This was not the case in the western province, although three Phoenician stone reliefs from Arwad and Byblos may have adorned a secular building. They represent a sphinx, griffins, and a lion.
A typology of the architecture of the Achaemenid period in the Levant is difficult to develop. The sanctuaries of Amrit and Bustan esh‐Sheikh are unique. The other buildings either refer to different Near Eastern types or are typeless because of their simplicity.
The Cemeteries
The largest cemeteries excavated thus far are in Deve Hüyük, Nayrab, al‐Mina, Tell Sukas, Kamid el‐Loz, Sarafand, Ahziv, Atlit, Dor, Tell es‐Saidiya, Tell el‐Mazar, Tel Michal/Makhmish, Gezer, Lakhish, Tell el‐Hesi, and Tell el‐Farah South. Their for the most part simple earth burials were sometimes faced or covered with stones or stone slabs. More elaborated are rock‐cut or cist graves built out of stone walls and covered by stone (Ras‐Shamra, Amrit, Gezer and Lakhish, Tell el‐Farah South). They could contain a simple stone (Nayrab, al‐Mina, Ras‐Shamra) or clay coffin (Til Barsip, Shekhem, Tell el‐Mazar, Tell Jemmeh). Rock‐cut shaft tombs with one or more chambers (Ras‐Shamra, Amrit, Sidon, Tyre, Akhziv, Atlit, Dor, Ashkelon, Gaza), in which anthropoid sarcophagi could be deposited (see below), are scattered along the coast. Monuments are rare. In Amrit, the two so‐called “maghazil” A and B (spindle in Arabic) are towers on a base adorned with lions and situated above hypogea.
The deceased were lying, without particular distribution between men, women, and children, either on their back, or outstretched on their sides or in a crouched position. Their heads were often oriented to the east. Most of the burial offerings were ceramic vessels. Bronze objects, such as bowls, dippers, strainers, jugs, sticks, pins, tweezers, or mirrors and weapons were signs of wealth (Deve Hüyük, Tell Ahmar, Atlit, Shekhem, Gezer, Tell el‐Farah South). The bronze joints of a couch and a stool in Tell el‐Farah South are exceptional. All the deceased were adorned with jewelry, women with necklaces, earrings and pins; men and women with bangles for arms or legs, finger rings and fibula. A rich burial would contain seals, coins (numerous in Kamid el‐Loz), bronze implements, and weapons. Of particular interest are the 970 dog burials in Ashkelon.
The Archeological Material
The archeological material is presented in order of quantity. The Achaemenid local ceramic is generally not spectacular and, because most shapes have their root in the Iron‐II‐Age, the identification of a sherd as Achaemenid is often problematic (Lehmann 1996; Stern 2001). Thin or thick and sometimes carinated bowls, craters, cooking pots, mortaria, jars, hole‐mouth jars, jars with basket handles, amphorae, bottles, and lamps allow us to trace settlement during this period in the Levant. This pottery is poorly decorated. The only characteristic feature is the wedge‐shaped and reed impressed decoration. Some vases have the shape of Bes.
A much more precise indicator is the imported Greek ceramic, which was found in all larger sites, but on the coastal sites more than inland, as pottery had to be transported from the harbors to the inland sites. Although east Greek and Corinthian pottery was still being imported, from the sixth century BCE on, Greek pottery is mainly Attic (Nunn 2014).
The bulk of Attic pottery consists of plain black glaze ceramic. The oldest Attic sherds in Israel/Palestine go back to 540–530 BCE and belong to the black glaze ceramic and the black figure ceramic types. The export of red figure ceramic began as early as c. 520 BCE, immediately after its invention. The repertoire of shapes is mainly limited to drinking vessels (skyphoi, cups, or cup‐skyphoi, bowls, and bolsals), storage vessels (bell crater, calyx crater, and column crater) and vessels for transport of wine, oil, or perfume (lekythoi, amphoriskoi, juglets). Plates and lamps were also relatively numerous. A few Panathenaic prize amphorae have been found. Many other shapes common among Attic ceramics do not occur at all.
The largest number of examples of black figure ceramic comes from the Haimon Painter workshop and his followers, and from the Beldam Painter, who are all of moderate quality. Among the best represented red figure painters is the Pithos Painter. But, along with the average quality, high‐quality vessels also found their way to the east. Finally, it should be noted that simple shapes of the black glaze ceramic were locally imitated.
When the Greek ceramic of al‐Mina was discovered, L. Woolley, its excavator, and many other scholars were enthusiastic about the “irrefutable” proof of Greek presence on the Levantine coast. However, it turned out that the relevant store room was not filled with Greek jugs, but with Levantine imitations of Greek jugs. Since then, the focus of mainstream research concerning the presence of Greeks in the Levant has changed. The material and textual evidence for the constant settlement of a significant Greek community is scant. The limited repertoire of shapes and motifs and the fact that the vessels were partly found in store rooms, indicate that the Greek tableware had been deposited to be subsequently distributed and sold. Almost all graffiti found on the Greek ceramic is Phoenician. The Greek influence left a heavy imprint on terracottas, seals, and statues during the Achaemenid time. But this was a phenomenon of fashion which of course presupposes contacts with Greeks, but no large permanent settlement whose design was adapted for certain objects. The cliché, that the Levantine did not like pictures, has been deconstructed. Even if seen from the Attic point of view the quality of the Greek vessels is average, from the local point of view, the Attic ceramic was incomparably more beautiful than the pictureless local variety.
Inner Levantine trade existed. The amphorae used to transport wine or oil in Israel/Palestine were generally not from Attica, but from Phoenicia or eastern Greece.
It is possible to distinguish two main regions for the local terracotta types (Nunn 2000a). They were generally solid, but a few are hollow and molded, sometimes with a stamped face.
The northern region reaches from north Syria to Amrit and includes the inland area. There, the main terracotta types are clay plaques with a woman en face and riders. The women are nude or dressed. They are very often presenting their breasts, or, when dressed, holding their arms alongside their body or carrying a flower on their breasts. Some have a crown or a polos on the head (Figure 18.2). These clay figurines are the subject of a general study (M.G. Micale). Preliminary results hint at the fact that these women with seemingly “Greek” features are more ancient than the nude ones and that they quickly spread under the Achaemenids.
Figure 18.2 Private collection: Terracotta of a woman, H. 15, 1 cm (Nunn 2000a, pl. 11, 15).
Figures of a male rider were so common that they are plainly called “Persian rider.” But the Syrian types are worthy of special mention as some variations are mostly confined to this region: there are male riders bearing a child, but there are also female riders, some with small added faces, and riding figures sitting under a very dominantly‐depicted canopy.
The second large region is situated south of the one aforementioned. Whereas Syria was not very permeable to foreign influences, the Phoenician clay figurines, which are two‐ and three‐dimensional, show an amazing thematic and stylistic diversity. One can observe the fine graduation between local Near Eastern, Egyptian, and Greek elements engrafted on local types. Nude women presenting their breasts, dressed pregnant or breastfeeding women, seated and standing men with different caps, horsemen, or masks were found all over this region, apart from Samaria and Judea. More Greek coined clay figurines show nude youths, men with caps or helmets, and dressed women. It seems that clay figurines were mainly locally produced, very few could have been imported from eastern Greece.
The clay figurines were mainly found in sanctuaries (Lakhish) and their refuse pits called favissa or bothros (Amrit, Kharaib, Dor, Makhmish/Tel Michal, Tell es‐Safi, Tel Zippor, Tel Erani) and rarely in tombs (Akhziv, Atlit).
A few figures are clearly representations of gods, but it is still impossible