Les dernières découvertes archéologiques

Byblos, an ancient capital of the Levant

Lorenzo Nigro, Professor of Near Eastern and Phoenician Punic Archaeology, Sapienza University of Rome

communities of the ancient Near East, and

Location and name
The promontory of Jbeil which dominates
the northern coast of Lebanon, squeezed be-
tween the mountains and the sea, was the
place where from the 7th millennium BCE a
human community of fishermen and agricul-
turalists gave rise to one of the most durable
settlements of the Levant. The dominating
position of the mound, over the easily land-
ing great seashore to the south, fertile but thin
coastal plain, the proximity to the mountains,
suitable source of timber, and above all the
presence of freshwater within the same prom-
ontory, are factors which set Byblos amongst
the most precocious and innovative Neolithic
made it a flourishing city in the Bronze and
Iron Ages (Figure 1)1,2,3,4.
From the 3rd millennium BCE onwards, the
ancient name of the city was Kepny in Egyp-
tian*, and Gubal in Akkadian*,5. In Phoenician,
the name is Gebal - Geval in Biblical Hebrew,
and it descends from the words gib, ‘well’ and
El, ‘god’. This might be related with the ear-
liest Bronze Age temple, located immediate-
ly west of the deep well in the centre of the
promontory and called Enceinte sacrée, dated
from 3,400 to 3,050 BCE. The city in Hellen-
istic and Roman times was known as Býblos
(βυβλος) and became famous for the impor-
tation of papyrus from Egypt, a country with

Figure 1. View of the ruins of Byblos: in the foreground the Temple of the Baalat.

* The oldest attestation of this toponym (Kepny) is from the time of the first pharaoh of the IV Dynasty, Snefru, the builder of
the pyramids of Dahshur. During his reign, 40 ships loaded with cedar wood arrived from Byblos.

61
 LA REVUE PHÉNICIENNE

which it always kept a preferential relation-

ship, so that its name is probably the origin
of the Greek and Roman, for book (βίβλος,
βιβλίον), as well as the word ‘Bible’. In the
Middle Ages, the castle built on top the prom-
ontory and earlier ruins to the north, was
called Gebelet.
According to Philo of Byblos, who men-
tions the Phoenician priest Sanchuniaton, and
is in turn quoted by Eusebius of Cesarea, By-
blos was the oldest city in the world, directly
founded by the god Chronos.
The site was thoroughly excavated by Er-
nest Renan6 during the Mission de Phénicie
in the 19th century and Pierre Montet7 in the
1920’s of the 20th century, followed by Mau-
rice Dunand who carried out excavations from
1924 to 19752,8-19. Figure 2. Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (8800-6500 BCE)
lime plastered floors of rectangular houses.
Prehistoric Byblos
Byblos in prehistory was a major site of the
Levantine coast that emerged in M. Dunand’s
excavations but was first recognized by Hen-
ri Victor Vallois20. Its material culture and
anthropological remains were studied by Le
Bourhis21, the Emir Maurice Chehab22, Henri
de Contenson23 and Jacques Cauvin24,25,26.
The five stages in prehistoric Byblos dis-
tinguished by Dunand and re-examined by
Y. Garfinkel27, illustrated the following cul-
tural horizons: a) Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
(8800-6500 BCE) with rectangular houses,
a highly developed pyrotechnology attested
by plastered floors (Figure 2) and idols made
with big elongated pebbles with incised eyes
(Figure 3); b) Pottery Neolithic A or Yarmuki-
an culture (6500-5300 BCE, = Jericho IX)
with hemi- underground huts, painted and Figure 3. Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
(8800-6500 BCE) stone idol.
incised pottery, animal figurines, and flint
sickle-blades and points; c) Pottery Neolithic
B (5300-4300 BCE; = Jericho VIII), a kind phase characterized by the appearance of cur-
of Early Chalcolithic; d) Late Chalcolithic or vilinear architecture (Figure 4), distinguished
Ghassulian (4300-3600 BCE, also called by adults burials in big jars or pithoi (Figure 5),
Dunand “Énéolithique Ancien”: a flourishing and the introduction of copper items, together

62
 Les dernières découvertes archéologiques
Figure 4. Map showing the superimposition of dwellings
from the Late Neolithic to the Late Chalcolithic or
Ghassulian/Énéolithique Ancien (4300 -3600 BCE) with
typical curvilinear architecture to the Early Bronze I
Énéolithique Recent (3600-3100 BCE).
Figure 5. On of the adult burials in big jars or pithoi typical of
the Énéolithique Recent (3600-3100 BCE) settlement.
with pierced flints, churns and a violin-shaped
figurines. The following Énéolithique Recent
is equivalent to the Early Bronze Age I (3600-
3100 BCE), and shows the rise of public ar-
chitecture with the earliest temple near the
central well. This stage yielded stamp seals
made of clay, stone, bone and ivory, with
geometric and animalistic motives, hinting at
proto-administrative practices. The earliest
63
finds of cedar timber in Egypt arriving from
the Levantine coast, namely the ceremonial
boats made of cedar of Lebanon found in the
royal necropolis of Umm el-Qaab at Abydos
in southern Egypt date from this same period.
The Early City: Byblos in the Early
Bronze II and III (3050-2300 BCE)
In the last decades of the fourth millenni-
um BCE, Byblos experienced its fundamental
transformation into a major urban centre28. In
the Early Bronze II (3000-2800 BCE) rela-
tions with Pharaonic Egypt settled steadily at
the highest level, raising the city as a mercan-
tile harbour, exporter of luxury goods from
timber to olive oil and wine. The complexi-
ty of its society and the relationships estab-
lished by the city are attested by the number
and structure of public buildings erected in
this period, as well as the variety of material
culture and the presence of status symbols im-
ported from abroad.
The city-walls
The city takes on a circular shape with the
construction of the walls that protect it over
all the sides except from the sea29,30,31,32,33. The
first boundary wall was made up of a stone
base at the bottom with a raised section made
of raw bricks and wood (Figure 6). The main
north gate, in use only in Early Bronze II, led
directly to the central quarter with the sacred
well and lake, and the surrounding area of
the temples (Figure 7). A second entrance to
the city was the slightly narrower north-west
gate, preceded by a zigzag ramp that connect-
ed the quarter of the palace and main Temple
of the Baalat with the northern port. An east-
southern gate completed the access system to
the city and connected the town to the wide
southern beach, which also served as a port
for everyday life needs33.
In the Early Bronze III, the city-walls were
rebuilt with the addition of offsets jutting out
 LA REVUE PHÉNICIENNE

Figure 6. Section across the earliest city-wall of the Early Bronze II (3100-2800 BCE).

inside the city (Rempart à redents)17,32,34. These

connected to each other by a wooden walk-
way. The new circuit is added to the previous
one, thus starting that process of progressive
thickening of the defensive line that will con-
tinue until the end of the Middle Bronze Age.
On the outside there was also an embankment
with pressed sand and marl casts (Glacis C),
which brings the overall thickness of the forti-
fications to about 20 m (Figure 8)33.
The reconstruction of the city-walls with
the addition of the buttress wall underwent
some important changes in its urban lay-
out: the north gate, just over 25 m from the
north-west gate, was closed, while the latter
was emphasized and equipped with an access
ramp; at the same time, the north-east gate as-
sumed the role of main entrance to the city
and opened directly to the centre equidistantly
from the two major sanctuaries: the Temple of
the Baalat and the ‘L’ Temple, a sacred build-
ing dedicated to male divinity or to a triad. Fi-
nally, a third south-east gate was built leading
to the large beach to the south.

The “well” district and the

Figure 7. Plan of the Early Bronze II (3100-2800 BCE) city of Byblos
with the city-wall, the gates, and the main public buildings, including
the temples in the centre.
surrounding temples
The central sector all around the sacred
well was populated by various religious build-
ings35. The Temple of the Baalat, the ‘Lady of
Byblos’3,17,30,36, (Bâtiment II, XVIII and then

64
 Les dernières découvertes archéologiques

Figure 8. Section across the Early Bronze III (2800-2500 BCE) city-wall, with the characteristic inner offsets and
the rampart outside.

Bâtiment XL) occupied the highest point of

this sector and consisted of a large hypostyle
hall with a series of accessory rooms (Figure
9). It is similar to other main contemporary
centers of the region (Tell el- Mutesellim/
Megiddo and Et-Tell/’Ai in Palestine). The
board-room temple Enceinte sacrée18,30,37,38
(Figure 10) is located west of the well and
consists of a broad-room temple. The “L”
Temple 18,30,39,40 is located to the east next to a
sacred pool and the Ancient Bronze Age III,
the ‘Chapelle Orientale18,30, a temple in antis
(Figure 11) similar to the so-called ‘Megaron Figure 10. Plan of the sacred well at the centre of the city and of the
Temples’ (T. 4040, 5192, 5269) of Megiddo nearby broad-room temple called Enceinte sacrée in use from the
Early Bronze I to the Early Bronze III (3100-2300 BCE).
stratum XV/J-741.

Figure 9. Plan of the Temple of the Baalat, the ‘Lady of Byblos’ Figure 11. Plan of he ‘Temple en L’ and the nearby Chapelle
during the Early Bronze III, (Bâtiment II, Bâtiment XVIII and Orientale located east of the sacred well and south of the sacred pond
then Bâtiment XL). during the Early Bronze III (2800-2500 BCE).

65
 LA REVUE PHÉNICIENNE

In the Temple of the ‘Lady of Byblos’ or

in front of it, there were some Egyptian-style
giant statues (Figure 12). A fragment of a
vase in diorite with the symbol of Pharaoh
Khasekemui, the last king of the II Dynasty,
suggesting that the foundation of the temple
dates back to the beginning of the 3rd millen-
nium BCE. The presence of Egyptian objects
bearing pharaonic symbols throughout the
subsequent Early Bronze III (K III stratum)*,42
shows how the export of cedar wood and oth-
er products like resins and wine kept alive the
relationship with Egypt that some perhaps
like to describe rather than commercial, a
complete political subjugation43.
Public buildings
During the same period, two large not-reli-
gious public buildings were also erected. One
was the palace of the lords of the city18,32, lo-
cated to the north-west of the Temple of the
Baalat. Under the palace, huge tombs were
excavated in the rocky hill7,36. They had huge
vertical square shaft (5-10 m deep) and host-
ed some carefully carved limestone, basalt or
marble sarcophagi which resemble Old and
Middle Kingdom Egyptian prototypes (Figure
13). The second building, called by Dunand
‘Grande Résidence’32,34, was locate south-
west of the spring and yielded administrative
functions (Figure 14).
Urban Byblos of the 3rd millennium BCE
has revealed cylinder seals, bronze weapons,
terracotta, pottery, stone tools testifying to the
greatness of this centre and how it was flour-
ishing up until around 2,300 BCE44 when a
violent destruction may have occurred. At that

Figure 12. Egyptian colossus from the area of the sacred pond and the Figure 13. Monumental limestone sarcophagus made according to
nearby Temple of Baalat (another, better preserved, is the National the Egyptian Old-Kingdom technique from the Royal Necropolis
Archaeological Museum at Beirut). underneath the Royal Palace at Byblos.

* II Dynasty: - Fragment of a vase inscribed with the name of Khasekhemui, the last ruler of the 2nd dynasty, from the
superficial layer near the Bâtiment I. III/IV Dynasty: - Fragment of an offering disk in alabaster with the name of Nefer-
seshem-Ra (Ward 1964) “scribe of the royal carpenters”, found in one of the courts of the Bâtiment XVIII; - Ivory plaque with
the inscription “the known by King Tasen”, probably an Egyptian official. IV Dynasty: - Fragment of a vase with the name of
Queen Merittes, consort of Snefru; - Fragment of a monkey-shaped pot with part of the name of Khufu; - Fragment of a vase
with the name of Hetepheres, mother of Khufu; - Fragment of a vase with the name of Khufu; - Cylinder with the inscription
“Khafra loved by Hathor, loved by the gods”; - Fragment of a diorite cup with the Menkaure/Mycerinos cartouche; - Four
fragments with the name of Mycerinus; - Shale bar with the inscription “Golden Horus Mycerinos, endowed with life, every
happiness of heart, of every health, eternally”.

66
 Les dernières découvertes archéologiques

time Byblos was also mentioned with the the Middle Kingdom, Egyptian vessels sailed
name “DULU” in the Ebla Royal Archives. towards Byblos again.
Numerous excavated contexts can be re-
ferred to this period, in particular several
votive offerings found in a cult place called
‘Camp des offrandes’3,18,30,47,48 which was still
in use in the 2nd millennium BCE, and where
precious metal objects, figurines and pottery
vases, were buried49. These rich finds, includ-
ing the ‘Jarre Montet’7,50, again testify to the
wealth of the city and its vast international
network.

Byblos in the second millennium

Figure 14. Plan of the Grande Residence an Early Bronze Age II-III
administrative building south of the religious central compound.
Byblos in the last quarter of the
III millennium BCE
Despite this destructive accident, the city
recovered immediately and did not suffer
from the crisis which affected especially the
southern Levant during the last centuries of
the 3rd millennium BCE. Byblos remained an
active harbour in contact with the empires of
Ur III in Mesopotamia45, as atteseted by a cu-
neiform tablet which is a lexical list written as
an exercise by an apprentice scribe5,46.
Towards the end of the 3rd millennium
BCE, during the reign of the pharaoh Men-
tuhotep II (c. 2060-2010 BCE), the founder of
BCE (Middle and Late Bronze Age)
In the 2nd millennium BCE, Byblos was
protected by a magnificent rampart covered
with stones (Figure 15) and its main sacred
buildings were rebuilt51. The Temple of the
Baalat had the typical plan of a long-room
temple, with an entrance porch, an antecella
and a cella. It still layed on a high terrace and
was still flanked by the royal palace erected
on the spur overlooking both the harbours of
the city. Also the royal necropolis under the
palace continued to be in use.52 Further east,
the Temple of Reshef was rebuilt with a chap-
el at the centre of a courtyard and various
rows of baetyls and obelisks (26) inside the
sacred complex connecting to a well and oth-
er installations (Figure 16)53,54. A series of vo-
tive deposits, a group of ten golden axes, two

Figure 15. Section across the whole fortification system at Byblos showing in the centre (red) the Middle Bronze Age rampart.

67
 LA REVUE PHÉNICIENNE
Figure 16. Plan of the Temple of the Obelisks with its cult installations
(Middle Bronze II, 1800-1600 BCE).
of which with a relief decoration depicting a
ram and a greyhound55 (perhaps the royal in-
signia of the king of Byblos), one with the en-
graving of the goddess Hathor/Anat/Astarte
(Figure 17) illustrated the skill achieved by
Gublite craftsmen56. An obelisk in the tem-
ple bore a hieroglyphic inscription with the
name of the ruler who erected it: Abi-shemu,
beloved of Reshef (Figures 18, 19). This
ruler and his son/brother Yapy-shemu-Abi
Figure 17. Votive axe made of gold from the deposit in the
Temple of the Obelisk with engraved the warrior-goddess
Ishtar/Anat/Astarte (Middle Bronze Age, 1800-1600 BCE).
68
Figure 18. Obelisk from the courtyard in the Temple of the
Oblelisk with the dedicatory inscription in hieroglyphic
by the Gublite king “Abi-shemu, beloved of Reshef”.
together with another king, ‘Aker, were bur-
ied in tombs I, II and III of the royal necrop-
olis in which several precious objects were
found. Two items were presumably royal gifts
bearing the names of two Egyptian Pharaohs.
Amenemhat III (1860-1815 BCE) name was
engraved on an obsidian and gold jewel case
from Tomb I, and the name of his son and
successor, Amenemhet IV (1814-1806 BCE),
engraved on a cylindrical ointment box also
Figure 19. Golden fenestrated axes with emblems depicting a ram
and a greyhound from the deposit in the Temple of the Obelisk
(Middle Bronze Age, 1800-1600 BCE).
 Les dernières découvertes archéologiques

made of obsidian and gold found in Tomb
II57. There is, however, a weak possibility
that such precious gifts arrived from robbed
tombs, together with five amethyst sig-
net-scarabs and many other jewels, weapons
and luxury items, some of which have been
recently re-interpreted as local imitation of
Egyptian ornaments58. Whether or not this is
the case, all these precious finds set the Gub-
lite kings of the times of the Egyptian XII and
XIII Dynasties amongst the members of the
highest royal élites of the Levant, and attest
to some basic synchronisms between the Le-
vant, Egypt and Mesopotamia59. In the same
tombs and in coeval tomb III many pottery
and metal vases were found, including one
Cretan (a Kamares cup), which attests to the
connections of Byblos with many countries of
central and eastern Mediterranean from Crete
to Anatolia, Cyprus, Syria and Palestine.
In the Late Bronze Age, Byblos maintained
its role as a major pole within the central coast
of the Levant, and it is cited in the lists of cities
of the Levant by Thutmosis III in the 15th cen-
tury BCE. In the archive of el-Amarna more
than 54 missives were sent by Rib-Hadda king
of Gubal (Byblos) to the Pharaoh, during the
reign of Amenhotep IV/Akhenaton*. Byblos
during the Ramesside imperium, is less known
from sources, and we have almost no certain
archaeological data, even though, the Ahiram
sarcophagus, possibly was carved during this
time. The Tale of Wenamun, an Egyptian en-
voy who visited Byblos and met its king Zakar-
baal, is an Egyptian literary text depicting a
real journey that occurred towards the end of
the 2nd millennium BCE during the so-called
Renaissance60 under the reign of Ramesses XI
(1190-1077 BCE). It describes the decline of
Egyptian power in the Levant, but confirms
the timeless role of port and trade centre with
Egypt of the early Phoenician city. The same
picture might be inferred from the quotation
of the Middle Assyrian king, Tiglath-Pileser I
(1114-1076 BCE), who invaded Syria and the
Levantine coast and sailed and fished in the
sea of Arwad.
Phoenician Byblos in the first
millennium BCE (Iron Age)
Phoenician Byblos during the Iron Age
(1200-332 BCE) is partly hidden beneath the
houses of the modern village which occupies
the northern part of the promontory and only
some sparse remains allow us to glimpse the
history of this city that continued to exploit
its preferential relationship with Egypt, im-
porting the papyrus and distributing the pre-
cious rolls all over the Mediterranean, when
the alphabet had replaced the most complex

* Rib-Hadda’s letters to Pharaoh Akhenaton are famous for being mainly complaints or pleas for immediate help. In EA 89, he
reported a upheaval in Tyre, where the king and his family, including Rib-Hadda’s relatives, have been killed. In EA 105, he
begged the Pharaoh to intervene in a dispute with Biruta (the nearby Beirut), whose ruler had captured two merchant vessels
of Byblos. In EA 122, Rib-Hadda reports an attack by the Egyptian commander Pihuri, who had killed a number of Shardana
mercenaries and captivated three men of Byblos. Rib-Hadda was involved in a long-standing conflict with Amurru, a boundary
reign in south-central Syria, whose ruler Abdi-Ashirta, had hired mercenaries (Habiru, Shardana, and other nomad tribes) to
raid the land. This conflict generated a long series of letters to the Pharoh. Rib-Hadda accused Abdi-Ashirta to have attempted
to his life sending an assassin to kill him. Rib-Hadda pleaded with Akhenaten to send his official to defend him from the forces
of Amurru and from raising rebellions in his own country, as his neighbour was killed by his people (EA 75). His expressions
have become famous: “like a bird in a trap so I am here in Gubla” (EA 74, EA 81). There is an increasing drama in Rib-Hadda’s
tale. With the withdrawn of the Egyptian commissioner Pahanate from the province of Ube (north Canaan), he feels in danger.
His continuous pleas with the Pharaoh annoyed Akhenaton, who according to EA 117 charged Rib-Hadda to be the only one
writing to him. When his enemy (Abdi-Ashirta king of Amurru) is killed (EA 101), there is no relief, as his son, Aziru, keeps
the aggressive policy of his father (EA 103, EA 109). The end of this political instability is illustrated by EA 126: the Hittites
have started to invade Egyptian protectorates (“the king’s land”) in Syria setting them on fire. Eventually, Rib-Hadda is forced
to seek for protection in exile by the king of Biruta Ammunira (EA 137).

69
 LA REVUE PHÉNICIENNE

Figure 20. Carved sarcophagus of king Ahiram with the inscription Figure 21. Phoenician dedicatory inscription of king Yehimilk, first
added by his son Ittobaal (Beirut, National Archaeological Museum): half of the 10th century BCE.
sarcophagus of the 13th century BCE and successive burial of the 10th.

writings of previous millennia. The sarcoph-

agus of King Ahiram (Figure 20), with the
long dedication of his son Ittobaal*, is the old-
est testimony of this historical era of the city.
The sarcophagus is made of limestone carved
on all sides (actually a work of the XIV-XIII
century BCE, reused at around 1000 BCE*,61).
The top is supported by four crouching lions,
while carved on one side a scene of a funeral
banquet with the sovereign enthroned holding
a lotus flower withered in front of his servants
and, on the other, the mourners and weeping
subjects. On the lid were carved two other li-
ons and two kings - the deceased king and the
reigning king - which illustrate the Phoenician
royal funerary ideology. A series of inscrip-
tions inform us of the successors of the two
Figure 22. Phoenician Inscription of king Elibaal
kings in the 10th and 9th centuries BCE62. They on the reused busts of pharaoh Osorkon I (922-
were Yehimilk (Figure 21)*, Abibaal on the 889 BCE) (Paris, Musée du Louvre).

* The text is subdivided into two lines. 1. ’RN - Z P‘L- [?]TB‘L - BN ’HRM – MLK GBL - L’HRM - ’BH - KŠTH - B‘LM;
Sarcophagus who made [I]TB’L (others read PLSB’L), son of ’HRM, king of Byblos, for’ HRM his father when he laid him in
eternity; 2. W’L - MLK - BMLKM - WSKN - BS[K]NM - WTM’ - MḤNT - ‘LY - GBL - WYGL - ’RN - ZN - TḤTSP - ḤṬR
- MŠPṬH - THTPK - KS’ - MLKH - WNḤT - TBRḤ - ‘L - GBL - WH’ - YMḤ SPRH - LPN - GBL
And if a king among the kings and a governor among the governors and an army commander assault Byblos and violates this
sarcophagus, may the sceptre of his command be broken, the throne of his kingdom be overthrown and may peace cease on
Byblos and may his inscription before Byblos be cancelled.
* Finkelstein and Sass 2013 (181-183) argue a dating of the royal inscriptions of Byblos between 850 and 750 BCE, as a
consequence of their reconstruction of the spread over of the alphabet from the Hebrew to the other languages.
* Dunand 1930: House [temple] that Yehimilk king of Byblos has built; [the one who has restored] all the ruins of those
temples; may Ba’al Shamim and Ba’al Gebal and all the saint gods of Byblos elongate the days of Yehimilk and his years over
Byblos; because he is a right king and a honest king in front of the gods of Byblos.

70
 Les dernières découvertes archéologiques
reused busts of the pharaoh Sheshonq I (945-
924 BCE), Elibaal (Figure 22) on the reused
busts of the pharaoh Osorkon I (922-889
BCE), and Shipitbaal, to underline the per-
sistence of preferential relations between the
Phoenician harbour city and pharaonic Egypt.
Byblos was conquered by the Assyrians
before the submission of the other Phoenician
cities, during the earliest raids of Ashurnasir-
pal II in 877 BCE. Perhaps also for this rea-
son, the supremacy over the Phoenician coast
passed to the southernmost cities Sidon and
Tyre, which remained independent for at least
another century until the conquest by Sen-
nacherib (701 BCE), who also submitted By-
blos after it had rebelled. In the treaty between
the Assyrian king Esarhaddon (681-669 BCE)
and Ba’al king of Tyre, Byblos was clearly
subjugated by Tyre63.
Figure 23. Stela of king Yehawmilk
represented as official or priest paying
homage to the “Lady of Byblos” (5th century
BCE).
71
Under the Persian Achaemenid domination
(539-333 BCE)64, Byblos was rebuilt in mon-
umental forms, and a raised cultural platform
was erected in the eastern sector of the city.
The stele of King Yehawmilk (5th century
BCE), today in the Louvre (Figure 23), shows
us the sovereign dressed as a Persian official,
paying homage to the ‘Lady of Byblos’ seated
on a throne adorned with sphinxes and bear-
ing Hathor’s horned crown. The inscribed text
celebrates the reconstruction of her temple.
Hellenistic and Roman Byblos
With the arrival of Alexander the Great and
his conquest of Phoenicia in 332 BCE, Byblos
spontaneously submitted to the Macedonian
ruler, and became a completely Hellenized
city and remained so until the Seleucid king-
dom. In the 2nd century BCE the city was the
home of Philo, an erudite and Greek speaking
author, who transmitted important documents
on Phoenician culture and history.
During the Roman age, Byblos flourished
and two new temples were erected on the ru-
ins of the temple of the Baalat Gebal and on
those of the Temple of the Obelisks. Lucian
of Samosata describes the city as the place
of worship of Adonis. The Roman theatre,
excavated and rebuilt by Dunand near the
promontory were the royal palace use to be,
was founded in 218 CE. Roman Byblos was
destroyed in 551 CE by a strong earthquake,
which destroyed all the cities of Phoenicia.
The city was then occupied during the
Byzantine and Islamic periods36, with public
buildings extending in the northern area of the
promontory, largely damaged in the 19th cen-
tury. Today the site is dominated by the ruins
of the Crusader castle that was founded there
after the Crusader conquest in 1108 CE.
 LA REVUE PHÉNICIENNE
References
[1] DUNAND M., “Histoire d’une source”,
Mélanges de l’Université Saint-Joseph 37/3,
1961a, p. 39-53.
[2] DUNAND M., “Rapport préliminaire sur
les fouilles de Byblos en 1957, 1958, 1959”,
Bulletin du Musée de Beyrouth XVI, 1961b.
[3] DUNAND M., “Byblos et ses Temples après
la pénétration amorite”, in H.J. NISSEN,
J. RENGER (ed.), Mesopotamien und
seine Nachbarn. Politische und kulturelle
Wechselbeziehungen im alten Vorderasien
vom 4. bis 1. Jahrtausend v. Chr (XXIV
Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale
Berlin 3. bis 7. Juli 1978), Berlin, 1982, p.
195-201.
[4] NIGRO L., “Aside the Spring: Byblos
and Jericho From Village to Town in the
Second Half of the 4th Millennium BC”,
in L. NIGRO (ed.), Byblos and Jericho in
the Early Bronze I: Social Dynamics and
Cultural Interactions: Proceedings of the
International Workshop Held in Rome on
March 6th 2007 by Rome” La Sapienza”
University (Rome «La Sapienza» Studies on
the Archaeology of Palestine & Transjordan
4), Rome, 2007, p. 1-45.
[5] LAFONT B., “D’Ur à Byblos : les relations
entre la Mésopotamie et le Levant aux âges
du Bronze Ancien et Moyen : l’apport des
textes”, in: Interconnections in the Eastern
Mediterranean: Lebanon in the Bronze and
Iron Ages; Proceedings of the International
Symposium Beirut 2008 (Bulletin
d’archéologie et d’architecture libanaises/
Hors-Série 6), 2009, p. 91-106.
[6] RENAN E., Mission de Phénicie dirigée par
Ernest Renan: Texte (Impr. Impériale), Paris,
1864.
[7] MONTET P., “Byblos et L’Égypte : Quatre
campagnes de fouilles à Gebeil 1921, 1922,
1923, 1924”, Bibliothèque Archéologique et
Historique XI, Paris, 1928.
[8] DUNAND M., “Byblos”, Bulletin du Musée
de Beyrouth 2, 1938, p. 113-114.
[9] DUNAND M., “Fouilles de Byblos”, Bulletin
du Musée de Beyrouth 3, 1939, p. 77-79.
[10] DUNAND M., “Rapport préliminaire sur
les fouilles de Byblos en 1948”, Bulletin du
72
Musée de Beyrouth 9, 1949-1950a, p. 53-64.
[11] DUNAND M., “Rapport préliminaire sur
les fouilles de Byblos en 1949”, Bulletin du
Musée de Beyrouth 9, 1949-1950b, p. 65-74.
[12] DUNAND M., “Rapports préliminaires sur
les fouilles de Byblos. Année 1950, année
1951, année 1952”, Bulletin du Musée de
Beyrouth XII, 1955.
[13] DUNAND M., “Rapport préliminaire sur
les fouilles de Byblos en 1954”, Bulletin du
Musée de Beyrouth XIII, 1956.
[14] DUNAND M., “Rapport préliminaire sur
les fouilles de Byblos en 1955”, Bulletin du
Musée de Beyrouth XIII, 1956b.
[15] DUNAND M., “Rapport sur les fouilles de
Byblos en 1960; Rapport en 1961; Rapport
en 1962”, Bulletin du Musée de Beyrouth
XVII, 1964.
[16] DUNAND M., “Rapport préliminaire sur
les fouilles de Byblos en 1964”, Bulletin du
Musée de Beyrouth XIX, 1966.
[17] DUNAND M., Fouilles de Byblos. Tome I.
1926-1932, (Bibliothèque Archéologique et
Historique 24), Paris, 1937-1939 (= Byblos
I).
[18] DUNAND M., Fouilles de Byblos. Tome
II. 1933-1938, (Etudes et Documents
d’archéologie III), Paris, 1950-1958 (=
Byblos II).
[19] DUNAND M., Fouilles de Byblos. Tome
V: L’architecture, les tombes, le matériel
domestique, des origines néolithiques à
l’avènement urbain, (Etudes et Documents
d’archéologie VI), Paris, 1973a (= Byblos
V).
[20] VALLOIS H.V., “Note sur les ossements
humains de la nécropole énéolithique de
Byblos”, Bulletin du Musée de Beyrouth 1,
1937, p. 23-33.
[21] LE BOURHIS A.M., “Maxillaires et dents
de la nécropole énéolithique de Byblos”,
Bulletin du Musée de Beyrouth 5, 1941, p.
21-29.
[22] CHEHAB M., “Tombes des chefs d’époque
énéolithique trouvées à Byblos”, Bulletin du
musée de Beyrouth 9, 1950, p. 75-85.
[23] VAN LIERE W.J., DE CONTENSON H.,
“Holocene environment and early settlement
in the Levant”, Annales Archéologiques
Arabes Syriennes, 1964, p. 125-128.
 Les dernières découvertes archéologiques
[24] CAUVIN J., “Les industries lithiques du Tell
de Byblos (Liban)”, L’Anthropologie 66/5-6,
1962, p. 488-502.
[25] ARTIN G., “Échanges “commerciaux”
et “culturels” au Levant durant le IVe
millénaire à travers le “prisme” funéraire
du site de Byblos”, in: Interconnections in
the Eastern Mediterranean. Lebanon in
the Bronze and Iron Age. Proceedings of
the International Symposium, Beirut 2008
(Bulletin d’Archéologie et d’Architecture
Libanaises Hors-Série 6), Beyrouth, 2009, p.
57-68.
[26] ARTIN G., “The Necropolis and Dwellings
of Byblos during the Chalcolithic Period New
Interpretations”,  Near Eastern Archaeology
73:2, 2010, p. 2-12.
[27] GARFINKEL Y., “ “Néolithique” and
“Enéolithique” Byblos in Southern
Levantine Context”, in E.J. PELTENBURG,
A. WASSE (ed.), Neolithic revolution: new
perspectives on Southwest Asia in light
of recent discoveries on Cyprus (Levant
Supplementary Series 1), Oxford and
Oakville, CT: Oxbow Books, 2004, p. 177-
91.
[28] ASSAF M.B., “L’urbanisation de Byblos
dans son contexte régional au Bronze
Ancien”, BAAL Hors-Série 6, 2009, p. 77-90.
[29] DUNAND M., “L’avènement urbain de
Byblos”: La ville dans le Proche-Orient
ancien. Actes du Colloque de Cartigny 1979
(Les Cahiers du CEPOA 1), Leuven, 1983,
p. 93-96.
[30] SAGHIEH M., Byblos in the Third
Millennium BC: A Reconstruction of the
Stratigraphy and a Study of the Cultural
Connections, Warminster, 1983.
[31] MARGUERON J.C., “L’urbanisme de
Byblos: certitudes et problems”, in E.
ACQUARO (ed.), Biblo: una città e la sua
cultura. Atti del Colloquio Internazionale
(Roma 5-7 dicembre 1990) (Collezione di
Studi Fenici 34), Roma, 1994, p. 13-35.
[32] LAUFFRAY J., Fouilles de Byblos, Tome VI:
L’urbanisme et l’architecture. De l’époque
proto-urbaine à l’occupation amorite
(de l’Énéolithique à l’âge du Bronze II)
(Bibliothèque Archéologique et Historique
182), Beyrouth, 2008.
73
[33] NIGRO L., “Costruire le mura, fondare
la città: biblo nel III millennio aC: origini,
sviluppo e significato delle fortificazioni
di una capitale del Levante”, in L.M.
MICHETTI, G. BARTOLINI (ed.), Mura
di legno, mura di terra, mura di pietra:
fortificazioni nel Mediterraneo antico
(Scienze dell’Antichità 19, 2-3), Roma,
2013, p. 169-178.
[34] DUNAND M., Byblos: son histoire, ses
ruines, ses légendes, Beyrouth, 1973b.
[35] SALA M., “Early and Middle Bronze Age
Temples at Byblos: specificity and Levantine
interconnections”, Bulletin d’Archéologie
et d’Architecture Libanaises Hors-Série 10,
2015, p. 31-58.
[36] JIDEJIAN N., Byblos through the Ages,
Beyrouth, 1968.
[37] SALA M., “Early shrines at Byblos and Tell
es-Sultan/ancient Jericho in the Early Bronze
I (3300–3000 BC)”, in L. NIGRO (ed.),
Byblos and Jericho in the Early Bronze I:
Social dynamics and Cultural Interactions.
Proceedings of the International Workshop
held in Rome on March 6th 2007 by Rome
“La Sapienza” University (Rome «La
Sapienza» Studies on the Archaeology of
Palestine & Transjordan 4), Rome, 2007, p.
47-68.
[38] SALA M., “Sanctuaries, temples and cult
places in Early Bronze I southern Levant”,
Vicino & Medio Oriente 15, 2011, p. 1-32.
[39] DUNAND M., “Chronologie des plus
anciennes installations de Byblos”, Revue
Biblique 57.4 (1946-), 1950, p. 583-603.
[40] SALA M., “Il Temple en L a Biblo”, Vicino
Oriente 14, 2008, p. 59-84.
[41] USSISHKIN D., “The sacred area of
Early Bronze Megiddo: history and
interpretation”,  Bulletin of the American
Schools of Oriental Research 373.1, 2015, p.
69-104.
[42] WARD W., “The inscribed offering-table of
Neferseshem-Ra from Byblos”, Bulletin du
Musée de Beyrouth 17, 1964, p. 37-46.
[43] ESPINEL A.D., “The Role of the Temple of
Ba’alat Gebal as Intermediary between Egypt
and Byblos during the Old Kingdom”, Studien
zur altägyptischen Kultur 30, 2002, p. 103-
119.
 LA REVUE PHÉNICIENNE
[44] DUNAND M., “Byblos au temps du Bronze
ancien et de la conquête Amorite”, Revue
Biblique 59.1 (1946-), 1952, p. 82-90.
[45] TUFNELL O., WARD W.A., “Relations
between Byblos, Egypt and Mesopotamia at
the end of the third millennium BC. A study
of the Montet jar”, Syria 43. Fasc. 3/4, 1966,
p. 165-241.
[46] FINKEL I.L., “Report on the Sidon cuneiform
tablet”, AHL 24, 2006, p. 114-20.
[47] NIGRO L., “Santuario e pellegrinaggio
nella Palestina dell’Età del Bronzo Medio
(2000–1600 aC): recenti scoperte sulle aree
di culto aperte e gli ‘alti luoghi’ dei Cananei:
AA.VV.”, Santuario, tenda dell’incontro con
Dio, Roma, 1996, p. 216-229.
[48] MINIACI G., “Deposit f (Nos. 15121–15567)
in the Obelisk Temple at Byblos. Artefact
Mobility in the Middle Bronze Age I–II
(1850–1650 BC) between Egypt and the
Levant”, Ägypten und Levante/Egypt and the
Levant 28, 2018, p. 379-408.
[49] NEGBI O., MOSKOWITZ S., “The
“foundation deposits” or” offering deposits”
of Byblos”, Bulletin of the American Schools
of Oriental Research 184.1, 1966, p. 21-26.
[50] BEN-TOR D., “The Absolute Date of the
Montet Jar Scarabs”, in L.H. LESKO (ed.),
Ancient Egyptian and Mediterranean Studies
in Memory of William A. Ward, Providence,
Rhode Island, 1998, p. 1-17.
[51] SALA M., “The Middle Bronze Age stone
glacis at Byblos”, in L.M. MICHETTI, G.
BARTOLINI (ed.), Mura di legno, mura
di terra, mura di pietra: fortificazioni nel
Mediterraneo antico (Scienze dell’Antichità
19, 2-3), Roma, 2013, p. 179-186.
[52] ALBRIGHT W.F., “Further light on the
history of Middle-Bronze Byblos”, Bulletin
of the American Schools of Oriental Research
179.1, 1965, p. 38-43.
[53] FINKBEINER U., “Untersuchungen
zur Stratigraphie des Obeliskentempels
in Byblos. Versuch einer methodischen
Auswertung”,  Baghdader Mitteilungen
Berlin 12, 1981, p. 13-69.
[54] BIETAK M. et al, “The Obelisk Temple
in Byblos and its predecessors”, in A.
PIEŃKOWSKA, D. SZELĄG, I. ZYCH
74
(ed.),  Stories Told Around the Fountain.
Papers Offered to Piotr Bieliński on the
Occasion of His 70th Birthday, Warsaw,
2019, p. 165-186.
[55] YASUR-LANDAU A., “From Byblos to
Vapheio: fenestrated axes between the
Aegean and the Levant”, Bulletin of the
American Schools of Oriental Research
373.1, 2015, p. 139-150.
[56] PINNOCK F., “Some Gublite Artifact
Possibly Made at Ebla”, Syria. Archéologie,
art et histoire 89, 2012, p. 85-100.
[57] KOPETZKY K., “Egyptian Burial costumes
in the Royal tombs I–III of Byblos”, Bulletin
d’Archéologie et d’Architecture Libanaises
Hors-Série 10, 2015, p. 393-412.
[58] KOPETZKY K., “Some Remarks on the
Relation between Egypt and the Levant
during the late Middle Kingdom and Second
Intermediate Period”, in G. MINIACI, W.
GRAJETZKI (ed.), The World of Middle
Kingdom Egypt (2000‒1550BC) II (MKS 2),
London, 2016, p. 143-159.
[59] NIGRO L., “The Eighteen Century BC
Princes of Byblos and Ebla and the
Chronology of the Middle Bronze Age”,
BAAL Hors-Série 6, 2008, p. 159-175.
[60] SCHIPPER B.U., Die Erzählung
des Wenamun: Ein Literaturwerk im
Spannungsfeld von Politik, Geschichte
und Religion (Academic Press Fribourg/
Vandenboeck & Ruprecht Göttingen),
Freiburg/Göttingen, 2005.
[61] FINKELSTEIN I., SASS B., “The West
Semitic alphabetic inscriptions, Late Bronze
II to Iron IIA: Archeological context,
distribution and chronology”, Hebrew Bible
and Ancient Israel 2.2, 2013, p. 149-220.
[62] SASS B., “The emergence of monumental
West Semitic alphabetic writing, with an
emphasis on Byblos”, Semitica 59, 2017, p.
109-141.
[63] ELAYI J., “Byblos, cité sacrée (8e-4e s. av.
J.-C.)”, Transeuphratène/Supplément 15,
Paris, 2009.
[64] DUNAND M., “L’architecture à Byblos au
temps des achéménides”, Bulletin du musée
de Beyrouth XXII, 1969.
F O N D A T I O N C H A R L E S C O R M

100
SPÉCIAL

ANS
2020

P H O E N I C I A N
H E R I T A G E
I N S T I T U T E
F O N D A T I O N C H A R L E S C O R M

DECEMBRE

2020

Beyrouth, Liban
© Éditions de La Revue Phénicienne
Place du Musée B.P. 11-221
Beyrouth - Liban 2020
www.revuephenicienne.com

Suivi éditorial : Grace Salameh

Design : Sarah-Joe Wakim
Impression : Raidy Printing Group
Decembre 2020

Tous droits de reproduction, de traductions

et d’adaptations réservés pour tous pays.
 Editor
Pierre Zalloua

Editorial Board
Magda Bou Dagher Kharrat, Wissam Khalil, Maroun Khreich,
Pierre Zalloua, Nassim Nicolas Taleb, Roland Tomb

Contributing Authors
David Corm Anis Chaaya Pierre Zalloua
Hiram Corm Hans H. Curves Jimmy Daccache
Sarkis Khoury Federica Spagnoli Corinne Bonnet
Nicolas Grimal Issam Khalifé Maria Bianco
Roland Tomb Wissam Khalil Ida Oggiano
Josette Elayi Hassan Ramez Badawi Hareth Boustany
Maroun Khreich Helene Sader Magda Bou Dagher Kharrat
Francisco J. Núñez Maha Masri Marie Rose Samia
Marc Abou-Abdallah Marlies Heinz Carole Saliba
Lorenzo Nigro Christina Ioannou
 From the editor
One hundred years ago, the 24-year-old
Charles Corm whose love for Lebanon mold-
ed every aspect of his character, decided to
provide a platform for all those who wanted
to express and share their views on the na-
scent state. He called this platform “La Revue
Phénicienne” and the year was 1919. The date
was of paramount importance, 1919 was the
year when “Le Grand Liban” was declared.
Corm saw with this declaration a new and
bright dawn for a free Lebanon, just liberat-
ed from 400 years of Ottoman domination. A
Lebanon that met the ideals and aspirations of
Corm and an entire class of his contemporar-
ies who shared his humanist vision.
 
The name “Revue Phénicienne” was also as
important. Corm wanted to revive Lebanon’s
most cherished heritage, that of the Phoeni-
cians. For Corm, the Phoenician culture was
one of openness, peace and prosperity, that
he himself epitomized.  In the 1919’s Revue
Phénicienne, Corm and others expressed ideas
about all aspects of Lebanese culture of the
time and many were enthusiastic patriots who
dreamt of a bright future for Lebanon that was
recovering from the crippling Great Famine.
Corm wanted to remind his fellow country-
men, as they were turning a new page, of their
rich history at the most crucial time. He want-
ed to show them that Lebanon has the fun-
damentals and the talent necessary to spring
back into life by bringing together many lumi-
naries of his time to write about the country’s
past glories and future aspirations. 
 
This 100-year anniversary volume of “La
Revue Phénicienne” is exclusively dedicated
to commemorating the Phoenician culture in
Lebanon as a recognition for Charles Corm’s
passion for Lebanon’s heritage. A passion that
is still certainly shared by many in Lebanon
and elsewhere. This book brings together, as
Corm would have dreamt it, many Phoenician
scholars from around the world. The work
presented in this centenary volume highlights,
using several perspectives and many lan-
guages, the rich, magnanimous, versatile and
beautiful contributions of the Phoenicians. It
is the first in a series of volumes focusing on
Lebanon. Successive volumes will explore the
Phoenician settlements across the Mediter-
ranean world, carrying the torch of faith and
hope that Charles Corm lit in 1919.
Pierre Zalloua
 Table des matières

Note liminaire��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ix
David et Hiram Corm
Préface��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� x
Sarkis Khoury
Introduction | Charles Corm, la Revue Phénicienne et le Grand-Liban : une approche subjective
de deux centenaires�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������xi
Roland Tomb

Thème I: La civilization phénicienne au Levant

[The Phoenician Civilization in the Levant]

Il y a 34 siècles, le Liban dans un papyrus égyptien������������������������������������������������������������������ 2

Nicolas Grimal
L’histoire d’Arwad au Ier millénaire avant notre ère������������������������������������������������������������������ 4
Josette Elayi
L’arbre qui cache la forêt : la Phénicie du Sud au Ier millénaire avant notre ère...................... 11
Maroun Khreich
The Phoenicians: Stratigraphy of ceramics through archaeology............................................. 28
Francisco J. Núñez
Byblos, royaume de la culture et du commerce........................................................................ 43
Marc Abou-Abdallah
Phoenician culture and heritage................................................................................................ 50
Lorenzo Nigro

Thème II: Les dernières découvertes archéologiques

[The Latest Archeological Discoveries]

Tell Arqa, une cité de la Phénicie.............................................................................................. 54

Anis Chaaya
Byblos, an ancient capital of the Levant................................................................................... 61
Lorenzo Nigro
Marked stones at the western gate of Iron Age II-III Beirut, (BEY 032)................................. 75
Hans H. Curvers
Khaldeh, the necropolis of an uncovered Phoenician city of the Iron Age............................... 85
Federica Spagnoli
Sarepta (Sarafand), an industrial coastal city............................................................................ 89
Federica Spagnoli

v
 LA REVUE PHÉNICIENNE

Sarepta (Sarafand), une ville phénicienne vouée à l’oubli, entre histoire et traditions............ 94
Issam Khalifé
Les récentes découvertes archéologiques dans la région du Chouf au Mont-Liban............... 111
Wissam Khalil
Oumm el-Amed – Naqoura..................................................................................................... 121
Hassan Ramez Badawi
Les vestiges phéniciens de Tell el-Burak................................................................................ 133
Helene Sader
Sidon et les fouilles archéologiques........................................................................................ 146
Maha Masri
Kamid el-Loz – a short story!................................................................................................. 154
Marlies Heinz
Cyprus, another island, another world of the Mediterranean Sea........................................... 159
Christina Ioannou

Thème III: Epigraphie

[Epigraphy]

The first alphabet..................................................................................................................... 168

Pierre Zalloua
Le panthéon phénicien de Chypre........................................................................................... 174
Jimmy Daccache

Thème IV: Religion

[Religion]

Les Phéniciens et la religion................................................................................................... 188

Corinne Bonnet, Maria Bianco
Le sanctuaire phénicien de Kharayeb dans l’arrière-pays de Tyr............................................ 201
Ida Oggiano, Wissam Khalil
Le monothéisme des Cananéens-Phéniciens.......................................................................... 209
Hareth Boustany

Thème V: Sciences
[Sciences]

The Phoenicians and their DNA............................................................................................. 222

Pierre Zalloua
Phoenicians and their natural resources.................................................................................. 228
Magda Bou Dagher Kharrat, Marie Rose Samia, Carole Saliba

vi
 Note liminaire
Il y a juste cent ans, à la veille de la procla-
mation du Grand-Liban en septembre 1920,
paraissait à Beyrouth le premier numéro de la
première publication francophone du Proche-
Orient, intitulée La Revue Phénicienne.
Charles Corm, un jeune Libanais âgé de 26
ans à peine en était à la fois le propriétaire, le
directeur et le principal éditorialiste.
Cette revue avait rassemblé à l’époque
une pléthore de personnalités de lettres, de
juristes, de scientifiques, des hauts fonction-
naires et des hommes d’affaires venus de tous
les horizons et qui exprimaient leur exaltation
patriotique et leur espoir en un pays démocra-
tique indépendant et souverain.
vii
Aujourd’hui en 2020, nous célébrons la
Déclaration du Grand-Liban de 1920, tom-
bé entretemps dans une grande déchéance
politico-économique, et qui passe par une
crise existentielle qui menace de saper ces
fondements. Mais nous tenons également
par ce numéro spécial, consacré exclusive-
ment au monde phénicien, à commémorer le
centenaire de la Revue Phénicienne. Et cela,
dans la même tradition de ceux qui s’y ex-
primaient jadis, en publiant les contributions
d’une collection d’érudits contemporains
surtout focalisés sur le rayonnement phéni-
cien avec l’espoir d’une renaissance du Li-
ban pour le siècle à venir.
David et Hiram Corm
 Préface
Enraciné dans une terre orgueilleuse, le
pays des Cèdres a perpétuellement résisté au
vent des conquêtes, en assimilant les diverses
civilisations qui se sont succédé sur son terri-
toire engendrant un patrimoine culturel riche
et diversifié, tout en offrant l’alphabet phéni-
cien à l’humanité.
Depuis l’Antiquité, son chemin fut parse-
mé par des épisodes tragiques qui ont marqué
son paisible visage par des rides et des stig-
mates.
Le peuple libanais ne s’est jamais résigné
face aux obstacles ; au contraire, il a toujours
tiré profit des catastrophes, en sortant vain-
queur et anobli après chaque épreuve. Ain-
si, les désastres causés par les épidémies et
la grande famine, qui ont dévasté le Liban
durant la Première Guerre mondiale, ont té-
moigné de sa vitalité et de sa ténacité. De
plus, ils ont ouvert un nouveau chapitre dans
l’Histoire tourmentée de ce pays, rédigé par
les prestigieuses plumes des grands intellec-
tuels tel Charles Corm, fondateur de la Re-
vue Phénicienne en 1919. Ces derniers ont
joué un rôle primordial dans la naissance du
Grand-Liban le 1er septembre 1920, et par
la suite dans le développement du système
administratif, financier, judiciaire et sécuri-
taire.
En revanche, la préservation du patri-
moine culturel de ce pays fut confiée au ser-
vice des antiquités qui vit le jour en 1921,
et qui constituera, après l’Indépendance, le
noyau de la Direction Générale des Antiquités
(DGA) relevant actuellement du ministère de
la Culture.
viii
Depuis un siècle, la DGA maintient un en-
gagement ferme dans la sauvegarde et la ges-
tion de notre héritage culturel afin de garantir
sa transmission aux générations futures.
Cependant, et en dépit de toutes les mesures
prises pour la protection de notre patrimoine,
la monstrueuse explosion, qui a ravagé le port
de Beyrouth le 4 août 2020, a endommagé le
tissu urbain historique, social et culturel dans
les quartiers sinistrés. Ainsi, le Liban célèbre
son premier centenaire en reflétant l’image
d’une capitale défigurée et accablée par des
enjeux économiques et politiques, favorisant
la récession et l’émigration.
Dans les périodes les plus cruciales de
son histoire, le défi pour le Liban fut toujours
d’être un lieu de rencontre entre l’Orient et
l’Occident, un havre de communication et de
tolérance, de spiritualité et de modernité.
Face à cet avenir incertain, le peuple liba-
nais est invité, encore une fois, à prouver sa
résilience, sa capacité à surmonter les crises,
à combattre le chaos, bâtir, recréer, préserver,
et reconstruire le pays des cèdres, afin de se
hisser à la hauteur de nos ancêtres qui nous
ont légué un pays tissé par les malheurs et les
sacrifices.
Un grand hommage est dédié à l’honorable
Revue Phénicienne qui, cent ans après sa fon-
dation, continue à relater l’histoire sublime
d’un pays dont le destin est de survivre à ses
peines à l’image d’Adonis, et de renaître de
ses cendres tel le légendaire Phoenix.
Sarkis Khoury
Directeur Général des Antiquités
 Thème II
§

Les dernières découvertes

achéologiques
[The Latest Archeological Discoveries]