Although distinctions between official and private religiosity cannot be applied rigidly, at the level of personal piety a direct glimpse can be gleaned from the repertoire of anthroponyms (theophoric names), which testifies to the multifaceted divine–human relationship as can be deduced from the structure of the names (Benz 1972; Jongeling 1984). Even if the deity is Lord or Lady, and the faithful declares himself her or his “servant/slave,” she or he is also felt in terms of kinship, manifesting care and attention for her or his human subjects. Many verbs express a range of positive and comforting actions attributed to the gods: to bless, to grant wishes, to protect, to save, to give life, to foster, to prosper, to heal, to help, to nurture, to listen, and so on. All acts of worship, from prayer to sacrifice, confirm the individual’s and community’s dependence on the gods who, in turn, require the attention of humankind, in a relationship advantageous for both.
Mythological Traditions
The study of Phoenician mythological traditions presents a twofold problem. On the one hand, the documentary situation is daunting, because we almost completely lack direct sources. On the other hand, we do not know how and to what extent the Levantine mythological heritage was actually exported through the Mediterranean diaspora. We can certainly assume the formation of new traditions during the expansion phase and in the new settlements.
As for the mythological traditions during the Late Bronze Age, the texts from Ugarit are an invaluable source of knowledge also for ancient Phoenicia from a comparative point of view. Everything we have to date testifies to a traditional heritage widely shared in Syria-Palestine, in spite of local variations which occurred over time. For later periods, Classical writers provide information on Phoenician and Punic deities and their cults, often indicating the corresponding Greek and Latin gods, and also recording some mythological traditions that, although subject to the phenomena of syncretism, could reflect, at least in part, originally Phoenician myths.
In any case, Phoenician mythology as a whole is almost unknown owing to our lack of direct evidence. The only notable exception is the complex material handed down by Philo of Byblos, who wrote a Phoenician History in Greek in the second century ce, allegedly collecting ancient traditions (Ebach 1972; Baumgarten 1981; Attridge and Oden 1983). Some fragments of his work have come down to us thanks to the Christian bishop Eusebius of Caesarea (fourth century ce). Philo claims to be the heir of a legendary Phoenician priest, Sanchouniathon, purported to have lived before the time of the Trojan War. In his work, heterogeneous material is merged, including cosmogonic and theogonic events and myths about the origins of culture; to a certain extent, it is possible that we are dealing with materials dating back to ancient traditions. At the same time, the influence of Hellenistic cultural trends (Bonnet 2015), in particular Euhemerism (from Euhemeros of Messene, fourth–third centuries bce) is clearly discernible: according to this latter theory, originally the deities were ancient deified kings, worshiped as superhuman entities owing to the fame achieved through the benefits they brought to humankind (see López-Ruiz 2017 and chapter 18, this volume).
In the case of the god Milqart (/Melqart), the Baal of Tyre, we have the advantage of having a name with clear meaning and full of implications (Bonnet 1988). Milqart means “king of the city,” and some studies have extensively shown that he is the Iron Age heir of the ancient Syro-Palestinian tradition of deceased deified kings, dating back to the midst of the third millennium bce. There was certainly an underlying ideology that united the traditions of this area from the Bronze until the Iron Age. It is a particular core theme centered on the vicissitudes of a young and powerful god, who experiences death, and his subsequent return to life thanks to the intervention of a goddess (Xella 2001). It goes without saying that the myth of the Ugaritic Baal (who died and was resurrected with the help of Anat) functions as a paradigmatic model, according to which an experience of a human type enters the curriculum vitae of a deity. Since various Classical sources enable us to reconstruct similar events for the Phoenician gods, we can speak of a remarkable continuity in the mythological tradition of this area through the ages (Xella 2014), also confirmed by the persistence of the decisive role of a great goddess (Anat, and subsequently Ashtart) beside the Ugaritic Baal or Phoenician Baal/Melqart.
The Levant
From a historical point of view, the Phoenicians and their city-states were the heirs of the previous Syro-Palestinian kingdoms of the Late Bronze Age (Xella 1995), partially preserving the former organization, institutions, and structure of the pantheon. Territorial states had a national god—flanked by a parhedra and a divine assembly—considered the owner of the country. The same basic structure is detectable in the Phoenician world. In turn, every Phoenician city had its own tutelary deities integrated into a cosmological universe, although within the framework of a shared tradition: the diversification of gods and cults were a powerful means of cultural identification, a means for each city to affirm its specificity, combining individual elements of a common code.
These are some common, basic features of the pantheon of the Phoenician cities: At the top there is regularly a divine couple consisting of a male god (called baal or adon, “Lord”), whose identity varies from city to city; and a goddess, his spouse (called baalat, “Lady”). This divine couple is considered as the supernatural hypostasis of the human royal couple.
The deity is the protector of the city, its king, and his subjects, and he preserves much of the personality of the Baals of the Late Bronze Age. Nevertheless, gods such as Milqart at Tyre or Eshmun at Sidon each develop particular functions, which render their personalities increasingly specific. As for the goddess, she is, almost everywhere, a local manifestation of Ashtart (Bonnet 1996), a complex divine character with manifold functions: defender of the royalty and, therefore, a special interlocutor of the king, but also a guarantor of fertility and fecundity and, in some cases, also protectress of sailors and military enterprises.
Starting from North Phoenicia, an important cult place was located in the vicinity of Tartous (Antarados), at Amrit (Marathus; Dunand and Saliby 1985). In this shrine, mainly therapeutic cults were followed, implying the veneration of healing gods such as Shadrapha, Eshmun, and Milqart. In front of Tartous, on the island of Arwad (Arados), the cults of various gods known to us by their Greek names are attested, which probably hide Semitic deities such as Milqart, Eshmun, Ashtart, and maybe Baal Hammon.
According to ancient Classical traditions, Byblos was reputed to be the most ancient Phoenician city, directly founded by the god Kronos (here, El), who made a certain Baaltis lady of Byblos (Ribichini 1994). In fact, according to direct Phoenician sources, the Byblian pantheon was dominated by a local Ashtart, called “Lady” (Baalat; cf. Baaltis) of Byblos”; she was strongly influenced by the Egyptian goddesses Hathor, at first, then Isis, and lastly by Greek Aphrodite (Xella 1994). Coherently, Late Bronze Age sources confirm the goddess’s supremacy over the Byblian pantheon and her special relationship with the king. The male element of the supreme couple is called “Adonis” by the Classical sources (Semitic adon), and this name has to be connected with the “Baal of Byblos” mentioned by Phoenician inscriptions and also quoted in the Amarna letters. Adonis is a Greek creation, representing an ideal model of the Phoenician polyadic god, protagonist of a tragic story of death told in different mythological versions (Ribichini 1981). The epilogue establishes his destiny in the Netherworld, but also provides for his temporary return to life. Special ceremonies in his honor, called Adonia, were celebrated at Byblos and elsewhere in the Hellenistic period according to Lucian of Samosata (De Dea Syria 9). In addition to the divine couple, the pantheon of Byblos included among others the sky god Baal Shamem (Niehr 2003) and a chthonic deity called Baal Addir (“Powerful Lord”). As in the case of other major Phoenician sites, archaeological evidence for the Iron Age is almost completely lacking. In a sacred area of Byblos’s acropolis, the ruins of different temples dating to Early Bronze II have been preserved: th
e temple of the city goddess, maybe the temple of her parhedros (the “L-Temple”), and another characterized by a series of obelisks dating back to the Middle Bronze Age.
As for Beirut (Berytos), our knowledge of the local pantheon is incomplete (Lipiński 1995: 115ff.). A Baal with marine features was particularly venerated, identified with Poseidon by the Classical sources; this god is also attested in the Hellenistic period, when he was the patron of a congregation of Phoenicians merchants (Poseidoniastes) living at Delos (Bruneau 1978; Bonnet 2015: 491ff.). Another deity associated with the sea was called Pontos by the Classical sources, perhaps related to Ugaritic Yam. Still in the mountainous hinterland of Beirut, the cult of a god called Baal Marqod (“Lord of the dance”?), worshiped along with a mysterious goddess, is attested.
Evidence regarding Sarepta (Sarafand) is scarce and does not enable us to identify the local pantheon in detail (Lipiński 1995: 193ff.). Owing to its proximity to Sidon and Tyre, it is probable that Sarepta shared many of the religious traditions of the two major cities. Local epigraphic evidence mentions some deities, first of all Tinnit-Ashtart, attested on an inscribed ivory plaque dating to the beginning of sixth century bce, and possibly related to a cult statue of the goddess(es) located in a shrine as yet unidentified. The healer god Shadrapha occurs in a dedicatory inscription dating back to the fourth century bce and it is possible that Eshmun was also worshiped in a local sanctuary. Some Greek inscriptions mention a divine figure called “Holy god of Sarepta” (Xella 2006), particularly venerated by the local community but also elsewhere; its cult, strongly characterized by therapeutic aspects, continued to be popular in Roman times. As for the precise identity of this deity, it is possible that he was Eshmun, although Milqart is also a possibility.
As for Sidon (Lipiński 1995: 123ff.; Bonnet 2015: 199ff.), its history testifies to a close relationship with nearby Tyre, although both cities had their own cultic traditions. Archaeological exploration in the urban area began only a few years ago; in addition to some royal necropoleis dating back to the Persian period, the extra-urban sanctuary of Bustan esh-Sheikh has been satisfactorily investigated. Cuneiform sources of the Late Bronze Age (Ugarit and El-Amarna) attest that the local Baal was a storm-god, venerated together with a goddess, probably Ashtart, and his sanctuary enjoyed great prestige. Coherently, during the Iron Age, Sidonian inscriptions dating back to the Persian period testify to a divine couple consisting of a “Baal of Sidon” and Ashtart at the top of the city’s pantheon. But the most popular deity in this period seems to have been Eshmun, the healer god, bearing the epithet of “Holy Prince.” It is probable that the Baal of Sidon was Eshmun himself, especially as Eshmun often occurs as the partner of Ashtart, characterized by the epithet “Name of Baal.” In the case of Eshmun, an evolution in the nature of this god must be presupposed, with a gradual increase in his healing functions (Xella 1993).
A famous cult place dedicated to Eshmun and Ashtart was the above-mentioned sanctuary at Bustan esh-Sheikh, at the mouth of the Awali River (ancient Asklepios). The site was renowned for its therapeutic cults related to the waters of the river, which were transported to the holy place by the Sidonian king Bodashtart (Xella and Zamora 2005). This imposing architectural complex was marked by a monumental podium and other cultic installations, including a “pool” dedicated to Ashtart. It was progressively enlarged and embellished over time by the kings of Sidon, who had a marked devotion to Eshmun and Ashart. During the Achaemenid period, some kings of Sidon belonging to Eshmunazor I’s dynasty proclaimed themselves “Priest of Ashtart,” mentioning this title even before the royal title (KAI 13 and 14; Elayi 1986). It has been deduced that the religious charge was even more important than the royal function, but this interpretation lacks convincing evidence. Rather, the priestly function was closely tied to the monarchy, so that the sovereign was considered as the first symbolic cultic agent.
According to local epigraphic evidence, the territory of Sidon—both urban and extra-urban—was probably divided into various districts following a special sacred topography: “Lofty Skies,” “Land of Reshefs,” “Sidon rules” (KAI 14; 15), the precise meaning of which is unknown to us. As for the mythological traditions, late Classical sources tell that Eshmun (Greek Esmounos) was the protagonist of a dramatic tale similar to that of Adonis, but with analogies also with the story of the Phrygian Attis, a young misogynist who, in order to escape the love of the goddess Cybele (here “Astronoe”—i.e, Ashtart), ended up emasculating himself.
As for Tyre, here too archaeological evidence is very meager: however, recent excavations in the cremation necropolis of Al-Bass have shed light on the funerary customs in the archaic period, providing very interesting material such as urns, stelae, and funerary equipment (Aubet 2004). Also in the case of Tyre (Lipiński 1995: 219ff.; Bonnet 2015: 269ff.), cuneiform texts from the Syrian area during the Late Bronze Age testify to the cult of a divine couple consisting of a “storm-god” and his spouse, a goddess of the Ashtart type. Subsequently, at the beginning of the Iron Age, a new major divine character emerges, Milqart, whose name clearly alludes to both his leading role at Tyre and his function as protector of the inhabitants. Also as a result of these traits, Milqart was identified with Herakles, the Greek deified hero and founder of colonies. Indeed, both the Phoenician god and the Greek hero have a mythological background characterized by an episode of death and return to life—as is also the case of Eshmun and Greek Asklepios—that certainly favored the convergence of the two deities and their perception in the popular imagination.
Milqart’s sanctuary at Tyre, however, where Ashtart was also worshiped, was probably located under the modern city and has not yet been identified. Herodotus (2.44) describes it as overflowing with precious offerings and treasures; there were two holy columns, one of gold and the other of emerald. Two late versions of its foundation myth are known, due respectively to Philo of Byblos and Nonnos of Panopolis (Grottanelli 1972), which establish the original duality, continental and insular, of the ancient site also at a mythical level.
Milqart’s death and return to life was annually commemorated by a solemn feast, called egersis (“awakening”) in Greek sources, in which Ashtart also played an important role. It was an important public event celebrated by the king himself, where the god’s tragic vicissitudes, followed by his reawakening, was the focus of the ritual. A character called miqim elim played a major role in this celebration (Zamora, in press). This title could be translated as “Awakener of the deity” and corresponds to Greek egerseites, also a religious charge related to the cult of Herakles. The link of Milqart’s tradition to the mythical-ritual cycle of the Greek hero is confirmed by the myth according to which Herakles immolated himself on a pyre, thereby attaining divine status.
This complex tradition concerning Milqart is of fundamental importance for understanding Tyrian and, generally speaking, Phoenician royal ideology. It deals with the hypostasis—both at mythical and ritual level—of the royal figure, projected into the divine sphere. Milqart is considered the first ideal king, the prototypic founder of the dynastic genealogy which has its the roots in the mythical past. As divine cultural hero, the Tyrian god has always played a central role in the Mediterranean Phoenician diaspora representing a cultural landmark, which gave identity to all those who had lost contact with the homeland (see chapter 40, this volume).
In addition to Milqart and Ashtart, the worship of others deities occurs at Tyre, as shown by the mention of the gods representative of the Tyrian pantheon in the treaty stipulated between Esarhaddon, king of Assyria, and Baal, king of Tyre (ca. 676 bce) (cuneiform text: http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/saao/saa02/corpus: 8’-19’). The deities of the two parties are called upon to punish violators of the agreement, and the Tyrian gods are mentioned according to their specific powers: the sky-god Baal Shamem, Baal Malage, and Baal Saphon are related to atmospheric phenomena such as storms and sea winds. Interestingly, Milqart and Eshmun are mentioned together and share the basic function
s of feeding, dressing, and generally protecting their worshippers; Ashtart is characterized by a strong warrior-like nature. A small but convincing series of clues suggests that Baal Hammon was a Tyrian god of ancestral and paternal character, who would enjoy special popularity in Carthage and North Africa.
At Umm el-Amed, in the vicinity of Tyre (Dunand and Duru 1962; Bonnet 2015: 306ff.), there was a temple dedicated to the god Milkashtart in the third century bce, where Ashtart was also worshiped. Milkashart—whose name could be interpreted as “King of (the city of) Ashtart” (Amadasi Guzzo 1991)—had a personality similar to that of Milqart. In the local pantheon there was also a god called “angel/messenger of Milkashtart,” who seems to be the product of theological speculation. Also attested are the cults of Baalshamem and Osiris.
If Milkashtart contains a composite name, the worship of pairs of deities identified by a double name seems to be a special feature of Phoenician-Punic religion (Xella 1990): in addition to Tinnit-Ashtart of Sarepta, other cases of divine “association” occurred, such as Eshmun-Melqart on Cyprus and Ibiza, Eshmun-Ashtart, Sid-Tinnit, and Sid-Milqart at Carthage and elsewhere. The phenomenon of the “double-deities” presupposes a special link between two divine characters conceived as complementary in their powers, and consequently worshiped in shared shrines.
The Oxford Handbook of the Phoenician and Punic Mediterranean Page 40