.]

14172 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, pp. 144, 145, ll. 84-98.]

14173 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 139, l. 17.]

14173 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 139, l. 17.]

14174 (return)
[ Records of the Past, vol. i. p. 100.]

14174 (return)
[ Records of the Past, vol. i. p. 100.]

14175 (return)
[ Records of the Past, i. 66; ix. 41.]

14175 (return)
[ Records of the Past, i. 66; ix. 41.]

14176 (return)
[ Ibid. iii. 67, ll. 116, 117.]

14176 (return)
[ Ibid. iii. 67, ll. 116, 117.]

14177 (return)
[ Ibid. i. 67, 68.]

14177 (return)
[ Ibid. i. 67, 68.]

14178 (return)
[ See Judg. xix. 29; Eponym Canon, p. 132, l. 9.]

14178 (return)
[ See Judg. xix. 29; Eponym Canon, p. 132, l. 9.]

14179 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, pp. 149, 149.]

14179 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, pp. 149, 149.]

14180 (return)
[ Eponym Canon, p. 70.]

14180 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Eponym Canon, p. 70.]

14181 (return)
[ Herod. i. 103. B.C. 633 was, according to Herodotus, the year of the accession of Cyaxares. His attack on Nineveh seems to have followed shortly after.]

14181 (return)
[According to Herodotus, the year 633 B.C. marked the beginning of Cyaxares' reign. His campaign against Nineveh appears to have taken place soon after.]

14182 (return)
[ Herod. l.s.c. and iv. 1; Ezek. xxxviii. 2-16; Strabo, xi. 8, § 4; Diod. Sic. ii. 34, § 2-5.]

14182 (return)
[ Herod. l.s.c. and iv. 1; Ezek. xxxviii. 2-16; Strabo, xi. 8, § 4; Diod. Sic. ii. 34, § 2-5.]

14183 (return)
[ Ancient Monarchies, ii. 221.]

14183 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ancient Monarchies, ii. 221.]

14184 (return)
[ Stanley, Lectures on the Jewish Church, ii. 432, 433.]

14184 (return)
[ Stanley, Lectures on the Jewish Church, ii. 432, 433.]

14185 (return)
[ Herod. i. 105; Strabo, i. 3, 16; Justin, ii. 3.]

14185 (return)
[ Herod. i. 105; Strabo, i. 3, 16; Justin, ii. 3.]

14186 (return)
[ Herod. l.s.c.; Hippocrat. De Aëre, Aqua, et Locis, vi. § 108.]

14186 (return)
[ Herod. l.s.c.; Hippocrat. On Air, Waters, and Places, vi. § 108.]

14187 (return)
[ Herod. i. 73.]

14187 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. i. 73.]

14188 (return)
[ Strabo, xi. 767; Arrian, Exp. Alex. iii. 8, § 4.]

14188 (return)
[ Strabo, xi. 767; Arrian, Exp. Alex. iii. 8, § 4.]

14189 (return)
[ Polyb. v. 70, § 4.]

14189 (return)
[ Polyb. v. 70, § 4.]

14190 (return)
[ Ancient Monarchies, ii. 228, note.]

14190 (return)
[ Ancient Monarchies, ii. 228, note.]

14191 (return)
[ Ancient Monarchies, ii. 232.]

14191 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ancient Monarchies, vol. 2, p. 232.]

14192 (return)
[ Herod. ii. 157; and compare the author’s History of Ancient Egypt, ii. 467, note 6.]

14192 (return)
[ Herod. ii. 157; and compare the author’s History of Ancient Egypt, ii. 467, note 6.]

14193 (return)
[ Ezek. xxvii. 8.]

14193 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ezek. 27:8.]

14194 (return)
[ Ibid. verse 11.]

14194 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, verse 11.]

14195 (return)
[ Ibid. verse 9.]

14195 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Same source, verse 9.]

14196 (return)
[ Ibid. xxviii. 2-5.]

14196 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ibid. 28.2-5.]

14197 (return)
[ Ezek. xxvii. 3-6, and 25.]

14197 (return)
[ Ezek. 27:3-6, and 25.]

14198 (return)
[ See the author’s History of Ancient Egypt, ii. 472, note 1.]

14198 (return)
[ See the author's History of Ancient Egypt, ii. 472, note 1.]

14199 (return)
[ Herod. ii. 159; 2 Kings xxiii. 29; 2 Chron. xxxv. 20-24.]

14199 (return)
[ Herod. ii. 159; 2 Kings 23:29; 2 Chron. 35:20-24.]

14200 (return)
[ Herod. ii. 157.]

14200 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. ii. 157.]

14201 (return)
[ See Jer. xlvii. 1. Gaza, however, may not have been taken till the campaign of B.C. 608.]

14201 (return)
[See Jer. 47:1. Gaza, however, might not have been taken until the campaign of 608 B.C.]

14202 (return)
[ Herod. i. 105 raises the suspicion that Askelon, which was nearer Egypt than Ashdod, may have belonged to Psamatik I.]

14202 (return)
[ Herod. i. 105 raises the suspicion that Askelon, which was closer to Egypt than Ashdod, might have belonged to Psamatik I.]

14203 (return)
[ Ibid. ii. 159.]

14203 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ibid. 2. 159.]

14204 (return)
[ 2 Kings xxiii. 19; 2 Chron. xxxiv. 6.]

14204 (return)
[ 2 Kings 23:19; 2 Chronicles 34:6.]

14205 (return)
[ History of Ancient Egypt, ii. 228.]

14205 (return)
[ History of Ancient Egypt, ii. 228.]

14206 (return)
[ Judg. iv. 15; v. 19.]

14206 (return)
[ Judg. iv. 15; v. 19.]

14207 (return)
[ 2 Chron. xxxv. 21.]

14207 (return)
[ 2 Chron. xxxv. 21.]

14208 (return)
[ See Jer. xlvi. 2.]

14208 (return)
[ See Jer. xlvi. 2.]

14209 (return)
[ Berosus, Fr. 1; 2 Kings xxiv. 7.]

14209 (return)
[ Berosus, Fr. 1; 2 Kings 24:7.]

14210 (return)
[ Herod. iv. 42.]

14210 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Herod. iv. 42.]

14211 (return)
[ Ibid. ii. 112.]

14211 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ibid. II. 112.]

14212 (return)
[ Berosus, l.s.c.]

14212 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Berosus, l.s.c.]

14213 (return)
[ Habakkuk, i. 6-10.]

14213 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Habakkuk 1:6-10]

14214 (return)
[ Jer. xlvi. 3, 4.]

14214 (return)
[ Jer. xlvi. 3, 4.]

14215 (return)
[ Ibid. verse 5.]

14215 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, verse 5.]

14216 (return)
[ Ibid. verse 6.]

14216 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, verse 6.]

14217 (return)
[ Jer. xlvi. 10.]

14217 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Jer. 46:10.]

14218 (return)
[ Ibid. verse 16.]

14218 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Same source, verse 16.]

14219 (return)
[ Ibid. verse 21.]

14219 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, verse 21.]

14220 (return)
[ Stanley, Lectures on the Jewish Church, ii. 455.]

14220 (return)
[ Stanley, Lectures on the Jewish Church, ii. 455.]

14221 (return)
[ Ibid.]

14221 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source.]

14222 (return)
[ Berosus, l.s.c. The extreme haste of the return is indicated by the fact, which is noted, that Nebuchadnezzer himself, with a few light troops, took the short cut across the desert, while his army, with its prisoners, pursued the more usual route through the valley of the Orontes, by Aleppo to Carchemish, and then along the course of the Euphrates.]

14222 (return)
[ Berosus, l.s.c. The urgency of the return is shown by the detail that Nebuchadnezzar himself, with a few light troops, took a shortcut across the desert, while his army, along with its prisoners, followed the typical path through the Orontes valley, passing by Aleppo to Carchemish, and then along the Euphrates River.]

14223 (return)
[ See History of Ancient Egypt, ii. 480.]

14223 (return)
[ See History of Ancient Egypt, ii. 480.]

14224 (return)
[ Habak. i. 6.]

14224 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Habak. i. 6.]

14225 (return)
[ Menander ap. Joseph. Contr. Ap. i. 21.]

14225 (return)
[ Menander quoted in Josephus. Against Apion i. 21.]

14226 (return)
[ Ezek. xxvii. 8, 9, 11.]

14226 (return)
[ Ezek. 27:8, 9, 11.]

14227 (return)
[ So Joseph. l.s.c. Mr. Kenrick disputes the date on account of Ezek. xxvi. 2, which he thinks must refer to the final siege and capture of Jerusalem; but the reference may be to the breaking of the power of Judæa, either by Neco in B.C. 608 or by Nebuchadnezzar in B.C. 605.]

14227 (return)
[ So Joseph. l.s.c. Mr. Kenrick questions the date because of Ezek. xxvi. 2, which he believes must refer to the final siege and capture of Jerusalem; however, the reference could point to the weakening of Judæa's power, either by Neco in 608 B.C. or by Nebuchadnezzar in 605 B.C.]

14228 (return)
[ 2 Kings xxiv. 2; 2 Chr. xxxvi. 6.]

14228 (return)
[ 2 Kings 24:2; 2 Chronicles 36:6.]

14229 (return)
[ Ezek. xxviii. 21-23.]

14229 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Ezek. 28:21-23.]

14230 (return)
[ Menander, l.s.c.]

14230 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Menander, l.s.c.]

14231 (return)
[ Ezek. xxvi. 8-12.]

14231 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ezek. 26:8-12.]

14232 (return)
[ Isaiah xliii. 14; Æschyl. Pers. l. 54.]

14232 (return)
[ Isaiah 43:14; Æschylus Persians line 54.]

14233 (return)
[ As Kenrick (Phoenicia, p. 390).]

14233 (return)
[ As Kenrick (Phoenicia, p. 390).]

14234 (return)
[ See especially, ch. xxviii. 2, 12.]

14234 (return)
[See especially, ch. xxviii. 2, 12.]

14235 (return)
[ Ibid. verses 2-10, 17, 18.]

14235 (return)
[ Ibid. verses 2-10, 17, 18.]

14236 (return)
[ Ezek. xxvii. 26.]

14236 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ezek. 27:26.]

14237 (return)
[ Herod. vii. 44, 96, 100, 128.]

14237 (return)
[ Herod. vii. 44, 96, 100, 128.]

14238 (return)
[ Ibid. ii. 161; vii. 98; Ezra iii. 7.]

14238 (return)
[ Ibid. ii. 161; vii. 98; Ezra iii. 7.]

14239 (return)
[ Menander, Fr. 2.]

14239 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Menander, Fr. 2.]

14240 (return)
[ Herod. ii. 182.]

14240 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. ii. 182.]

14241 (return)
[ Ibid. i. 201-214; Ctesias, Ex. Pers. § 6-8.]

14241 (return)
[ Ibid. i. 201-214; Ctesias, Ex. Pers. § 6-8.]

14242 (return)
[ Herod. i. 177; Arrian, Exp. Alex. iii. 27.]

14242 (return)
[ Herod. i. 177; Arrian, Exp. Alex. iii. 27.]

14243 (return)
[ Herod. i. 201-214; Ctes. Ex. Pers. l.s.c.]

14243 (return)
[ Herod. i. 201-214; Ctes. Ex. Pers. l.s.c.]

14244 (return)
[ Ezra i. 1-11.]

14244 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ezra 1:1-11]

14245 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 393.]

14245 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 393.]

14246 (return)
[ Herod. iii. 19, 34.]

14246 (return)
[ Herod. iii. 19, 34.]

14247 (return)
[ Ezra iii. 7.]

14247 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ezra 3:7 ]

14248 (return)
[ Ezra iii. 7.]

14248 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ezra 3:7]

14249 (return)
[ Herod. i. 153.]

14249 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. i. 153.]

14250 (return)
[ Ibid. ii. 177.]

14250 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, ii. 177.]

14251 (return)
[ See Berosus, ap. Joseph. Ant. Jud. x. 11, § 1.]

14251 (return)
[See Berosus, ap. Joseph. Ant. Jud. x. 11, § 1.]

14252 (return)
[ Hence the sacred writers speak of the Assyrians and Babylonians as “God’s northern army,” “a people from the north country.” (Jer. i. 15; vi. 22; Ezek. xxvi. 7; Joel ii. 20, &c.)]

14252 (return)
[ So the holy writers refer to the Assyrians and Babylonians as "God’s northern army," "a people from the north country." (Jer. i. 15; vi. 22; Ezek. xxvi. 7; Joel ii. 20, &c.)]

14253 (return)
[ See Herod. iii. 5.]

14253 (return)
[ See Herod. iii. 5.]

14254 (return)
[ Ibid. ii. 159.]

14254 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Ibid. 2.159.]

14255 (return)
[ Ibid. ii. 161.]

14255 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, p. 161.]

14256 (return)
[ Ibid. ii. 182.]

14256 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, p. 182.]

14257 (return)
[ Herod. ii. 150, 154; iii. 11.]

14257 (return)
[ Herod. ii. 150, 154; iii. 11.]

14258 (return)
[ Ibid. iii. 19.]

14258 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ibid. III. 19.]

14259 (return)
[ Ibid. vii. 98; viii. 67, § 2; Diod. Sic. xvi. 42, § 2; xvii. 47, § 1; Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 13, 15, &c.]

14259 (return)
[ Same as above. vii. 98; viii. 67, § 2; Diodorus Siculus xvi. 42, § 2; xvii. 47, § 1; Arrian, Expedition of Alexander ii. 13, 15, &c.]

14260 (return)
[ Herod. iii. 19.]

14260 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. iii. 19.]

14261 (return)
[ Ezek. xxix. 10.]

14261 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ezek. 29:10.]

14262 (return)
[ Herod. iii. 17.]

14262 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. iii. 17.]

14263 (return)
[ Herod. iii. 19.]

14263 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. iii. 19.]

14264 (return)
[ Ibid.]

14264 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source.]

14265 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 394.]

14265 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 394.]

14266 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvi. 41.]

14266 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvi. 41.]

14267 (return)
[ Kenrick, p. 391, note 3.]

14267 (return)
[ Kenrick, p. 391, note 3.]

14268 (return)
[ Herod. iii. 91.]

14268 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Herod. iii. 91.]

14269 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvi. 41, § 2.]

14269 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvi. 41, § 2.]

14270 (return)
[ Herod. v. 52.]

14270 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. v. 52.]

14271 (return)
[ See the author’s Herodotus, iv. 30, note 1.]

14271 (return)
[ See the author’s Herodotus, iv. 30, note 1.]

14272 (return)
[ Herod. vii. 28.]

14272 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Herod. vii. 28.]

14273 (return)
[ Ibid. iv. 166.]

14273 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, iv. 166.]

14274 (return)
[ Herod. v. 37-104.]

14274 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. v. 37-104.]

14275 (return)
[ Phoenicia could furnish 300 triremes, Cyprus 150, Ionia at this time 283 (Herod. vi. 8), Æolis at least 70 (ibid.), Caria the same number (ib. vii. 93)—total, 873. Against these Darious could only have mustered 200 from Egypt (ib. vii. 89), 100 from Cilicia (ib. 91), 50 from Lycia (ib. 92), and 30 from Pamphylia (ib. 91)—total, 380.]

14275 (return)
[ Phoenicia could provide 300 triremes, Cyprus 150, Ionia at this time 283 (Herod. vi. 8), Æolis at least 70 (ibid.), Caria the same number (ib. vii. 93)—total, 873. Against these, Darius could have only gathered 200 from Egypt (ib. vii. 89), 100 from Cilicia (ib. 91), 50 from Lycia (ib. 92), and 30 from Pamphylia (ib. 91)—total, 380.]

14276 (return)
[ Herod. i. 28, 176; Appian, Bell. Civ. iv. 80.]

14276 (return)
[ Herod. i. 28, 176; Appian, Bell. Civ. iv. 80.]

14277 (return)
[ Herod. iii. 14-16, 27-29, 37, &c.]

14277 (return)
[ Herod. iii. 14-16, 27-29, 37, &c.]

14278 (return)
[ Ibid. v. 108.]

14278 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ibid. p. 108.]

14279 (return)
[ Ibid.]

14279 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source.]

14280 (return)
[ Ibid. v. 112.]

14280 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ibid. p. 112.]

14281 (return)
[ See the author’s Herodotus, i. 268, 269, 3rd ed.]

14281 (return)
[ See the author’s Herodotus, i. 268, 269, 3rd ed.]

14282 (return)
[ Herod. vi. 9.]

14282 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. vi. 9.]

14283 (return)
[ Ibid. ch. 6.]

14283 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Same source, ch. 6.]

14284 (return)
[ Herod. ch. 8.]

14284 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Herod. ch. 8.]

14285 (return)
[ Ibid. chs. 9-13.]

14285 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, chs. 9-13.]

14286 (return)
[ The Lesbians and most of the Samians (Herod. v. 14).]

14286 (return)
[ The Lesbians and most of the Samians (Herod. v. 14).]

14287 (return)
[ Ibid. ch. 15.]

14287 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, ch. 15.]

14288 (return)
[ Ibid. chs. 31-33.]

14288 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, chs. 31-33.]

14289 (return)
[ Herod. v. 41.]

14289 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Herod. v. 41.]

14290 (return)
[ Ibid. iii. 135-138.]

14290 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ibid. iii. 135-138.]

14291 (return)
[ Herod. vi. 43-45.]

14291 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. vi. 43-45.]

14292 (return)
[ See the author’s Herodotus, iii. 494, note 3.]

14292 (return)
[ See the author’s Herodotus, iii. 494, note 3.]

14293 (return)
[ The fleet which accomponied Mardonius lost nearly three hundred vessels off Mount Athos (Herod. vi. 44), and therefore can scarcely have fallen much short of 500; that of Datis and Artaphernes is reckoned at 600 by Herodotus (vi. 95), at a thousand by Cicero (Orat. in Verr. ii. 1, § 18), and Valerius Maximus (i. 1).]

14293 (return)
[ The fleet that accompanied Mardonius lost nearly three hundred ships off Mount Athos (Herod. vi. 44), so it must have been close to 500; Datis and Artaphernes' fleet is counted at 600 by Herodotus (vi. 95), at a thousand by Cicero (Orat. in Verr. ii. 1, § 18), and Valerius Maximus (i. 1).]

14294 (return)
[ So Herodotus (vi. 95).]

14294 (return)
[ So Herodotus (vi. 95).]

14295 (return)
[ Herod. vi. 118.]

14295 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Herod. 6.118.]

14296 (return)
[ Herod. vii. 23.]

14296 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. 7:23.]

14297 (return)
[ Ibid. vii. 34-36.]

14297 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Ibid. vii. 34-36.]

14298 (return)
[ Ibid. viii. 117.]

14298 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Ibid. p. 117.]

14299 (return)
[ Æschyl. Pers. l. 343; Herod. vii. 89.]

14299 (return)
[ Æschyl. Pers. l. 343; Herod. vii. 89.]

14300 (return)
[ Herod. vii. 89-95; Diod. Sic. xi. 3, § 7.]

14300 (return)
[ Herod. vii. 89-95; Diod. Sic. xi. 3, § 7.]

14301 (return)
[ Herod. vii. 44.]

14301 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Herod. vii. 44.]

14302 (return)
[ Ibid. vii. 100, 128.]

14302 (return)
[ Ibid. vii. 100, 128.]

14303 (return)
[ Ibid. viii. 85.]

14303 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Ibid. viii. 85.]

14304 (return)
[ Ibid. viii. 17.]

14304 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, viii. 17.]

14305 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xi. 13, § 2: {’Aristeusai Phasi para men tois ‘El-lesin ‘Athnaious, para de, tois barbarois Sidonious}.]

14305 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xi. 13, § 2: {’Aristeusai Phasi para men tois ‘El-lesin ‘Athnaious, para de, tois barbarois Sidonious}.]

14306 (return)
[ Herod. viii. 84; Æschyl. Pers. ll. 415-7.]

14306 (return)
[ Herod. viii. 84; Æschyl. Pers. ll. 415-7.]

14307 (return)
[ Herod. viii. 86-90.]

14307 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Herod. viii. 86-90.]

14308 (return)
[ Ibid. ch. 90.]

14308 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, ch. 90.]

14309 (return)
[ Ibid. ch. 90.]

14309 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ibid. ch. 90.]

14310 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xi. 19, § 4.]

14310 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xi. 19, § 4.]

14311 (return)
[ Herod. ix. 96.]

14311 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. ix. 96.]

14312 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xi. 60, § 5, 6.]

14312 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xi. 60, § 5, 6.]

14313 (return)
[ So Diodorus (xi. 62, § 3); but the mention of Cyprus in line 6 renders this somewhat doubtful.]

14313 (return)
[ So Diodorus (xi. 62, § 3); but mentioning Cyprus in line 6 makes this a bit uncertain.]

14314 (return)
[ Thucyd. i. 110.]

14314 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Thucyd. i. 110.]

14315 (return)
[ See Ancient Monarchies, iii. 501.]

14315 (return)
[ See Ancient Monarchies, iii. 501.]

14316 (return)
[ See the Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum, i. 139-148.]

14316 (return)
[ See the Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum, i. 139-148.]

14317 (return)
[ Nos. 115, 116, 117, 119, 120.]

14317 (return)
[ Nos. 115, 116, 117, 119, 120.]

14318 (return)
[ Ibid. No. 118.]

14318 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same Source, No. 118.]

14319 (return)
[ Corp. Ins. Sem. i. 132, 145.]

14319 (return)
[ Corp. Ins. Sem. i. 132, 145.]

14320 (return)
[ Dionys. Halicarn. De Orat. Antiq. “Dinarch.” § 10.]

14320 (return)
[ Dionys. Halicarn. On Ancient Oratory. “Dinarch.” § 10.]

14321 (return)
[ Corp. Ins. Sem. i. 145, No. 119.]

14321 (return)
[ Corp. Ins. Sem. i. 145, No. 119.]

14322 (return)
[ See the Corpus Inscriptionum Græcarum, i. 126, No. 87.]

14322 (return)
[ See the Corpus Inscriptionum Græcarum, i. 126, No. 87.]

14323 (return)
[ Nefaheritis or Nefaa-ert. (See the author’s Story of Egypt, pp. 385, 386, and compare Ancient Monarchies, iii. 481, 482.)]

14323 (return)
[ Nefaheritis or Nefaa-ert. (See the author’s Story of Egypt, pp. 385, 386, and compare Ancient Monarchies, iii. 481, 482.)]

14324 (return)
[ Isocrates, Paneg. and Evag.; Theopompas, Fr. 111; Diod. Sic. xiv. 98; Ctesias, Exc. Pers. Fr. 29, § 63.]

14324 (return)
[ Isocrates, Paneg. and Evag.; Theopompus, Fr. 111; Diodorus Siculus xiv. 98; Ctesias, Exc. Pers. Fr. 29, § 63.]

14325 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xv. 9, § 2. (See Grote’s Hist. of Greece, x. 30, note 3.)]

14325 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xv. 9, § 2. (See Grote’s Hist. of Greece, x. 30, note 3.)]

14326 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xv. 9, § 2.]

14326 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xv. 9, § 2.]

14327 (return)
[ Isocrates, Paneg. § 161; Evag. §§ 23, 62.]

14327 (return)
[ Isocrates, Paneg. § 161; Evag. §§ 23, 62.]

14328 (return)
[ See Diod. Sic. xiv. 98; xv. 2; Ephorus Fr.; 134 Isocrates, Evag. §§ 75, 76.]

14328 (return)
[ See Diod. Sic. xiv. 98; xv. 2; Ephorus Fr.; 134 Isocrates, Evag. §§ 75, 76.]

14329 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 405.]

14329 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 405.]

14330 (return)
[ See Ancient Monarchies, iii. 504.]

14330 (return)
[ See Ancient Monarchies, iii. 504.]

14331 (return)
[ Ancient Monarchies, iii. 505, 506.]

14331 (return)
[ Ancient Monarchies, iii. 505, 506.]

14332 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xv. 90, § 3.]

14332 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xv. 90, § 3.]

14333 (return)
[ Ibid. xv. 92, § 5.]

14333 (return)
[ Ibid. xv. 92, § 5.]

14334 (return)
[ Ibid. xvi. 41, § 1.]

14334 (return)
[ Ibid. xvi. 41, § 1.]

14335 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvi. 42, § 2.]

14335 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvi. 42, § 2.]

14336 (return)
[ Ibid. xvi. 41, § 5.]

14336 (return)
[ Ibid. xvi. 41, § 5.]

14337 (return)
[ Ibid. xvi. 32, § 2.]

14337 (return)
[Ibid. xvi. 32, § 2.]

14338 (return)
[ Ibid. § 5.]

14338 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, § 5.]

14339 (return)
[ Ibid. xvi. 40, § 5, ad fin.]

14339 (return)
[ Same source xvi. 40, § 5, at the end.]

14340 (return)
[ Ibid. xvi. 44, § 6, ad fin.]

14340 (return)
[ Ibid. xvi. 44, § 6, ad fin.]

14341 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvi. § 5.]

14341 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvi. § 5.]

14342 (return)
[ Diodorus is our authority for all these facts (xvi. 45, § 1-6).]

14342 (return)
[ Diodorus is our source for all these details (xvi. 45, § 1-6).]

14343 (return)
[ See the author’s Story of Egypt, pp. 396-401.]

14343 (return)
[ See the author’s Story of Egypt, pp. 396-401.]

14344 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvi. 42, § 6; 46, § 3.]

14344 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvi. 42, § 6; 46, § 3.]

14345 (return)
[ Scylax, Periplus, § 104.]

14345 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Scylax, Periplus, § 104.]

14346 (return)
[ Ibid.]

14346 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source.]

14347 (return)
[ See Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 13, sub fin.; 15, sub fin.; 30, sub init.]

14347 (return)
[ See Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 13, sub fin.; 15, sub fin.; 30, sub init.]

14348 (return)
[ See Encycl. Brit. xviii. 809.]

14348 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ See Encycl. Brit. 18:809.]

14349 (return)
[ Quint. Curt. iv. 4; Justin, xi. 10. Diodorus by mistake makes Strato II. king of Tyre (xvii. 47, § 1).]

14349 (return)
[ Quint. Curt. iv. 4; Justin, xi. 10. Diodorus mistakenly identifies Strato II. as king of Tyre (xvii. 47, § 1).]

14350 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. i. 1, § 2.]

14350 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. i. 1, § 2.]

14351 (return)
[ See Grote, History of Greece, xii. 102.]

14351 (return)
[ See Grote, History of Greece, xii. 102.]

14352 (return)
[ Ibid. pp. 29-51.]

14352 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ibid. pp. 29-51.]

14353 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvii. 7.]

14353 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvii. 7.]

14354 (return)
[ Four hundred were actually brought to the relief of Miletus a few weeks later (Arrian, Exp. Alex. i. 18, § 5).]

14354 (return)
[ Four hundred were actually sent to help Miletus a few weeks later (Arrian, Exp. Alex. i. 18, § 5).]

14355 (return)
[ Ibid. § 4.]

14355 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Ibid. § 4.]

14356 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvii. 22; Arrian, Exp. Alex. i. 18-20.]

14356 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvii. 22; Arrian, Exp. Alex. i. 18-20.]

14357 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvii. 23-26; Arrian, Exp. Alex. i. 20-23.]

14357 (return)
[ Diodorus Siculus xvii. 23-26; Arrian, Expedition of Alexander i. 20-23.]

14358 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvii. 29, § 2; Arrian., Exp. Alex. ii. 1, § 1.]

14358 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvii. 29, § 2; Arrian., Exp. Alex. ii. 1, § 1.]

14359 (return)
[ See the remarks of Mr. Grote (History of Greece, xii. 142, 143.)]

14359 (return)
[ See the comments from Mr. Grote (History of Greece, xii. 142, 143.)]

14360 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvii. 29, § 4.]

14360 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvii. 29, § 4.]

14361 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. i. 20, § 1; Diod. Sic. i. 22, § 5.]

14361 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. i. 20, § 1; Diod. Sic. i. 22, § 5.]

14362 (return)
[ Arrian, ii. 8-13.]

14362 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Arrian, ii. 8-13.]

14363 (return)
[ Arrian, ii. 13, 87; Diod. Sic. xvii. 40, § 2.]

14363 (return)
[ Arrian, ii. 13, 87; Diod. Sic. xvii. 40, § 2.]

14364 (return)
[ As Ger-astartus, king of Aradus (Arrian, l.s.c.); Enylus, king of Byblus (ibid. ii. 20, § 1); and Azemileus, king of Tyre (ibid. ii. 15, ad fin.)]

14364 (return)
[ As Ger-astartus, king of Aradus (Arrian, l.s.c.); Enylus, king of Byblus (ibid. ii. 20, § 1); and Azemileus, king of Tyre (ibid. ii. 15, ad fin.)]

14365 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 13, ad fin.]

14365 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 13, ad fin.]

14366 (return)
[ Ibid. ii. 15, § 6.]

14366 (return)
[ Ibid. ii. 15, § 6.]

14367 (return)
[ Arrian, l.s.c.]

14367 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Arrian, l.s.c.]

14368 (return)
[ Ibid. ii. 15, § 7; Q. Curt. iv. 2, § 3.]

14368 (return)
[Ibid. ii. 15, § 7; Q. Curt. iv. 2, § 3.]

14369 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 16, ad fin.; Q. Curt. iv. 2, § 5; Justin, xi. 10.]

14369 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 16, at the end; Q. Curt. iv. 2, § 5; Justin, xi. 10.]

14370 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvii. 40, § 2.]

14370 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvii. 40, § 2.]

14371 (return)
[ See Diod. Sic. xv. 73, § 4; 77, § 4.]

14371 (return)
[ See Diod. Sic. xv. 73, § 4; 77, § 4.]

14372 (return)
[ In point of fact, he only obtained, towards the fleet which he collected against Tyre, twenty-three vessels that were not either Cyprian or Phoenician (Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 20, § 2).]

14372 (return)
[ In fact, he only managed to gather twenty-three ships for the fleet he assembled against Tyre that were neither Cyprian nor Phoenician (Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 20, § 2).]

14373 (return)
[ Herod. viii. 97.]

14373 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Herod. viii. 97.]

14374 (return)
[ Compare Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 15, § 7, with ii. 24, § 5.]

14374 (return)
[ Compare Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 15, § 7, with ii. 24, § 5.]

14375 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvii. 41, § 3.]

14375 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvii. 41, § 3.]

14376 (return)
[ Ibid. § 4.]

14376 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source § 4.]

14377 (return)
[ Q. Curt. iv. § 20; Diod. Sic. xvii. 41, § 1, 2.]

14377 (return)
[ Q. Curt. iv. § 20; Diod. Sic. xvii. 41, § 1, 2.]

14378 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvii. 40, § 5.]

14378 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvii. 40, § 5.]

14379 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 18, § 3.]

14379 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 18, § 3.]

14380 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 18, § 3.]

14380 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 18, § 3.]

14381 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvii. 42, § 1; Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 18, § 5.]

14381 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvii. 42, § 1; Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 18, § 5.]

14382 (return)
[ Arrian, ii. 18, sub fin.]

14382 (return)
[ Arrian, ii. 18, sub fin.]

14383 (return)
[ Ibid. ii. 19, § 1.]

14383 (return)
[ Ibid. ii. 19, § 1.]

14384 (return)
[ This seems to be Arrian’s meaning, when he says, {ai keraiai periklastheisaiexekhean es to pur osa es exapsin tes phlogus pareskeuasmena en} (ii. 19, § 4).]

14384 (return)
[ This seems to be Arrian’s meaning when he says, {and the horns, being adorned, were arranged for the fire as if prepared for incineration} (ii. 19, § 4).]

14385 (return)
[ Grote, History of Greece, xii. 185, 186.]

14385 (return)
[ Grote, History of Greece, xii. 185, 186.]

14386 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 418.]

14386 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 418.]

14387 (return)
[ Q. Curt. iv. 3, § 8.]

14387 (return)
[ Q. Curt. iv. 3, § 8.]

14388 (return)
[ Arrian, l.s.c.]

14388 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Arrian, l.s.c.]

14389 (return)
[ Arrian, ii. 20, § 1.]

14389 (return)
[ Arrian, ii. 20, § 1.]

14390 (return)
[ Ibid. § 2.]

14390 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Same source, § 2.]

14391 (return)
[ Arrian, ii. 20; § 3; Q. Curt. iv. 3, § 11.]

14391 (return)
[ Arrian, ii. 20; § 3; Q. Curt. iv. 3, § 11.]

14392 (return)
[ {’Epibibasas tois katastromasi ton upaspiston osoi ikanoi edokoun es to ergon} (Arrian, ii. 20, § 6).]

14392 (return)
[ {’They began to gather the troops as many as were able to contribute to the work} (Arrian, ii. 20, § 6).]

14393 (return)
[ The Tyrians had but eighty vessels against Alexander’s 224.]

14393 (return)
[ The Tyrians only had eighty ships against Alexander’s 224.]

14394 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 20, ad fin.]

14394 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 20, at the end.]

14395 (return)
[ Ibid. ii. 21, § 8.]

14395 (return)
[ Ibid. ii. 21, § 8.]

14396 (return)
[ Q. Curt. iv. 3, § 7-9.]

14396 (return)
[ Q. Curt. iv. 3, § 7-9.]

14397 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvii. 42, § 6; Q. Curt. l.s.c.]

14397 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvii. 42, § 6; Q. Curt. l.s.c.]

14398 (return)
[ See Kenrick, Phoenicia, pp. 421, 422.]

14398 (return)
[ See Kenrick, Phoenicia, pp. 421, 422.]

14399 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 21, § 1.]

14399 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 21, § 1.]

14400 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 21, § 4-7.]

14400 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 21, § 4-7.]

14401 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 21, § 8.]

14401 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 21, § 8.]

14402 (return)
[ Some editions of Arrian gave {Pasikratous tou Thourieos}, “Pasicrates the Thurian,” but the right reading is undoubtedly {tou Kourieos}, “the Curian, or king of Curium.” (See the note of Sintenis ad loc.)]

14402 (return)
[ Some editions of Arrian gave {Pasikratous tou Thourieos}, “Pasicrates the Thurian,” but the correct reading is definitely {tou Kourieos}, “the Curian, or king of Curium.” (See the note of Sintenis ad loc.)]

14403 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 22, § 2.]

14403 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 22, § 2.]

14404 (return)
[ Six triremes and all the quinqueremes (Arrian, ii. 22, § 3).]

14404 (return)
[ Six triremes and all the quinqueremes (Arrian, ii. 22, § 3).]

14405 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 22, § 5.]

14405 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 22, § 5.]

14406 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvii. 42, § 7.]

14406 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvii. 42, § 7.]

14407 (return)
[ Ibid. xvii. 45, § 4.]

14407 (return)
[ Ibid. xvii. 45, § 4.]

14408 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvii. 45, § 3.]

14408 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvii. 45, § 3.]

14409 (return)
[ Ibid. xvii. 43, § 7, 8.]

14409 (return)
[ Ibid. xvii. 43, § 7, 8.]

14410 (return)
[ Ibid. xvii. 44, § 4.]

14410 (return)
[ Ibid. xvii. 44, § 4.]

14411 (return)
[ Ibid. xvii. 44, § 1-3.]

14411 (return)
[ Ibid. xvii. 44, § 1-3.]

14412 (return)
[ Ibid. § 4.]

14412 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source § 4.]

14413 (return)
[ Ibid. xvii. 45, § 6.]

14413 (return)
[ Ibid. xvii. 45, § 6.]

14414 (return)
[ Ibid. xvii. 43, § 3.]

14414 (return)
[ Ibid. xvii. 43, § 3.]

14415 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 22, sub fin.]

14415 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 22, sub fin.]

14416 (return)
[ {Kateseise tou teikhous epi mega} (Ibid. ii. 23, § 1).]

14416 (return)
[ {The siege of the city at great length} (Ibid. ii. 23, § 1).]

14417 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvii. 46, § 1.]

14417 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvii. 46, § 1.]

14418 (return)
[ Arrian, ii. 23, § 2.]

14418 (return)
[ Arrian, ii. 23, § 2.]

14419 (return)
[ Ibid. ii. 23, § 5.]

14419 (return)
[Same source, ii. 23, § 5.]

14420 (return)
[ Not “the foremost,” as Diodorus says (xvii. 46, § 2).]

14420 (return)
[ Not “the foremost,” as Diodorus says (xvii. 46, § 2).]

14421 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 23, ad fin.]

14421 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 23, at the end.]

14422 (return)
[ Ibid. ii. 24, § 1.]

14422 (return)
[ Ibid. ii. 24, § 1.]

14423 (return)
[ Ibid.]

14423 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source.]

14424 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 24, § 4.]

14424 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. ii. 24, § 4.]

14425 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvii. 46, § 4.]

14425 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvii. 46, § 4.]

14426 (return)
[ So Arrian (l.s.c.) Diodorus reduces the number to thirteen thousand (xvii. 46, § 4).]

14426 (return)
[ So Arrian (l.s.c.) Diodorus lowers the figure to thirteen thousand (xvii. 46, § 4).]

14427 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvii. 46, § 5; Arrian, ii. 24, § 6.]

14427 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xvii. 46, § 5; Arrian, ii. 24, § 6.]

14428 (return)
[ See Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 428, note 3.]

14428 (return)
[ See Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 428, note 3.]

14429 (return)
[ See Diod. Sic. xvii. 46, § 6. The name Abd-elonim, “servant of the gods,” is common. The Greeks and Romans generally render it by Abdalonymus.]

14429 (return)
[ See Diod. Sic. xvii. 46, § 6. The name Abd-elonim, “servant of the gods,” is common. The Greeks and Romans usually translate it as Abdalonymus.]

14430 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. iii. 6, § 3.]

14430 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. iii. 6, § 3.]

14431 (return)
[ Ibid. vi. 1, § 6.]

14431 (return)
[ Ibid. vi. 1, § 6.]

14432 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. vi. 22, § 4.]

14432 (return)
[ Arrian, Exp. Alex. vi. 22, § 4.]

14433 (return)
[ Ibid. vii. 19, § 3.]

14433 (return)
[ Ibid. vii. 19, § 3.]

14434 (return)
[ Ibid. § 5.]

14434 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source § 5.]

14435 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xviii. 3, § 1.]

14435 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xviii. 3, § 1.]

14436 (return)
[ Ibid. 43, § 2.]

14436 (return)
[ Ibid. 43, § 2.]

14437 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xix. 58, § 1.]

14437 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xix. 58, § 1.]

14438 (return)
[ So Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 433. Compare Diod. Sic. xviii. 37, § 4.]

14438 (return)
[ So Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 433. Compare Diod. Sic. xviii. 37, § 4.]

14439 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xix. 58, § 2-4.]

14439 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xix. 58, § 2-4.]

14440 (return)
[ Ibid. 61, § 6.]

14440 (return)
[ Ibid. 61, § 6.]

14441 (return)
[ Plutarch, Vit. Demetr. § 32.]

14441 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Plutarch, Life of Demetrius § 32.]

14442 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xxx. 17; Polyb. v. 40.]

14442 (return)
[ Diod. Sic. xxx. 17; Polyb. v. 40.]

14443 (return)
[ Polyb. v. 60.]

14443 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Polyb. v. 60.]

14444 (return)
[ Ibid. v. 62.]

14444 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Same source, p. 62.]

14445 (return)
[ Polyb. xvi. 18; Joseph. Ant. Jud. xii. 3, § 3.]

14445 (return)
[ Polyb. xvi. 18; Joseph. Ant. Jud. xii. 3, § 3.]

14446 (return)
[ See Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 436.]

14446 (return)
[ See Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 436.]

14447 (return)
[ Herod. i. 1. Egypt never sent trading ships into the Mediterranean. All her commerce with Syria, Asia Minor, and Europe was carried on either in Greek or Phoenician bottoms.]

14447 (return)
[ Herod. i. 1. Egypt never sent trading ships into the Mediterranean. All her trade with Syria, Asia Minor, and Europe was conducted either on Greek or Phoenician ships.]

14448 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, l.s.c.]

14448 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, l.s.c.]

14449 (return)
[ As that of the Red Sea, Arabia, and the East African coast.]

14449 (return)
[ Like that of the Red Sea, Arabia, and the East African coast.]

14450 (return)
[ 2 Macc. iv. 18.]

14450 (return)
[ 2 Macc. iv. 18.]

14451 (return)
[ Ibid. verses 44-50.]

14451 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, verses 44-50.]

14452 (return)
[ Gesenius, Mon. Phoen. pls. 32-34.]

14452 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Gesenius, Mon. Phoen. pls. 32-34.]

14453 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, pp. 437, 438.]

14453 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, pp. 437, 438.]

14454 (return)
[ Livy, xxvii. 30.]

14454 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Livy, 27.30.]

14455 (return)
[ 2 Macc. iv. 49.]

14455 (return)
[ 2 Macc. iv. 49.]

14456 (return)
[ 1 Macc. iii. 34-36; 2 Macc. viii. 9; Joseph. Ant. Jud. xii. 7, § 2,]

14456 (return)
[ 1 Macc. iii. 34-36; 2 Macc. viii. 9; Joseph. Ant. Jud. xii. 7, § 2,]

14457 (return)
[ 2 Macc. viii. 11.]

14457 (return)
[ 2 Macc. viii. 11.]

14458 (return)
[ 1 Macc. iii. 41.]

14458 (return)
[ 1 Macc. iii. 41.]

14459 (return)
[ 2 Macc. viii. 25; Joseph. Ant. Jud. xii. 7, § 4.]

14459 (return)
[ 2 Macc. viii. 25; Joseph. Ant. Jud. xii. 7, § 4.]

14460 (return)
[ Strab. xvii. 2, § 22.]

14460 (return)
[ Strab. xvii. 2, § 22.]

14461 (return)
[ Joseph. Ant. Jud. xii. 4, § 3.]

14461 (return)
[ Joseph. Ant. Jud. xii. 4, § 3.]

14462 (return)
[ Ibid. § 4.]

14462 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, § 4.]

14463 (return)
[ By Theodotus in B.C. 219 (Polyb. v. 61, § 5), by Cleopatra, queen of Syria, about B.C. 85 (Joseph. Ant. Jud. xiii. 13, § 2), by Tigranes in B.C. 83 (ibid. xiii. 16, § 4), &c.]

14463 (return)
[ By Theodotus in 219 B.C. (Polyb. v. 61, § 5), by Cleopatra, queen of Syria, around 85 B.C. (Joseph. Ant. Jud. xiii. 13, § 2), by Tigranes in 83 B.C. (ibid. xiii. 16, § 4), etc.]

14464 (return)
[ Justin, Hist. Philipp. xl. 1; Appian, Syriaca, § 48.]

14464 (return)
[ Justin, Hist. Philipp. xl. 1; Appian, Syriaca, § 48.]

14465 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 438.]

14465 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 438.]

14466 (return)
[ Or, sometimes, under a proprætor.]

14466 (return)
[ Or, occasionally, under a proprætor.]

14467 (return)
[ Joseph. Ant. Jud. xiv. 10, § 2.]

14467 (return)
[ Joseph. Ant. Jud. xiv. 10, § 2.]

14468 (return)
[ Ibid. xv. 4, § 1, ad fin.]

14468 (return)
[ Ibid. xv. 4, § 1, at the end.]

14469 (return)
[ Ibid. xiv. 12, §§ 4, 5.]

14469 (return)
[ Ibid. xiv. 12, §§ 4, 5.]

14470 (return)
[ Mommsen, History of Rome, iv. 113-115, Engl. Tr.; Merivale, Roman Empire, i. 36.]

14470 (return)
[ Mommsen, History of Rome, iv. 113-115, Engl. Tr.; Merivale, Roman Empire, i. 36.]

14471 (return)
[ Thucyd. i. 4.]

14471 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Thucyd. i. 4.]

14472 (return)
[ See the author’s Sixth Oriental Monarchy, pp. 178-180.]

14472 (return)
[ See the author’s Sixth Oriental Monarchy, pp. 178-180.]

14473 (return)
[ Dio Cass. Hist. Rom. xlviii. 25.]

14473 (return)
[ Dio Cass. Hist. Rom. xlviii. 25.]

14474 (return)
[ Ibid. § 26.]

14474 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source § 26.]

14475 (return)
[ Joseph. Ant. Jud. xiv. 13.]

14475 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Joseph. Ant. Jud. xiv. 13.]

14476 (return)
[ Dio. Cass. xlviii. 39-41.]

14476 (return)
[ Dio. Cass. xlviii. 39-41.]

14477 (return)
[ Ibid. liv. 7.]

14477 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ibid. liv. 7.]

14478 (return)
[ Ramsay, in Smith’s Dict. of Greek and Rom. Geography, i. 11.]

14478 (return)
[ Ramsay, in Smith’s Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography, i. 11.]

14479 (return)
[ Suidas ad voc. {Paulos Turios}.]

14479 (return)
[ Suidas regarding the term. {Paulos Turios}.]

14480 (return)
[ Mark vii. 24-30. Compare Matt. xv. 21-28.]

14480 (return)
[ Mark 7:24-30. Compare Matthew 15:21-28.]

14481 (return)
[ Acts xii. 20, 21.]

14481 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Acts 12:20, 21.]

14482 (return)
[ Acts xi. 19.]

14482 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Acts 11:19.]

14483 (return)
[ Ibid. xxi. 3-7.]

14483 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Ibid. 21, 3-7.]

14484 (return)
[ See Robertson, History of the Christian Church, i. 195, 196.]

14484 (return)
[ See Robertson, History of the Christian Church, i. 195, 196.]

14485 (return)
[ Ibid. p. 201.]

14485 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, p. 201.]

14486 (return)
[ Some doubts have been entertained as to whether Porphyry was really a Tyrian, but his own statement (Vit. Plotini, ii. 107), backed as it is by the testimony of Eunapius and Suidas, should be regarded as settling the question.]

14486 (return)
[ There have been some doubts about whether Porphyry was actually from Tyre, but his own claim (Vit. Plotini, ii. 107), supported by Eunapius and Suidas, should be considered definitive.]

14487 (return)
[ Mason, in Smith’s Dict. of Greek and Rom. Biography, iii. 502.]

14487 (return)
[ Mason, in Smith’s Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography, iii. 502.]

14488 (return)
[ See the article on PORPHYRIUS in Smith’s Dict. of Greek and Rom. Biography, iii. 498-502.]

14488 (return)
[ See the article on PORPHYRIUS in Smith’s Dict. of Greek and Rom. Biography, iii. 498-502.]

14489 (return)
[ Strab. xvi. 2, § 24.]

14489 (return)
[ Strab. xvi. 2, § 24.]

14490 (return)
[ See the lines quoted by Kenrick (Phoenicia, p. 440, note) from Cramer’s Anecdota Græca (iv. 19, § 6):—]

14490 (return)
[ See the lines quoted by Kenrick (Phoenicia, p. 440, note) from Cramer’s Anecdota Græca (iv. 19, § 6):—]

{Oi tes Stoas bullousin ‘Akademian, Purronas outoi, pantas o Stegeirites. ‘Alloi de touton Phoinikes te kai Suroi.}]

{Oi tes Stoas bullousin ‘Akademian, Purronas outoi, pantas o Stegeirites. ‘Alloi de touton Phoinikes te kai Suroi.}

14491 (return)
[ Strabo, l.s.c.]

14491 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Strabo, l.s.c.]

14492 (return)
[ Ibid. Strabo’s words are: {Nuni de pases kai tes alles philosophias euporian polu pleisten labein estin ek touton ton poleon.}]

14492 (return)
[ Ibid. Strabo says: {Now, regarding peace and other philosophies, there is much to gain from these cities.}]

14493 (return)
[ Smith’s Dict. of Greek and Rom. Biography, ii. 417.]

14493 (return)
[ Smith’s Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography, ii. 417.]

14494 (return)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 440.]

14494 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 440.]

14495 (return)
[ Suidas, s.v. {Paulos Turios}.]

14495 (return)
[ Suidas, s.v. {Paulos Turios}.]

14496 (return)
[ Smith’s Dict. of Greek and Rom. Biography, ii. 1000.]

14496 (return)
[ Smith’s Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography, ii. 1000.]

14497 (return)
[ Smith’s Gibbon, ii. 317.]

14497 (return)
[ Smith’s Gibbon, ii. 317.]

14498 (return)
[ Heineccius, Ant. Rom. Synt. Proëm, § 45.]

14498 (return)
[ Heineccius, Ant. Rom. Synt. Proëm, § 45.]

14499 (return)
[ Ibid.]

14499 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source.]

14500 (return)
[ See Eckhel, Doctr. Num. Vet. iii. 366; Mionnet, Description des Médailles, Supplement.]

14500 (return)
[ See Eckhel, Doctr. Num. Vet. iii. 366; Mionnet, Description des Médailles, Supplement.]

14501 (return)
[ Note that the “Syro-Phoenician woman” who conversed with our Lord is spoken of as also {’Ellenis}, one whose language was Greek (Mark vii. 26).]

14501 (return)
[Note that the “Syro-Phoenician woman” who spoke with our Lord is also referred to as {’Ellenis}, which indicates that she spoke Greek (Mark 7:26).]

14502 (return)
[ De situ orbis, i. 12; “Sidon adhuc opulenta.”]

14502 (return)
[ De situ orbis, i. 12; “Sidon is still prosperous.”]

14503 (return)
[ Ulpian, Digest. Leg. de Cens. tit. 15.]

14503 (return)
[ Ulpian, Digest. Leg. de Cens. tit. 15.]

14504 (return)
[ Exp. totius Mundi in Hudson’s Geographi Minores, iii. 6.]

14504 (return)
[ Exp. totius Mundi in Hudson’s Geographi Minores, iii. 6.]

14505 (return)
[ Hieronymus, Comment. ad Ezek. xxxvi. 7.]

14505 (return)
[ Hieronymus, Comment. on Ezekiel xxxvi. 7.]

14506 (return)
[ Hieronymus, Comment. ad Ezek. xxvii. 2.]

14506 (return)
[ Hieronymus, Comment. ad Ezek. xxvii. 2.]

14507 (return)
[ Ezek. xxvi. 14.]

14507 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Ezek. 26:14.]

14508 (return)
[ Euseb. Vita Constantin. Magni, iii. 58.]

14508 (return)
[ Euseb. Life of Constantine the Great, iii. 58.]






Download ePUB

If you like this ebook, consider a donation!