DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.4920#0008
INTRODUCTION CONTINUED.
date. Thothmes III. had only received tribute from the island, but Amasis II. conquered.
Nor is it possible to show a succession of sculpture of Egyptianized Phoenician art for
the space of a thousand years, while the sculpture which falls into this category shows
evident signs of the influence of Greek art. In pure Egyptian art the parts between the
limbs are reserved or left solid, but in Greek art, especially after the period of the Da>
dalic epoch, they are detached. Nor is there great difference in treatment between this
art and that of the old Hellenic, especially the statues of Herakles found in Cyprus.
It would be difficult to conceive that Greek art is older than six centuries and a half before
Christ, even if it can be elevated to so remote an age. Consequently the Phoenician art
of this older character must be considered the contemporaneous efforts of the Phoenician
population extending down to the Persian conquest, and probably later. That it is not
servilely copied from the Egyptian is evident by the treatment of the eyes and head,
while the rounded mass in which the hair is gathered at the back of the head shows that
some of the statues were imitated from Egyptian art when that mode of attire was domi-
nant. The feet are bare, and exhibit no criterion for the determination of the period. The
shentiy or tunic, is not Egyptian, but modifications of that dress. Cambyses subsequently
restored the autonomy of the island, about B.C. 527. Persian art, a descendant of Assyrian,
is clearly marked by the kittaris, or pointed cap.
The Phoenician dynasty, which succeeded the Persian, or was contemporaneous, has
chiefly been made out from the coins, and consists of Azbaal, supposed to have reigned
in the middle of the fifth century B.C.; at an uncertain interval succeeded by Baalmelek,
conjectured to have reigned from B.C. 450 to B.C. 420; Abdeshmun, or Abdamon, de-
throned by Evagoras about B.C. 410, but perhaps subsequently restored by the Persians
in B.C. 395; Baalram, whose son, known as Melekiathon, reigned over Kitium and
Idalium, of whom, besides the coins, a Phoenician inscription, found at Nicosia, at pres-
ent in the Louvre, is dated in the third year; and a bilingual Cypriote and Phoenician
inscription, found at Larnaka, is in the British Museum. He is supposed to have reigned
from B.C. 385 to 375. His successor, Pumiathon, son of Melekiathon, who reigned over
date. Thothmes III. had only received tribute from the island, but Amasis II. conquered.
Nor is it possible to show a succession of sculpture of Egyptianized Phoenician art for
the space of a thousand years, while the sculpture which falls into this category shows
evident signs of the influence of Greek art. In pure Egyptian art the parts between the
limbs are reserved or left solid, but in Greek art, especially after the period of the Da>
dalic epoch, they are detached. Nor is there great difference in treatment between this
art and that of the old Hellenic, especially the statues of Herakles found in Cyprus.
It would be difficult to conceive that Greek art is older than six centuries and a half before
Christ, even if it can be elevated to so remote an age. Consequently the Phoenician art
of this older character must be considered the contemporaneous efforts of the Phoenician
population extending down to the Persian conquest, and probably later. That it is not
servilely copied from the Egyptian is evident by the treatment of the eyes and head,
while the rounded mass in which the hair is gathered at the back of the head shows that
some of the statues were imitated from Egyptian art when that mode of attire was domi-
nant. The feet are bare, and exhibit no criterion for the determination of the period. The
shentiy or tunic, is not Egyptian, but modifications of that dress. Cambyses subsequently
restored the autonomy of the island, about B.C. 527. Persian art, a descendant of Assyrian,
is clearly marked by the kittaris, or pointed cap.
The Phoenician dynasty, which succeeded the Persian, or was contemporaneous, has
chiefly been made out from the coins, and consists of Azbaal, supposed to have reigned
in the middle of the fifth century B.C.; at an uncertain interval succeeded by Baalmelek,
conjectured to have reigned from B.C. 450 to B.C. 420; Abdeshmun, or Abdamon, de-
throned by Evagoras about B.C. 410, but perhaps subsequently restored by the Persians
in B.C. 395; Baalram, whose son, known as Melekiathon, reigned over Kitium and
Idalium, of whom, besides the coins, a Phoenician inscription, found at Nicosia, at pres-
ent in the Louvre, is dated in the third year; and a bilingual Cypriote and Phoenician
inscription, found at Larnaka, is in the British Museum. He is supposed to have reigned
from B.C. 385 to 375. His successor, Pumiathon, son of Melekiathon, who reigned over