target="_blank" rel="nofollow" href="#ulink_c9577bda-3c00-5344-8c31-13ca38e43932">3 For further references about Achaemenid column capitals and bases in Babylonia see Haerinck (1997: 30).
4 4 The term is used in accordance with Assyriological practices and spans the period of time from the Late Assyrian to Seleucid‐Parthian periods.
5 5 Bergamini’s reasoning concentrates entirely on the fluviatile sediments found to overlay the river walls south of the Sergami alongside the Euphrates riverbed where floods can naturally be expected to have happened periodically. This fact does not prove, however, that the Euphrates flowed at this point back from the city area in its original riverbed west of Kasr. The quoted work about recent excavations by Iraqi archaeologists does not confirm Bergamini’s reconstruction since it reports that the sand‐and‐earth layers were found below the mudbrick walls.
CHAPTER 18 Syria
Astrid Nunn
Introduction
When the Levant became Achaemenid in the year 539 BCE, it had already been part of a large political entity, the Late Babylonian Empire with her capital in distant Babylon. Following the reorganization under Darius I, an area coinciding approximately with the present‐day states of Syria, Lebanon, Israel, Palestine, Cyprus, and Jordan became the Fifth Satrapy “abar Nahar” (in Aramaic). This satrapy with the exception of Cyprus will be the subject of this chapter. The Lebanese and north Israeli coast comprises the core region of ancient Phoenicia.
The archeological remains consist of architecture, ceramic, clay figurines, seals, sculpture, metal implements, and coins. The majority of this material and the most spectacular one was excavated on the coastal strip. The inland was less populated and is therefore today poorer in archeological remains.
City Layout and Architecture
The Cities and the Ports
In spite of the Achaemenid policy of centralization, some of the Phoenician cities retained a local dynasty and Samaria and Judea were partially ruled by local governors. The Phoenician cities flourished because of their key position between East and West. But unfortunately, due to either the large‐scale building activities during the Hellenistic period or the fact that most coastal cities (Sidon, Tyre, Gaza) are still inhabited, it is difficult today to find large Achaemenid areas and therefore to reconstruct a city plan of this time in the Levant. Nonetheless, it seems that, as in Iron Age Palestine, well‐planned cities with intersecting streets were the rule. Portions of them can be reconstructed in al‐Mina, Beirut, Acco, Tel Abu Hawam, Shiqmona, Tel Megadim, Dor, Tel Michal/Makhmish, Ashdod, and Ashkelon.
Some cities, such as Arwad, Sidon, Tyre, Acco, Tel Abu Hawam, Tel Megadim, Dor, Heshbon, or Lakhish, were protected by a fortification wall of the offset‐inset or the casemate type. Most of them date to the pre‐Achaemenid era. Large forts or citadels, such as in Rishon Lezion, Tell el‐Hesi, Tell Jemmeh, or Tell el‐Kheleifeh had a strategic and administrative function.
The prototype of an east Mediterranean harbor consists of one or two naturals bays, defensible from rocks or islands located nearby. The natural location of Sidon is marked by four bays. According to the prevailing wind, the harbors could be approached from the north or the south. Minet al‐Beyda, Tell Sukas, Byblos, Sidon, Acco, Atlit, Dor, or Jaffa and the islands of Arwad and Tyre were of international importance. They had some undersea quays and moles, which were made out of large stone blocks placed on top of one another without mortar. The mortar technique was invented in the Roman period and serves as a chronological indicator, as these walls are very difficult to date. Shipwrecks of the Achaemenid time have been discovered in Shave Zion, Atlit, or Ma’agan Mikha’el (Nunn 2000a,b, 2001; Stern 2001).
The Architecture
The foundations were made out of rubble, the walls either of stones (Tell Mardikh, Tell Sukas, Amrit, Byblos, Sarafand, Makhmish, Lakhish) or of unbaked clay bricks (Tell Mardikh, al‐Mina, Ras‐Shamra, Tell Sukas, Tel Megadim, Tel Michal, Ashdod, Ashkelon). Typical of Phoenician architecture is ashlar masonry or bricks laid in headers and stretchers alternating with a fill of rubble. Rusticated stones can be seen in the temples of Byblos and Bustan esh‐Sheikh, dovetail joints in Amrit.
Whereas most of the sanctuaries of the Achaemenid period in the Levant are unspectacular, two are exceptional: Amrit, located 10 km south of Tartus and Bustan esh‐Sheikh, a few km north of Sidon.
The core building, the so‐called “Maabed” in Amrit, is a peristyle of 48–56 m per side (Figure 18.1). It encloses a water basin, in whose center a small niche in Egyptian style rose above the water level. The central cultic place of the sanctuary of Bustan esh‐Sheikh was a podium of 60 × 40.60 m and at least 10 m in height. It was probably built around 600 BCE and extended a century later. Scattered architectural elements may indicate the presence of sanctuaries on it. The first sanctuary was built on the first or on the extended podium in a local Assyrian‐Late Hittite style. This local temple was replaced about 390–360 BCE by an Attic temple with Ionic‐Karian‐Lycian elements. Achaemenid elements, such as taurine capitals, may have belonged to a third contemporary temple (Stucky 2005).
Figure 18.1 Reconstructed view of the Temple of Amrit (Nunn 2000a, p. 203).
A lot of other installations, such as pools and reliefs, were also part of this sanctuary, which was dedicated to the healing god Eshmun (see below, sculpture, temple boys). A second podium was located in Byblos. The temple on it was a pillar hall of 50 × 21 m. All the other temples were much smaller and of a very simple plan. A broad shrine can be found in Tell Sukas (level F), Mizpe Yammim and Lakhish (“Solar Shrine”), a long temple in Byblos (“Temple of Yehawmilk”), Tell Sukas (level G1) and probably Mount Gerizim.
The mention of a paradeisos in Sidon in Diod. 16.41.5 and several fragments of taurine capital protomes make it probable that the most famous Achaemenid palace in the Levant was the one in Sidon. Currently, everything, from its location to its plan, remains unknown. Small, sometimes fortified palaces were built according to the so‐called “open court plan,” which was adopted from Assyria (Tell Mardikh, Acco, Hazor, Tell es‐Saidiya, Tell el‐Mazar, Tel Michal/Makhmish, Tell Jemmeh). The “bâtiment I” in Byblos recalls the Late Hittite architecture. The “Residency” in Lakhish combines the Assyrian‐Achaemenid broad room and court with the Syrian entrance with steps and columns.
Most of the dwelling houses had a very simple plan. More sophisticated was a courtyard surrounded by rooms on three or four sides (al‐Mina, Ras‐Shamra, Tel Nahariya, Shiqmona, Megiddo, Ashkelon). Those houses could also be storerooms. The plan of the houses in Dor is inspired from the Palestinian “Four‐room” type.
Almost nothing is known about the external and interior furnishing and decoration of the buildings. A few stepped blocks probably adorned the roofs of the temples in Byblos and Amrit (Figure 18.1). Benches (Tel Michal) or platforms (“altar” in Tell Sukas and Lakhish, “bamah” in Mizpe Yammim) were placed along the walls. Amongst the widespread devotional objects are the small cubic incense burners, which sometimes bear pictures of men and animals. They probably came to Palestine under Assyrian influence. One of the bronze buckets found in the sanctuary of Mizpe Yammim bears a drawing of Isis and an inscription, according to which the donor made this offering to Astarte.
Large secular buildings