mainly imported to Phoenicia between 620 and 320 BCE, a few statues being local imitations. Though they were found along or near the coast from al‐Mina to Tell Jemmeh, around 550 out of 650 pieces were found in Amrit. Others came to light with clay figurines in temple favissae (Tell es‐Safi, Tel Zippor and Tel Erani). They were offerings, devoted to local deities and placed in sanctuaries. They represent gods and donors, the “master of the animals,” standing men, who are generally dressed, sometimes with offerings and rarely standing women and temple boys (Lembke 2004). A few Cypriot temple boys also found their way to the sanctuary of Bustan‐esh‐Sheikh. The Sidonian court sculptors refashioned them after the Greek manner from 430 BCE, creating a new Greek style and new types featuring standing and sitting toddlers and children. The Hellenized production of temple boys and sarcophagi reached its peak between 420 and 380 BCE. The U‐formed “tribune d’Echmoun,” which is decorated with gods and nymphs and a hunting relief, testifies to the extreme hellenization of the Sidonian court around 350 BCE.
A few other small statues, whether in metal, stone, clay, or faience, in Egyptian, Greek or local style, have survived.
Of outstanding importance is the stela of Yehawmilk, King of Byblos around 450–425 BCE. The king is represented in Achaemenid court dress in front of his goddess, who resembles Isis but is, according to the inscription, Baalat.
Luxury items made of metal, such as vessels, candelabra, furniture, or jewelry, and weapons, alabastra, and glass have mostly been found in graves. Because of an international Achaemenid style, it is often difficult to be precise as to their origin. The two bronze thymiateria from the graves in Shekhem and Umm Udhaina, respectively adorned with floral elements and a female figurine, give us an idea of temple furnishing. A bronze lion paw found near Samaria points to a royal seat.
The largest number of circulating coins was local, the foreign ones being from Persia, Greece, or Cyprus, (see Chapter 57 Royal Coinage). The main Phoenician cities Byblos, Tyre, Sidon, and Arwad coined money from 470 BCE onward. Each city developed its own iconography. It was Egyptianizing and Phoenician in Byblos, Achaemenid (archer) and Greek (hippocampus and dolphin) in Tyre. The ship and the murex shell commemorate the economic power of Sidon. Attic motifs were imitated in Samaria, where coinage started about a century later. Judaean coins bear the name of the province written in Hebrew letters and are therefore called Yehud coins.
Conclusion
The main characteristics of the Achaemenid archeological material of the fifth satrapy are multiplicity, diversity, and eclecticism. Local, Near Eastern, Cypriot, Egyptian, Greek, and typical Achaemenid elements were combined. But, obviously, style is only an external shape, which does not touch on the content of the represented figure. This is especially clear amongst the clay figurines and the seals, on which some themes, such as single women with a child, men, or the “Master of the animals,” are repeated in Egyptian, Greek, local‐Phoenician, or local Near Eastern style, whereas their meaning remains identical. It is also evident that only figures or themes, which were either pre‐existing in the Levantine culture or easy to integrate into Levantine life, were chosen. The figurative Attic ceramic provides a good example for this. The pictures on the vessels showed Greek gods, in particular Dionysos, heroes, amongst them Herakles, mythological scenes, mixed beings, and men and women. The broad categories of the divine, the heroic, and the human were understood by the local population. Herakles could easily fit into the image of the “Master of the animals.” The same can be said for mixed beings such as satyrs, maenads, sphinxes, and centaurs. Even if the fashion may have started in royal circles, because Hellenized objects were in part expensive, it was largely accepted and supported by the entire population from 550 BCE onward. The numerous affordable local clay figurines and seals also underwent a phase of hellenization.
Another novelty of this period is the choice of the figurative representations which allow us to draw conclusions about religious changes. If in the second millennium it is already very difficult, due to the lack of attributes or special garments, to identify the gods, by the first millennium it is often impossible to ascertain whether the represented person is even divine. Iconography and written sources allow us to follow the evolution from a “classical” polytheistic religion, where each god is responsible for one domain to a religion, where one god embraces all aspects. Each individual is able to choose his god – the main goal is his personal wellbeing and salute. The idea of protection is predominant in all realms: combined with care (pregnant women), with power (“master of the animals”), or healing (temple boys).
These developments were indirectly fostered by the Achaemenid Empire. The Levant became part of a large territory, whose borders were open to the political center in the east, as well as to the west, where the cultural and economic entwinement increased.
The scarcity of Achaemenid remains raised the issue of an “elusive empire.” But the Levant has always been shaped by a mixture of cultural elements, precisely making its own unique cultural profile. This continues in the Achaemenid period. While Persian dresses, jewelry, furniture, or architectural elements mainly entered the royal and elite circles, they did not change basic elements such as language, religion, or the content of pictures.
The Achaemenid Empire was in reality not elusive in the Levant, even if the coast profited more than the inland, which remained more rooted in the Iron Age. The “lack” of Achaemenid material turns more and more out to be a matter of awareness.
REFERENCES
1 Frede, S. (2000). Die phönizischen anthropoiden Sarkophage. Mainz: von Zabern.
2 Lehmann, G. (1996). Untersuchungen zur späten Eisenzeit in Syrien und Libanon: Stratigraphie und Keramikformen zwischen ca. 720 bis 300 v. Chr. (Altertumskunde des Vorderen Orients 5). Münster: Ugarit‐Verlag.
3 Lembke, K. (2001). Phönizische anthropoide Sarkophage (Damaszener Forschungen 10). Mainz: von Zabern.
4 Lembke, K. (2004). Die Skulpturen aus dem Quellheiligtum von Amrit: Studie zur Akkulturation in Phönizien (Damaszener Forschungen 12). Mainz: von Zabern.
5 Nunn, A. (2000a). Der figürliche Motivschatz Phöniziens, Syriens und Transjordaniens vom 6. bis zum 4. Jahrhundert v. Chr. (Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis: Series Archaeologica 18). Freiburg/Göttingen: Universitätsverlag/Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
6 Nunn, A. (2000b). Zur Architektur in Westvorderasien während der Achämenidenzeit. In R. Dittmann, B. Hrouda, U. Low, et al. (eds.), Variatio Delectat: Iran und der Westen: Gedenkschrift für Peter Calmeyer (Alter Orient Altes Testament 272). Münster: Ugarit‐Verlag, pp. 503–538.
7 Nunn, A. (2001). Nekropolen und Gräber in Phönizien, Syrien und Jordanien zur Achämenidenzeit. Ugarit‐Forschungen, 32, pp. 389–461.
8 Nunn, A. (2014). Attic pottery imports and their impact on ‘identity discourses’: a reassessment. In C. Frevel, K. Pyschny, and I. Cornelius (eds.), A “Religious Revolution” in Yehûd? The Material Culture of the Persian Period as a Test Case (Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 267). Fribourg: Academic Press, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, pp. 391–429.
9 Stern, E. (2001). Archaeology of the Land of the Bible II: The Assyrian, Babylonian and Persian Periods 732–332 BCE. New York: Doubleday.
10 Stucky, R., with von S. Stucky (2005). Das Eschmun‐Heiligtum von Sidon: Architektur und Inschriften (Antike Kunst: Beiheft 19). Basel: Birkhäuser.
FURTHER READING
1 Bonnet, C. (1996). Astarte: Dossier documentaire et perspectives historiques (Collezione di Studi Fenici 37). Roma: Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche.
