The Oxford Handbook of the Phoenician and Punic Mediterranean

by Carolina Lopez-Ruiz

  Increasingly, archaeological evidence of the late second millennium bce suggests a nuanced development of a distinctive “Phoenician” material culture that combines predominantly Late Bronze Age traditions with the infusion of some new foreign features, which are often attributed to the “Sea Peoples” (see Artzy 2013; Killebrew and Lehmann 2013; Lehmann 2013; Sharon and Gilboa 2013; Stern 2013, for various views). This view is not new; already in the mid-twentieth century scholars proposed that Phoenician culture resulted from an arrival of small numbers of outside groups who mixed with the descendants of the autochthonous inhabitants of the Late Bronze Age central and northern Levant (e.g., Albright 1949: 109; Baramki 1961: 25–26; Culican 1966: 72; see further discussion that follows). Much like the second-millennium Bronze Age inhabitants of the Levant who appear as “Canaanites” in Egyptian, Mesopotamian, and biblical sources (e.g., Na’aman 1994; Killebrew 2005: 93–96), the early Phoenicians, who may have referred to themselves as Canaanites, can best be understood as a confederation of merchant communities of predominantly indigenous populations residing along the central and northern Levantine littoral, with a similar material culture and language, who likely self-identified in terms of their cities and family lineage (also, e.g., Aubet 2001: 9–11). What these coastal city-states held in common was a way of life that centered on seafaring, trade, and craft production, including luxury goods, such as the manufacture of purple cloth and extensive metal industries. As Phoenician influence extended westward and southward during the first millennium to other regions bordering the Mediterranean Sea, the term also is used to describe settlements, material culture, and populations that were impacted culturally by Levantine Phoenician commercial activities or colonization.

  The Northern and Central Levantine Littoral During the Late Bronze II and Early Iron I Periods

  General Setting

  Extensive archaeological excavations in the eastern Mediterranean, considered together with the rich assemblage of fourteenth- and thirteenth-century bce Egyptian and Ugaritic texts, provide the broader context for our understanding of the coastal areas of the central and northern Levant. Key to understanding this region is the role of the Hittite and New Kingdom Egyptian empires, both of which vied for control over the Levantine coastal maritime city-states. In addition to the two superpowers, other regional centers of power, including Mycenaean mainland Greece, Crete, and Cyprus, were pivotal players in the international exchange systems that characterized this period (Cline 2015: 43–101 for a general overview of the eastern Mediterranean during the Late Bronze II; for Late Bronze Age trade in the Eastern Mediterranean world, see Monroe 2009). The scope of Late Bronze Age Mediterranean connectivity and the extent of regional interaction during its heyday at around 1300 bce is best illustrated by the objects recovered from the Uluburun shipwreck. The ship’s rich cargo included commodities that originated from the entire eastern Mediterranean and elsewhere, providing a glimpse into elite entrepreneurial trade networks during the Late Bronze Age. Based on the ship’s contents, its excavators proposed that the ship originated in the Levant and was crewed by Syro-Canaanite (or “Proto-Phoenician”) merchants and sailors (Pulak 2008).

  The end of the Late Bronze Age witnessed the disruption and collapse of international trade, coinciding with or a result of natural or man-made crises, or a combination of both. The Hittite empire suffered devastation, as did Ugarit, the most important Late Bronze Levantine maritime city-state. Its destruction and subsequent abandonment may have encouraged the development and expansion of commercial port cities along the Phoenician coastline, which for the most part did not suffer the same fate. In the Aegean, many of the city-states of mainland Greece, Crete, and elsewhere in this region also experienced destructions, resulting in population movements in the eastern Mediterranean. New Kingdom Egypt, the second great superpower of the Late Bronze Age, gradually declined during the twelfth century bce. This is evidenced by its retreat from Canaan, marking its loss of territorial control and economic influence in the Levant. Many of Canaan’s city-states, especially along the northern coast, and their hinterlands benefited from their newfound independence (regarding the crises at the end of the Bronze Age, e.g., Drews 1993; Killebrew 2005: 21–49; Cline 2015: 102–76; Knapp and Manning 2016; regarding the economic impact of Egyptian imperialism in the Levant, e.g., Na’aman 1981, 1988).

  Textual Evidence

  The mid-fourteenth-century bce Amarna archives are especially insightful with regard to the political and socioeconomic structure of Late Bronze II Levantine city-states. These tablets, mainly written in Akkadian and nearly four hundred in number, represent correspondence between the Egyptian Pharaohs Amenhotep III and Akhenaten and their various vassals or regional powers. The vast majority of letters deal with diplomatic concerns. A significant number originate from Syro-Canaanite rulers of city-states along the northern and central Levantine coast. The most numerous originate from Byblos in the north, a major source of cedar wood and copper, and may indicate special relations between Egypt and Byblos’s ruler, Rib-Hadda, who continuously pleads for military assistance against the Hittites and ‘apiru. The southern Phoenician cities of Beirut (Biruta), Sidon (Siduna), Tyre (Surru), and Akko (Akka), while dependent upon the Egyptians for military and administrative support, appear in the letters as independent maritime trading centers with dynastic houses, characterized by their commercial rivalries with each other (e.g., Na’aman 2000 for Egyptian-Canaanite correspondence; Goren et al. 2004 for the texts and their origin; Elayi 2018: 69–79, for the Phoenician cities in the Amarna archives).

  A second major written source for reconstructing the Proto-Phoenician period are nearly 5,000 tablets from Ugarit, a major Late Bronze Age port city and trading center located on the northern coast of Syria within the Hittite sphere of influence. The texts were recovered from archives that date to the fourteenth through early twelfth centuries. They are written in Ugaritic, a northwest Semitic language that is related to Phoenician, Hebrew, and several other languages. In addition to royal correspondence, mythological texts, legal documents, international treaties, and administrative lists, they document Ugarit’s shipping and business transactions with the port cities of Beirut, Sidon, Tyre, Akko, and especially Byblos and the Akkar Plain along the northern Phoenician coast. Sidon appears prominently in these letters, including an episode relating to a “great sin” committed by citizens of Ugarit against the storm-god of Sidon (Singer 1999: 668–73 and Peckham 2014: 15–21, for Ugarit’s interactions with the Phoenician coast).

  In the aftermath of the collapse of international trade, the devastation of the Hittite capital, Hattusha, the withdrawal of Egypt from Canaan, and the destruction and abandonment of Ugarit, written sources are rare. Two texts from this period, an inscription of Tiglath-pileser I (1114–1076 bce) and the Egyptian Report of Wenamun, depict thriving Iron I shipping and commercial centers along the Phoenician coast that continue their Late Bronze Age legacy (Stieglitz 1990 summarizes the evidence). The Assyrian text recounts Tiglath-pileser I’s expedition to obtain cedar wood from the Phoenician coast for the renovation of the temple to Anu-Adad in Ashur (compare 1 Kings 5 on the prominence of Lebanese timber for the building of the Jerusalem temple somewhat later; see chapter 43, this volume). During his journey, he collects tribute from Sidon, Byblos, and Arwad, an event that illustrates the cities’ prosperity in the early eleventh century bce (Pritchard 1969: 274–75).

  The Report of Wenamun, a priest of Amun at Karnak, is most likely a work of historical fiction that takes place during “Year 5” of an unknown pharaoh who is usually identified as Ramesses XI (1107–1078 bce), though others suggest a date as late as the tenth century bce for the text (see Sass 2002 for discussion). In this tale, Wenamun is sent to Byblos to obtain cedar to build a ship for Amun. En route, he stops at Dor, where he is robbed by Beder, a Tjekker (“Sea People”) prince. Upon reaching Byblos, he is humiliated by the city’s ruler, Zakar-Baal, who demands payment for the lumber instead of providing it
for free, as apparently had been the custom. The story ends with Wenamun’s rescue in Cyprus by Hatbi, a local queen (translation and commentary in Goedicke 1975). Regardless of its date of composition, the tale clearly depicts the decline of Egyptian influence along the Phoenician coast and illustrates the independence and importance of Byblos and Dor (see also Elayi 2018: 100–104).

  Archaeological Evidence

  Though significant, the textual evidence provides only a limited glimpse into the world of the Late Bronze and Iron I Phoenician coastal cultures. Unfortunately, exploration of the main city-states in the Phoenician heartland, especially the second-millennium through middle first-millennium bce occupation layers, has been hampered by modern occupation of many of these sites including Arwad (figure 4.1), Beirut, Sidon, and Tyre. This condition, combined with the unpredictable political situation of the region, has discouraged extensive excavations. As a result, our knowledge of thirteenth- through eleventh-century bce occupation at these sites remains incomplete (chapter 10, this volume, surveys archaeological research along the Phoenician coast). The best stratigraphic sequences for the Late Bronze through Iron I periods are the results from excavations at Tell Kazel, on the southern coast of Syria, the port cities of Sidon and Tyre, the industrial center of Sarepta, and Tel Akko, with its natural harbor and industrial zone. The archaeological findings from these coastal sites are summarized here.

  Figure 4.1 Satellite image of the island of Arwad off the coast of Syria and closer view of the modern city.

  Source: Map from Google Earth; graphics by R. Stidsing.

  At Dor, culturally part of the Iron I Phoenician cultural sphere, no in situ Late Bronze II or early twelfth-century bce settlement has been uncovered. Its Iron I pottery assemblage, however, is among the best stratified and well published from the coastal Levant. Owing to some non-local elements discernible in its material culture, some have associated it with the Tjekker/Sikil “Sea People” phenomenon (e.g., Stern 2013 considers Dor a Sikil settlement; for an alternative view, see Sharon and Gilboa 2013). As such, the Dor assemblage is essential to understanding Iron I Phoenician cultural and commercial interactions (see chapter 30, this volume; Gilboa 2005; Gilboa and Goren 2015; Gilboa, Waiman-Barak, and Sharon 2015).

  Tell Kazel

  Identified with ancient Sumur/Simyra, the capital of Amurru mentioned in the Amarna letters, Tell Kazel is one of the most important settlements in the Akkar Plain. Excavations, directed by Maurice Dunand, Adnan Bounni, and Nasser Saliby between 1960 and 1962, and resumed in 1985–2010 under the direction of Leila Badre, have revealed Late Bronze II remains in two main excavation areas, II and IV, each with slightly different stratigraphic sequences for the Late Bronze II–Iron I transition. Of special interest is a series of superimposed temples spanning the fourteenth through twelfth centuries bce in Area IV. The end of the Late Bronze Age (ca. 1200 bce) is marked by the disappearance of imported objects from the west Aegean and Cyprus (Level 5 lower) and the appearance of handmade burnished wares, Trojan Grey Ware pottery from the region of Troy, and locally produced Aegean-style Mycenaean IIIC pottery often associated with the “Sea Peoples” (Level 5 upper). This phase, which suggests a foreign component, is destroyed. It is followed by an Iron I urban settlement, including a temple built on top of the earlier ones. Both the architectural and the material culture of this phase continues Late Bronze traditions, accompanied by eleventh-century bce bichrome pottery typical of Phoenician coastal sites (most recently, Badre and Capet 2014 for the Late Bronze–Iron I stratigraphic sequence; regarding the Area II southern sector sequence, Chitti and Pedrazzi 2015).

  Sidon

  Ancient Sidon is a large mound situated on a promontory bordered on its south by a natural cove and a harbor to the north. Owing to the continuous occupation of Sidon until modern times, archaeological work has been limited to three downtown sites: the Castle, Sandikli, and College sites. Of special relevance for this discussion is the recent work at the College site currently under the direction of Claude Doumet-Serhal (figure 4.2). These excavations have uncovered the remains of a monumental temple, constructed ca. 1500 bce and still in use during the second half of the second millennium. During the last phase of the Late Bronze Age, Sidonians worshiped in a subterranean temple. It contained an especially rich assemblage of cultic and imported objects, including a vessel with the cartouches of Queen Twosret dated to ca. 1190 bce (Doumet-Serhal 2010: 125–28). The Iron I temple, briefly summarized in preliminary publications, includes a pillar base, bench, and altar of unhewn stones, demonstrating continuity with Late Bronze Age traditions (see Doumet-Serhal 2013: 108–9; Doumet-Serhal 2017).

  Figure 4.2 View of the College Site excavations.

  Source: Courtesy of the Lebanese Directorate General of Antiquities; photo by R. Mikulski (2017).

  Sarepta

  The southern Phoenician settlement of Sarepta is situated on the promontory of Ras el-Qantara, a low mound overlooking a sheltered anchorage (figure 4.3). Excavations conducted by James Pritchard from 1969 to 1974 in Soundings X (industrial zone) and Y (residential area and potters’ quarter) revealed an uninterrupted sequence of habitation with a strong industrial component beginning in the Late Bronze through Hellenistic periods. The industries uncovered at Sarepta included pottery, purple dye, olive oil, and jewelry production. There is no evidence of destruction at the end of the thirteenth or during the twelfth centuries bce, indicating continuity between the Late Bronze and Iron I periods (spanning Strata G, F, and E in Sounding Y and Periods III–VI in Sounding X). Though most of the material culture represents continuity with Late Bronze Age traditions, the appearance of locally produced Aegean-style Mycenaean IIIC pottery suggests the integration of non-local populations during the twelfth century bce (overview in Pritchard 1975: 64–67; for final reports, Anderson 1988 [Sounding Y]; and Khalifeh 1988 [Sounding X]).

  Figure 4.3 Satellite image of modern Sarafand and area of Phoenician Sarepta.

  Source: Map from Google Earth; graphics by R. Stidsing.

  Tyre

  Ancient Tyre was originally an island. Following Alexander the Great’s construction of a mole that connected the island to the mainland, the accumulation of sediments gradually formed the peninsula of today (Katzenstein 1997: 9–76 for a history of Tyre during the second millennium). As with Sidon, only limited excavations of Bronze Age and Phoenician Tyre have been possible within the urban context of the modern city built over earlier habitation of the site. These include a series of soundings on the acropolis situated on the original island and at Al-Bass located on the ancient coastline opposite the island (figure 4.4). Patricia Bikai’s excavation of six 5-by-5 m squares in 1973–1974 remains the only expedition that has uncovered remains from third- and second-millennium. Tyre (Bikai 1978). Strata XV–XIII span the thirteenth through eleventh centuries bce. They demonstrate architectural continuity and represent a domestic area of the city with some signs of a bead and pottery production. Stratum XV is Late Bronze II in date with a pottery assemblage that includes Mycenaean and Cypriot pottery typical of the thirteenth century. Stratum XIV dates to the twelfth century with very small quantities of Aegean-style Mycenaean IIIC pottery similar to the assemblage from Enkomi. Stratum XIII is assigned to the second half of the eleventh century bce (Bikai 1978: 7–9, 65–66). At Al-Bass, the current excavations directed by María Eugenia Aubet have uncovered the city’s cemetery dating to the first millennium bce and continuing into the Roman and Byzantine periods. Proto-Phoenician Late Bronze and Iron I burials have not yet been found (Aubet et al. 2016).

  Figure 4.4 Satellite image of Tyre with the two main excavation sites, the Acropolis and Al-Bass, indicated.

  Source: Map from Google Earth; graphics by R. Stidsing.

  Tel Akko

  Although today the mound is located ca. 700 m inland from the sea, Tel Akko was originally a peninsula flanked on its west by the Mediterranean Sea and the estuary of the Na‘aman (Belus) River to its south. With its anchorage and natural ha
rbor, one of the few along the southern Levantine coast, Akko served as the region’s major port city during much of its five-thousand-year history. The site was first excavated by Moshe Dothan (1973–1989). Unfortunately, very little of his large-scale excavations have been published (Artzy and Beeri 2010 for summary). The current expedition at Tel Akko, co-directed by Ann Killebrew and Michal Artzy (2010–present), aims to clarify the occupational history and stratigraphy of the site, publish Dothan’s results, and examine the role of this second- and first-millennium bce maritime center in its regional setting and international context. Based on preliminary analyses of Dothan’s excavations, the Iron I settlement at Tel Akko continued earlier thirteenth-century Late Bronze traditions, with evidence of limited contacts with Cyprus and a possible Shardana/Sherden connection. The latter are a “Sea Peoples” group that is localized in the Akko region by the Onomasticon of Amenope (Dothan 1989; Artzy 2006, 2013). Like Sarepta, industrial production dominates Tel Akko during the late second and first millennia bce. In Area AB, a thirteenth- to twelfth-century bce bronze-working and pottery-production area was excavated by Dothan (figure 4.5). This area’s industrial character continued into the Persian period (sixth through fourth centuries bce), when iron smithing occurred on an unprecedented scale under Achaemenid auspices.