PHCENICIA 



PHCENIX 



370) the relation of vroxenia was entered 

 into between Strato, king of Sidon, and the Athen 

 ian people. Towards the later part of the Persian 

 !: iod. however, the allegiance of Plxcnicia Itegitn 

 to waver. Kvagoras of Salami*, when in revolt 

 against Mnemon, in thought to have obtained a 

 an iiinoiint of Pho'iiician -iip|n! ( Kenrick, 

 Phirnirin, p. 405). In the 'War of the Satrap ' ( 366 ) 

 the defection of Phirnicia from the Persian cause is 

 certain. Lateron came the great I'lurnician revolt. 

 Encouraged by the successful stand which N'ectanebo 

 hail made against Ochus, Tennes, king of Sidon 

 probably the Tahnit of the Siilonian inscriptions 

 raised i in :C>1 ) the standard of rebellion. All the 

 other cities joine.l him. Alliance was made with 

 Egypt ; the Persian garrisons in Phoenicia were 

 massacred, the royal park was plundered, and the 

 stoie hud up for the Persian cavalry were destroyed 

 (l)iixl.Sie. xvi. 41, sect. 5). The first attempt which 

 IVi-ia made to crush the rebellion failed ; hut 

 in :U."i tMius liimself invadeil Pho'iiicia with an 

 anny of 330,000 men, and Tennes, regarding resist- 

 ance as hopeless, siihmilted, anil rereiveil the 

 Persians within the walls. But the inhabitants 

 generally refused to submit. Shutting themselves 

 ii|> within their houses, together with their wives 

 and children, they applied the torch to their 

 dwellings, and lighted up a general conflagration. 

 Forty thousand |M>rsons are said to have perished 

 in the Ihimes ( liiod. Sic. xvi. 45). Tennes, not- 

 withstanding his submission, was executed, and the 

 crown passed to hU son Abd-Astartus (Strato II.). 

 The last Sidonian dynasty is traceable for five 

 generations, through the following six sovereigns 

 K.Miiunazar I., fattier of the first Tabnit (circa 

 460-440) ; Tabnit I., his son, who married his own 

 sister. Am . Ashtoreth ; Esmunazar II., their son, 

 whose tomb is in the collection of the Ixiuvre ; 

 Strato I., this Ksmunazar's brother, who reigned 

 from about 400 to 361, and was proxenos of 

 . \tliens; Tennes II., Strato's son, who reigned 

 from 3lil to 345, when he was put to death by 

 < Mms; and Strato II., the son of the second 

 Tahnit, who held the throne from his father's 

 death to the linal extinction of Pluenician inde- 

 |-ndence (333) by Alexander. 



Alexander's invasion of Asiii in 334 found the 

 Phoenician* still attached to Persia. The fleet of 

 Meiiinoii, which eomiiiaiided the .-Kgeaii, consisted 

 principally of Pho-nieian vessels, the contingent of 

 each state lii-ing under the direction of the native 

 monarch, or his -on. No ^i, of disall'ection showed 

 its,. If until the defeat of Darius at Issiis (333), when 

 the collapse of the Persian jxiwer, and the Hilvance 

 of the Macedonians into Syria in overwhelming 

 force, made a change- of [xilicy necessary. Aradus. 

 I!y bins ((iehal), and Sidon then surrendered them- 

 :id Tyre would have done the same had 

 not Alexander made the unpalatable demand that 

 lie should IM' received into the inland-city. Upon 

 Ihi- thcT\iiaiis rc-ohcd to defy him, aild, tinder 

 their king, A/emilciis, SI<HM| the famous siege, 

 which i+ |NTlin|in the most glorious event in Pine- 

 nieiaii hi-toiy. It was not till all their sister-cities 

 hail dc-.-rt.MJ them, and the Macedonian monarch 

 hail tilled up the strait lictween the mainland and 

 their i-le, that they were coiii|iiered. Then at 

 last the bra vi- and tenacious |>cople succnmlM'd 

 to di-tiny. mid. losing their nationality, In-came 

 aUorlx'd into the (ireeo M.-iccilonian empire. 



N.I native hi.tory of 1'lnriiir-ia has come down to us, 

 ml it i qMrttMMM whether Buy such history was ever 

 writl.-n. Tin- so-called ' I'h.rnicUn History* of 1'liilo 

 Kybliii, ascribed by him to Hunch, mintlimi. in not 

 hMOftaU but mythological i'hirniciun history has to 

 be gathered from Mattered notices in the Hebrew and 

 cUvwcul writer*, and from a few a very few native 

 'menu. Tlie bent modern work* on the general 



subject are Movers'* Die Pkimuicr und dot Pkonititeke 

 XOer<Aum(5voU. 1841-06) and Kenriok's Salary and 

 Atitiquitirt of J'kanifia (1855), to which the writer 

 may perhaps be allowed to add his own Salary of 

 Pk(rniria ( 1889). There is a valuable article by Movers 

 in the Kneyclojxrdui of Ersch and Uruber, and another 

 chiefly by Gutachmid in the Eneyclopmtia Britanniea ; 

 and Home excellent essays on the principal characteris- 

 tics of the Phoenicians, written by Kmanuel Deutsch, 

 will he found in his Literary Remain* (1874). Recently 

 the attention of scholars has been directed mainly to the 

 three point* of the geography of the country, the 

 language and literary remains, and the aesthetic art and 

 architecture. The geography has been largely illus- 

 trated by Kenan in his Motion de Phrnii-ii 1 1S)'>4), by 

 Waljwle in his A nmyrii ( 1851 ), by Tristram in his L nil 

 o//rtirf(1866), andbyLortet inLaSyri, l'Anj;unl'liHi 

 ( 1XK4 ). The language and literary remains, which engaged 

 the attention of Gesenius towards the middle of the 

 I'.ith century, were subjected by him to careful analysis 

 in his important work, Seripturif Limnim/iii I'hnnieiae 

 Monutiifnla ( 1837 ), which is still an authority of impM t- 

 ance ; but the work has since been further carried on 

 with remarkable success by Judas, Etvdet drmowtrativei 

 tie la Lanriue Pkenieicnne etdela Lanjue Liliuquc ( IS rj \ ; 

 by the Abbe Bourgade Inscription* PIUnMenntt ( 18T)L' I ; 

 by Dietrich, Zvxi Sidoniickc Intekriften (1855); by 

 Ewald, Erkldrung dergrosten PhimiziKhcn Intchrift von 

 .SWon (ia r >6); by Schroder, Die Phonizuchc S/irackc 

 ( 1809 ) ; and recently by M. Renan and other scholars in the 

 magnificent work entitled Corptu Intcriptionum Scniit- 

 irarum (Paris, 1881-90), where the Phoenician inscrip- 

 tions occupy almost the entire first volume. 1'h.i ui. i.m 

 art and architecture have been largely discussed by M. 

 Renan in his Mission de Phenicie, and exhaustively 

 treated by M. Clermont-Ganneau in his work, L'lmayerie 

 Phenicienne (Paris, 1880), and by JIM. Pcrrot'and 

 Chipicz in their magnificent Hatoire de I' Art Jam 

 I'Antiquite (1882-87), wliere the subject of Phoenicia 

 occupies the third volume. Byways of Phoenician art 

 have been pursued by General di Ccsnola in his Cyprut 

 (1877), and by his brother, A. di Cesnola, in his Ni/o 

 mi Din (1882) ; also by Ceccaldi, Monuments antique! de 

 Cyprc (1880); by Signor Cara, Ktla:ionc degli idoli 

 Sanlo-fenici (Cagliari, 1875); and by M, de Vogue, 

 Melanirt tl'Arfliroloflic Orientate (ISfio;. Research is 

 still goiug on upon Phoenician sites, as in the vicinity of 

 Heyrout and Saida (Sidon), and again in Cyprus. The 

 !; \nrnt journal Le Bachir contains from time to time 

 interesting notices of the objects exhumed in Phoenicia 

 pro(>er, while accounts of the work done in Cyprus have 

 appeared in the Times and elsewhere. 



I'hu'llix. the name of a mythical I'.gv |>ti;in bird, 

 Riii>|K)sed by some to ! a kind of plover, like the 

 kiottt, often de|>icted with human arms, and called 

 in hieroglyphs ;,//,. Others consider it to l>e the 

 lirniin, or nycticorax, a binl sacred to ( Isiris. It 

 visited Egypt after the death of its father, and 

 entered the shrine particularly dedicated to it at 

 HeUopoIia, and there buried its parent, putting the 

 Ixxly into an egg or case made of myrrh, and then 

 dosing up the egg. Another account is that the 

 I'hicnU, when about to die, made a nest for itself 

 in Arabia, from which a new Phu'iiix sprung of 

 itself. This bird proceeded to Hcliopolis, and 

 there burned and buried its father, lint the mine 

 tMipiilarly-known version is that the Phienix 

 liiirned itself, and a new and young Phu-nix sprang 

 from the ashes. The Plucnix was, according U> tin- 

 ino-t authentic accounto, supposed to visit Kgypt 

 eM'rv 5(H) years ; the prerise period, however, was 

 not known at Heliopolis, and was a subject of con- 

 tention till its appearance. The connection of the 

 I'ho nix period with that of the Sothiac cycle 

 appears to lie generally received by chronologiste, 

 as well as the statement that it 'designated the 

 Mini and the inundation of the Nile. A great differ- 

 ence of opinion has prevailed about the Phienix 

 period a cycle generally of 500 years, but varying 

 also from 250 to 7000 years. Lepsius makes ft 

 a cycle of 1600 years. The Pho-nix was fabled 

 to have four times appeared in Egypt. For 



