Artikel

Tophet of Carthage

Tophet of Carthage


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.


Adakah Carthaginians benar-benar mempraktikkan Pengorbanan Anak Manusia?

Orang Carthagin, yang merupakan saingan utama Rom pada abad ketiga SM, ditulis secara meluas oleh sejarawan klasik dan ahli geografi. Masyarakat Carthaginian digambarkan sebagai campuran budaya Fenisia, dari mana kebanyakan orang keturunan, dan budaya Numidian / Afrika Utara dengan banyak pengaruh dari orang Yunani dan Rom. Livy, Diodorus, Strabo, dan lain-lain menulis petikan yang memperincikan pemerintahan, perdagangan, dan agama Carthagin, dengan bahagian mengenai agama, mungkin yang paling menarik.

Menurut sumber-sumber klasik, orang-orang Carthagina mengikuti kante Kanaan / Phoenician dan dengan tegas mengikuti upacara-upacara tersebut, yang kadang-kadang termasuk pengorbanan anak-anak mereka sendiri. Sebilangan petikan cukup grafik, tetapi persoalannya harus diajukan: Benarkah? Lagipun, Carthaginians adalah musuh Romawi yang kekal sehingga akan berlaku bahawa banyak sejarawan klasik akan melukis mereka dengan cahaya negatif.

Kenyataannya adalah bahawa ada tradisi lama pengorbanan anak oleh nenek moyang Carthaginians, orang Kanaan, dan orang Fenisia. Orang-orang pra-Carthaginian ini sering disebut "Semitik Barat" oleh para sarjana, melakukan pengorbanan manusia secara langsung kepada dewa-dewa mereka untuk mendapatkan bantuan perang, panen, dan ekspedisi pelayaran jarak jauh. Pemeriksaan terhadap sumber-sumber lama dari Levant, digabungkan dengan sumber-sumber klasik dan bukti-bukti arkeologi dari Carthage menegaskan bahawa Carthaginians bukan sahaja mempraktikkan pengorbanan anak, tetapi mereka melakukannya pada tahap yang lebih tinggi daripada nenek moyang mereka.

Orang Kanaan dan Fenisia serta Pengorbanan Anak

Orang Carthagina berasal dari orang Semitic Bronze Age yang mendiami Levant (kira-kira setara dengan negara-negara moden Israel, Lebanon, dan Syria). Seperti kebanyakan orang Timur Dekat kuno, orang Kanaan menganut agama politeistik dan celik, tetapi sayangnya, ada sedikit bukti dalam teks mereka yang berkaitan dengan pengorbanan anak. Namun, orang Israel, yang berkait rapat dengan orang Kanaan secara linguistik dan budaya, menyebut tindakan pengorbanan manusia berkali-kali dalam Perjanjian Lama. Walaupun perbuatan itu dilarang keras oleh Yahweh, orang Israel, yang dipengaruhi oleh jiran Kanaan mereka, sering melakukan ritual, biasanya dengan hasil yang buruk.

"Kerana orang-orang Yehuda telah melakukan kejahatan di mata saya, firman TUHAN: mereka telah membuat kekejian mereka di rumah yang dipanggil dengan nama-Ku, untuk mencemarkannya. Dan mereka telah membangun tempat-tempat tinggi Tophet, yang berada di lembah putra Hinnom untuk membakar anak-anak lelaki dan anak perempuan mereka dalam api yang tidak Aku perintahkan kepada mereka, dan juga tidak masuk ke dalam hatiku. " [1]

Ritual yang dilakukan oleh orang Kanaan dan Israel kemudian diikuti oleh orang Phoenicia. Oleh kerana orang Fenisia menjadi orang penting di kawasan pesisir Levant, begitu juga amalan pengorbanan anak. Ritual secara umum hanya dilakukan pada masa bencana, tetapi di dunia kuno yang dapat surut dan mengalir. [2]

Walaupun begitu, mengenal pasti hubungan pengorbanan anak antara Carthage dan Phoenicia tidaklah mudah. Para sarjana tahu bahawa orang Kanaan dan orang Israel mengikuti praktik tersebut dan bahawa orang Fenisia juga kemudian mengorbankan anak-anak kepada dewa-dewa mereka, tetapi bukti arkeologi cukup sedikit. Sebahagian dari masalah ini disebabkan oleh sifat arkeologi di Lubnan moden, yang menjadikannya hampir mustahil untuk menggali banyak kota kuno Fenisia yang semuanya terletak di pesisir. [3] Para sarjana moden lain telah menunjukkan bahawa tanah air Fenisia juga dekat tempat kelahiran agama-agama Abraham, jadi kemungkinan stelae dan artifak lain yang menggambarkan pengorbanan manusia dihancurkan oleh pengikut agama-agama yang bersemangat itu. [4]

Adalah penting untuk menunjukkan bahawa orang Fenisia, seperti orang Kanaan sebelum mereka, bukanlah sebuah kerajaan yang bersatu, tetapi yang terbaik adalah gabungan yang bebas dari negara-negara kota yang bebas. Agama Fenisia serupa dari kota ke kota, tetapi dewa-dewa tertentu lebih diutamakan di kota-kota yang berbeza. Sebagai contoh, Moloch, atau Melqart, dewa yang sering dikaitkan dengan pengorbanan anak di Levant, adalah dewa utama kota Tirus. [5] Sambungan Moloch ke Tirus dan pengorbanan anak penting ketika seseorang menganggap amalan di Carthage.

The Carthaginians dan Pengorbanan Kanak-kanak

Memahami pendahuluan pengorbanan kanak-kanak oleh orang Kanaan dan Phoenicia sangat penting dalam menentukan apakah tuntutan bahawa orang Carthagin yang mempraktikkan pengorbanan anak adalah benar kerana Carthage didirikan semasa pemerintahan Raja Ithobaal I dari Tirus pada abad kesembilan SM. [6] Walaupun Carthage didirikan sebagai jajahan Fenisia, ia berkembang secara bebas dari Tirus dan seperti yang disebutkan sebelumnya, dipengaruhi oleh jirannya yang lain. Walaupun demikian, orang Carthagina mengikuti agama Fenisia, menyembah semua dewa utama pantheon, tetapi tiga dewa yang paling penting di kota ini adalah Baal, Tanit, dan Reshep. [7]

Menurut sumber-sumber klasik, orang-orang Carthagin mengorbankan anak-anak mereka kepada Cronus, yang merupakan bahasa Yunani yang setara dengan Baal. Sejarawan Yunani abad pertama SM, Diodorus, menulis bahawa orang Carthagin mengorbankan ratusan anak mereka sendiri untuk Cronus / Baal setelah mengalami kekalahan ketenteraan besar kepada Agathocles dan orang Yunani Syracuse pada tahun 310 SM.

"Mereka juga menuduh bahawa Cronus telah menentang mereka kerana pada masa lalu mereka telah terbiasa berkorban kepada dewa ini yang paling mulia dari anak lelaki mereka, tetapi baru-baru ini, secara diam-diam membeli dan mengasuh anak-anak, mereka telah mengirimkannya kepada korban dan ketika siasatan dibuat, beberapa dari mereka yang telah dikorbankan didapati sebagai pengganti. Ketika mereka memikirkan hal-hal ini dan melihat musuh mereka berkemah di depan tembok mereka, mereka dipenuhi ketakutan takhayul, kerana mereka percaya bahawa mereka telah mengabaikan kehormatan para dewa yang telah ditetapkan oleh ayah mereka. "

Dalam semangat mereka untuk menebus kesalahan mereka, mereka memilih dua ratus anak yang paling mulia dan mengorbankan mereka secara terbuka dan yang lain yang disyaki mengorbankan diri secara sukarela, jumlahnya tidak kurang dari tiga ratus. Di kota mereka terdapat patung perunggu Cronus, yang memanjangkan tangan, telapak tangan ke atas dan landai ke tanah sehingga setiap anak ketika diletakkan di atasnya berguling-guling ke bawah dan jatuh ke dalam lubang yang ternganga penuh dengan api. [8]

Sejarah pengorbanan anak Kanaan dan Fenisia bersama dengan catatan Diodorus di atas tentu menunjuk ke arah orang Carthagin yang mengorbankan anak mereka sendiri untuk tuhan mereka, tetapi bukti arkeologi adalah bukti terakhir.

Bukti Arkeologi Pengorbanan Kanak-kanak di Carthage

Orang Israel kuno menyebut tempat pengorbanan anak sebagai "Tophet," yang merupakan istilah sarjana moden yang sekarang digunakan untuk tempat-tempat pengorbanan anak Semit kuno yang diketahui. Karya arkeologi di Carthage telah menemui Tophet terbesar yang diketahui wujud. Kawasan yang luas sekali berisi lebih dari 20,000 guci tulang bayi dan haiwan, yang semuanya telah dikremasi. [9]

Beberapa sarjana ragu-ragu bahawa semua guci mewakili korban pengorbanan, tetapi konteksnya nampak jelas bagi kebanyakan dan lain-lain, Tofet serupa telah ditemui di kota-kota Fenisia lain pada masa yang sama di Hadrumentum, Sicily, dan Sardinia. [10] Oleh itu, bukti arkeologi di Carthage mengesahkan rujukan klasik pengorbanan anak dan pendahuluan sejarah sebelumnya yang ditubuhkan oleh nenek moyang Semitik Carthaginians.

Kesimpulannya

Dunia kuno penuh dengan banyak percanggahan yang kelihatan dengan kepekaan moden. Sebilangan orang yang paling beradab di dunia kuno tidak mempunyai masalah untuk melakukan kempen ketenteraan genosida, melakukan perbudakan secara berkala, dan mungkin yang paling sukar bagi orang dewasa ini untuk memahami, bahkan melakukan ritual pengorbanan anak. Sejarawan Yunani dan Rom kuno mendakwa bahawa Carthaginians melakukan ritual ini secara teratur dan dengan semua kisah mereka benar. Apabila seseorang mengkaji amalan keagamaan nenek moyang Carthaginians di Levant bersama dengan bukti arkeologi Carthage Tophet, maka jelaslah bahawa kisah Diodorus mengenai pengorbanan anak yang meluas di Carthage adalah kenyataan.


Pengorbanan Anak Purba: Warisan Pengguguran Moden

Saya baru-baru ini melakukan beberapa kajian mengenai pengorbanan anak dalam Alkitab demi sebuah novel yang saya tulis mengenai Ratu Jezebel dan Israel kuno pada abad kesembilan SM. Sebilangan besar pembaca Alkitab tidak merasa kontroversi bahawa pengorbanan manusia dilakukan di dunia kuno dan bahawa ia dilarang oleh Tuhan orang Ibrani. Tetapi seperti biasa, para sarjana dan skeptis moden cuba mempertikaikan fakta dengan teori penyusunan teori sastera mereka. Sekiranya Alkitab itu salah dan dunia kuno tidak begitu buruk, maka kita dapat terus maju dan mengorbankan anak-anak kita sendiri di kemudahan mezbah kita dan membuang rasa kesedihan yang menyakitkan yang timbul dari mempelajari pelajaran sejarah.

Pengorbanan Anak dalam Alkitab

Pengorbanan anak adalah salah satu tingkah laku orang Kanaan yang keji yang berulang kali dikutuk oleh Yahweh (Ul 12:31, Im 18:21 20: 2-5.) Kadang-kadang disebut secara langsung sebagai "membakar putra dan putri mereka di api ”(Ulangan 12:31 juga, 2 Raja-raja 17:17 Jer.7: 31 19: 5 Yeh. 16: 20-21 20:31.) atau“ menyebarkannya melalui api ”(Ul. 18:10 2 Raja 16: 3 17:17 21: 6 23:10 2 Tawarikh 33: 6 Yer. 32:35 Ezek. 16:21 20:26, 32 23:37), dan kadang-kadang secara tidak langsung sebagai "menumpahkan darah yang tidak bersalah" (2 Kings 21:16 juga, 2 Kings 24: 4 Yes 59: 7 Jer.22: 3 26:15 Mazmur 106: 38). Mangsa yang tidak bersalah itu digambarkan sebagai makanan yang dimakan oleh para dewa (Yeh. 23: 37-39).

Sayangnya, orang Israel bersalah melanggar perintah Tuhan ini segera setelah memasuki Tanah Perjanjian.

[Orang Israel] menumpahkan darah yang tidak bersalah, darah anak-anak lelaki dan anak perempuan mereka, yang mereka korbankan untuk berhala-berhala Kanaan, dan tanah itu tercemar dengan darah (Mazmur 106: 38).

Yehuda bersalah melakukan pengorbanan anak sejak zaman Salomo hingga pembuangan Babilon:

[Orang-orang Yahudi] telah membangun tempat-tempat tinggi Baal untuk membakar anak-anak mereka di dalam api sebagai persembahan bakaran kepada Baal, yang tidak saya perintahkan atau ketetapankan, dan juga tidak terlintas dalam fikiran saya— (Yeremia 19: 5).

Setelah kerajaan Salomo berpecah, Israel juga bersalah atas pengorbanan anak yang menyebabkan pembuangan mereka di Asiria.

Dan [Israel] membakar anak lelaki dan anak perempuan mereka sebagai persembahan dan menggunakan ramalan dan pertanda dan menjual diri untuk melakukan kejahatan di mata TUHAN, memprovokasi dia. Oleh itu, Tuhan sangat marah kepada Israel dan menyingkirkan mereka dari pandangannya (2 Raja-raja 17: 17–18).

Molech dan Tophet-nya di Lembah Hinnom di Yerusalem adalah yang paling berkaitan dengan pengorbanan anak dalam Perjanjian Lama (lihat Im. 18:21 20: 2-4 1 Raja-raja 11: 7 2 Raja-raja 23:10 Jer. 32:35 Tetapi dia bukan satu-satunya penerima persembahan tersebut. Baal kadang-kadang berhubung dengan Molech sebagai dewa yang terpisah tetapi berkaitan. Dia dikatakan hadir di Lembah Hinnom yang terkutuk Molech.

Mereka membina tempat-tempat tinggi Baal di Lembah Anak Hinnom, untuk mempersembahkan anak-anak lelaki dan perempuan mereka kepada Molech (Yer. 32:35 juga Yer. 19: 5 :).

Baal di sini bisa menjadi rujukan kepada dewa Kanaan dengan nama itu atau rujukan umum untuk "tuan" (Baal) dari daerah lembah. Tetapi di tempat lain, tempat-tempat tinggi dihubungkan dengan kultus kesuburan Baal, sementara lembah dihubungkan dengan kultus dunia bawah tanah Molech, dua lokasi yang berbeza dari dua dewa yang berbeza. Walaupun begitu, hubungan yang terjalin antara kedua dewa dan kultus mereka dinyatakan dalam Yesaya 57. ((Tentang Molech dan Baal sebagai dewa yang terpisah melihat Hari John, Molech: Dewa Pengorbanan Manusia Dalam Perjanjian Lama (New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 1989), 34-36.)

kamu yang membakar nafsu di antara pohon ek, di bawah setiap pokok hijau, [Kultur kesuburan Baal]

yang menyembelih anak-anak anda di lembah, di bawah celah batu… [Molech Tophet cult]

Di gunung yang tinggi dan tinggi [tempat-tempat tinggi Baal] kamu telah meletakkan tempat tidurmu, dan di sana kamu pergi untuk mempersembahkan korban. [kepada Baal]

Anda pergi ke raja dengan minyak [Molech] dan menggandakan minyak wangi anda

anda menghantar utusan anda jauh, dan menghantar bahkan ke Sheol. [lembah Molech] (Yesaya 57: 5-9)

Tophet (juga disebut Topheth) adalah mezbah di mana kanak-kanak dibakar sebagai korban kepada dewa. Di mana sahaja perkataan itu muncul dalam Perjanjian Lama, kata itu selalu digunakan berkaitan dengan Lembah Hinnom dan oleh itu juga dengan Molech.

Lembah Hinnom, tempat Tofet pengorbanan Molech berada, menjadi "Gehenna" (turunan dari bahasa Ibrani), metafora untuk neraka atau penghakiman terakhir pada masa Kuil Kedua dan Perjanjian Baru. ((Lihat, 2 Esdras 7:36 2 Baruch 59:10, 85:13 Markus 9:43, 45, 47. Lihat Hari, Molekes, 52.)) Ini adalah salah faham umum untuk karikatur Gehenna sebagai tempat pembuangan sampah. Tidak ada bukti teks atau arkeologi bahawa ia adalah perkara seperti itu. Tetapi itu adalah tempat kejahatan yang dinilai dengan api dan kehancuran.

Dalam Yeremia 7 dan 19, nabi meramalkan penghakiman terhadap Yehuda kerana dia menyembah tuhan-tuhan lain, termasuk pengorbanan anak di Tophet di Lembah Hinnom. Dia menubuatkan bahawa orang Babilonia akan datang dan membawa kehancuran besar ke atas Yerusalem. Akan ada begitu banyak orang mati yang terbaring di tanah sehingga nama lembah itu akan ditukar dari Lembah Anak-Anak Hinnom menjadi Lembah Penyembelihan.

... kerana mereka akan menguburkan di Topheth, kerana tidak ada ruang di tempat lain. Dan mayat orang-orang ini akan menjadi makanan bagi burung-burung di udara, dan untuk binatang-binatang di bumi, dan tidak ada yang akan menakutkan mereka (Yer. 7: 32–33).

Demikianlah yang akan saya lakukan ke tempat ini, menyatakan Tuhan, dan penduduknya, menjadikan kota ini seperti Topheth. Rumah-rumah Yerusalem dan rumah-rumah raja-raja Yehuda — semua rumah yang persembahan atapnya telah dipersembahkan kepada seluruh penjuru surga, dan persembahan minuman telah dicurahkan kepada dewa-dewa lain — akan menjadi najis seperti tempat Topheth ( Jere 19: 12–13).

Yahweh mengatakan bahawa dia akan menjadikan Yerusalem itu sendiri menjadi Tophet kehancuran yang membara seperti pengorbanan kepadanya kerana mereka menggunakan Tophet dan penyembahan kepada surga. Inilah yang sebenarnya berlaku ketika Babel menghancurkan Yerusalem pada tahun 586 SM. Dan dengan demikian Gehenna (Lembah Penyembelihan) menjadi simbol penghakiman Tuhan terhadap mereka yang melanggar perintahnya.

Percubaan Mengaitkan Pengorbanan Manusia dengan Alkitab

Cendekiawan kritikal baru-baru ini telah cuba berpendapat bahawa Yahweh sendiri benar-benar memerintahkan dan menerima pengorbanan manusia dari orang Israel dan kemudian kemudian pengarang-pengarang agenda pasca-pengasingan menulis propaganda ke dalam Alkitab untuk cuba mendiskreditkan "pengorbanan yang pernah diterima" ini. Ini adalah usaha untuk mengurangkan Yahwisme Ibrani untuk berkembang agama Kanaan daripada wahyu dari surga. Mereka mencadangkan beberapa petikan penting untuk menyokong pertikaian ini: (1) Perintah Yahweh kepada Abraham untuk mengorbankan anaknya (Kej. 22), (2) Sumpah Yefah untuk mengorbankan anak perempuannya sendiri (Hakim 11: 29-40), dan 3) Yahweh pernyataan eksplisit bahawa dia sebelumnya memerintahkan pengorbanan manusia dalam Yehezkiel 20:25.

Perintah Yahweh kepada Abraham adalah salah satu petikan yang paling diperdebatkan dalam Alkitab. Perintah itu secara jelas dan menguji secara kontekstual iman Abraham bahawa Yahweh tidak bermaksud Abraham melaksanakannya. Pengujian hipotesis semacam itu lebih mencerminkan kontras dengan budaya Kanaan daripada tempat tinggalnya. Adakah Abraham bersedia melakukan perkara yang menurutnya salah sekiranya Yahweh memerintahkannya? Abraham seharusnya mempercayai kebenaran Yahweh dan tidak bergantung pada pemahamannya sendiri yang jatuh. Itu adalah ujian kepercayaan, bukan pengesahan kejahatan.

Sumpah Jephthah juga telah diperdebatkan selama berabad-abad tentang apakah itu merujuk kepada pengorbanan manusia dan bukannya kehidupan selibat agama (Hakim 11:30). Tetapi pada akhirnya, teks tersebut tidak memberikan penilaian moral terhadap tingkah laku Yefta dari perspektif Tuhan. Yahweh tidak diperlihatkan untuk menyetujuinya lebih dari sekadar ditunjukkan untuk menghukumnya. Hujah dari diam bukanlah hujah untuk apa-apa. Cerita itu hanya menggambarkan apa yang berlaku. Oleh itu, prestasi Jefthah atas sumpahnya masih harus dinilai oleh ayat-ayat suci yang menjadikan penilaian moral terhadap pengorbanan manusia sebagai jahat.

Rakaman Yehezkiel tentang pernyataan aneh Yahweh mengenai undang-undang dan pengorbanan manusia pasti merupakan petikan yang paling sukar untuk ditangani. Di dalamnya, Yahweh merujuk ketidaktaatan Israel terhadapnya di padang belantara.

Lebih-lebih lagi, saya memberi mereka undang-undang yang tidak baik dan peraturan yang tidak boleh mereka jalani, dan saya mencemarkannya melalui pemberian mereka dalam persembahan mereka untuk semua anak sulung mereka, sehingga saya mungkin menghancurkan mereka. Saya melakukannya agar mereka tahu bahawa saya adalah Tuhan. (Yeh. 20: 25–26).

Kedengarannya seolah-olah Tuhan mengatakan bahawa hukum Tauratnya tidak baik dan dia sengaja mengotori orang-orang dengan menyuruh mereka mengorbankan anak-anak mereka. Dan kemudian dia menjadi lebih aneh untuk mengatakan bahawa ini dilakukan supaya mereka tahu bahawa dia adalah Yahweh. Ini adalah salah satu senarai kontradiksi yang membingungkan terhadap segala yang tertulis dalam Hukum Tuhan dalam Perjanjian Lama.

Konteks petikan menyelesaikan masalah salah tafsir. Tidak masuk akal bahawa Yahweh di sini akan mengatakan kebalikan dari semua yang dia katakan sepanjang Perjanjian Lama mengenai Hukumnya. Sebenarnya, tidak masuk akal untuk bertentangan dengan apa yang sebelumnya dikatakan dalam bab Keluaran 20 yang sama: bahawa ketetapannya baik (ay.12), bahawa mereka akan menghidupkan (ay.11), bahawa berhala mencemarkannya (ay.7, 18), dan bahawa pengorbanan manusia dilarang (ayat 28-29, 31). Yahweh mengatakan dengan jelas bahawa mengenai pengorbanan anak, "Saya tidak memerintahkannya, dan juga tidak masuk ke dalam pikiran saya" (Yer. 7:31).

Konteks adalah segalanya. Dan konteks petikan ini adalah mengenai Israel diserahkan kepada kekuasaan kafir sebagai hukuman atas ketidaktaatannya. Ayat-ayat sebelum Yehezkiel 20: 25-26 mengulangi peringatan Yahweh bahawa dia akan "menyebarkannya di antara bangsa-bangsa dan menyebarkannya ke seluruh negara" (20: 23-24). Yahweh menyerahkan mereka kepada bangsa-bangsa yang tidak bertuhan di sekitar mereka yang dewa-dewa mereka pilih untuk disembah.

Ya, dewa-dewa itu mempunyai undang-undang dan peraturan mereka sendiri yang melanggar undang-undang Yahweh. Jadi terjemahan terbaik dari ay 25 bukanlah Tuhan "memberi mereka ketetapan itu," tetapi seperti yang diterjemahkan oleh NKJV, Tuhan "menyerahkan mereka" kepada undang-undang dan peraturan jahat itu. Inilah yang dimaksudkan dengan "menahan tangannya" dari Israel dalam ay 22. Ini juga yang dimaksudkan oleh Paulus dalam Roma 1 di mana Tuhan "menyerahkan" orang-orang kafir untuk kebobrokan mereka untuk dinilai olehnya (Rom. 1: 24, 26, 28). Maka Tuhan menyerahkan orang Israel kepada bangsa-bangsa yang tidak bertuhan dengan undang-undang dan budaya mereka yang tidak bertuhan yang dicari oleh Israel. Matlamat Yahweh adalah agar Israel menderita pilihan buruknya dan kembali ke Yahweh.

Percubaan untuk mengaitkan pengorbanan anak dengan Alkitab seolah-olah awalnya merupakan bagian normal dari penyembahan Yahweh tidak mendapat sokongan teks dari Alkitab. Fakta bahawa banyak orang Israel terlibat dalam pengorbanan manusia hanyalah bukti dari apa yang Alkitab katakan bahawa mereka secara rohani tidak setia kepada Yahweh sejak sekian lama sehingga dia mengirim mereka ke pengasingan tepat untuk dosa-dosa seperti pengorbanan anak.

Hubungan jelas pengorbanan anak dengan amalan pengguguran moden tidak sukar untuk dilakukan, dan dengan itu persamaan antara zaman Jezebel dan kita sendiri sangat berguna. Frasa seperti "mengorbankan anak-anak di kuil Molech" atau "di altar keselesaan" digunakan oleh klinik pengguguran pro-lifer kerana pembunuhan anak sendiri dengan sengaja untuk memberi manfaat kepada kehidupan seseorang atau untuk melepaskan diri dari penderitaan peribadi adalah apa sebenarnya motivasi di sebalik pengorbanan anak-anak di dunia kuno. Dengan cara yang sama seperti dunia kuno memohon kepada para dewa melalui pengorbanan anak untuk menyelamatkan mereka dari penderitaan penyakit, kelaparan, atau perang, sehingga budaya hari ini meminta Molech melalui pengguguran untuk "menyelamatkan" wanita dari penderitaan kemiskinan, "tertindas status, ”atau perang gender.

Penganut sejati dalam pengorbanan anak yang merupakan ibu pada zaman dahulu menganggap sukar tetapi perlu mengorbankan bayi mereka, sama seperti orang percaya yang benar dalam pengguguran dewasa ini akan mengakui kesukaran tindakan mereka sambil menuntut hak yang diperlukan untuk mengorbankan bayi mereka. & ldquoSelamat, sah, dan jarang & rdquo telah menghasilkan sakramen sejagat.

Pada akhirnya, tidak ada hujah moral yang sah untuk membunuh kanak-kanak yang tidak bersalah. Dan seperti di Israel kuno, pengorbanan anak terhadap pengguguran menandakan permulaan akhir peradaban dengan penghakiman Tuhan.

Percubaan Moden untuk Menolak Pengorbanan Manusia Purba

Di luar Alkitab, pengorbanan anak dalam budaya Phoenician (seperti Tyre's) mempunyai kehadiran yang signifikan dalam bukti teks dan arkeologi. Di antara teks paling kuno yang merujuknya adalah berikut yang ditulis mengenai kota Carthage di Afrika Utara, sebuah penempatan orang Phoenicia.

Pengarang Yunani abad keempat SM Kleitarchos (diparafrasekan):

"Kleitarchos mengatakan bahawa kerana menghormati Kronos [setara Yunani dengan Ba'al Hammon], orang Fenisia, dan terutama orang Carthaginian, setiap kali mereka berusaha mendapatkan bantuan besar, bersumpah salah satu anak mereka, membakarnya sebagai pengorbanan kepada ketuhanan jika mereka sangat ingin memperoleh kejayaan. Di sana terdapat sebuah patung perunggu dari Kronos [Baal], tangannya dilipat di atas tembaga, api yang menelan anak itu. Apabila api jatuh ke atas badan, anggota badan berkontrak dan mulut terbuka kelihatan hampir ketawa, sehingga (badan) menguncup perlahan ke dalam brazier. Oleh itu, "senyum" dikenal sebagai "tawa sardonik," kerana mereka mati ketawa. " ((Kleitarchos, Scholia ke Plato & rsquos Republic, 337A: Dipetik dalam Paul G. Mosca, Pengorbanan Anak di Kanaan dan Agama Israel: Satu kajian di Mulk, Tesis PhD, (Cambridge, MA: Universiti Harvard, 1975), 22.))

Sejarawan Yunani abad pertama SM Diodorus Siculus:

"Dalam semangat mereka untuk menebus kesalahan mereka untuk mengorbankan anak-anak yang paling mulia, mereka memilih dua ratus anak yang paling mulia dan mengorbankan mereka secara terbuka dan yang lain yang disyaki mengorbankan diri secara sukarela, dalam jumlah tidak kurang dari tiga ratus. Di kota mereka terdapat patung perunggu Cronus, yang memanjangkan tangan, telapak tangan ke atas dan landai ke tanah sehingga setiap anak ketika ditempatkan di atasnya berguling-guling dan jatuh ke dalam lubang yang ternganga penuh dengan api. " ((Diodorus Siculus, Perpustakaan Sejarah, Buku 20, 14:4-7, Perpustakaan Klasik Loeb, 1954, 153. Dipetik dalam Lawrence E. Stager dan Samuel R. Wolff, & ldquoChild Sacrifice at Carthage: Ritus Keagamaan atau Kawalan Penduduk? & Rdquo Kajian Arkeologi Alkitab 10:1 (1984), 14.))

Pengarang Yunani abad kedua AD Plutarch:

"Tidak, tetapi dengan pengetahuan dan pengertian penuh, mereka sendiri menawarkan anak-anak mereka sendiri, dan mereka yang tidak mempunyai anak akan membeli anak-anak kecil dari orang miskin dan memotong kerongkong mereka seolah-olah mereka begitu banyak domba atau burung muda sementara itu ibu berdiri tanpa air mata atau rintihan tetapi sekiranya dia mengucapkan satu erangan tunggal atau membiarkannya jatuh, dia harus kehilangan wangnya, dan anaknya dikorbankan namun seluruh kawasan sebelum patung itu dipenuhi dengan suara seruling dan gendang yang kuat [jadi bahawa] tangisan tangisan tidak boleh sampai ke telinga orang. " ((Plutarch, Pada Takhayul, Perpustakaan Klasik Loeb, 1928, 2: 495. Dipetik dalam Smith, Jr., "Pengorbanan Anak Kanaan," 98.))

Walaupun teks-teks ini berbicara tentang pengorbanan anak Fenisia di lokasi yang secara geografis dikeluarkan dari Kanaan, mereka sebenarnya mengesahkan hubungan agama dan budaya dengan Jezebel's Tyre. Kota Carthage didirikan oleh Dido of Tire sejurus selepas kematian Jezebel. ((Stager dan Wolff, & ldquoChild Sacrifice at Carthage, "6.)) Seperti yang dijelaskan oleh Henry Smith," Bukti menunjukkan bahawa orang Fenisia membawa praktik biadab ini ke Carthage dari Kanaan, dan oleh itu, bukti pengorbanan anak di Carthage memberikan sokongan bukti untuk sejarah sejarah Alkitab yang menyebutkan pengorbanan tersebut. " ((Henry B. Smith, Jr., “Pengorbanan Anak Kanaan, Pengguguran, dan Alkitab, & rdquo Jurnal Kementerian dan Teologi, 93.))

Cendekiawan kritikal baru-baru ini berusaha untuk memburukkan atau mengurangkan perihal pengorbanan anak Phoenicia dalam kedua-dua sejarawan alkitabiah dan klasik dengan mengadu prasangka pada pengarang yang menggambarkan pengorbanan tersebut. Dengan kata lain, para nabi alkitabiah menggunakan hiperbola puitis terhadap politeis, dan pengarang Yunani dan Rom menulis propaganda tentang musuh-musuh mereka, seperti Carthage, untuk melukis mereka sebagai barbar dan untuk membenarkan keganasan mereka sendiri. ((Smith, Jr., "Pengorbanan Anak Kanaan," 93.))

Tetapi ini tidak sesuai dengan fakta. Pertama, kerana pengarang era yang berbeza dan budaya yang sangat berbeza semuanya menulis mengenai pengorbanan kanak-kanak Carthage. Itu adalah definisi saksi mata yang benar.

Kedua, orang Yunani dan Rom mempraktikkan pendedahan bayi, meninggalkan bayi yang tidak diingini mati kerana terdedah kepada unsur semula jadi. Oleh itu, mereka tidak mengutuk pembunuhan bayi - kerana mereka mempraktikkannya. Minat mereka bukanlah moral tetapi teologi. ((Smith, Jr., "Pengorbanan Anak Kanaan," 99-100.))

Ketiga, bukti arkeologi mengesahkan bahawa kedua-dua penulis alkitabiah dan klasik tahu apa yang mereka bicarakan. Bukti fizikal seperti pengorbanan kanak-kanak telah dijumpai di jajahan Phoenicia di seluruh Mediterranean barat. Laman web yang paling terkenal adalah Tophet di Carthage, Afrika Utara, yang telah disebut di atas.

Lawrence Stager dan Sam Wolff, ahli arkeologi yang telah menggali laman web ini menerangkannya dengan cara ini:

Carthaginian Tophet adalah yang terbesar dari laman Phoenicia ini dan sememangnya merupakan perkuburan terbesar manusia yang dikorbankan yang pernah ditemui. Pengorbanan kanak-kanak berlaku di sana hampir berterusan untuk jangka masa hampir 600 tahun & mldr kami tetap menganggarkan ukuran Carthaginian Tophet pada abad keempat dan mungkin abad ketiga SM. sekurang-kurangnya antara 54,000 hingga 64,000 kaki persegi. Dengan menggunakan ketumpatan guci di kawasan penggalian kami sebagai standard, kami menganggarkan sebanyak 20,000 guci mungkin telah disimpan di sana antara 400 dan 200 SM. ((Stager dan Wolff, & ldquoChild Sacrifice at Carthage, ”2.))

Tapak penggalian melibatkan beberapa peringkat yang merangkumi jangka masa dari 800 SM. hingga sekitar 146 SM Tarikh awal berada di bawah paras air dan tidak dapat dicapai. Setiap tingkat terdiri dari guci yang berisi tulang hangus anak-anak, baik kanak-kanak lelaki dan perempuan, dari bayi baru lahir hingga berusia tiga tahun, dicampur dengan tulang kambing dan domba hangus. Pengorbanan yang dibakar ini dilakukan kepada Tanit dan Baal-Hammon, dewi pelindung dan dewa Carthage. Tanit adalah setara dengan Astarte di Kanaan. Ada yang mengatakan Baal-Hammon adalah setara dengan dewa El yang tinggi. Tetapi di Kanaan Astarte adalah permaisuri, bukan El, tetapi Baal, "Yang Mahatinggi." Jadi Baal-Hammon kemungkinan besar setara dengan Baal-Hadad Kanaan.

Cendekiawan kritikal baru-baru ini membina teori revisionis untuk menggambarkan Carthage Tophet sebagai bukan lokasi pengorbanan kanak-kanak tetapi perkuburan untuk kanak-kanak yang mati kerana sebab semula jadi. Stager, Wolff, dan Greene menghilangkan skeptisisme ini dengan menjelaskan beberapa aspek yang mengurangkan spekulasi semakan seperti itu. ((Sebab-sebab ini semua diambil dari beberapa sumber: Perdebatan mengenai pengorbanan anak: https://phoenicia.org/childsacrifice.html Brien K. Garnand, Lawrence E. Stager, Joseph A. Greene, & ldquoInfants sebagai Penawaran: Corak Palaeodemografi dan Pengebumian Tophet, & rdquo Studi Epigrafici e Linguistici 29-30, 2012-13: 193-222 Lawrence E. Stager dan Samuel R. Wolff, & ldquo Pengorbanan Kanak-kanak di Carthage: Ritual Keagamaan atau Kawalan Penduduk? & Rdquo B_Bahasa Kajian Arkeologi_ 10,1 (1984).))

Pertama, kadar kematian semula jadi kanak-kanak pada masa ini tidak sepadan dengan kadar kematian kanak-kanak yang sangat tinggi di Tophet, sehingga menunjukkan pembunuhan sengaja dan bukan sebab semula jadi. ((Garnand, Stager dan. Greene, & ldquoInfants sebagai Penawaran, 193-222.))

Kedua, tidak ada mayat bayi yang menunjukkan keadaan patologi penyakit ini. ((https://phoenicia.org/childsacrifice.html))

Ketiga, bayi yang dilahirkan secara semula jadi biasanya dikebumikan secara rutin di pondok rumah atau berhampiran orang dewasa keluarga, bukan di tanah perkuburan yang terpisah.

Keempat, beberapa prasasti di stela di atas guci menggambarkan sumpah pengorbanan kepada dewa yang tidak pernah dilihat di stela pemakaman biasa.

Akhirnya, tempat penguburan tulang binatang hangus yang menjadi pengganti korban didapati diselingi dengan guci anak-anak, sesuatu yang hanya masuk akal dari segi upacara korban. Tidak ada tanah perkuburan haiwan peliharaan, dan penggantian korban haiwan untuk manusia adalah perkara biasa walaupun tidak universal. Beberapa kanak-kanak masih dikorbankan. ((Stager dan Wolff, & ldquoChild Sacrifice at Carthage, ”11.))

Ada yang berpendapat bahawa penggantian haiwan berkembang dari pengorbanan manusia, tetapi tahap Carthage kemudian menunjukkan peningkatan pengorbanan manusia pada tahun-tahun kemudian, bukan penurunan, sehingga menyangkal teori evolusi. ((Stager dan Wolff, & ldquoChild Sacrifice at Carthage, ”13.))

Pengorbanan anak disatukan ke dalam budaya Fenisia dan budaya Israel dan Yahudi dengan cara yang sangat mempengaruhi. Bukti alkitabiah, sejarah, dan arkeologi saling sesuai.

Saya berusaha untuk menggambarkan realiti pengorbanan anak kuno di Phoenicia kuno dan Israel dalam novel baru saya Jezebel: Ratu Harlot Israel. Untuk menunjukkan bagaimana ia disatukan ke dalam dunia sosio-ekonomi mereka. Dalam satu pengertian, pembaca moden akan terkejut melihat bagaimana hal itu dapat dinormalisasi - sehingga pembaca yang cerdas itu menyedari analogi dengan normalisasi pengguguran, pengorbanan anak 2.0.

Brian Godawa adalah pengarang fiksyen alkitabiah terlaris dari siri novel perang rohani baru dalam Alkitab, Chronicles of the Watchers. Buku pertama dalam siri ini, Jezebel: Harlot Queen of Israel kini tersedia. Artikel ini dipetik dari buku The Spiritual World of Jezebel and Elijah yang merupakan buku teologi bagi novel Jezebel.


Bukti Pengorbanan.

Sejarawan telah menggunakan dua kumpulan teks kuno utama sebagai bukti pengorbanan anak Carthaginian: Perjanjian Lama Alkitab dan laporan dari penulis klasik.

Banyak buku Perjanjian Lama merujuk kepada pengorbanan anak kepada Baal, dewa pendamping Tanit di Carthage. Yeremia 7.31 dan 19.5, khususnya, merujuk kepada tempat-tempat berkorban tinggi jika anak-anak dipersembahkan kepada dewa. Chronicles 27 refers to a King Ahaz, who made molten images for Baal and burned his sons as offerings.

In the fourth century AD, Plato referred to the Carthaginian’s penchant for sacrificing their sons. Later, Kleitarchos, a third-century Greek writer gave a graphic description of the practice:

Out of reverence for Kronos (the Greek equivalent of Ba’al Hammon), the Phoenicians, and especially the Carthaginians, whenever they seek to obtain some great favor, vow one of their children, burning it as a sacrifice to the deity if they are especially eager to gain success.There stands in their midst a bronze statue of Kronos, its hands extended over a bronze brazier, the flames of which engulf the child. When the flame falls upon the body, the limbs contract and the open mouth seems almost to be laughing until the body slips quietly into the brazier.’

In the first century BC, Diodorus Siculus elaborated on this theme. He describes how the ancient Carthaginians sacrificed their children in times of crisis. He explicitly describes one such event in 310 BC when 300 upper-class children were killed to gain the favor of Baal. The parents were reputed to have placed the infants in the outstretched arms of the statue after a priest had killed the child. It was then allowed to fall into a pit of fire.

Many of the inscriptions found on the grave stelae have been taken to support this idea of sacrifice. Many include dedications to Baal containing the phrase ‘for having granted his prayer,.’ They also include the word ‘mlk’ which has been taken to mean ‘gift’ or ‘offering.’ All of this has been interpreted as proof that the children were offerings for the achievement of specific aims.

A Sacrifice to Baal by Henri Motte. Domain awam. Wikimedia Commons


Kandungan

The Punics derived the original core of their religion from Phoenicia, but also developed their own pantheons. [3] The poor quality of the evidence means that conclusions about these gods must be tentative. [4] There are no surviving hymns, prayers, or lists of gods and while there are many inscriptions, [5] these are very formulaic and generally only mention the names of gods. [6] [7] The names of gods were also often incorporated into theophoric personal names and some gods are known primarily from this onomastic evidence. [8] [1]

It is difficult to reconstruct a hierarchy of the Carthaginian gods. [9] It was common for the pantheons of Phoenician cities to be headed by a divine couple, entitled Baal (lord) and "Baalat" ("lady"). [10] At Carthage, this divine couple appears to have consisted of the god Baal Hammon and the goddess Tanit, who appear frequently in inscriptions from the tophet of Salammbô, with which they seem to have been especially associated. [4] [11] From the fifth century BCE, Tanit begins to be mentioned before Baal Hammon in inscriptions and bears the title "Face of Baal" (pene Baal), perhaps indicating that she was seen as mediating between the worshipper and Baal Hammon. [12] An anthropomorphic symbol, composed of a circular "head", horizontal "arms", and a triangular "body," which is frequently found on Carthaginian stelae, is known by modern scholars as the sign of Tanit, but it is not clear whether the Carthaginians themselves associated it with Tanit. The connections of Baal Hammon and Tanit to the Phoenician pantheon are debated: Tanit may have a Libyan origin, [12] but some scholars connect her to the Phoenician goddesses Anat, Astarte or Asherah Baal Hammon is sometimes connected to Melqart or El. [4] The gods Eshmun and Melqart also had their own temples in Carthage. [4] The priests of other gods are known from epigraphic evidence, include Ashtart (Astarte), Reshef, Sakon, and Shamash. [11]

Different Punic centres had their own distinct pantheons. In Punic Sardinia, Sid or Sid Babi (known to the Romans as Sardus Pater and apparently an indigenous deity) received worship as the son of Melqart and was particularly associated with the island. [13] At Maktar, to the southwest of Carthage, an important god was Hoter Miskar ("the sceptre of Miskar"). At Leptis Magna, a number of unique gods are attested, many of them in Punic-Latin bilingual inscriptions, such as El-qone-eres, Milkashtart (Hercules), and Shadrafa (Liber Pater). [14] Inscriptions in the tophet at Motya in western Sicily frequently refer to Baal Hammon, as in Carthage, but do not refer to Tanit at all. [15]

Following the common practice of interpretatio graeca, Greco-Roman sources consistently use Greek and Latin names, rather than Punic ones, to refer to Punic deities. [8] They typically identify Baal Hammon with Cronus/Saturn, Tanit with Hera/Juno Caelestis, [11] Melqart with Hercules, [12] and Astarte with Venus/Aphrodite, although the Etruscan-Punic bilingual Pyrgi Tablets produced around 500 BCE identify her with the Etruscan goddess Uni (Hera/Juno). [15] Both Reshef and Eshmun could be Apollo, but Eshmun was also identified with Asclepius. [8] [12] Many of these Roman gods, especially Saturn, Caelestis, Hercules, and Asclepius remained very popular in North Africa after the Roman conquest and probably represent an adaptation and continuation of the Punic deities. [16]

An important source on the Carthaginian pantheon is a treaty between Hamilcar of Carthage and Philip III of Macedon preserved by the second-century BCE Greek historian Polybius which lists the Carthaginian gods under Greek names, in a set of three triads. Shared formulas and phrasing show it belongs to a Near Eastern treaty tradition, with parallels attested in Hittite, Akkadian, and Aramaic. [17] [18] Given the inconsistencies in identifications by Greco-Roman authors, it is not clear which Carthaginian gods are to be interpreted. [8] Paolo Xella and Michael Barré (followed by Clifford) have put forward different identifications. [14] [17] [18] Barré has also connected his identifications with Tyrian and Ugaritic predecessors [18]

The Carthaginians also adopted the Greek cults of Persephone (Kore) and Demeter in 396 BCE as a result of a plague that was seen as divine retribution for the Carthaginian desecration of these goddesses' shrines at Syracuse. [19] Nevertheless, Carthaginian religion did not undergo any significant Hellenization. [20] The Egyptian deities Bes, Bastet, Isis, Osiris and Ra were also worshiped. [21] [8]

There is very little evidence for a Punic mythology, but some scholars have seen an original Carthaginian myth behind the story of the foundation of Carthage that is reported by Greek and Latin sources, especially Josephus and Vergil. In this story, Elissa (or Dido) flees Tyre after the her brother king Pygmalion murders her husband, a priest of Melqart, and establishes the city of Carthage. Eventually, Elissa/Dido burns herself on a pyre. Some scholars connect this and other instances of self-immolation in historical accounts of Carthaginian generals with tophet rituals. [22] Josephine Crawley Quinn has proposed that myth of the Philaeni brothers in Libya had its roots in Punic myth and Carolina López-Ruiz has made similar arguments for the story of Gargoris and Habis in Tartessus. [23] [24]

Priesthood Edit

The Carthaginians appear to have had both part-time and full-time priests, the latter called khnm (tunggal khn, cognate with the Hebrew term kohen), led by high priests called rb khnm. Lower-ranking religious officials, attached to specific sanctuaries, included the "chief of the gatekeepers," people called "servants" or "slaves" of the sanctuary (male: ˤbd, female: ˤbdt atau mt), and functionaries like cooks, butchers, singers, and barbers. [20] [25] Goddesses may have been worshiped together and shared the same priests. [26] A class of cultic officials known as the mqm ˤlm (vocalized miqim elim, usually translated "Awakener of the god") was responsible for ensuring that the dying-and-rising god Melqart returned to watch over the city each year. [19] [27] Sanctuaries had associations, referred to as mrzḥ in Punic and Neo-Punic inscriptions, who held ritual banquets. [25] M'Hamed Hassine Fantar proposes that it was the part-time priests, appointed in some way by the civil authorities, who controlled religious affairs, while the full-time priests were primarily responsible for rites and the interpretation of myth. [28] At Carthage, for example, there was a thirty-person council that regulated sacrifices. [29] Some Phoenician communities practiced sacred prostitution in the Punic sphere this is attested at Sicca Veneria (El Kef) in western Tunisia and the sanctuary of Venus Erycina at Eryx in western Sicily. [25]

Funerary practices Edit

The funerary practices of the Carthaginians were very similar to those of Phoenicians in the Levant. They include the rituals surrounding the disposal of the remains, funerary feasts, and ancestor worship. A variety of grave goods are found in the tombs, which indicate a belief in life after death. [30]

Cemeteries were located outside settlements. [31] They were often symbolically separated from them by geographic features like rivers or valleys. [32] A short papyrus found in a tomb at Tal-Virtù in Malta suggests a belief that the dead had to cross a body of water to enter the afterlife. [33] Tombs could take the form of fossae (rectangular graves cut into the earth or bedrock), pozzi (shallow, round pits), and hypogea (rock-cut chambers with stone benches on which the deceased was laid). There are some built tombs, all from before the sixth century BC. [34] [35] Tombs are often surmounted by small funerary stelae and baetyls.

At different times, Punic people practiced both cremation and inhumation. Until the sixth century BCE, cremation was the normal means of disposing of the dead. [30] [36] In the sixth century BCE, cremation was almost entirely superseded by inhumation. Thereafter, cremation was largely restricted to infant burials. [30] [36] This change is sometimes associated with the expansion of Carthaginian influence in the western Mediterranean, but exactly how and why this change occurred is unclear. [36] Around 300 BC, cremation once again became the norm, especially in Sardinia and Ibiza. [37] Cremation pits have been identified at Gades in Spain and Monte Sirai in Sardinia. [38] [39] [40] After cremation, the bones were cleaned and separated from the ashes and then placed carefully in urns before burial. At Hoya de los Rastros, near Ayamonte in Spain, for example, the bones were arranged in order in their urns so that the feet were at the bottom and the skull at the top. [38] [41] Cremated and inhumed remains could be placed in wooden coffins or stone sarcophagi. [42] [36] Examples are known from Tharros and Sulci in Sardinia, [43] Lilybaeum in Sicily, Casa del Obispo at Gades in Spain, [44] and Carthage and Kerkouane in Tunisia. [38] Before burial, the deceased was anointed with perfumed resin, [45] coloured red with ochre or cinnabar, [46] traces of which have been recovered archaeologically. [47]

The funeral was accompanied by a feast in the cemetery. [48] This banquet, called a mrz, is attested in inscriptions of the fourth and third centuries BC, but is known in the Levant in earlier periods. The attendees decorated an altar and sacrificed an animal which they then ate. [48] The feasts included the consumption of wine, [48] which may have had symbolic links to blood, the fertility of the Earth, and new life, as it did for other Mediterranean peoples. [49] At the end of the feast, the crockery was smashed or buried in order to ritually kill it. [48] [50] Cemeteries included spaces and equipment for food preparation. [48] The feast may have played a role in determining inheritance and could have symbolised the enduring bond between the deceased and their survivors. [48] These funerary feasts were repeated at regular intervals as part of a cult of the ancestors (called rpʼm, cognate with the Hebrew rephaim). In Neo-Punic texts, the rpʼm are equated with the Latin Manes. [51] At Monte Sirai in Sardinia, tombs included amphorae to channel libations offered on these occasions down into the tomb. [52] The funerary stelae and baetyls erected on top of tombs, which are often inscribed with the name of the deceased and anthropomorphised, may have been intended as the focus for worship of the deceased within the context of this ancestor cult. [53] Small stone altars were found in the cemeteries at Palermo and Lilybaeum in Sicily and are depicted on funerary stelae in Sardinia and Sicily. It appears that fires were lit on top of them as part of purification rites. [54] [55]

A range of grave goods are found deposited with the deceased, which seem to have been intended to provide the deceased with protection and symbolic nourishment. [56] These do not differ significantly based on the gender or age of the deceased. [57] Grave offerings could include carved masks [20] and amulets, especially the eye of Horus (wadjet) and small glass apotropaic heads (protomae), which were intended to protect the deceased. [58] Offerings of food and drink were probably intended to nourish the deceased in the afterlife. [19] [31] They were often accompanied by a standardised set of feasting equipment for the deceased, consisting of two jugs, a drinking bowl, and an oil lamp. [42] [59] Oil and perfume may have been intended to provide the deceased with heat and light. [60] Chickens and their eggs were particularly frequent offerings and may have represented the soul's resurrection or transition to the afterlife in Punic thought. [42] [61] Razors, left next to the head of the deceased, may indicate that the corpse was shaved before burial or an expectation that priests would continue to shave in death as they had in life. [47] [62] Bronze cymbals and bells found in some tombs may derive from songs and music played at the funeral of the deceased - perhaps intended to ward off evil spirts. Terracotta figurines of musicians are found in graves, and depictions of them were carved on funerary stelae and on razors deposited in the grave. Almost all these musicians are female, suggesting that women had a particular role in this part of the funeral most play the drums, kithara, or aulos. [63] [64]

Sacrifice and dedications Edit

Animals and other valuables were sacrificed to propitiate the gods such sacrifices had to be done according to strict specifications, [19] which are described on nine surviving inscriptions known as "sacrificial tariffs." [25] The longest of these is KAI 69, known as the Marseille Tariff, after its find-spot, which probably originally stood in Carthage. It lists the portions of sacrifices that the priests of a temple of Baal Saphon were entitled to. The other sacrificial tariffs are CIS I.165, 167-170, 3915-3917, all found in North Africa. These tariffs are similar to a pair of fifth-century BC tariff inscriptions found at the Phoenician city of Kition in Cyprus. They also share some terminology and formulae with Ugaritic and Biblical Hebrew texts on sacrifice. There is also a list of festival offerings, CIS I.166 and many short votive inscriptions, mostly associated with the tophets. [65] Many of these tophet inscriptions refer to the sacrificial ritual as mlk (vocalized mulk atau molk), which some scholars connect with the biblical Moloch. [66] [67] Votive inscriptions are also found in other contexts a long inscription on an eighth-century BC bronze statuette found at Seville dedicates it to Athtart (KAI 5 294). [68] A fifth-century BC inscription (KAI 72) from Ebusus records the dedication of a temple, first to Rašap-Melqart, and then to Tinnit and Gad by a priest who states that the process involved making a vow. [69] A stele erected at Carthage in the mid-second century BC by a woman named Abibaal shows the sacrifice of a cow's head by burning on an altar the details of the image show continuity with much earlier Near Eastern sacrificial rituals. [70]

Libations and incense also appear to have been an important part of sacrifices, based on archaeological finds. [71] A custom attested at Byblos by the Greek author Lucian of Samosata that those sacrificing to Melqart had to shave their heads may explain ritual razors found in many Carthaginian tombs. [62]

Tophets and child sacrifice Edit

Various Greek and Roman sources describe and criticize the Carthaginians as engaging in the practice of sacrificing children by burning. [12] Classical writers describing some version of child sacrifice to "Cronos" (Baal Hammon) include the Greek historians Diodorus Siculus and Cleitarchus, as well as the Christian apologists Tertullian and Orosius. [72] [73] These descriptions were compared to those found in the Hebrew Bible describing the sacrifice of children by burning to Baal and Moloch at a place called Tophet. [72] The ancient descriptions were seemingly confirmed by the discovering of the so-called "Tophet of Salammbô" in Carthage in 1921, which contained the urns of cremated children. [74] However, modern historians and archaeologists debate the reality and extent of this practice. [75] [76] Some scholars propose that all remains at the tophet were sacrificed, whereas others propose that only some were. [77]

Archaeological evidence Edit

The specific sort of open aired sanctuary described as a Tophet in modern scholarship is unique to the Punic communities of the Western Mediterranean. [78] Over 100 tophets have been found throughout the Western Mediterranean, [79] but are absent in Spain. [80] The largest tophet discovered was the Tophet of Salammbô at Carthage. [74] The Tophet of Salammbô seems to date to the city's founding and continued in use for at least a few decades after the city's destruction in 146 BCE. [81] No Carthaginian texts survive that would explain or describe what rituals were performed at the tophet. [80] When Carthaginian inscriptions refer to these locations, they are referred to as bt (temple or sanctuary), or qdš (shrine), not Tophets. This is the same word used for temples in general. [82] [79]

As far as the archaeological evidence reveals, the typical ritual at the Tophet - which, however, shows much variation - began by the burial of a small urn containing a child's ashes, sometimes mixed with or replaced by that of an animal, after which a stele, typically dedicated to Baal Hammon and sometimes Tanit was erected. In a few occasions, a chapel was built as well. [83] Uneven burning on the bones indicate that they were burned on an open air pyre. [84] The dead children are never mentioned on the stele inscriptions, only the dedicators and that the gods had granted them some request. [85]

While tophets fell out of use after the fall of Carthage on islands formerly controlled by Carthage, in North Africa they became more common in the Roman Period. [86] In addition to infants, some of these tophets contain offerings only of goats, sheep, birds, or plants many of the worshipers have Libyan rather than Punic names. [86] Their use appears to have declined in the second and third centuries CE. [87]

Controversy Edit

The degree and existence of Carthaginian child sacrifice is controversial, and has been ever since the Tophet of Salammbô was discovered in 1920. [88] Some historians have proposed that the Tophet may have been a cemetery for premature or short-lived infants who died naturally and then were ritually offered. [76] The Greco-Roman authors were not eye-witnesses, contradict each other on how the children were killed, and describe children older than infants being killed as opposed to the infants found in the tophets. [74] Accounts such as Cleitarchus's, in which the baby dropped into the fire by a statue, are contradicted by the archaeological evidence. [89] There are not any mentions of child sacrifice from the Punic Wars, which are better documented than the earlier periods in which mass child sacrifice is claimed. [74] Child sacrifice may have been overemphasized for effect after the Romans finally defeated Carthage and totally destroyed the city, they engaged in postwar propaganda to make their archenemies seem cruel and less civilized. [90] Matthew McCarty argues that, even if the Greco-Roman testimonies are inaccurate "even the most fantastical slanders rely upon a germ of fact." [89]

Many archaeologists argue that the ancient authors and the evidence of the Tophet indicates that all remains in the Tophet must have been sacrificed. Others argue that only some infants were sacrificed. [77] Paolo Xella argues that the weight of classical and biblical sources indicate that the sacrifices occurred. [91] He further argues that the number of children in the tophet is far smaller than the rate of natural infant mortality. [92] In Xella's estimation, prenatal remains at the tophet are probably those of children who were promised to be sacrificed but died before birth, but who were nevertheless offered as a sacrifice in fulfillment of a vow. [93] He concludes that the child sacrifice was probably done as a last resort and probably frequently involved the substitution of an animal for the child. [94]


Tophet of Carthage - History

Same thing with Spain under Fernando y Isabella. When Sefadics had to leave under peril of being made Catholic, what happened to their land? I have a man, Harry Gold (doesn’t sound too Spanish, does he?) who reportedly had much land he moved up to Ipswich, England. Is my family entitled to damages from the Spanish crown? Harry’s two daughters, Elizabeth and Isabella, angry at being thrown out of Spain, where the family had probably been long-established, ended being treated like subversives by the Anglicans after they visited Geneva, and after instruction, helped establish the Congregational Church in England. There you go: From Hebrew Congregation to the Congregational Church–all to get back at the Anglican Catholic Establishment. Losing their land, they were tired of any Catholic establishment.

After the defeat by Rome, what happened to the homes and farms of the Jews in Judea? All movable property (including the Jews) was stolen and sent to Rome but the land could not be so what happed to it – who owned it after the capture or death of the owners? Are the descendants of those crucified still the legal heirs?

Wonderful post but I was wanting to know if you could write a litte more on this subject?
I’d be very thankful if you could elaborate a little bit more.
Terima kasih!

Excellent finds and comments. High places were selected for sacrifies by 7 nations (Deu Chapter 7) that requoted by major prophets warning children of Israel.

Then there are the cremated remains of all other Carthaginians of all other age groups all over the place? Documentation, please.

A sacrifice of what you do not want anyway is meaningless. Such libations are not to be poured out in sacrifice. Only the first fruits count.

The firstborn are always consecrated, and are the possession of the gods. Especially the first-born son, the one who bursts open the womb. Hence the need to ransom.

This is clearly human sacrifice / infanticide, and was not taken lightly by the populace or the priesthood itself.

Child sacrifice:
In sharp contrast with the Israelites, the inhabitants of Canaan offered their children as sacrifices to their gods, including the Ammonite god called Molech, also known as Milcom or Moloch. (1 Kings 11:5, 7, 33 Acts 7:43) Halley’s Bible Handbook says: “Canaanites worshipped, by immoral indulgence, as a religious rite, in the presence of their gods and then, by murdering their first-born children, as a sacrifice to these same gods.”
Se also human sacrifice(Aztecs,Maya)http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200274990

On a visit to Carthage (Tunisia) some years ago our guide took us around the ancient sites, including the cemetery of children and, using the name “Tophet”, explained that the people, hoping to placate the god’s and save themselves from the Romans, sacrificed their children who were then buried in the cemetery we were visiting – this occurred in the historical period when the prophets of Israel were denouncing such practices: “The people of Judah have done evil … they have set up detestabile idols ….They have built the high places of Tophet … to burn their sons and daughters in the fire – something I did not command …” (Jeremiah 7:30-31)

Your children are your “seed”. The term s for both sperm and offspring, when referencing a sire.

Milcom and Molech are mixed up in various translations of the Old Testament and differ between the Masoretic and LXX translations. Milcom was the God of the Ammonites, while Molech is always consistent with, “fires of Molech”in the Old Testament. There’s no physical evidence of the Bronze Molech, and the stories of child sacrifice to a bronze statue don’t appear in history until after Alexander the Great (300 BCE or so).

The Torah is very clear that the practice referred to is giving ones ‘seed’ to Molech.

Leviticus 20:3
And I will set my face against that man, and will cut him off from among his people because he hath given of his seed unto Molech, to defile my sanctuary, and to profane my holy (קדש) name.

Deuteronomy 23:17
There shall be no whore (קדשה “holy” feminine) of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite (קדש “holy” masculine) of the sons of Israel.

If these passages were translated directly out of the Hebrew Scriptures we wouldn’t be able to read the Old Testament to our young children. Nobody would ever mention Temple Prostitution or the practices in the land of ancient Israel recorded by Herodotus and Lucian of Samosata among others. We would much rather tell our children that ‘they’ killed kids, rather than have to get into the whole nasty topic of temple prostitution. As did the Greek translators who invented a god named Molech to smooth over the subject. After all its way easier to speak of killing kids then spilling ones seed.

Let’s not forget that Christianity is largely a Greek creation. Even Jesus himself reads from the Septuagint in Luke 4:18, as that text is only found in the LXX. And let’s not forget the Greeks had no problem at all exposing their unwanted kids.

Then consider Mary a Jew who fled to Jerusalem and the first mention of the name ‘Mary’ (in that form) in known history I believe. It doesn’t even matter if this story is true or not as it was believed by the people in that day including Vespasian.

Josephus, Wars, VI, 3, 4.
There was a certain woman that dwelt beyond Jordan, her name was Mary her father was Eleazar, of the village Bethezob, which signifies the house of Hyssop. She was eminent for her family and her wealth, and had fled away to Jerusalem with the rest of the multitude, and was with them besieged therein at this time. The other effects of this woman had been already seized upon, such I mean as she had brought with her out of Perea, and removed to the city. What she had treasured up besides, as also what food she had contrived to save, had been also carried off by the rapacious guards, who came every day running into her house for that purpose. This put the poor woman into a very great passion, and by the frequent reproaches and imprecations she east at these rapacious villains, she had provoked them to anger against her but none of them, either out of the indignation she had raised against herself, or out of commiseration of her case, would take away her life and if she found any food, she perceived her labors were for others, and not for herself and it was now become impossible for her any way to find any more food, while the famine pierced through her very bowels and marrow, when also her passion was fired to a degree beyond the famine itself nor did she consult with any thing but with her passion and the necessity she was in. She then attempted a most unnatural thing and snatching up her son, who was a child sucking at her breast,

she said, “O thou miserable infant! for whom shall I preserve thee in this war, this famine, and this sedition? As to the war with the Romans, if they preserve our lives, we must be slaves. This famine also will destroy us, even before that slavery comes upon us. Yet are these seditious rogues more terrible than both the other. Come on be thou my food, and be thou a fury to these seditious varlets, and a by-word to the world, which is all that is now wanting to complete the calamities of us Jews.” As soon as she had said this, she slew her son, and then roasted him, and eat the one half of him, and kept the other half by her concealed.

Upon this the seditious came in presently, and smelling the horrid scent of this food, they threatened her that they would cut her throat immediately if she did not show them what food she had gotten ready. She replied that she had saved a very fine portion of it for them, and withal uncovered what was left of her son. Hereupon they were seized with a horror and amazement of mind, and stood astonished at the sight, when she said to them, “This is mine own son, and what hath been done was mine own doing! Come, eat of this food for I have eaten of it myself! Do not you pretend to be either more tender than a woman, or more compassionate than a mother but if you be so scrupulous, and do abominate this my sacrifice, as I have eaten the one half, let the rest be reserved for me also.” After which those men went out trembling, being never so much aftrighted at any thing as they were at this, and with some difficulty they left the rest of that meat to the mother. Upon which the whole city was full of this horrid action immediately and while every body laid this miserable case before their own eyes, they trembled, as if this unheard of action had been done by themselves. So those that were thus distressed by the famine were very desirous to die, and those already dead were esteemed happy, because they had not lived long enough either to hear or to see such miseries.

I’m surprised that there is no reference to a BAR discussion some years ago on the then, latest, translation of ‘Molech’. It was determined at the time, that Molech was not a ‘god’, but, a practice, so, ” Offering to Molech ” would be an incorrect phrasing. Experts in the field had just released a number of more complete, & contemporary translations. I’m not a good article saver & I apologize. I can’t save everything, but perhaps someone at BAR, or elsewhere may more completely recall the issue. As far as I can recollect, it was in 󈨠-95.

One of the practices that the prophet Mohammed forbade when Islam came to power in Arabia was ending the common practice of female infant murder (usually burial or simply left open in the desert sand) by pagan Arabs of the 6th century and before. It may have been a common practice across a number nations and tribes of North Africa, including Carthage. The article doesn’t state whether the infant were male or female – this may be an important consideration.

good article 2 things all same age and animals also there you go

Where did the assertion come from that Phoenecians and Carthaginians didn’t perform in child sacrifice? This is a commonly known practice that Baal/Molech were worshipped by Carthage. The Roman historians (Livy, Plurarch) mentioned their child sacrifices as a justification for Roman provocation in the First Punic War (whether it was a real justification is up for debate). Prior to the First Punic War Rome had maintained an “Italy only” policy. Carthage had a very difficult time maintaining large armies to combat Roman due to their child sacrifice, to the extent that they had to call in mercenaries and foreign generals (Xanthippus for example). This appears to be shallow research, Carthage was well known to offer their children to Molech.

This is an old debate. It usually means certain people refuse to accept the fact a pagan or idol worshiping society committed acts that Jews and Christians abhorred. To them, anything that Jews or Christians did was wrong or inaccurate. Facts, writings by others all must wrong.

The fires of Moleck is a complete misinterpretation and translation of the Hebrew text that started with the Greek Bible or LXX. LMLK is what’s translated as ” of Molech”, and there are hundreds if not thousands of LMLK artifacts all over modern Israel. It just means “of the king”.

The ancient Greeks always had the practice, it was called “exposure”. They would leave their unwanted babies out in a field for birds or strangers.

Looking more closely, 2 Chr. 28.3 claims it was a Canaanite custom, though Chronicles was drawn together later than Kings and the prophets, which don’t mention this tradition.

@Hilary: Yes, I was wondering this too. Once a custom like that is part of a society though, I wonder if some wanted—as well as unwanted—children may have been sacrificed: the more the sacrificial offering means to the supplicant, the greater the chance of being blessed tends to be a pretty universal part of sacrifice ritual, as I understand it. Philo apparently “specified that the sacrificed child was best-loved”.

Though I suppose we’re all glad it’s not part of our culture, I don’t think we can necessarily judge them, or claim we would never had done that had we been conditioned in the same way, any more than that we would have been one of the few who passed the Milgram experiment. That said, the biblical prophets’ declaration of the horror and folly of this man-made institution in Judah (inspired perhaps by Phoenicia, though there’s no indication in the text of this) of course seems justified.

It’s also good to have some scholars presenting the case against, regardless of how damning the evidence may seem, though I do wonder how emotionally invested some experts become. It must have been frustrating for the perception of Phoenicians as child-sacrificers to have persisted before the discovery of these cemeteries, while there was no solid unbiased evidence. A good (if macabre) example that absence of evidence isn’t evidence of absence.

Not disputing that child sacrifice was practised, but an alternative take on WHY it was practised:

Before modern methods of contraception, virtually every society had a method for “disposing” of unwanted children. Even today “baby hatches” exist in some countries as a place where mothers can dump unwanted infants to be raised in an orphanage or adopted, with no questions asked. In certain EU countries, women have a legal right to give birth anonymously such that the infant is automatically taken into the care of the state and the mother is never identified. And new, grisly evidence has recently been emerging of the casual cruelty and high mortality rates in Irish orphanages of the 20th century.

It’s widely known that in Sparta and other parts of ancient Greece, unwanted or malformed infants were routinely “exposed” – deserted and left to die. The polite fiction that someone might, just might, come along and save an exposed infant enabled people to pretend this wasn’t really murder, even though the means of dying was particularly prolonged and distressing.

It seems to me quite plausible that in phoenician society ritual sacrifice, or “passing through the fire to Molech” [as the Hebrew bible describes it] may have been viewed as the most dignified means of disposing of unwanted infants. Or to put it another, if you’re going to kill your child anyway, dedicating his/her life to your god at least shows a degree of respect.

This is not to defend an utterly abominable custom, but to set it in context.

The evidence is indisputable and screaming. The Bible sources should be taken more seriously. Nothing that was written there could not be a common knowledge at the time that it was written.


New Finds At The Punic Tophet Of Carthage

Full of history, Tunisia has non even in addition to hence revealed all its secrets. Influenza A virus subtype H5N1 recent uncovering inwards the remains of ancient Carthage is proof of this. Archaeologists convey discovered novel urns in addition to objects that convey been carefully buried for centuries spell digging nether a slice of dry soil on Jugurtha Street, which borders the electrical current Carthaginian Tophet.

According to Jerbania, this monument is of peachy importance. It traces the history of Carthage, from its nascence to its fall. "In the Tophet, 1 finds everything, from ceramics, bones, inscriptions alongside the identities of the dedicators, their offerings. inwards short, an insight into the agency of life of the Carthaginians in addition to a precise persuasion of their religious beliefs."


Tophet at Carthage

Lihat semua gambar

Tophets are at the center of one of the most contentious archaeological debates surrounding the region of northern Africa that was once part of the ancient Carthaginian Empire. The enigmatic ancient cemeteries are believed to have been used for the ritual sacrifice of children and animals.

The burial site at Carthage in Tunisia, as well as others in the region, was discovered in the 20th century. It, along with the others, contained funerary urns stuffed with the cremated ashes and bone fragments of young children. Over 20,000 urns buried under stelae (stone slabs with inscriptions) were found at the tophet in Carthage, which is one of the largest cemeteries from the Phoenician period.

These findings and subsequent research, which included referencing accounts in ancient texts, propelled the theory that infants were sacrificed and cremated as part of a ritual to give thanks for favors from deities, mainly the goddess Tanit and the god Baal.

For many years, the rumors that the ancient Carthaginians had sacrificed their own young was considered to be propaganda spread by the Greeks and Romans, who disliked them and the wider Phoenician civilization.

Over the decades, several groups of historians have debated the subject, but they have yet to reach a concrete answer. Most recently, a team led by an Oxford historian ruled there was strong evidence that ritual sacrifices did, in fact, take place. It wasn’t an isolated incident either—it happened over several centuries.

Today, the tombstones and ritual altars form part of a historical site outside the capital city of Tunis, which was granted World Heritage status in 1979. The cemetery, a hybrid of a sanctuary and a necropolis, forms a striking picture. When it was at its largest, it was over 64,000 square feet and spanned nine different levels.

The word “tophet” comes from a place described in Hebrew scripture, where people who were influenced by an ancient Canaanite religion burned and sacrificed children to their gods. It’s also another term for hell.

Know Before You Go

The Archeological site of Carthage is 1,600 feet (500 meters) from Carthage Salammbo Station.


Kandungan

The name is possibly derived from the Hebrew toph = drum, because drums were used to drown the cries of children, but possibly connected with a root word meaning “burning” - the "place of burning". In the King James Version, the form Tophet is used, except in 2 Kings 23:10, where it spelt Topheth.

The following references are made in the Hebrew Bible: “They have built the high places of Topheth, which is in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire” (Jeremiah 7:31). On account of this abomination Topheth and the Valley of Hinnom should be called "The Valley of Slaughter: for they shall bury in Topheth, till there be no place to bury," the Revised Version margin “because there shall be no place else” ( Jeremiah 7:32 ) see also Jer 19:6 , 19:12-14. Josiah is said to have “defiled Topheth” as part of his great religious reforms ( 2 Kings 23:10 ). The site would seem to have been either at the lower end of the Valley of Hinnom, near where Akeldama is now pointed out, or in the open ground where this valley joins the Kidron Valley.


Carthage – The Punic Harbors and the Tophet

Join us for a tale of two halves in Carthage as Mohamed, your guide, teaches you about the Roman and Carthaginian empires. Learn about the harbours that were instrumental for the Roman military and mercantile trade, as well as the Tophet Tombs, the supposed site where Carthaginian families sacrificed their first male child. A tour for history and archaeology enthusiasts alike, and certainly not one to be missed!

Meet MedTunis

MedTunis

Mohamed Halouani, Tunisian native. Mohamed transformed his profound passion for travel and history into a creative and diversified educational career, designing and carrying out multiple archaeological and cultural trips for various institutions such as The Detroit Institute of Art, the Textile Museum, the American Museum of Natural History, and many more organizations. After having received his degrees in English and Spanish, Mohamed completed his European Master's in linguistics and Hispanic studies at the Sorbonne University in Paris. He has extensive knowledge on Islamic architecture and Eastern decorative elements, as well as, archaeology and history. An excellent lecturer on ethnographic and anthropological subjects, he will introduce you not only to the historical jewels of Tunisia but he'll also reveal to you the culture and history. He is the Co-founder of the Tunisian Interprofessional Federation for Tourism and President of the Cultural Tourism in Tunisia.

Apa yang diharapkan

Bersedia untuk sesuatu yang istimewa. We’re travelling to Tunis & Carthage with no passport, no plane ticket and no luggage. Namun anda akan mengalami semua pemandangan, suara dan cerita hanya dengan komputer riba, makanan ringan kegemaran anda dan pencipta kandungan yang menakjubkan.

The tour will last about 40 mins and will be live-streamed by your content creator directly from Tunis & Carthage . Lupakan tayangan slaid atau video pra-rakaman, ini adalah siaran langsung dan apa sahaja boleh berlaku!

Semasa dalam lawatan, anda dapat melihat video skrin penuh pencipta kandungan anda dan persekitarannya, berinteraksi dengan mereka dan pelancong lain melalui sembang langsung, melihat di mana anda berada di dunia pada peta dan menunjukkan penghargaan anda dengan petua.

Mengapa mereka disokong tip?

Kami menjalankan lawatan ini berdasarkan sokongan untuk menjadikannya seboleh mungkin. Mereka bebas untuk bergabung, tetapi anda mempunyai pilihan untuk memberikan tip semasa lawatan.

Sebilangan besar tip anda terus menyokong saluran, sementara yang lain membantu Heygo terus membina tempat yang mendekatkan dunia.

Lihat lawatan beraksi

Cara menyertai

Tempah tempat anda dengan memilih masa untuk membuat tempahan. Setelah selesai, anda akan dapat melihat tempahan anda di halaman Perjalanan anda dan kami akan menghantar pengesahan e-mel kepada anda dengan pautan untuk menyertai lawatan ini.

Untuk pengalaman menonton terbaik, sertai komputer menggunakan Google Chrome.


Tonton videonya: Tophet de Carthage ou de Salammbô - The Tophet of Carthage, Tunisia. (Mungkin 2022).