Phoenician sanctuary of Kharayeb

The Phoenician sanctuary of Kharayeb (Arabic: معبد الخرايب الفينيقي), is a historic temple in Southern Lebanon. It was surveyed during three archaeological missions. The first mission, led by then Director of Lebanon's Antiquities Maurice Chehab in 1946, revealed a Hellenistic period temple and thousands of clay figurines dating from the sixth to the first centuries BC. Subsequent excavations in 1969, carried out by Lebanese archaeologist Brahim Kaoukabani, and a more recent survey in 2009, funded by the Italian government, yielded significant discoveries regarding cultic practices and a detailed reconstruction of the sanctuary's architecture and development.

Phoenician sanctuary of Kharayeb
معبد الخرايب الفينيقي
Phoenician sanctuary of Kharayeb is located in Lebanon
Phoenician sanctuary of Kharayeb
Shown within Lebanon
Phoenician sanctuary of Kharayeb is located in Near East
Phoenician sanctuary of Kharayeb
Phoenician sanctuary of Kharayeb (Near East)
LocationKharayeb, South Lebanon
Coordinates33.3459°N 35.2815°E / 33.3459; 35.2815
History
FoundedIron Age II
Abandoned1st century BC
CulturesPhoenician, Hellenistic
Site notes
Excavation dates
  • 1946
  • 1969
  • 2009–2013
Archaeologists
ConditionRuined
Public accessYes

The sanctuary's origins date back to the Late Iron Age/Persian period, with the establishment of rural agricultural centers by the growing city of Tyre, in the 6th century BC. Over time, it underwent modifications and expansions during the Hellenistic period. Initially, a temple was likely constructed from perishable materials, with only fragments of stone cultic statues surviving from this phase. Later, during the Hellenistic period, a new and larger building replaced the original structure. This Hellenistic period temple was fronted by a paved courtyard and consisted of a square hall leading to a smaller rectangular room. The interior was embellished with stucco decorations, a central mosaic flooring and gem-like glass paste. The exterior featured a cavetto cornice, a lintel with a sun disk and uraei, and the entrance was flanked by two standing Egyptian-style male figure statues. The architecture followed pre-Classical Phoenician temple design, characterized by specific features such as a "bent-entry", and an east-west axis orientation.

The sanctuary of Kharayeb yielded an extensive collection of artifacts, including thousands of terracotta figurines and miniature vessels, and inscriptions, which provide insights into the religious practices of the local rural Phoenician population. The terracotta figurines from the Late Iron Age and Persian period depicted various subjects, including pregnant women, male figures, and deities. During the Hellenistic period, new molding techniques introduced Greek themes and deities like Aphrodite and Hermes. The religious practices observed at the sanctuary remained faithful to local Phoenician traditions, and were part of a wider cultic system within the Tyre hinterland, involving similar rituals across different sanctuaries in the region.

The Phoenician sanctuary of Kharayeb's deity remains unidentified due to the absence of specific god names in the inscriptions. Current interpretation suggest that the sanctuary served as a small rural religious site focused on healing and salvation deities, with rituals associated with childbearing and childhood, as evident from numerous child figurines. The discovery of around 8,000 terracotta figurines indicates intensive religious activity spanning centuries, ending when the site's religious activity ceased in the first century BC.

Location

The town of Kharayeb sits on the hills overlooking the Mediterranean, at a short distance north of the Leontes River, 77 km (48 mi) south of Beirut, Lebanon.[1] The Phoenician sanctuary of Kharayeb is located on a hilly plateau at the entrance of the homonymous village, near the locality of Jemjim.[2] Locals alternatively refer to the area of the sanctuary as Mahdoumeh (the demolished place), Juret el-Khawatem for the reasons explained above, and after the start of the archaeological excavations as al-Mathaf (the museum).[3]

History
Relevant Ancient Near East periodization
Iron Age I1200–1000 BC
Iron Age II1000–539 BC
Persian period539–330 BC
Hellenistic period330–31 BC

Historical background and foundation

Archaeological excavation in Kharayeb and its vicinity have revealed a complex settlement landscape spanning various chronological periods, from the Prehistoric to the Ottoman era (1516–1918). The region had been inhabited since the Middle Paleolithic, as evidenced by numerous discovered flint tools.[4] The earliest signs of agricultural use of the area in historical periods comes from the site of Jemjim near Kharayeb, where a stele dating back to the Late Iron Age was discovered.[5] Excavations have also found a rural settlement with a complex system of cisterns dating to the Iron Age, along with ceramics indicating occupation dating back to the second millennium BC.[4]

During the Persian period (539–330 BC), Phoenicia flourished economically and coastal city populations grew, necessitating resource optimization in their respective territories.[6] The Persian policy aimed at promoting intensive agriculture within irrigated areas further supported this development. The subsistence of Tyre was ensured by the establishment of ancient rural agricultural centers, extending from the coast to southern Palestine. These rural areas, especially those situated near rivers, played a crucial role in Tyre's economy and witnessed the emergence of a series of planned settlements.[6][3][7][8] It is within this territorial organization context that the construction of a place of worship in Kharayeb was begun around the 6th century BC.[3][4] The establishment of the sanctuary of Kharayeb along a river, and in a relatively isolated context occurs during a time when the cults of deities of healing and salvation were emerging throughout the Levant.[9]

Hellenistic period and decline
Terracotta statuette of a standing male child holding a fowl, presumed to be a duck.
Terracotta figurine holding a duck from the Kharayeb sanctuary, in the collection of the National Museum of Beirut

Following Alexander the Great's conquest of the Achaemenid Empire in 330 BC and his premature death, various Hellenistic kingdoms emerged across the conquered land, namely the Seleucid Empire in West Asia and Ptolemaic Egypt. Greek culture and language was spread as far as modern-day India, resulting in a fusion of ancient Greek and local cultures.[10]

In Phoenicia, although the majority of the population still spoke Phoenician, the institutions and organization of the Phoenician coastal cities were heavily Hellenized. However, Greek influence did not fully reach the countryside.[lower-alpha 1][12][13] During this period, the sanctuary was completely rebuilt,[14] and there was an intensive use of Greek and Ptolemaic Egypt-inspired imagery and artistic productions made in the heavily Hellenized coastal Phoenician cities.[15] Yet all inscriptions in the sanctuary of Kharayeb were written in Phoenician, as in the nearby Phoenician sanctuary of Umm al-Amad where Phoenician was also predominant,[lower-alpha 2][18][19][12] indicating that the locals remained attached to their language, traditions, and deities.[12] No archaeological evidence dating from later than the end of the Hellenistic period has been uncovered in the sanctuary area, indicating that cultic activity at the sanctuary ceased, after a long period of prosperity and intensive use, in the first century BC.[4]

Modern discovery

The region encompassing Kharayeb and its neighboring localities yielded a number of ancient artifacts, attracting the attention of scholars and explorers since the 19th century. Some of these findings were documented by orientalists.[20] In April 1863, a marble slab featuring intricate relief sculpture was found among the construction material of a house in Jemjim. The slab was acquired by local treasure hunter Alphonse Durighello. In the relief, a seated female figure crowned with an Egyptian pschent is depicted with an incense burner in front of her. The right edge of the slab is decorated with Phoenician palmette motifs. In his book Mission de Phénicie, French biblical scholar and orientalist Ernest Renan reported the discovery as being from the town of "Djamdjîne" (Jemjim).[20] The locals of Kharayeb referred to the area where the Phoenician sanctuary was later discovered as Juret el-Khawatem (the pit of the rings). This name derives from the practice of collecting ancient "beads" unearthed on the premises, which were subsequently used in the creation of bracelets and other decorative accessories.[21][22]

In 1946, the Director of Lebanon's Antiquities Maurice Chehab, initiated excavations at Juret el-Khawatem, prompted by the discovery of a number of terracotta figurines.[22][23] He unearthed the remains of a rectangular cultic building dating back to the Hellenistic period. In front of the building, near a paved courtyard, he uncovered a favissa containing thousands of clay figurines dating from the sixth to the first centuries BC.[24] Archaeological activities at the site were halted for over two decades until 1969, when Lebanese archaeologist Brahim Kaoukabani resumed excavations.[23][25] He unearthed various figurines, significant architectural elements, including a lintel adorned with uraei and two large statues that exhibited an Egyptian style attire.[26][23] Kaoukabani published his preliminary excavation report in 1973.[24] In 2009, the Italian government funded the reexamination and study of the sanctuary's clay figurines in the collections of the General Directorate of Antiquities in Beirut, and in November 2013, a new survey project in the Kharayeb sanctuary site and its vicinity.[24] Several significant discoveries ensued, including a previously undiscovered section of the main rectangular cultic building. The Italian mission made a detailed reconstruction of the sanctuary, revealing the various developmental stages of the building. Notably, the team digitally reconstructed original architectural embellishments of the Hellenistic structure, showcasing intricate designs featuring colored mosaic tesserae, stucco, and glass ornaments.[23]

Architecture

Temple style

The cultic building of the sanctuary of Kharayeb follows the pre-Classical Phoenician temple design, the predominant temple type in Phoenicia and its dependencies.[27] Iron Age Phoenician temples followed a similar plan, with distinct characteristics that set them apart from other cultic architecture in the region. The temples were rectangular, often with a smaller annex room, and were built along an east-west axis. The sacred area, or "holy-of-holies," was located in the western part of the temple. One notable feature of these temples was the "bent-entry," where the main entrance was not centrally located. Other common features included benches along the inner walls, stone bases for supporting columns, and elements related to libation such as channels, drains, and basins. These temples were typically smaller in size compared to other cultic architecture in the southern Levant. The architecture and the humble proportions of such temples indicate that they were not meant for public use but rather for the clergy. Many of these elements were preserved in temple design during the late Persian period.[27]

Description

Archaeological evidence indicates that the Phoenician sanctuary at Kharayeb was modified in multiple phases.[28] A temple was initially built during the Iron Age II/Persian period, but remains have not survived, indicating that it was likely built using perishable materials.[28][14] In this first phase, at least one cultic statue was present in the sacred area. A fragment of a small-sized statue dating back to the first half of the 6th century BC was discovered 20 m (66 ft) northwest of the sanctuary favissa.[29] This statue resembles several examples of Cypriot cultic statues discovered among the materials of the Amrit favissa, but it remains uncertain whether this statue was imported from Cyprus or locally produced. Additionally, the feet of another statue of a different iconographic type, were found by Kaoukabani.[26] Cultic artefacts dating from the Late Iron Age/Persian period were also discovered, including figurines, small and miniature vases and pottery, and miniature altars.[30][31]

Header against stretcher ashlar construction technique used in the Phoenician sanctuary of Kharayeb

In a later phase, at the beginning of the Hellenistic period, the structures from the Iron Age II were replaced by a larger, completely new building.[14][28] The surviving Hellenistic period temple remains measure approximately 13 m × 11 m (43 ft × 36 ft).[32] Significant foundation work was done to level the flooring due to the sloping rocky terrain, and the walls aligned north-south were built directly on the bedrock.[33] The sanctuary then consisted of a large paved courtyard leading to the southwest-facing temple façade. The temple consisted of a large square hall giving access to a smaller rectangular room in the west-northwest side.[34] The walls of the sanctuary were constructed using stones of different sizes and large blocks to provide stability, employing a typical header-and-stretcher bond ashlar construction technique commonly seen in the Persian and Hellenistic period constructions in Phoenicia. Both interior and exterior walls were covered with lime plaster, and the interior plaster was polished.[35][34] The temple exterior was adorned with architectural design elements commonly found in sacred buildings in the Tyre region, including a cavetto cornice and a lintel decorated with a sun disk flanked by uraei. The design of the building and its decorations resembled the sanctuary of Umm al-Amad, south of Tyre.[36] The temple's main entrance on the southwest-facing façade was flanked by two shendyt-clad male figure statues.[37] Each statue has one advanced foot (one on the right, the other on the left), and the better-preserved of the two figures shows traces of an animal held under the left arm. Such sculptures are typical of Phoenicia and Cyprus. In Phoenicia, examples of this type were found in Sarepta, Amrit, Byblos, Sidon, Tyre, and Umm al-Amad.[38] Scholars believe that these Egypt-inspired sculptural groups served as protective figures, and were stationed at the entrance of Phoenician temples.[39]

At a later stage during the Hellenistic period, the floor of the large square hall was paved with flat stone slabs.[35][40] A group of multicolored tesserae was excavated, suggesting the presence of a simple geometric pattern mosaic in the center of the hall. The interior walls were embellished with stucco decoration, similar to the ornate houses of the coastal cities of the Levant during that period, featuring oval-shaped motifs some examples of which have been found on site by Kaoukabani. This phase can be associated with the interior decoration of the building, which included the scattered gem-like glass pastes collected by the locals to make jewelry.[26][40]

Artifacts and finds

In addition to the architectural, decorative, and cultic items mentioned above, the successive excavations at the Phoenician Sanctuary of Kharayeb have yielded a wealth of artifacts, including thousands of terracotta figurines, and miniature vessels that provide insight into the religious practices of the local Phoenician population.[41][42]

Votive terracotta figurines
Figurines of the Late Iron Age Persian period from Kharayeb and Tyre, at the National Museum of Beirut

Terracotta figurines from the Late Iron Age/Persian period were found on site. They were made locally by artisans who produced images of a well-documented type found in Phoenicia (Sarepta, Tyre, Tell Keisan, Achziv, Dor), and Cyprus. The repertoire of votive figurines includes pregnant women, women with their hands placed on their breasts, seated male figurines wearing an atef crown or with a flat hairstyle, horse riders, tambourine players, and the god Bes.[43][9][41] From this period onward, some types were influenced by Eastern Greek production, such as the women dressed in chitons, which were also documented in Beirut and Sidon.[9]

In the Hellenistic period, a heavy influx of worshipers prompted local coroplasts to adopt the more efficient and cost-effective double molds technique.[42] The new technique was introduced from prominent Hellenistic coroplastic production centers like Alexandria in Egypt.[44] Original molds were acquired and modified to reflect local styles and context,[42] and figurines were locally produced in Tyre as evidenced by clay ion-beam analysis,[45][44] and the presence of incised Phoenician letters on the figurines before firing.[42] The acquisition of molds with Greek iconography introduced the images of Hellenistic deities such as Aphrodite, Artemis, Demeter, Dionysus, Eros, Heracles, and Hermes into the hinterland of Tyre. The number of figurines depicting deities is scarce compared to the total cataloged pieces, with the majority of the figurines depicting female and male subjects, and, most notably, children engaged in playful activities. The imagery portrays the rural and pastoral environment in which the users of these figurines lived. There were numerous figurines of schoolchildren and theater masks indicating that the sanctuary may have also frequented by worshipers from coastal cities.[15] The influence of Alexandria is also apparent through a number of figurines depicting a breastfeeding Isis, Horus, and Harpocrates.[46]

Other finds
Figurines of the Hellenistic period (330–31 BC) from Kharayeb and Tyre, showcasing Greek influence, displayed at the Beirut Rafik Hariri International Airport

Miniature cultic pottery vessels were found in various places in the sanctuary, and were utilized in rituals throughout the sanctuary's periods of use. Small plates and bowls were found by the Italian mission under the temple's paving, in the Late Iron Age/Persian period phase layers.[41] Pottery from the Hellenistic phase include small and miniature unguentaria, miniature plates, and small jugs.[47][48] Chéhab uncovered the remains of lamb and an astragalus within one of the unearthed small plates.[49] A number of miniature altars, dating to the Late Iron Age/Persian period, and similar to ones found in Amrit, Sidon, and Tell el-Burak were also found on site.[30][31]

The site provided a few of inscriptions: on votive figurines,[42] and on a fragment of a limestone statue found by Chéhab at the bottom of the sanctuary favissa.[50] The fragment consists of a statue base with both feet depicted in profile, with a Phoenician inscription carved between the legs. Chéhab translated the inscription in his 1952 excavation report as "Because he heard the word of his servants".[51] In 1955, he revised his interpretation, presenting a slightly different translation: "...of them, because he heard their words (prayers), may he bless them".[52][53] The inscription was dated to the 4th century BC, based on comparisons with the inscription of the Batnoam sarcophagus (KAI 11) and the Phoenician graffiti from Abydos (KAI 49).[53]

Dedication and function

It was not possible for scholars to identify the deity worshiped at the Phoenician sanctuary of Kharayeb as no specific god names are mentioned in the site inscriptions.[32] Chéhab proposed that the sanctuary was a center for agrarian and initiatory cults, based on the figurines representing Demeter and Kore.[54][55] On the other hand, Kaoukabani suggested that the sanctuary was initially dedicated to Astarte associated or identified with the goddess Isis. According to his interpretation, the building was a mammisi. He further proposed that the cult likely acquired characteristics related to Demeter and included mysteric elements.[56][57] The study of the terracotta figurines however, contributed to the understanding of the religious cult. A revised understanding was put forth by Italian historian Maria Grazia Lancellotti who characterizes the sanctuary as a smaller religious site that, like the temple of Eshmun in Bustan el-Sheikh at the outskirts of Sidon, centered around the veneration of deities of healing and salvation, with an emphasis on rituals associated with childbearing and childhood.[55][58] This interpretation would explain the discovery of numerous child figurines on-site.[46]

According to Oggiano, the religious practices observed at the Kharayeb sanctuary were part of the same cultic system that included the sanctuaries of Umm al-Amad, the temple of Sarepta, and possibly Tyre. These shared practices include the performance of comparable rituals, the dedication of stone and terracotta statues, and the use of a similar syntax of dedicatory inscriptions across the entire region of the Tyre hinterland.[32] The Eastern Temple in Umm al-Amad yielded twelve terracotta figurines, with the majority retrieved from the "Throne Chapel." Notably, these figurines belong to the well-documented type associated with the Kharayeb sanctuary.[59] In addition to the dedication of figurines, the rituals practiced at the Kharayeb sanctuary included pouring oils from unguentaria, and offering libations poured from miniature and medium-sized jugs.[47] The great number of clay figurines discovered at the sanctuary is evidence of the intensive religious activity in the Phoenician sanctuary between the fourth and first centuries BC. The temple's small interior was periodically cleared of votive offerings to make space for new statuettes. As a result, around 8,000 terracotta figurines were collected and stored in a specially dug favissa.[42] The Kharayeb figurines portrayed various aspects of local Phoenician society over many centuries, consistently emphasizing the significance of motherhood and childhood for the people frequenting the sanctuary. During the Persian period, a great number of figurines represented pregnant women, and in the Hellenistic period, numerous depictions of children engaged in playful activities with animals or music instruments were found. The small size of the cultic objects further indicates the potential involvement of children in the rituals.[47]

See also

Notes
  1. The social strata of any society evolve historically at different speeds and in different ways. For the Hellenistic era, as for many other periods, a safe rule of thumb is "The lower, the slower." For the fellahin of Egypt, or the peasantry of Greece and Anatolia, very little changed over these three centuries except the identity and, sometimes, the severity of their (mostly alien) oppressors, whose unswerving aim was to extract as much tax-money and labor from them as could be done without provoking mass revolution.[11]
  2. Not all of Umm al-Amad's inscriptions are in Phoenician, one is in Greek and reads ("ΑΒΔΗΛΙ[ΜΟΣ] / ΤΥΡΙΟΣ Χ[ΑΙΡΕ]" [Abdelim of Tyre, farewell]).[16][17]

References

Citations
  1. Localiban 2015.
  2. Khalil & Oggiano 2021, p. 337.
  3. Oggiano 2013, p. 241.
  4. Oggiano & Khalil 2020, p. 201.
  5. Gubel 2002, p. 115.
  6. Elayi 1980, p. 16.
  7. Elayi 2018, pp. 227–230.
  8. Jigoulov 2010, pp. 131, 163.
  9. Oggiano 2013, p. 242.
  10. Green 2008, pp. xv–xviii, 132.
  11. Green 2008, pp. xviii, 132.
  12. Oggiano 2013, p. 246.
  13. Edrey 2018, p. 197.
  14. Oggiano 2018, p. 18.
  15. Oggiano 2013, pp. 243–244.
  16. Conder et al. 1881, p. 183.
  17. Ledrain 1888, p. 67.
  18. Chéhab 1953–1954, figure CIb.
  19. Kaoukabani 1973, Figure VI.
  20. Renan 1864, pp. 653–654.
  21. Oggiano 2022, p. 306.
  22. Oggiano et al. 2016, p. 193.
  23. Oggiano 2018, p. 17.
  24. Khalil & Oggiano 2021, p. 332.
  25. Oggiano 2012, p. 6.
  26. Kaoukabani 1973, p. 54.
  27. Edrey 2018.
  28. Oggiano & Khalil 2020, p. 203.
  29. Chéhab 1951–1952, p. 19.
  30. Sader 2016.
  31. Oggiano 2018, pp. 29, 32.
  32. Oggiano 2018, p. 33.
  33. Oggiano 2018, p. 20.
  34. Oggiano 2018, pp. 20–21.
  35. Chéhab 1951–1952, p. 9.
  36. Oggiano 2018, p. 23.
  37. Oggiano 2018, p. 24.
  38. Oggiano 2018, pp. 24–30.
  39. Oggiano 2018, p. 30.
  40. Oggiano 2018, pp. 30–31.
  41. Oggiano 2022, p. 309.
  42. Oggiano 2013, p. 243.
  43. Kaoukabani 1973, Figure 8.
  44. Oggiano 2022, p. 15.
  45. Roumie et al. 2019.
  46. Oggiano 2013, p. 244.
  47. Oggiano 2022, p. 312.
  48. Oggiano 2022, pp. 309–310.
  49. Chéhab 1951–1952, p. 13.
  50. Chéhab 1951–1952, p. 77.
  51. Chéhab 1951–1952.
  52. Chéhab 1955, pp. 45–46.
  53. Amadasi Guzzo 2016, p. 81.
  54. Chéhab 1951–1952, pp. 143–154.
  55. Oggiano 2012, p. 7.
  56. Kaoukabani 1973.
  57. Oggiano 2019, p. 270.
  58. Lancellotti 2003, pp. 341–370.
  59. Vella 2000, p. 37.

Sources

Further reading
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.