PHILOLOGUS
xiv. 106). Antony bestowed on Cleopatra the whole
coast from the Egyptian desert to the Eleurherus except
the cities Tyreand Sidon (36 B . c . ; Plut. Ant. 36; Jos.
BJ i. 1 8 5 ) . Augustus (in 30 B. c. ) added to the kingdom
of Herod Gaza, Anthedon, Joppa, and Strato’s Tower ;
the last Herod rebuilt and named CEsarea. In the
division of Herods kingdom Gaza was put immediately
under the governor of Syria ; the same disposition was
made of Joppa and Caesarea when Archelaus was de-
posed (6 A . D . ) ; Ashdod and Jamnia were given to
Salomp; upon her death their revenues were paid to
the empress Livia and subsequently to Tiberius (see
Schurer, W Y N 278). Ashkelon enjoyed the privileges
of a free city during all these changes, maintaining the
liberties it had gained in 104 R.C. In 66 A . D . , at the
beginning of the war with Rome, the Jews in Czsarea
were slaughtered by their fellow-townsmen, with the
connivance of the procurator, Gessius F1orus.l In
revenge the insurgents set fire to Ptolemais and Ash-
kelon. and demolished Anthedon and Gaza,2 with many
unwalled towns in the country (B/ ii. 18 I ) . Joppa was
taken by the Romans under Cestius Gallus and its
Jewish population massacred (B/ ii. 18 I O ) : it was re-
occupied by the Jews (see B/ ii. ZO4), who held it until
its destruction by Vespasian (BJiii. 9 2 8 ) .
After the destruction of Jerusalem in 70, Jamnia,
which since the Asmonzean times had been inhabited
chiefly by Jews, and Lydda became the seats of the
most famous Jewish schools: and in the other towns
of this region there was a considerable Jewish popnla-
tion, among whom Jewish Christians are frequently
mentioned.
Calmet, ‘ Dissertatio de origine et nominihus Philistrearum,‘
in Proleg. et dissertt., etc., ed. Mansi, 11%-189: Movers Die
Ph#nizier, 13J 2 7 3 (1841) ; Bertheau: Zur
20. Literature. Gesch. deer Isrueliten, 186-2m, 280-285, 306-
308, 354J (1842); Hit& Urgesch. Y. M y
thol. der Pplistiier (1845); (;VI1 3 6 8 i z o s etc. (1869);
A. Arnold, Philister’ in Ersch u. Gruber’s Encyklopadie,
Sect. iii. 23 321-329 ; A. Knohel, Volkeytnfel der Genesis, 98,
208fl, z r 5 3 (1850); Stark, Gana u. die philistdische Kiisfe
(1852); [older literature in full fl 31j: 244 3 3 5 3 5 0 3 8
61rJ:l; A. Baur, ‘ Philister’ in Ri)el?m’s HWB; cp DerProfhct
Amos, 76-94 (1847); Kohler, Bib. Gesch. 1 8 1 , s (1875): De
Goeje, Het tiende Hoofdstuk van Genesis, T h T 42338,
especially 2 5 7 8 (1870) ; Fr. W., Schultz, ‘,Philister ’ in PREP)
11618.656 (1883) ; Kneucker, Philistaer in Schenkel’s BL
4541.559: ‘Ewald G V f @ )1 3 4 8 3 (18,64) 3 4 2 8 etc. (1866);
Schwally, Die dasse der Phihstler, ZWT34 1 0 3 3 (r891);
Ehers, Aegypten unddie Biicher Mosis, 1 3 0 8(1868) : Prugsch,
Egy$tundev the Pharaohs, ch. 1 4 8 (1881); W. M. Muller, As.
u. Eur. ch. 26-29 (1893) : ‘Die Urheimat der Philister’ : ‘ Der
Papyrus Golenischeff’ : ‘ Die Chronologie der Philistereinwan-
derung,’ in MVG vol. 5 ‘pt. I (IP) i ,H. Winckler, G I 1 2 1 6 s
(1895); W. J. Beecher, Philintmes, in Hastings’ D B 3844-848;
Schiirer, G/V(31 2 5s 22J etc. G. F. M.
PHILOLOGUS (@l,4oAoroc),greeted in Rom. 1 6 1 5 ,
together with J ULIA [q.”.]. It IS a common slave-
name, and occurs not unfrequently in the inscriptions
of the imperial household ( C I L 6 4 1 1 6 , etc). According
t o Pseudo-Hippolytus he was one of the seventy dis-
ciples, and tradition makes him bishop of Sinope.
PHILOSOPHY. See H ELLENISM , W ISDOM LITERA-
TURE.
PHINEES. I. I Esd. 5 5 2 Esd. 1 zb, also I Esd. 8 2 2 8
= Ezra7 5 8 I PHINEHAS ($ 3), I.
2. I Esd.531, KVPhinoe=Eera249 PASEAH, 2.
3. I Esd.863=Ezra833 PHINEHAS, 3.
4. 2 Esd. 12a. See P HINEHAS , 2.
PHINEHAS (D?!’?, once by!& I S. 1 3 ; @[E]INEEC
[BAFL]).
The name is very un-Hebraic, and since the mother
of Phinehas ben Eleazar is described (Ex. 6 3 5 ) as one
1. Is the name of the daughters of Putiel (cp Poti-
Eggptian or phera‘), it is plausible to seek for
Hebrew? an Egyptian origin. Hence Lauth
(ZDMG 25 [1871], 139), followed by
Nestle (Eigennamen. 112 [1876]), and formerly by
1 See also the slaughterat Ashkelon and Ptolemais, SJii. 185.
2 In the case of Gaza, at least, this demolition can have been
but partial ; see Schiirer, 288.
3727
PHINEHAS
Cheyne (Proph. 144),explained Phinehas as ‘ the
negro,’ the corresponding Egyptian form being well-
attested (see § 2). All such theories, however, seem
to be inferior in probability to the rival hypothesis.
The present writer ventures to think that, if the name were
Egyptian, it must have honorific meaning. We might perhaps
suppose on19 to he an early corruption of my9, which in nj9y
(ZAPHNATH-PAANEAH) may he a misvocalisation of the
Egyptian name Pianhi (or some similar form); 0 and y were
often confounded. But considering that the evidence before
us (see MOSES, B 6 ) seems to favour a N. Arabian origin for
Moses and his relatives, and that ‘ Phinehas’ in the Hexateuch
is the name not only of an individual, hut also of a hill wit:
which not ;he individual hut his father (though ‘Eleazar
really’comes from a clankme) is associated,’ also that the
J.evites certainly had Jerahmeelite affinities, and that the father
of the second Phinehas bears a name which is prohahly a mutila-
tion of Jerahmeel, it becomes more probable that o n j ~is to
be explained as a mutilated and corrupt form (through iring) of
5 f l ~ n i(Jerahme’el).
- The name Jerahme’el could of course be
given both to an individual and to a locality. Cp TIMNATH-
HERES. PUTIEL(cp note 3 below), is & with the afformative
5 ~ I. t is possible, however, that Putiel and POTIPHERA ( q . ~ . )
were early explained as = ‘ devoted to El,’ or ‘ to Re‘.’ On the
supposed Ephraimite connection of the second Phinehas see
SHILOH, and note that ‘Epirraim’ is not nnfrequently a cor-
ruption of ‘ Jerahmeel’ (e.g., Judg. 17 I 191 I S. 1 I ) .
T. K. C.
On the assumption, however, that the name Phinehas
is of Egyptian origin the following details deserve
2. a second consideration.
It seems to stand for Egyptian
answer to the pe(’)-n&ssi,2 later without the vocalic
question. ending, in Coptic letters ~ E N ~ H (cpC
Ptoemphnneis, Ptol. iv. 7 34, mutilated Ptemphe, Plin.
6 192, ‘ the country of the negro ’).
The r of the biblical punctuation could he an archaic render-
ing of E , which stands mostly for old 2. The fact that the
article is often written @:i or even p & ~Liehl.
, 884 add.) like the
demonstrative must not be misunderstood : it is only an attempt
at expressing the helping sound 6 before two double con-
sonants notwithstanding the biblical I-a scriptio plena which
seems io show that the name was felt to be foreign. The
meaning ‘the negro’ does not imply black skin, the desig-
nation n(e)&siapplying also to all brownish Hamitic tribes of
Eastern Africa (WMM, As. u. Eur. 112). Therefore, the name
means nothing hut ‘a child of darker (brunette) corn lexion.’
The name hegins to appear in dynasty 18 and gecomes
most frequent in dynasty 19 to 21. By the time of dynasty
26 (ahout 666 B.c.) it seems to he rare, if not ,obsolete. It
was superseded by P-ek6S (mxucis), ‘the Cushite.
W. M. M.
Son of Eleazarand of one ofthe daughters of Putiel.8
I.
H e is mentioned a s accomnanvine the Israelites aeainst
Midian (Nu.316 fl),and as sent to
o&t:yEe. admonish the trans-Jordanic Israelites
for erecting their altar bv the < lordan
L ,
(Jos.221330 8 ) . He is, however, more especially
renowned for his zeal and energy at Shittim in the
matter of the Midianitess COZRI ( q . ~ . ,Nu. 2 5 6 fl),
to which repeated allusion is made in later Judaism, cp
Ps. lO630f. I Macc. 2 2 6 (@vews [A]) and Ecclus. 4523.
T h e story (the opening of which is lost) is a later
addition by P to the already composite 2 5 1 - 5 (JE),and
is probably an artificial attempt to antedate and fore-
shadow the zealous endeavours of Nehemiah to purify
the remnants of the Jewish G d a h (cp Bertholet, SfeZhng
a?. ZsraeZifen, 147). See N UMBERS , 5 7? and Oxford
Hex. ad 106.
1 On the analogy of Josh. 19 50 we may assume that the hill
of Phinehas (Jerahmeel) in Josh. 24 33 was traditionally
assigned to Eleazar. Originally, however, 7 1 ~ 5must
~ have
been $ ~ [ * l y ;~ i.e.,
y it was a clan-name.
2 Written mostly &ar\\7$+
3 For a view of the name Putiel which implies two stages in
the history of the name, see above, I. According to the
ordinary view. the second of the two stages represents the
entire history of the name. Both views are illustrated hy the
fact that in Eg.-Aram. inscriptions and papyri of the fifth and
fourth century B.C. ~ 1 9 ‘devoted
, to,’ appears in the form ED,
e.g., 3 ~ ~ (‘of
~ 1 Isis,’etc.).
9 An earlier example is , i ~ ~ ~Gk.
( i n
inscr. rrarourprs) in an inscription found at Teima in Aiahia
(CIS ii. no. 113).
3728
 PHINEHAS
The importance of Phinehas in P lies in the fact that he is in
the direct line from Aaron, and hence (as the father of Ahishua)
enters into the genealogy of the high- riests ( I Ch. 6 4 [5 301 50
[6 351 Ezra 7 5 = I Esd. 8 2 2 Ksd. 126 Phrnees). The Chronicler
moreover, speaks of him as the ruler over the porters 'in tim;
past' ( I Ch. 9 20). In the days of the 'return ' the h'ne Phinehas
form one of the priestly classes (Ezra 8 z = I Esd. 5 5 8 29, +pas
[B;, PHIHRES), at the head of whom stands Gershom (see
GERSHOM, GERSHON).
Like his father Eleazar, Phinehas rarely appears
previous to P. In Judg.2028 the statement that h e
stood before Yahwb in the days of the Judges is no
doubt a gloss (cp S HILOH) ; the whole chapter in its
present form is post-exilic. ( C p Moore, Judges, 434,
and see J UDGES , 5 13.) Ancient, on the other hand,
is the announcement affixed to Jos. 24 (G)of the death
of Eleazar and his burial in the GIBEAHOF PHINEHAS
[q.n.] which wa given to Phinehas in the hill-country
of Ephriain (n. 3 3 ) . @BAL adds also that Phinehas
himself was afterwards buried in the same ' Gibeah '
(PY yaaaap [-a0 [A], y~ paap, L] TG [yi Bab] l a w &
[baud A]) : Dt. 106 (Eleazar succeeds Aaron a t
Moserah) is probably also E.
2. Phinehas b. Eli2 and his brother H OPHNI [ p . ~ . ]
were 'sons of Belial ' who, for their wickedness and
wantonness towards the off'erers of sacrifices. incurred
the wrath of Yahwk and perished together a t Eben-ezer
when the ark was taken by the Philistines ( I S. 1-4).
T h z son of Phinehas born upon that fateful day receives
the name I CHABOD [g.u.] . PHLEaON ( @ A E r W N ) is saluted in Rom.1614.
According to Budde's analysis (SSOT), the old narrative in
I S. 4 related the loss of the ark without further comment ;
it, is a later writer (E?) who in 2J ascribes the disa-ter to the
wickedness of Eli's sons and to their father's laxity (esp. 3 146),
and finally it is a Dt. writer who lays even greater stress
upon their iniquity and actually foreshadows their fate. There
is much to be said, however, in favour of H. P. Smith's
view that I S. 212.17 22-25 rz7-36 ?I, 416-71 is a fragment
of an independent history of the Elida This torso (which
is already composite) contains two peculiarities : (a) the
association of the family with Moses, and (6) the prominence of
Shiloh. I t may, therefore, be conjectured that this narrative
formerly stood in t h e closest connection with another in Judg.
1Sl: where, too, a descendant of Moses and the foundation of a
shrine (perhap5 in the original story that not of Dan but of
Shiloh) play an important part.3 The Mosaic associations and
the unique description of the power of the ark ( I S. 4 5 8 ) may
further suggest that the narrative is a fragment of that account
of the Exodus a trace of which survives in Nu. 10 29-36 (itself
also coiuposite); cp EXODUS i., $ 5 8 , KADESH, $ 3.
Another son, Ahitub, was the father of Ahiah
( = A h i n ~ e l e c h ) who
, ~ appears as a priest in the time of
Saul ( I S.143).5 It is a remarkable fact that the
famoiis line of priests from Eli to Abiathar is ignored in
the later genealogies, with the curious exception of
2 Esd. 1 I, where Phinehas b. Heli ( =Eli) and Phinehas
b. Eleazar occur in the ancestry of Ezra (see G ENEA -
LOGIES i., § 7 [4]).
An interesting question arises as to the precise
relation between Phinehas ( I ) and (2). T h e latter,
according to M T a n Ephraimite, seems to disappear
from history only to be represented in a later age by the
former, a shadowy and unreal character whom also
tradition connects with Ephraim. At all events the
iniquity of the Ephraimite son of Eli (cp esp. I S .
2 226) is amply atoned for in later tradition by the zeal
(cp esp. N u . 2 5 6 f l ) of the younger namesake. T h a t
1 Prof. Cheyne, however, proposes to read 'Gibeah of
Jerahmeel,' regarding both ' Phinehas' and 'Eleazar' as cor-
ru tions of clan-names (see $ I).
1:Eli's origin is not given, no doubt because he was previ-
ously mentioned in the longer narrative of which I S. 1 8 in its
present form is an excerpt. Marq. (Fund. I Z ~ recognises
) the
traces of a double tradition in the very full notices given in v. T
(see ELKANAH i., J E R O H A M i. SAMUEL).Is ZI. I a confused
combination of marginal notes kiving the parentage and origin
of both Elkanah (a.I ) and Eli (u. 3) ? [Note, however, the view
respecting the name Eli in B I and compare SHII.OH.]
3 For a parallel but somiwhat different theory depending
on emended texts see MICAH SHILOH ' cp also MOSES.
4 Prof. Cheyne'has suggedd that bdth Ahiah and Ahimelech
may be popular corruptions of Jerahmeel.
5 The statement, perha s, does not helong to the original
document (J). It has notling to do with t h e chapter, and is
more probably a gloss introduced on account of the ' priest' in
zm. 19 366.
3729
PHCENICIA
(I) is an image of the son of Eli is denied however by
We. (ProI.('j 142), but thme are a t all events certain
considerations which point to a connection between the
two. The names Eli, Hophni, and Phinehas are of
the same un-Hebraic cast as Moses and Gershom, and
(unless we have recourse to emendation) find their only
explanation from Egyptian, or from S . Palestinian
dialects (Sabrean, Sinaitic, etc.) ; the tradition in I S . 2 27
(although due to RD ; see We., I.c. ) seems, moreover, to
connect the house of Eli with Moses (cp also Jochebed
and Phinehas' son ICHABOD [ q . ~ . ] ) . ' T h e relation of
Phinehas b. Eli to Phinehas the grandson of Aarnn
finds an analogy in the cases of Eliezer and tiershoni
b'ne Moses compared with Eleazar and Gershon b n e
Aaron.2 T h e conjecture is perhaps a plausible one that
the ' stone of help' (Eben-ezer) in I S. 4 has some connec-
tion with the grave of Eleazar (Josh. 24 32). also the burial-
place of the Aaronite Phinehas; note the explanation
of the name in I S. 712.
3. Eleazar b. Phinehas, a priest temp. Ezra (Ezra 8 33= I Esd.
863, PHINEER).
T . K . C . , $ I ; W.M.M.,$2; S.A.C..§3.
PHINOE (+!NO€), I Esd. 531 RV, AV PHIXEES;
See PASEAH, 2.
PHISON (+[E]ICWN [BKA]), Ecclus. 2425 AV, RV
PISHON. See PISON.
C p ROMANS (E PISTLE). His name occurs in the
apocryphal lists of the 'seventy' given by Pseudo-
Dorotheus and Pseudo- Hippolytus. Tradition made
him bishop of Marathon, and the Greek church com-
memorates his martyrdom on April 8th.
PHGBE (+oIBH), the 'sister,' 'deaconess' (RVmg. :
AIAKONOC) of the church at Cenchreae, who, according
to Rom. ISxJ, had been a 'helper [or 'patroness'] of
many,' includiug the writer. See further, R OMANS and
(for the nature of her diaconate) DEACON.
PHENICIA.
CONTENTS.
Names ($ I). Trade, art, navigation ($8 7-9).
Origin and nationality (5 2). Religion (gp TO-15).
Beginning of history ($ 3). Constitution ($ 16).
List of towns (g 4). Sources ($5 17).
Egyptian dominion ($ 5). History (Bli 18-22).
Phcenician colonies ( 5 6). Bibliography ($ 23).
By the Phenicians are meant the inhabitants of the
commercial coast towns of Canaan. T h e name is of
1. Names. Greek origin. For a long time its proto-
type was thought t o have been found in the
Egyptian Fen&-u ( vocalisation unknown), hut it has
since been shown (notably by W. M. Muller, Ar. u.
EUY.208J) that this Egyptian word is not the name
of a nation but a poetical designation of the (Asiatic)
barbarians-possibly indeed only a traditional scribal
error for Fehu. T h e name Qoivr$ is rather a Gk.
derivative from @ O L Y ~ S ,' blood-red,' with the common
old suffix, -LK.
The name Phcenix is by no means rare in the ancient Grecian
world as a place-name indicating the presence of a reddish
colour. Thus there was a brook Phcenix near Thermopyk, a
mount Phcenix in Baeotia and in Caria, a town Phcenikk in
Epirus, and so on (cp Meyer GA 2, $ gzjwhere
i it is out of the
question to suppose that ' Ptkenician ' settlements are meant.
'This name was given by the Greeks to the Canaanite
seafaring men, as well as to the most highly-prized of
all their imports, purple, and to the palm, which was
likewise introduced by them (first a t Delos, Od. 6103).
Probably @ o b t [ denoted first the purple, then the
' purple-men,' and finally the tree they imported.
1 The identification of these names has been also made by
Wellh. CHPl 371 (1899). See also ICHABOD, JOCHEBED.
2 If Eli's genealogy has indeed found its way into I S. 1I (see
5 2 , n. I , above), we might venture to find a trace of it in
mi*11,which name is no other than Jerahmeel. Eli may have
been a Jerahmeelite ; the relation between the Kenites, Jerah-
meelites, and &her clans of the south appears to have heen a
Close One (See JEKAHLIEEL, 5 3).
3730
 PHCENICIA
The Greek genealogic poetry provided the Phcenicians with
a n eponym-Phcenix king of Sidon,-who was identified with a
Cretan god and hero Phoinix, whose daughter Europa, origin-
al1.y a Bceotian and Cretan goddess, thus became a Sidonian
princess. For what reason Cadmus, the son of Agenor the
eponym and founder of the Cadmeia of Thehes, was made the
brother of Phcenix we do not know: he had at any rate,
nothing to do with Phmnicia. At a still later'time Cadmus
became the brother of Europa which resulted in the latter's
becoming the daughter of Aienor, and her father Phcenix
becoming her brother. A further analysis of this legend does
not belong here; cp Meyer, (;A 2 9 3 3 The Latin Pcenus is
prohahly rather a contraction of ' Phoinix' than an older form
without the suffix.
Kaft, which frequently occurs in the Egyptian in-
scriptions of the New Empire, passed for a long time
as another old name for Phoenicia; % O W ~ K ~is thus
rendered in the hieroglyphic text in the bilingual decree
of Canopus. There are cogent reasons, however, for
rejecting this view, and seeking for Kaft outside the
Semitic world, perhaps in Cilicia (cp C APHTOR, 4 ) .
T h e name may be connected with the enigmatical name
JAPHETH [ q . ~ . ] ,and the Gk. ' I & m r o s (the name of a
Cilician god, in Steph. Byz., S.V. "AGauaand 'Ayx~dXq).
In the OT the Phcenicians generally are named
nm*x, Sidonians; for instance Itoba'al, king of Tyre,
is called ' King of the Sidonians' in I K. 1631 ; c p
J u d g . 1 0 6 1 ~1 8 7 r K . 5 ~ 0111533 z K . 2 3 1 3 ; and in
the genealcgy of the nations, Gen. 101s (cp Judg. 33=
Josh. 134-6). In the same way King Hiram 11. of
Tyre is called in an inscription p n x ~ S D , ' King of the
Sidonians,' and on coins of the time of Antiochus IV.
Tyre is called o j l x ow, ' the metropolis of the Sidonians '
-Le., Phcenicians. I n Homer the Phoenicians are
often called Z d J v m (Il. 6290 Od. 15118 4618), their
land Z d o v l q (11.6291 Od. 1328s); but % O i V l K € S is also
found (IZ.23 743 f: ; Od. 13 272 1 4 288 j? 15 415 8).
Both names occur together in the celebrated verses
concerning Menelaus' wanderings (Od. 4 8 4 5 ). T h e
name of the town Sidon is found in Od. 15425. From
the fact that Sidon, not Tyre, is mentioned, we must
not draw political conclusions as some have done;
through the influence of the ethnic name 'Sidonian'
the name of Sidon was familiar to the Greeks a t a n
earlier time than that of Tyre, although the latter was
then much the more important. Roman poets, too,
frequently w e ' Sidonius' (as a synonym for ' Pcenus ')
in the sense of ' Phcenician' (cp Ovid, Fasf.3108 etc. ).
A precise definition of Phcenicia can hardly be given.
T h e boundaries assigned by Herodotus, Scylax, Straho,
Pliny, and Ptolemy vary greatly. The last-mentioned
(v. 154) reckons Phoenicia from the Eleutherus to the
brook Chorseas S. of Dor. Accepting this view, we
may describe Phcenicia as the coast-land a t the foot of
Lebanon and of the hill-country of Galilee down to
Carmel. Marathus and Arados, however, lie N. of
this territory, and in the S. the border is fluctuating
and arbitrary. T h e impossibility of fixing a definite
boundary line between the Phcenicians and the other
Canaanites is specially obvious in the more remote
times before the settlement of the Israelites and the
Philistines. The limits above assigned correspond
roughly to the name Zuhi by which the Egyptians a t
the time of their conquests designated the Phcenician
coast (cp W M M , As. II.BUY.1768). T h e origin of
this name is unknown.
Herodotiis relates that the Phcenicians, as they them-
selves declare, were originally settled upon the ' Red '
I .
a. origin and Sea, and came thence to the Syrian
nationality. coast (1I 7 89): The ' Red ' Sea is of
course the Indian Ocean. more esDeci-
ally the Persian Gulf. I t would seem therefore-that
there once was a Phoenician tradition which, like that
in the OT, made their ancestors immigrants from
Babylonia.
* The story was afterwards further embellished :support for
it was found in the names of the islands Tylos and Arados of
Bahrein on the Persian Gulf (Straho, xvi. 3 4 zJ). On the story
of Trogus Pompeius, see SODOM A N D GOMORRAH.
3731
PHCE NICIA
The long prevailing derivation of the name Phcenicia from the
Egyptian Punt (Lepsius), a land that was located by older
writers in S. Arabia, is quite impossible. The Egyptian Punt
is the incense-bearing Somali-coa5t in Africa whose inhabitants
(Eg. Punti, Lepsius wrongly P U M )have dothing whatever to
do with Pceni, Qoiurrss.
The Phoenicians themselves reckoned their land to
Canaan (for the evidence, see C ANAAN , I), and with
perfect justice. They are, in fact, a branch of the
Canaanites, which, a t the beginning of the time
historidly known to us (about 1500 B.c.),had occupied
many places on the coast, while the intermediate region
was still in the hands of a n Amorite population (cp
AMORITES, CANAAN).^
One evidence of this is supplied by the Phcenician
language, which differs only dialectically from the other
Canaanite dialects known to us (Hebrew and Moabite) ;
see W RITING. Though it exhibits in many instances a
younger vocabulary (e.g.,in>,to give, ih, God), it has
frequently retained older grammatical forms and words
which in Hebrew have become obsolete.2
I n fact it was simply the difference between the
conditions of life of the coast-land and those of the
interior, that gradually separated the Phcenicians from
their fellows who had settled farther inland-much in
the same way as the Dutch were severed from the other
N. Germans. Their different historical development,
and above all the occupation of Palestine by the
Israelites, enlarged the breach.
As to the age of the Phcenician tawns we possess no
information. for of course no historical value attaches to
3. Commence- the statement of Africanus (in Syn-
merit of the cellus, 31) that the Phcenicians said
they had a historical tradition reaching
history. back for 20.0oo years. Far more
moderate is the assertion -of Herodotus (244) that,
according to native tradition, Tyre and its temple of
Hercules had been founded 2300 years previously-
L e . , about 2730 B.C. Even in this, however, no one
will venture to find a real tradition. According to
another statement the founding of Tyre was much later.
Justin (182) relates that for a long time after their
immigration (see above, § 2) and the founding of Sidon
the Phcenicians lived on the coast, but that being then
overcome (ezpugRati) by the king of Ashkelon, they
took to their ships, and founded Tyre the year before
the fall of Troy. T o what year the latter event is
assigned here cannot be gathered from the context ; but
when we find in Menander of Ephesus, the historian
of Tyre, a Tyrian era that begins in the year 1198-7
B.c. (Jos. Ant.viii.31, 5 62,c. A$. i. 18. 8 126; and
thence Eus. a. A h . 745)we may regard it as almost
certain that this is the epoch intended. Now it was a t
this time that there occurred the great movement among
the nations which resulted in the occupation of Ashkelon
and the neighbouring places by the PHILISTINES ( q . ~ . )
and also affected the Phcenician cities (see 5 5). I t
is possible, therefore, that the statement of Justin
and Menander's era preserve a recollection of these
events. On the other hand, the date may rest simply
on some chronological combination no longer known
to us. It is, a t any rate, historically certain from
the Amarna tablets that, in the fifteenth century, the
island-city of Tyre was already extant, and one of the
most powerful cities of Phcenicia.
Whether the lists of Phcenician kings mentioned by later
writers (Tatian, adv. Crrpc. 37 ; Porphyry ap. Eus. Prrp). a.
x. 9 12, from Sanchuniathon) possessed any value for the older
period, is uncertain. If there were any historical lists going
1 This is probable on the following ground. As late as the
last millennium B.c., new Phcenician towns were planted upon
the northern foot of Lebanon-Fbtrys under Hiram I. of Tyre,
Triplis probably not until the time of the Persians. How to
account for t h e existence of a (much mutilated) Phcenician
inscription in N. S ria two hours W. of Zenjirli (Winckler
AOfi 1305), is not ccar. The inscription belongs to the tim;
about 750-700 B.C.
a C Stade 'Erneute Priifung des zwischen dem Pbcen. u.
Heb. %esteheAde Venvandtschaftsgrades,' in Morgenlandisch
rschungcn,
30. 1874.
3732
 PHCENICIA
back to the second millennium or even farther, they must have
been written in cuneiform, which it is hardly likely that anyone
in later times could read.
Should the Babylonian archives at any time give us
any authentic information regarding the expeditions
of Sargon a n d Naram-sin into Syria (according to
Nabonidus’ inscription about 3750 B . c . ) , we may
expect to find that there was in Phcenicia in the
fourth millennium a state of things more or less similar
to what we find two thousand years later when the
Egyptians came to Asia. That the relations between
Babylonia a n d Syria were exceedingly ancient a n d
were never interrupted, is shown by the Amarna
tablets ; presumably every great power which took
shape in Babylon sought to extend its dominion over
Syria as wall ; we know that this is true also of the
Elamite conquerors (about 2200 B . c . ) . Hence the use
of the Babylonian language a n d script was familiar at
the court of all the Syrian princes whether Semitic or
not. I t is specially, however, in the sphere of art a n d
religion that we can see how ancient a n d deeply-rooted
Babylonian influence was, a n d we shall find this to be
the case in Phcenicia a s well a s elsewhere. But there
must always have been close relations also with the
empire on the Nile.’
These long ages are, however, gone beyond recall.
Our information regarding the history of Syria, a n d
therefore of Phcenicia. begins with the Egyptian con-
quest in the sixteenth century. Even then, however,
the details supplied by the triumphal inscriptions of the
victorious Pharaohs are meagre to the last degree ; it is
only the annals of Thutmosis 111. that yield somewhat
fuller material, to which are to be added notices in
Egyptian works, such as pre-eminently the papyrus
Anastasi I. (see PALESTINE, J I S ), where Phcenician
(among other) places are named. Our store of facts
receives important additions from the Amarna tablets.
For the centuries from the ninth to the seventh we
have good information in the Assyrian inscriptions (cp
Fr. Del., W o Lag dus Paradies ? 281j ? ) ; and, more-
over, most of the Phcenician towns are occasionally
mentioned in the OT.
From these sources, we obtain the following list of
Phcenician towns from Carmel northwards :-
I. Acco (r>y, Judg. 131: Josh. 19 30 corr. for
4. List of n ~ y ) ,a separate principality in the Amarna
Phcenician tablets. See PTOLEMAIS.
towns. 2. Akzib ( y ! > ~Egyptian
, ‘ A k s a j u , Ass. d k -
ei62). &ACHZIB.
3. Mahalliba (so in Assyrian; 5>nn, in Josh.19ag [see
AHLAB,n.]; corrupted to 25nH in Judg. 131).
Akzib and Mahalliba do not occur in the Amarna letters:
they were small towns probably belonging to one of the
neighbonring principalities.
4. Kana (np, Jos. 19 z8)=Eg. K a n a , a separate principality
in the Amarna letters. See KANAH.
5. Tyre (ik, ‘the rock’ ; old Latin Sarra), on a rocky island
in the sea, about half an English mile ( 4 stadia) from the shore,
with an area of about 130 acres, without wells or vegetation
In time of war, when the mainland was in the hands of the enemy:
the Tyrians had to depend on water from cisterns ; in ordinary
times the water supply was carried over in boats, as is already
mentioned in pap. Anastasi. On the coast was a suburb which
the Greeks called Palztyros. They wrongly supposed the
settlement on the shore to be older than that on the island.
The local name was Usu or Uzu (Ass. Ushu=Eg. Authu), often
mentioned in the Amarna tablets. There is much proba-
bility in the su gestion of PraSek and Cbeyne (see ESAU,
XOSAH),that &oos, the brother of Hypsuranios of Tyre in
Philo’s story, the man who first ventured to sea on a log, is
simply the eponym of Palwyros.
6. Sarepta (nair), a place at the foot of Lebanon belonging
toSidon(1 K. 17g)=Eg. Zarpta, Ass. Sariptu, not mentioned in
the Amarna tablets. Cp ZAREPHATH.
7. Sidon (i-pd,the greatest of the Phcenician or ‘Sidonian’
towns, and already in the time of the Amarna letters the
principal rival of Tyre, with a harbour secured seawards by a
range of rocks. See SIDON.
1 This is sufficientlyproved by the fact that from very early
times Byblos was known to the Egyptians (as ‘Kupna’), and
that the prescriptions preserved on the papyrus Ebers (written
ahour 15jo B.c.) mention a remedy of ‘a Semite from Byblos’ in
which several Semitic loan-words occur (cp WMM, Ezyptiaca,
7 7 8 ) . See GEBAL i.
3733
PHCENICIA
8. Berytus (Biruta in the pap. Anastani, Birutu and [much
more frequently] Biruna in the Amarna letters), the modern
Beinif. In ancient times it was not an important place. In
the time of the Amarna letters it belonged originally to the
principality of Byblos, and afterwards became independent ; it
does not occur in the OT or in the Assyrian inscriptions.
9. Byblos (Phmn. Gebal; see GEBAL,i.; Slj, Josh.135
I K. 5 32 Ezek. 27 g, Ass. Gublu, Egyptian K u j n a ) , the seat of
a great goddess, ‘the mistress of Bybl05 ’ (Baaltis), mentioned
in pap. Anastasi and very often in the Amarna letters. Byblos
stood in relation with Egypt from very ancient times (see
col. 3733, n. I), and always was one of the principal Phcenician
towns ; it was in possession of the greater part of the shore of Mt.
Lebanon from Beirot northwards. In the time of the Armarna
letters it was lord of Berytos and of two other places on the
coast Sigata and Ambi. Southwards of Byblos runs the stream
Nah; Ihrlhim, the ancient Adonis, associated with the death
of ADONIS (q.v., g 2). At its sources lay the sacred Apheka,
p ~Josh. , 13 4 1930 Judg. 131 (see APHEK,I). The town
Tripolis is of much later origin (see below 5 21).
IO. Arka at the northern end of the Lebanon range on the
plain of the Eleutherus (Nahr el-Kebir), by which the main
road led from the coast to the Orontes-valley. This route is
called by Thutmosis 111. ‘the coast-road,’ by which he attacks
the town ‘Arkantu. This town can be no other than ‘Arka.
In the Amarni tablets it is called Irkata and bas its own king;
the Assyrians call it Arka ; only Shalmaneser 11. uses the older
form Irkanata. In the OT ‘the Arkites,’ ’piyn, are mentioned
in Gen.’lO 17 (see AXKITE).
11. Simyra at the northern end of the Eleutherus plain
(=Eg. Zama:, Ass. Sumun’ and Jinzirra), is often mentioned
.
in the Amarna tablets .: the Simvrites.
~ . vxm in Gen. 1018 (see
ZEMARITE).
12. Arados, on a small rock-island opposite Jebel No-iriye,
in position and importance equal to Tyre, and already in the
Egyptian period one of the principal seafaring places of Syria.
Its Phmnician name was i i y ~ (Arwid
, (now Ruiid), ~ i mGen. ,
1018 Ezek. 278 11=Eg. A r a t u ( t ) , Ass. d r u a d a . See ARVAD.
Opposite to it lay a place called by the Greeks Antaradus
(later Tortosa, now Tartfis) ; farther southwards, Marathus
(now ‘Arnrit)belonged to its territory. Marathusacquiredimport-
ance and independence only in Hellenistic times (see below, D 22).
‘3. In Gen. 1017 between the people of ‘Arka and Arados are
mentioned ‘3.~2, ‘the Sinites ’ the inhabitants of Sin (see
SINITE). This town identifieh by Delitzscb ( P a r . 282) with
Sianu in the Assyriad inscriptions, IS not otherwise known.
The names of the dynasts of Tyre, Byblos, Arka, in
the Amarna letters show that the inhabitants at that time
were Canaanites-ie., Phenicians. F o r Arados we
have n o direct proof; but its position is characteristic-
ally Phoenician, a n d n o one will doubt that, as in later
times (in the Assyrian inscriptions its kings have
Phoenician names), so already in the sixteenth century
it was inhabited by Phcenicians.
T h e Pharaohs of Egypt began the conquests of Syria
at the end of the sixteenth century, a short time after
the final expulsion of the Hyksos (see EGYPT,
6. The
Egyptian 5s 5 3 8 : ) . Thutmosis I. was the first who
dominion. overran the whole of Syria to the banks of
the Euphrates, a n d received the tribute of
its dynasts. His son Thutmosis 111. (1503-1449), in his
twenty-second year, had to begin the conquest anew. He
first defeated the Canaanites in the battle of Megiddo, and
then conquered the northern parts of Syria. Thutmosis
111. is the founder of the great Egyptian empire. Most
of the Phcenician towns appear to have acknowledged his
sovereignty without much fighting ; only Simyra a n d
Arados had to be taken b y force. Simyra received an
Egyptian garrison and became the principal stronghold
of the Egyptian dominion on the coast. All the kings
a n d petty princes of the Syrian and Phcenician towns
became vassals of Egypt ; they had to pay tribute a n d
supply provisions for the Pharaoh and his army ; their
sons were educated at the Egyptian court and received
their principalities from the hands of the Pharaoh, even
if they succeeded their fathers. Under Amenophis II.,
who suppressed a great rebellion, and Thutmosis IV.
the Egyptian supremacy remained unshaken ; but
during the long a n d peaceful reign of Amenophis III.,
at the end of the fifteenth century, its strength began to
decline; a n d under his son Amenophis IV., whose
interests were absorbed by the religious reformation he
attempted in Egypt, it broke down altogether. From
the north the Hittites invaded Syria a n d took one place
after another ; and they were supported by the nomads
3734
 PHCENICIA
of the desert, and by many of the local dynasts who
longed for independence (see HITTITES, 5s 8 8 ) . Among
these, AbdaSirta and his son Aziru, the dynasts of the
Amorites, in the northern part of the Lebanon, took a
leading position. The Phanician towns were divided ;
all their kings tried to gain as much as they could for
themselves, but they all pretended to be faithful vassals
of Egypt, even if they did as much harm to its interests
as was possible to them. The Amarna tablets give a
very vivid picture of these troubles. W e see that Arados
made itself independent ; Simyra was conquered and
destroyed by Aziru ; the king of Arka was slain ; the
king of Sidon supported the rebels, in spite of his loyal
letters, while Rib-hadad of Byblos held out to the last on
the Egyptian side. In Tyre the king and his wife and
children were slain ; but here the Egyptians gained the
supremacy again, and the new king Abimelech proved
a faithful vassal like Rib-hadad. Both were pressed hard
by the rebels. Usu was occupied by the Sidoniam, who
were supported by a fleet from Arados, and the Tyrians
on their island suffered severely for the want of wood and
water. Rib-hadad lost one part of the Byblian territory
after another, and the inhabitants of Byblos had to
sell their sons and daughters in payment of the pro-
visions they imported from the sea. At last, when
Rib-hadad had gone for help to Berytus, where an
Egyptian officer was posted, his subjects revolted, shut
the gates against his return, and joined the enemy.’
In the religious troubles under Amenophis IV. and
his successors, the Egyptian power in Asia was reduced
to nothing. Sethos I. (Setoy, about 1350 R.c.) had
to begin the conquest anew. He slew the Bedouins,
occupied Palestine and southern Phcenicia, made the
Syrian magnates cut trees on the Lebanon for his
buildings in Egypt, and fought, as it seems, with
varying success against the Hittites. Neither Sethos,
however, nor his son Ramses II., in spite of his
victories, was able to subjugate the Hittites and the
N. of Syria again. At last Ramses 11. concluded a
treaty with the Hittites, by which both empires re-
cognised each other as equals and became friends.
From that time (about 1320) onwards, Palestine and
southern Phcenicia were for more than a century in the
possession of the Egyptians. T h e boundary seems to
have been formed by the Nahr el-Kelb, N. of Beiriit,
where three tablets of Ramses 11. allude to his victories
and fix the frontier ; unfortunately, they are in very bad
preservation. A visit which the king of Tyre paid to
Egypt is mentioned in pap. Anastasi IV. verso 6, Z. 3.
The peaceful state of Syria was again disturbed, first
by the decay of the Egyptian power under the weak suc-
cessors of Ramses 11. and by the internal troubles which
led to the rise of the twentieth dynasty with Setnekht
and Ramses I I I . , and perhaps also by a similar decay
of the very loosely organised Hittite empire. Then
followed the great invasion of Syria by a migration of
peoples from Asia Minor and Europe, who came both
by land and by s e a ; a migration about which some
information has come down to us in the inscriptions
of Ramses 111. (about 1200 B.c.), who defeated the
invaders on the frontier of Egypt. T h e final result of
this migration was the occupation of the coast of
Palestine by the Zakari (in Dor) and the Philistines (in
Ashkelon and the neighbouring towns).
The empire of the Hittites henceforth disappears ; it
is dissolved into a great number of smaller states.
Ranises 111. still maintained a part of Canaan and
fought against the Amorites; but under his feeble
successors the power of the Pharaohs in Asia was
again reduced to nought, although they never gave up
the claim of supremacy over Palestine and Phenicia.
W e possess part of an account of an official of the
temple of Anion in Thebes,* who was sent by the high
1 For the chronology of Rib-hadad’s letters see Knudtzon in
Beitnip ZUY Assyriologie, 4 2 m 5 (IT.).
a Published by Golenischeff,RecarzZdc Trauuux, 21, 1899 ;
3735
PHCENICIA
priest Hrihor and the prince of T a n k Smendes (after-
wards thefirst king of the twenty-first dynasty, about 1075
B . C . ) , to Byblos in order to get timber from Lebanon
for the sacred bark of the god, and brought a statue of
the god with him for his protection. T h e Phcenicians
still regarded the great god of Thebes with some awe ;
nevertheless the Egyptian messenger was received with
bad grace by Beder, prince of the Zakari of DOR ( g . ~ . ) ,
and worse still by Zekar-ba‘al prince of Byblos (see
GEBALi. ). T h e latter proved that neither he nor his
ancestors had been subjects of the Pharaohs, and when
at last he gave the timber on religious grounds, he ex-
acted the promise that he should be paid for it on the
envoy’s return.
T h e father-in-law of Solomon, and afterwards, in
Rehoboam’s time, Shishak, the first Pharoah of the
twenty-second dynasty, once more renewed the Egyptian
campaign to Palestine, but only with momentary
success. Farther northward no Egyptian army again
penetrated until the time of Pharaoh Necho in 608.
There was no dominant power in Syria either, and the
invasion of Syria by Tiglath-pileser I. who came to
Arados and hunted in the Lebanon, was only a passing
episode. So the Phenician towns were left to them-
selves; the period of their rise and greatness begins,
and with it the dominating position of Tyre in Phenicia
T h e prosperity of Phcenicia was the result of sea-
trade and colonisation. For a long time, scholars
g. Phmniciarr were inclined to put the beginning
of Phcenician colonisation into much
colonies. earlier times, and to suppose that in
the second millennium B.C. they were d o k n a n t on all
the islands and shores on the Z g e a n sea. W e hsve
since learnt, however, that this was a mistake. Cer-
tainly the Phoenicians went to sea as early as in the
time of Thutmosis 111. and his successors, and on the
other hand, numerous remains in Greece and Egypt
prove that there was a lively intercourse between the
E. and the Greeks of the Mycenaean period during
the whole time of the Egyptian empire; but the
Oriental people, which at this time was most nearly
connected with Greece, were the inhabitants of Kaft ;
and we know now that this was not Phcenicia, but
another country farther to the W. (cp 5 I).
On the other hand, the Greeks of the Mycenaean
time (with Crete and Argos a s the great centres of their
civilisation) were far more enterprising than scholars
had supposed; they came to the E. as mercenaries,
pirates, and tradesmen, and brought their wares
(Mycenzan pottery, arms, etc.) to Cyprus and Egypt.
There can be no doubt that at a very early period
(perhaps in connection with the great migration under
Ramses 111.) they settled on the southern coast of Asia
Minor (Pamphy1ia)and in Cyprus, before the Phcenicians
had any colonies there. I n the time of the Amarna
tablets there were no Phoenician colonies ; probably
their colonisation did not begin before the twelfth
century, and it never reached the extent which used
often to be dreamt of. I n Cyprus they founded Citium
and some other places; but to the B g e a n sea they
always came only as traders (as we see in Homer), and
never possessed more than a few factories (probably on
some islands, on the Isthmus of Corinth. etc.), from
which they carried on their trade with the Greeks.
This is the character of Phcenician colonisation gener-
ally; by far the larger number of the Phoenician
colonies were mercantile settlements, factories, planted
at sheltered points of the coast, or, still better, on a
rocky island off it, like the towns of Phcenicia itself.
For the task of occupying extensive territories, for
subjugation of foreign peoples or even assertion of
political supremacy over them, the Phcenician cities
were not powerful enough; they did not even possess
cp Erman, ‘Eine Reise nach Phoenicien im elften Jahrhundert
vor Chr.’ in Z& vol. 38 (IF).
3736
 L

OL

OL

3
8:
E E

SE SI

z z

OL Ot
I I
a ,OE 3 gF 8
'VI3INZOHd
 PHCl3NICIA
the interior of the country adjacent to themselves.
Never, for example, could such an idea have occurred
to them as that of bringing a people like the Greeks to
a condition of dependence. The history of Phcenician
trade and colonisation presents many analogies with
those of Portugal and Holland. The territory dis-
covered by the Phcenicians and opened up to their
commerce was much too large to be acquired by them.
.4s :I rule they were quite satisfied if they could carry on
business in a peaceful way, exchanging the native raw
products for the articles of industry and luxury pro-
duced by the E a s t ; and for this purpose the small
settlements they possessed furnished a sufficient basis of
operations. This fully explains (I) why the colonies
continued to be dependent on the mother country ; ( 2 )
how it came about that, when the nation within whose
territory they lay gained in political and commercial
strength, these colonies could, quite easily and without
a struggle, disappear completely and leave no trace (as
for example on the B g e a n , and for the most part also
in Sicily) ; ( 3 ) how it was that their influence on the
nations with whom they had dealings was always SO
slight and for the most part limited to trade trans-
actions and the transmission of manual dexterities.
Colonisation of a more thorough order, out of which sprang
large and flourishing new commonwealths, occurred only in
Cyprus and on the north coast of Africa. Resides this, Gades,
and some other colonies in the land of Tarshish--i.e., Southern
Spain-ought to he mentioned here. When we consider the
sm:illness of the mother-country, this achievement was indeed
of itself no inconsiderable performance, rendered possible only
by the fact that a great proportion of the settlers came from the
Syro-Palestinian interior, the Phcenician towns in many cases
supplying only the leaders and mercantile aristocracy of the new
corumunlty. Occasionally also, as the legendary story of the
founding of Carthage shows, internal disputes may have led to
the migration of the defeated party.
All the Phenician colonies were anciently regarded
as having been founded from Tyre, and so far as the
towns of Cyprus and North Africa are concerned this
is confirmed by all our other information. I t cannot be
shown that any other of the Phcenician towns planted
colonies.’ We shall see that within the same period
Tyre had a leading position also in home politics.
A splendid picture of the commerce of Tyre is given
by Ezekiel Z (27). ‘The prophet represents the nations
., as the seruanfs of Tyre ; but this is only
Trade, to heighten the impression of the queenly
industries.
city’s greatness. I t is plain that the
Phcenicians had commercial relations with countries in
which they neither had nor could have any colonies.
Apart from Ezekiel, and from the evidence of Greek writers,
we have the four Greek words X L S & (nxm), ~ p v w d (p?),
r 26~1
(iW),and rrdharis ( W h ) , as records of early Phcenician trade
with Greeks. In Egypt we are told of a ‘ Tyrian quarter’ at
Memphis (Tvpiov ~ ~ p a d r r dHerod.~ , 2 112). The friendly
relations between Hiram and Solomon (who had command of
the harbours of Edom) enabled the Phcenicians to carry out
(with Solomon) naval expeditions to the coasts of the Arabian
Sea and the Indian Ocean as far as Ophir (I K. 9 2 6 s 1022).
With the loss of Edom this field of activity was closed ; on a
later attempt of the men of Judah to reopen it see JEHOSHAPHAT.
The Phoenicians had also an overland trade, though
this was less important than the waterborne. First in
importance as Phcenician marts were the great trading
cities of Syria-Damascus, Hamath, etc. I t is certain,
however, that Phcenician merchants had also direct
1 Two apparent exceptions-(i.) Leptis between the two
Syrtes, the founding of which is attributed by Sallust (Jug. 78)
to Sidonians whom internal dissensions had driven from their
home, and (ii.) the island Oliaros near Paros which is called by
Heraklides Ponticus in Steph. Byz. Zr8wviov &ror.ia-are to
he explained by the extended use, mentioned above, of the name
Sidonians. Leptis, which Pliny (576) speaks of as a Tyrian
settlement, was really founded by the Carthaginians about
5 1 2 B.C. Nor is any weight to be attached to the facts that
according to Steph. Byz. the island Melos was originally called
Ryhlis from its mother town, and that Tarsus (which was not
Phcenician at all) is in Dio Cbrysost. (Or. 33 14) represented
a* being colonised from Aradus, not, as the other authorities
have it, from Argos.
2 The text is unfortunately not free from corruption (see
especially uu. 19 23). See CANNEH, CHILMAD, J AVAN , 8 I , etc.
3737
PHCEINICIA
,elations with regions much more remote-Babylon.
Vineveh, and various trade centres of Asia Minor and
Irmenia, as well as of Arabia. Detailed information.
3eyond what is known of ancient oriental commerce in
:eueral, is wanting here. The sketch given by Ezekiel
27) tells us only that all the peoples there enumerated
&ought their wares to the Tyrians, and this is quite
iccurate. It does not often occur that a centre of sea
trade is also a t the same time a city with extensive inland
iommerce. There can be no doubt whatever that the
land commerce of the Semitic world was mainly in the
hands of Syrian (Aramaean) merchants, and, next to
these, in the hands of Arabian tribes living in the desert.
It was by this agency that the wares of the East were
brought to Tyre and the other cities of Phoenicia, where
the products of the West, and of the native industries
of Phcenicia, were received in exchange for them. In
particular it may be regarded as certain that, apart
from a short-lived attempt under Hiram, the Phoenicians
never themselves brought from the country of its pro-
duction the frankincense with which its merchants
supplied the Mediterranean coasts (Herod. 3 107).
Originally the incense- trade was from hand to hand ;
but afterwards, from the beginning of the last millen-
nium R.c., the S. Arabian tribes-the Sabzeans, and
still more the Minzeans-themselves took it up and
sent yearly caravans to the Mediterranean centres of
civilisation.
Herodotus (1I) narrates : ‘the Phcenicians as soon as
they had arrived on the Syrian coast from their original
seat on the shore of the Erythaean (Arabian) Sea at once
began to make extensive voyages, and exported Egyptian
and Assyrian ( L e . , according to the terminology of
Herodotus. Babylonian) wares.’ The picture thus given,
though anachronistic, quite accurately expresses the
essential features of Phcenician trade. Just as the history
of the Syrian countries and the course of their civilisation
was determined by their intermediate position between
Babylon and Egypt, the two great foci of civilisation,
so also it was from these countries that the Syro-
Phaenician merchants derived not only many of their
wares but also above all the patterns from which they
worked, and their first artistic processes and methods.
By the Greeks the Phmnicians were regarded as the masters of
invention ; not only glass-making(cpGLASS, $ I), the preparation
of purple and metal-work, but even weights, measures,and the art
of writing (see WRIT IN^;) were carried back to them. The actual
state of the case is certainly quite otherwise ; not one of these
discoveries was of Phcenician origin. All these conveniences the
Phoenicians in common with the other Syrian peoples borrowed ;
but they carried them much farther after the appropriation.
Although the Phcenician cities drew a large pro-
portion of their commercial wares from the interior,
a n extensive and busy native industry soon arose.
Phcenician purple, Phoenician garments in colour, and
Phcenician metal-work were specially famous, as the
Homeric poems abundantly show (see ZZ.6289, Od.
15415; 12. 23741, Od. 4618, 13288 15460, ZZ.1120). In
Od. 1542s Sidon is spoken of as ‘rich in copper’
( ~ o X ~ X ~ X K O S Similarly
). the bronze and silver paterae
with engraved work after a n Egyptianising style
which have been found in the palace of Kalab
(Nimriid), a t Praeneste in Latium, and elsewhere, are
of Phcenician workmanship. The Egyptian monu-
ments, too, frequently mention, in catalogues of tribute,
Phoenician vessels of gold and silver, as also of iron and
copper, often with blue and red enamel (WMM, As. u.
Bur. 306).
The character of the Phcenician merchant nation, so
receptive, so practical and soberminded, is nowhere
s. Ilrt. more strikingly seen than in the region of
art. The question as to the essential nature
of Phoenician art has for long been one of the most
burning and difficult in the whole field of archaeology.
The difficulty lay partly in the fact that until now
from Phcenicia itself only a very few monuments,
none at all of a date earlier than the Persian period,
3738
 PHaNICIA
have come down to us. The chief trouble, however,
was created by the investigators themselves, who set
out in search of a a Phoenician style’ and could not
find one. T h e solution of the problem is very simple ;
we are now able to say very positively that there never
was such a thing as a Phoenician style. Phoenician
art, like that of Syria in general, simply exhibits in
combination the motzys derived by it from a variety of
quarters (in the first instance mainly from Babylon and
Egypt), without any attempt at fusing them into any
higher essential unity.
The stele of king Yehawmelek of Byblos (Persian period)
represeuts the king, in Pekian dress and hearing, before a seated
goddess who is exactly reproduced after the pattern of Isis and
Hathor with cow’s horns and the sun-disk upon her head. Over
lier head hovers, as in all Egyptian steles, the winged sun-
disk (Perrot and Chipiez, Art in Phuvzicia, 1 %, fig. 23). This
is typically Phcenician. A stele of Marathus exhibits a god in
Egyptian dress, wearing an Egyptian helmet with the u r a x s
serpent, and holding in his right hand an E yptian hooked sword.
With his left hand he holds, in Assyrio-%abylonianfashion, a
lioness by the legs ; his feet rest upon a lioness who in turn stands
upon a hill-like pedestal--motifs which Hittite-Asiatic art de-
veloped still further from Babylonian models. Above the god
hover two Egyptian emblems ; the moon (crescent, with full moon
shown within) and the winged sun-disk (0). cit. 2 11, fig. 7).
A few examples may be given of the way in which
borrowed artistic symbols were so modified as to lose
their original meaning. T h e Egyptian emblem of the
moon became a half-moon, with the sun or a star above
it : the sphinx became womanlike in form ; the u r z u s
serpents dependent from the winged sun-disk were
changed into a bird’s tail: out of the cross
f grew
the symbol
8 so familiar on Phoenician seals and
Carthaginian steles, having, apparently, arms and legs
added to it. In decoration, however, Phcenician art
(and Syrian art generally) shows a certain independence
in its employment of flower-like ornaments- lotos
blossoms and rosettes-or of ornaments taken from
the animal world, such as heads of wild goats, oxen,
lions, and so forth. In this field a decorative a Western-
Asiatic’ mixed style was developed, which, as already
indicated, began to exert a n influence on Greek art from
the ninth century onwards.
For the rest, the art of Syria and Phcenicia follows
the ‘ fashion,‘ that is, the ruling power. In the second
millennhn B. c. Egyptian models prevail ; with the rise
of Assyrian ascendancy, Assyrio-Babylonian motifs come
more strongly into play ; and these in their turn had to
give place to the influence of Persia. Alongside of these
Asiatic models, however, from the sixth century onwards,
the influence of Greek art made itself increasingly felt,
and had already become predominant within the Persian
period, in the first instance in the technique (e.g., in
coins), and soon afterwards in motifas well.
In one department the Phcenicians maintained their
superiority-that of navigation. Even in Xenophon’s
9. Navigation. time, when the Greeks, especially the
Athenians, had long been keen rivals
of the Phcenicians by sea, and had defeated them in
naval battles, a great Phcenician merchantman was re-
garded as a pattern of order and of practical outfitting
(Xen. E c . 8 1 1 ) : and still later even Strabo speaks of
the absolute supremacy of the Phoenicians in the arts of
seamanship (xvi. 2 23). When Sennacherib caused Syrian
carpenters to build him a fleet upon the Tigris for the
subjugation of the Babylonians, he manned it with
Tyrian, Sidonian, and Greek (Cyprian) sailors, just as
Alexander brought Phcenician ships to Thapsacus on
the Euphrates for his projected Arabian campaign
(Am. vii. 193). When the Egyptians under Psam-
nietichus and Necho brought together a fleet it consisted
mainly of Fhoenicians ; and it was by Phcenicians that,
under Necho, the circumnavigation of Africa was ac-
complished (Herod. 442). In the fleet of Xerxes the
Phenicians (and of these the Sidonians) supplied the
3739
PHCENICIA
best vessels (Herod. 7 9 6 ) . T h e war between the Greeks
and the Persians was pre-eminently a struggle between
the sea-power of Greece and that of Phcenicia.
W e proceed now to a brief survey of the Phoenician
religion.
The Phoenicians applied to their gods the term ‘ZZim
less frequently than the longer form, ’ d o n i m (so in
lo. Religion : the inscriptions of Eshmunazar and
Yehawmelek), fern. ‘donot (in Plautus),
just as in Heb. the plu. n*n$N, and in
conceptions’ Aram. the lengthened form ikih, came
to be the forms in common use (cp NAMES, rrqf:).
The general word for ‘ goddess ’ in the Semitic dialects
is either iZ& (cp below) or ‘AStar (Rab. igtar) ; but the
Phoenicians employed exclusively the form ‘AItavt,
‘Attoref (with the feminine terminations added to the
feminine word).
Like other Semites, they believed that these divine
powers can enter into relations with human communities,
and that when they do so they accord them their pro-
tection and live a common life with their clients. They
bestow blessing. prosperity, and victory, grant increase
of the flocks and herds, and of the field, and in return
have a share in all that their worshippers acquire or
enjoy, above all in the common meal and in the spoil.
I n this, essentially, d o worship and sacrifice consist (cp
S ACRIFICE). T h e tutelary deities are the lords and
kings of the community which worships them; the
community and each individual member of it are their
servants or handmaidens or even their Metoikoi (gZr,
very common in Phcen. proper names), their proteges,
taken up and cared for by them. [Cp STRANGER.]
Connected with this is the idea that the gods are the blood-
relations of their worshippers-an idea which the Phcenicians
shared with the rest of t h e Semites, as is shown in t h e proper
names which designate an individual as the brother or sister,
father or mother, son or daughter of the divinity (see A BI-,
AMMI-,N AMES IN, etc.). These names however are not of
.
frequent occurrence among the Phcenikans th; idea that
underlies them had plainly ceased to be intelliiible.
The gods manifest themselves to men in objects the
most diverse. Not unfrequently in rocks and
mountains ; thus the name given by the Greeks to the
conspicuous headland between Byblos and Tripolis
(‘ Theouprosdpon ’), plainly represents the Phceuician
PZnzj’Zl; see PENUEL.Near Theouprosopon there is a
dedicatory inscription to Zeus (Renan, Miss. en P h h .
146),obviously the E l of the headland. Another form
of manifestation was in trees and animals, especially in
serpents. Still more prevalent, and manifestly also of
greater antiquity, is the idea that the god has taken u p
his abode in movable stones or bits of wood. These
are veritable fetishes, which can be carried about every-
where, and in which, accordingly, the divinity in the
primitive nomad stage could accompany the tribe on its
wanderings. Such a animated stones ‘ were supposed
to have fallen from heaven, and were called by the
Phcenicians ,9arrrihta-i.e., bait-el, ‘ G o d s house ’ : cp
Jacob‘s pillar at Bethel 2 (see MASSEBAH). These
stones may originally perhaps have remained unhewn ;
but in later times it became usual to give them a
certain form-either a cone, or a n obelisk with a
pyramid-shaped head, or even a simple stele.
Such ‘set-u ’ stones were to be found in every cult 3 and at
every altar ; tfey form the most usual dedicatory offering to the
1 More particularly in the names ‘A6a“eZi-m (‘ABG<hryw,
Renan, Miss. en Ph4n. 7 9 , in meaning identical with ‘Ahd’alonim
‘A@Gd&vvpoc),servant of the gods ; Anrat’eZtm, maidservant
of the gods, Mattrin‘elim (gift of the gods, cp Mufhunili-m,C I L
8 10525)~KaQ‘eZim, dog of the gods (CIS 1 4 9 ; abbreviated to
KaOd, i6. 52).
a Cp Philo Bybl. fr. 2, 19, where the &zz%yZfaare spoken of
as an invention of Uranos; Damascius (Vit. Zsid.,ed. Wester-
mann [ap. Didot] 94 203) has it that 7Ljv @ ~ L T V ~ ~Bhhov
W V Bhho
~ v a x c b 0 a r0 . i $pJ:o, A&, ‘Hhiy, +ais hhhorc. Hence &tuZ&,
a species of mi’gic stoine, in Pliny (37 135 etc.).
1 Thus from the coins of Byblos we know of the cones in the
conrt of the great temple, where the goddess of the town had
her seat, and similar objects were to he found in the sanctuary
of Aphrodite at Paphos, which, though Greek, was strongly
influenced by Phcenicia.
3740
 PHQ3NICIA
divinity. By the Phcrnicians as b y the Hebrews and other
Canaanites, they were caldd rnassabath (cp CIS 144-a
mas$ebah a t Kition dedicated to Eshmnn ; for votive arid burial
steles, as in the Pirmus Inscr., see Rev. Arch. 3 ser. 11 5 ; C I S
1116 etc.) or, otherwise, na@b ( C I S 1x39-a nasib a t Kition
dedicated to Baalshamein ; cp the Malkiba'al steles [see below] ;
Steph. Byz. S.W. N ~ U L , ~[calledK Niar&s by Philo, 81;
oypaivrr 62, bs +yub *lAwv, Ndo#?tr 76s u+as ; o 8 . Oirpdvros
V ~ U ~ & S ,$ ~ u c uypaivcr
, .i, O O L V ~ K W$0.5 hieor ovyxripcvor
oup+opqrai,-in other words, cairns or stone-heaps like the Gr.
+para, out of which on a precisely similar manner arose the
hewn H e r m z or symbols of Hermes). Another name is
Hanmnuin, which in Phcenician must have been quite current
(see helow); it occurs also in O T (Is. 1 7 8 279, etc.) in con-
junction with the Asherim; so too in Palmyra. T h e name is
probably identical with the 'Appouveir of the Phcenician
tempks from whose mystic inscriptions, according to Philo
(1 j), Skchuniathon derived his wisdom. T h e origin of the
name is uncertain; HammPnim in the O T is best translated
' hammSn-pillars.'l Stone -cones of the kind described are
often found delineated in the Carthaginian steles, also upon
a stele from Libybzum (CIS 1138). C p MASSEBAH.
I n close association with the stone-pillar we find the
erected pole, or the tree-stump, precisely as in the
Grecian cultus. This is called AshErah (a::;!) as in
Hebrew (see A S H E R A H ). Copies of it in clay are very
often found in the ruins of the temples of Cyprus.
A representation of a goddess, in clay, has been found in
Cyprus, sitting within the tree-trunk of Ashera (cp Ohnefalsch-
Richter, Xy@-os, 1 1 7 1 ; 2 Tab. 17 2)) and we hear in the in-
scription of Ma'sob of ' the Astarte in the AshZra.' T h e word
Asherah might therefore he used as a divine name. T h e only
known instance of this, however, is Abd-agrat (also Abd-aSirta) in
the Amarna letters, where ASrat is always written with the deter-
minative sign of deity.
A variety of these poles may plainly be seen in
Carthage steles : and closely associated with them,
perhaps, are the quickly fading flowers and rootless
plants of the Adonis gardens at the Adonis festival (cp
A DONIS).
A s to the origin of these modes of worship, Philo (28)
relntes that Usoos the brother of Hypsouranios of Tyre
(cp below, § IZ), after a sea voyage on a tree-trunk,
erected two steles to the Fire and the Wind, worship-
ping them and making a n offering of the blood of
beasts. After the death of the two brothers, staves
were consecrated to them, the steles adored, and their
memory commeinorated in a yearly feast. These staves
and steles are the Asherim and Masebahs or gummdnim
-in the first instance doubtless, in Philo's view, some
specially holy and ancient objects in Tyre.
When a people becomes settled, not only does it
itself undergo a change as it accommodates itself to the
land which it tills, the city it inhabits, the mountains
and streams of its chosen home; its gods also no
longer continue the same. They too abandon their
nomadic life, settle, and become the lords of the soil
upon which they are worshipped.
'Thus an E l or ZZut (or Astarte) becomes the dn'aZ or
ddtzlut of a definite locality, the god or goddess of
ll. Gods
I ~
some particular town or hill. Such
divinities are many in Phcenicia.
proper names* Thus the 'pod of Sidon' is called
' Baal-sidon ' ( C I S i. 3 18 [Eshmunazar], Inscr. of
Pirzus, Rev. Arch. 3 ser. 11j ; on the gods of Tyre
see below). The 'goddess of Byblos' is invoked as
e the mistress, the Ba'alat of Gebal' (CZS l r , cp
GP:RAL, I). Rib-hadnd too gives her this title in all his
letters (the name is always written ideographically).
In &irrt&zduSt (Kition) of Cyprus the peuple worship
the god of the Lebanon on the mainland opposite, as
1 13aaLhanimiin was the chief deity of Punic N. Africa
(found also in Libybzmnn C I S 1 138). H e is the god of the
&nziruin-sfe& in which 'he had his abode, and the steles
dcclicated to him frequently bear the enigmatical name 3 ~ 3
5z325n (crs 1 123 147 194 q j 380. H a d n r m e t z m 9). Similarly
t e god Melki'aitart in Umm el-'kw;lmid, S. of +yre ( C I S 1 8 )
ani1 in the neighbouring Ma'snb are designated EZ-jLanwuin.
H i s female counterpart is 'the Astarte in the Asherah of El-
hammxn.' Melki'aTtart is in fact the El-hammxn. T h e numen
occupying his (tamman-pillar (Ra'al-hamman) is naturally his
inferior, who in turn has a n Asherah in which dwells a female
beirig, an Aitarte.
3741
PHCENICIA
' Baal-libanon, their lord ' (CZS 1s).' Among the hills
behind Sidon there occurs a ZEIJS 6p,peros-i.e., a
mountain-god pure and simple-to whom in a n
inscription (Renan, il4iss. 397) two lions are dedicated.
A god can also take his name from specified
attributes ascribed to him at a particular place of
worship, or from his association with some particular
religious object or custom.
A well-known instance of this kind is the BAAL-BERITH
[r.u:] a t Shechem : there was also a 'god of dancing' (Lat.
Jupiter Balmarcodes, Gk. Bahpdpros .oipavos ~ S p w v ) ,a god
worshipped with festal dances a t the sanctuary of Der el-
Kal'a i n the mountains behind Bsrot (cp CIG 4536, C I L 3 r j j ,
Cler.-Ganneau, Reu. d A r r l . Orient. 2 1 0 1 8: Euting, SBA W,
1887% p. 407, no. 129). Most renowned of all is Baal-hammiin
(see above, 5 10).
All these gods and goddesses are strictly nameless,
and are merely powers possessing a specified sphere of
influence. So also with Ba'al-Zani&m (see below, 12).
There is no god Ba'?! and goddess Ba'alat. It is only
very rarely that a genuine proper name occurs a t all.
The God of Tyre (Ba'al s r ) indeed bears the name
Melkart (cp 12) ; but even this is really no proper
name but a compound of iWeelek Kart, king of the city.
For worshippers, the god of their home, or of the
temple which they frequent, is ' t h e Ba'al' or ' t h e
Ba'alat ' without qualification, and in ordinary life no
other phraseology is used (cp I K . 1 7 8 )
There is no need to specify what particular god is intended.
I t is quite usual, therefore, to give children such .names as
.
Hanniba'al, ' favour of Baal ' 'Azru-ba'al 'help of Ba'al ' .
Ba'al'azar, ' Ra'al helps' ;Ba'al-daniin, 'IBaali; favourable' ; 'Abd:
Ba'al, 'servant of Baa1';Adoni-Ba'al, 'Baal is lord,'etc. I n these
cases the giver as a rule has in his mind some such god as
Ba'al-hammPn, Ba'al-Samen, Ba'al-$don, or the like. Often
enough too, the god's name falls away altogether, and we get
such names as Haniin or Hann6, 'Abdo, etc.
It is easy to understand how, ultimately, this should
have given rise to the feeling that there was an absolute
god Ba'al of whom the individual Ba'alim are only
forms. This feeling must have developed greatly in
Babylonia, and, to a certain extent, also among the
Ararnaeans, where Bel, Aram. B'el, actually became the
proper name of a definite deity. It found its way into
Phcenicia as well. In the first instance foreigners
naturally formed the belief that there was a single
Phoenician deity Bdal. The Egyptians took over his
cult and-in the new kingdom-worshipped him as
identical with Sutekh (Set). The Greeks always desig-
nate him by his Aramaic name as re lo^,^ and identify
him with Zeus,-and rightly. for everywhere the Baal
of a place is the highest god of its proper pantheon.
Similarly they explained B a a h i s (so Philo, 2 2 5 ) or BaXOrs
(Melito in Cureton, Spic. Syr. 44: Hesych.) as the
proper name of the goddess of Byblos. At last the
Phcenicians themselves followed the example, a t least
in their systeni of the gods-the idea is found in Philo.
In the native inscriptions indeed, and so, we may infer,
in their worship, it never found a place; only one
Greek inscription, from the neighbourhood of Antara-
dos. mentions an altar of BqXos; here doubtless the
Syrian, not the Phcenician. deity is intended (Renan,
op. cit. 104).
Ba'alat is never employed in the formation of proper
names, and is indeed of somewhat rare occurrence
anywhere; to denote the feminine divinity the name
AStart is ordinarily used. In the religious conception,
indeed, there is no difference between the twb, only
Astarte needs no complement of the name o f a place ;
but the Astarte in the AsLZnih of El-+ommdn mentioned
1 I n Philo27 these gods appear as mighty primzval
men from whom the mountains which they occupy (&v
2xpl:yuav) took their names. Thus the Lebanon, Antilibanus,
Kasius mount Bpae;.
2 I t 'may here be remarked once for all that, later, the
Aramaic form crept into use in all divine names. Philo has
only the form BGAos. A late inscription from Berytus ( L e b n
111. 1854 ir) presents both forms in the two contiguous name:
' A @ L ~ ~ ~ and
AOW 'O<cp@nhou. I n Africa the pronunciation h ' a l
alone is found : cp Hannibal, Haadruhal, etc. Sew. ad &'n.
1729 ; ' Saturnus . . . lingua punica Bal deus dicitur.' T h e
identification of Kronos and Ba'al in rare.
3742
 PHCENICIA
above might equally well have been called 6u'aZuth
hi-asherah.
The Greeks were quite correct when for the most part they
applied t h e designation Asfarfe to the goddess of Byblos (Cic.
Nat. Dew. 359, Plut. de Is. 15). In Tyre Hiram I. hudt a
temple to Astarte (Menander ap. Jos. C. A#. 118, cp Philo
224). Itoba'al I. was priest of Astarte before he became
king. In Sidon Astarte is the principal divinity (so throughout
the OT ; similarly, e.g., Lucian, Dea Sur. 4). The Kings Esh-
munazar I. and his son Tabnit are priests; the latter's sister, t h e
queen-mother Am'aHtart, is priestess of Astarte (cp inscr. of
Tahnit and Eshm. 11.); the king Bod'aStart raised a building
to her (CIS 14). By the side of the goddess of the city we
find also in Sidon an 'Astarte of the Baal of Heaven' (see
below). From what we know we may presume that all the
Phcenician towns had an Astarte as tutelary deity.
Alongside ofilstarte is found the name Wit, 'goddess'
(cp above). Il%t had her priests in Carthage (CIS
1z43f:), and, under the name ' the lady Ilat,' a temple
in Sulci. On the other hand, E l is never found as the
designation of any definite deity, and, even in personal
names, occurs only in inscriptions from Byblos, in
striking contrast to the Hebrew and Arabic usage' (cp
N AMES, § 25). The same remark applies to 'adon,
'lord.' The true name of the god known to the
Greeks as ADONIS [ g . ~ . ]is undiscovered. Perhaps he
remained nameless in the cultus, and it may well be
that the case is similar with El. T h e ancients, indeed,
have much to tell us of El (whom they identify with
Kronos). Philo informs us that 'HXos was made with
four wings, of which two are at rest and the other two
outstretched; also, he had two eyes open and two
closed, so as to show that in sleeping he also waked
and in resting flew. Upon his head he wore (after the
Egyptian manner) two feathers. From this description
De Vogue (MeYanges d' Arch. Orient. 109)has identi-
fied him, perhaps rightly, upon Phcenician seals. His
first seat was at Byblos ; later he presented Byblos to
Baaltis, Berytus to Poseidon and the Cabiri. In
conformity with this, we find in Steph. By% the
founding of Byblos and Berytus ascribed to Kronos.
Thus the E l of Byblos is probably one of the gods
of the Byblos district. Accordingly El forms an ele-
ment of the name of the king of Byblos, Elpa'al
(!&m), known to us from coins ; and also probably,
in spite of the elision of K , in 5j.y. "EvuXos (Arrian,
ii. 156)-i.e., 'Ain'el, ' Eye of El.' In this case E l (as
Bdal elsewhere) must be regarded as the abbreviation
of some fuller divine name. But a similar El must also
have been worshipped in other towns. I t is stated by
Philo (ii. 1824; fr. 3 4 J ) that human sacrifices were
offered t.0 Kronos, and the Greek historians constantly
speak of Kronos as the god to whom in Phcenicia,
Carthage, and Sardinia, children were sacrificed.' This
Kronos is certainly El. who, according to Philo,
offered up his only son I ~ o d(cp I S AA C , § 3) in time
of famine to his father Uranos, and also killed his son
Sadidos and a daughter. Whether there was a separate
El in every individual town, or whether he, too, had a
no longer ascertainable proper name (such perhaps as
El-Hamman Melki'aStart) we cannot say.
As man's civilisation and culture advance, the great
cosmical forces, on which the course of the world
depends, acquire for him increasing interest and im-
portance. At first the community of worship takes no
account of them a t all. Sun, moon, and stars, it is
thought, roll on in their courses unconcerned about
men ; the seasons come and go whether man sacrifices,
or refrains from sacrificing, to the celestial powers by
whom these changes are ordered. I t is on the local
1 On the other hand in Syrian territory a god 5~ is found in
the inscriptions of Zenjirli and Gerjin, among the gods of
J?'udi, but always mentioned after t h e god Hadad. Along
with El is named the god Rkb-'el (pronunciation unknown),
who seems to have heen the chief divinitv of Sam'al (Bauinschrift
:d. Sachau SBA W 1896, p. 1051) and- hears the title n*l
lord of thehouse ' ((nscr. of Panamu)[cp WRS, ReL Sem. 94 n.]:
2 Plato, Minus, 3 1 5 ; Diodor. 1386 2014; cp Justin, 1 8 6 ;
Plut. de supersf. 13; Porphyr. a'z ndstin. - 2 5 6 ; Suidas,
Xap8bvror yiAws=schol. Od. 20 302, etc.
3743
PHCENICIA
powers who stand under these greater powers that the
prosperity a man desires in his own immediate circle
and in the home depends-fruitfulness of field and
flock, success in trade, victory in war. T o these
local deities prayers are made and sacrifices offered,
and to them the grateful worshipper returns thanks
when the god has ' heard his voice and blessed him,' as
the standing formula in the Phcenician inscriptions mns.
Hence these local gods live with, and in, nature, like
the ' Lord ' worshipped a t Byblos (see A DONIS ), who
according to the legend, was killed while hunting the
boar far up in Lebanon, near the fountain of 'Afka,
whereupon the spring became red with his blood
(Lucian, 2.c. ).
Similar religious observances are met with elsewhere
also. In Tyre the awaking (ZyepuLs ; Menand., ap.
]os. c. Ap. 118, § 119)of Melkart-Heracles was cele-
brated in the Macedonian month Peritios (Feb. -March,
according to the Tyrian calendar; cp Gutschmid,
KZ. Schr. 4474fl) ; his death in the West occurs in
colonial legends. In other places the gods are associ-
ated with other elements. Thus the god of Berytus
doubtless a ' Baal Berut,' is treated as god of the sea
(Poseidon; Philo, 225). A Poseidon, to whom offerings
were thrown into the sea, is found also in Carthage
(Diod. 1383, Polyb. 7 9 ) ; but the name bywhich he was
there called is not known. Similarly, in Sidon honour
was paid to a BaX&uuros Zeds (Hesych., s.v.). I n
Berytus. according to Philo (211 17 25 27). he has associ-
ated with him seven other gods, the sons of Sydyk, 'the
righteous' (2II 20-i. e., p w ) , the discoverers and patrons
of navigation, called the Kabiri, 'great gods.' W e know
that their worship also reached Greece ; but its Phcenician
form is quite obscure.
No such deities are found u on the inscriptions ; pelhaps we
should identify them with the ghanician Pataikoi mentioned by
Herod. (Y37), dwarf-like images placed at the bows of the
ships (see CAsToK A N D PoLmx)-modifications of the grotesque
Besa (Bes) figures (which the Egyptians of t h e New Kingdom
borrowed from the Semites and prized so highly) which appear
so frequently upon Phcenician monuments.1
When, with the advance in civilisation, the good
things of life for which man cares and toils increase,
when his interests and connections, both political and
commercial, are extended, and the community steps
forth from its narrow isolation into a larger world, the
local gods no longer suffice. There arises the need for
higher powers who can exert their influence and extend
their protection everywhere throughout the world. At
the same time the religious conceptions are raised and
intensified ; man begins to realise his dependence upon
the great cosmic powers, and feels the necessity of
coming into close relations with them. Its influence is
shown in two opposite directions; in the elevation of
the local deities to a rank in which their influence is not
local, or at least not exclusively so, and in the intro-
duction into the local worships of the great cosmic
powers, with the development of a worship specially
dedicated to them, which gradually pushes into the
background and ultimately supersedes the cults of the
old local deities. Among the Israelites the first of
these two processes triumphed and obtained undivided
supremacy ; the tribal-god Yahwk became the universal
God-the ruler of heaven and of earth, besides whom
there is no other. Elsewhere we usually find the two
processes going on side by side, with no consciousness
of their mutual opposition. So it was in Phcenicia.
W e have already seen how it came to pass that the
local deities rose to a position of larger significance.
I t was quite natural that the god who had protected
Tyre and made it great and prosperous should continue
to grant his aid when his worshippers removed to
distant lands and founded cities there; and that the
goddess of Byblos and other Astartes should manifest
1 W. M. Miiller's conjecture (As. u. Eur. 310) that they are
derived from the Babylonian Izdubar-type seems highly
probable.
3744
 PHmNICIA
themselves as givers of prosperity and fruitfulness, and
as patrons of sexual life, not within the narrow confines
of the city alone ; to those who worshipped them they
became gods capable of showing their power far and wide
over the earth. For this reason it was that foreigners also
turned to them and, to gain their protection, dedicated
to them altars and temples. T h e festival of Adonis,
for example, was celebrated throughout the Phoenician
world ; the god of Lebanon was worshipped in Cyprus,
etc. Of still greater importance in this connection is
the similarity of the functions of ‘the various gods, the
Baals, Astartes (‘Altaroth), etc., leading as it does
inevitably to the view that they are all but forms of
one and the same mighty universal being. They are
deemed to be the gods w h rule the w-orld and regulate
all the phenomena of the cosmos. Here, especially,
the Babylonian conception that the gods manifest
themselves in the stars, finds a place (so Astarte,
according to Philo, 224). In the cultus all these views
are represented; but the local tie, by which their
worshippers stand to them in a quite different relation
from that which they OCCUPY towards similar gods of
ueighbouring places, still subsists. I n feeling, how-
ever, and in religious idea, the sense of this local tie
retreats more and more into the background, and
ultimately its place is taken by the larger, more
generalised conception of the Baal, the Astarte, etc.,
spoken of above.
There are instances, hpwever. of the opposite develop-
ment also. In isolated cases in the Phoenician cities,
on the evidence of proper names, we can trace the
worship of the sun-god Shemesh (Adoni-5eme4, CIS
1 8 8 [Irlalium] ; Abd-leme5, ib. 116 [Sidon] ; 107
[Citium]), and of the moon-god Yerah’ (‘Abd-yerah,
on a seal, TSBA 5456). Reference in this connection
may be made also to the earth-goddess, invoked in
Carthage, along with the sun and the moon (Polyb.
79), of whom Philo has much to say.
Above all, however, worship was given to the ‘god
of heaven ’ Bdal-SamCm.
His temples are found in Tyre,a in U m m el-‘Awimid (CIS
17). ,Carthage ‘(3. 379) on the Hawk’s Island near Sulci in
Sardinia (3. 139). He’is the Z&s irravpavror of the altar in
Sarba beside the Nahr el-Kelb near Beirht (Renan op. cit.
332). Carthage borrowed his cult from Cyprus (J& 185).
T o the religious consciousness of a later age he became the
chief deity, equivalent to the Greek Zeus (cp Plautus, Pan.
56J); he alone of all the gods is b Philo explained not
as a deified man, but as the sun, who gas been invoked from
the earliest times (25). This narrows the conception far too
much, although we may assume that h e was believed to manifest
himself particularly in the sun.
Corresponding to the ‘god of heaven’ we have the
‘goddess of heaven,‘ the ‘Astarte of the heaven of
Baal’ ( $ y > n w n i n ~ y ) , to whom we find ESmun.azar
setting up a temple by the side of the sanctuary of
B.ial-Sidon-a temple which is not to be confounded
with that ‘of our lady Astarte in the sea-land (coast-
land).’ This goddess was worshipped by other Syrian
tribes as well.
Herodotus calls her Aphrodite Urania (i. 105 137), and (very
incorrectly) regards the sanctuary of the goddess of Askelon
[Atar atis i e , the ‘Attar (Astarte) of the god ‘Ate (see ATAR-
G A T I ~ Ias%; lentre of diffusion from which her worship passed
to Cyprus and Cythera. Compare also the ‘Atur&zmuin-i.e.
At21 of heaven (an Aramaic forrnbworshipped by an Arabia;
nomad tribe (ASur-bani-pal, col. viii. 112 124: cp KATP)
I48 414). and the ‘queen of heaven,’ worshipped in Jerusalem
Uer. 7 18 44 178). The merchants of Citium brought the cult
of their goddess with them to Athens and erected a sanctuary
t o her there in B.C. 333 (CIA 2 168). In CIA 2 1588 (a tolerably
old votive-insciptipn erected bv Aristoclea of Citium) she is
called ’ A + P O ~O LU~~ Q V See
~ QUEEN OF H EAVEN .
This Astarte was pre-eminently worshipped in Car-
thage and all over Punic North Africa. I n Latin authors
and inscriptions she is called Ccelestis, ‘the heavenly
goddess.’ She is a virgin (Aug. Civ. Dei, ii. 4 26 ;
1 The name Ben-hodeS (Gk. Novlujucor), so frequently found in
Cyprus, has nothing to do with a cult : it merely denotes a child
born a t the new-moon. See BAR-SABBAS, NAMES, g 72.
Menand., ap. Jos. c. A,#. 118, i v 70:s TOG A&; Dios, ib.
117, 705 ‘Ohu~rriouA& 7 b rep&.
120 3745
PHCEINICIA
CZL 89796; ‘ D e = magna3 virgini ccelesti,’ etc.), and
so not the wife of BdalSamem; but she stands in the
inscriptions by the side of Saturn ( i . e . , probably,
Bdal-hamnign) as the chief goddess of N. Africa. I n
the treaty with Philip (Polyb. 7 1 9 ) the two appear a s
Zeus and Hera at the head of the Carthaginian pantheon
(cp Aug. in Heptateuch. 7 16 : ‘lingua punica Juno Astarte
vocatur ’). Ancient writers identify her more commonly
with Urania. Her image, probably a cone of stone,
was brought by the emperor Elagabalus to Rome,
and wedded to the stone fetish of Emesa which was
an object of veneration with him (Herodian, 56,
Dio Cass. 79 12). For her aspect as moon-goddess, see
below, 5 13.
The divinity is ‘ king ’ as well as ‘ lord.’ H e stands
over the community which he protects, in the same way
as the earthly ruler does, only that the latter also is his
subject. ‘ K i n g ’ and ‘queen’ (Melek and Milkat) are
used with extraordinary frequency in Phoenician personal
names to denote some divinity (thus we have the name
Abi-milki of Tyre as early as the Amarna tablets), just as
in Israel down to the exile Yahwk was very often invoked
as Melek (wrongly vocalised Molech). But here also
we meet the same phenomenon as in the cases of El.
Ba‘al. and Ba‘alat ; there is not a single inscription in
which any god named Melek or Milkat is invoked.
These, like the others, were obviously mere titles,
whilst the names by which the deities were invoked
varied. Perhaps we may co-ordinate Melek with the
MelkiL‘aStart mentioned above (but not with Melkart,
which, when occurring in proper names, remains un-
changed),’ and Milkat with the ‘queen of heaven‘ (Jer.
Z.c.)--i.e., the Carthaginian Caelestis. Here, too, no
certainty is possible. See MOLECH.
None of the divine names hitherto mentioned have
been genuine proper
. . names; but such names are,
12. G)ods with nevertheless, abundant enough. T o
this class belongs that of Melkart of
a
proper names’Tyre (see 11),with reference to whom
it may here be a d i e d that according to Philo he is the
son of (the otherwise quite unknown) Damariis, son
of heaven and earth (222, -r$ 6& AqpapoDr-ri yivmar
MEXKdepos 6 Kai ‘HpaKXijs) ; and according to Eudoxus
(ap. Athen. 9392) son of Asteria (Astarte) and of Zeus.
Another name of this class is that of ESmiin, one of the
chief gods of Sidon, where ESmun-‘azar (2. 17) built him
a temple.
I n personal names ESmBn is exceedingly frequent (for the
pronunciation cp ‘ABG&oiruos : Lebas, 3 1 8 6 6 ~ ) . H e was also
worshipped in Citium (CIS 142#.), and bad a temple in
Carthage (ih. 252). A trilingual inscription in Phcenician,
Greek, and Latin, from a temple in Sardinia, gives him the
enigmatical cognomen ~ H Dwhich
, is simplyretained in the trans-
lations (Wscolujio Merre, ’AmdqrrLo Mqppq), plainly because
even then unintelligible. T h e inscr:ption shows that ESmhn
was identified with Esculapius, whom Philo (2 20 27) names a s
son of Sydyk by a daughter of Cronos (El) and Astarte, and as
brother of the Kabiri. On ESmhn-‘AStart and ESmhn-Melkart,
see below.
Another deity frequently found in compound proper
names is i x (prouably to be pronounced *d).
A Tyrian living in the Egyptian On is called Sidyaton (‘Sid
gives ), son of Ger-$id (‘metoikos of Sid’) cp CIS 1 IO‘.
YatonTid and ‘Abdsid are very frequently met with in Carthage *
for Han-:id cp CIS1292. W e do not find any trace of
worship of Sid ; but the gods Sid-melkart, and Sid-tnt are both
met with (see below). We may hazard the conjecture that
?id is, th; ’Ayprlis of Philo (29), ‘ t h e hunter,’ or his brother
Ahrwr, the Fisher,’ who figure in that work as men of the
primzval time.
The name can scarcely be separated from that of
SIDON [pv.]. 1s it not most probable that both town
and people have taken their designation from the god
(cp the tribal names Asher, Gad, Edom, etc., derived
from deities)? I t may also be noted that Cheyne
( Z A T W 1 7 1 8 9 ) has rightly discerned the eponym of
USu=Palzetyros in the Usoos named by Philo (28) as
1 The Melekbaal and Melelt‘osir mentioned above cannot
help us here.
3746
 PHaNICIA
the brother and rival of Saniemrumos' of Tyre, who
settled upon the mainland opposite a n d became the
first seafarer (see above, § IO). This being so, the
identification with Esau disappears, unless perhaps the
region took its name from this deity2 (see E S A U ).
We are still less in a position to speak of the rest of
the deities found in the Phoenician inscriptions.
Sankun, in IayXowLaBljv, written ]ID, Sakkiin, in the very
frequent Carthaginian proper name Ger-sakkiin (cp also 'Ahd-
sakkun, CIS 112 n [Abydos]), and i3DN (Eskiin) in an inscription
from the Pirzus (ib.118), where an altar is set up i i u p D & -
i e . , doubtless ' t o the mighty Eskiin' (cp 11"7y2).3 3ng
is found in many Cypriote names, but also in Carthage ( C I S
1197 617 670) in the names Pmy-bma' and PmyatBn . it is
written Pni 'in 'Abdp'm in Abydos (ib. IIZC). Ykn ocdurs in
Ykn-Sillem inCitium(C1.S i. 1013)and Carthage(id.484). Dmin
D'm-$lleh (cp above), son of Dm-hanni, GI. 4 o p u d w s 4opauo
from Sidon (Athens, CIS 1 lrg), and in Tsnoyi, D'm-malak in
Tyre ( Z D M G 39217). pDq (perhaps sfisim, horses, cp I K.
23 T I ) appears in Abd-ssrn rn Cyprus (CIS 1 46 49 53 93) ; see
SISMAI. Again, we have i3DniL)n. a god or goddess who
possessed a temple in Carthage (CIS1253J); the first part of
the name according to the editors is connected with the Egyptian
Hathar, whilst the second part appears in the name Ger-mskr
(ib. 267 372 886 : cp ISSACHAR, $ 6, end).
Of the female deities, only one, Tnt, claims attention.
I t has become customary to pronounce the name a s
Tanith ; but there is no authority for
In the name of the Sidonian 'Abd-tnt Gr. Ap~pr8wpor(CIS assumed as royal ornament the head of an ox. The symbol
1 116: Athens) the goddess is interpreted as Artemis; but
whether the seven Tisavi8ss 4 ' A ~ T & %of F Philo(2 zo), daughters (whence Lucian's designation of Astarte as ZcAqvaiq, De Dea
of El and Astarte, have anything to do with her we do not
know. She is elsewhere found only in Carthage where, as
'the lady l'nt of the Pne ba'al'5 (that is, as Halevy has reco
nised, a place-name-' face of Ba'al corresponding to PEKUEL~; Herodian56 : Ai@vespBv o;ua;rilv Ohpaviav K ~ O V U ~Qoivncr88
she has a temple which was held in high repute, and is invoked,
along with 'the lord Baal hamman,' in countless inscriptions, in
which she is always given the first place.
Once ( C I S 1380), in her stead, we find mention of
'the mother, the mistress of Pne'ba'al ' fi ( 5 ~ x n2 i~l 5 0x5
inn Sy25 i&). From this it would appear that the
' lady mother ' ( N D N ) who in Carthage (CIS 1177) is in-
voked along with the ' goddess of the cella' (niinn n5yx),
is only another name of T n t ; but whether the ' mother
of the Ashera' in Citium ( n i m n nN so read for n i m n ; in 'Abdis [?I o i l y , from Sidon in Carthage, ib. 308).
CIS 1 1 3 ) is so also, remains undetermined. If further
combinations are sought, we may perhaps discern in this
motherly divinity the earth-goddess.
Whether we are to assume that the Phoenicians had
also a goddess of Fortune or Fate, Gad ( = d x ~ )we
cannot say. The frequent feminine name Gadna'mat
with its variations (in Plautus Giddeneme ' pleasant
fortune ') is no proof of this.7
A large class of Phoenician divine names is formed
b y combining two simple names. Other Semitic tribes
also thus combined names of opposite sexes. T h e
often -quoted Phoenician divine name Melki'aStart i s
doubtless to be explained in the same way, as meaning
the Melech who is the husband of Astarte. So also
in Carthage we find a god Egniun-'AStart (CIS1245) ;
another Sid-tnt of Ma'arat (Megara, the lower town of
earthage ; ib. 247-249).
There is more difficulty in explaining similar combinations of
1 There was most probably a god bearing this strange name
(Philo translates it 'Y$oupavros) in Tyre.
2 Esau is as much a divine name a s Edom. WMM rightly
sees his female counternart in the Svrian goddess 'Asit (see
Eoohl 8 2' ESAU S n. 6). Whither <he ~ i ~ i of'the x y
Carthiginia; inscri&on {CZSlz95 ; text difficult) should really
be read 'Abdedom or 'Obed-edom (cp OBEII-E~OM), and taken Ya'udi [Zenjirli]. He is idenhied with Apollo in the bilingual
as proving the existence of a Carthaginian god Edom, the present
writer does not venture to decide.
3 In Cirta CIS 1145 Baliddir CIL 85279 1 9 1 2 1 3
4 Hoffmarh's acute :ombinatibns regarding this and other
names (Uebev einige P h n . G8ttir, 3 2 8 : : ) seem to the present
writer quite untenable. At all events, they admit neither of
proof nor of disproof.
5 Written 5 ~ 2 ~ 3 Euting,
3, Cnrthagische Inschnytten,IW.
6 This shows at the same time that Pne-ha'al is really a
locality and that the rendering 'face of Baal' in which some
have sought to find a mystic doctrine of theology is untenable.
7 Whether the m z c . name nyi, in Idalium (CIS193) ought
t o be pronounced Gad'ate, and is compounded from the Syrian
divine name 'Ate (cp ATARGATIS), is, doubtful ; see Noldeke,
ZDMG 4247' [1888], who compares Gld'on (see GIDEON).
3747
PHaNICIA
two masculine names, Egmun-melkart in Citium (CIS1 1 6 0
23-28), Sid-melkart in Carthage (id. &), Melkart Reseph (prob!
ably for Rebeph) on the old seal of Ba'alyaton-man-of-the-gods
(Le., divine servant) of Melkarth-reseph: W N D ~ NV N in*sp&
q x i mpS& (De Vogue, Mil. 8 1 ; Levy,SiegeZ u. Gemmen, 31,
no. 18, from Tyre). Perhaps we should reckon also to this class
such names as Ba'al-adir, Melek-ba'al, Melek-'osir, and the like.
In the case of these names there is hardly any other course open
than to assume an identification of the two gods to be intended
-not a very Semitic idea.
T h e Phoenicians showed in religion, as in so many
other directions, their readiness to appropriate what
13. was foreign. As in art, so also here, the
gods, etc. influences of Babylonia (in the form in
which these had reached Syria) and of
Egypt are most apparent (though there are also Syrian
gods). T h e influence of the two civilisations upon the
character of the deities a n d of the religious symbols a n d
amulets employed, has been referred to already (§ 8).
I n this instance it is the Egyptian element that pre-
dominates. T h e Ba'alat of Byblos is modelled exactly
on the pattern of Hathor ,or Isis-with cow-horns on
her head, between them the sun-disk, in her hand a
sceptre with flowers.
Astarte was often similarly represented (see ASHTAROTH.
KARNAIM) ; as she was also in the Syrian interior-for example
at Kadesh on the Orontes, where the goddess of the city was sg
fashioned. Hence the statement of Philo (2 24) that Astarte
later, ceased to be understood and was taken for a crescent moo;
Syr. 4) which along with the interpretation of Ba'al-bnem as
mean& Sun-god (see above) led to the result that the heavenly
Astarte (oirpdvra) came to be regarded as a moon-goddess ; so
.
' A u ~ p o a p ~[corrupted
qv from Astarte, the reference being to her
star, see above] bvo,~&<owur, ufh$vl)v dvar BiAovTas. Modern
scholars have long mistakenly sought to find in this identification
with a moon-goddess the central conception of Astarte-worship.
Ba'alat of Ryblos was connected with Isis and Osiris.
Later we find the name of Osiris frequently present in
proper names ( C I S 1 9 1 3 [Umm el'AwRmid]; 122
[Tyre] ;, 46 58 65 [Cyprus]) ; also Bast (Bnbastis),
Horus ( Abdhor, zb. 53 ; Cyprus ; c p 46), Isis (perhaps
T h e god Tdau~or son of Mi@r (Egypt), that is, the
Egyptian Thoth, who plays so great a part in Philo
(14 ' 2 1 1 2 5 8 5 9 ) as inventor of writing a n d all wisdom,
has not as yet been met with in the inscriptions.
, It was from Syria that two deities zealously worshipped
by the Phoenicians in Cyprus originally came-ReSep
(pronounciation uncertain) a n d (possibly from Babylonia)
'Anat-both of whom the Egyptians of the New Kingdom
adopted as war-gods e (see R ESHEPH, ANATH).
'Anat has a temple in Citium (Euting, SRA W , 1885,
no. I ~ o ) and , another in Idalium characterised by the
absence of any of these votive images of the god so
common elsewhere in Cyprian temple^.^
To Babylonia is d u e t h e influence exerted o n the
ritual of Adonis of Byblos by the legend of TammCiz.
From the same source also came the cultus of Hadad
(for such appears to be the right pronounciation of the
Babylonian-Assyrian deityusually called RammXn), which
we meet with not only in Syria but also in Phcenicia at
Byblos in the name of Rib-addi in the Amarna tablets
1 n D 2 N in n D l N i i y , C I S 186 B 6 [Kartha-daSt in .Cyprus]
ib. 102 [Ahydus] ' Gk. ' A @ & o ~ ~ a u[Lehasroc 3 1 8 6 6 ~ ;Sldon].
'2 See WMM, 'As. U. Eur. 3 1 1 3 R&e; is included, in the
Hadad-inscription of Panamu among the gods of the land of
inscriptions, and has several names that are in part borrowed
from the Greeks (Mkl='ApwrAos [CIS 1 8 9 8 , Idaliuml, n+
='Ehcrras, and Dn'n~H='Ahauioras-i.e. of AlaHia? [Euting,
S B A W , 1887, p. 119f:; Tamassus]). I: Carthage he has a
temple under the form r p q ~ ~ (CIS1251 ; cp 'Abd'ariap
ArSaph
ib. 393). NRldeke (ZDMG 42473 [1888])rightly adduces also
the name of the Palestinian town Arsiif (the Greek Apollonia);
possibly the god had a temple there. [So, before Niildeke,
Clerm.-Ganneau, Horns et saint Georges, 16f. (1877).1
3 See Ohnefalsch-Richter, Kyjros, 16. In a Lapathos in-
.
scription we find 0.n ly y cp 0-n li~ nmwy and Dt;3020.
That is, approximately, k a t h in her fnlness of vigour ; she
is taken as the equivalent of 'ABqva uwreipa V ~ K V(i6.95). She is
not elsewhere met with in Phrenician territory.
3748
 PHCENICIA
(see HADAD,R I MM O N ). His name does not occur in
Phoenician inscriptions : but Philo ( 2 2 4 ) knows him as
‘king of the gods’ who, with ‘ t h e greatest Astarte’
(4 peylurq ’Aurdprq) and with Zeus son of Demarus,
rules the land by the authority of Cronos (El). Philo
mentions also DAGON [q...], whom he takes for a corn-
god, but who is of Babylonian origin, and whose cultus
came to Philistis before the Philistine settlement (Dagan-
takala, Am. Tab. 215f:).
On Assyrian gods in Sidon, see below, fj 21. Here
and there also we find traces in the later period of the
deity, originally from Gaza, known as hlarna, ‘ o u r
Lord’ in the proper names ‘Abdmarfiai (‘jmmy, CZS
1166) and MarThai (i6. 93 [Cyprus] ; cp the Tyrian
lamp with the dedication 6’eG BseXpapr CZS1 p. 111).
With the Macedonian period the Greek deities began
to be introduced and, as we have already seen, to be
put as much as possible on a level with the native ones.
Such, apart from a few other figures in Philo quite
-
unintelligible to us. are the deities known to have been
worshipped among the Phoenicians.
142tt;y Though the general type, however,
state after was the same everywhere, the details
..
aeatn* of the Dantheon were. as niieht he
exoected. different in ‘each i n c h d u a l
city. T h e only one of these pantheons about which we
possess precise information is that of Carthage, which
we know through the Greek translation of the treaty
between Hannibal and Philip of Macedon (Polyb. 7 9 ) .
I n that treaty the gods of Carthage are arranged in
groups of three, invoked in the following order :-(I)
Zeus [Ba‘al-Sami%n], Hera [‘AHtart Sme Ba‘al= Coelestis],
Apollo [unknown : hardly ReSep ; many have thought
of Ba‘alhammh, hut ESmtin is also possible]; (2)
Gaipwv KapXqGoviwv [Astarte of Carthage], Herakles
[Melkart]. Iolaos [unknown ; in any case he is thought
of as a constant attendant of Melkart] ; ( 3 ) @so2 oi
uuurpareubpwor-by which we are to understand
fetishes carried along with the army to the field as was
the ark of Yahwk--, sun, moon, earth ; ( 4 ) rivers, har-
bours, streams ; (5)all the gods who inhabit ( K a d X o u u r )
Carthage. T h e name most conspicuous by its absence
is that of Tnt-for it cannot be represented by any of
the deities mentioned.
The Phoenician worship differs in no essential particu-
lar from that of the allied members of the Semitic
family. Sacred territories are dedicated to the various
gods, and altars and niassebahs grow up. Out of
these the image of the god is gradually developed, often
(as we have seen) borrowing its forms from the nations
more advanced in civilisation. T h e image of the god
demands also a house for the god, a temple, which in
the Phmnician cities was built throughout in the Egyptian
style. Alongside of the newer, however, the older
forms of religion continued to hold their ground. The
arrangements of a Phoenician temple, as we learn from
the coins and excavations in Cyprus (see Ohnefalsch-
Richter ; especially instructive is his [partly recon-
structed] temenos of Idalium. Plate lvi.), included a
large open court, in which stood the stone-fetish of the
god and the worshippers set up their votive pillars (mas-
SEbahs) and divine images. Limitation of space forbids
a lengthened discussion as to the various sacred animals
(doves to Astarte, etc.), or of the festivals or the ritual.
From Carthage have been recovered several fragments of sacri-
ficial ordinances (CIS 1 165 167.170 - amongst them the great
sacrificial tariff of Marseilles) which fix with exactitude the
various dues of the priests, just as in P, or in the Greek ordin-
ances relating to the same subject. Moreover, we have from
Cilium fragments of a list of expenses for temple servants and
sacrifices (i6. 86), and from Carthage a fragment of a sacrificial
calendar (i6.166), as also of a list of large expenditures b y the
citizens on the temple (3. 171). Amongst the personnel of the
temple, the ‘ hair-cutters (barbers) of the gods’ (&K 152, C I S
1 8 6 a P J , 257-259588) have a prominent place (cp B E A R D ); as
1 T h e existence of a God 5” (as conjectured by Berger in a
dissertation cited by Noldeke in Z D h f G 4 2 471 [1888])can hardly
be said to have been sufficiently proved.
3749
PHCl3NICIA
also have the temple-servants (86247&, etc.); other ofiicial
designations (e.c., 260J 377 ; and some in the passages already
cited) still remain ohscure (cp Doc;, $ 3).
Of all that the individual or the state receives by the
favour of the god, a certain portion, and that the first
and hest-an (irrapxf or nvmi (CZS15, as in 0T)-
is rendered to the giver. S o also the deity receives
a share of the spoils of war. The practice, the
existence of which we know from the O T , of sacrificing
to the god after any great victory or deliverance. if not
all the prisoners, at least the best and choicest of them,
*upon the altar before the holy tent ’ was still followed in
Carthage in 307 R. c., after the victory over Agathocles
(Diod. 2065). When angry, however, the godhead
demands for propitiation also the blood of the wor-
shipper’s own kin. The maxim ‘every firstborn is
mine ’ plainly held good in Phoenicia also, and applied,
as amongst the Israelites, to the firstborn of men as
well as of earth (see F IRSTBORN). In ordinary times
no doubt the debt was redeemed, as in Israel ; but in
times of extremity a man would offer to his god his
own grown-up son. See MOLECH.
I f it were his only son, the sacrifice would be all the more
efficacious, as we learn from the story of El (like that of
Abraham ; see ISAAC) in the legend narrating the institution of
this kind ofoffering(see above, $ 1 1 , col. 3743). As civilisation ad-
vanced, the Carthaginians sought to escape thedire obligation by
settingapart forsacrificechildrenofslaves whom they brought u p
as their own. In 310, however, when Agathocles had reduced the
state to the utmost straits and the enemy lay encamped before the
city, they once more laid 200 boys of their nohlest families upon
the arms of the brazen image of Cronos where they were allowed
t o fall into the fiery furnace flaming beneath (Diud. 20 14).
This seems to have been the last occasion on which matters
were brought to such extremity; in the agonies of the Punic
wars we d o not read of any similar measure being resorted to.
In other cases, when a catastrophe threatens or has
already befallen, the head of the state offers himself as
a sacrifice to the offended deities and ascends the
sacrificial pyre. So, according to the legend, did Dido-
Elissa, the foundress of the city ; so did Hamilcar after
the battle on the Himera; and a similar step was
meditated by King Juba of Numidia after the battle of
Thapsus, and would actually have been taken by him
if Cirta his capital had not shut her gates upon him.
T h e deity demands yet other sacrifices besides. Among
these was circumcision-a practice borrowed by the Phcenicians,
as by the Israelites, from Egypt (Herod. 2 108), and according
to Philo (224) performed by El upon himself in the first instance
and so imposed upon his subjects. We find no allusion, however
to the practice of castration in honour of the gods so frequentl;
found in Syria and Asia Minor. O n the other hand ecstatic
L prophets ’ who in honour of ‘the Ba‘al ’ perform wild dances
and wound themselves with swords and spears in orgiastic
frenzy as was done by the followers of the goddess of Comma,
and ishven now done by the Persians a t the mourning festival
of Hasan and Husein were known to the Phoenicians also (cp
I K: 18 26fi). In the’Golenischeff Papyrus (see B 5 ) a page of
the King of Ryhlos, seized by the god during a sacrifice, gives
a n oracle in his ecstasy. Another sacrifice to the deity is the re-
quirement that virgins should prostitute themselves in the service
of the great goddesses and make over the profits t o the temple
treasury- a practice that was widely diffused among the
Semites and the peoples of Asia Minor. Perhaps Rohertson
Smith is right in finding here a religious survival of primitive
conditions, under which fixed marriages were still unknown and
the sexual coitus was considered as a manifestation of the
divinity in human life. W e have direct evidence of the existence
of the custom at Byhlos (Luc. D e Dea Syr. 6) and in Cyprus
(Herod. 1 199, Justin 18 5). For another analogous practice in
the service of the deity which seems to have been current in
Phcenicia c p Eus. Vit. Const. 3 55.
With regard to what happens to men after death the
views of the Phoenicians, as of the other Semitic peoples,
remained quite undeveloped. From the sepulchral
inscriptions of Eshmunazar and Tabnit we see that
undisturbed rest in the grave was desired, and to ensure
it imprecations were employed ; to open a grave or
coffin is an ‘abomination unto Astarte’ (Tabnit 6). It
is, however, hut a comfortless, shadowy existence that is
lived in the dark kingdom of death ‘ among the ghosts
or Rephiinz’ (A40ot. nn. the god of death, son of El,
mentioned in Philo, 2 24). The Phoenician, like the
Israelite, had no more heartfelt longing than for a
descendant to continue his family and with it his earthly
3750
 PHCENICIA
existence ; e to have. no son or seed' is the heaviest
curse the gods can inflict ( ESmun. 8 I I 22, Tabnit 7).
In connection with the cultus, among the Phcenicians
as elsewhere, there gradually developed a body of
theological doctrines. T h e few allu-
15. TheologJl
and cosmogony. sions to these in the inscriptions, how-
ever, are practically unintelligible, as
is shown by the texts of the Malakba'al-stelPs,l and still
more by the inscription of Ma'siib (see above, 5 I O ).
This last would almost seem to sdggest that the Israelite
conception of an ' apostle' or messenger (1~53) of the
deity was not unfamiliar even in Phcenicia (cp the name
Ba'al-mal'ak. CIS 1 182 455, etc!). In Cyprus arose the
singular conception of a divinity in which man and
woman are united, and which accordingly was repre-
sented as a bearded goddess.
T h e theologians of the Hellenistic period dragged this to
light, calling the deity in question Aphroditus (Philochorus and
Aristophanea <z#. Mucrod. iii. 8 2 3 , Hesych. S.V. 'A+pd&roc, etc.),
a n d the church fathers are very ready to refer to the subject ;
but this deity never possessed much importance. I t is portrayed
on no monument, and the attempt to associate it with any of
the divinities named above, still more to find it (as has sometimes
been done) in the compound names of gods, is very Precarious.
It is not even certain whether it is really Phcenician a t all,
Fince, according to Hesych. (/.c.), it seems to have belonged
originally to Amathus, which was not a Phcenician town.
P h e n i c i m theology had its speculations about the
origin and growth of the world, of mankind, of
civilisation, and of its own home. Presumably these
were embodied in a religions literature of the subject,
which dealt with it somewhat after the manner of the
narratives of Genesis. All our actual information on
the subject, however, has to be taken from late recen-
sions of it, written in Greek, and showing marked traces
of foreign influences. In these writings, as in the many
Jewish writings of the Hellenistic age, we have native
scholars with patriotic arrogance seeking to exhibit to
the then dominant race the antiquity and depth of the
native traditions, and to prove that the Greeks really
stole their wisdom and theology from the East, a t
the same time distorting it in the process. That these
writings, however, rest not only on native traditions,
but also, as was the case with the Jews likewise, on
native written documents, is not to be questioned. On
the other hand, the names of wise men of remote
antiquity, who are alleged as authors of these works,
are of very problematic authenticity.
Two cosmogonies have come down to us, the one
from Sidon, the other from Byblos.2 The former was
narrated in Greek by Eudenius a pupil of Aristotle,
and from him it was borrowed by Damascius (De pr.
grin. 125) who subjoined a Neo-platonic interpretation.
I n a somewhat modified form the same Sidonian
tradition is cited at a later date as the work of the
ancient Sidonian Mochos ( M G X O S )which ~ had been
translated into Greek, ostensibly by a certain Lretos,
along a i t h other unknown Phenician authors (Theo-
dotos, Hypsicrates) in the time of Posidonius of Rhodes
(first half of the last century B . C . ). Damascius (Depv.
priz. 125) has preserved for us a n extract from this cos-
1 Berger in his discussion of these has doubtless established
the literal meaning correctly enough ; but that does not solve
the whole problem (1. As. ser. 7 tome 8 [1896]).
2 It is no proof of Byhios beibg the religious metropolis of
Phcenicia that we usually find on its coins, from the Hellenistic
period onwards, the surname 'the holy' ( n & q j ~ $ i ~ $i f.p i c BUS-
A o v ) . for similar expressions occur on the coins of Sidon and
Tyr~(Ec8Gvocn i s iepp8r m i LWAov [also with personification of
the city-deity ZLGSVOS &is i r p i s rai LaJAov ai vavapx~8osl
and Tdpou k p L rai L&A\ou).
3 According to Posidonius (Strabo, xvi. 224) he lived r p b TGV
T p o r i l v . He passed into the later handbooks as one of the
oriental founders of Philosophy; Diog. Lzrt. #rem. I (mis-
written'tlps, followed by Suidas, s.~.), Ianiblich. Vif.P th 14
( b +uor6hoyor, ancestor of the Sidonian prophets, and d e rest
of the Phcenician hierophants), Jos. Ant. I. 3 9 (with a n unknown
Hestizus, and the Egyptian Hieronymus, and other writers of
various nationalities, as alleged authorities for the story of the
flood) ; Athen. 3 1 2 6 a (with Sanchuniathon).
4 Tatian, adv. Grrecos, 37 [copied by Clem.Alex. Sirom.
i 21 1171 ; cp Kiihl ' zu Menander von Ephesus u. Lretos,' Rhein.
M US. 50 1
41x
3751
PHCE N ICIA
mogony also, Posidonius detected in it the atomic theory
(Strabo, xvi. 224), just as Damascius found in it the
Neo-platonic conception of the world. It does not at all
followfrom this, however, eitherthat thewritingof Mochus
contained a single word about atoms-how Posidonius
arrived at his view can be perceived clearly enough
from the fragment which has come down to us-or that
the writing was a ' literary fraud' as Riihl supposed.
Considerably later is our authority upon the Byblian
traditions-Philo of Byblos, the well known writer of
the period of Hadrian. H e relied for his information
upon an ancient sage, Sanchuniathon, who had drawn
the primreval wijdom of Taaut from the writings of the
'Appouveis in the temples (see above, 5 IO).^ Whether
there ever really was a I'hcenician writing under the
name of Sanchuniathon we do not know ; in any case
the tradition has been very greatly manipulated by
Philo with two objects ; first, to explain all mythology
in the Euhemeristic sense, by making out all the gods
to have been men-kings and others of primitive times
who had been raised to divine honours after their death
--and secondly to make ont that the Greek mythology
was only a depraved copy of the Phcenician.
T h e lateness of his traditions is shown also by the fact
that he uses Aramaic forms of names ( B s t h u a p j u , Zo+aaqp;v,
Bljhor ; only PaplppoGpor is the Phcenician pronunciation of
Shamemrgm), and that he says the companions of EL or
Kronos bore the name 'Ehosrp, i.e., Kp6uror. This is of course
the Heb. &N, Ehhirn, which is not met with in Phcenician,
and thus Philo here betrays a Jewish influence not discernible
elsewhere. From Philo we still possess large extracts in Eus.
Prq5. En., which in their turn seem to have been taken from
Porphyry.
I n details the Sidonian cosmogony and that of
Byblos differ from one another a t many points.
Fundamentally they are in closest agreement not only
with each other but also with the old Hebrew myths
which can still be clearly enough detected behind the
narratives of Gen. 1 2 (see C REATION, 3 7).
Of the Phcenician constitution and government we
know almost nothing, even in the case of Carthage,
16. Constitution. not to speak of the other cities.
That their polity had a thoroughly
aristocratic character might he presumed from the
whole character of Semitic civil life, and is confirmed by
the weight everywhere laid upon descent ; this comes
into special prominence in the long genealogies of the
inscriptions. The ' eldest ones ' (cp the ?rpeuppdra.ror
in Marathos and Aradus ; Diod. xxxiii. 5 z 3) who form
the council .of the king are the representatives of
families ; in Sidon the council seems to form a college
of.100 members (Diod. 16 45). The most distinguished
family is of course the royal ; in Tyre the priest of
Melkarth ranks next the king (Justin. 184). In these
little city-states, however, with their many vvealthy
merchant families t h e power of the king was limited in
many directions by the council and the nobility. I n
Tyre a t the time of the Chaldean suzerainty the
monarchy was for a time abolished and a 'judge'
(ffiphe?;)took his place as supreme authority (Jos. c. Ap.
121). Presumably the office was responsible, and limited
in time, although in Tyre the tenure cannot have been
for a fixed period, since we find individual judges ruling
for 2, I O , 3 months, and then, apparently, two together
rulingfor dyears(see below,§ao). Something similar may
have occurred in other cities also, just as in Carthage from
the time that we know anything of its history two suffetes
(usually called ' kings ' by the Greeks) figure as yearly
officials a t the head of the state; so also in other
colonies, such as Gades. T o the Hebrews also, as
1 Compare the strange statement of Porphpy(Eus. Pr&. ED.
i. 9 21 and x. 9 12) that Sanchuniathon here called a native of
Berytus derived hisaccountof theJewsirom a writingof Jerombal
(= JeTuLa'aI) the priest of God, of euo ( k p d s 8eoG TOG 'Iwir)
that IS, Yahwk, who had dedicated l i s work to King Abelbal or
Abihal of Berytus. Whether this absurd story was Porphyry's
own, or due to the inventiveness of others before him, we cannot
tell ;in any case i t has nothing to d o with Philo's Sanchuniathon.
Its lateness Is shown also by the part assigned in i t to Berytur
3752
 PHCENICIA
the Book of Judges shows, the conception of 'judges '
as rulers of a state, with royal but not hereditary powers,
was not unfamiliar.
Of the native histories written by the Phcenicians
themselves nothing has come down to us, even in Greek
l,. Sources. trarislntiotis, except a few extracts (pre-
served by Josephus), from the Chronicles
of Tyre, which Meiinnder of Ephesus had translated
into Greek ; they relate to the period extending from
969 to 774 B.C. (c. Ap. 118 ; Ant. viii. 53 [also viii. 31 on
the era of Tyre]. Ant. viii. 132)and to the siege uuder
Elulaxs (Ant. ix. 142). Josephus also ( 6 . A$. 121)
gives the list of kings during the period from Nebuchad-
rezzar down to Cyrus (585-532 B .c.), but here, too, is
doubtless dependent on Menander, although a little
before (c. Ap. l z o = A n t . x. 111) he refers for the siege
of Tyre hy Nebuchadrezzar to the otherwise unknown
Jewish and Phcenician history of one Philostratus.
In addition to these Josephus cites(Anf. viii. 53=c. A$.117),
for the eriod of Hiram I., the Phcenician history of Dim, who
is close& dependent on Menander. H e also is not otherwise
known. I t IS probable that Josephus took all these fragments
directly from a compilation by Alexander Polyhistor (v. Gut-
schmid ; cp Wachsmuth, EinL in die a l f e Gesch. 403,f). These
short fragments contain little that relates to the history of
Phcenician colonisation.
W e return now to the history of the mother country
from the end of the Egyptian period onwards. T h e
18. Period of little we know for the immediately
independence, succeeding centuries relates only to
Tyre. Tyre was successful not only
in founding a colonial empire, but also in gaining the
supremacy in the mother country. Our accounts begin
-since they concern themselves with merely biblical
interests-with the first H I R A M ( 4 . z ).'
Of him we learn that he extended the city territory by mounds
in the quarter Eurychoros (Jos. c. A$. 113), substituted new
temples for old, to Melkarth and Astarte, dedicated a golden
stele (CLJY) to BaHIFam&n in his temple and instituted the
festival of the awakening of Melkarth. H e brought back to its
allegiance the city of Utica which had refused to pay the
usual tribute. Mention has already been made of his relations
with Israel, and of his Ophir voyages (see also C ABUL, H IR A M ).
Josephus, in speaking of the successors of Hiram,
gives only the duration of the life and of the reign of
each down to the founding of Carthage. W e may
be sure, however, that Menander gave some further
particulars. I t is, at any rate, clear from the list of
kings that usurpations and struggles for the succession
were not unknown. Hiram's grandson was put to
death by the four sons of his foster mother ; of these
the eldest held the throne for twelve years. Then
followed further confusions, with regard to which
tradition is very uncertain, until the priest of Astarte,
Itoba'al. by violent means (see ETHBAAL)founded a
new dynasty. Owing to his relation to Ahab, one or two
facts respecting him have been preserved by Josephus.
T h e length of his reign is unfortunately not known;
Kuhl, following the tradition of Theophilus, assigns
him twelve years (876-866 B .c.), but according to most
MSS he reigned thirty-two years (though the length
of life assigned by tradition to him and to his son makes
this doubtful) from 885-854 B.C. The three years
famine of the period of Ahab and Elijah ( I K. 17f.)is
mentioned by Menander as having lasted one year.
Hiram I. is in the O T invariably called king of Tyre
( 2 S. 521 I K. 515 910); Ethbaal, on the other hand, is
king of the Sidonians ( I K. 1631). This last is also the
title borne on the oldest extant Phcenician inscription
( C I S 1 5 ) by Hiram I L 2 who is also named by the
Assyrians in 738 ; it is the inscription of a bronze
sacrificial vessel which the ' governor ( 1 3 ~of
) KarthadaSt
(Citium), servant of Hiram king of the Sidonians, dedi-
1 The individual items in Menander's list of kings vary in the
tradition. We here follow the reconstruction of Riihl (Rhein.
Mus. 18 565 #-although by no means certain at all points).
In their original form the data seem to he quite authentic.
2 That Hirani II., not Hiram I., is intended in the inscrip
tion has been shown by von Landau, Beitr. ZUY Alterthums-
Kunde des Orients, 1 (1893).
3753
PHCI3NICIA
cated to his lord the god of Lebanon (13a'al-lebanon)3s
a ' ' first fruits (6aapxlj)of copper ' (nun> nzwiz) in the
"
temple upon the hill Muti Shinoas near Amathus (Ohne-
falsch-Richter, Kypros, 119). The Tyrian dominion In
Cyprus must accordingly have extended thus far. These
designations show that, in the interval between Hiram I.
and Ethhaal, the ' kings of Tyre' had become 'kings
of the Phcenicians,' and thus had considerably extended
their authority, in particular by acquiring the sovereignty
of Sidon. This is confirmed by the Assyrian data, that
the whole coast from 'Akko (near the Israelite frontier) to
near Berytus w-as in the possession of Tyre.' Of Ethbaal
we are told that he pressed even farther north; having
founded the city of Botrys, to the N. of Byblos. in the
neighbourhood of the 'l'heouprosopon. Plainly the
intention, which was not, however, effected, was toreduce
Ryhlos also to dependence on Tyre. Of Ethbaal we
learn further that he founded Auza in Libya. Under the
third of his successors, Pygmalion (820-774), Tinlaeus
(and, following him, Menander) placed the founding
of Carthage in 814-3 ; its mythical foundress is called
the sister of the king. With Pygmalion Josephus's
extract from Menander (Jos. c. Ap. 1 IS) ends.
For the next century we get some information from
the Assyrian data. The great westward campaigns
of the Assyrians began in the begin-
19. The ning of the ninth century.2 In 876
suaerainty' ASur-nBsir-nal invaded Svria
-, and the
~~
dynasts of the interior as weli as the kings of the seal
coast, of Tyre, Sidon, Byblos. Maballata (sic), Maisa
(unknown), K a k a (unknown), Amuri, ' Arvad in the
sea,' brought tribute-brazen vessels and parti-coloured
and white linen garments as well as silver, gold, lead,
copper, and cedar wood. Shalmaneser 11. (860-824)
undertook the subjugation of Syria in a more thorough-
going way. Only the more northerly, however, of the
Phcenician dynasts were represented in the army of the
allied Syrian princes which fought at Karkar in 854
(see A HAB , S HALMANESER ). T h e remaining cities
preferred to submit quietly and in 842 and 839 paid
tribute to Shalmaneser as they also did later to his
grandson Hadad-nirari 111. (81 1-782) when he marched
upon Syria.
As yet these expeditions led to no enduring suzerainty
(see ASSYRIA, § 32). In the first half of the eighth
century the movements of the Assyrians were restricted
by the powerful opposition of the kings of Urartu. With
Tiglath-pileser 111. began those systematic invasions
which ended in the virtual subjugation of the whole
Syrian territory.
It is within this period that more precise information
regarding Phceuicia first becomes accessible. Whilst
the older Assyrian kings, as we have seen, mention
(correctly or incorrectly) the names of a large number
of Phcenician cities and dynasts, under Tiglath-pileser
111. and Sargon there are only three Phcenician states
-Aradus, Byblos, and Tyre. The coastland of the
Eleutherus region, along with Simyra. 'Arka, and
Siyana, now belongs to the kingdom of Hamath (Annals
of Tiglath-pileser : 3 R. 9, 3 ZI. 26 46), but is made
by Tiglath-pileser into an Assyrian province. T h e
Phoenician cities appear to have submitted without
striking a blow. In 738 we find, amongst many other
dynasts, Matanha'al of Arados, Sibittiba'al of Byblos.
and Hiram 11. of Tyre paying tribute to Tiglath-pileser.
Soon afterwards Tyre showed signs of a longing for
independence; a heavy tribute was exacted from Metinna
(Mytton-ie., MattBn) of Tyre in consequence (about
1 As cities taken b y him from Tyre Sennacherib (Prism
Inscr. 2 3 8 8 ) enumerates :--Great and Little Sidon, Betzitti,
Sarepta, Mahalliba, USii (pr. UsB),--i.e., Palretyrus,-Akzih.
Akko. In Menander (Jos. A n f . ix. 142 285) w e must, therefore.
read I r r e ' c ~r e Tupiov PiSLv x a i ' A q rat $ Ildarm'por x d
rroMa1 B M a r rrdhrrc (so LV), and not with the other M S S
'Ap=:Arka.,
Various kings of Assyria set up steles by the D o g river near
names can now be deciphered.
-
Beirut ; but these are in such had preservation that noteven the.
3754
 PHCEINICIA
730 B.C.). The main portion of the Phcenician coast-
land still owned the sovereignty of T y r e ; Elulaios
(Ass. Lule), who reigned, as Menander says (Jos. Ant.
ix. 14z), thirty-six years (say 725-690)~ is therefore
called by Sennacherib ‘ King of Sidon ’ (cp SIDON).
O n the other hand, Tyre lost its hold on Cyprus ; seven
Cyprian princes did homage to Sargon,l who set up a
statue of himself in Citium. That Citium was lost to
Tyre for a time is attested also by Menander.
Under Shalmaneser IV. (727-722) and Sargon (722-
705)the Phoenicians appear to have remained quiet.2
Under Sennacherib (705-681). however, when a n aqti-
Assyrian league was planned in South Syria, Elulaios of
Tyre gave in hisadhesionto the project. T h e result is told
elsewhere (see SENNACHERIB). I t may suffice to quote
the words of Sennacberib, ‘ From Lule king of Sidon I
took his kingdom ’ ( C O T 1279). Menander informs us
that Elulaios again reduced Citium to subjection, and so
reopened hostilities. In the great campaign of 701, how-
ever, Sennacherib in all essential respects recovered the
supremacy, though Tyre, like Jerusalem, escaped being
captured. The Tyrians lost the whole of their territory,
and in Sidon a new king was installed, Tuba’lu (Ituha‘al),
who had to pay a fixed annual tribute. Elulaios
himself fled to Cyprus, evidently to the recently re-
acquired Citium. Here again Menander comes to our
aid. H e tells us that the Assyrian king Selampsas, after
conquering all Phmnicia, made peace and returned
home. Selampsas can only be Shalmaneser IV., as
Josephns also assumes. Therefore, doubtless, what is
referred to is his campaign against Hosea of Samaria,
who formed an alliance with Egypt against the Assyrians
in 725. Perhaps the Phcenicians also at first participated
in this action-it is to be observed that we learn nothing
about Shalmaneser from Assyrian sources-but made
their peace in good time.4
Next however Menander goes on to relate-taking no ac-
count df the inte6ening period and without any knowledge of
the wider political relations-th& Sidon, Akko, Palaetyrus, and
many other cities of the Tyrians revolted and yielded themselves
t o the Assyrian king. Accordin&, when the Tyrians themselves
rebelled, and the king took the field against them, he was
supported by 60 ships and 800 rowing boats, manned hy
Phaenicians. With only 12 ships, however, the fleet was
scattered, and 500 were taken prisoners. The Assyrian king,
withdrawing, stationed a garrison at Palaetyrus 705 WOTO+O~
I(& 7 j v 38pa wyciwv) to cut off the water supply. The Tyrians,
however, wi& their reservoirs held ont for five years (701-@6),
and presumably obtained satisfactory conditions Thus one
sees that the war followed the same course as under Abimelech
at the time of the Amarna letters. The sea-fortress was im-
pregnable-a fact admitted by Sennacherih himself, who passes
over Tyre in eloquent silence. The possessions of Tyre on the
mainland, however, were lost to it ; in Usu Sennacherib received
the tribute of the kings of the West, among others of Abdili’ti of
Aradus and of Urumilki-the correct name also (-r5a[J~) of the
grandfather of Yehaw-melek of Byhlos (CIS 1 I t o f Byhlos.5
Her Cyprian possessions also Tyre had to forfeit ; among the
other names in the list of Cyprian va%al princes under Esar-
haddon and Agnr-bani-pal appear these of Damigu, king of
KarthadaSt (Citium) Kistura of Idalium, and RnmiSu of
Tamassos.6 From this date the Tyrians never again exercised
sovereign rights in Cyprus.
1 [Does this ex lain ‘ even there (in Cyprus) thou shalt have no
rest ’ Is. 23 I Z ? gee &he. I n k . Is. 140 ; hut cp Duhm, ad Zoc.1
2 ’The general expression ‘who pacified Kue (see CILICIA) and
Tyre’ [cp Che. Infr. Is. 1441 supplies no sure evidence to the
contrary.
3 [So Tiele BAG a37 314’ Che. Znfr. Zs. 144.1
4 In GA 1 ir884), p. 467, ’a different view is assumed ; but
the above now appears to the present writer the most probable
solution. It is i n untenable assumption of von Landau, in his
study on the siege of Tyre by Shalmaneser in Menander
(Reitrrigp 1) to suppose that in the closing portion of his
account MeAander passes from Sennacherib’s campaign to the
war of Esarhaddon and Aiur-hBni-pal against Ra‘al of Tyre, so
that Menander has compressed into one the various Assyrian
campaigns against Tyre. That the same occurrences should
repeat themselves in sieges of Tyre lies in the natnre of the case ;
the Amarna letters and the history of Nebnchadrezzar hear out
this view. Alexander was the first to contrive the means for the
thorough subjugation of the sea fortress.
5 Under Esarhaddon and ASur-biini-pal these places are taken
by Matanha‘al and Yakinlu of Arvad (see below) and Milkiasaph
of Byblos.
6 Cp Schrader S B A W isgo, pp. 3 5 7 8 It is not inconceiv-
able that these three pridcipalities may only then for the first
3755
PHCEINICIA
Under Esarhaddon (680-668) arose new conflicts.
Firstly, Sidon rebelled under king ‘Abdimilkut ( i . e . ,
Abdimilkat with the usual obscuration of the u ) , but
after a long siege the city was conquered, and the king,
who had taken refuge beyond seas with ‘a Cilician
dynast, was taken prisoner together with his host, and
put to death (675). T h e rebellious city, which had so
ill requited the Assyrians for its deliverance through
them from the Tyrian ascendency, was destroyed, and
its population deported. An ’ Esarhaddon’s town ’ was
newly built on another site, and peopled with foreign
settlers. Hencefonvard a n Assyrian governor ruled
here as well as in Simyra. The possessions of Tyre on
the mainland were now (if not before) placed under a
similar officer, who received the high-sounding title
‘ governor of Tyre ’ although the city proper was never
under his rule.’ Tyre still remained unconquered, even
though (presumably) compelled to pay tribute. T h e
king, Ba‘al (an abbreviation of some composite name),
was attacked by Esarhaddon, probably on his second
expedition to Egypt (670). The triumph stele of Zenjirli
represents the king as leading captive the Ethiopian king
Taharka and the king of Tyre by a cord passed through
rings on their lips ; but in reality neither the one nor the
other ever was his prisoner. Esarhaddon, however,
caused the shore to be fortified, and cut off the Tyrians
from water and supplies as his father had done. Neither
he nor ASur-bani-pal(668-626). however, met with more
success than Sennacherib. On the subjugation of
Egypt, however, Baal gave u p the struggle, submitted
to a ‘heavy tribute,’ sent his daughter and nieces to the
harem of the great king, and despatched his sou
Yahimilki (Yehaumelek) to court, where ASur-bani-pal
received him to favour and dismissed him. At a later
date we find A+-bani-pal, like Esarhaddon before him,
placing Baal of Tyre a t the head of the list of his
Syrian and Cyprian vassals. Yakinlu of Arados. who
seems to have made common cause with Baal, was less
fortunate. H e had to send his daughter and all his
sons with rich gifts to the great king, and abdicate in
favour of his son Aziba’al. Opposite Arados, at
Antarados, ASur-bani-pal raised a memorial stone
(PSBA 7 141). These events belong to the earlier years
of his reign. At a later date, after his expedition
against Uaiti of Kedar, A h - b s n i - p a l called to account
Usu and Akko which had been insubordinate, put to
death the offenders, and deported some of the remaining
inhabitants to Assyria.
T h e next decades are a blank. We have no precise
information as to wrhat occurred in the Phcenician
ao. The chal- cities during the period of the decline
daan period. and fall of the Assyrian empire ; this it
would seem was materially hastened by
the great Scythian invasion-which in 626 extended tb
Syria (see SCYTHIANS). At any rate the Phcenician
cities, like Judah and its neighbours-the four Philistine
cities, Edom, Moab, Ammon-recovered their independ-
ence for a while ; in the list of all the existing states of
which he prophesies the downfall, Jeremiah (in 604 B.c. )
includes the kings of Tyre, of Sidon, and of the isles
beyond the sea-Le., Cyprus (Jer. 26 22 ; c p 273 Ezek.
25-29). T h e inference is plain ; Sidon also must have
regained independence and received kings of its own-
presumably of Phcenician origin (see below, § Z I ) . ~
T h e time, however, for the independent life of petty states
was past. When Assyria collapsed, Egypt sought once
more to acquire the suzerainty of Syria (see E GYPT , 68 ;
JOSIAH). Its success was brief, though in 588 Apries
~ ~~ ~
time have been added to the list of the seven which had done
homage to Sargon.
1 Wi. G I 1 201 n. corrected by Wi. A 0 F l 4 4 1 , n.
2 The intentidn df the representation was first perceived by
Pietschmann (Gesck. P h n . 303). See Ansgrabungen in
Zendschirli’ in the MiftheiZ. a u s d. Oriental-Sad. d. B e d .
Mus. Hft. 11 17 (von Luschan).
3 Winckler’s attempt to set aside this evidence (AD. Unt.
1 1 4 8 ) seems to the present writer inconclusive.
3756
 PHCECNICIA
(Pharaoh-Hophra) still hoped to preserve Palestine
lrom becoming a prey to the Babylonians. He pene-
trated into Phoenicia, the cities of which were on the
opposite side, and fought successfully against Sidon and
Tyre (see Herod. 2 161).l When Nebuchadrezzar’s army
approached, however, Apries retired, leaving Syria to
its fate. No sooner had Jerusalem fallen (586) than
Nebuchadrezzar marched upon Phoenicia. The other
cities would seem to have again submitted ; but King
Itobaal 11. of Tyre once more defied the apparently
inevitable. For fifteen years (585-573) Nebuchadrezzar
laid siege to Tyre.
Ezekiel, who in 586 had prophesied the approaching assault
(2&20), expected the annihilation of the haughty city. H e was
mistaken, however ; once more the sea-fortress asserted her
strength; the prophet was constrained in 570 to confess that
Nebuchadreuar and his army had had ‘ no-recompense ’ for the
manifold fatigues of the siege (Ezek. 29 18). Yet it is evident
that in the end Tyre became more dependent on the Babylonian
King than it had previously been.
The list of kings which here again has been pre-
served to us (Jos. c. A?. 121)shows that with the close
of the siege Itobaal’s reign came to an end-doubtless
he was deposed. His successor was Baal 11. (572-563)
after whom judges (see 5 16) took the place of kings,-at
first, single judges for a few months, and afterwards, if
the reading be correct.2 two priests (or brothers) for
six years ; between them (according to Gutschmid,
’ after them ’ ) Balatoros was king for a year. Then a
ruler Merbaal was fetched from Babylon (555-2).who
in turn was succeeded by Hiram 111. (551-532), under
whom the ChaldEan fell into the hands of the Persians.
In the struggles of the Assyrian and Chaldzean period,
the political power of the Phcenician towns, and the
position of ascendancy which Tyre had occupied in the
Phoenician world, came to an end. Nor could the
sway of Phcenicia over its colonies be any longer
maintained. The spread of Greek trade and the
development of the Greek naval power, broke up their
solidarity, and when, even during the continuance of
Cbaldaean suzerainty, the Phoenicians of the west com-
bined to withstand the Greeks, it was no longer Tyre
but Carthage that stood at their head. Carthage never
indeed broke with Tyre.3 and for a long time continued
to send tithes to the Melkarth of the mother city ; but
politically the relations came to he inverted ; Carthage
was a great power, Tyre a city-community subject to
foreign lords. Even when, in consequence, the trans-
mission of the tithes had been reduced to that of a
trifling present, Carthage still continued to show filial
piety by regularly sending festal embassies to Tyre
(Arr. ii. 2 4 5 Polyb. xxxi. 2012)until, after the defeat
by Agathocles, the Tyrian Melkarth again once more
received propitiatory offerings (Diod. 20 14).
T h e prosperity and commercial importance of Tyre
suffered much less by the vicissitudes of war than is
often supposed. Even if the connection of the city
with the shore was cut off repeatedly for periods of
years, the Assyrians and Chaldzeans could do little to
her sea power and her trade ; the attempt to overwhelm
her by the aid of the fleets of the other Phoenician
towns was an entire failure. As soon as peace was
restored the old relations with the interior were re-
sumed ; in fact, the import and export traffic forthwith
became all the brisker from the temporary check. As
for Sidon, which otherwise might have been a forrnid-
able rival, i t needed a long breathing time in order to
1 I n Aradus has been discovered a fragment referring to his
deputy Psamtik-nofer (Renan M i s s . en. Phen. 2 6 5 ) De
Rouge connected it with P w k t i k I., but hardly with justice.
W. M. Muller (Mifflr.d. zforderus. Ges. Hft. 4 1896) tries to
detect a king of Byhlos on a very mutilated E b p t i a n monu-
ment of this time from Phcenicia (published TSBA 16 91); hut
this is hiphly problematical.
2 See Riihl Rhein. Mus. 48577. It is perhaps significant
that the reign’of Baal 11. came toanend with that of Nebnchad-
rezzar whilst Merbaal’s begins with that of Nabuna’id.
8 1; its second treaty with Rome (348) Tyre is named along
with Carthage, though it is not mentioned in the first, about
503 (?)(POI. 3 24).
3757
PHCECNICIA
recover from its catastrophe under Esarhaddon. W e
must not forget, moreover, that during the period
between Tiglath-pileser 111. and Cyrus for 20 years
of war there were 180 years of peace, in which trade
and the general well-being must have prospered, the
more because the connection with the great continental
empire made business relations easier and more ex-
tensive ; the sovereigns, too, were energetic in protect-
ing the safety of the routes of traffic. Finally, her loss
of colonial supremacy affected Tyre’s commerce but
little because it came about without any violent shock,
and the community of speech and sentiment as well as
the sharp antithesis to the Greeks kept the two portions
of the Phcenician nationality together. If in Carthage
the wares and art-products of Greece were imported in
ever increasing quantity, neither could that city dispense
with the products of the E a s t ; and it need not
be said that the Carthaginian merchants sought for
these at the fountain-head of Phoenician life rather than
from Greek middle-men.
How prosperous Tyre was, and how dominating was
her position in Phoenicia in q86 B.c., is visiblv shown
zl.-persian by Ezekiel’ (2f). It was not b y a single
blow that this queen of the seas lost her
period. imDerial state : the transference of Dower
was gradual. When the Persians in 539 enteredupon
the inheritance of the Chaldzeans without meeting with
any resistance from the peoples of Syria and Phcenicia,
Sidon became the first and richest city of Phoenicia (cp
Diod. 1641). The best ships in the fleet of Xerxes
were contributed by the Sidonians, whose king took the
place of honour next the great king. Next in order
came the king of Tyre, and after him the other vassal
princes (Herod. 7 44 96 98 8 6 7 ; cp also 3136 7 100 128 ;
Diod. 1479). This superiority of Sidon is doubtless
chiefly to be accounted for by the fact that the advantage
of situation which remained with Tyre during the period
of the wars became a positive disadvantage when peace
prevailed, and all the Phoenician cities equally belonged
to a great empire.
I t then became a positive disadvantage that Sidon was able
to expand freely while Tyre was confined within a narrow space
(in Strabo’s time it was very closely built, the houses having
more stories than in Rome) ; the many purple manufactories
were indeed a great source of income, hut did not add to the
amenity of the city as a residence (16223). Above all, the
merchants and caravans must have found it much more con-
venient to expose their goods in Sidon than to ship them over to
Tyre. Sidon accordinsly became a successful competitor with
Tyre. That the Persian kings deliberately set themselves to
advance Sidon a t the expense of Tyre is hardly likely; the
situation existed before they came, and was not of their making.
But they promoted its development ; in Sidon the Persian kings
had a park (rrap&ruos), and it was here that the satraps of
Syria resided when they came to Phcenicia.
Perhaps there was another factor in the change. As
a result of its destruction and re-foundation by Esar-
haddon Sidon received a very mixed population ; and
even although, after the fall of the Assyrian monarchy,
the Phmnicians recovered the ascendancy, the foreign
elements (as in Samaria) continued strongly to assert
themselves; indeed, we can still trace them even in
the scanty materials that have come down to u s 2 W e
can thus understand how in Sidon the national narrow-
ness may have been counteracted, and the rejuvenated
commonwealth have acquired an international character
which had a favourable influence also upon its trade.
Hence we find in Sidon, during the whole Persian
period, in spite of the opposing political interests and
1 T h e ‘oracle on Tyre ’ (Is. 23) is too uncertain to be referred
to here (see ‘Isaiah’ in SBOT,and cp Che. Infr. Is. 138-145,
and the commentaries).
2 T h e fact has been recognised by Winckler (A T Unf. rtcgz,
p. 177). The tomb of ’Au&m Zuvpurh’jgou %Govia &e., Asephat,
daughter of ESmunSillem, of Sidon) in Pirmus (CZS !,119;
CIA 2119) was erected by Yatonbel, son of ESmunsdleh,
chief priest of Nergal (hij O ~ OK J ~ J23). W e see that the
Assyrian god Nergal is worshipped even in the Sidonian colony
at Athens. Moreover the name Yatonbel is compounded from
that of the Assyrian Bel, not from that of the Phaenician Baal.
Similarly a Sidonian in Carthage (CIS 1287) bears the name of
szl~y,‘Ahdbel.
3758
 PHO3NICIA
repeated hostility between the Greek and Phcenician
fleets, the traces of a singularly strong and ever grow-
ing Phi1hellenism.l W e find this in its highest degree
under King Straton (probably a corruption for ‘Abd‘aSt-
art) in the first half of the fourth century. H e main-
tained a mast luxurious court, and brought together
from all parts of Greece singing and dancing women,
who competed at his feasts for prizes in their art
(Theopoinp. fr. 126 in Athenzus 12531 ; M i a n , Yur.
hist. 7 ~ ) .H~e had close relations with Athens, and
gave his support to the embassy which went to the
Persian court in 367. In return the Athenians granted
him and his successors the right of pvoxenia and the
Sidonian merchants staying at Athens were exempted
from all taxes ( C I A 2 86.) The same king’s name
probably occurs in the bilingual inscription from Delos
in CZS 1114, where only the beginning of his name
.. . y i i y is preserved ; perhaps also in CIS 14.
I n other respects the conditions of Phrenicia seem to
have altered but little under the Persians. Now as
before it consists of four states-Tyre. Sidon, Byblos,
Arados. All four are in separate existence in the time
of Alexander the Great (Arr. ii. 13 7 1565 201 =Curtius
4 1 6 fi), whilst Herodotus ( 7 9 8 ) in his catalogue of
Xerxes‘ fleet mentions only the kings of Sidon, Tyre,
and Aradus. He does not name Byblos at all ; plainly
in his time this city occupied politically and commercially
a very subordinate position, and partook of the character
rather of a country town.
Also the cities which took part in the settlement of a level
strip of coast near the northern end of Lebanon beyond the
Theouprosopon, called by the Greeks Tripolis (its Phcenician
name is unknown) were the same three-Arados Tyre and
Sidon. Each of these had a special quarter to itself,’surrounded
by a wall and separated from the others by an interval. Here,
a s Dipdorus (following Ephorus) informs us, the Phcenicians
were wont to hold a federal meeting and joint political council ;
the king of Sidon attends it with 100 councillors. (Scylax,
104 ; Diod. 16 41 45 ; Strabo 16 z 15.) I t is hardly probable that
the town, or this attempt to bring the whole nationality under a
combined organisation, was older than the Persian period.
From the end of the fifth century the Phcenician
states also began to introduce the employment of
coinage-that is, the issue of pieces of precious metal
of a standard money weight, bearing the emblem and
often also the name of the state or of the lord of the
issuing mint. T h e Persian kings since Darius had
already, as we know. been in the habit of coining. and
reserving the right of gold coinage as a royal privilege,
whilst the issue of silver money was left to the discretion
of the vassal princes and communities and of the satraps.
Arados coined by the Persian standard, the three other
cities by the Phcenician. W e are able to determine
with absolute certainty, however, only the coins of
Byblos, which invariably bear the name of the king
(Elpa’al, Adarmelek, ‘Azba’al, and ‘Ainel) and of the
city ; the names of two other-earlier-kings of Byblos
we know through the stele of Yehawmelek. Of Tyre,
Sidon, and Arados, also many coins are still extant ;
but the name of city and ruler is either absent or
inscribed in characters that cannot be clearly made out.
Their assignment to the three cities seems to have been
satisfactorily determined by the researches of Six and
Babelon ; on the other hand the attempt to determine
the name of the individual king, and hence establish
fresh historical data, as for example the reign of a
certain Euagoras in Sidon, is highly precarious.
1 This is visibly brought before us in the sarcophagi of the
Sidonian royal sepulchres discovered by Hamdy Hey. See
Hamdy-hey and Th. Reinach, Nicrojole voynle ri Sidon. On
the interpretation and on the place of the sarcophagi in the
history of art, see especially Studniczka, ‘ Ueber die Grundlagen
der geschichtlichen Erklsrung der sidonischen Sarkophage ’ in
Jahr. d. an&oL. Inst. 10 (r894). Hut the present writer
cannot concur in Studniczka’s dating of the tombs of Tabnit and
Eshmuna‘zar (see below).
2 Probably the sarcophagus of the Mourning Women dates
from his reign.
3 Six, Nzmism. Chron. 1877 : Ren. nunrism. 1883 ; Eabelon,
BuZl. de cowes#. helien. 15 1891 and in Cat. des nronraics
grecqrres de le 522.Nat. 2 (“Ls Gases Achkmknides,’ 1893).
3759
PHO3NICIA
I t is clear that Berytus throughout belonged to the
kingdom of Byblos. Then comes the territory of Sidon
to which also Ornithopolis N. of Tyre belonged, whilst
Sarepta nearer Sidon was a possession of the Tyrians.
The coast down to Akko and Cannel is Tyrian. The
Palestinian maritime plain during the Persian period
was also shared by the two states. Dor, probably also
Joppa, was Sidonian ; Ashkelon and presumably Ashdod
(Azotus) to the N. of it were Tyrian.l Only Gaza
formed an independent commonwealth of very cosmo-
politan character which steadily rose in importance,
above all as the goal of the S. Arabian caravans.
During the Persian period it issued coins of Attic type
and Attic standard.
Of Sidon we have already spoken. Regarding Tyre
we possess only the quite legendary narrative preserved
in Justin (183).
According to Justin’s story the city was long and variously
attacked by the Persians i n d came off from the struggle
victorious indeed. but so echausted that it fell into the hands &
the slaves who rdse in insurrection and massacred their masters.
Only one, a certain Straton, was saved by his slaves and after-
wards after he had shown the superiority of his kifts, macle
king dy the insurgents. In consequence, Alexander at his con-
quest of Tyre, by way of exemplary punishment, caused all the
survivors to he crucified with the exception of the descendants
of Straton whom he reinstalled a s rulers. If this narrative
contains aAy historical element a t all, the struggles with the
Persians of which it speaks can in reality only be the Assyrian
and Chaldrean sieges, and it might perhaps be assumed that
after these a revolution may have broken out, in which the
dependent population made themselves masters of the city.
Possibly the introduction of Sufetes in the Chaldaean period
may have been connected with this. T h e whole story, however,
i s of so dubious a character that it is hardly possible for us to
give it any place in history.2
Arados rose in importance during the Persian period ;
the whole of the opposite coast was subject to it : on
the N. Paltos and Balanaia; then, opposite Arados,
Karnos or Karna (so Plin. 578). which in the second
century B.C. for some time issued coins inscribed l i p
(Ant-Arados, mod. Tartiis, is of later origin and is
mentioned only in Ptolemy) ; then Marathus (on
Hellenistic coins nia), which though never mentioned
in the older period had in Alexander’s time become a
great and prosperous town; finally, Simyra and the
regions of the Eleutheros (Am. ii. 137f: = Curt. iv. 1 6 ;
Strab. xvi. 2 IZ 2 16).
Under the Persian rule Phcenicia, in common with
all Western Asia, enjoyed for a period of a century and
a half an epoch of peaceful prosperity, within which,
apart from the intervention of the Phcenician fleets in
the struggle with Greece (480-449) and afterwards in
that against Sparta (396-387), there is nothing of im-
portance to relate. I t was not until the decline of the
Empire had become growingly evident under Artax-
erxes 11. (404-359) that Phcenicia also became involved
in the confusions and contests which again broke out.
Euagoras of Salamis who in the unceasing conflict between
Greeks and PhmniciaLs for supremacy in the island had once
again for a short time secured the ascendancy for the Grecian
element in 387 supported by Akoris of Egypt, conquered Tyre
also and ruied’it for a time (Isocr. Euag. 62 ; Pane,,. 161 ;.Diad.
15 2). Straton of Sidon (see above) held close relations with his
son Nicocles ; both became involved in the great Satrap revolt
of 362 and on the victory of the Persians, were compelled to
seek their &n death- Straton by the hand of his wife (Jer. adv.
/m&. 145).
Most disastrous was the revolt of all Phcenicia which
in 350 Tennes of Sidon in alliance with Nectanebos
of Egypt stirred up, embittered by the harsh oppression
exercised by the Persian kings over Egypt and by the
deeds of violence perpetrated by the satraps and generals
in Sidon. The outbreak in Sidon was one of great
violence; the populace wasted the royal park, burnt
the stores at the royal stables, and put to death as
1 See the (unfortunately very fragmentary) notice in Scylax,
lot One is strongly tempted to suspect that it is in some way
connected with the story of Abdalonymos (referred by Diodorus
to Tyre) and derived from that. This appears to be the
supposition of Judeich also (jalrrd. d. archreol. Inst. 10 167,
n. 2).
3760
 PHCENICIA
many of the Persians as fell into their hands. At first
the movement seemed likely to succeed. When, how-
ever, Artaxerxes 111. advanced a t the head of a great
army, Tennes and his captain of mercenaries, the
Rhodian Mentor- who afterwards played so great a
part, as also did his brother Memnon, in the Persian
service-surrendered the city to the king, who gave
free course to his vengeance. Sidon was given up to
massacre and flame. More than 40,000 inhabitants
are said to have perished-chiefly by their own hands
or in the flames of the conflagration they themselves
had kindled. The traitor Tennes himself, after he had
served his turn, the Persian king caused to be put to
death. Hereupon the other Phmnician cities sur-
rendered (Diod. 1 6 4 1 8 ) . In Sidon we again at a
later date find a king Straton installed by the Persians.
When Alexander, after the battle of Issus (Nov. 333).
marched on Phcenicia. the citv-kinm with their con-
i "
22. Macedonian !ingents were with the Persian fleet
and Roman in the Egean. T h e cities, however,
opened their gates to him and the
period. Persian fleet dispersed. In Sidon
Alexander was received with enthusiasm ; he deposed
king Straton and elevated to the throne a descendant
of the old royal house, Abdalonymos, who is alleged
to have heen living as a gardener in very humble
circumstances.l Tyre alone was recalcitrant, and de-
clined to admit Alexander to the island city, where
he wished to make an offering to Heracles ; plainly its
hope was to regain its independence, and as in former
days to be able to defy the lords of the mainland.
Alexander, however, was too strong for it. The fleets
of the other Phcenician cities, those of the kings of
Cyprus, as well as ships from Rhodes and Asia
Minor, %-erea t his disposal. By a causeway which he
constructed in the sea-it has ever since connected
the island with the mainland-he brought his siege
engines to bear. After a seven month's siege the city
was carried by storm (July 332). The entire popula-
tion, so far as it had survived the horrors of the siege,
was sold into slavery, to the number of 30,000 ; mercy
was shown only to those who had sought asylum in the
sanctuary of Herakles. among them king Azeniilkos,
the higher officials, and the members of a festal embassy
from Carthage. The city itself had a new population
sent to it, and in the period immediatelyfollowing Tyre
figures as one of the chief garrison-cities of the Mace-
donians.
The subsequent history of Phcenicia can be told very
shortly. After Alexander's death the satrapy of Syria
fell to Laomedon ; but in 320 he was displaced by
Ptolemy of Egypt. In 315 Antigonus made himself
master of Syria, and maintained himself there despite
repeated attempts of Ptolemy to dislodge him. H e died
on the battlefield of Ipsus ( ~ o I ) and
, his kingdom
fell to pieces. Demetrius secured, amongst other
fragments, Sidon. 'Tyre, and portions of Palestine ; it
was not until he went to Greece in 296 that Seleucus
came into possession. Among the many cities which
he founded, we must probably reckon Laodicea, to the
S. of Tyre. the ruins of which are now known as Umm
el-'Aw%rnid. After the death of Seleucus (281)Ptolemy
11. became master of Palestine, Ccelesyria, and Phcenicia,
and not only he but also his successors continued to
hold them despite all efforts of the Seleucidre to dis-
possess them, till 197. Aradus alone and its territory
(also Orthosia ; see Euseb. Chrun. 1251, ed. Schmne)
were retained by the Seleucidre, who greatly favoured
that city.
T h e era of Aradus dates from the year 259, which may be
taken as marking the termination of the native kingdom-
i t is probable that in that >-ear the cityalong with thr republican'
- ~~ ~
1 The story is related in thoroughly romantic st le by Curtius
(iv.1158) and Justin (1110). In Diodorus (1747) i t is re-
ferred to Tyrr, and in Plutarch (De f o r t . A l . 28) even to
Paphos, and the house of the Cinyradz. Abdalonymos of Sidon
is mentioned also in Pollux (ti 105).
3761
PHCENICIA
constitution granted by Antiochus 11. took at the same time the
position of a free city-i.r., became exempt from the jurisdiction
of the satraps, like the cities of lonia. Seleucus 11. ( 2 4 7 . 2 ~ 5 ) ~
having been supported by Aradus in his struggle with his
brother Antiochus Hierax, added the further privilege that it
was not compelled to surrender a subject of the Seleucidz who
had taken refuge there, hut was permitted to intern him-a
concession that greatly raised the prestige o i the city (Strabo,
xvi. 2 14). I n 218 the city is completely free, and enters into a
treaty of alliance with Antiochus the tireat IO the war against
Ptolemy IV. (Polyh. 568).
Marathus, on the other hand, seems to have made
use of the political situation to emancipate itself from
Aradus; from 278 onwards it coins money after the
Seleucid era, but with the heads of Lagid kings and
queens. The other Phcenician possessions of Aradus
also seek to gain independence ; in 218 Antiochus the
Great mediates between them and Aradus. At a later
date Karne also for some time issued autonomous
coins. But the Aradians were in the end successful in
reasserting their supremacy. About 148 they attempted.
after having bribed Ammonius the minister, to destroy
Marathus with the help of the royal troops by an
assault which, at the last moment, after the Aradians
had already put to death the ambassadors of the hated
city contrary to the law of nations, was frustrated by
the warning of an Aradrean sailor. who by night swam
over to Marathus (Diod. 335). Finally, in the time of
Tigranes. with whom (or soon afterwards) the coins of
Marathus come to an end, they achieved their object,
Marathus was destroyed and its territory like that of
Simyra divided into agricultural lots (Strabo, xvi. 2 1 2 ) .
Under the Roman rule, the whole coast from Paltos to
the Eleutheriis belonged to them.
Of the cities of the Ptolemrean domain Sidon is again
the only one of which we know anything. Here the
kingship continued to subsist for a long time. When
Ptolemy I. in 312 became for the time lord of Phmnicia
he appears to have made his general Philokles, son of
Apollonides, king of Sidon, for this title is borne by
Philokles in inscriptions of Athens and Delos (CZA 2 1371 ;
~ ~ curr.
2 hell.
~ .
4327 14409, cp 407, etc.). His rule
can have been only quite transitory, however, although
he continued to take the title, for in 311 Phcenicia and
all Syria. had already been reclaimed and readministered
by Demetrius the son of Antigonus. Philocles. although
as already said he continued to wear the title, appears
in the immediately following years as Ptolemy's corn-
mander-in-chief on the A3gean.2 In the third century
we again meet with a native royal family which also
exercised the priesthood of Astarte (see above) ; to it
belong kings Eshmunazar I., Tabnit (pronunciation
quite uncertain ; perhaps identical with Tdvvqo) and
Eshmunazar II., all of whom we know of through the
sarcophagi of the two last named.
T h e sarcophagi are Egyptian, in mummy form : that of
Tabnit bears the epitaph of a n Egyptian general Penptah, and
seems to have been stolen from a n Egyptian tomb, perhaps in
the conquests of Artaxerxes III., and then to have passed into
the hands of the king of Sidon. Both cotlins bear a Phcenician
inscription with imprecatory formulas against the violator of
tombs ; 3 that of Eshmunazar also enumerates his buildings and
other benefactions to Sidon. 'l'he date of these inscriptions has
heen much disputed, but should most probably be assigned to
the Ptolemzan period and to the middle of the third century
B.C.4 T h e preference shown for poor Egyptian coffins, and
these stolen, over the splendid Greek works of art which the
kings of the Persian period had caused to be made, certainly
shows an amazing degeneracy of taste, a native reaction against
the Greek polish of Straton and Abdalonymus. In priests of
__ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ . ~. ~
~ - _ _ -
1 For this and subseauent data derived from coins see Babelon.
0). cit.
2 That the case was so has heen shown by Homolle in BUZZ.
Cory. hell. 15 137. Formerly a later date was given to him.
3 [For the inscription of Tabnit, c p Driver, TBS, Introd.
pp, xxvi-xxix.]
4 Eshmunazar designates his overlord as 'Lord of kings'
(0350 y~),which is the standing title of the Ptolemies in
Phcenihan inscriptions (CfSi. 93 95, inscriptions of Ma'gab.
and of Lamar Lapithu ; transferred to the Seleucidie, CfS 1 7).
So far as we know, the Persian king always took the title 'king
of kings,' ~ 2 750.5 ~At present we must allow decisive weirht
t o this argument' of Clerrnont-Ganneau.
3762
 PHCENICIA
Astarte, however, and under the rule of the Ptolemies such a
phenomenon presents nothing surprising. The Ptolemies were
never favourable, as the Seleucidae were, to Hellenism and !he
fusion of nationalities and civilisations, but dealt wlth the native
populations as subject mces sharply separated from the ruling
Macedonian Greek race.
Eshmunazar 11. reigned for 14 years in conjunction
with his mother Am‘aStart the sister and wife of Tahnit.
‘ In compensation for the great tribute paid by me, the
lord of kings presented us with Dor and Joppa, the
magnificent grain lands1 in the plain of Sharon, and
we added them to the territory so that they became
for ever the possession of the Sidonians.’ T h e old
Sidonian possessions on the Palestinian coast thus came
back to them once more. Eshmunazar died while still
young, leaving apparently no children. On his death
perhaps, or at all events not long afterwards, a republican
constitution was introduced in Sidon.
To this not to the later era of 111 B .c., must be referred the
era by wdich a bilingual honorary decree of the Sidonian colony
in the Pirzus is dated : ‘in the 15th year of the people of
Sidon.’z The inscription (Renan Rm. Arch. 3 ser. t. 11 [1888l,
p. sf:. Hoffmann ‘Ueher einige’phcen. Inschr.,’ in Adh. G%t.
Ges. rb89, p. 36) belongs as Kohler observed (CIA ii. suppl.
1335 I), to the third cent& or only a little after it.
In Tyre the same thing occurred in 274: it is by
the era of ‘ the people of Tyre’ (274-3)that one of
the inscriptions of Umm el‘AwHmid (CIS17) and of
Md+Cb is dated. This district accordingly must have
remained Tyrian. On the other hand, Akko became
independent. Coins are extant, with Phoenician legends
( n ~ y ) dated
, most probably according to the Seleucidan
era, down to the year 47 (=267 B . c . ) , ~when Akko
was changed by Ptolemy 11. into a Greek city bearing
the name Ptolemais (first mentioned Polyb. 437). With
regard to Byblos we have no information. Tripolis
had doubtless been a n independent commonwealth
from the beginning of the period of the Diadochi (Diod.
195885); Babelon attempts to make out for it an
independent era from the year 156,the place of which
was afterwards taken by the Seleucidan era. Berytus
also issued autonomous coins for some time during the
second century.
From 197 onwards all Phcenicia belonged to the
Seleucidae ; but not for long. Soon after, with the
death of Antiochus Epiphanes (164 B.C.), began the
collapse of the kingdom- the revolt of the Jews, the
appearance of rival claimants to the throne, the loss
of the eastern provinces. At last came the complete
break up at the end of the second century. For some
time the kingdom was in the hands of Tigranes of
Armenia (82-69).
Phoenicia was affected in various ways by these con-
fusions. Berytus was destroyed by Diodoros Tryphon
(141-138; Strabo, xvi. 2 19). On the ather hand Tyre,
probably in 126 B. c., a for a small sum ’ (Strabo, xvi. 2 z?),
and Sidon in 111, received complete autonomy: with
these years new eras begin for each of the respective
cities. Aradus in the time of Tigranes destroyed
Marathus (see above), and regained all its old territory.
On the other hand Arabian robber tribes established
themselves in Lebanon, wasting the territories of Byblos
and Berytus, and seizing Botrys and other places on
the coast (Strabo, xvi. 2 18). In Byblos and Tripolis
usurpers or ‘ tyrants ’ (Strabo, 2.c. : Jos. A n f . xiv. 3 2)
arose, as in so many other places in Syria.
To this intolerable state of affairs a n end was put by
Pompey in 64. H e made Syria a Roman province and
established order everywhere. The robber tribes were
subjugated, the tyrants of Byblos and Tripolis put to
death. T h e privileges and the territories of Aradus,
Sidon, and Tyre were confirmed and enlarged (Strabo,
xvi. 2 14 223; Jos. Ant. xv. 41). I n a n inscription
.
1 Or ‘lands of Dagon ’ see DAGON, D OR , 5 3.
2 As long as the kingihip lasted, dates were gben by the
regnal years ; when it ceased the dating was given accordinc:to
the years of ‘the eop1e’-i.c., of the republi: (where not along
with, or exclusive& by, the Seleucidan era).
3 Cp Babelon, 03.cit. clxxvii.
3763
PHCENICIA
Tripolis also is called iepd ~ a dsuhor l K U ~ah6vopor
K U ~vauapxir. I n the main these arrangements proved
permanent, though of course not without certain modi-
fications. Thus Augustus on account of internal dis-
turbances deprived Tyre and Sidon of their freedom :
that is, he placed them under the direct oversight of the
imperial legate (Dio Cass. 547 ; in 20 B .c.). Their
civic self-government, however, with aristocratic insti-
tutions, he preserved and maintained in the Phoenician
communities as elsewhere throughout Syria.
I n the centuries that followed Alexander’s time, the
Greek influence in Syria became continually stronger.
T h e Phcenician language occasionally appears in con-
junction with the Greek legends on coins down to the
second century A. D., and in the mouth of the common
people was superseded, as in the case of the Jews, not
by Greek but by Aramaic, as Philo of Byblos shows (see
above, 15). Greek everywhere makes its appearance
alongside of it, however, and in the inscriptions Greek
rules alone from the beginning of the Roman period.
Relations with the Greek world become continually
more and more active ; here Sidon takes the pre-emin-
ence by far. Among the Phoenicians who are named in
Greek inscriptions the Sidonians form a majority.
AS early as the end of the fourth century we find a Sidonian
-Apollonides son of Demetrius (he may have been the father of
king Philocles mentioned above)-receiving,on account of the
services he had rendered to Attic merchants and sailors, the
honour of a Proxenos and Benefactor, and the right to acquire
landed property in Attica ( C I A 2 171). Ofa still earlier date is
the decree in favour of two Tyrians (ib. 170).
From the second century the sons of Sidonians,
Berytians, and Aradians enter the corps of the Attic
ephehi (CIA ii. 482467 469 471 482), and among the victors
in gymnastic games there figure in Athens (ih448 498 g66
968 970) and elsewhere (Bull. cow. hell. 5 207 [Cos],
6 146 [Delos]) Sidonians, Tyrians, Berytians, Byblians.
Soon we meet with artists (e.g., CIA 2 1318) and
philosophers who come from Sidon and Tyre (Strabo,
xvi. 2 24) ; and, however much they may try to preserve
their native traditions, they become imbued with Greek
elements, as Philo’s exposition of the Phoenician religion
visibly shows.
The Roman rule introduced also a Latin element.
Augustus in 14 B.C. caused Berytus to be rebuilt as a
Roman colony, and settled in it two veteran legions
(Strabo, xvi. 220, etc.). From that time Latin became
the official and prevailing language of the city, which
was endowed with an extensive territory reaching as far
as to the source of the Orontes. Under Claudius,
Ptolemais, under Septimius Severus, Tyre, and under
Elagabalus, Sidon became Roman colonies.
The trade and prosperity of the Phoenician towns
received a great impetus under the peaceful, orderly
rule of the Roman emperors and their governors. On
the other hand the Phcenician speech and nationality-
like so many others- became extinct within the same
period. I n N. Africa alone did they continue to drag
on a further existence for some centuries longer-how
degenerately, is conclusively attested by the language
and writing of the inscriptions.
Among works dealing with Pbcenician history or portions Of
it, after Bochart’s Phaleg e f Cunaair (1646), special mention IS
due to Movers’ Die Phonizicr (1842-1856),
23. Literature. which long enj.oyed a great reputation. In
reality it IS quite uncritical and unscientific,
?nd at every opportunity falls into the most fantastic combina-
tions ; it is impossible to warn the reader too earnestly of the
need for caution in its use. Good and very useful, on the othef
hand, are the short surveys by von Gutschmid (art. ‘Phcenicia
.
in EB(9)18&1$ in German in the 2nd vol. of hls Kleinz
Schnzten) and by)Pietschmann, Gesch. der Phocnizier, Berlin,
r889 (in Oncken’s Alllgein. Gescfi. in Einzel-darsfellunlgen).
See further the Phcenician sectlons of the larger works on
ancient history ; in particular, Duncker’s Gesch. d.Alferfhums,
Maspero’s Hist. anc. des jeujles de IOrienf, and E. Meyer’s
Gesch. d. Alterthutns. A l ~ oH. Winckler’s ‘ Zur phiinizisch-
Karthagischen Geschichte a numher of often very bold
hypotheses(AZtor. Forschu&n, 1 I18971 421.462). For Carthage
Meltzer’s Gesch. d. Karfhalger (2 vols. as yet : 1879, 1895) is
thorough. On Phcenician religion see further Baudissin, Stud.
semit. ReL-gesch. 1 118761, 2 [1878], Baethgen, Beitr. ZUY
3764
 PHmNIX
smi. jieL-gesch. [1888] NGldeke in ZDMG 42 4 7 0 8 several
articles of E. Meyer ’in Roscher’s Lex. d. Griech. Rdin. A..
J/ytkolo@e, in particular the article ‘ Baal 1 2 % 7 f i (the older
articles ‘Astarte’ and ‘El’ are antiquated) and W. R. Smith,
ReL Sern.(z), 1894. E. M.
PHCENIX (kn, or [the reading of the Massoretic
school of Nehardea and of the Western recension, Ginsb. Zntrod,
515, but cp Kirnhi, Ek. of Roots, who attests only the
former] irn, @ below).
The name of a certain long-lived bird, Job2918
RVm5 (text of EV has ‘sand,’ which can hardly be
right). This rendering harmonises with the preceding
stichus in M T , which EV renders, ‘ Then I said, I shall
die in my nest’ ( i . e . , in my home), but RV‘W more
corrcctly, ‘ ...
beside [Heb. with] ’my nest.’ An
allusion is supposed (Ew., Hi., Del., Bu., Du. ) to
the story of tne bird called the Phoenix (Herod. 273).
which lived 500 years, and then consumed itself and
its nest with fire, to rise again as a yonng Phoenix
out of the ashes. Franz Delitzsch even produces
linguistic justification for the identification of h,@Z,
or 5an, 4ziS (so pointed to preclude the rendering ‘ sand ’ )
with the Phcenix. But though Ezekielos, the Jewish
dramatist of Alexandria (2nd cent. B.c.), introduces
the Phanix into his drama on the Exodus (Del. Gesch.
d. jiid. Puesie, 219,quotes the passage in its context),
it is most unlikely that the Phcenix myth was known
to Jewish writers as early as the composition of Job.
’There are three further objections to Ewald’s view--
viz. ( I ) that the next verse leads us to expect a figure
from a tree rather than from a n animal, (2)that there
is considerable difficulty in explaining ’ with my nest,’
in the first stichus, with reference both to Job and to
the Phcenix, and ( 3 ) that 6 points to a different and
much more natural form of the text.
@ renders v. 18 thus,-
r I r a 64, $ $At& FOV y?pducr’
& r f p u r M c y . o s 4oivixor rrohiv ~ p d v o vj3~6uw.
l h i s suggests reading for ‘3iJ-W,‘with m y nest,’ ‘3?1?, ‘in
my old age,’and for iin91, ‘and as the s a n d ’ o r ‘and’as the
phcenix,’ h?>, ‘and as the palm t r e e ’ l (cp C h e . j Q R , July
1897). When we remember that the Phcenixof later literature is
merely a materialised form o f one of the fine old Egyptian
symbols of the sun-god (of which another is the CROCODILE
[ q : ~ . ] ) ,we can give u p Job’s supposed reference to the fable
without a pang. On the Phcenix, see art. ‘Phcenix’ in EB (’3)
(where references a r e given) ; Delitzsch on Job 29 18 ; Bochart,
Hieroz. 6 5 ; Charles, Sewets of Enoch,. IZJ ; James, Texts
and Sfudies v. 188 (4 Bar. 6), and cp O N 2. For the hlidrashic
stories see Hamburger, R E desJzdenth~ms,2 @.
T. K. C.
PHCENIX, Acts 27 IZ RV, AV PHENICE ( q . ~ . ) .
PHOROS (&mor:
.T-, rBA1). - - L _I
I. I Esd. 5 g = Ezra 2 3, PAROSH (q.~.).
2. I Esd. 8 30 R V = Ezra 8 3. PAROSH (q.~.).
3. I Esd. ! l z b = E z r a 1 0 ~ 5 ,PARDSH(g.~.).
PHRURAI (apoypal [BLB]), Esth. 111 RV, AV
PHURIM. See P URIM.
PHRYGIA (@PY,-la[WH Ti.], Acts 166, 1823,
doubtful whether as noun or as adjective [ywpg, under-
I n z Macc. 522 the ethnic
1. Geopaphy. stood].
[@pu.] is applied to Philip, governor of
Jerusalem under Antiochus Epiphanes-Le., about 170
B.C. ). Phrygia, the country of the Phryges, was the name
given to a vast and ill-defined region in central Asia
Minor. Speaking generally, we may say that it em-
braces the extreme western part of the plateau and the
fringing mountains, from the confines of Bithynia to
those of Pisidia. The more eastern portion of this
country consists of broad open valleys, gradually merg-
ing into the great steppe which forms the centre of Asia
Minor ; to the west it is more broken ; it has several
important mountain ranges ; and its cities lie in moun-
tain valleys, through which pass the main-lines of com-
munication [e.g., the valley of the Lycus]. Throughout
it run the two great roads [the old Royal Road, and
the Eastern Trade Route] which have at different
1 Cp Ecclus. 5012, where $ n ~ = + o b t & See PALM.
3765
PHRYGIB
periods connected the sea-coast and the interior ; and
Phrygia has in consequence always had a double history
-on the one side linked with the central plateau and
the East, on the other with the sea-coast towns and
the Greek peoples of the West ’ (Headlam, in Aufhurity
and Archeulozy, 363 8).T h e original extent of
Phrygia was much wider than is indicated above ; but
it was only for a short time that there was an independent
Phrygian-kingdom.
T h e Phryges were a group of invaders from Macedonia
(Herod. 7 72) who solit UD the old emnire (Hittite?) that had its
~~
c;tl>iulat kycri.i i,~’~’~~i,,:;,,l,,,,in. C r k i n i the Htllc-pcat~, the
l’hryges ,pre.d OVCT A5ta > I i n x , eii\ra.ard.; acru..r ilir 5mig:mti~
a> f;ar as the Hal!., and wuth-es*iuarda 10 I ycaonia arid t h e
‘l’:~urus. In the suuih-cii.r, I c ~ ~ ~ ~ iwi4.l
I’hrygiii.
u n i t l x I x t cit) uf
I n thc opp.”itc rlirectiuii, they twrdered upcm the
Hellc.pmi angl the I’rqmnti, (cp the (;reek ir3ditic)ii of :I
I’hrygi;m ‘ ~ l i : . l . t ~ ~ , u ; iI:a-ting
cy twciity-tiye ye:.rs from q , 5 ii.c.;
I J w d . 7 1 1 ; ll<m./ I . 24 j T h e Trujan c i r y m d i h e d!iw+ty
g > f I’+m LcItm<cd I., t h uple. l’riljct froni Tt race, the
3ly.1, Thyni, .tiid Ilitltyi .ur.cd the Ijospurus a l l t i s a c r e d
l’ltry<ia i i i t d I U U part--Hellc,yonliiie UT I.itrle Plirygia, a n
uiiclcrind ,trip ; t l ~ , nthe ~ w i i t h e r n illore of the l’rq)on~i-,of
no nccotiitt i i i Iii-tury, s i l d (:rent l’liryyia (l’h,yKia A l a p t n ) the
reiti:\iiider (Str.iI)>, 571).
‘The ccntre of p ( ~ \ \ ~ufr Gre:it Phrygia lay in the
region of thc Slidas ’I‘cmb (sce Murray’s l f a n d h u k /r,
A.If, 134 8 ) : with this kiiigtlom arc coiinected the
ixiiiies of (;ordim :id1lid:ib ; : i d to i t the rarly kings
of Lydia ( t l t c uestern imgnieiit of the old Hittite [?]
monarcli!) rmctl nlleginiicc. (For cc1iot.s o f thc l’hrygian
power. c p Iloni. / I . 3 1 8 7 2862 ; Honi. lfymn /,I Jphru-
lfitt!, 112. )
‘I‘he (~‘intnicrianinvasion (about 675 t { . c ~ . j lroke the
I’hrygian power, and caused a re\t.rsal o f t h t . relations
2. IIistory. with Lydia, \\hich I I O N ( l c v t h p ~ linto a
great kingdonr. and rtilc~l ;I> > w t n i i i over
I’hrygia as f;rr as the Ilnlys (see L Y I ) I A ) .’l‘lirre was
hencrfor\vard no unity i n Phrygixn hiator! ; for the old
conquering ~ i c citself was at,sorl,ed by the native race
which it had conquered : the I’lirygea ‘sank to that
placid level of character which tielonged to the older
subject population and is produccd by tlic genius of the
land iri vhich they dwelt-the character of an agri-
cultttml a i d c:ittle-breetling popul:itioii of rustics, pence.
ful and god-liuniouretl ’ {E.llcyer. C A 130~). ’l’his
atsorption \vas already coniplete when, in 278 H . C . . the
( h u l s entered Asia Minor. As the result of thcir victories
over the then umvarlike I’hrygians.’ and of thcir defeats
a t the Iiands of .\ttnlus l . , king of PEHCAML‘M (q.~,.),
the Gauls were fiiially rcbtricted tu north-eastern I’hrygia,
which thus twanie known as (;alatia.? ‘l‘he northern
part of I’hrygia alJo gaiiird a spc-rial name about 205
H.C. As the outcome of w i r with t’rusias, king of
Rithyiiia, Attnlus I. made hiinsrlf niaster of the region
in wliich lay Cotimiin :lilt1 D o r y l m i r n , which herice-
forth was cnllcd I’hrygia lipictetus (Acquired Phrygia :
Strxbo, 576).
‘l‘he south.ca&rn corncr, betweeu the ranges nom called
EmiY./)qh a i d .Su/t~m-l)ngh,wa> called P h q g i a Pamreui
( I l a p 6 p t t o c ) ; i t contain, the cities I’olylmtui, Philomelium,
lyrizuiii, arid other, (Ranla. / / / s t . (;mq~. of Ah? r39J). S.
of the .Ytr/tan-Un,~h, :b f:rr as the ’I’aiirus, came tlic dktrict
kiiuwn itr l’i.idic(l’i.,idiait) Phrygin, u,r I’,hr)gia towarda Pi5idin
(Strnbo, 576, p y + .
T p p y l a . : cv c u n v q TB n a p 6 L ~ O F
h r y o p i v q 4 p u y r a rat 7 rrpos Iltotlm. C p Polyh. xxii. 5 14, 6toI.
Y. 5 i ) ; : j it- one important city Antioch (‘.4w<+ta 6 n p b c
Ilruidip, >irabu, 557, 56g, 577).
When I’hrygia came to form p a r t of the Konlan pro-
vinei:il sysiem i t was dealt ~ i t in
h a uav thxt ( I d \ iulenue
to Iiistory ;mcl ethiiology. For, on the w i t ’ Iinnd, the
wstitrit portion i n \I hich lay Ironiuni, arid r l t r s(mihcrn
portion in u hich lay Antioch, ucre attached to thr pro-
viiice G.rl:tti;i, whilst the rest fell to the province A& ;
on the other hand, the name I’hrygia \has cxterided i n
the \V. to enibracc all the I.ycus vallcp, and in the SM‘.
to enilrace all thc country tounrds L y i a . l ‘ l p;ut ~
of l’hrygia H hich helonged to Galatia \vas cnllcd P h ~ g ’ a
1 Cp Herod. B 3 2 , App. Milhr. 19, & f i p d o ~ v dnohipotr.
2 l h e Gauls a k o extended their conquest, ea.twards, m e r
territory claimed by t h e Pontic kmg> and the Cnppadocianb.
3 See Kaiiia. Cifies and B i d . of t’hrygin, 131~lf:
3766
 PHRYGIA
GaZaatica; that which belonged to Asia was Phrygia
Asiana (Galen, 4312 [Kuhn, 6515]).' Hence many
inscriptions enumerate Phrygia as a component part of
the province Galatia (e.g., CZL 36818, where the parts
are Galatia, Pisidia, Phrygia, Lycaonia, Isauria, Paphla-
gonia, Pontus Galaticus, and Pontus Polemoniacns ;
date. after 6 3 A. D. ). Phrygia experienced many vicissi-
tudes ; but these fall outside the province of the student
of N T history (for details, see Rams. Hist. Geog?. of
A M 1sr$).
The Jews were much favoured by the Seleucid kings,
who planted large colonies of them on the routes leading
3,Jews infrom the Syrian Antioch through Lycaonia
into Lydia and Phrygia. Antiochns the
Phrygia' Great settled 2000 Jews in the cities of Lydia
and Phrygia about zoo B . c . (Jos. Ant. xii. 3 3 , (i 1485).
Seleucus Nicator had granted the Jews full rights of
citizenship, equal to those of Greeks and Macedonians,
in all his foundations ( i d . , Ant. xii. 31, (i 119). and the
later kings maintained this policy. Hence the Jews were
members of the aristocracy in the Phrygian cities (see
on this Rams. Cities and Bish. of Phrysia, 2667 8 ) .
T h e Phrygian Jews were considered in the Talmud as
the Ten Tribes (for many of them had been transplanted
from Babylonia) ; and it is said of them that the baths
and wines of Phrygia had separated them from their
brethren-by which we must understand that they had
failed to maintain their own peculiar religion, and had
approximated to the Grreco-Roman civilisation by which
they were snrrounded (cp Neubauer, Ge'ogr. du TaZmud,
315; Rams. St. Paul the Travelleler, 142 8 ) . T h e
marriage of the Jewess Eunice to a Greek a t Lystra, and
the fact that Timotheus, the offspring of the marriage,
was not circumcised, is an illustration of this declension
from the Jewish standard (Acts 16 I ) . The result was
that the Jews had in their turn strongly influenced their
neighbours, and thus prepared unconsciously a favourable
field for Paul's teaching (cp the many proselytes a t
Antioch, Acts 1343 so). On the other hand, the Phrygian
Christians were strongly inclined to Judaism (Gal. 1 6 49),
for there was no strong racial antipathy between the
natives and the Jews (cp Rams. Hist. Cumm. on GaZ.
189J).
The distinction between Galatic and Asian Phrygia
which held during the first century A.D. (8 z), explains
4. Phrygia the passage in Acts 166 (TC@puylau K a l
inthe wT. raharrh-ilv X h p a v , AV Phrygia and the
region of Galatia' ; RV ' the region of
Phrygia and Gal&'). T h e word Phry@an is here a n
adjective, connected with the following 'country' ( X d p a v ) :
and the whole phrase denotes that territory which was a t
once Phrygian and Galatian-Phrygian from the point of
view of history and local feeling, Galatian from the
point of view of the Roman provincial classification, Le.,
' the Phrygo-Galatic Region,' or, ' the Phrygian .- or
Galatic Region.'
Even if ' Phrygian' (Qpvyiav) in this passage he regarded as
a noun the interpretation must be the same. Paul was at Lystra
(v. 3);'and unless he abandoned his intention of visiting the
brethren 'in every city' in which the word had been preached
(Acts 1536), he must necessarily have crossed the frontier of
Lycaonia a few miles N. of Lystra (cp Acts 146) into Galatic
Phrygia, the region &&pa, Repio)in which the cities of Iconium
and Antioch lav.
This interpretation is entirely independent of any view
that may be held with regard to the whereabouts of the
churches of Galatia. [See, however, G ALATIA , $1 I O -
14.I
More difficult is the explanation of Acts 1823, where
the same words are found, but in reverse order (74"
r a X a r i r + j v X h p a v Kal +puyiav, AV the conntry [RV
region] of Galatiaand Phrygia'). T h e phrase in Acts 18 23
covers a larger extent of ground than does that of Acts
166 ; for the latter, we saw, fell NW. and W. of Lystra,
but Derbe and Lystra are now included. T h e order of
words is also important ; whereas in Acts 166 two
1 4 AapJAarov :UT' pdv &xLq T$S ' A u r a 4 s Qpvyias.
3767
PHRYGIA
epithets are attached to one noun following them, in
Acts 1823 an epithet and noun are connected by ' and '
with a following epithet (if +puyiav be an adjective here
also) to which the preceding noun must be supplied.'
T h e explanation set forth by Ramsay is that cPpvyiav is
here an adjective-the ' Phrygian Region ' being simply
the briefer description of the territory spoken of in Acts
166 as the 'Phrygo-Galatic Region.' T h e region is
combined with another, lying E. of it, the region con-
taining the towns of Derbe and Lystra-i.~., Galatic
Lycaonia, as opposed to Antiochian Lycaonia which
was ruled by king Antiochus (see L YCAONIA ). This
explanation involves the assumption that the titles Lyca-
unia Galatica and Lycaonin Antiochiann could become
' Galatic region ' ( F a h a r i K G XLjpa) and ' Antiochian
region ' ( ' A v r r o x i a v v X h p a ) , respectively, in the mouth
of a Greek (or of Greek-speaking Paul) passing through
the country. Put in this way the parallelism is deceptive.
On the one hand, of the Latin titles only the second,
Lycaonia Antiochiana, has been found ( C Z L 10866o),
whilst the other is inferred from the analogy of Pontils
Galaticus; on the other hand, of the Greek terms only
the second '( AurroXiavG X d p a : Ptol. v. 6 17j occurs. The
use of the term ' Galatic region ' (l'axanrb X h p a ) for
the Roman part of Lycaonia (and even its supposed
Latin equivalent, Lycaonia Galaticn), however possible
on grounds of analogy and desirable in the interests
of symmetry, is not yet proved. On this ground, not
on that of its complexity, we reject Ranisay's explanation.
Its weakness lies in the necessity of taking the passage
in close connection and comparison with Acts 166.
Still, even so, what is there to suggest the contrast with the
non. Roman part of Lycaonia whereby alone the expression
' Galatic region ' (raAaarm$ x&pa)isjustified and explained'! In
Acts 166 ' Galatic region' ( l h b z r L x $ &pa) receives its explana-
tion and limitation precisely from the word ' Phrygian' (QpvyLav)
with which it appears in combination ; but in Acts 18 23 the
definingwords 'of Lycaonia ' ( n i s Avraovlac :cp Rams. St. Paul
the Traveller, 1 0 4 ) have to be supplied by reference to Acts 14 6
(where Lystra and Derbe are called 'cities of Lycaonia') On
formal grounds also the expression ' t h e Galatic region and
Phrygian' (*v raAartr+v X&pav cdr Qvyiav) becomes objec-
tionable if ex lained as Ramsay explains it. For the adjective
' Galatic' in t i e first member of it indicates the province, and
the part (Fycaonia) is to be supplied by the reader ; hut the
adjective Phrygian' (apvyiav) in the second niember of it
indicates the part, and the province (Galatia) is to he supplied
by the reader; for, according to Ramsay, the expression means
'the Galatic Region f:( Lycaonia) and the Phrygian Region (of
the province Galatia). Cp GALATIA,5 12.
I t is a mistake to insist upon the parallelism of the
two phrases ; Acts 1823 must be interpreted indepen-
dentlyof Acts 166. In 1 6 6 'Phrygian' (@pryla.) is an
adjective, in 18 23 it is a noun. In Acts 1823 ' Phrygia'
is not Phlrgia GaZatica but Phtygia A s i a n a :the words
'the Galatic region ' sum up the whole breadth of the
province Galatia from Derbe to Antioch, including,
therefore, both the Galatic part of Lycaonia (which,
in Acts 146. is described as Lystra and Derbe ' and ' the
region that lieth round about ' ) and the Galatic part of
Phrygia (which, in Acts 166, is described as the ' Phrygo-
Galatic Region '). See GALATIA.g 9, col. 1598. On
this view, Paul travelled westwards from Antioch
(Pisidinn) and struck the eastern trade route perhaps
a t Metropolis (in the TchaGOvaj; but, instead of
following the road through Apameia and the Lycus
valley, he took the more direct road through Higher
Phrygia, by way of Seiblia (see Rams. Cities and
Risk. o f Phqzia, 25795). This journey through
Phrygia is described in Acts 191 as a journey * through
the upper coasts' ( r d dvcorepiKb y.!pp?! RV ' t h e
upper country'). I t is vain to explain this phrase as
having reference to the distinction between High Phrygia
and Low Phrygia (Rams. Church in Rom. 94)
if non-Galatian Phrygia has not previously been men-
tioned, but only Galatic Phrygia; for that distinction
had no validity for Galatic Phrygia. The phrase in
1 For the grammatical point here involved see Ramsay,
Church in Roin. Enr$.(5)486 ; St. Pad the Tr&ller, 210f:
3768
 PHUD
Acts 191 refers back to, and is a n expansion of, the
word Phrjyian (+pu$av) in Acts 1823.
Phrygia is also mentioned in Acts 2 io(on thislist, see PONTUS).
If we are not to admit here a cross-division (the names of Roman
provinces being used indiscriminately with pre-Roman national
divisions emhraced hy them), Phrygia must he taken to stand
for Galatia ; I'h~ug'aGalaticu being, from the point of view of
Jews, the most important part of the Phrygian province (cp
Acts 13 qf:14 I ).
Christianity was introduced into Galatic Phrygia by
Paul and Barnabas on the 'first missionary journey' (Acts
5. Christianity 1314$, Pisidian Antioch ; Acts 1 4 1 $ ,
inPhrygia. Iconiuni ; both revisited, 1421). On
the ' second journey' Paul and Silas
traversed Asian Phrygia, probably from (Pisidian)
Antioch to Dorylzeum (Acts 166J See MYSIA) ; but
n o public prexhing was attempted as they were ' for-
bidden to preach the word in Asia.' On the ' third
journey,' Phrygin Galaaticu was traversed a fourth time,
and Phvygiu ilsiana a second time; but we have no
record of the establishment of churches in the latter
region. There is, however, no reason at all for imagin-
ing that the churches of the Lycus valley (Colossae,
Laodiceia, and Hierapolis) were the earliest foundations
in Phrygia; although it is clear from Rev. I r r that
Laodiceia was the representative church, at any rate in
SW. Phrygia, in the first century A.13. T h e tradition
that Bartholoniew was the apostle of the Lycaones
makes it probable that central Phrygia was the scene of
his lahours, for the Lycaones lay N W . of Synnada
(Rams. Citie-r and Rish. Phrygia. 2709). I n the
history of Christianity in Asia Minor. Phrygia holds a n
important place, and from it comes a larger number of
inscriptions claimed a3 Christian than from any other
part of the world except Rome itself.
Christianremainscomr:fromfour dktricts : (1)central Phrygia,
the region of the Pentapolis. From it comes t h e famous tomh-
inscription of Avircius Marcellus, hishop or preshytsr of Hiera-
polis (192 A . U . ) . l He was the leader of the anti-hlontanistparty,
a 'disciple of the pure Shepherd, who feedeth flocks of sheep on
mountains and plains ' who ' with Paul for a companion followed
while Faith led the Cay' (Rams. Cities and Bish. ofP/zrygia,
2 7098); (2) the districts of Eumeneia and Apameia; (3) Iconium
and t h e country N. and NE. from it (Rams. H i s f . Conrm. on
Gal. 2 2 0 ) ; (4) N. Phrygia, the valley ofthe Tembris (Rams.
Ex#m., 1888, ? 4 o r J ) .
' These facts point distinctly to three separate lines of
Christian influence in Phrygia during the early centuries.
T h e first comes u p the Mzander valley, and reaches on
different lines as far as Akmonia, and the Pentapolis and
Apameia and Pisidian Antioch ; the second belongs to
Lycaonia and the extreme SE. district ; the third belongs
to the NW. T h e spheres of these three influences are
separated from each other by belts of country where early
Christian inscriptions are non-existent ' (Ranis. Cit. and
B5L. 2511). Ramsay would trace all three centres to a
Pauline source (ibid. and 715). The persecution of
Diocletian practically destroyed Christianity throughout
Phrygia.
See Ramsay's monumental work, The Cities and Bish. of
Ph?yKia,of whichonlytwoparts-i., LycosValley ; ii., West and
West-Central Phrygia-have as yet appeared. w. J. w.
PHUD (@oyA[BKA]), Judith 223AV, RV P u ~ ( g . v . 1 .
PHURAH, RV Purah (???; as if ' v a t ' ; c p 283
Judg. 7 2 5 , but see below ; @ap&[BA4L]), Gideon's
attendant, or armour-bearer, Judg. 7 I O / T h a t a mere
attendant's name is recorded, is remarkable. Purah
must either be, or spring from, some clan-name, either
::3 (see G IOEON , I , n. z, PUAH), or more probably
Ophrah (Judg. 6 1 1 etc. ) or Ephrath. Cp M EONENIM,
MOREH. T. K. C.
PHURIM ( a p o y p a l [BLB]), Esth. 11 I , AV. See
P URIM .
PHUT (B.1B). Gen. 106 I Ch. 1 8 AV, R V PUT (4.v.).
1 [The view that this inscription owes its origin to a Christian
is extremely doubtful. A mass of literature on the suhject is
cited, for example, in Rev. de ?h<st. des rcl. 1897, 418f: The
most noteworthy defence of its pagan origin is insietrich, Die
Gra6schrlfi des Aberkios, Leipsic, 18g6.1
3769
PIBESETH
PHUVAH (nl?),Gen. 4613 AV, RV PUVAH=
I Ch.
7 1 P UAH (4.v.).
PHYGELLUS, RV better, Phygelus ( a y r s h o c .
KCD), is mentioned in 2 Tim. 1151.beside Hermogenes
as having become alienated from Paul. Pseudo-Doro-
theus speaks of both (see HERMOGENES), and represents
Phygelus as having been a follower of Simon (Magus),
and afterwards bishop of Ephesus. Otherwise the voice
of legend is silent.
PHYLACTERIES ( @ ~ A & K T H P I &Mt.
) , 23s. See
FRONTLETS.
PHYLARCHES (0@ ~ A A P X H C2 )Macc.
, 8 3 2 RVmg.,
AV PHILARCHES,
RV ' the phylarch.'
PHYSICIAN (K61,Gen. 502 etc.; I&TPOC,Mt.912
etc. ). See M EDICINE.
PIBESETH (npa+g; ~ O y ~ a c T o[B.4rI. c CTOMh
~ ~ n e l [Q] p &; Bubastus), a city of Egypt which along
with On - Heliopolis is threatened with
Name* destruction by the Babylonian armies
(Ezek. 3017). I n view of the connection with cities on
the Western frontier of the Delta (Tahpanhes, v. 18)
and the renderings in the versions, we must recognise
here the famous city not far from the W. entrance t o
G'oshen. Its ruins, which are still known as Tel(1)
Basta, are situated just S. of the modern city and
railway-centre ZakBzik.
T h e earliest Egyptian name of the city was ( PL')bst'
(signification unknown), probably to be pronounced
UbFset. T h e place acquired a religious importance so
high that its divinity, a cat (sometimes also in form of
a lioness) or cat-headed goddess, had no other name
than ( W)bstt,2 U6astet, ' t h e one of Ubeset.' Later,
the city was called 'house (or temple)3 of Ubastet,'
P (originally Per)-ubaste(t). T h e Greek rendering
of this form changes the P to B, as always before
w , ~and drops the ending in accordance with the
vulgar pronunciation. T h e Coptic version of the OT
gives the rather old form $,oyBaceI. T h e Hebrew
orthography has hardly been handed down correctly ;
it is certainly influenced by the analogy of *s, ' mouth,'
(cp @Q as above). Besides, the vocalisation -des&
instead of -bast must have been introduced a t a quite
recent date after a n analogy of Hebrew grammar.
Originally, the name must have been pronounced by the
Hebrews also like Pubast(e?). T h e modern shorten-
ing Basfa(h) is as old as the Arabian conquest.
Our knowledge of Bubastus has been greatly increased
by the excavations of Ed. Naville, in the winters
1887-89, described in Memoir 8 of
2. the Egypt Exploration Fund (1891).
where also the literature relating t o the city and its
history are collected.
T h e city, the capital of the eighteenth nome of
Lower Egypt, must have been very old. Naville
found remains of buildings by the pyramid-builders
Cheops and Chephren (@wfw[i?] and @a'f&). At a
still earlier date, the local goddess U6nsfet-Bubastis
(presupposing the existence of the city) is mentioned in
the texts of the pyramids (cp E GYPT , 46). This
goddess was called Artemis by the Greeks; the
. Cp Brugsch, Dirt. Geox. 206.
4 The singular freedom of Egyptian
writing allows the suppression of the ini-
tial in the common orthography. Occas-
ionally, however, it is written, and the
'
form of the name is made certain by the foreign transcriptions.
4 C p E TH A M . Notice that the classical writers
' ' give Buhastlrs for the city, Buhastis for the goddess.
The confusion between the forms which, unfortun-
ately now prevails, is due to Herodotus, who does
not distinguish (in the present text).
3770
 PICTURES
Egyptians emphasised her joyous and benign nature as
contrasted with various warlike goddesses in lioness-
form. C p the feasts of Bubastis at which hundreds of
thousands of pilgrims from all Egypt assembled for the
revelries so vividly described by Herodotus (260). Of
course, the goddess, like all important divinities, soon
received a solar character, and one of her chief titles is,
‘eye of the sun-god,’ by which evidently she is designated
as the sun-disk itself. T h e cat was sacred to Bubastis,
and consequently there was near the city an enormous
cemetery for cats (and ichneumons), which in our
prosaic time has been exploited for manure. That the
cat was considered sacred not only in Bubastus hut
also throughout all Egypt proves the general worship
of Bubastis. Male divinities worshipped along with
her were Nefer-tem and Ma-hes, in lion-forms.
Various kings of all dynasties (6, 12,etc.) built a t
Bubastus, even the Hyksos-rulers Heyan and Apopi ;
above all, however, the pharaohs of dynasty 2 2
among whom Lower Egypt had completely gained the
upper hand over the Thebaid. Osorkon 11. erected
there a very large hall in commemoration of one of
those jubilee-festivals called (zeb-sid by the Egyptians,
7praKovraaT4pt6es ( Inscr. Rosettana, 3) by the Greeks.
See for the curious sculptures of that building Memoir
I O of the Egypt Exploration Fund. The twenty-second
and twenty-third dynasties seem to have had their resid-
ence in Bubastus ; for the question, why Manetho calls
them Bubastide kings, see EGYPT, 64. Herodotiis
gives a very impressive description of the temple.
Later it was enlarged by Nectanebes (Ne/LtnFbef),one
of the last Egyptian kings. Diodorus (1649) narrates
the capture of the place by the generals of Artaxerxes
Ochus. Although the Greek and Roman rulers do not
seem to have expended much on the temple, Bubastus
continued to be a flourishing city down to Arab times.
Diiring the middle ages, it was abandoned ; the present
ruins d o not offer many attractions to tourists.
W. M. M.
PICTURES. T h e rendering is found only in AV.
I. ni”?v, W i y y a t k , Is. 2 16, RV ‘imagery,’ RVmr. ‘watch-
towers.’ ‘ Figured works’ would be the most natural rendering ;
but we expect something tall to he mentioned. There seems to
he corruption in the text. ‘Ships of Tarshish’ in n. 16a cannot
be right ; they do not come in at all naturally after ‘high towers
and ‘steepwalls.’ Tocorrect ni*?pinto niipD, ‘ships’(Siegfr.- Ant. xviii. 42,5 89).
Stade), is therefore unsatisfactory, even apart from the fact that
this word, well known in Aramaic, only occurs in the late Book
of Jonah 1 (Jon. 16). We can hardly defend it by @BKA m b a v
BCuv rrhoiov KC~AAOUS, which is paraphrastic. See E BONY,’ $ z (e).
2. ni’jl$F, ~lraikbiyyatk. ( a ) Nu. 33 5 2 (uKorrcai), rather
‘fignred(stones),’asRV;cpLev.261, n.3V.a ?>N, ‘figuredstone’
(AVw., RV), and see IDOL, $ 13 (6) Prdv.2511 (on @ see
B ASKET ), RV ‘baskets’ ; hut the ‘baskets of silver ’ are as
doubtful as the ‘pictures.’ See B ASKET .
PIECE OF MONEY, PIECE OF SILVER, or OP supposed to furnish completely satisfactory evidence of
GOLD.
I. “F’kq, &ii@ (Gen. 33 19 and II Josh. 24 32 [RV ; AV has
‘pieces of silver’]; also Job 4211). A doubtful reading. See
KESITAH.
2. manip, Mt. 1727t AV, E V w ‘stater,’RV S HEKEL (pa.).
3. I D ? n$is, ’dg8rath kdseSepk (b@oAoS dwvpiov ; numinuin
argenteum, I 8 . 2 36 ; EV ‘ a piece of silver ’). Doubtful (see
S PELT).
4. I n 2 K. 5 5 E V has ‘six thousand [pieces] of gold’ for nuw
331o.&. RVw. suggflsts ‘shekels’ for ‘pieces’; cp Zech.
11IZJ ‘[pieces] of silver. See M ONEY .
5. I n Lk. 158 f: the ‘piece of silver’ is G p a x p G (EVW
‘drachma ; a coin worth about eightpence ’). The ‘pieces of xviii. 3 I , 56 ; BJii. 92, § 169). For five days Pilate
silver ’ of Mt. 26 15 27 3f are hpydpra ; the fifty thousand pieces
of silver in Acts 19 19, apyvpiov p v p i & s ~ C V T S .
PIGEON ($fiJ, Gen. 159 ; n!V, Lev. 128). See day the malcontents were surrounded by troops in the
DOVE, FOWL.
PI-HAHIROTH (llicn3-93 ; in Ex. T H C E T T A Y ~ E W C against this display of power, and Pilate was obliged to
[BAFL], in Nu. CTOMA snipwe [Bl, CT. a p W B
1 Gunkel (SckCjJ 50) thinks ni.?i to be a rare word for
‘ships ’ ; but his theory has no solid basis.
3771
PILATE, PONTIUS
[BabAFL] ; Phihahiroth) Ex. 142 g Nu. 337 ; also
HAHIROTH(nVn;! ; alpwe [BAFL] ; Phihahiroth)
Nu. 338. See EXODUS i., 5 IT ; also B AAL - ZEPHON ,
and MIGDOL, I.
PILATE, PONTIUS (TTONTIOC T T I ~ A T O C rrrsl-
AATOC KBDI).
I n Mt. 27 2 TICLA&TWr i Ijyep6vr ; thereafter 8 TIerhGso~or b
$yep& simply ; Mk. f5 I ‘ I I c L A & T ~simply, thereafter b 11. ; Lk.
3 I +pVovdovroc TIovriov I I E L A ~ T O(here
V only
1. Name and Acts 427 t h e double name); for the title
a d titles. cp 20 20 : in other places 6 rI. as in 23 I 8 or
11. simply (as also in Acts3 13); Jn. I S z g f l
has 4 27 onlv b TI.
T h e Nf, as above shown, uses only the title f i y ~ p d u ,
= Lat. prmes, a general term (cp fiyepovla used in Lk.
3 I of the emperor, in w.hich place it is translated ‘reign,’
EV), used also by Josephus in speaking of the ’governor ’
of Judzea ( A n t . xviii. 31, § 55). Josephus also often
employs the word 8aapxos (Ant. xix. 92, 363) or
B m p ~ h 7 p j s( A n t . xviii. 42, § 89) ; but the specific title of
the governor of Judrea was procuratov, in Greek Bai-
s , so he is called by Jos. Ant. xx. 62, 132,
~ p o ~ o and
231 ii. 81, 117, 92, 169 and elsewhere (cp Tac. Ann.
1544-the only passage in which Pilate is mentioned by
a Roman writer). For an account of this office see
P ROCURATOR .
Pilate’s birthplace is unknown ; hut the legends offer
an ample choice (Muller, P o d Pil. 48J ). His nomen
Pontius suggests a connection with the famous Samnite
family of the Pontii ; his cognomen Pilatus, if it were really
derived from the word pileutus (pilleatus), ‘wearing the
piZZeus, or felt cap of the manumitted slave,’ would
suggest the taint of slavery in the history of his family
(cp the case of Felix, who although actually only a
freedman held the procuratorship of Judaea). T h e word
Pilatus may, however, just as probably he connected
with pilutus (piZum) or p i l a h a ( p i h ) , either of which
derivations would start us upon a very different train of
imagination, the conclusion of which would equally
have no historical validity whatever.
On the death of Archelaus in 6 A.D. his kingdom,
which had included Judzea, Saniaria. and Idumrea, was
made a Czesarian province (see HEROD [FAMILY], 8).
Of the seven procurators who administered the province
between 6 A.D. and 41 A.D. Pontius Pilate w a s the
fifth ; he held office for ten years (26-36 A. D. Cp Jos.
According to Philo, Agrippa I. in his letter to
Caligula describes Pilate as inflexible, merciless, and
a. StorJrof obstinate’ (T+Y $6uiv ~ K U ~ T + Sai p ~ d
TOO ab0dsous ~ ~ E ~ ~ L K T O and S ) , charges
imperial him with ‘ corruption. violence, robbery,
image* ill-usage,oppression, illegalexecutions,and
never-ending most grievous cruelty ’ (Phil. Leg ad
Caium, 38). The few incidents recorded of his career are
this undoubtedly overdrawn characterisation. So ‘ the
very first act by which Pilate introduced himself into office
was characteristic of him who treated with contempt the
Jewish customs and privileges ’ (Schurer, G 3 Y 1 4 w ;
ET i. 283). I n order to satisfy Jewish scruples it was
a standing order that the image of the emperor borne
upon Roman military standards should he removed
before troops entered Jerusalem ; hut on one occasion,
probably soon after Pilate’s entry upon office, it was
discovered that this rule had been evaded by a detach-
ment which had entered the city by night (Jos. Ant.
was deaf to the protestations of the crowd which
gathered before his palace a t Caesarea. On the sixth
race-course ; but their fanatical obstinacy was proof
give way. It was his first experience of that strange
intractable temper which made the Jews so difficult to
govern; h e learnt now, a t the outset of his career as
governor, how far the people were prepared to go for
3772
 PILATE, PONTIUS
the sake of their religious scruples. That a massacre
of the mob was seriously contemplated, it would be
foolish to assert ; for the imperial system was a sensible
attempt to govern by means of sensible men. T h e
utmost that can be extracted from the narrative, in our
ignorance of the exact circumstances of the breach of
regulations, is the conclusion that the procurator erred
through inexperience of the people and a n inopportune
insistence upon a point of honour. Pilate's Roman
sentiments must claim weight equally with the punctilios
of the Jewish mob ; but this is often overlooked.
The other instances of friction will be found upon a
fair review to bear a very different interpretation from
that usually put upon them.
The treasure accumulated in the temple was in part
appropriated for the construction of an aqueduct to
3. Other Jerusalem. This excited vehement opposi-
stories. tion, and a visit of the procurator to the
city was made the occasion of a great
popnlar demonstration. Pilate having received previous
information of the intended outburst issued the necessary
orders, and the soldiers mingling with the crowd dispersed
the rioters with bludgeons, and effectually silenced all
open opposition to the scheme; this was uot accomplished
without some loss of life (Jos. Ant. xviii. 3 z ; BJ ii. 94).
The incident to which reference is made in Lk. 131
( ' the Galilreans, whose blood Pilate had mingled with
their sacrifices ') is not elsewhere recorded. When
accmunt is taken of the disrurhed state of the country,
due to the fanatical mutual hatred of the various religious
groups (cp, for example, the act of the Samaritans who
threw bones into the temple just before the Passover
in order to pollute it-Jos. Ant. xviii. 22, Q 3 0 ) , we
must recognise in the incident only the strong hand of
a governor concerned to carry out impartially the duty
which was in fact the prime requirement of a provincial
governor-the maintenance of order (cp Ranisay, W a s
C h i s t born a t BethZekem ? 174f.). The permanent
difficulty of this task in the case of Jndzea is evidenced
by the insurrection in which Barabhas had been pro-
minent (Mk. 1 5 7 Lk. 2 3 1 9 ) , and also by that collision
between the government and the Samaritans which led to
Pilate's recall. These Samaritans, under the leadership
of an impostor, who promised to reveal the sacred
utensils which were supposed to be concealed on Mt.
Gerizini since the time of Moses, gathered in great
numbers armed a t the mountain, but were dispersed
with bloodshed by Pilate's troops, and those of repute
and influence among them executed. The Samaritans
made complaint to Vitellius, who had come as legatus
to Syria, and Vitellius sent Pilate to Rome to answer
for his conduct, making over the administration of
J u d z a to Marcellus (Jos. Ant. xviii. 42).
The true nature of the two incidents last sketched is
clear. Upon the whole, we must refuse to subscribe to
that unfavourableverdict which has been
4. Pilate's passed upon Pilate on the strength of
administration. evidence derived from hostile sources,
whether Jewish or Christian. The peculiar misfortune
of Pilate, that he was connected with the tragedy of
Jesus (see R O M AN E MPIRE ), has resulted in all treat-
ment of his career being merely a search for evidence in
support of a foregone conclusion. His ten years'
tenure of office (a length of tenure equalled only by
that of his predecessor Valerius Gratus, 15-26 A . D . ) is
evidence of the general success of his administration ;
for the reason assigned by Josephus ( A n t . xviii. 6 5 ) , that
long tenure was due to deliberate intention on the part of
Tiberius to secure if possibIe a mitigation of official
rapacity, on the principle that ' it is better to leave the
gorged flies on a sore than to drive them off' is simply
foolish if taken as more than thejeu d'esprit of a mal-
content (for other assigned reasons, c p Tac. Ann. l SO).
Pilate's suspension and dismissal to Rome just before
the death of Tiberius (Tac. Ann. 6 3 2 ) proves only the
greatness of the pressure brought to bear upon the
3773
PILDASH
newly-appointed legate of Syria, or at most the desire
on the part of the central government to go still farther
on a path of conciliation, signs of which tendency had
not been wanting even before this event. For Pilate
had already been compelled by imperial mandate to
remove to Czsarea certain votive shields, without figures,
gilded only and inscribed with the emperor's name,
which he had huug up in the palace a t Jerusalem. 'less
for the honour of Tiberius than for the annoyance of the
Jews,' as the letter of Agrippa I. unfairly puts it (Philo,
Leg. ad Caiufn, 3 8 ) . This was probably after the death
of Seianus (31 A . D . ) if it be true that Seianus was an
arch-enemy of the Jews (cp Schiirer, GVf 1411 ; E T
i. '286 note). Here a corrcct interpretation will see,
not ' a piece of purely wanton bravado on the part of
Pilate,' but a small concession on the part of his
imperial master overriding and correcting the attitude
of a subordinate, in deference to a petition supported
by powerful names. This new departure was entered
upon very energetically by Vitellius (for the details, see
Jos. Ant. xviii.43), and had its natural sequel in the
favour shown by Caligula to Agrippa I. and the great
advancement of Agrippa by Claudius (see HEROD,
F A M ILY OF, Q 12).
Pilate has woii notoriety through his connection with
the trial and sentence of Jesus (Mt. 2 7 z J Mk. 15.f. ;
more fully in Lk. 23 ~ f . Jn. 1828f: adds much to the
Synoptic accounts). See, further, R OMAN E M P I R E .
Of Pilate's end nothing is known. Refore he reached
Rome Tiberius was dead (Jos. Ant. xviii. 42). Various
5. Legends. traditions were current. Eusehius (L'hron.
and H E 27) asserts, on the authority of
unnamed Greek or Roman chroniclers, that he fell into
such misfortunes under Caligula that he committed
suicide. In the apocryphal Mors Pilati, his suicide
follows upon his condemnation to death by Tiberius
for his failure to save Jesus. His body was cast into
the Tiber ; but evil spirits disturbed the water so much
that it was carried to Vienna ( Vienne) and cast into the
Rhone, and after various vicissitudes, ended in the re-
cesses of a lake on Mt. Pilatus, opposite Lucerne (for
this legend and its origin, see Muller, Pont. Pil. 82f. ;
Ruskin. Mod. Point. 5 128). I n the apocryphal IIapd-
doors DrXdsov it is related that Tiberius called Pilate to
account for the crucifixion of Jesus and condemned him
to death ; and both he and his wife died penitent, and
were assured of forgiveness by a voice from heaven
(see Tisch. E'vang. Apocr. 449f:). According to other
accounts, Pilate's execution occurred under Nero (so
Malalas. ed. Dind. z5oJ ; and authorities quoted by
Schurer, op. cit. 88 n. ). T h e tendency of the tradition
to represent both Pilate and his wife as embracing
Christianity is easily understood, and is in contrast with
the unsympathetic estimate of later times (cp Tertull.
Ap. 21, jam pro sua conscientia Chistianus. ' already
in conviction a Christian,' at or immediately after Jesus'
death ; Gosp. of Nic. 2 ; Orig. Nom. on Mt. 35 ; Stan-
ley, East. ch. 13). Tradition gives the name of Pilate's
wife as Claudia Procula or Procla, and by some she has
been identified with the Claudia mentioned in z Tim. 4 21.
G. A. Muller, Ponfius Pilafirs der f f t e Proczrator von
J&u, etc., 1888 ; with full list to date of the literature on
Pilate. Arnold, Die neronische Cht istenver-
6. Literature.fl'ng, 116f: Articles in Exflos. ser. 2. vol.
8 (1884), 1c7f: (Cox), and ser. 6, vol. I (IW)
5 9 3 (hlacgregor). Taylor Innes, Trial ofJesus Chvist, L
legal Mono rap& 1899. The many Lives of C h i s f may also
be consulterf but with little profit as regards obtaining a correct
view of Pilate himself. For the so-called Acts ofPiZnfe (Gospel
of Nicodenzus) consult J. C. Thilo, Codex upocr. NT i., 1832,
1183 4 8 7 3 ; R. A. Lipsius, Die Pilatus-Ahfen, 1871.
W. J. W.
PILDASH (~;)B), b. N AHOR (Gen. 2222 : +AAAAC
[AD'PL], -A [D"]). T h e name, however, looks doubt-
ful, and may have been partly assimilated to the name
q h which follows (Che.).'
1 Dillniann (adloc.) citesa Nab. name )vi$fi;but the reading
is more than doubtful
3774