ANIMALS IN SYRO-PALESTINIAN ART

Annie Caubet

Animals in the art of Syria-Palestine are only one of the main categories of representations in Near Eastern art as a whole. The same constants can be observed: The image of the animal is on a par, at least, with that of the human being; animal images occupy a pre-eminent place in the evocation of the divine, itself in the forefront of artistic representations; and as a result, animals in art have an essentially symbolic role. The elites of society were the main sponsors of artistic creation and imagery was at the service of their ideology. However, as in the entire Near East, relations between the real world and the world of images vary according to time and place.

ANIMALS AND SYMBOLS

The figurative representations of animals in Syro-Palestinian art did not make clear distinctions between real and invented creatures. Animals were very much present in the imagination as well as in everyday life. The boundary we draw between the two was unknown or blurred in the minds of the people of antiquity whose everyday life indissolubly combined subsistence activities, social rites and appearances of the divine. The bestiary of works of art drew either on normal life and husbandry or on disquieting creatures from the wild, often seen as manifestations of the divine.

When attempting to “read” images of animals, we have to be aware that they are the product of the minds of the artists who endeavored to convey their visions. This vision has been shaped in their minds by many different factors, including morality, religion, and psychology, as well as by traditional techniques and training.

ANIMALS AND SOCIETY

Figurative works of art are relatively scarce, reserved for the elites of society. Even so-called “popular” artifacts, such as terracotta figurines, are rarely encountered in village contexts and come from specialized workshops attached to sanctuaries and large urban centers. Works of art therefore illuminate only a limited part of the society and culture of Syro-Palestine. As in the rest of the Near East, information from images must be verified by comparing them with bone remains, reflecting the actual presence of animals in the food chain, in the domestic or wild environment, or in religious life through the remains of sacrifices and ritual meals.

TIME AND SPACE

The bestiary varied according to time and place. The human relationship with animals was not the same on the coast as in the Syrian hinterland, in the north or the south, or in the Neolithic, Bronze Age or first millennium b. c. Great changes can be seen especially at the end of the second millennium b. c. in the south, when the Philistines introduced closer contacts with the Aegean world and Cyprus. This study will select its examples from periods that saw the development of an international palatial civilization whose elites shared the same ideologies. From the Middle Bronze Age to the Assyrian and Persian periods, in spite of many historical upheavals, a certain continuity in the configuration of a society made up of many small kingdoms favored a cultural and iconographic continuity that is particularly noticeable in the imagery of animals.

MEDIUM OF REPRESENTATION

The types of objects or monuments that served as the medium for figurative representations of animals instantly show the link that attached the latter to the higher levels of the social hierarchy or the divine world.

Monumental Architecture

Images can form part of the decoration of monumental and official architecture, of which the few extant remains are sufficient to show the symbolic nature of their presence. The lions in high relief at Razor, guardians of the entrance gate into the temple (Stern et al. 1993, 2: 598 s. v. Razor), or the lions’ heads on the city wall at Byblos (Jidejian 2000: 173) of the Persian period signal to the visitors on arrival that they are entering a territory governed by the power of the king. This concept was adopted by the Neo-Assyrian kings who gave it an even more monumental expression. The reliefs at Beth Shean showing two scenes in which lions and dogs confront each other (Stern et al. 1993, 1:216 s. v. Beth Shean) are part of an element of a city gate and probably had the same symbolism. The lion is also present in small scale architecture such as sarcophagi and chests that represent actual buildings in reduced size. They indicate that the association of the lion with architecture must have been more common than the few remaining examples would have us believe. Thus the sarcophagus of Ahiram, king of Byblos, is guarded by four crouching lions sculpted in low relief on the side of the coffin with their heads completely free-standing in the round (Jidejian 2000: 4042). A similar composition can be seen on some caskets made like miniature monuments, and even on cosmetic boxes, such as those from Megiddo (Barnett 1982: pi. 17 a-b) in the Late Bronze Age and from Nimrud in the Iron Age (Catalog 1985; no. 181), produced in Syro-Palestinian workshops. Figurative wall paintings are even rarer outside Egypt (Bietak 1999) and the Aegean. The few examples from Alalakh or Tell Kabri, such as they appear following a recent re-examination, came from a palatial context, and their imagery, perhaps of Aegean inspiration, introduced the idea of “noble” animals (Niemeier 1991: 188-201).

Statues and Stelae

Statues and stelae, both connected to the cult and royal power, are also scarce. Alongside stelae of Egyptian manufacture, whose imagery is directly derived from Egypt, as for example at Beth Shean, local stelae often show a lion associated with a deity (fig. 6.1).

Fig. 6.1, Stone stela from the vicinity of Amrit (Syria) showing a storm god mastering a small lion and perched above a lion striding over mountains. AO 22247. Ca. 750-650 b. c. Photo courtesy Musee du Louvre.

Figurines

Figurines offer much more abundant evidence. Clay and bone figurines appeared early in the Neolithic period and animal representations are frequent among them. The clay bull figurines from the PPNB site at 'Ain Ghazal were pierced by flint blades, an indication of the magic rituals of the hunters. Clay and terracotta figurines were to become one of the major expressions of “popular beliefs,” throughout antiquity, while metal figurines are among the specialties of the Levantine artists working for the elite. It is interesting to compare the repertoire of metal figurines, necessarily cosdy to produce, with that of inexpensively produced terracottas. Whether the figurines came from domestic cults, offerings in sanctuaries or funerary assemblages, they established a social hierarchy. The repertoire of the metal figurines is relatively limited. In addition to deities, notably the smiting god, there are images of young bulls, the animal attribute of the storm god and the incarnation of the “Golden Calf’ of the Bible. The metal is generally bronze, often covered with gold or silver leaf as shown on examples from Ashkelon (fig. 6.2) or Ugarit (Schaeffer 1961/62: fig. 6), which made the statuette more opulent. Snakes (Stern et al. 1993, 3: 1032 s. v. tel Mevorakh) and falcons (Schaeffer 1929: pi. LII), the Egyptian symbols of royalty, are also found, although more rarely. The repertoire of terracotta figurines is even less varied. The great majority show either the “naked goddess,” or the bull, and sometimes a ram. The storm god, so popular in metal statuettes, almost never appears in its anthropomorphic guise in coroplastic art, probably because it already appears in its theriomorphic form, the bull. Some figurines show a male figure perched on a bull or ram (Badre 1980: pi. XVI) and on chariots led by cattle. Throughout the Bronze Age, these hand-modeled figurines were very common in the Syrian hinterland, in the Khabur region, and along the Orontes and the Euphrates. Around the end of the second millennium b. g. figurines of horses began to appear in coastal sites. Throughout the first millennium B. G. and until the hellenization of the Orient, the horse, sometimes replaced in inland regions by the camel, became the most frequent expression of popular beliefs through the medium of terracotta figurines (Catalog 1987: nos. 137-39).

Fig. 6.2. Bronze figurine of a young bull with remnants of silver leaf. From Ashkelon. Middle Bronze Age. Photo courtesy Ashkelon Excavations.

Cultic Implements

Animals are much in evidence in cultic implements and paraphernalia. Pottery altars, offering-stands, composite vases, rhyta and wall-brackets often bear painted, applied or incised ornaments. In some instances, animals are grouped in pairs of lions, bovines, cervids and horses. Birds and snakes are associated with the “naked goddess” and the stylized tree (Stern et al. 1993, 1:217 s. v. Beth Shean, 1993, 3: 1432 s. v. Taanach; see also fig. 15.1 here).

Glyptic

Seals, cylinder seals, and their impressions are the main source of ancient Near Eastern imagery and on them animals occupy an important position (Collon 1975: passim). The use of these commercial and administrative tools spread from Mesopotamia to the Levant, which developed its own repertoire during the second and first millennia b. c. Seals tended to be limited to the higher levels of society and thus reflect their ideologies.

Fig. 6.3. Duck-shaped cosmetic box from a tomb at Minet el-Beida, ancient harbor of Ugarit. Hippopotamus ivory. AO 14779. Ca. 1200 B. c. Drawing by J.-P. Lange. Courtesy Musee du Louvre.

Personal Items

Animals are also present on many objects of personal use, such as furniture (Jidejian 2000: 168 top left), caskets, containers, jewelry and cosmetic items. These were mostly luxury goods belonging to the elites if not to the royal families themselves. These artifacts, made of valuable or exotic raw materials such as faience, ivory, wood or precious metals, are found in wealthy contexts in palaces, rich houses and graves or in sanctuaries. Some, especially jewelry and toiletries, such as a duck-shaped ivory cosmetic box from Minet el-Beida, have distinctly female associations (fig. 6.3).

THE ANIMAL AS MOTIF

Some species are very common in the imagery while others are much rarer, although the ratio has little to do with the actual fauna. There was certainly an imaginary bestiary that was distinct from the reality of nature. It is not possible to follow here the conventional distinction between wild and domesticated species. Since caprids and ovines often appear in scenes that give no clue as to whether they belong to wild or domesticated species, while composite, invented creatures are mixed with real ones, it is necessary therefore to use other categories.

Animals Close to Humans

In contrast to Egypt, which gave the cat special status in art and religion, the Levantine artists all but ignored the cat (and the mouse) in their imagery, even though these two animals are present in the bone remains. The rare exceptions are probably due to Egyptian influence (Jidejian 2000: 56 bottom; Stern et al. 1993, 1: 33 s. v. Achziv). This is noteworthy since the near absence of the cat is surprising in a society based on agriculture and therefore certainly anxious to preserve its harvests from rodents.

Another animal that is very close to humans and well-attested in bone remains is the dog, which, surprisingly, is rarely represented. The dog was the hunter’s companion and sometimes the lion’s adversary (Stern et al. 1993, 1:216 s. v. Beth Shean), and if the hunter was of royal blood, as on a gold cup from Ugarit (fig. 6.4), some of its master’s prestige reflected on it.

Around the beginning of the second millennium b. c. the “real” horse replaced the small equids of the previous periods. It is depicted harnessed to the royal chariot on many cylinder seals (fig. 6.5) and on the furniture from palaces (Stern et al. 1993, 3: 1012 s. v. Megiddo), all these representations being evidence of its prestigious nature. In contrast to the images of slow moving Mesopotamian donkeys and onagers in the third millennium b. c., these scenes put the emphasis on equine speed, always represented at a gallop (Amiet 1992: nos. 301-310). This “flying gallop” demonstrated the mastery and courage of the driver (fig. 6.4). At the same time as the horse evolved from draft animal to a mount near the end of the second millennium b. c,, the imagery of the horse also gradually changed. When mounted, it formed a single body with his rider, earning it the status of man’s close companion. A hybrid creature, half man half horse, which epitomises the unity of the rider and mount, appeared thoughout the Mediterranean world in Greece, Cyprus and the Levant. The horse also made its appearance in the imaginary bestiary. Like the Greek Pegasus, it is often fitted with a pair of wings (Porada 1948: pi. LXXXIX 620; Matthews 1990: no. 399). The horse is seen alongside a bird and a fish (Yon 1997: no 35) in a complex scene

Fig. 6.4. Gold cup discovered in 1933 on the Acropolis at Ugarit. The individual in the chariot is probably royal, and demonstrates his prowess in the hunt, with wild goats and a family of bovines as his prey. Ca. 1200 B. c. AO 17208. D. 18 cm. Photo courtesy Musee du Louvre.

Fig. 6.5. Cylinder seal from Ugarit, excavated in 1932 at Minet el-Beida. A “royal hunter” drives his chariot with the reins around his waist while shooting at a lion and trampling a vanquished enemy. A dominating falcon and a vulture survey the scene. AO 15772. Ca. 1200 b. c. Courtesy Musee du Louvre.

Following a worshiper in front of an enthroned deity. The horse also appears on cultic objects used in rituals, such as rhyta (Murray, Smith, and Walters 1900: pi III). Finally, either alone or with rider, it became the subject of innumerable terracotta figurines deposited in the sanctuaries of warrior gods, thereby gradually taking the place of the very ancient image of the bull, the animal attribute of the storm god. The horse is a synonym of speed and ardour and is always shown in motion. The galloping posture, more difficult to show in the round than in a relief or a painting, remains perceptible in the figurine by the diverging oblique stance of the legs. The donkey, a humble beast of burden in the entire Levant, but essential to caravan transport before the domestication of the dromedary camel, acquired the status of a noble mount during the Bronze Age. As early as the Middle Bronze Age, it was ridden by royal hunters in bronze figurines (Ziffer 1990: 81, fig. 88), and appears on the sheath of a dagger from Byblos (Jidejian 2000: 48, 49 bottom)

Cattle, Sheep and Goats

In the imaginary bestiary of the Levant, the bull held a preeminent position. It was even more important than the cow, which is shown tenderly licking the calf she is feeding in an unambiguous analogy to animal, human and divine motherhood (fig. 6.6). As indicated by the texts and by statues of deities, the bull was clearly associated with the storm god. It was both his mount and his substitute, and its bellowing was a metaphor for the roll of thunder. Thus the nature of the bull in art—animal or divine, wild or domesticated—is always ambiguous. It is often represented in a wild context, hunted (Mallowan 1966, 2: no. 385), attacked by lions (Mallowan 1966, 2: nos. 416-417) or by mythical creatures such as the griffin (Jidejian 2000: 42 top). The Ugarit gold cup (fig. 6.4) is a good example of the different possible readings of the representation: A hunter in a chariot, probably a royal hunter, is shooting arrows at a “flying” goat and a herd of bovids comprising an old and massive male, a younger, faster and more slender bull, and a cow with her calf. Is this the depiction of a real hunt? That would presuppose that aurochs, the wild bulls, still existed in northern Levant at the end of the second millennium b. g., unless the scene takes place in one of the “paradises,” i. e., parks artificially populated by exotic animals for the entertainment of kings, which were well-known at Mari at the

Fig. 6.6. Ivory carving of cow suckling her calf used on decorated furniture. Arslantash. 9th Century. H. 5.8 cm. Aleppo Museum.

Beginning of the second millennium b. c. and in Assyria later. But it is possible that the zoomorphic figures on the gold cup also represent divinities from the Ugaritic mythological epics, including the elderly god El, the young Baal and possibly the “heifer” Anat.

As in the rest of the ancient Near East, cap rids (sheep and goats) possessed a symbolic value. They symbolized fertility and wealth, signs that the gods were favorable. They could sometimes even represent the gods if the latter wished to appear before humans in their theriomorphic form.

Images of goats are common but not nearly as frequent as might be expected given the importance of this species in the economy of the Levant since the Neolithic. The picture is complicated by the fact that it is difficult to differentiate between the wild and domesticated varieties of goats in the art thus, perhaps artificially, minimizing the role of the domestic goat in the iconography. Artists stress the independent and adventurous nature of the goat. It is depicted rearing up, often vis-a-vis confronting each other or nibbling the buds of a stylized tree (Collon 1975: no. 224; Mallowan 1966, 2: fig. 464).

Parades of animals, a favorite decorative composition of Mesopotamian artists, are also common in the imagery of the Levant.

Rows of pacific animals, whether attacked or not by wild beasts, group together (or in the same attitude) different species of horned animals such as goats, sheep, gazelles and deer. The combination of wild and domestic(?) species in such groupings further suggests that the wild/domestic distinction is no more relevant for sheep and goats than it is for cattle (see, e. g.. Yon 1997: no. 56; Jidejian 2000: 49; Mallowan 1966, 2: 464, 471). Is the mythological theme of the Master or Mistress of Animals, which is widespread in antiquity and well-attested in the Levant, connected to an environment of wild nature or to domestication and husbandry? Such a “goddess,” mastering goats on the lid of a cosmetic box from Ugarit, is standing on a stylized scaled design, which is usually considered to represent mountains, and indicates that the scene is set in the wilderness (Barnett 1982: pi. 24b; Yon 1997: back cover). She coaxes them with ears of wheat, a symbol of agriculture and of the mastery of humans over their natural environment. The goddess with the goats also appears on jewels and feminine objects such as gold pendants where she is naked, riding a lion and brandishing snakes and small caprids (Yon 1997: no. 58).

The ram, which seems to be the equivalent of the bull in its role as a reproducer, is popular among terracotta figurines and vessels, and a wooden flat dish from a tomb at Jericho (Ziffer 1998: 30, fig. 28) is decorated with four protruding rams heads. A cup in the shape of a ram’s head appears in the drinking set of a Middle Bronze age tomb of a warrior (tomb 9), also from Jericho (Ziffer 1998: 120, fig. 135). The ram may also figure among the personal belongings of women: Rams’ head-shaped rhyta in faience appear alongside rhyta in the shape of females’ or horses’ heads during the Late Bronze Age.

Without going into the question of the ban on the eating of pork, it is noticeable that the wild boar is attested, albeit rarely, in works of art (see, e. g., Woolley 1955: pi. XLV). Considered unclean in a number of Near Eastern countries, at least in historical periods, the pig is a noble animal in Europe, the Balkans, and the Mycenaean world. It is probably from there that they came into Syria. Like the elephant and the hippopotamus, the boar was a source of ivory destined for prestigious works of art. Part of that prestige reflects on the living animal.

The Lion

Among images of wild animals and perhaps among images of all animals, the lion is the most common. This contrasts sharply with its very limited presence in the remains of the actual fauna. The image and the myth of the lion go well beyond that reality. The lion is almost the only animal represented in official monumental architecture, at the gates of cities and temples. It frequently occurs on luxury objects or cult furniture. Calm or combative, whether making a show of strength or not, only the male lion is represented, never the female or the cubs, although in nature it is normally the lionness that hunts. Artists in the Levant, like those in Mesopotamia, limited their depiction of the species to the image of the triumphant male, characterized by its thick mane. Depending on its position in the figurative scenes, the lion symbolized the equivalence between the king of animals and the earthly king, which was asserted at the city gate. Alternatively, it is the adversary of the royal power. The lion is thus engaged in combat against a human being, the so-called hero (Collon 1975: pi. XXXVIII) sometimes in the midst of pacific parading animals. These scenes can be read as cosmic battles between the hero, a mythical royal ancestor, and the lion, the embodiment of the forces of the wild that threaten cattle. The lion also attacks wild animals, such as deer and gazelles, which it always dominates. The frequent combat scenes between the lion and the bull again emphasize the ambiguity of the status of these animals, linked as they are to the concept of kingship and to the storm god.

Parts of the lion’s body, such as the head and paws, were placed in the anatomically appropriate position on everyday objects like caskets, beds and chairs, with the functional object itself serving as the animal’s body. The result is a sort of metaphorical lion, no longer an inanimate object but the image of a living creature. Egyptian influence is obvious in furniture (Jidejian 2000: 168; Yon 1997: no. 13), such as thrones or beds, but the Levantine tradition asserts itself in architectural reproductions such as sarcophagi or caskets. In both cases the royal connotations are strong, as much in the nature of the objects as in the ideology they express.

The Elephant, Hippopotamus and Crocodile

Texts, bone remains and ivory work all testify to the presence of these large animals in nature, in the Syrian hinterland in the case of the elephant, and in the swampy river mouths of the Palestinian coast for the hippopotamus and the crocodile. If we compare the figures given by the Pharaoh Tuthmosis III (1470-1439 B. c.), who claims to have hunted 120 elephants in the lake near Homs, with the letters from Mari (ca. 1800-1750 b. c.), which make an isolated reference to a lionness captured for the royal park, elephants and hippopotami were certainly more common than the lion, at least during the second millennium b. c. The ivory carvers of the second and first millennia B. c. knew how to make masterful use of the tusks of the elephant and the canines and incisors of the hippopotamus, perhaps without establishing the relationship between the inert material and the living animal that supplied it. Despite their impressive appearance, these animals were never favorites of Oriental artists. No indisputable figurative representation is attested from Syria, Palestine or the entire Near East until the Assyrian period, as on the black obelisk of Shalmaneser III (858-824 B. c.). There the artist who represented a baby elephant brought as tribute from Egypt seems to have worked more from textual descriptions than from an actual model. While images of the hippopotamus are very popular in Egypt, they appear in the Levant only on imported Egyptian artifacts, for example on faiences from Byblos (Jidejian 2000: 55).

Hippopotami and crocodiles shared a similar habitat in the swamps of the Palestinian coast. Crocodiles are absent from the local imagery, as are hippopotami. They may have inspired the biblical monsters of Leviathan and Behemoth.

“Inferior” Animals

Amongst crawling creatures linked to the underground and still waters, snakes, scorpions and tortoises are to be found in a great number of images, especially in glyptic art. They are generally associated with other divine or animal figures. On pottery cult stands and jewelery pendants, the snake is associated with the naked goddess, which may be compared to the Cretan goddess brandishing snakes. Through the goddess, the snake becomes connected with the bird, its aerial opposite, and with the lion, the attribute of the goddess of sexuality, as on gold pendants from Ugarit (Yon 1997: no. 58). Figurines of snakes in precious metal were placed in sanctuaries (Stern et al. 1993, 3; 1032 s. v. Tel Mevorakh).

The cobra, the Egyptian uraeus, was adopted as a royal emblem

In the Levant. It is depicted on jewelery in the princely graves at Byblos from the Middle Kingdom, and in Cyprus and Phoenicia. It is used during the Persian period to decorate door lintels in monumental architecture, or is represented on the Egyptian style loincloths of dignitaries.

Among flying creatures, the grasshopper appears on an ivory figurine from Kamid el Loz, undoubtedly of Egyptian inspiration (Hachman 1983: no. 4; Miron 1990: pis. 39, 63). Flies, although very frequent not only in the real world but also in the images of Sumerian Mesopotamia or at Mari, are seldom represented in Syria-Palestine, with a few exceptions, such as on Middle Bronze Age jewelery from Ajjul (Catalog 1986: 123, fig. 52).

Aquatic Fauna

Fish, frogs and turtles appear as fill-in elements in Syrian glyptic as well as on some painted vases at Megiddo and Ugarit. As in Mesopotamia, they seem linked to the powers of the underworld, underground waters, springs and rivers, in the same way as the snake. In contrast to Cretan and Mycenaean art, where maritime fauna such as the octopus and shells figure prominently, they are little represented in local Levantine art, although the sea-fishing industry is well-attested. The imagery seems to ignore the Mediterranean sea, turning its back on it, thereby following Ugaritic mythology in which the sea is a hostile, sterile element as opposed to the beneficial rain waters embodied by the god Baal.

Aerial Fauna

The aerial fauna are divided between birds of prey and pacific, harmless birds, notably the duck (Caubet and Poplin 1987: 280; Barnett 1982: pi. 23c; Miron 1990: 115-18) and the dove. The latter and its opposite, the snake, are pointers to the goddess of love. Eagles and falcons hark back to the warring gods whose celestial character is evoked by these winged creatures of “lightning” speed, which provides another “storm” metaphor. Falcons and various birds of prey are frequent in the Levant, but their images show a strong inspiration from Egypt’s royal ideology: Metal figurines of the falcon bearing a royal crown are found in religious context (Schaeffer 1929: pi. LII; Schaeffer 1939: 35, fig. 24). In some composite scenes, a bird in flight with the long wings of a bird of prey is soaring above the chariot of a royal hunter or warring sovereign (fig. 6.5; Markoe 1985: nos. E2, E6, E8, E9, E13; Gaubet et al. 1992: no. 82). The eagle, attribute of the celestial god of the Arabo-Syrian hinterland, which is attested on the monuments of Medain Saleh, Petra, the Hauran and Palmyra, was easily assimilated at the end of the first millennium B. c. to the bird of the Greek Zeus and Latin Jupiter.

The ostrich, which until recently populated the Syrian hinterland, is frequently mentioned in texts, at Mari, and in Assyrian letters. Because of its speed, it is a difficult animal to hunt making it a noble quarry worthy of a king. Its feathers and skin were much sought after, its enormous eggs were consumed, and the shells were used to make decorated containers (see below). However, the image of the ostrich is rare prior to the first millennium b. c. (Mallowan 1966, 1: fig. 61; Porada 1948: fig. 606E).

The innovation of adding large swans’ or eagles’ wings to human-or animal-shaped creatures that lacked them in nature seems to have its roots in the Syro-Palestinian region. Such a creature, a winged goddess, suckles two young boys on a decorated ivory bed from Ugarit in fig. 6.7b. The bird’s wings probably conveyed an impression of ethereal lightness and speed, which brought to mind the breath of the spirit, mostly divine. This same association of ideas may help explain how the winged disc became the symbol of the divine spirit in the scenes where it dominates.

Foreign Bestiaries

The impact of Egyptian imagery in the Levant can be seen mainly in the imaginary bestiary illustrated by the sphinx, although many “real” animals present in the Levant are depicted in Egyptian style, on imported objects or their local imitations: scarabs of faience or precious stones, and falcons on Egyptian jewelry such as the gold pectoral from Byblos (Jidejian 2000: 31). Monkeys and baboons are exotic animals and appear on alabaster vases and figurines Jidejian 2000: 155 upper right), and on the sheath of the Byblos dagger Jidejian 2000: 49).

The bestiary of Aegean origin, which is not as common, consists mostly of the octopus and nautilus. It is found almost exclusively on imported artifacts, mainly painted ceramics from Crete or continental Greece found in sites on the coast, for example the octopus rhyton