Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-cnmwb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T18:02:26.687Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Some Graeco-Phoenician Shrines

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 December 2013

G. F. Hill
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

With but two exceptions, no trace now remains of the shrines with which this paper deals, or at least no trace has been revealed by excavation. Practically the sole record of these buildings is to be found on the coins struck in the district during the period of the Roman Empire, and more especially during the third century of our era. The earlier coins, from the beginning of the coinage towards the end of the fifth century B.C., tell us something about the cults, but little of their furniture. But in the Roman age, especially during the time of the family of Severus and Elagabalus, there was a considerable outburst of coinage, which, in its types, reveals certain details interesting to the student of the fringe of Greek and Roman culture.

The evidence thus provided is necessarily disjointed, and concerns only the external, official aspects of the Phoenician religion. The inner truth of these things, it is safe to say, is hidden for ever: even the development from the primitive religion to the weird syncretistic systems of the Roman age is hopelessly obscure. One can only see dimly what was the state of things during the period illustrated by the monuments.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Hellenic Studies , Volume 31 , November 1911 , pp. 56 - 64
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies 1911

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 In order to avoid overloading this article with references, I may refer generally to the British Museum Catalogue of Greek Coins, , Phoenicia (1910)Google Scholar, where all the Phoenician coins here discussed are described and illustrated, and where numerous other details in the argument, omitted here for lack of space, may be found by anyone interested in the subject. The 34 coins, all for which space could be found in the plates to this article, must not therefore be taken as representing all the available evidence. The periods to which they belong are as follows: 1, 2—late V. to IV. cent. B.C. 24, 33—IV. cent. B.C. 4— II. cent. B.C. 21—9/8 B.C. 26, 28—Domna. 11, 27, 30—Caracalla. 6, 16—Macrinus. 10—Diadumenian. 3, 5, 7, 9, 13–15, 17–19, 29, 31, 32—Elagabalus. 12— Soaemias. 22—Paula. 20—Severus Alexander. 23—Trebonianus Gallus. 25—Valerian. 8, 34—Gallienus. Nos. 9, 29, and 30 are at Berlin; 33 at Paris; the rest in the British Museum.

2 Church Quarterly Review, 1908, pp. 118–141.

3 Cumont (in Pauly-Wissowa ii. 1777 f.) may be right in supposing that the name Astarte was often used by the Greeks loosely for other goddesses; but in the age with which we are chiefly concerned there can be no doubt that the inhabitants of the Phoenician towns were no more precise themselves. To deny the name Astarte to the consort of Adonis at Byblus may be correct in theory, but is misleading in fact. Cp. Heisenberg, A., Grabeskirche und Apostelkirche i. p. 203Google Scholar.

4 Renan, , Mission de Phénicie, p. 397Google Scholar.

5 For the eagle and lion as solar, see especially the remarkable coins of Euagoras II of Salamis, on which is represented a lion with an eagle on his back, and a sun in the field (B.M.C. Cyprus, p. cv).

6 See especially Dussaud, , Rev. Arch. 1897, xxx. pp. 319Google Scholar ff. On the relief mentioned in the text, see Perdrizet, in C.R. de l'Acad. 1901, p. 132Google Scholar; also Jahrb. xvii. p. 98; Rev. Arch. 1903, i. p. 130.

7 Lucian, , de Syria dea, 41Google Scholar:

8 Steph. Byz. s.v. Βηρυτός; Eustath. ad Dion. Perieg. 912.

9 For see especially Nonnus, Dion. bks. xlii, xliii. The quantity of the first syllable in may be different, but there can be no doubt of the connexion between the two in legend and in popular etymology.

10 Eusebius, , Praep. Evang. i. 10, 14Google Scholar, quoting Philo of Byblus; she is sister of Elioun, i.e. the ‘Highest,’ i.e. the Baal of Byblus.

11 Renan, pp. 355 f.; references to later literature in B.M.C. Phoenicia, p. xlviii, n. 3.

12 Damascius ap. Phot. Bibl. 1064 R., 348 Bekker.

13 B.C.H. xxvi. 1902, p. 182.

14 On cultus-busts see von Fritze, H., Münzen von Pergamon (1910), p. 90Google Scholar.

15 Renan, pp. 162, 201, 230, 234.

16 Grabeskirche und Apostelkirche i. pp. 201 ff. I owe the reference to this book (as well as many other suggestions) to Miss Gertrude Bell Small points requiring correction in Heisenberg's account of the coins are: that the pyramidal-roofed temple does not occur on coins before the time of Elagabalus (his nos. 3 and 4 are rightly catalogued by Babelon under the latter emperor), and that the object held by Astarte on his nos. 4 and 8, which has puzzled him, is an aphlaston.

17 Evans, A. J., ‘Mycenaean Tree and Pillar Cult,’ J.H.S. xxi. p. 138Google Scholar; Heisenberg, op. cit. pp. 208 ff., and many other works.

18 Lucian, , de Syr. dea 4Google Scholar.

19 B.M.C. Cyprus, p. cxxxii.

20 Ap. Euseb., Praep. Ev. i. 10Google Scholar. 2.

21 J.H.S. xv. pp. 87 f. The form with μ for ν seems to be certain.

22 B.M.C. Galatia etc. p. xc.

23 B.M.C. Lycia etc. Pl. XXIV. 15.

24 On the significance of the zodiac in connexion with Astarte see Macrobius, Sat. i. 21. 2Google Scholar.

25 See references for this and Heracles Astrochiton in B.M.C. Phoenicia, p. cxxiii.

26 Euseb., Praep. Ev. i. 10. 31Google Scholar.

27 B.M.C. Lycia, etc. lvii. Besides the references there given for this cult of Helen and the Dioscuri, see Perdrizet, in B.S.A. iii. p. 163Google Scholar.

28 But, as Miss Bell points, out, this may be a mere coincidence. A closer parallel is afforded by the battlemented motive on the rock-cut tombs of Petra and Medâin Sâleh, which show similarly a half-battlement at each end of the façade (Brünnow, u. Domaszewski, , Prov. Arabia, i. pp. 137, ff.Google Scholar; Jaussen, et Savignac, , Mission Archéol en Arabie, (1909), pp. 308 ffGoogle Scholar.).

29 Sat. i. 21. 5. This passage has been quoted à propos of sculptures at Ghineh and Mashnaka, with which—except that Astarte is mourning—it has no connexion. It is interesting to note that Selden, wishing to connect the passage with the Astarte of Aphaca, unwarrantably emended ‘Architis’ into ‘Aphacitis.’