Ptolemy I and the transformation of Egypt, 404-282 BCE

Ptolemy I and the Transformation of Egypt 404ndash282 BCE

MnemosyneSupplements

history and archaeologyof classical antiquity

Series Editor

Hans vanWees (University College London)

Associate Editors

Jan Paul Crielaard (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam)Benet Salway (University College London)

volume 415

The titles published in this series are listed at brillcommns‑haca

Ptolemy I and the Transformationof Egypt 404ndash282 BCE

Edited by

Paul McKechnieJennifer A Cromwell

LEIDEN | BOSTON

Cover image description From left A Nectanebo II gold stater from the 350s340s A Ptolemy I stater issuedin the name of Philip III of Macedon while Ptolemy was satrap of Egypt (ie between 316 and 310BCE)Images published by kind permission of wwwcngcoinscomSilver tetradrachm (1428g) minted by Ptolemy I (305ndash283BCE) Collection of the Australian Centre forAncient Numismatic Studies Macquarie University (ACANS 05A03) Photography courtesy of ACANS

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names McKechnie Paul 1957- editor | Cromwell Jennifer editorTitle Ptolemy I and the transformation of Egypt 404-282 BCE edited by Paul

McKechnie Jennifer A CromwellDescription Leiden Boston Brill 2018 | Series Mnemosyne supplements

History and archaeology of classical antiquity ISSN 2352-8656 volume 415 |Includes bibliographical references and index

Identifiers LCCN 2018016199 (print) | LCCN 2018017559 (ebook) |ISBN 9789004367623 (ebook) | ISBN 9789004366961 (hardback alk paper)

Subjects LCSH EgyptndashHistoryndash332-30 BC | EgyptndashHistoryndashTo 332 BC | Ptolemy ISoter King of Egypt -283 BC

Classification LCC DT92P7 (ebook) | LCC DT92P7 P85 2018 (print) |DDC 932021ndashdc23

LC record available at httpslccnlocgov2018016199

Typeface for the Latin Greek and Cyrillic scripts ldquoBrillrdquo See and download brillcombrill‑typeface

ISSN 2352-8656ISBN 978-90-04-36696-1 (hardback)ISBN 978-90-04-36762-3 (e-book)

Copyright 2018 by Koninklijke Brill NV Leiden The NetherlandsKoninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill Brill Hes amp De Graaf Brill Nijhoff Brill RodopiBrill Sense and Hotei PublishingAll rights reserved No part of this publication may be reproduced translated stored in a retrieval systemor transmitted in any form or by any means electronic mechanical photocopying recording or otherwisewithout prior written permission from the publisherAuthorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Koninklijke Brill NV providedthat the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center 222 Rosewood DriveSuite 910 Danvers MA 01923 USA Fees are subject to change

This book is printed on acid-free paper and produced in a sustainable manner

Contents

Preface viiList of Figures and Tables ixNotes on Contributors xi

Introduction 1Paul McKechnie

1 Ptolemy I in Egypt Continuity and Change 6Dorothy J Thompson

2 The GreekWars The Fight for Egypt 27Paul McKechnie

3 Soter and the Calendars 46daggerChris Bennett

4 The Role of Coinage in the Political Economy of Fourth CenturyEgypt 70

Henry P Colburn

5 Pharaoh and Temple Building in the Fourth Century BCE 120MartinaMinas-Nerpel

6 The Satrap Stele of Ptolemy A Reassessment 166Boyo G Ockinga

7 Identity and Cross-cultural Interaction in Early Ptolemaic AlexandriaCremation in Context 199

Thomas Landvatter

Index of Names and Subjects 235

Preface

In 525BCE near Pelusium Cambyses and his Persians fought and routed thearmy of Egypt led by Psammenitus (Psamtik III last pharaoh of the Twenty-sixth Dynasty) then laid siege to Memphis and took control of the country1Eighty or so years later Herodotus saw a miracle (θῶμα δὲ μέγα εἶδον) which isto say that he heard of it from locals (πυθόμενος παρὰ τῶν ἐπιχωρίων)2 the Per-sian skulls left on the battlefield could be holed by throwing a pebble at thembut theEgyptian skulls from the samebattle couldhardly bebrokenwith a largestone

Egyptiansmdashthis is the point of the unreliable storymdashwere resilient Fortyyears or so after Herodotusrsquo visit to Egypt they found a way of departing fromthe Persian orbit The skull-cracking came later in their resistance to multi-ple invasions over a sixty-year period Like an old-time pharaoh Nectanebo Ilongest-reigning and most powerful ruler in these years attributed his successto his goddess Neith as stated in the stele from Naucratis and its twin fromHeracleion3

She raised his majesty above millionsAppointed him ruler of the Two LandsShe placed her uraeus upon his headCaptured for him the noblesrsquo heartsShe enslaved for him the peoplersquos heartsAnd destroyed all his enemiesMighty monarch guarding EgyptCopper wall enclosing EgyptPowerful one with active armSword master who attacks a hostFiery-hearted at seeing his foesHeart gouger of the treason-hearted

That stele itself however its wording echoing the Egypt of long ago testifiedto the change which surrounded the Two Lands and would sweep them alongwith it Its purpose was to regulate and tax trade with the outside worldmdashand

1 Hdt 310ndash132 Hdt 3123 Lichtheim Ancient Egyptian Literature 86

viii preface

that outside world in the 340s brought Egypt Artaxerxes III ldquothe king of kingsthe king of countries the king of this earthrdquo4 then in 332 ldquoAlexander destroyerof the Persiansrdquo5 who was followed by his successor Ptolemy

The impact which the outside world had for good and ill on Egypt made thefourth century into a period of transformation for the country In a conferenceat Macquarie University in September 2011 the authors whose work is pub-lished in this volume met to discuss that transformation under a broad rangeof headings Predecessor volumes in this informal series are my and PhilippeGuillaumersquos Ptolemy II Philadelphus and hisWorld (2008) JoachimQuackrsquos andAndrea JoumlrdensrsquoAumlgypten zwischen inneremZwist und aumluszligeremDruck (2011) andKostas Buraselis Mary Stefanou and Dorothy J Thompsonrsquos The Ptolemies theSea and the Nile (2013)

Jennifer Cromwell and I wish to thank those who were present for theirenthusiasm and their forbearance and Dorothy J Thompson in particular forher encouragement and counsel We wish to thank Macquarie University foraccommodating the conference and the Ian Potter Foundation for a granttowards the costs

PMcKMacquarie UniversitySydney AustraliaNovember 2017

Bibliography

Kent RG 1950 Old Persian Grammar Texts Lexicon New Haven American OrientalSociety

Lichtheim M 1980 Ancient Egyptian Literature vol 3 The Late Period Berkeley LosAngeles London University of California Press

4 From his inscription on the western staircase of the palace of Darius at Persepolis A3Pa (cfKent Old Persian 107ndash115)

5 Theocritus Idyll 1718ndash19

List of Figures and Tables

Figures

31 Drift of Ptolemaic Dystros 1 against the Babylonian Calendar 264ndash210 5432 Biennial Intercalation vs Lunisolar Alignment 336ndash264 5533 Tax years and regnal years of Ptolemy I and Ptolemy II during the

coregency 6034 Property tax rate in Thebesmdashcoregency vs accession-based dating 6341 AR imitation Athenian tetradrachm (Buttrey Type X) from the Fayum Hoard

(CoinH 10442) Ann Arbor Kelsey Museum of Archaeology 1984010330Reproduced courtesy of the Kelsey Museum of Archaeology University ofMichigan 87

42 AR imitation Athenian tetradrachm (Buttrey Type B) from the Fayum Hoard(CoinH 10442) Ann Arbor Kelsey Museum of Archaeology 1984010042Reproduced courtesy of the Kelsey Museum of Archaeology University ofMichigan 88

43 AR imitation Athenian tetradrachm (Buttrey Type M) from the Fayum Hoard(CoinH 10442) Ann Arbor Kelsey Museum of Archaeology 1984010041Reproduced courtesy of the Kelsey Museum of Archaeology University ofMichigan 89

44 AR possible imitation Athenian tetradrachm (pi style) from Nablus (CoinH9441) Ann Arbor Kelsey Museum of Archaeology 85606 Reproduced courtesyof the Kelsey Museum of Archaeology University of Michigan 91

45 AU stater of Tachos London British Museum 192508081 Reproduced courtesyof the Trustees of the British Museum 95

46 AU stater of Nectanebo II London British Museum 195410061 Reproducedcourtesy of the Trustees of the British Museum 96

47 AR tetradrachm of Artaxerxes III from CoinH 10244 New York AmericanNumismatic Society 20081539 Reproduced courtesy of the AmericanNumismatic Society 100

48 AR tetradrachm of Sabaces New York American Numismatic Society194410075462 Reproduced courtesy of the American NumismaticSociety 101

51 Map of the Nile Delta with archaeological sites (after Arnold Temples of theLast Pharaohs fig XVI on p 20) 126

52 Ruins of the Iseum at Behbeit el-Hagar (photograph M Minas-Nerpel) 12753 Ruins of the temple at Bubastis (photograph D Rosenow) 12954 Map of Upper Egypt (after Arnold Temples of the Last Pharaohs fig XVIII on

p 22) 136

x list of figures and tables

55 Sphinx avenue linking the temples of Luxor and Karnak (photographTL Sagrillo) 137

56 Elkab enclosure wall (photograph M Minas-Nerpel) 13857 Philae kiosk of Nectanebo I (photograph M Minas-Nerpel) 14458 Elephantine temple of Khnum gate of Alexander IV (photograph

M Minas-Nerpel) 14859 Tuna el-Gebel chapel of Ptolemy I Soter now in Roemer- and Pelizaeus-

Museum Hildesheim inv no 1883 (photograph Roemer- andPelizaeus-Museum Hildesheim) 152

71 Map of Alexandria with locations of major cemeteries Fig 28 in McKenzie TheArchitecture of Alexandria and Egypt 201

72 View of Shatby in 2012 focusing on Hypogeum A Photo by the author 20673 Plan of Shatby cemetery Main plan from Breccia La Necropoli di Sciatbi Table

A with tombs in Section A numbered according to earlier plan in 1905 (lsquoLaNecropoli di Sciatbirsquo) preliminary publication 208

74 Plan of Hypogeum A From Breccia La Necropoli di Sciatbi Table 1 withlabeling redone for clarity 216

Tables

21 The fight for Egypt Persian operations from the beginning of Artaxerxes IIrsquosreign 31

41 Fourth century coin hoards 8242a Fourth century fractional issues in silver by weight 9842b Fourth century fractional issues in bronze by weight 9971 Object types with number of graves in which they appear (ldquoincidencesrdquo) in

parentheses and whether a type appears in a cremation burial inhumationburial or mixed-type context The type ldquovesselsrdquo includes all ceramic andalabaster vessels the italicized types are the different categories of vessel forwhich a function could be determined based on the Shatby site report 212

72 Hadra vases from Shatby cemetery arranged in ascending chronological orderDerived from Enklaar 1992 56 table 8 with information added from elsewherein his work Style shape painter and decoration categories are Enklaarrsquos as arethe suggested dates The corresponding catalogue number in Breccia LaNecropoli di Sciatbi is included Number 19100 marked with a was found inroom h of Hypogeum A 213

73 Association of cremation and inhumation burials with a given tomb typeTomb types are categorized by architecture type and single interment versusmultiple interment 214

Notes on Contributors

daggerChris Bennett(1953ndash2014) was a freelance consultant whose chief technical work after 2001was as a senior designer and architect of security systems for satellite and cableTV in the US and the UK As a visiting scholar at the University of CaliforniaSan Diego he published in the field of Egyptian Ptolemaic Roman and Indianchronology

Henry P Colburnis Lecturer in Art History at the University of Southern California His researchfocuses on cross-cultural interaction in the eastern Mediterranean and heis now completing a book on the archaeology of Egypt during the period ofAchaemenid Persian rule there

Jennifer A Cromwellis a Marie Curie Research Fellow in the Department of Cross-cultural andRegional Studies in the University of Copenhagen Her most recent book isRecording Village Life A Coptic Scribe in Early Islamic Egypt (Ann Arbor 2017)

Thomas Landvatteris Assistant Professor of Classics and Humanities at Reed College in Port-land Oregon USA His research concerns mortuary behaviour social identityand the material effects of cross-cultural interaction and imperialism in theAncient Mediterranean with a particular focus on Ptolemaic Egypt and thewider Hellenistic Near East

Paul McKechnieis Associate Professor (CoRE) in Ancient Cultures Macquarie University

MartinaMinas-Nerpelis Professor of Egyptology at Swansea University

Boyo G Ockingais anAssociate Professor in theDepartment of AncientHistoryMacquarieUni-versity

Dorothy J Thompsonis a Fellow of Girton College Cambridge where she used to direct studies inClassics

copy koninklijke brill nv leiden 2018 | doi 1011639789004367623_002

Introduction

Paul McKechnie

This book has a unique aim to describe and explain change in Egypt duringthe fourth century BCEmdashthe century of Alexander theGreatrsquos conquest and ofthe takeover by Alexanderrsquos general Ptolemy son of Lagus who in the fullnessof time became pharaoh and the founding figure in a ruling dynasty whichwas to last almost three hundred years It has been observed before nowmdashfor example by JG Manning in The Last Pharaohsmdashthat the Ptolemies werethe longest-lasting dynasty in Egyptian history1 but their record and the com-pelling attractiveness of the empire they presided over have induced nearly allwriters to make 323 into Year One in a way which has closed down analyticalpossibilities rather than opening them up

The Library was institutionally pivotal a sine qua non for the growth ofldquothe archiverdquo as Tim Whitmarsh would call it2 Alexandria became the largestandmost vibrant city in the world home to Herophilusrsquo ground-breaking (andsoon forgotten) work on human anatomy home to Euclidrsquos Elements home toEratosthenesrsquo sieve The imperial politics of Hellenistic Egypt began with theruin of Perdiccas bearer of Alexanderrsquos ring advanced through early alignmentwith Rome ended in intriguemdashCleopatra and Caesar Antony and CleopatraAll that Ptolemaicbrilliance however has stolen the limelight fromEgypt itselfwhich in the long run ought to be the star of the show Except by convention323 was not Year One and a proper explanation of how events went forward inEgypt calls for examination of circumstances which were working themselvesout in Egypt long before Ptolemy set foot there

Ptolemy has found his historians and biographers notablyWM Ellis (1994)CA Caroli (2007) and recently IanWorthington (2016)Worthingtonrsquos accounttouches on Egypt from when Alexander arrived there3 and in substance fromthe time of Ptolemyrsquos takeover after Alexanderrsquos death4 For Egypt before Al-exanderWorthington echoes a familiar narrative the Egyptians hated the Per-sians and the reason for that hatred was the contempt in which the Persiansas rulers held the Egyptians ldquokilling their sacred bulls in a blatant disregard of

1 Manning Last Pharaohs 312 Cf Whitmarsh Ancient Greek Literature3 Worthington Ptolemy I 32ndash354 Worthington Ptolemy I 89ndash212

2 mckechnie

native religionrdquo5 As a biographer of Ptolemy Worthington allows himself nolapse in concentrationmdashin his book Egypt comes into focus only as the sceneof the second half of Ptolemyrsquos life

Persian Egyptmdasha seldom-used phrasemdashmore or less still awaits its histo-rian Thismodest book cannot fill that voidWhen someonewith the right skill-set to draw together the complex sources and diverse modern studies whichbear on Egypt between 525 and 323 comes forward however I am certain thatthe studies in the present collectionwill throw important light on thematter inhand The excitement generated by the new Achaemenid history will perhapsprompt someone to develop a special study of the country which elsewhere inthis book I have called ldquoa jewel in the Persian crownrdquo

In an agenda-setting chapter Dorothy J Thompsonprofiles Ptolemyandshows how Alexanderrsquos conquest and Ptolemyrsquos takeover meshed with exist-ing conditions in Egypt There was precedent in Egypt both relatively recentand from ancient history (which some priests knew of) for foreigners as rulersbut Ptolemy commencedmdashas the Persian rulers of whatManethowas to num-ber as theTwenty-seventhDynasty did notmdashby living in Egypt and positioninghimself and his government consciously with attention to Egyptian as well asMacedonian precedent The Ptolemies although at times ambitious in rela-tion to territorial acquisition outside Egypt (Cyrene Cyprus an island empire)eschewed the radical flexibility in borders which over time characterized theSeleucid and Antigonid kingdoms Thompson investigates how Ptolemy Irsquosown disposition coalesced with the characteristics of the country he ruled inthe second half of his lifetime to give rise to a distinctive and long-lasting state

Before the coming of Alexander to Egypt however an enigma surroundshow the empire of the Persians first fought for six decades to recover the landand then after a decade in command once more proved unable to defendit The focus in my Paul McKechniersquos chapter is on how the loss of Egyptlooked from the heart of Persian powermdashand what Artaxerxes II and his sonArtaxerxes III wanted from the Greek world in the decades when reconquestwas in its varying stages of planning failure (satrapsrsquo revolts) renewed endeav-our and seemingly final successmdashsoon followedbyAlexanderrsquos capture of Tyreand its sequel in his takeover in Egypt Ptolemy too had his fight for Egypt atfirst theNile crocodiles savedhim (as did Perdiccasrsquo officers) and later his strat-egy for defending Egypt involved seeking control of Syria as Tachos had donein the days of the Thirtieth Dynasty

5 Worthington Ptolemy I 33

introduction 3

One of the benefits for the Macedonians of taking Egypt over was thatit brought them into contact with ldquothe only intelligent calendar which everexisted in human historyrdquo as Otto Neugebauer called it6 The late Chris Ben-nett in ldquoSoter and the Calendarsrdquo quotes Neugebauer and engages with thedrama of the initial encounter between Macedonian and Egyptian timekeep-ing The Hyksos foreigners who ruled Egypt as the Fifteenth Dynasty in theseventeenth and sixteenth centuries BCE at first had their own calendar until acalendar reform left theEgyptian calendar unchallengedThePersians retainedtheir ldquoownrdquo calendar (ie the Babylonian calendar) for their dealings withEgyptmdashbut it was a system which failed to leave a mark on how things weredone in Egypt after the Persians were gone Bennett comments on how inmany other places in the Macedonian sphere the calendar was ldquoan instrumentof policyrdquomdashthat is imperial policy Ptolemy Soter throughout his reign reliedon the Egyptian calendar formost Egyptian purposes and theMacedonian cal-endar for Macedonian purposes (including taxationmdashan area in which anyEgyptian concern took second place to a Macedonian concern of overridingurgency)

One of the most significant parts of the transformation which occurred inEgypt was the shift over the fourth century from restricted use of coinsmdashveryuncommon in the fifth centurymdashto a Ptolemaic political economy which wasmonetized to an important degree Henry P Colburnrsquos chapter a ground-breaking study surveys the role of coinage in Egypt across the fourth centurya study which commences from an analysis of what constituted wealth andmoney in the patchwork of temple-based economies which added up to Egyptin the Twenty-eighth to Thirtieth Dynasties The influence of Athens is writlarge in the use of the Athenian tetradrachm (and Egyptian copies of it) dur-ing the decades of indigenous rule in Egypt and in the decade after the Persianreconquest coinsmdashstill imitation Athenian tetradrachmsmdashwere minted withthe names of Artaxerxes Sabaces Mazaces However once Ptolemy had begunminting coinsmdashfirst in Memphis then AlexandriamdashAthenian tetradrachmsceased to be buried in coin hoards the journey to the closed monetary systemcharacteristic of the Ptolemaic state had commenced

Throughout Egypt the temples held land collected and stored produceand existed symbiotically with the pharaoh and the central governmentmdashor a regional ruler in periods of divided authority Neglect of temples wenttogether with decay in infrastructure and general institutional weakness peri-ods of vigour and expansion went together with growth in the temple sector

6 Neugebauer Exact Sciences in Antiquity 8

4 mckechnie

redevelopment and creation of new temples When Alexander decreed thebuilding of Alexandria he specified what deities were to have temples theremdashGreek deities except Isis But Alexanderrsquos new departure came on the back ofan unusually active period of temple-building in Egypt in the earlier fourthcentury and particularly in the days of the Thirtieth Dynasty In her chapteran innovative analysis based on discussion of major sites Martina Minas-Nerpel examines the dynamic of pharaoh and temple building across thefourth century The temple was the cosmos and its decoration showed thepharaoh carrying out the rituals which ensured the good estate of Egypt Therulers of the Twenty-seventh Dynasty the Persian kings had not taken actionto co-opt this architectural and ritual structure but Nectanebo I reassertedthe convention in new temple work across Egypt Then during Alexanderthe Greatrsquos short reign extensions to temples went ahead in several loca-tions evidence for Alexanderrsquos deliberate policy of strengthening relationsbetween church and state Accidents of non-preservation have been less kindto Ptolemy Irsquos new temples but enough survives to infer a master plan imple-mented in a range of developments

In the next-to-last chapter of the book Boyo Ockinga subjects the SatrapStele chef drsquooeuvre of hieroglyphic documents of Soterrsquos reign to a more de-tailed linguistic and historical examination than it has received before Hisfindings underline the sense that institutionalmemory in the formof the learn-ing the Egyptian priesthood could draw on was highly influential in shapingthe way Ptolemy and his government were presented to the Egyptian publicIn 311 he had not yet declared himself pharaohmdashhe remained loyal to Alexan-der IVmdashbut the fingerprints of kingship are all over the stele

Yet at the same timeas all thewell-judgedconformitywithEgyptianexpecta-tions which Ptolemy Soterrsquos regime demonstrated there was large-scalemigra-tion from the Macedonian and Greek world into Egypt and Alexandria espe-cially The impact is evident partly in the burial-places the migrants used andThomas Landvatter in his chapter reanalyses Evaristo Brecciarsquos reports ofhis finds in the Shatby cemetery at Alexandria (in use from the late fourthcentury to the early third) with the aim of looking beyond the conventionwhich used to privilege Hadra vases by classifying them under the headingof art objectsmdashwith the result that finds from excavations at Shatby werereported with insufficient sensitivity to the whole context in which they werediscovered Cremation as un-Egyptian as it was was not only Macedonianmdashalthough inMacedon it had a particular elite connotation and nowhere in theGreek world apparently was cremation the primary method of disposing ofdead bodies Landvatterrsquos work however adds considerable detail to knowl-edge of the use of cremation in the context of the Shatby cemetery and leads

introduction 5

to the inference that cremation in the first half-century or so of Alexandriarsquosexistence operated as a marker of non-indigenous identity rather than of aspecifically Greek or Macedonian identity

Over the long fourth century from 404 to 282 Egypt was transformed TheAchaemenid-ruled Egypt where Herodotus had travelled and found that hewas in opposite-land (where women go shopping and men do the weavingwhere priests have shaven heads while in Greece they have long hair7) becamea destination for Greek migration in a way it never could be in the days ofeighth-century colonizationmdashwhen Mediterranean regions with strong gov-ernments remained able to regulate Greek settlement or disallow it altogetherThe Twenty-eighth and Twenty-ninth Dynasties but especially the ThirtiethDynasty put matters within Egypt back on a track more characteristic of howthings had worked over the centuries before Cambysesrsquo conquest and subse-quently Alexander and his successor Ptolemy maintained vital features of theThirtieth-Dynasty settlement while simultaneously building an innovative set-tler society on foundations derived from their Macedonian heritage

Bibliography

Caroli CA 2007 Ptolemaios I SoterHerrscher zweierKulturen Konstanz BadawiArtesAfro Arabica

Ellis WM 1994 Ptolemy of Egypt London RoutledgeLewis N 1986 Greeks in Ptolemaic Egypt Oxford Oxford University PressMcCaskie TC 2012 ldquo lsquoAs on aDarkling Plainrsquo Practitioners Publics Propagandists and

Ancient Historiographyrdquo Comparative Studies in Society and History 54 145ndash173Manning JG 2010 The Last Pharaohs Princeton and Oxford Princeton University

PressNeugebauer O 1957 The Exact Sciences in Antiquity Providence Brown University

PressWhitmarsh T 2004 Ancient Greek Literature Cambridge Polity PressWorthington I 2016 Ptolemy I King and Pharaoh of Egypt Oxford Oxford University

Press

7 Hdt 135ndash36


chapter 1

Ptolemy I in Egypt Continuity and Change

Dorothy J Thompson

The sudden and unexpected death of Alexander in Babylon in the summerof 323BCE was immediately followed by disagreement and dispute among hiskey generals over the succession As recipient of the kingrsquos signet ring Perdic-cas took the role of regent for Philip Arrhidaeus Alexanderrsquos half-brother whothoughmentally impairedwas nownominally appointed king and in the ensu-ing (first) division of territory in the words of Diodorus Siculus he ldquogave Egyptrdquoto Ptolemy son of Lagus1 As so often with public announcements on key mat-ters of state the background to this ldquogiftrdquomust be left to the imagination Itmayhave been the result of long hard negotiation but whatever went on behindclosed doors there is no doubt that Ptolemy made the most of what he wasoffered He made for Egypt immediately and finding a healthy treasury there(with some 8000 talents) he set about enlisting mercenaries to build up anarmy and to reinforce the garrisons2 He was after all a general of long expe-rience who had marched with Alexander all the way This was a world wheremilitary strength came first and Ptolemy was well aware of this But there wasmore to Ptolemyrsquos approach

Ptolemy so Diodorus reports took Egypt without difficulty and he treatedthe inhabitants in a benevolent manner (philanthrocircpocircs) A large number offriends flocked to join him there because of his fairness (epieikeia) ldquoBenev-olentrdquo (philanthrocircpos) and ldquofairrdquo (epieikecircs) are adjectives used elsewhere todescribe Ptolemy who was also said to be generous (euergetikos) a man whoshowed personal bravery (idia andreia) and treated those who came to himwith cordiality and kindness3 The account of Diodorus is consistently positive

1 Diod Sic 182ndash31 tecircn Aigypton edocircken2 Diod Sic 181413 Diod Sic 18141 acting philanthrocircpocircs and showing epieikeia 333 generous and fair (euer-

getikos kai epieikecircs) granting all the leaders freedom of speech (parrhecircsia) 344 personalprowess (autos aristeuocircn) 395 personal bravery (idia andreia) 19555 his kindness (chrecircs-totecircs) showing a cordiality and generosity (to ektenes kai philanthrocircpon) towards those whofled to him 561 his kindness (philanthrocircpia) towards Seleucus On Ptolemyrsquos ldquopeople skillsrdquosee further McKechnie in this volume

ptolemy i in egypt continuity and change 7

and I use it here to introduce my subject since it raises the question of therole of the individual in the events of which he was part For Ptolemy son ofLagus was soon to become the first of a new dynasty of Macedonian pharaohsin the age-old land of Egypt How far can the character of this man be seento have combined with his political strategic and military acumen to explainthe success of the early generations of Ptolemaic Egypt the longest-lasting ofAlexanderrsquos successor kingdoms

In considering the interplay of events and the role that Ptolemy played firstas satrap and then as king the overarching questions that concern me hereare those of continuity and change How far did Ptolemy adopt or adapt thesituation he inherited and what sort of innovations did he make Such ques-tions apply not just to the period immediately beforemdashto the experience ofAlexanderrsquos conquest and the set-up he put in placemdashbut to earlier periodstoo For during the first half of the fourth century BCE under the ThirtiethDynasty (404ndash342BCE) which included the reigns of Nectanebo I and II Egypthad once again enjoyed a period of independence before the second periodof Achaemenid rule (343ndash332BCE) that was ended by Alexanderrsquos conquestYet earlier the first dynasty of Persian rulers (Twenty-seventh Dynasty 525ndash404BCE) followed the (Egyptian) Saite kings of theTwenty-sixthDynasty (664ndash525BCE) Egypt was no stranger to foreign rulers but in the face of similarchallenges these rulers differed in their approach and the new Macedonianrulers appear well attuned to the record of their Persian predecessors

One final aimof this contribution is to draw attention to the range of sourcesavailable to the historian of the periodmdashmonuments and buildings inscrip-tions and coins literary and historical texts ostraca and papyri in a range ofdifferent languages (Egyptian both hieroglyphs and demotic Aramaic andGreek) All of these are limited in coverage often frustratingly inconclusive inwhat they tell together they may begin to provide some answers to my ques-tions

Ptolemy son of Lagus was aged around 44 when he acquired Egypt to govern assatrap for the new king Philip Arrhidaeus4 Some ten years older than Alexan-

4 The title of satrap ismdashto datemdashfirst recorded for Ptolemy in a Greek marriage contractPEleph 1 = MChr 2831 (310BCE) in the 14th year of his satrapy In the hieroglyphic ldquoSatrapstelerdquo of 311BCE (Cairo JdE 22182 trans Ritner in Simpson Literature of Ancient Egypt 392ndash397 at 393) Ptolemy is termed ldquoa great Prince who is in Egyptrdquo For his years see Lucian Makr12 Ptolemy died aged 84 having handed rule over to his 25-year old son (in 285BCE) two yearsbefore his death

8 thompson

der under whom he had loyally served he too was Macedonian from theregion of Eordea as we learn from one of Posidippusrsquo poems5 His name Ptole-maios is from the Macedonian form of polemos (war) and that of his fathermdashLa(a)gosmdashis ldquoleader of peoplerdquo And Ptolemy the warlike lived up to his nameCredit for the wealth he found in Egyptrsquos treasury at Memphis must go toCleomenes whom Alexander had left in charge with overall financial respon-sibility6 Cleomenes gets a poor press from Greek sources but for Ptolemy thefull treasury he found inMemphis enabled him to secure the boundaries of hiscountry7

Like his predecessors Alexander had left garrisons at Memphis at Pelusiumon the eastern approach and on the island of Elephantine on the southernborder which on one occasion he used as a place of safe-keeping for dissidentChiotes8 From an earlier date fairly extensive finds of Aramaic papyri provideinformation for the Persian garrison at Elephantine made up of Jews and oth-ers on the island with its connected civilian settlement in Syene (Aswan) onthe eastern bank of the Nile9 This was an obvious place for a garrison and itis not surprising to find continuity here Under the Achaemenids as again thepapyri show relations regularly ran up and down the Nile It seems likely thatthe Nile valley postal service which is later found in place dates in origin fromthe Persian period10 the kingrsquos roads and communications system were fea-tures of the Achaemenid empire

The commanderwhomAlexander left atMemphis Peucestas is nowknownfrom a stray sheet of papyrus with four nail holes in its corners which comesfrom the desert edge of Saqqara and bears an order In Greek it reads ldquo(Order)of Peucestas No entry Priestly propertyrdquo11 Such respect shown by the invadersfor a temple structure is surely illustrative of the approach favoured by Alexan-der and his officers an approach that finds other support After all on arrival at

5 Posidippus (AndashB) 8846 Arrian 354 responsible for control of the easternDelta (ldquoArabiardquo) aroundHeroonpolis for

relations with native rulers (nomarchs) and collection of dues See Burstein ldquoAlexanderrsquosOrganization of Egyptrdquo

7 Ps-AristOec 2233 (1352 andashb) raising cash corndealing (cf [Dem]Dionysod 7) relationswith priests Arrian 7236 a negative view Paus 163 his position and fate cf BaynhamldquoCleomenes of Naucratisrdquo

8 Arrian 353 cf 327 for Elephantine9 Porten Elephantine Papyri in English Thompson ldquoMultilingual Environmentrdquo 395ndash39910 PHib I 11054ndash114 = Select Papyri 397 (c 255BCE) For the earlier Persian system cf Hdt

552ndash5411 Arrian 355 Peucestas son of Macartatus as stratecircgos SB XIV 11942 (331BCE)


the capital of Memphis in the course of his invasion Alexander is said to havesacrificed to Apis the Egyptian sacred bull and the other gods before holdingGreek-style games and musical contests12 When later he came to lay out thefoundations for his new city of Alexandria on the coast along with other tem-ples he included one for Isis the Egyptian goddess13 As so often Alexander setthe tone which Ptolemy was to follow On taking the title of king it is notableone of Ptolemy Irsquos first acts was a decree forbidding the alienation of sacredproperty14 We shall return to this subject below

Ptolemy concentrated first on his military security and when as he hadexpected two years later Perdiccas invaded in an attempt to take Egypt fromhim he was able successfully to hold off his attack Perdiccas came from theeast to Pelusium and somewhat south of there the two sides engaged Ptolemygouged out the eye of his opponentrsquos leading elephant Perdiccas retreated yetfurther south towards Memphis where disaster struck As he tried to organizea river crossing to the island for his troops the stirred-up bed of the river dis-solved and disappeared beneath their feet Two thousandmenwere lost eitherdrowned or consumed by the crocodiles His troops turned against their leaderand Perdiccas was speedily dispatched Ptolemy on the other hand was gen-erous to the defeated troops he himself of course always stood in need ofadditional troops15 He also forewent the chance to take over control of the twokings (Arrhidaeus and Roxanersquos young son Alexander IV)

In repelling Perdiccas Ptolemy had successfully fought off the only invasionthat made it past the Egyptian frontier until that of Antiochus IV in the sec-ond century BCE Egypt was now secure and when at Triparadeisos later in thesame year Antipater oversaw a further division of the satrapies from Alexan-derrsquos empire he left Ptolemy where he was formdashDiodorus reportsmdashit wasimpossible to displace him he seemed to be holding Egypt by virtue of his ownprowess as if it were a prize of war (hoionei doriktecirctos)16 Ptolemy was a mili-

12 Arrian 31413 Arrian 315 For this temple as possibly that of Isis lady of Yat-Wadjat see BM stele EA 886

(in Gorre Les relations du clergeacute eacutegyptien et des Lagides 329ndash333 no 65) with ThompsonMemphis under the Ptolemies2 129

14 SB XVI 125191ndash10 (second century BCE) with Rigsby ldquoEdict of Ptolemy Irdquo For the originaldate of this decree as 304BCE see Hagedorn ldquoEin Erlass Ptolemaiosrsquo I Soterrdquo

15 Diod Sic 18256 preparations in 322BCE 1829 decision to invade with the kings (iePhilip Arrhidaeus and the young Alexander IV) 1833ndash367 invasion defeat death andaftermath See now Roisman ldquoPerdikkasrsquo Invasionrdquo

16 Diod Sic 18395 cf 18431 hocircsanei tina doriktecircton

10 thompson

tary man and his satrapy was presented as ldquospear-wonrdquo territory a descriptionthat recurs in this post-Alexander world this it appears gave him a degree oflegitimacy

Before looking more closely at the nature of his ldquospear-wonrdquo territory men-tion should be made of a second aspect of Ptolemyrsquos ldquorightrdquo to control Egyptmdashin the eyes that is of the Greeks his possession of Alexanderrsquos corpse OnAlexanderrsquos unexpected death in Babylon the embalmers got to work instruc-tions were given for the design of an exceedingly elaborate hearse and its con-struction dragged out for nearly two years during which time a lot of jockeyingtook place for the best positions amongst Alexanderrsquos generals Finally all wasready and the funerary procession set out most probably for Macedon whereAlexander would come to join in death the earlier Macedonian kings But onthe waymdashand the details are obscuremdashin Syria they deviated from their routeand Alexanderrsquos cortegravege ended up in Egypt to Ptolemyrsquos advantage Remainsand relics can have enormous force and those of Alexander were among themost potent imaginable Buried first in Memphis which for some time stillserved as the countryrsquos capital as in the period before Alexanderrsquos remainsformed a powerful talisman for Ptolemy He later brought them to Alexan-dria where they were probably located by 311BCE when the Satrap stele waserected (see below) It was there almost three hundred years later that Octa-vian refusing to pay his respects to the Apis bull of Memphis and treating withdisdain the centre where the Ptolemies were preserved chose instead to visitthe mausoleum of Alexander and there he managed to knock off the Con-querorrsquos nose17 Yet for the moment Alexander was better looked after and forthat Ptolemy son of Lagus was responsible They served each other well andsometime around 290BCE a cult of Alexander was established in the capitalwith a prominentAlexandrian serving as eponymous priest18 The dynastic cultof the Ptolemies was later added This link with Alexander and the continuityit implied was important for Ptolemy son of Lagus

Ptolemyrsquos long lifemdashhe held Egypt for some forty years and died aged 84mdashmust to some degree be part of his success After all he escaped assassinationand managed the succession well But an important part in this success wassurely played by the country itself Self-contained and fertile the long nar-row valley of the Nile with the Delta to its north was bounded by desert oneither side with Libya to the west and Arabia to the east The Nile valley was

17 Diod Sic 18261 18282 preparations for hearse 18431 FGrH 1569251 Paus 163 Strabo1718 with Erskine ldquoLife after Deathrdquo For Octavian see Dio 51165 174ndash5

18 PHib I 84a1 (2854BCE) cf PEleph 21 (284BCE) with Fraser Ptolemaic Alexandria vol 2365 n 215


narrow but as long as the Nile flood reached a reasonable levelmdashneither toohigh nor too lowmdashit was potentially productive the source of Egyptrsquos contin-uing wealth With good management control of its ditches and dykes and anadministration that functioned reasonably well as long as the country was freeof internal strife Ptolemy could expect a continuing return from the crops thatwere sown in the valley

Traditionally Egypt was divided into Lower and Upper Egypt the tying ofthe knot between these two lands a regular scene on monuments signifiedthe early act of union between these two lands But tension always remainedbetween Upper Egypt with its central city of Thebes and the temple of Amunand Lower Egypt centred onMemphis where the great temple of Ptahwas rec-ognized by Herodotus as that of Hephaistos Memphis as already noted wasthe capital which Alexander had visited first and it continued to hold this roleinto the start of Ptolemyrsquos period of control as satrap Later the focus switchedto Alexandria on the coast looking now towards theMediterranean where thenew regime had originated rather than with the African focus of earlier timesWithin ten years it seems that the capital had moved to Alexandria Such atleast is the implication of the so-called Satrap stele of 311BCE which recordsthe reaffirmation of a royal donation to the local temples of the Delta town ofButo There Alexandria Ptolemyrsquos (satrapal) residence is named the ldquoFortressof the King of Upper and Lower Egypt Merikaamon-Setepenre the son of ReAlexanderrdquo19

Ptolemy too was soon to become the Lord of the Two Lands where unlikehis Persian predecessors he was a resident pharaoh In grasping what thisinvolved and the nature of the geography and history of the country he showeda willingness to learn from local instruction He was after all a historian him-self20 His account of Alexanderrsquos expedition was to serve as one of the twomain sourcesmuch later for Arrianrsquos account of Alexanderrsquos eastern conquests

19 Ritner in Simpson Literature of Ancient Egypt 393 Merikaamon-Setepenre is ldquobelovedof the ka-spirit of Amon chosen of Rerdquo and Alexandria is further described as formerlynamed Rhakotis ldquoon the shore of the great green sea of the Greeksrdquo For Alexanderrsquos fullroyal titulary see Bosch-Puche ldquoLrsquo lsquoautelrsquo du temple drsquoAlexandre le Grandrdquo 33ndash34 Bosch-Puche ldquoEgyptianRoyalTitulary of Alexander theGreatrdquo I and II On the Satrap steleXerxesprobably stands for Artaxerxes (342ndash339BCE) see further Ockinga in this volume

20 See FGrHist 138 Arrian (12) trusted Ptolemy since as a king he would refrain from lieshe may have been over-optimistic More recent writers have differed as to Ptolemyrsquos reli-ability see eg Welles ldquoReliability of Ptolemyrdquo Errington ldquoBias in Ptolemyrsquos HistoryrdquoZambrini ldquoHistorians of Alexanderrdquo 217ndash218 with further bibliography Meeus ldquoTerrito-rial Ambitionsrdquo 304ndash305

12 thompson

Ptolemy addressed the problem of the two lands in a novel very Macedonianway by founding a further Greek polis in the south a city named for himselfmdashPtolemais Hermeiou just south of Akhminmdashas an alternative to Thebes anda centre of Greekness in the area With a cult of Soter and polis status Ptole-mais remains something of a mystery21 There are no papyri from there andthough excavation has at last been planned there is no immediate prospect ofit starting In founding Ptolemais Ptolemy showed himself aware of the needto control the south This area posed greater problems to his rule than did thenorth This was a legacy that remained for his successors

Impenetrable desertsmake goodborders and as Perdiccas andothers foundthe approach toEgypt from the eastwas far fromeasyUnderstandably Ptolemywas concerned also to control the Gaza strip and Phoenicia to the north thearea known as Koile Syria Phoenicia was an important source of timber andships both of which Egypt lacked so from early on Ptolemaic troops wereactive in the area The first Syrian invasion came in 319BCE and it may be thisexpedition to which the Satrap stele refers reporting how (in Ritnerrsquos transla-tion) ldquohe brought back the sacred images of the gods which were foundwithinAsia together with all the ritual implements and all the sacred scrolls of thetemples of Upper and Lower Egyptrdquo This repatriation could however have fol-lowed the later victory of Ptolemy and Seleucus over Demetrius Poliorcetes atGaza in 312BCE22 Whichever expedition lies behind the claim it is clear thatPtolemy was acting as a traditional Egyptian pharaoh for whom the return oflooted statues was a standard result of victory abroad23 At the same time hefollowed the example of Alexander who returned to Athens from Susa the stat-ues of Harmodius and Aristogeiton looted during Xerxesrsquo invasion 150 yearsbefore24

It was not just the land borders of Egyptwithwhich Ptolemywas concernedCyprus too was an early target of his ambitions Situated off the coast of Egyptand close to that of Phoenicia Cyprus lies in an important strategic position IfPtolemyhad anyAegeanpretensions of whatever kind strongnaval baseswereimportant Cyprus also had natural resourcesmdashcopper corn and (like Phoeni-cia) timber for ship-building Furthermore its location was suited to a role it

21 PHaun IV 7018ndash20 (11918BCE) a cult of theos Soter in the city A dynastic priesthood ofPtolemy I Soter and the rulingmonarch(s) was instituted in Ptolemais only in 215214BCE

22 Diod Sic 18432 Phoenicia invaded by Ptolemaic forces (31918BCE) 18803ndash848 victoryat Gaza in 312BCE

23 Winnicki ldquoCarrying Off and Bringing Homerdquo24 Arrian 3168 return of statues of Harmodius and Aristogeiton Alexander himself was of

course following eastern precedent


often played in later years as an alternative home for royal princes those notliquidated but wanted off the scene or as a haven for fugitive kings its gover-nors forma roll-call of thehigh-ranking stars of thePtolemaic administration25

Ptolemy first invaded Cyprus in 315BCE with the help of Seleucus and hisbrother Menelaus and he annexed the island in 313BCE In 310 Menelaus wasappointed governormdashan example of what may be noted as a feature of per-sonal monarchy the appointment of family and friends to key positions26In 306 however Ptolemaic forces were decisively defeated by Antigonus Mo-nophthalmus and his son Demetrius27 Finally in 295 Ptolemy recovered theisland which then remained with the Ptolemies until bequeathed to Rome inthe first century BCE28

To the west of Alexandria communications were somewhat easier than tothe east Here the city of Cyrene a seventh-century BCEGreek foundation wasthe most important settlement Once again Alexander set the scene when hemarched out westwards from his new city in the direction of Cyrene Accord-ing to the less reliable account of Diodorus Siculus29 at Paraetonium (modernMersa Matruh) he met up with envoys from Cyrene who brought him giftsand a treaty of friendship before he turned south into the desert on his wayto the Siwa oasis If some form of treaty was ever made at that time this didnot survive into the new regime Early on as satrap however in 322 Ptolemytook advantage of rivalry among the local aristocrats and mounted an expedi-tion west under his general Ophellas Ophellas speedily subdued Cyrene andits territory and was left in charge of the city30

Egyptian relations with Cyrene remained close and like Cyprus for muchof the Ptolemaic period it remained a dependency of Egypt under greater orlesser control of the centremdashanother home for Ptolemaic princes a prize foryounger brothers who were needed off the scene Ophellas the first governormet a violent end after a revolt and assertion of independence and in 301 fol-lowing the battle of Ipsus Ptolemy installed his stepson Magas as governor of

25 On Cyprus see Caroli Ptolemaios I Soter 83ndash87 cf Bagnall Administration of the Ptole-maic Possessions 38ndash79 More generally see nowMeeus ldquoTerritorial Ambitionsrdquo

26 Diod Sic 19624ndash5 794ndash5 20211ndash2 Ptolemy and Cyprus See below for Magas his step-son (son of queen Berenice) as governor of Cyrene

27 Diod Sic 20473ndash4 49ndash531 cf Buraselis et al The Ptolemies the Sea and the Nile chap-ter 1 nn 15ndash19 on the naval aspect

28 Huss Aumlgypten in hellenistischer Zeit 204ndash205 Caroli Ptolemaios I Soter 8729 Diod Sic 17492ndash3 Curt 479 There is no mention of this in the version of Arrian30 On Cyrene see Caroli Ptolemaios I Soter 71ndash83 Bagnall Administration of the Ptolemaic

Possessions 25ndash37 on the administration of the wider area

14 thompson

the city31 With this excellent choice of governor the problem of Cyrene wassolved at least for some time Again a family member had come in useful andthe western boundary of Egypt was secure32

An appreciation of the geography of Egypt would appear to have beenan important factor in the ultimate success of Ptolemy son of Lagus Aloneof Alexanderrsquos successors Ptolemy succeeded in preserving unchanged theboundaries of his core kingdom hiswas the kingdomtoo that lasted the longestwhen Rome entered the scene This is where Ptolemy built up his personalposition where he consolidated his rule and where he made innovations Thechanges he made need some further consideration

First the changing position of Ptolemy Even after Alexander IV the sec-ond of the successor kings was liquidated by Cassander in 311BCE Ptolemyremained nominally satrap until 304BCE Then following the example of Anti-gonus and Demetrius who had recently routed him on Cyprus Ptolemy aban-doned this fiction and openly adopted the title of kingmdashjust basileus not kingof any particular place No longer was any single successor to Alexander on theagenda So from shortly after this date Ptolemaic coins drop the Alexanderpossessive (Alexandrou) in favour of ldquo(of) king Ptolemyrdquo (Ptolemaiou basileocircs)The diademed head of Ptolemy now replaces that of Alexander on the obverseand what became the Ptolemaic eagle on a thunderbolt is figured on thereverse33 This is a powerful image of a powerful ruler From the same datethe new regnal years of Ptolemy are found on documents and inscriptions inboth Greek and Egyptian Ptolemy was no longer satrap he was king Soon hewas also SaviourmdashSoter34

31 Paus 16832 The use of Ptolemyrsquos daughters for political ends is equally striking see Bennettrsquos recon-

struction of the ldquoPtolemaic Dynastyrdquo (httpwwwtyndalehousecomEgyptptolemiesptolemy_i_frhtm) replacing Ellis Ptolemy of Egypt 71 His daughter Eirene by Thais mar-ried Eunostus king of Soli (Cyprus) Theoxena his step daughter (d of Berenice) mar-ried Agathocles king of Sicily of his two daughters by Berenice Arsinoe II married (1)Lysimachus king of Macedon and Thrace (2) Ptolemy Ceraunus and (after her fatherrsquosdeath) (3) her brother Ptolemy II Philotera died fairly young apparently unmarried Ofhis daughters by Eurydice Ptolemais married Demetrius Poliorcetes Lysandra married(1) Alexander V king of Macedon (2) Agathocles son of king Lysimachus

33 Moslashrkholm Early Hellenistic Coinage 66 Le Rider amp de Callatayuml Les Seacuteleucides et lesPtoleacutemeacutees 50ndash51 On Ptolemyrsquos later introduction of a closed monetary economy see deCallatayuml ldquoLrsquo instaurationrdquo Lianou ldquoPtolemy Irdquo 399ndash409

34 For title of king see Caroli Ptolemaios I Soter 175ndash176 with discussion of sources whichdiffer on chronology and motivation For the title of Soter granted by the Rhodians seePaus 186 Hazzard ldquoDid Ptolemy I get his Surname from the Rhodiansrdquo 52ndash56 questions


With coinage we enter the realm of interpretation How far were suchchanges really significant and who was responsible for making them Is thisa case of Ptolemy manipulating his image For this was a cultured king a kingwith a sense of the past who writing history himself was well aware of theimportance of self-presentation (In this context one might recall the hiss-ing snakes he recordedmdashthe Egyptian royal reptile rather than Aristoboulusrsquocrowsmdashwho led his predecessor Alexander safely through the desert sand-storm to the oracle temple at Siwa35) As far as Greeks were concerned withspear-won territory Alexanderrsquos remains and the conquerorrsquos example to thefore Ptolemy trod carefully and it seems with success However it was not justimages that he cultivated but economic prosperity as well36 This was impor-tant in encouraging immigration as also in ensuring the loyalty of his troops

There is a tendency for occupying powers to function in the tried ways thatthey know best So the first wave of Persian pharaohs who unlike the resi-dent Ptolemies always ruled Egypt from outside aiming to exploit their newprovince ignored the Nile valley in favour of what is now known as the WadiGadid the New Valleymdashthe area that is of the western oases with BahariyaDakhla andKharga running southwards and Siwa to the north This is themainarea in Egypt where Persian period temple building took place and this in turnis likely to reflect the growing agricultural wealth of the area which resultedfrom technological improvements in irrigation under the PersiansWe know ofthese both from excavation and from the finds of demotic ostraca recordingwater rights in the area37 Now in the Wadi Gadid diesel pumps bring up thewater from below the deep-down waters that once covered the desert of theSahara give the misleading impression of a never-ending flow In the Persianperiod in contrast water was brought through a network of qanats under-ground tunnels hewn out of the rock which used the natural slope of the landto carry water long distances underground before spilling it out onto the fieldsThe systemof qanats is describedmdashnone too clearlymdashbyPolybius in the region

the role of Rhodes Itmay be relevant that a statue of Zeus Soter stood on top of the Pharosin Alexandria

35 Arrian 345 See Barbantini ldquoMother of Snakes and Kingsrdquo 22136 On the economic aspects of Ptolemyrsquos consolidation see now the helpful discussion of

Lianou ldquoPtolemy Irdquo37 For temples see Bagnall and Rathbone Egypt From Alexander to the Copts 249ndash278 in

Kharga temples at Hibis and Qasr el-Ghueita (both Darius I) in Bahariya the Alexandertemple For underground waterducts (falaj foggera manafi manawal qanat) in oasessee Chauveau ldquoLes qanātsrdquoWuttmann ldquoLes qanāts de ʿAyn-Manacircwicircrrdquo ODouchdem andOMan

16 thompson

east of the Caspian gates38 it was a system the Persians knew well and onewhich they now put to good use in the western oases of Egypt

Macedonians in contrast were more familiar with techniques for drainageInMacedon underAlexanderrsquos father Philip II the plains aroundhis new foun-dation of Philippi had been drained while further south in Boeotia drainagework on Lake Copais was ongoing39 In Egypt the happy coincidence of Mace-donianexpertise indrainage and long experience in irrigationon thepart of theEgyptians allowed important land reclamation to take place especially in theFayum the basin lying some 50km south of Memphis This area was knownas the Marsh or Lake District (hecirc Limnecirc) but early drainage and land clear-ance here resulted in large new tracts of cultivable land which Ptolemy coulduse to settle his troops on plots that would feed them when not under armsand provide them with a pension on retirement40 There were precedents forsuch a land-grant policy in both imperial Athens and in Macedon itself wherePhilip had rewardedhis companionswith land and in Egypt land grants for sol-diers are reported from early on41 As well as tying troops to the land cleruchicsettlement would aid the crown in encouraging agricultural production Thesuccess of Ptolemyrsquos policy may be seen in Cyprus when Menelausrsquo troopswere defeated at Salamis in 306BCE A large number of men were killed butevenmoremadeprisoner byDemetriusWith troops in short supplyDemetriusdecided to pardon his prisoners and to re-enrol them among his own forcesImagine his surprisewhen rather thanwelcoming this act of clemency themendefected back to the losing side Their families goods and chattels (aposkeuai)Diodorus reports lay back home in Egypt their lot lay firmly with Ptolemy42Military strength and the economic well-being of his kingdom went hand inhand for this king

In any historical explanation the role of the individual plays its part andin the case of Ptolemy I this seems to have been particularly important ForPtolemy was a cultured individual a king who was concerned not just with thesecurity of his power-base and the economicwell-being of his subjectsHehim-

38 Polyb 10282ndash639 Theophrastus De causis plantarum 5145ndash6 Hammond and Griffith History of Macedo-

nia 659 Strabo 9218 Copais under Alexander40 Cf PRev 3112 7211 17 (259BCE) the Lake District For drainage and reclamation see

Thompson ldquoIrrigation and Drainagerdquo41 For earlier allotments in Egypt see Hdt 2168 Diod Sic 1737ndash9 land ormachimoi Larger

gift-estates (docircreai) granted to non-military personnel are only documented from underPtolemy II but could well predate his reign

42 Diod Sic 20474 On aposkeuecirc in this sense see Holleaux ldquoCeux qui sont dans le bagagerdquo


self as already noted above was a historian endowed with a sense of the pastand the importance of tradition but how far was this the case for the otherGreek immigrants to this ancient land What picture of their new homelandwas encouraged from above for these settlers what image of Egypt was fos-tered In partial answer to this question mention must be made of the role ofroyal patronage especially in relation both to the Alexandrian Museum andLibrary and to Manetho priest of Heliopolis

For the Musesrsquo sanctuary and its connected library both Ptolemies I and IIhave been given credit The sources line up on either side and in the end it isimpossible to be sure43 In opting to ascribe the original concept to Ptolemy II place reliance on the reported input of Demetrius of Phaleron More impor-tantly however the project fits well withwhat is knownof Ptolemy I a culturedindividual as well as a military leader and strategist a king who was full ofinitiative and aware of the bigger picture Manetho from Sebennytus in theDelta Egyptian priest at the great temple in Heliopolis was the recipient ofroyal patronage under either Ptolemy I or II and is best known for his record inGreek of the earlier dynasties of Egyptian history44 Ptolemyrsquos project of foster-ing a broad sense of Greek and Egyptian culture in his new home may be seenas central to his success In this enterprise he needed cooperation from thosewith relevant expertise

It makes good sense for new rulers to listen to those with local knowledgeFrom early in the reign of Darius I there survives the statue with a long bio-graphical inscriptionof aprominent Saitenoble oneUdjahorresnewhoearlierserved under Amasis and Psammetichus III Udjahorresne was a vicar of Braysort of figure a man who turned to serve the new regime as a courtier underCambyses He did well from his new position In residence at the Persian courthe was appointed chief physician he was even he boasts responsible for com-posing the Egyptian titulary for the new rulersmdashldquoKing of Upper and LowerEgypt the offspring of Rerdquo is how Cambyses was to be known He won sup-port he claims for building projects at his home temple of Neith in Sais andhe ended his days back in Egypt45

43 See for instance Fraser Ptolemaic Alexandria vol 1 312ndash325 with full documentation tothat date

44 The Byzantine chronicler Syncellus places him under Ptolemy II Plutarch De Is et Os 28connects him with the introduction of Sarapis to Alexandria See now Dillery Cliorsquos OtherSons

45 Lichtheim Ancient Egyptian Literature vol 3 36ndash41 translates the hieroglyphic inscrip-tion of his statue cf Lloyd ldquoThe Egyptian Elite in the Early Ptolemaic Periodrdquo 118ndash119ldquoFrom Satrapy to Hellenistic Kingdomrdquo 85ndash86 Legras ldquoLes experts eacutegyptiensrdquo

18 thompson

The use of experts like Udjahorresne to advise on the subjects of theirexpertise is a practice forwhich Ptolemy Iwas also notedManetho fits this pat-tern on the Egyptian side The Eumolpid Timotheus from Athens was anotherinvited to court hemost probably oversaw the introduction there of theDeme-ter cult in Alexandrian Eleusis46 Timotheus is further recorded as providingadvice on the image for the new cult of Sarapis which takes us further into thesubject of religion

In Egypt the pharaoh played an important part in the well-being of thecountry and from Alexander on Macedonian rulers readily assumed this roleAlexanderrsquos extraordinary expedition deep into the Sahara to visit the oracletemple at Siwa which met with near-disaster in a sandstorm fits the pic-ture of a strong sense of need for divine acknowledgement as pharaoh asthe new ruler of Egypt especially in the eyes of the Egyptians In the oasis ofBahariya to the south of Siwa a Greek dedication from ldquoKing Alexanderrdquo toldquo(his) father Ammonrdquo was inscribed on the side of a hieroglyphic dedicationfrom the Alexander temple47 On the walls of a new structure in the earlierbarque chapel of Amenhotep III within the Luxor temple the new ruler wasportrayed in different forms of pharaonic dress before Amun and a variety ofother Egyptian gods48 For pharaoh was high priest throughout the land evenif others regularly fulfilled this role In Egyptian eyes Alexander was pharaohIndeed as already noted he had adopted this role on his first arrival at the cap-ital Memphis when he had made sacrifice there to Apis and the other gods

As so often Ptolemy I adopted the same policy When some time after hisarrival inEgypt anApis bull diedof old age and lavishpreparationswereunder-way for the seventy-day period of mourning andmummification Ptolemy pro-vided a loan of fifty talents to help with the heavy costs of burial49 Patronagelike this was very much at odds with the reported acts of Persian predecessorsIn contrast to Cambyses or Artaxerxes Ochus Ptolemy showed himself a good

46 Tac Hist 483 In 2011 Jean-Yves Empereur of the Centre des Eacutetudes Alexandrines work-ing with the Museacutee de Mariemont may have located Eleusis in the district of Smouha inAlexandria cf Bruwier ldquoSur les traces de lrsquoEacuteleusis drsquoAlexandrierdquo

47 Bosch-Puche ldquoLrsquo lsquoautelrsquo du temple drsquoAlexandre le Grandrdquo 37ndash3848 See Schaumlfer ldquoAlexander der Grosserdquo a detailed study of Alexander as pharaoh in the con-

text of Egyptian religion Lloyd ldquoFrom Satrapy to Hellenistic Kingdomrdquo 86ndash89 Minas-Nerpel this volume Houmllbl History of the Ptolemaic Empire 306 conveniently collectssimilar material for Ptolemy I cf Fraser ldquoA Temple of Ḥatḥōr at Kusaerdquo 98 for the Hathortemple at Kusae Crawford Kerkeosiris frontispiece for Tebtunis

49 Diod Sic 1848 with Thompson Memphis under the Ptolemies2 106ndash107 177ndash192


Egyptian pharaoh50 He further acknowledged the importance of Apis in Egyp-tian eyes when he adapted the cult of the deified (that is mummified) Apisknown as Osiris-Apis Osorapis in Greek in the new Alexandrian cult of thegod Sarapis now a deity in human form51 Developed probably with Greek andother immigrant communities inmind in practice Sarapis took off particularlyas a god for export Alongwith Isis andAnubis Sarapis came to represent Ptole-maic Egypt throughout the Aegean world

As long as a pharaoh served the gods of the country thus looking afterthe well-being of his people he might expect a reasonable reception Ptolemywas rather good at this The Satrap stele has already been mentioned abovethere a strong contrast was made with Egyptrsquos earlier Persian overlords In itshieroglyphs the stele records the reaffirmation by Ptolemy of an older grantof territory to the local gods of Buto A similar grant is recorded this time inthe demotic script on a stele now in the collection of Sigmund Freud52 Onthat stele a smaller donation is describedmdashof a local chapelmdashand Ptolemy isonce again shown as generous and respectful towards the gods of Egypt Sucha stance was essential to his survival and that of his regime

Other hieroglyphic material illuminates the role that alongside GreeksEgyptians played in the court and counsels of Ptolemy I Alan Lloyd has drawnattention to members of the Egyptian elite known to have served in theseearly years These include a couple of descendants of the last native pharaohsNectanebo I and II53 Suchwell-connectedmembers of themilitary andpriestlyelite who found themselves now serving under an immigrant pharaoh re-tained a sense of their value and importance to the new regime Another wasPetosiris whose magnificent tomb has survived at Ashmunein and who in thecourse of a long biographical inscription (probably) from early in the reignclaims that54

I was favoured by the ruler of EgyptI was loved by his courtiers

50 See Thompson Memphis Under the Ptolemies2 99 for details51 The bibliography on Sarapis is immense See most recently Bergmann ldquoSarapis im 3

Jahrhundertrdquo Devauchelle ldquoPas drsquoApis pour Sarapisrdquo with more emphasis on the Osirisaspect

52 Ray ldquoDonation stele 5481rdquo53 Lloyd ldquoThe Egyptian Eliterdquo Lloyd ldquoFrom Satrapy to Hellenistic Kingdomrdquo 94ndash9554 Translated by Lichtheim Ancient Egyptian Literature vol 3 44ndash54 at 48 For the tomb see

Cherpion Le tombeau de Peacutetosiris for the date see Menu ldquoLe tombeau de Peacutetosiris (4)rdquo250 under Alexander Baines ldquoEgyptian Elite Self-Presentationrdquo 45ndash47 early Ptolemy I

20 thompson

Petosiris claims hewas at home at court and others toomade this claimTheinscription from the sarcophagus lid of a Memphite one Onnophris describeshis well-connected lifetime pursuits55

I was a lover of drink a lord of the feast dayIt was my passion to roam the marshesI spent life on earth in the Kingrsquos favourI was beloved of his courtiers

Yet another fromMemphis the ladyTathotis describes the role of her offspringespecially her son Beniout56

hellip his son [ie her grandson] was in the service of the Lord of the TwoLands and transmitted reports to the magistrates They [ie he and hisfather] preceded all the courtiers in approaching the king for each secretcounsel in the palace

It is only from the hieroglyphic sources that this picture of continuity mayemerge The language of these texts is of course formulaic the dates are oftenonly approximate and the actual strength of the influence claimed is hardto assess Nevertheless any rounded consideration of Ptolemy I must takeaccount of such records

In contrast to the many Aramaic texts from the Persian period just a fewGreek papyri survive from the first generation of Ptolemaic rule One papyro-logical discovery is however relevant to our enquiry into Ptolemy I To put thisin context we need to return to the southern border settlement of Elephantinewhere as alreadymentioned the existing garrisonwas replaced under Alexan-der From here a jar was found dating from the early Ptolemaic period and in ita group of private papers includingGreekmarriage contracts recording unionsbetween new settlers who came frommany different parts of the Greek worldSo for instance in one contract dated 311BCE Herakleides from Temnos mar-ried Demetria from the island of Cos57 Of the six witnesses required for this tobe legal three were from Temnos like the groom one from Cos like the brideone fromGela in Sicily andone fromCyrene along the coastwest of Alexandria

55 CGC 29310 = Gorre Les relations du clergeacute eacutegyptien et des Lagides 281ndash284 no 58 trans-lated in Lichtheim Ancient Egyptian Literature vol 3 55

56 Vienna stele 5857 =Gorre Les relations du clergeacute eacutegyptien et des Lagides 228ndash230 no 474ndash5 (230ndash220BCE)

57 PEleph 1 (310BCE) with introduction to volume for the find


Earlier the Persian garrison had consisted mainly of Jews and other Semiticpeoples Now early in the second decade of Ptolemyrsquos tenure of Egypt a verymixedGreek communitywas settled at this garrison post Security at homewasimportant for Ptolemy who after all was primarily a military man and it wasGreeks that he used to secure the border58

Greekpapyri only survive in significant numbers from the reignof Ptolemy IIonwards when changes in burial practices with the recycling of discardedpapyri from government offices to make mummy casing or cartonnage allowus to see the system at work from the mid-third century BCE But when theydo start to survive in number Greek papyri tend to provide a somewhat mis-leading picture of the degree of Greekness in the land First far more of thesurvivingGreekpapyri havebeendeciphered andpublished thanhave contem-porary texts in (Egyptian) demotic this somewhat skews the picture Secondlylanguage use is not always to be identifiedwith the ethnicity of its user It prob-ably was the case as it later appears to have been that already under Ptolemy Iwithin the administration most of the senior ranks were filled by immigrantsbut at the local level Egyptiansmust have run the systemAndaswas indeed thecase earlier under the Persians and later under the Arabs it was not overnightbutwithin a generation or two that local scribes retooled learning the new lan-guage and script of the nowGreek rulers of their land Their Egyptian hands arestill to be traced in the rush with which they sometimes used to write59 Someof them changed their names or went by double names

This is the reality of the Ptolemaic system that was developing under Ptole-my I Both immigrant Greeks and Egyptians were involved in a system whichincreasingly functioned in Greek As we seek to identify the extent of continu-ity or change involved in these early years it remains imperative that we avoidbeing overly influenced by any one set of sources That means looking closelyat all that survives from Egypt in this period in all languages and scripts atvisual material too and at material culture at temples coins and other surviv-ing objects This is the only way that wemay start to get closer to an evaluationof continuity and change under Ptolemy I60

58 See Fischer-Bovet Army and Society in Ptolemaic Egypt 40ndash45 52 120 on the structureand role of the army more generally under Ptolemy I

59 Clarysse ldquoEgyptian ScribesWriting in Greekrdquo60 As is to be found in the contributions to this volumeMy own paper has greatly benefitted

fromdiscussion fromother participants at the originalmeeting on Ptolemy I atMacquarieUniversity NSW in SeptemberOctober 2011 I wish to record my thanks to Paul McKech-nie for inviting me to take part in such a stimulating gathering

22 thompson

This investigation has primarily been concerned with Ptolemy I within thecountry he ruled A fuller appreciation would need to look more closely athis dealings in the Aegean where the strong navy he built up laid the founda-tions for the League of Islanders that flourished under his successor PtolemyII Struggles with the Antigonids in the same area of the Aegean and alongthe Lycian Cilician and Syrian coasts were on-going during his reign Syriaas already noted was invaded more than once It is however the power baseof the territory of Egypt which lay at the base of these other ventures

What I have tried to show in this chapter is the degree to which the broadvision and personal characteristics of Ptolemy his sense of history and how helearned fromhis experience allowedhim tomake themost of the land thatwasgranted him Aware of Egyptrsquos past with the constraints of its geography andthe power bases of Upper and Lower Egypt he followed Alexanderrsquos examplein his respect for indigenous ways In contrast to the earlier Persian overlordsPtolemy was not an absentee but a resident ruler He was pharaoh of and inEgypt concerned with the gods of his adopted land as much as with of thosefromhome and as such accepted into the temples of Egypt and like Alexanderbefore him but not the Persian rulers displayed on temple walls Like all previ-ous rulers he too was concerned tomake themost of the agricultural wealth ofthe valley of theNile and in his administration hewas happy to exploit existingexpertise

Under Ptolemy however Egypt was now ruled by a Greek pharaoh and theadministration centred in the new city of Alexandria began increasingly tofunction in Greek Details of the developing bureaucracy only become knownunder the reign of his son Ptolemy II but whereas many of the old institu-tionsmdashlike census or land surveymdashremained in place when details do emergeit seems that some degree of innovation and experiment was in hand thatprobably dates back to the reign of Ptolemy I Coinage began to play a greatereconomic role being used for the payment of taxes monetization was under-way The new Greek settlers from Macedon and elsewhere too came to forma minority over-class in the towns and villages of the Egyptian countrysideand in the capital new cultural institutions like the Museum or the Librarypromulgated a degree of Greekness through their activities and their holdingsMeanwhile Ptolemyrsquos acute military sense was an enduring feature He hadstrengthened the borders of Egypt and taken thought for the provision of themen that he needed for his army both at home and abroad With a strongpower base in Egypt he was well-fitted for an international role He lived longand with admirable imagination by instigating joint rule with his chosen son(another Ptolemy) on his death he secured a family succession


Bibliography61

Bagnall RS 1976TheAdministration of the Ptolemaic Possessions outside Egypt LeidenBrill

Bagnall RS and DW Rathbone 2004 Egypt From Alexander to the Copts An Archae-ological and Historical Guide London British Museum Press

Baines J 2004 ldquoEgyptian Elite Self-Presentation in the Context of Ptolemaic Rulerdquo inAncient Alexandria Between Egypt and Greece edited by WV Harris and G Ruffini33ndash61 Leiden and Boston Brill

Barbantani S 2014 ldquoMother of Snakes and Kings Apollonius Rhodiusrsquo Foundation ofAlexandriardquo Histos 8 209ndash245

Baynham EJ 2015 ldquoCleomenes of Naucratis Villain or Victimrdquo in Greece Macedonand Persia Studies in Social Political and Military History in Honour of WaldemarHeckel edited by T Howe EE Garvin and G Wrightson 127ndash134 Oxford OxbowBooks

Bergmann M 2010 ldquoSarapis im 3 Jahrhundert v Chrrdquo in Alexandreia und das ptole-maumlischeAumlgypten Kulturbegegnungen in hellenistischer Zeit edited byGWeber 109ndash135 Berlin Verlag Antike

Bosch-Puche F 2014 ldquoThe Egyptian Royal Titulary of Alexander the Great II Per-sonal Name Empty Cartouches Final Remarks and Appendixrdquo Journal of EgyptianArchaeology 100 89ndash109

Bosch-Puche F 2013 ldquoThe Egyptian Royal Titulary of Alexander the Great I HorusTwo Ladies GoldenHorus andThrone Namesrdquo Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 99131ndash154

Bosch-Puche F 2008 ldquoLrsquo lsquoautelrsquo du temple drsquoAlexandre le Grand agrave Bahariya retrouveacuterdquoBulletin de lrsquo Institut Franccedilais drsquoArcheacuteologie Orientale 108 29ndash44

Bruwier M-C 2016 ldquoSur les traces de lrsquoEacuteleusis drsquoAlexandrierdquo in Alexandrie grecqueromaine eacutegyptienne edited by M-D Nenna 38ndash39 Dijon Faton

Buraselis K M Stefanou and DJ Thompson 2013 The Ptolemies the Sea and the NileCambridge Cambridge University Press

Burstein SM 2008 ldquoAlexanderrsquos Organization of Egypt A Note on the Career ofCleomenes of Naucratisrdquo in Macedonian Legacies Studies in Ancient MacedonianHistory and Culture in Honor of Eugene H Borza edited by T Howe and J Reames183ndash194 Claremont Regina Press

Callatayuml F de 2005 ldquoLrsquo instauration par Ptoleacutemeacutee Ier Socircter drsquoune eacuteconomie moneacutetaire

61 For papyri see the web-based version of Checklist of Editions of Greek Latin Demoticand Coptic Papyri Ostraca and Tablets (httplibrarydukeedurubensteinscriptoriumpapyrustextsclisthtml)

24 thompson

fermeacuteerdquo in Lrsquoexception eacutegyptienne Production et eacutechanges moneacutetaires en Eacutegypte hel-leacutenistique et romaine edited by F Duyrat and O Picard 117ndash134 Cairo IFAO

Caroli CA 2007 Ptolemaios I Soter Herrscher zweier Kulturen Konstanz BadawiChauveau M 2001 ldquoLes qanāts dans les ostraca de Manacircwirrdquo in Irrigation et drainage

dans lrsquoAntiquiteacute qanāts et canalisations souterraines en Iran en Eacutegypte et en Gregraveceseacuteminaire tenu au Collegravege de France sous la direction de Pierre Briant edited by P Bri-ant 137ndash142 Persika 2 Paris Thotm

Cherpion N 2007 Le tombeau de Peacutetosiris agrave Touna el-Gebel releveacute photographiqueCairo IFAO

Clarysse W 1993 ldquoEgyptian Scribes Writing in Greekrdquo Chronique drsquoEacutegypte 68 186ndash201

Crawford DJ 1971 Kerkeosiris An Egyptian Village in the Ptolemaic Period CambridgeCambridge University Press

Devauchelle D 2012 ldquoPas drsquoApis pour Sarapisrdquo in Et inAegypto et adAegyptum Recueildrsquoeacutetudes deacutedieacutees agrave Jean-ClaudeGrenier edited byAGasse F Servajean andCThiersVol 2 213ndash225 Montpellier Universiteacute Paul-Valeacutery Montpellier III

Dillery J 2015Cliorsquos Other Sons Berossus andManetho AnnArbor University of Michi-gan Press

Ellis WM 1994 Ptolemy of Egypt London and New York RoutledgeErrington RM 1969 ldquoBias in Ptolemyrsquos History of Alexanderrdquo Classical Quarterly 19

233ndash242Erskine A 2002 ldquoLife after Death Alexandria and the Body of Alexanderrdquo Greece and

Rome 49 163ndash179Fischer-Bovet C 2014 Army and Society in Ptolemaic Egypt Cambridge Cambridge

University PressFraser PM 1956 ldquoA Temple of Ḥatḥōr at Kusaerdquo Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 42

97ndash98Fraser PM 1972 Ptolemaic Alexandria 3 vols Oxford Clarendon PressGorre G 2009 Les relations du clergeacute eacutegyptien et des Lagides drsquoapregraves les sources priveacutees

Studia Hellenistica 45 Leuven PeetersHagedorn D 1986 ldquoEin Erlass Ptolemaiosrsquo I Soterrdquo Zeitschrift fuumlr Papyrologie und

Epigraphik 66 65ndash70Hammond NGL and GT Griffith 1979 A History of Macedonia Vol 2 550ndash336BC

Oxford Clarendon PressHauben H and A Meeus (eds) 2014 The Age of the Successors and the Creation of the

Hellenistic Kingdoms (323ndash276BC) Studia Hellenistica 53 LeuvenHazzard RA 1992 ldquoDid Ptolemy I get his Surname from the Rhodians in 304rdquo Zeit-

schrift fuumlr Papyrologie und Epigraphik 93 52ndash56Houmllbl G 2001 AHistory of the Ptolemaic Empire Translated byT Saavedra London and

New York Routledge


Holleaux M 1942 ldquoCeux qui sont dans le bagagerdquo in Eacutetudes drsquoeacutepigraphie et drsquohistoiregrecques vol 3 15ndash26 Paris de Boccard

Huss W 2001 Aumlgypten in hellenistischer Zeit 332ndash30 v Chr Munich CH BeckLe Rider G and F de Callatayuml 2006 Les Seacuteleucides et les Ptoleacutemeacutees Lrsquoheacuteritagemoneacutetaire

et financier drsquoAlexandre le grand Monaco Eacuteditions du RocherLegras B 2002 ldquoLes experts eacutegyptiens agrave la cour des Ptoleacutemeacuteesrdquo Revue Historique 304

963ndash991LianouM 2014 ldquoPtolemy I and the Economics of Consolidationrdquo inHauben andMeeus

2014 379ndash411Lichtheim M 1980 Ancient Egyptian Literature Vol 3 The Late Period Berkeley Los

Angeles London University of California PressLloyd AB 2011 ldquoFrom Satrapy to Hellenistic Kingdom The Case of Egyptrdquo in Creating

a Hellenistic World edited by A Erskine and Ll Llewellyn-Jones 83ndash105 SwanseaClassical Press of Wales

Lloyd AB 2002 ldquoThe Egyptian Elite in the Early Ptolemaic Period Some HieroglyphicEvidencerdquo in The Hellenistic World New Perspectives edited by D Ogden 117ndash136Swansea Classical Press of Wales and Duckworth

Meeus A 2014 ldquoThe Territorial Ambitions of Ptolemy Irdquo in Hauben and Meeus 2014263ndash306

Menu B 1998 ldquoLe tombeau de Peacutetosiris (4) Le souverain de lrsquoEacutegypterdquo Bulletin delrsquo institut franccedilais drsquoarcheacuteologie orientale 98 247ndash262

Moslashrkholm O 1991 Early Hellenistic Coinage From the Accession of Alexander to thePeace of Apamea (336ndash186BC) Cambridge Cambridge University Press

Porten B et al 1996The Elephantine Papyri in English ThreeMillennia of Cross-culturalContinuity and Change Leiden New York Cologne Brill

Ray JD 1989 ldquoDonation stele 5481rdquo in Sigmund Freud and Art His Personal Collectionof Antiquities edited by L Gamwell and R Wells 54 New York and London StateUniversity and Freud Museum

Rigsby KJ 1988 ldquoAn Edict of Ptolemy Irdquo Zeitschrift fuumlr Papyrologie und Epigraphik 72273ndash274

Roisman J 2014 ldquoPerdikkasrsquo Invasion of Egyptrdquo in Hauben and Meeus 2014 455ndash474Schaumlfer D 2007 ldquoAlexander der Grosse Pharao und Priesterrdquo in Aumlgypten unter fremden

Herrschern zwischen persischer Satrapie und roumlmische Provinz edited by S Pfeiffer54ndash74 Frankfurt amMain Verlag Antike

Simpson WK 2003 The Literature of Ancient Egypt An Anthology of Stories Instruc-tions Stelae Autobiographies and Poetry3 New Haven and London Yale UniversityPress

Thompson DJ 2012 Memphis under the Ptolemies2 Princeton Princeton UniversityPress

Thompson DJ 2009 ldquoThe Multilingual Environment of Persian and Ptolemaic Egypt

26 thompson

Egyptian Aramaic and Greek Documentationrdquo in The Oxford Handbook of Papyrol-ogy edited by RS Bagnall 395ndash417 New York Oxford University Press

Thompson DJ 1999 ldquoIrrigation and Drainage in the Early Ptolemaic Fayyumrdquo in Agri-culture in Egypt from Pharaonic toModern Times edited by AK Bowman and E Ro-gan 107ndash122 Oxford Oxford University Press

Welles CB 1963 ldquoThe Reliability of Ptolemy as an Historianrdquo in Miscellanea di StudiAlessandrini inmemoria di AugustoRostagni edited by Emile Rostain 101ndash116 TurinBottega drsquoErasmo

Winnicki J-K 1994 ldquoCarrying Off and Bringing Home the Statues of the Godsrdquo Journalof Juristic Papyrology 24 149ndash190

Wuttmann M 2001 ldquoLes qanāts de ʿAyn-Manacircwicircr (oasis de Kharga) Eacutegypterdquo in Irri-gation et drainage dans lrsquoAntiquiteacute qanāts et canalisations souterraines en Iran enEacutegypte et en Gregravece seacuteminaire tenu au Collegravege de France sous la direction de Pierre Bri-ant edited by P Briant 109ndash136 Persika 2 Paris Thotm

Zambrini A 2007 ldquoThe Historians of Alexander the Greatrdquo in A Companion to Greekand Roman Historiography edited by J Marincola 210ndash220 2 vols Oxford Black-well


chapter 2

The GreekWars The Fight for Egypt

Paul McKechnie

To the Persians in their days of greatness Babylonia was the core of theirrealm and the big three other satrapies1 were Bactria Lydia and Egypt HilmarKlinkott comments on their known economic and diplomatic importance2Lydia in Klinkottrsquos words was the ldquogate to the Westrdquo guaranteeing the politi-cal and trade connection to the Aegean Bactria in a similar way was a potterrsquoswheel which facilitated trade branching out into the territory of the Sogdiansand the Sacae the Hindu Kush and the Pamirs To gloss the term ldquotraderdquo inKlinkottrsquos context one must avoid being (in Moses Finleyrsquos words) ldquobemusedby the Anglo-Dutch warsrdquo3 and bear in mind that ldquotrade competitionrdquo equalscompetition to secure supply of commodities not competition to gainmarketsThat supply at a symbolic level is the flow of tribute to the king as illustratedin the Persepolis reliefsmdashwhile at a more prosaic level it is most importantlythe supply of armed forces for the kingrsquos campaigns

This chapterrsquos name is adapted from the title of George Cawkwellrsquos GreekWars The Failure of Persia The implication here that there ought to be reser-vations about ldquothe failure of Persiardquo is intentional and a current of sympathywith the ldquonewAchaemenid historyrdquowill be detected in this chapter as awhole4What will be expounded therefore is the idea that a vital focus of the wholefourth century from Cunaxa to Ipsus was ldquothe fight for Egyptrdquomdashfor ldquoEldoradoon the Nilerdquo (as Naphtali Lewis called it)5 and that by emerging as the last win-ner of that fight Ptolemy son of Lagus inaugurated in Egypt what JG Manning(drawing onWilly Clarysse) calls the ldquoGreek millenniumrdquo6

1 Hdt 389ndash972 Klinkott Der Satrap 583 Finley Ancient Economy 1584 An idea discussed and evaluated byMcCaskie ldquo lsquoAs on a darkling plainrsquo rdquo especially at 152ndash1735 Lewis Greeks in Ptolemaic Egypt 8ndash366 Manning LastPharaohs 27ndash28Manningmakes it a ldquolongmillenniumrdquo viewing thePtolemaic

reformation as ldquothe consummationhellipof a long process of understanding and accommodationbetween two cultures that had been in direct and sustained contact with each other since theseventh century BCrdquo

28 mckechnie

In the Persian imperial context the importance of Bactria and Lydia respec-tively is clear Bactria was governed by highly placed satraps including Masis-tes7 and in the last Achaemenid days by Bessus8 who attempted to take overas king after Darius III Pierre Briant argues from the appointment of Bardiyayounger son of Cyrus to Bactria that the Achaemenid kings attached greatimportance to the satrapy9 Its continuing importance under Alexander is evi-dent because it was the home of his wife Roxane daughter of Oxyartes

Lydia destination of the royal road had a special role in the empire onewhich is implied by the four Lydian gold Croeseid coins found under each ofthe two foundation deposits at Persepolis Soon after gold coins showing theking as an archer were to beminted at Sardismdashbut coin production apparentlyremained from the royal viewpoint a contribution which Lydia was uniquelyqualified to make Then in 408 Darius II sent Cyrus the Younger his secondson to awesternAsian command centred in Lydiamdashapower-basewhich sevenyears later was to give Cyrus a decent chance of overthrowing his elder brotherArtaxerxes II

Cyrusrsquo revolt was a pivotal moment in the life of the Achaemenid empirenot for what it accomplished (since Cyrus failed to overthrow Artaxerxes andwas killed in the attempt) but for what it distracted Artaxerxes frommdashinEgypt the third of the big three satrapies About the time of Darius IIrsquos deathEgypt had revolted from Persian control This was not unusual every or almostevery accession to the thronewas accompanied by a power-struggle10 PharaohAmyrtaeusrsquo reign and the time of the Twenty-eighth Dynasty are dated from40411 but Amyrtaeusrsquo control of Egypt was partial at first Egyptians fought for

7 Hdt 9107 and 113 Possibly Masistesrsquo name reflects Old Persian mathišta (ldquothe Greatestrdquo)a word used by Xerxes in XPf the Harem Inscription from Persepolis where Xerxes saysldquoDarius had other sons butmdashthus was Ahuramazdarsquos desiremdashmy father Darius mademethe greatest [mathišta] after himself When my father Darius went away from the throneby the grace of Ahuramazda I became king onmy fatherrsquos thronerdquo (XPf lines 28ndash35 cf Bri-ant Cyrus to Alexander 523) Tuplin ldquoAll the kingrsquos menrdquo 55 argues against the idea thatmathišta is a technical term and Briant Cyrus to Alexander 520 observes that the wordis used in XPf where the (unattested) term visa-puthramight have been expected

8 Arrian Anabasis 383 and 2119 Briant Cyrus to Alexander 7810 George Cawkwell Greek Wars 162 explains the revolt as ldquopresumably part of the usual

accession troubles of a new kingrdquo On the power-struggle at the beginning of Darius IIrsquosreign see Lewis Sparta and Persia 70ndash76

11 Dariusrsquo nineteen years as king of Egypt commenced in 4243 and Amyrtaeusrsquo six in 4054according to Eusebius (Chronicle Schoene-Petermann edition p 149)

the greek wars the fight for egypt 29

Artaxerxes at Cunaxa12 and the Jewish garrison based at Elephantine until 399remained loyal to Persia13 Under these conditions Egypt could not be a shortterm priority for the king It was however a jewel in the Persian crown14 Sum-marizing the tribute of Egypt Herodotus says15

The sixth province was Egypt and the neighbouring parts of Libya andCyrene and Barca all of which were included in the province of EgyptFrom here came seven hundred talents besides the income in silver fromthe fish of the lakeMoeris besides that silver and the assessment of grainthat was given also seven hundred talents were paid for a hundred andtwenty thousand bushels of grainwere also assigned to the Persians quar-tered at theWhiteWall of Memphis and their allies

This makes Egypt in Herodotusrsquo list the Persiansrsquo second richest satrapy afterBabylonia assuming that Babylonrsquos 1000 talents of silver and 500 eunuch boyswere worth more than 700 talents plus the income from the fish plus the sup-plies for the Persian garrison in Memphis In Xerxesrsquo day the satrap of Egypthad been the kingrsquos own brother Achaemenes son of Darius16 all satraps wereby definition highly placed in the Persian empire but not many could be moresenior than the kingrsquos brother

Egypt then was worth keeping17 as it must have seemed to Artaxerxes IIwhen he surveyed the outer portions of his imperial spider-web in the after-math of Cunaxa whereas Greece or at least European Greece was a realmover which his ancestors had had (at best) partial control What Artaxerxes IIand III wanted from Greece was help in regaining Egypt Egypt they wantedfor its own sake but Greece they wanted for the sake of Egypt This fact ispractically the key to the history of Greece from the Peloponnesian war until

12 Xenophon Anabasis 189 but in discussions after the defeat at Cunaxa Xenophon sayssome Greeks were speculating that Artaxerxes might hire their army to campaign againstEgypt (Anabasis 2114) Later Clearchus tells Tissaphernes that he has heard that the Per-sians are ldquoespecially angryrdquo with the Egyptians (Anabasis 2513)

13 Porten Elephantine Papyri2 p 1814 And yet not inmy view ldquothemain granary of the Empirerdquo (as argued byDandamaev Polit-

ical History 273)15 Hdt 3912ndash316 Hdt 7717 Briant Cyrus to Alexander 652 calls the reconquest of Egypt ldquothe Great Kingrsquos principal

objectrdquo

30 mckechnie

Alexandermdasha period which can seem like an incoherent mess of attempts toestablish hegemony

The Spartans were at the heart of the incoherence They as Polybius ob-served18 ldquohellip after contending for supremacy in Greece for many generationswhen they did get it held it without dispute for barely twelve yearsrdquo After-wards Athens seemed to be in the ascendant and at theOlympicGames in 380Isocrates asked19 ldquoWho be he young or old is so indolent that hewill not desiretohave apart inhellipanexpedition ledby theAthenians and the Spartanshellip faringforth to wreak vengeance on the barbariansrdquo But Isocrates was an Athenianand a teacher of rhetoric and his hopes for Panhellenism as an Athenian-ledproject were more or less all talk Then in the 370s Thebes entered the sceneas a hegemonic power and Epaminondas as he lay dying in 362 claimed20ldquoI leave behind two daughters Leuctra and Mantinea my victoriesrdquomdashbut hefailed to cement Thebesrsquo decade-long advantage over other Greek states andas Xenophon a hostile but not incompetent witness wrote21 ldquothere was evenmore confusion and disorder in Greece after the battle [of Mantinea] thanbeforerdquo

It appears that even before Cunaxa Artaxerxes had a tool to hand to strengthenhis partial control of Egypt the army of 30000 which Abrocomas satrap ofPhoenicia22 hadmdashand which Cyrus thought might cut his own advance offat the Syrian Gates This army may have been recruited with a view to a cam-paign against Egypt23 but if so it was needed elsewhere Afterwards acrossthe period before Alexander although it is difficult to gauge with exactitudehowmuchwas put into regaining control of Egypt there were recurrent effortsto invade and conquer Table 21 based principally on Greek literary sourcesgives an idea of how Artaxerxes II and III approached the challenge of regain-ing Egypt

18 Polybius 1219 Isocrates 4 (Panegyricus)18520 DS 1587621 Xenophon Hellenica 752722 Xenophon Anabasis 145 not describing Abrocomas as a satrap Klinkott Der Satrap

515 Suda sv Ἀβροκόμας and Harpocration Lexicon p 3 3 describe Abrocomas as a satrapunder Artaxerxes not specifying which Artaxerxes Klinkott prefers Artaxerxes III per-haps implausibly (a misprint here)

23 On this Cawkwell GreekWars 162 cites Dandamaev Political History 273 approvingly


table 21 The fight for Egypt Persian operations from the beginning of Artaxerxes IIrsquos reign

Date Source Details

401 Xenophon Anabasis 145 Abrocomas satrap of Phoenicia has an army of30000 raised with a view to being used againstEgypt ()

397ndash396 Xenophon Hellenica 341 Phoenician fleet of 300 ships observed in prepa-ration by Herodas of Syracuse intended forEgyptian campaign ()

[393ndash390 or]385ndash383

Isocrates 4 (Panegyricus)140 Attack on Egypt led by Abrocomas Pharn-abazus Tithraustes

374ndash368 DS 1541ndash44Nepos Datames 3ndash4

Attack on Egypt led by Pharnabazus Iphicrates(Tithraustes) Datames

[360] [DS 1590ndash93] [Attack by Tachos on Persian-controlledPhoenicia]

DS 15925 ldquoArtaxerxes not only cleared[Tachos] of the charges against him but evenappointed him general in the war against Egyptrdquo

359 or before George SyncellusἘκλογὴ χρο-νογραφίας Dindorf edition(Bonn 1829) p 486 line 20ndash487 line 4 (= 256 B)24

Attack on Egypt led () by Ochus (later knownas Artaxerxes III)

[Presumably same thing as the defence ofPhoenicia against Egyptian attack led by Tachosthen Nectanebo II]

24 ldquoThis Ochus campaigned against Egyptwhile his father Artaxerxeswas still alive as othersdid and at a later date (μετὰ ταῦτα) he conquered Egypt and Nectanebo fled as some sayto Ethiopia but as others say to Macedonia helliprdquo

32 mckechnie

Table 21 The fight for Egypt Persian operations (cont)

Date Source Details

3543 () Demosthenes 14 (On the Sym-mories)3125

Trogus Prologue 10

Greek mercenaries would fight for Artax-erxes III

Three invasions of Egypt by Artaxerxes III

35150 Demosthenes 15 (Liberty of theRhodians)11ndash12 Isocrates 5 (ToPhilip)101

Campaign against Egypt led by Artaxerxes IIIrsquosgenerals

343 DS 16441ndash513 Campaign against Egypt led by Artaxerxes IIIhimself

341 or laterprobably 336

Recapture of Egypt by Persians from Khababash

Of the authors drawn on in the table Isocrates Xenophon and Demosthenes(in descending order of age) wrote as contemporaries Xenophon had some-thing like first-hand knowledge of Abrocomasrsquo army and does not say it wasraised for an Egyptian campaignmdashthat inference is modern In the case of thefleet in 3976 the informant is named but again the inference that an attackon Egypt was the objective is modern Yet absence of evidence that Xenophonsaw Egypt as the kingrsquos real priority does not prove the modern inferenceswrong

Isocrates and Demosthenes instead of military intelligence had as theirsource whatever passed for political news at Athens This is a persuasive pointin my view against Cawkwellrsquos view otherwise plausible up to a point thatthe three-year Abrocomas Pharnabazus Tithraustes expedition mentioned inthe Panegyricus could have taken place in the late 390s26 speaking in 380 it

25 ldquohellipalthough I believe thatmanyGreekswould consent to serve in his pay against the Egyp-tians andOrontes and other barbarians not somuch to enable him to subdue any of thoseenemies as to win for themselves wealth and relief from their present poverty yet I do notthink that any Greek would attack Greece For where would he retire afterwardsWill hego to Phrygia and be a slaverdquo

26 Cawkwell GreekWars 162ndash163


is more likely on balance that Isocrates was recalling something which hap-pened two to five years ago than something frommore than a decade before27Furthermore even though events a decade old and more may remain vivid(remember 911) there is a second matter to consider the Kingrsquos Peace Thepoint of the Kingrsquos Peace in 387 to Artaxerxes must have been to allow him totake action inEgyptwithoutworrying aboutGreecemdashandwithGreek troops aspart of his invasion force Therefore there must have been a Persian operationin Egypt in the 380s If it was a different operation from the Abrocomas Pharn-abazus Tithraustes expedition the lack of attestation of it in Greek sourceswould be a difficulty Given that the allusion in the Panegyricus is the only ref-erence to the Abrocomas Pharnabazus Tithraustes expedition which wouldotherwise remain unknown and granted that one attestation is barely morethan zero it is even possible to claim that a great invasion of Egypt could havegone unmentioned in the sources and yet it would seemon a balance of proba-bility to be more likely than not that the Abrocomas Pharnabazus Tithraustesexpedition was the invasion of Egypt which must have been the sequel to theKingrsquos Peacemdashinstead of its having taken place in the nineties and a com-pletely unattested operation having taken place in the eighties

ThenDiodorus Nepos and PompeiusTroguswrote their works in the first cen-tury BCE using a complexmix of earlier texts as their sources Hammondrsquos firstarticle on the sources of Diodorus Siculus Book Sixteen a classic of a sort hintsat the intricate task Diodorus faced in producing his textmdashand Hammonddescribes the man himself as a ldquocareless and unintelligent compilerrdquo28 Lessharshly and more recently Iris Sulimani comments on Diodorus that ldquothoughhis work represents some progress in the field of source-citation he most cer-tainly was a man of his worldrdquo29 From a modern perspective that world theintellectual world of the first century BCE was more like an iceberg than itsfourth-century equivalent had been nine-tenths under water in the sense ofnot now being extant at all but the surviving tithe originally having stood onthe bulk of invisible work and bearing a relation to it which is difficult to quan-tify

27 This is the majority view held for example by Dandamaev Political History 297 BriantCyrus toAlexander 652 professes uncertainty but places the expedition in the 380s whileSekunda ldquoNotes on the Life of Datamesrdquo 40 writes of three years within the span from 384to 380 and Lloyd CAH VI2 347 also argues that Isocrates speaking in 380must have beenreferring to the war between Pharaoh Achoris and the Persians after the Kingrsquos Peace

28 Hammond ldquoSources of Diodorus XVIrdquo 7929 Sulimani ldquoDiodorusrsquo Source-Citationsrdquo 567

34 mckechnie

If that is the truth about Diodorusrsquo allusive summaries of how the Persiankings struggled against the rulers of the Twenty-eighth to Thirtieth Dynastiesthen it is the truth squared in the case of the prologue which records Pom-peius Trogusrsquo claim that Artaxerxes III Aegypto bellum ter intulit30 ldquothe truthsquaredrdquo because the Trogus prologues themselves were once the tip of theirown iceberg It would seem that ldquothree times [in Artaxerxes IIIrsquos reign]rdquo isimpliedmdashand that it might therefore be correct to date his three invasions in354 351 and 343 but to count as a separate campaignmdashand one which tookplace in 359 or beforemdashthe occasionwhenOchus laterArtaxerxes III attackedEgypt (George Syncellus says in his Ἐκλογὴ χρονογραφίας) during his fatherrsquosreign

Now if Diodorusrsquo Neposrsquo and Trogusrsquo books come down as ice from amuch-attenuated iceberg then perhaps Syncellusrsquo Ἐκλογὴ χρονογραφίας ought to beseen as coming from the ninth-century section of a long ice-core in whichDiodorus Nepos and Trogus are eight hundred and fifty years further downAppointed to theprestigious positionof cell-mate of Tarasius patriarchof Con-stantinople George Syncellus had access to the iceberg itself in cold storagein the imperial palace librarymdashthe same library where in the tenth centuryConstantinus Cephalas was to assemble the Palatine Anthology mother of allcollections of Greek epigrams Cephalas did for his epigram project what Syn-cellus had done earlier just after 800 drawing on the old books for his chrono-graphical project Although Syncellus wrote late in the tradition his sourceswere not inferior to those used by Diodorus Nepos and Trogus in fact theywere (broadly speaking) the same

The tipping-point in the events summarized in the table and a hinge of fatefor the Persian empire was the expedition commencing (after several years ofpreparation) in 373 for which the path had been cleared by the Greek com-mon peace of 37531 Diodorus writes of how the expedition failed despite hav-ing Iphicrates on the teammdashthe best-performed Greek general of his daymdashtogether with Pharnabazus satrap of Cilicia Artaxerxesrsquo most reliable west-ern servant During the unsuccessful invasion of Egypt in 373 Pharnabazus(Diodorus says) came to distrust Iphicrates because he was afraid that Iphi-crates would take control of Egypt for himself32 and perhaps his fear was notunreasonable but the political stakes in the operation were so high that Iphi-

30 Pompeius Trogus Prologues 1031 DS 15381ndash2 ldquoArtaxerxes hellip particularly hoped that the Greeks once released from their

domestic wars would be more ready to accept mercenary service helliprdquo32 DS 15432


crates was only the first to lose his place on the team Pharnabazuswas recalledby Artaxerxes and Datames appointed as his successor33

Sekunda argues that the expedition of the 370s against Egypt lasted at leastfour more years after the defeat of 373 the Persian force remaining based atAcre with Datames in command34 and then as Nepos makes a point of not-ing even when Datames left Acre to commence his revolt (in 368 Sekundaargues) he left Mandrocles of Magnesia in command of whatever was left ofthe invasion force35

The subsequent satrapsrsquo revolts although narrated more clearly than everbefore by Simon Hornblower in 199436 remain hard to account for in detailWhich satraps were aiming to take over the Persian empire one would want toask and which were only hoping to rule their own satrapies without an over-lordThe answers are not always clear There is however a striking synchronic-ity between the five-year campaign to regain Egypt its eventual failure and thecommencement of the multi-phase complex of satrapsrsquo revolts Ariobarzanessatrap of Phrygia sent Philiscus of Abydos to Delphi in 368 with money to hiremercenaries for Ariobarzanesrsquo revoltmdashor suchwas his realmotive although ascover hemade an attempt at negotiating deacutetente between Sparta andThebes37Wars against Artaxerxes II continued throughout the 360s By 362 PharaohTachoswas allied to rebel satraps planning an advance into Phoenicia to attackPersian forces Virtually unlimited commitment of resources and political cap-ital to the project of regaining Egypt had rebounded on Artaxerxes II costinghim credibility where it matteredmost among the satraps on whose loyalty hehad to depend

The king defeated his enemies before his death in 358 but his legacy toArtaxerxes III was far from unproblematic In 347 Isocrates who was beingunfair while sounding plausible said in the speech To Philip after Artaxerxeshad been in power a dozen years that38

hellip this King is so far from exercising dominion over others that he is notin control even of the cities which were surrendered to himhellip Egypt wasit is true in revolt even when Cyrus made his expedition but hellip now this

33 Nepos Datames 334 Sekunda ldquoNotes on the Life of Datamesrdquo 4235 Nepos Datames 536 I am however persuaded of Sekundarsquos view on the dating of Datamesrsquo revolt (368) which

Hornblower CAH VI2 84ndash85 places ldquosoon after 372rdquo (CAH VI2 84ndash85)37 Xenophon Hellenica 7127 cf Hornblower CAH VI2 8538 Isocrates 5 (To Philip)100ndash102

36 mckechnie

Kinghasdelivered them fromthat dread for after hehadbrought togetherand fitted out the largest force he could possibly raise hellip he retired fromEgypt not only defeated but laughed at and scorned as unfit either to bea king or to command an army Furthermore Cyprus and Phoenicia andCilicia and that region from which the barbarians used to recruit theirfleet belonged at that time to the King but now they have either revoltedfromhimor are so involved inwar and its attendant ills that none of thesepeoples is of any use to him

Isocratesrsquo unfairness lay in his underestimate of the valuewhichArtaxerxeswasto find in persistence His campaigning in the Phoenician region in the 340s asBriant notes may have been a historical germ behind the apocryphal story ofJudith and Holophernes39

From 343 persistence paid off and Artaxerxes III was able to carry outldquoremarkable feats by his own forceful activityrdquo40 Diodorusrsquo picture is of apatient man who finally got angry41 The really striking thing however aboutDiodorusrsquo account is that instead of wars in Greece ending at the Persiansrsquobehest as they had in the 380s to allow Greeks to fight for the king in 343ndash342 the fight for Egypt replicated features of the very things war in Greecewas about Pharaoh Nectanebo II had twenty thousand Greek mercenaries onhis side42 The Spartans and the Athenians had told Artaxerxes III that theywere still his friends but were not going to send him troops43 And yet atPelusium a Spartan by the name of Philophron commanded Nectanebo IIrsquosgarrison (which shows that Sparta would still do unofficially what it would notdo officially) and Philophronrsquos men and the Thebans fought each other to astandstill outside the walls separated only by nightfall An Egyptian replay ofLeuctra and Mantinea

Artaxerxesrsquo force carriedEgypt before it withGreek andPersianpairs of gen-erals (Lacrates of Thebes paired with Rhosaces satrap of Ionia and Lydia44

39 Briant Cyrus to Alexander 1005 On Holophernes see also DS 31192ndash3 where he is thegrandson of Datames and is ldquosent to aid the Persians in their war against the Egyptiansand [returns] home ladenwithhonourswhichOchus thePersianking bestowed for brav-eryrdquo

40 DS 1640341 DS 1640542 DS 1647643 DS 1644144 DS 16472


Nicostratus of Argos the man who wore a lionskin and carried a club45 pairedwith Aristazanes the Kingrsquos usher46 Mentor of Rhodes most formidablypaired with Bagoas ldquowhom the King trustedmostrdquo47) But even once Egypt wasback in Persian hands the power of the King and his satrap Pherendates wasnot unchallenged as the long biographical inscription on the tomb of Petosirisbears witness48

I spent seven years as controller for this god [Thoth]Administering his endowment without fault being foundWhile the Ruler-of-foreign-lands was Protector in EgyptAnd nothing was in its former placeSince fighting had started inside EgyptThe South being in turmoil the North in revoltThe people walked with [head turned back]The priests fled not knowing what was happening

At some date after 343 Khababash set himself up as pharaoh49 and had adegree of control in Egypt for two years or so until Persian power was re-asserted With Phoenicia and Cyprus under their control the Persians were ina position to attack Egypt at will an Egyptian ruler who could not follow theexample of Tachos and Nectanebo II and confront the Persians in Phoeniciawas at a sad disadvantage

This is thepivotal point in ldquothe fight for Egyptrdquo as the title of this chapter callsit The failure of the campaign begun in 373 precipitated the satrapsrsquo revoltsand over the following generation the fight for Egypt progressed from being aPersian imperial venture to being wholly a matter of who could put the mosteffective Greeks on the ground Artaxerxes III asked the Argives by name forNicostratus him of the lionskin and club50 Against that background Alexan-

45 DS 16443 Amitay From Alexander to Jesus 69 sidelines the idea of madness (ldquothis wasno lunaticrdquo) and connects Nicostratusrsquo Heracles pose with a broader current in fourth-century ideas (the ldquofascinating phenomenon of syncretistic self-Divinizationrdquo)

46 DS 1647347 DS 1647448 Lichtheim Ancient Egyptian Literature 3 4649 Badian (ldquoDarius IIIrdquo 252ndash253) seems tentatively to favour a date for Khababashrsquos reign

between 3432 and 3398 but Bursteinrsquos case for the two years between 338 and 336madein an article published in the sameyear as Badianrsquos ismore persuasive (lsquoPrelude toAlexan-der the Reign of Khababashrsquo 152)

50 DS 16442

38 mckechnie

der the Greatrsquos campaign after Issus fits the precedent set over the past threedecades the key was Tyre after the Sidonians had surrendered to Alexanderand it opened the door to Egypt51

Once in command in Memphis (332) Alexanderrsquos symbolic actions ad-dressed the idea of a resolution of the fight for Egyptmdasha resolution that iswhichwould entrench in Egypt the Greek life which already existed there Ath-letes and performers came from Greece for a gymnastic and musical contesta site was chosen for Alexandria and Alexander decided how many templeswould be in it where they would be and to which Greek deities (and oneEgyptian deity Isis) they would be dedicated52 All this symbolic action stoodalongside Alexanderrsquos demonstrations of positive feeling towards Egyptian tra-dition and religionmdashright fromhis first arrival inMemphis where he sacrificedto other gods and to Apis53 Then back at Memphis after the journey to Siwathere was a sacrifice to Zeus the King and a second athletic and musical con-test54 If Arrianrsquos idea of a sort of equestrian solution55 to governing Egypt is afair picture of how Alexander meant the place to be ruled in his absence thenhis thoughts on the subject were complex His first two nomarchs betweenwhom he divided the whole of Egypt were Petisis and Doloaspismdashboth Egyp-tian56 but complications not fully explained by Arrian ensued and the manwho came to the top of the heap of officials he left behind Cleomenes referredto as satrap in Pausanias and pseudo-Aristotle57 was a Greek fromNaukratismdashNaukratis whose vital place in the economic system of post-Persian Egypt isshown by the Nectanebo decree enacted in 380 The decree says

51 Leaving aside the relatively smallmatters of Gaza andAlexanderrsquos wound in the shoulder(Arrian Anabasis 2254ndash311)

52 Arrian Anabasis 314ndash5 ldquohellip a totallyHellenic celebrationrdquo BosworthConquest andEmpire70 comments ldquohellip no attempt or intention to adopt Egyptian religious ceremonialrdquo

53 Arrian Anabasis 31454 Arrian Anabasis 35255 Arrian Anabasis 357 About this piece of editorializing Brunt Arrian Loeb edition vol 1

237 n 6 writes ldquoI doubthellip if the comment is [Arrianrsquos] more probably vulgaterdquo BosworthCommentary on Arrian vol 1 278 observes that by using the term ὕπαρχος not ἔπαρχος forthe Prefect of Egypt ldquoArrian hellip has transferred one of his regular words for the satraps ofAlexander hellip to describe the Roman governors of Egyptrdquo

56 Arrian Anabasis 352 note that Doloaspis had a Persian name (cf Burstein lsquoPrelude toAlexander the Reign of Khababashrsquo 154)

57 Pausanias 163 [Aristotle]Oeconomicus 21352a OnCleomenes cf Le Rider ldquoCleacuteomegravene deNaucratisrdquo


His Majesty said ldquoLet there be given one in ten (of) gold of silver of tim-ber of worked wood of everything coming from the Sea of the Greeksof all the goods (or being all the goods) that are reckoned to the kingrsquosdomain in the town named Hent and one in ten (of) gold of silver of allthe things that come into being in Pi-emroye called (Nau)cratis on thebank of the Anu that are reckoned to the kingrsquos domain to be a divineoffering for my mother Neith for all time in addition to what was therebefore helliprdquo

The next chapter in the fight for Egypt however was played out almostwithoutviolence in Babylon in 323WhenAlexander died he gave his ring to Perdiccaswhich by itself was not enoughmdashbut every man has his price and Alexanderrsquosother bodyguards certainly did58 Ptolemyrsquos price was the highest as shown bythe fact that the allocation of Egypt to him is mentioned first both by Arrianand Diodorus59 Perdiccas as regent of the kingdom was prepared to pay theagreed prices and so purchase responsibility for everything60

Ptolemy moved into Egypt and took over unopposed and although Cleo-menes was made his deputy61 Ptolemy (Pausanias says) put Cleomenes todeath ldquoconsidering him a friend of Perdiccas and therefore not faithful to him-selfrdquo62 By the end of 321 it was clear to Perdiccas and his friends that in orderto secure Alexanderrsquos undivided empire a campaign against Ptolemy was thehighest priority63Thehijack of Alexanderrsquos bodymade it impossible for Perdic-cas to ignore the multiple other moves Ptolemy was making to entrench hispower and so Perdiccas staked everything on an invasion of Egypt64

58 All the seven bodyguards benefited from the reshuffle most becoming satraps Perdic-cas was a bodyguard and Ptolemy another On the rest see Arrian Events after Alexander2 (Leonnatus Lysimachus Aristonus Pithon) and DS 1831ndash3 (Pithon Leonnatus Lysi-machus Peucestas) See Bosworth Legacy of Alexander 29ndash63 contra a more superficialanalysis such as that of Boiy Between High and Low 130 to the effect that ldquothe hellip protago-nists at the Babylon settlement all received satrapies for their support of Perdiccasrdquo

59 DS 1831 ldquoAfter Perdiccas had assumed the supreme command and had taken counselwith the chief men he gave Egypt to Ptolemy son of Lagus helliprdquo [etc] Arrian Events afterAlexander 5 ldquoPtolemy son of Lagus was appointed governor of Egypt and Libya and ofthat part of Arabia that borders upon Egypt helliprdquo

60 DS 182361 Arrian Events after Alexander 1562 Pausanias 16363 DS 1825664 Pausanias 163 and Arrian Events after Alexander 125 contra the impression left by DS

18283 that the funeral cortegravegewasoriginally bound forEgypt Bosworth Legacyof Alexan-

40 mckechnie

The gamble almost paid off Diodorus echoes a Ptolemaic source by enthus-ing over Ptolemyrsquos people skills65 but Perdiccas followed the oft-repeated andcorrect method of invading Egypt66 and came close to Memphis where theremains of Alexander were entombed67 Ptolemyrsquos heroism in battle (so thePtolemaic source) at the Fort of Camels was part of a back-to-the-wall struggleto keep Perdiccasrsquo men out of a fortified position68 and only a misconceivedattempt to ford the Nile near Memphis caused the tide of feeling in Perdiccasrsquocamp to turn He was murdered by his own officers69

Perdiccas had made a bargain in hopes of gaining the real power of whichAlexanderrsquos ring was only a shadow Bosworth explains the bargain in termsof removing rivals and relocating them far from Babylon70 Christian A Carolianalyses the matter differently arguing that Ptolemyrsquos aim from the beginningwas to rule a separate sovereign state71 He attributes the same aim in chrono-logical terms less plausibly to Seleucus whom Perdiccas did not remove fromBabylon72 and toCassanderwhowasof no importanceuntil several years laterIan Worthington puts the transaction at Babylon in the context of long-termambition on Ptolemyrsquos part towards a takeover of the whole empire73

der 13 comments that ldquoPerdiccas had lost the body with all themystique it invested uponits owner and he was set on recovering it That meant war hellip with Ptolemy helliprdquo

65 DS 18333ndash4 Hornblower Hieronymus of Cardia 51 argues that ldquoDiodorus takes up hisPtolemaic source with its muddled order of events at 331rdquo

66 Cf Kahn andTammuz ldquoEgypt is Difficult to Enterrdquo 55ndash57 and 65 Fischer-Bovet discussingAntiochus IVrsquos second-century invasion is in agreement with Kahn and Tammuz onwhatwas needed to put success within the invaderrsquos grasp (ldquoEst-il facile de conqueacuterir lrsquoEacutegypterdquo210ndash212)

67 Evidence assembled and interpreted convincingly by Chugg ldquoSarcophagus of Alexanderthe Greatrdquo 14ndash20

68 DS 18336ndash34569 DS 18346ndash365 Nepos Eumenes 5 Bosworth Legacy of Alexander 14 observes that

Perdiccasrsquos chief lieutenants conspired to kill him and Boiy Between High and Low 134comments that Ptolemyrsquos visit on the following day to what had been Perdiccasrsquo campldquosuggests that Ptolemy was somehow involved in Perdiccasrsquo assassinationrdquo The cui bonoprinciple makes this hard to exclude

70 Bosworth Legacy of Alexander 57 later Bosworth adds that Perdiccas ldquoprofited from thecomparative weakness of his rivals and established himself as the leading figure in theempirerdquo

71 Caroli Ptolemaios I Soter 3472 DS 1839673 Worthington Ptolemy I 83ndash86


The death of Perdiccas was greatly to Ptolemyrsquos advantage but he still faceda strategic riskmdashone which the ghosts of Tachos and Nectanebo would haveadvised him to eliminate They in their lifetimes had carried the fight againsttheir and Egyptrsquos enemies north into Phoenicia to keep potential invaders atarmrsquos length A passage from Appianrsquos Syriaca shows that ghost or no ghostPtolemy was aware of the risk and ready to use every means to address it evenmoneymdashthough violence was also an option Appian says74

The first satrap of Syria was Laomedon of Mitylene who derived hisauthority from Perdiccas and from Antipater who succeeded the latteras prime minister To this Laomedon Ptolemy the satrap of Egypt camewith a fleet and offered him a large sum of money if he would hand overSyria to him because it was well situated for defending Egypt and forattacking CyprusWhen Laomedon refused Ptolemy seized him Laome-donbribedhis guards and escaped toAlcetas inCaria Thus Ptolemy ruledSyria for a while left a garrison there and returned to Egypt

Without Appian it would have remained unknown that Ptolemywas preparedto pay cash in preference to adding more spear-won territory This first Ptole-maic annexation of Syria came in 320 after Triparadisus75 and went almostunchallenged for five years even though (as Bosworth notes) it was ldquogener-ally regarded as unjustifiablerdquo76 If Laomedon had sold his satrapy for moneygrounds for disapproval of the takeover would have seemed weaker Ptolemykept Syria until Antigonus had first got the Silver Shields to hand Eumenes tohim after the battle of Gabiene inmidwinter 317677 and then dislodged Seleu-cus from Babylon78 but then in 315ndash314 Antigonus besieged Tyre for a yearand a quarter until Ptolemyrsquos garrison agreed to evacuate79

Consistent with logic and with strategic precedent this was the fourth-century fight for Egypt continued Ptolemy reacted as Egyptian predecessorshad with another military deployment northwards in 312 one which brought

74 Appian Syriaca 95275 DS 18432 and cf Wheatley ldquoPtolemy Soterrsquos Annexation of Syriardquo which shows in addi-

tion (pp 438ndash439) how numismatic evidence from Sidon implies that Sidon was takenover on Ptolemyrsquos behalf in 320

76 Bosworth Legacy of Alexander 102 he notes further on (p 213) that Eumenes ldquodenouncedthe annexation as soon as he became royal general in Asiardquo (cf DS 18732)

77 DS 19438 following Boiyrsquos chronology Between High and Low 140 and 14978 DS 19552ndash579 DS 19615

42 mckechnie

victory in battle at Gaza against Demetrius Poliorcetes80 and created condi-tions allowing Seleucus to take over again at Babylon and inaugurate the Seleu-cid era81 Ptolemy himself hadmoved to occupy Syria as a whole82 but decidedagainst fighting Antigonus for it and retreated to Egypt after demolishing thedefences of four cities in the hope of eliminating the threat Syria could pose83The victory in battle and the damage to Acre Joppa Samaria and Gaza werein view when the Satrap Stele in 310 claimed that

When he marched with his men to the Syriansrsquo land who were at warwith him he penetrated its interior his couragewas asmighty as the eagleamongst the young birds He took themat one stroke he led their princestheir cavalry their ships their works of art all to Egypt84

Victory in the third Diadoch war however did not entail permanent victoryin the fight for Egypt and Bosworth appears overly sanguine when he writesof Ptolemy withdrawing ldquoto fortress Egyptrdquo after the brief glories of the yearof Gaza85 The so-called fortress was far from impregnable Antigonus startingin 307 built Antigonia on the Orontes river86 a little way upstream fromwhereAntiochwas later to be sited and then in 306Demetrius conqueredCyprus keyto the downwind sea passage into Egypt Antigonia was the mustering-placein the following year for Antigonusrsquo invasion force which did little more thanpause at Gaza87 As the army moved into Egypt Ptolemy again used moneyto make friends inducing some to change sides88 and he combined attrac-tive offers with careful defensive preparations which caused the invasion forceto run out of steammdashAntigonus agreed with advisers who spoke in favourof retreating and returning when the Nile was lower89 It was party time forPtolemy who ldquomade a thank-offering to the gods [and] entertained his friends

80 DS 19803ndash863 Plutarch Demetrius 581 DS 19864 and 901ndash91582 See Bosworth Legacy of Alexander 228ndash23083 DS 1993784 Satrap Stele 23ndash26 the reference to ldquotheir princesrdquo however perhaps refers mostly to

Laomedon85 Bosworth Legacy of Alexander 22986 DS 2047587 DS 20732ndash388 DS 20751ndash389 DS 20761ndash5


lavishlyrdquo90 This to him was the end of the ldquosecond struggle for Egyptrdquo and hewrote to Seleucus Lysimachus and Cassander publicizing his success ldquocon-vinced that the countrywas his as a prize of war [he] returned toAlexandriardquo91

Here in 306 the story of theGreekwars and the fight for Egypt almost comesto a close regardless of Demetriusrsquo naval victory over Ptolemy at Salamis92 Inthe following year Ptolemy declared himself king Just one twist of fate was leftbefore the task of securingEgypt for anEgyptian-baseddynastywas completedAntigonus had retreated plotting his return though afterwards Rhodes causedhimmore difficulty than expected but then a coalition of the other Successorsheld together long enough to defeat Antigonus andDemetrius in 301 at Ipsus93Ptolemy had agreed to help Cassander Lysimachus and Seleucus but his armywas not in the Ipsus campaign and before the fighting was over he hadmovedagainst Phoenicia94At the cost toPtolemyof creating adiplomatic conundrumwhich courtiers were still squabbling over decades later95 Phoenicia and theHoly Land were firmly in Ptolemaic hands Greek wars were not over yet butthe fight for Egypt was won

Bibliography

Amitay O 2010 From Alexander to Jesus Berkeley and Los Angeles University of Cali-fornia Press

Badian E 2000 ldquoDarius IIIrdquo Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 100 241ndash267Boiy T 2007 BetweenHigh and Low A Chronology of the Early Hellenistic Period Frank-

furt amMain Verlag AntikeBosworth AB 2002 The Legacy of Alexander Politics Warfare and Propaganda under

the Successors Oxford Oxford University PressBosworthAB 1988Conquest andEmpireTheReignof Alexander theGreat Cambridge

Cambridge University Press

90 DS 2076691 DS 2076792 DS 20491ndash52693 Plutarch Demetrius 291ndash594 DS 201131ndash2 Plutarch Demetrius 35395 Polybius 5676ndash10 andBosworth Legacy of Alexander 261 n 58 ldquoThe rights andwrongs of

it were still debated 80 years later the Seleucids stressed the decision of the allies at Ipsusto place Coele Syria in Seleucusrsquo hands while the Ptolemiesmaintained that Seleucus hadpromised the area to Ptolemy when he joined the coalitionrdquo

44 mckechnie

Bosworth AB 1980 Historical Commentary on Arrianrsquos History of Alexander vol 1Cambridge Cambridge University Press

Briant P 2002 From Cyrus to Alexander A History of the Persian Empire Winona LakeEisenbrauns (translation by Peter T Daniels of Histoire de lrsquoEmpire perse [ParisFayard 1996])

Brunt PA 1976 (translator) Arrian History of Alexander and Indica vol 1 London andCambridge MA Heinemann and Harvard University Press

Burstein SM 2000 ldquoPrelude to Alexander The Reign of Khababashrdquo Ancient HistoryBulletin 14 149ndash154


Cawkwell G 2005 The Greek Wars The Failure of Persia Oxford Oxford UniversityPress

Chugg A 2002 ldquoThe Sarcophagus of Alexander the Greatrdquo Greece and Rome 49 8ndash26

Dandamaev MA 1989 Political History of the Achaemenid Empire Leiden Brill (trans-lation byWJ Vogelsang of Russian edition [1985])

Finley MI 1973 The Ancient Economy London Chatto andWindusFischer-Bovet C (2014) ldquoEst-il facile de conqueacuterir lrsquoEgypte Lrsquo invasion drsquoAntiochus IV

et ses conseacutequencesrdquo in Le projet politique drsquoAntiochos IV edited by C Feyel andL Graslin 209ndash259 Nancy Adra Publications

Hammond NGL 1937 ldquoThe Sources of Diodorus Siculus XVIrdquo Classical Quarterly 3179ndash91

Hornblower J 1981 Hieronymus of Cardia Oxford Oxford University PressHornblower S 1994 ldquoPersian Political History The Involvement with the Greeks 400ndash

336BCrdquo inCambridgeAncientHistory VITheFourthCenturyBC editedbyDM LewisJohn BoardmanM Ostwald and SimonHornblower 64ndash96 Cambridge CambridgeUniversity Press

Kahn D and O Tammuz 2008 ldquoEgypt is Difficult to Enter Invading EgyptmdashA GamePlan (seventhndashfourth centuries BCE)rdquo Journal of the Society for the Study of EgyptianAntiquities 35 37ndash66

Klinkott H 2005 Der Satrap ein achaimenidischer Amtstraumlger und seine Handlungs-spielraumlume Frankfurt amMain Verlag Antike

Le Rider G 1997 ldquoCleacuteomegravene de Naucratisrdquo Bulletin de Correspondance Helleacutenique 12171ndash93

Lewis DM 1977 Sparta and Persia Leiden BrillLewis N 1986 Greeks in Ptolemaic Egypt Oxford Oxford University PressLichtheim M 1980 Ancient Egyptian Literature Vol 3 The Late Period Berkeley and

Los Angeles University of California PressLloyd AB 1994 ldquoEgypt 404ndash332BCrdquo in Cambridge Ancient History VI The Fourth Cen-


tury BC edited by DM Lewis John Boardman M Ostwald and Simon Hornblower337ndash360 Cambridge Cambridge University Press

McCaskie TC 2012 ldquo lsquoAs on aDarkling Plainrsquo Practitioners Publics Propagandists andAncient Historiographyrdquo Comparative Studies in Society and History 54 145ndash173

Manning JG 2010 The Last Pharaohs Princeton and Oxford Princeton UniversityPress

Porten B with JJ Farber CJ Martin G Vittmann et al 2011 The Elephantine Papyri inEnglish2 Leiden Brill

Ray JD 1987 ldquoEgypt Dependence and Independence (425ndash343BC)rdquo in AchaemenidHistory I Sources Structures and Synthesis edited by Heleen Sancisi-Weerdenburg79ndash95 Leiden Brill

Schoene A 1875 Eusebi Chronicorum libri duo Berlin WeidmannSekunda NV 1988 ldquoSome Notes of the Life of Datamesrdquo Iran 26 35ndash54Sulimani I 2008 ldquoDiodorusrsquo Source-Citations A Turn in the Attitude of Ancient Au-

thors Towards Their PredecessorsrdquoAthenaeum 96 535ndash567Tuplin CJ 2010 ldquoAll theKingrsquosMenrdquo inTheWorldof AchaemenidPersiaHistoryArt and

Society in Iranand theAncientNear East edited by JohnCurtis and St John Simpson51ndash61 London IB Tauris

Wheatley P 1995 ldquoPtolemy Soterrsquos Annexation of Syria 320BCrdquo Classical Quarterly 45433ndash440

Worthington I 2016 Ptolemy I King and Pharaoh of Egypt Oxford Oxford UniversityPress


chapter 3

Soter and the Calendars

daggerChris Bennett

1 Calendars in Egypt The longue dureacutee

When Soter took on the administration of Egypt he inherited a country with astrong and ancient bureaucratic tradition A key tool perhaps the key tool inenabling the success of pharaonic administration was the Egyptian civil calen-dar which Otto Neugebauer famously if somewhat hyperbolically describedas ldquothe only intelligent calendar which ever existed in human historyrdquo1 It con-sisted of twelve months of thirty days each with five extra days making upthe 365-day ldquowanderingrdquo year so-called because it drifts or wanders by abouta day every four years against the sun As a measure of the solar year this isnot very accurate but it was certainly good enough for managing the agricul-tural needs of Egyptian society over the course of an ordinary human lifetimeAnd for the state bureaucracy it had the unique practical advantages of beingextremely simple and highly predictable which allowed it to be uniformlyapplied throughout the country with no central intervention

The Egyptian calendar was already immensely old the five extra days arementioned in the Pyramid Texts of the Old Kingdom2 The earliest calendardate currently known is a workerrsquos graffito in the Step Pyramid of Djoser some2500 years before Soterrsquos time3 Although the calendar was extremely stable itwas not static In the Old Kingdom the Egyptians identified years according tothenumber of cattle countswhichhadoccurred since the start of a reign there-after they used regnal years4 In the New Kingdom the names of somemonthswere changed5 and New Yearrsquos Day was changed from 1 Thoth to the anniver-sary of the kingrsquos accession only to be changed back by the Saite kings some900 years later6 Also in the New Kingdom the start of the lunar religious year

1 Neugebauer Exact Sciences 81 See now Stern Calendars in Antiquity on the sociopoliticalcontexts of the various calendars of the ancient world

2 Clagett Ancient Egyptian Science II 28ndash29 summarizes the documentary evidence3 Hornung et al ldquoMethods of Datingrdquo 474 Hornung et al ldquoMethods of Datingrdquo 45ndash465 Parker Calendars of Ancient Egypt 45ndash466 Gardiner ldquoRegnal Years and Civil Calendarrdquo

soter and the calendars 47

may have been realigned from the heliacal rising of Sirius to 1 Thoth a moresignificant change but one which did not affect the civil calendar7 Yet none ofthese changes affected the structure of the Egyptian calendar year which wasthe same in Soterrsquos time as it had been in Djoserrsquos

The Macedonians were not the first foreign rulers to bring their own calen-dar to Egypt8 A fragment of Manetho describes a calendar reform institutedby the Hyksos king Salitis This story probably reflects a decision by Salitismdashwhoever he was exactlymdashto forgo a native Hyksos lunar calendar and to adoptthe Egyptian civil one9 Over a thousand years later the Persians brought theBabylonian calendar to Egypt This calendar is well-documented in double-dated Aramaic texts10 but it seems to have made almost no impact on theEgyptians They were certainly aware of it and attempted to relate Babylonianmonths to Egyptian concepts in the Vienna demotic omen papyrus namedBabylonian months are identified by the term wrš which ordinarily refers tothemonths of temple service starting like the Babylonianmonth with a nom-inal new moon on the second day of the Egyptian lunar month11 But as withthe Hyksos calendrical influence ran more strongly in the other direction theZoroastrian calendar was probably drawn from the Egyptian model12

The Macedonian calendar in Egypt eventually suffered the same fate asthat of the Hyksos The signs that this would happen appear very early in therecord One of the earliest MacedonianEgyptian double dates that we cur-rently possess given by pHibeh I 92 from 264BCE already directly equates aMacedonian month (Xandikos) to an Egyptian month (Phamenoth) and thispractice becomes almost universal outside Alexandria only 50 years later Afteranother 70 years there are no traces at all of the Macedonian calendar operat-

7 Most recently Depuydt ldquoTwice Helix to Double Helixrdquo The existence of a lunar calendaryear as opposed to lunar days whether aligned to Sirius or to the civil year is still a con-troversial question cf Spalinger ldquoAncient Egyptian Calendars How Many Were Thererdquo(against the civil alignment) and Belmonte ldquoEgyptian Calendarrdquo 82ndash87 (against both) Fora brief overview of the civil year question see Krauss ldquoLunar Days Lunar Monthsrdquo 389ndash391

8 I know of no evidence for the calendars of the Libyans and Kushites before they ruledEgypt Both groups had already been heavily acculturated so it is likely that any nativecalendar had already been discarded before they came to power

9 Spalinger ldquoChronological Remarksrdquo 52ndash5410 The Elephantine double dates are listed in Stern ldquoBabylonian Calendar at Elephantinerdquo

62ndash63 (Table 1)11 Parker Vienna Demotic Papyrus 8 n 1812 de Blois ldquoPersian Calendarrdquo 48ndash50 Stern Calendars in Antiquity 174ndash178

48 bennett

ing independently of the Egyptian one although Macedonian month namesfor Egyptian months continued to be used in Egypt occasionally until the endof the fourth century AD13

2 Calendars in Greece andMacedon The Challenge of Empire

Soter came to Egypt equipped with Greek modes of thinking about calendarsThese were very different from Egyptian ones and from our own Firstly therewas no single Greek calendar Greek calendars were highly localized each cityor league had its own with its own month names new years and specializedcustoms Most Greek calendars including the Macedonian were based on alunar year throwing in an extra month every few years to maintain an align-ment with the seasons but not with each other14 Calendar dates could beadjusted ad hoc to meet immediate needs Days could be inserted to ensurethat there was time for everything to be in place for a festival which had tobe celebrated on a particular calendar date we possess an Athenian date ofthe eighth repetition of 25 Hekatombaion15 The months could also be manip-ulated Plutarch (Demetrius 26) records that in 303 the Athenians renamedMounichion the tenth month first as Anthesterion the eighth and then asBoedromion the third so that Demetrius Poliorcetes could be initiated into alldegrees of the Mysteries in the proper sequence without waiting a year

No such tours de force are reported for the Macedonians This is probablybecause the length of the Athenian year was fixed in advance by the constitu-tional needs of the prytanies while the calendar months were primarily usedto regulate religious festivals16 Hence as long as the sum of themonth lengthsmatched the lengthof theprytany year the lengthof an individualmonth could

13 Bennett Alexandria and the Moon 714 Bickerman Chronology of the AncientWorld 27ndash3315 For this and other such dates see Pritchett Athenian Calendars 6ndash716 Samuel Greek and Roman Chronology 58 64 Stern (Calendars in Antiquity 48) correctly

notes that the idea that the lengths of the prytanies and the number of months in theyear were determined before its start is not proven but the potential for political wran-gling if they were not seems so great that it seems most likely cf also Pritchett AthenianCalendars 127ndash135 While there are several documented instances of tampering with thelengths of calendarmonths the only documented case of tamperingwith the prytany cal-endar inHellenistic times in 2965 (Habicht Athens fromAlexander toAntony 88) clearlyreflects an extraordinary circumstance the collapse of the tyranny of Lachares and thecityrsquos capitulation to Demetrius (Plutarch Demetrius 33ndash34)


be adjusted as needed Lacking a similar division between a civil year and a reli-gious year the Macedonian calendar served both purposes and so retained anessentially lunar structure for its months However Plutarch (Alexander 16225) records twowell-known acts of Alexanderwhich show a similar willingnessto tamper with the calendar though in a much less extreme form On the dayof the battle of the Granicus some in the army objected to fighting in the cur-rent monthmdashDaisiosmdashbecause it was not customary to fight in that monthAlexander simply renamed it to be a second occurrence of Artemisios the pre-vious month And at the siege of Tyre a couple of years later he renumberedthe current day the last day of the month to be the previous day in order toencourage his troops to press the siege to a conclusion in that month

Such flexible attitudes towards datingwerepracticable evenuseful in a city-state like Athens or in a small loosely-knit pastoral kingdom like Macedon asit was before the reigns of Philip and Alexander Large states like the PersianEmpire or even large provinces like Egypt could not bemanaged on this basisowing to the synchronization issues created by the extensive delays in com-municating information over long distances We can trace the difficulties inthe archive of the Persian garrison on Egyptrsquos southern border at ElephantineThe double dates in these documents sometimes show misalignments of onemonth with the months of Babylon These appear to result from the sequencein Elephantine temporarily diverging from the Babylonian sequence17

The Achaemenids had addressed this problem by exploiting possibly evensponsoring ongoing astronomical research aimed at optimizing the date of thestart of the Babylonian year against the vernal equinox Modern research inthe Babylonian astronomical records has allowed us to trace this effort in somedetail18 The start of the first month of the Babylonian year had been stabilizedagainst the vernal equinox by the early fifth century From this time on theBabylonian calendar used a fixed nineteen-year cycle with seven intercalaryyears The pattern of intercalary months was fixed by the early fourth centuryIn six intercalary years the extramonthwas placed at the end of the year In theseventh it was placed after the sixth month This sequence became standard-ized throughout the empire allowing intercalation to take place automaticallyin the same month everywhere without the need for central intervention19

The Babylonians also developed methods for predicting whether a givenlunation would be twenty-nine or thirty days long20 However the available

17 Stern ldquoBabylonian Calendar at Elephantinerdquo 167ndash16818 Eg Britton ldquoCalendars Intercalations and Year-Lengths in Mesopotamian Astronomyrdquo19 The evidence is briefly summarized by Stern Calendars in Antiquity 18620 Stern ldquoBabylonian Monthrdquo 28ndash30 on the accuracy of Babylonian predictions Depuydt

50 bennett

data on the astronomical accuracy of both Macedonian and Egyptian lunarmonths suggests that these techniques were not widely used to regulate theirlengths21 As a result even though adoption of the Babylonian calendar meantthat different cities andprovinceswould agree on thenameof themonth theremight well be a variation between them of a day or two in the date within themonth Given communication speeds at the time synchronization errors ofthis magnitude were perfectly acceptable

Alexanderrsquos insertion of a day at Tyre therefore would have been entirelytolerable to an Achaemenid bureaucrat While we do not know the originallength of the month involved he may well simply have lengthened it from29 days to 30 However renaming Daisios mid-month as a second Artemisioswould have been another matter especially if the effect was to lengthen theyear by turning that month into an intercalary month At the time Alexanderwas close enough to home that the decision might have been communicatedto Macedon in time for it to take effect there in the same month but had hemade such a decision in say Bactria there would have been a difference ofone month between the calendars used in different parts of his empire for atleast several months

If Macedonian ideas of time were subject to any foreign influence underPhilip and Alexander that influence would not have been Babylonian and stillless Egyptian but Athenian We can trace a direct Athenian influence on theMacedonian calendar in the occasional use of a φθίνοντος or ldquowaningrdquo count ofdays at the end of Macedonian months seen in an Amphipolitan inscriptiondating to Philip in Plutarchrsquos extracts from the Ephemerides (Alexander 76)and in an Alexandrian inscription and a papyrus dating to Ptolemy II22 More-over Alexander encouraged the research of Callisthenes who sent Babylonianastronomical data to Athens and Soter sponsored Timocharis who used anastronomical Athenian calendar Both rulers were surely aware of the Metoniccycle for regulating the length of the Athenian year and of the efforts of Cal-lippus to develop an astronomical calendar which accurately modelled thelengths of individual lunations23 However Alexanderrsquos tamperings with the

ldquoWhyGreek LunarMonths Began aDay Laterhelliprdquo 156ndash158 for a proposed empiricalmethodof prediction

21 Bennett ldquoEgyptian Lunar Datesrdquo 2011 47 with Figure 322 Bennett Alexandria and the Moon 35ndash37 The term is recorded in only seven non-Athen-

ian and non-Macedonian dates in the PHI database three of which are Mysian Even inAthens it was no longer used after the fourth century (Samuel Greek and Roman Chronol-ogy 59ndash61)

23 Callisthenes and the transmission of Babylonian astronomical data to Athens Simpli-


months and the use of biennial intercalation under Philadelphus show thatnone of this had any effect on how the Macedonian calendar was managed inthe late fourth century

Though the Macedonian calendar was not tightly regulated it was con-sciously used as an instrument of policy in conquered territories inGreece TheearliestMacedoniandateswe currently possess come fromAmphipolis shortlyafter its conquest by Philip in 357 Cassandreia also used Macedonian monthsafter Antigonus Gonatas extinguished its freedom in 276 But Cassandreia hadbeen founded as a free city by Cassander in 316 Between its foundation andthe loss of its freedom it had used a different calendar in which the monthswere namedafter twelveOlympian godsThe same type of calendarwas used inother free cities foundedbyMacedonian kings in Philippi foundedbyPhilip IIand in Demetrias founded by Demetrius I We do not know how autonomousthese Olympian calendars truly were whether all free cities used the samemonth names and whether their intercalations and their years were tied tothe Macedonian calendar or whether they operated independently of it Nev-ertheless the general policy is clearmdashthe Macedonian calendar was imposedonconqueredGreek cities andwas amarkof their incorporation into theMace-donian state24

After Alexander the Macedonian calendar was used in new Greek settle-ments from Egypt to Bactria25 This is consistent with the usual belief thatthese settlements were originally conceived of as specifically Macedonian notautonomous cities It also recasts the problemof coordinationwhich had facedthe Persians intoMacedonian terms it would nowhave beennecessary to coor-dinate calendars tomaintain reliable communications between these far-flungoutposts

cius Commentarii in Aristotelis de Caelo II 12 (cf Burstein ldquoCallisthenes and BabylonianAstronomyrdquo) Timocharis Almagest 73 104 (cf van der Waerden ldquoGreek AstronomicalCalendarsrdquo on Timocharisrsquo Athenian dates) Metonic cycle Diodorus Siculus 1236 (cfMorgan ldquoCalendar and the Chronology of Athensrdquo and Lambert ldquoAthenian Chronology3521ndash3221BCrdquo on its application to the length of the Athenian year) Callippus Geminus859 (cf Goldstein and Bowen ldquoEarly Hellenistic Astronomyrdquo 279 on the choice of epochfor the first Callippic cycle)

24 HatzopolousMacedonian Institutions I 156ndash165 182 202ndash204 cf Bennett Alexandria andthe Moon 135

25 I know of two recorded Macedonian month names from Hellenistic Bactria a tax receiptdated Oloios year 4 of Antimachus (Rea et al ldquoTax Receipt fromHellenistic Bactriardquo) anda date stamp of Xandikos on a unique coin of Antiochus I (or II) (Senior and HoughtonldquoTwo Remarkable Bactrian Coinsrdquo) my thanks to Harry Falk (pers comm February 2011)for bringing the latter to my attention

52 bennett

This is surely why Seleucus Nicator reformed the calendar in his territoriesshortly after the foundation of Antioch We only know of his reform from alate brief and garbled description (Malalas 816) This is unfortunate in partbecause under Antiochus I it led to the creation of the chronographic instru-ment which is at least for historians perhaps the most important calendricalinvention of recorded time the Era which accounts years from a single fixedreference point instead of from the accessions of individual kings or by thenames of some eponymous official

It is generally held that Nicator adapted the Macedonian calendar to theBabylonian nineteen-year cycle by equating the first Macedonianmonth Diosto the seventh Babylonian month Tashritu and intercalating in sync26 Thismay not be correct In Arsacid times the Macedonian calendar was aligned byequating Dios with the eighth Babylonian month Arahsamnu27 and two let-ters of Antiochus III suggest that he already observed the same concordanceat the end of the third century28 On the other hand the solar alignment of thesynchronisms for the dates of Alexanderrsquos birth and death are a month earlierthan this concordance29 and a cycle based on keeping Dios as close as possibleto the autumn equinox by equating it to Tashritu in all but three years of the

26 Parker and Dubberstein Babylonian Chronology 26 Samuel Greek and Roman Chronol-ogy 142

27 Assar ldquoParthian Calendarsrdquo Bennett Alexandria and the Moon 190ndash19728 Correcting the discussion in Bennett Alexandria and the Moon 202ndash208 my thanks to

FarhadAssar for pointing out the error (pers commOctober 2011) Since there are at leasttwo full months between Xandikos 23 and Panemos 10 SEM 119 = 1943 not one the min-imum time for transmitting the letter SEG XIII 592 from western Anatolia to Ecbatanais about 74 days not 45 This implies a maximum speed of about 23 miles a day whichprecludes the use of a ldquopony expressrdquo as suggested in Bennett Alexandria and the Moon204ndash205 and is consistent with foot messengers For the decree of SEG XXXVII 1010 toreach Sardis fromEcbatana at the same speed theremust have been an intercalarymonthbetween Dystros and Artemisios SEM 103 = 2109 hence after either Dystros or XandikosSEM 103 and SEM 119 are both ordinary years on the autumn cycle developed in BennettAlexandria and the Moon 208ndash212 but both are intercalary on the spring (Babylonian)cycle If SEM 119 was in fact intercalary SEG XIII 592 suggests that its intercalary monthlay outside the range Xandikos to Panemos the overlap with SEG XXXVII 1010 implies anintercalary Dystros in both years which matches the practice of Parthian times

29 Bennett Alexandria and theMoon 92ndash98 SinceAlexanderrsquos birth in Loios 356 and deathinDaisios 323 both occurred less than sixmonths after a BabylonianAddaru II their datesare not conclusive proof that their solar alignment is the normal alignment of theArgaeadcalendar considered in isolation these alignments could be due to phase variance inintercalation with a Macedonian intercalation lagging the Babylonian Other events ofthe period cannot be fixed with the same degree of certainty However the assassination


nineteen matches a considerable amount of non-Seleucid and post-Seleuciddata30 However no matter which of these systems Nicator adopted if any itdoes seem clear that his reform driven by practical necessity automated theoperation of the Macedonian calendar in Seleucid territories at least down tothe sequence of months

3 TheMacedonian Calendar in Soterrsquos Egypt

Very fewMacedonian dates are known from Soterrsquos rule in Egypt The principalconclusions that can be drawn from them are that he accounted his Macedo-nian regnal years from the death of Alexander and that he did so well beforehe took the diadem31 Except for one seasonal synchronism none of his Mace-donian dates can be synchronized to the Egyptian or to any other calendarFor this reason important aspects of his calendrical practices must be inferredfrom the available data for succeeding rulers and fromMacedon itself

The bulk of our Egyptian data comes from papyri of the reigns of Ptolemy IIIII and IVTheseprovide a largenumberof EgyptianMacedoniandoubledatesIt has proved extremely difficult to devise amodel which accounts for them allso much so that Samuel essentially gave up on the reigns of Ptolemy III andIV However the volume and density of the double dates in the well-knownarchive of Zenon which covers the last 15 years of Ptolemy II and the first fewof Ptolemy III have always admitted analysis and the results which Edgar pub-lished in 1918 remain substantially valid32

The Zenon archive showed that calendar months in Alexandria were lunarwith an astronomical accuracy of about fifty-five per cent which matches thatseen in the Ptolemaic and Roman data for Egyptian lunar months althoughit is considerably lower than that achieved by the Babylonian astronomers33Yet although Zenon had worked with the lunar calendar at the highest levelsof the state bureaucracy before he was sent to the Fayum once there he esti-mated Alexandrian dates by offsetting the start of the nearest Egyptian monthby 0 10 or 20 days and within a couple of years he gave up even trying Similarinaccuracy though usually less systematic characterizes the bulk of the dou-

of Philip II which probably occurred in late summer and at the start of Dios appears toshow the Dios = Tashritu alignment even though it is two years after an Addaru II

30 Bennett Alexandria and the Moon 212ndash21731 Samuel Ptolemaic Chronology 11ndash1332 Edgar ldquoDating of Early Ptolemaic Papyrirdquo33 Bennett ldquoEgyptian Lunar Datesrdquo and Alexandria and the Moon 47 with Figure 3

54 bennett

figure 31 Drift of Ptolemaic Dystros 1 against the Babylonian Calendar 264ndash210Note After Bennett Alexandria and the Moon 240ndash247 (Table 12) The citeddouble dates are the first and the last covering the documented period ofexcessive intercalation The detailed reconstruction is my own but any other inthe literature shows the same general trend

ble dates from the Egyptian chora Greeks outside Alexandria did notmaintainlunar accuracy presumably because they did not need to an estimate of thenearest lunation seems to have been good enough There is no reason to doubtthat both characteristics apply to the calendar under Soter

Zenonrsquos archive showed two unexpected features First Ptolemy IIrsquos Mace-donian year did not begin in Dios Instead it began in late Dystros nearly 5months later Edgar concluded that this marked an important anniversary forPhiladelphus though he dithered between the anniversaries of his birth hiscoregency with his father and his fatherrsquos death34 But this custom was notPhiladelphusrsquo invention Soterrsquos yearmost probably began at the endof Daisiosmarking the anniversary of Alexanderrsquos death35

Secondly the Zenon papyri showed that an intercalary month was insertedevery other year They document this explicitly in the 250s and we need toassume intercalation at the same average rate to explain the double dates ofboth the next forty-five years and of Ptolemy IIrsquos year 22 = 2643 This remark-able practice caused the calendar year to slip by about a month every eightyears against the sun Figure 31 shows how Dystros slipped by some sevenmonths against the Babylonian calendar from 264 to 210 the period when theaverage rate of intercalation was biennial

34 Bennett Alexandria and the Moon 55ndash5635 Bennett Alexandria and the Moon 162ndash171 The date must lie between Artemisios and

Hyperberetaios frompEleph 3 and pEleph 4 However the argument usually cited for this(Samuel Ptolemaic Chronology 20ndash24) is not conclusive Rather the result follows fromconsidering the relationship of these papyri to the New Year of Ptolemy II


figure 32 Biennial intercalation vs lunisolar alignment 336ndash264

Samuel supposed that both features represented ancestralMacedonian cus-tom and Ptolemaicists have generally taken him at his word However otherHellenists almost universally assume that the ancestral Macedonian year al-ways started in Dios and that it was always aligned to the sun however looselyIf so then both features were Ptolemaic innovations made either by Soter orby his son We can reformulate this proposal into two specific questions didSoter also practice biennial intercalation And are there any traces of eithercustom in the Macedonian record

The earliest MacedonianEgyptian double dates we possess for Ptolemy IIare from his Macedonian year 22 = 2643 and are consistent with the biennialintercalation documented in the Zenon papyri But the idea that the Macedo-nians intercalated every other year cannot be reconciled with the month ofAlexanderrsquos death Daisios We know from Babylonian sources that he died atthe end of Aiaru on 11 June 32336 As shown in Figure 32 if biennial inter-calation was practiced from 323 to 264 then Daisios 323 should have fallen inOctoberNovember 324 sevenmonths earlier than it did If however theMace-donian calendarwas originally lunisolar and the solar alignment of Alexanderrsquostime is projected forwards biennial intercalation must have been introducedaround themid-260s shortly before the first appearance of MacedonianEgyp-tian double dates

This model is confirmed by a double-dated ostracon found at Khirbet el-Kocircm in ancient Idumea which equates Panemos to Tammuz in Philadelphusrsquoyear 6 = 2807937 This shows the same solar alignment as the earliest pre-cise double date given by odem Phil 14 Loios 19 year 22 = Epeiph 12 year 21 =4 September 264 It is likely that the date of Soterrsquos funeral games subsequentlyregarded as the first Ptolemaieia shows the same solar alignment38Thus bien-

36 Depuydt ldquoTime of Death of Alexanderrdquo and From Xerxesrsquo Murder (465) to Arridaiosrsquo Exe-cution (317) 47ndash51 cf Bennett Alexandria and the Moon 41 n 36 125 n 121

37 Bennett Alexandria and the Moon 102ndash10538 Bennett Alexandria and the Moon 105ndash124

56 bennett

nial intercalation did not begin until the middle of the reign of Philadelphusand was not practiced by his father

While the Macedonian calendar was lunisolar until the third decade ofPtolemy II it appears that its solar alignment at the start of his reignhad slippedby a month from Alexanderrsquos time We cannot say with any certainty when orwhy this happened A seasonal synchronism given by pHibeh I 84a a harvestcontract from very near the end of Soterrsquos reign suggests but does not provethat it had not yet occurred39 If so then the extramonthwas probably insertedby his son very shortly after he became sole king perhaps he did it to buy anextra month to organize his fatherrsquos funeral games as a pan-Hellenic event

The evidence suggests then that Soter did not change the frequency ofintercalation though he may have added one month too many But did hechange the basis for the Macedonian year Though the evidence on this pointis less clear it seems likely that he did not and that Samuel was correct to sup-pose that Macedonian kings had always based their years on the anniversaryof their ascension to power The best evidence to date comes from two inscrip-tions of Philip V which in combination appear to require that his regnal yearstarted between Panemos and Hyperberetaios40 This rules out a year begin-ning in Dios and almost certainly means his year was based on the anniversaryof his accession If thePtolemies and theAntigonids both accounted their yearsthis way then it is hard to avoid the conclusion that this was indeed the tradi-tional method of accounting years and that Soter did not change it

One other aspect of Soterrsquos Macedonian calendar arguably shows innova-tion his count of years The Seleucid Era is based on the date of Seleucusrsquo returnto Babylon in the spring of 311 and marks his assumption of power as satrapnot as king The papyrus pEleph 1 is dated to Dios year 7 of Alexander IV asking and year 14 of Ptolemy as satrap demonstrating that Soter had also startedcounting his Macedonian years from his appointment as satrap by 310 But thecuneiform data shows that Seleucus initially used the regnal years of Alexan-der IV occasionally adding his name as strategos He did not use Seleucid Erayears till he took the title of king in 30541While as yet we have no data allowingus to confirm that the same was true of his Macedonian years if we suppose itwas then it seems that Seleucus was following Ptolemyrsquos lead since Soter hadstarted counting his years as satrap at least five years before Seleucus began todo so

39 Bennett Alexandria and the Moon 98ndash99 123ndash12440 Bennett Alexandria and the Moon 150ndash15141 Boiy ldquoLocal and Imperial Datesrdquo 18 n 27


Again it turns out that Ptolemyrsquos dateswere not an innovation42 Cuneiformand Aramaic dates of Antigonus I from as early as 315 show that he too didnot account his years from his kingship but as strategos starting in 317 withthe death of Philip III While as yet we have no dated Greek inscription ofAntigonus an inscription from Beroia in Macedon is dated to year 27 of a kingDemetrius most likely Demetrius I showing that he also dated his years from317Wealsodonot yet have anydated inscriptions for Lysimachus orCassanderbut thenineteenyearswhichPorphyry assigns toCassander suggest that he alsobased his years from his assumption of power not from his assumption of thetitle of king

This custom also has counterparts in earlier and later Macedonian prac-tice43 Philip II probably and Antigonus III certainly both accounted theiryears from their appointment as guardian of a minor king even though theythemselves took the royal title some time later On the other hand althoughPerdiccas III and Philip V had nominally become kings as minors their yearswere accounted from the time they actually came to power Even the posthu-mous dates that the Babylonian records show for Philip III and that both Baby-lonian and Egyptian records show for Alexander IV may have analogies in ear-lier Macedonian practice both Philip II and Alexander III continued mintingcoins of their predecessors several years into their own reigns and it is wellknown that their own coinage continued to be minted long after their deaths

All indications are then that Soter used theMacedonian calendar through-out his reign exactly as it hadbeenused in theMacedonof his youth In contrastto Seleucus he made no effort at all to adapt it for use in the country he ruledIt is therefore no surprise that his Greek papyri include dates from his fortiethand forty-first years at a timewhenhe had already turned some though not allof the reins of power over to his son Although the number of dated Greek doc-uments we possess from his reign remains frustratingly small it is also perhapsnot surprising that none of them contains an Egyptian date Soterrsquos Macedo-nian calendar was the calendar of Alexandria it was of the Macedonians itwas for the Macedonians and it was used by the Macedonians


58 bennett

4 The Egyptian Calendar in Soterrsquos Egypt

With one exception this is also what we see in the Egyptian data Soterrsquos Egyp-tian calendar was that of the Egyptians it was for the Egyptians and it wasused by the Egyptians His Egyptian documents are dated by the nominal kingfirst Philip III then Alexander IV Only after he took the royal title do we seeEgyptian documents in his name For the next two decades the count of hisEgyptian years was some 20 years behind that of his Macedonian years almostall the dated demotic documents of his reign are dated from years 1 to 21 not21 to 4144

The one exception appears in that area of government most critical to itssurvival taxation Muhsrsquo study of early Ptolemaic tax receipts has shown thatPtolemy II reformed the taxation system around his twenty-first year whenthe earlier nḥb and nḥt taxes were replaced by the salt tax45 The Greek finan-cial year starting around the beginning of the Egyptian month of Mecheirwas probably introduced at the same time This year seems to be related toa pre-existing Egyptian tax year that had also started about Mecheir but wasnumbered one year later46

Although Soterrsquos taxation system is largely unknown it is reasonable to sup-pose that the system of Philadelphusrsquo early years was a continuation of that ofSoterrsquos final years Two of the ostraca Muhs studied were receipts for nḥb taxesof years 30 and3347Thesedates canonly reflect theMacedonian regnal years ofPtolemy I That is it appears that Soterrsquos tax year was based on hisMacedonianyear not the Egyptian year even though it was tied to the Egyptian calendar

Except for the management of state taxes then the calendrical data indi-cates that Soter largely left the Egyptian bureaucracy to its own devices receiv-ing at best general direction from theMacedonian overlords For the bulk of hisreign the Macedonian and Egyptian calendrical systems existed side-by-sideoperating almost entirely independently of each other

44 Depauw et al Chronological Survey of Precisely Dated Abnormal Hieratic and DemoticSources 31ndash34

45 Muhs Tax Receipts Taxpayers and Taxes 2946 Vleeming Ostraka Varia 38ndash39 Bennett Alexandria and the Moon 99ndash102 The pre-

cise start of the Greek financial year is still uncertain All Greek data from the reign ofPtolemy II is consistent with a date around the start of Mecheir conventionallyMecheir 1but under Ptolemy III and IV the financial year certainly started in Tybi If as argued herethe tax year was related to the Macedonian year the Egyptian date may not have beenfixed

47 odem Louvre 1424 and 87 cf Bennett Alexandria and the Moon 101 n 53


5 The Calendars and the Coregency

The fact that the Egyptian tax year was based on Soterrsquos Macedonian regnalyear rather than his Egyptian one explains why Philadelphusrsquo tax year beganin Mecheir both before and after the tax reform of year 21 That month corre-sponds roughly to the latter part of the Macedonian month of Dystros or toXandikos in the first two decades of his reign covering the anniversaries ofboth his coregency on Dystros 12 and his fatherrsquos death at the end of DystrosThus Philadelphusrsquo tax yearwas alreadyderived from theMacedonian calendarbefore the reform of year 21 Moreover since we possess nḥb tax receipts fromyears 1 to 3 his tax year must already have been adopted before his fatherrsquosdeathmdashthat is the collection of taxes was one of his responsibilities as core-gent

This tax year has two odd characteristics Before the reform of year 21 itstarted five months after the start of the corresponding Egyptian year whileafter that year it started seven months before the start of the correspondingEgyptian year Furthermore considered as a Macedonian year it ran one yearbehind the Philadelphusrsquo regnal year

The question of how Ptolemy II counted his years has been much debatedAt some point both his Egyptian and his Macedonian years were counted fromthe year he wasmade his fatherrsquos coregent in Dystros (February orMarch) 284It was long held that he initially counted both years from Soterrsquos death in lateDystros 282 and only switched to the other system some years later HoweverHazzard and Grzybek have shown that his Macedonian years were accountedfromthe year of coregency in the first year of his sole rule48 But if taxation years

48 Hazzard ldquoRegnal Years of Ptolemy IIrdquo and Grzybek Du calendrier maceacutedonien au calen-drier ptoleacutemaiumlque 124ndash129 Hazzardrsquos analysis depends in part on a series of alphabeticcontrol marks on a particular group of tetradrachms of Ptolemy II which Svoronos hadinterpreted as regnal years In particular he argued (ldquoRegnal Years of Ptolemy IIrdquo 144ndash145)that a transition from Α to Δ indicated that Philadelphus had switched from accession dat-ing to coregency dating shortly after his accession However 53 tetradrachms found in theimportantMeydancıkkale hoard showed non-consecutive values of thesemarks (Α-Ε-Ι-Ο-Ρ-Υ) even though there are obverse die links involving up to three of them (Davesne andLe Rider Meydancıkkale I 174ndash175 275ndash277 my thanks to Catharine Lorber [pers commAugust 2011] for the reference Hazzard [Imagination of a Monarchy 18] noted Davesnersquosanalysis but continued to rely on Svoronosrsquo interpretation without further discussion)Whatever their true purpose therefore these marks cannot indicate regnal years Hencethere is no longer any evidence that Ptolemy II changed the basis of his regnal years afterhis accession to sole rule However although the coins cited in Hazzard ldquoRegnal Years ofPtolemy IIrdquo 156ndash159 must be removed as evidence the epigraphic and papyrological data

60 bennett

figure 33 Tax years and regnal years of Ptolemy I and Ptolemy II during the coregency

were also Macedonian years also counted from the coregency it seems at firstsight hard to understand why the two series should have different numbers forthe same year

The explanation lies in the fact that Philadelphus was made coregent on 12Dystros in his fatherrsquos year 39 in early 284 while his father died on or veryshortly after 27 Dystros in his year 41 just over two years later The two datesare very close together but if we take 27 Dystros in 282 as the start of his fourthyear then 12 Dystros in 284 falls almost at the very end of a notional first yearstarting on 27Dystros 285 Therefore tax year numbers based however notion-ally on the anniversary of the coregency on 12 Dystros will be almost exactlya year behind the regnal year numbers based on 27 Dystros which is exactlywhat the taxation ostraca appear to show before year 21 The discrepancy wasremedied as part of the taxation reform of that year by the creation of a formalGreek financial year whose year numbermatched the regnal year The relation-ship between Philadelphusrsquo tax years his retroactive Macedonian regnal yearsand Soterrsquos regnal years is illustrated in Figure 33

cited by Hazzard and Grzybek is sufficient to establish that coregency dating was used forMacedonian years from year 4 = 2821 onwards


Although Hazzard and Grzybek settled the basis of his Macedonian yearsthe question of how Philadelphus accounted his Egyptian years remainedopen It was long believed that he switched from an accession-based to acoregency-based Egyptian system only in his year 16 which was followed byyear 19 Muhs has argued that the nḥb and nḥt tax receipts showed that hisEgyptian years were also accounted from the coregency at the start of his reignsince we have receipts for virtually all tax years up to year 21 including the firstthree and the dates in the receipts are correlated to Egyptian years starting inThoth by year number49 However evidence from the transitional period someof whichwas citedby Samuel andGlanville but overlooked inMuhsrsquo discussionspeaks in favour of a more complicated picture

Greek documents recognized Soter as king till the end of his days andPhiladelphus did not use Macedonian regnal years till after his fatherrsquos deathThe latest date for Soter is Artemisios year 41 (pEleph 3) approximately April282 shortly after his death in FebruaryMarch But the earliest Greek papyruswepossess fromPhiladelphusrsquo reign (pEleph 5) is dated toTybi 23of year 2Thisis an Egyptian date with no recognition of Soterrsquos existence If it is accountedfrom the coregency then it corresponds to 24March 283mdasha year before Soterrsquosdeath This date implies that some Greeks in Elephantine recognized Soter asking while others recognized Philadelphus at the same time and in the sameplace No such problem arises if the year was accounted from Soterrsquos death inthis case the date corresponds to 23 March 28150

49 Muhs ldquoChronology of the Reign of Ptolemy II Reconsideredrdquo50 Cf Samuel Ptolemaic Chronology 26 Skeat had earlier made the same point with respect

to odem Phil 10 dated Tybi year 3 as had Glanville with respect to odem BM 10530 datedTybi 2 year 2 (Glanville 1933 xviii xix) but these documents are both Theban and couldtherefore represent a different local convention from pEleph 2 though considerationsdiscussed below indicate that they do not None of these dates is discussed byMuhs whoasserts (ldquoChronology of the Reign of Ptolemy II Reconsideredrdquo 85) that ldquothe only Egyptianevidence for a recalculation of Ptolemy IIrsquos regnal yearsrdquo is given by iBucheum 3 Samueland Glanville following an argument first developed by Edgar had noted that this steleimplies accession-based dating when it states that a Buchis bull born in Soterrsquos year 14died at age 20 in the 13th year of Philadelphus if coregency-based dating had been usedthe bull should have died at age 18 Muhs objected that the age was written in an unortho-dox fashion (as 10+1 5 4) and its accuracy is therefore questionable While the pointis fair enough one can reasonably conjecture an explanation assuming the simultaneousexistence of coregency- and accession-based dating For example an initial ldquo18rdquo calcu-lated assuming a coregency-based death date could have been emended to ldquo20rdquo after theengraver learned that the Bucheum temple hierarchy had intended an accession-baseddate

62 bennett

Egyptian documents also did not stop using Soterrsquos count of regnal yearsafter his elevation of Philadelphus as coregent The demotic documentswe cur-rently possess from Soterrsquos year 21 are dated between Phamenoth and Epeiphor May to September 284 half a year after the start of the coregency in mid-February or March51 While we do not currently possess any documents ofyears 22 or 23 that are attributed to Soter52 there may be one other indica-tion that he was still recognized as pharaoh by the Egyptian community albeitpossibly with a change of status he had two different Egyptian throne namesSetepenre-Meriamun and Kheperkare-Setepenamun The first was certainlyused while he was sole king53 The second is only known from two examplesbut one is certainly posthumous54 It may well have been adopted at the timeof the coregency to signify to the Egyptians that he continued to be pharaoh

It is not possible in most cases to relate the documents we possess fromPhiladelphusrsquo years 1 to 3 to Soterrsquos final years An exception concerns a groupof demotic papyri recording purchase and property taxes paid between Soterrsquosyear 21 and year 9 of Philadelphus on two houses owned in Thebes by a certainTeinti55 She bought the first in Soterrsquos year 21 paying a purchase tax of 25 sil-ver kite and paid a property tax of 6 silver kite on it in Philadelphusrsquo year 2 Shebought the second house in year 5 again paying a purchase tax of 25 silver kiteShe paid property tax of 2 silver kite on it in year 6 andmade a second paymentof 6 silver kite for each house in year 9 Clearly the property tax was assessedat a rate of 2 silver kite per house per annum If the dates of Ptolemy II wereaccounted fromhis accession in 2832 then thedistancebetweenSoterrsquos year 21

51 Depauw et al Chronological Survey of Precisely Dated Abnormal Hieratic and DemoticSources 34

52 It may be that such documents are known but are misattributed on the presumption thatyear 21 was his last However the lack may also be due to gaps in the record Depauw etal Chronological Survey of Precisely Dated Abnormal Hieratic andDemotic Sources lists nodated documents for years 3 7 10 or 15 and for many years only one or two documentsare listed Year 23 was short lasting only 3 or 4 months

53 Stele Vienna 163 recording the death of the High Priest of Ptah Anemhor II on 26 Phar-mouthi year 5 of Ptolemy IV = 8 June 217 aged 72 years 1 month and 23 days and his birthon 3 Phamenoth year 16 of king Setepentre-meriamun Ptolemy = 4 May 289

54 Kuhlman ldquoDemise of a Spurious Queenrdquo55 odem BM 10537 10530 10536 10535 10529 (Glanville Catalogue of Demotic Papyri 39ndash45)

Samuel Ptolemaic Chronology 27 n 56 argued against Glanville that both dating systemsleft this set of documents in the same sequence and therefore they could not be used asevidence presumably this is why Muhs did not do so Neither Glanville nor Samuel con-sidered the effect of changing the dating system on the tax rate as discussed here


figure 34 Property tax rate in Thebesmdashcoregency vs accession-based dating

= 2854 and Philadelphusrsquo year 2 = 2821 is three years and the first tax paymenton the first house was assessed at the same rate But if the dates of Ptolemy IIwere accounted from his coregency then the distance between Soterrsquos year 21= 2854 and Philadelphusrsquo year 2 = 2843 is only one year and the taxation ratevaries from 6 kite in his first year to 2 kite per annum thereafter The differenceis illustrated in Figure 34

Thus Egyptian year numbers associated with the nḥb and nḥt taxes werederived from Soterrsquos Macedonian regnal years and from the anniversary ofPhiladelphusrsquo coregency yet property taxes in Thebes were dated from theanniversary of Philadelphusrsquo accession using ordinary Egyptian civil years Thedifference can be explained by considering the taxation authorities involvedThe nḥb and nḥt taxeswere annual capitation taxes levied by the state56WhileTeintirsquos purchase taxes were paid per purchase before a Greek commissioner arepresentative of the state57 the property tax was paid to scribes who also heldidentified positions in the temple hierarchy it was most probably a pure tem-

56 Muhs Tax Receipts Taxpayers and Taxes 3057 Muhs Tax Receipts Taxpayers and Taxes 68ndash70

64 bennett

ple tax58 Even though the receipts for all these taxes were dated according tothe Egyptian calendar year annual state taxes reflected the year numbers of theking or his coregentmdashMacedonian yearsmdashwhile annual temple taxes reflectedEgyptian custom

Glanville suggested that the transition from accession-based years to core-gency-based years may not have occurred at a fixed time but that differentschemes were used simultaneously in different contexts and different placesSamuel dismissed this idea59 but the taxationdata discussedhere suggests thatGlanville was correct After all if it is true that Soterrsquos Egyptian tax years usedhis Macedonian year numbers which were 20 years ahead of his Egyptian reg-nal year numbers and that Philadelphusrsquo tax year ran a full year ahead of hisMacedonian regnal year for some 20 years then the Egyptian civil year num-bers in the same taxation receiptsmaybe similarly disconnected fromEgyptiancivil year numbers used in other contexts

In otherwords it appears that coregency-basedEgyptian years derived froma Macedonian regnal year and used at least initially solely for taxation pur-poses existed alongside accession-based Egyptian civil years in the first fewyears of Philadelphusrsquo sole reign It is unclear whether coregency-based yearsremained confined to taxation during this period as Glanvillersquos suggestionimplies each systemmay have been used for different purposes or in differentplaces It is also unclear when and how the accession-based count was aban-doned It may have persisted for some considerable time If Grzybek was rightin redating the death of Arsinoe II from 270 to 268 then both counts were usedfor at least fifteen years

6 Conclusions

In summary the calendars of the two peoples hardly interacted during Soterrsquoslifetime This surely reflects a high degree of social segregation Soter mayhave established the syncretic cult of Serapis his army may have had Egyptianrecruits even Egyptian commanders and he may have relied on the Egyptian

58 Muhs Tax Receipts Taxpayers and Taxes 66ndash6859 Glanville Catalogue of Demotic Papyri xix (ldquonor did it necessarily happen simultaneously

everywhererdquo) vs Samuel PtolemaicChronology 27 n 56 (ldquoonce the orderwere issued therewould only be the interval required for the news to get throughout the country before thenew systemwere followed everywhererdquo) Samuel assumes not only that an orderwas actu-ally issued which may or may not be so but also that the ldquooldrdquo (accession-based) systemwas the only one previously in use which it is argued here was not the case


bureaucracy to raise his taxes but the Macedonians and the Egyptians lived inseparate conceptualworldsTheir calendars reflect very different notions of thenature of time and the legitimation of power The apparent persistence of thenative Macedonian calendar under Soter with no observable change reflectsboth the unique position of Alexandria and a high degree of confidence in thesecurity of his control over the country Unlike Seleucus he saw no need toadapt his ancestral practices to the needs of his new state nor did he need tointerferewith the native Egyptian calendar The only calendrical interactionwesee in his reign is in taxation

There is nothing particularly unexpected in this Both earlier and later con-querorsmdashthe Hyksos the Achaemenids and the Romansmdashbehaved in a simi-lar fashion retaining their own calendars to regulate their own customs whileadministering the country using the native Egyptian calendar a calendarwhose efficacy had been proven over many centuries

However the separation of calendars did not persist Near the end of hisreign Soter elevated his son to be coregent a decision which created a thirdsystem for accounting yearsWhile Soter remained king andwas so recognizedin both Greek and Egyptian documents the dates of the nḥb receipts from thistime indicate that this tax was the coregentrsquos responsibility and so the tax yearwas now accounted by years based on the anniversary of the coregency Thissystem continued after Philadelphus became sole king though it conflictedwith both the Macedonian and Egyptian methods of counting regnal years

It is now clear that Ptolemy II undertook a major calendrical reform in thelate 260s Its most remarkable feature was the introduction of biennial interca-lation in the Macedonian calendar I have elsewhere suggested that this wasintended to realign Dystros either to Thoth or the autumn equinox over aperiod of time60 But he also introduced the Greek financial year at or aroundthe same timeThiswaspartly necessary to keep the tax year seasonally aligned

60 Bennett Alexandria and theMoon 173ndash178 It remains unclearwhyhewouldwant tomakesuch a realignment Stern Calendars in Antiquity 118 n 46 and 155 n 92 finds the proposalof a gradual reform unconvincing as the ldquoreformers would never live to see the outcomeof their reformrdquo he prefers instead a single set of supernumerary intercalation(s) as beingldquofar more reliable and expedientrdquo Yet radical calendar reforms require great force of willand political strength to overcome the interests vested in the old calendarmdashcf Stern Cal-endars in Antiquity 141 on the likely reasons Ptolemy III did not attempt to realign theEgyptian year to the seasons in the Canopic reform It took a Caesar to enable the Julianreform and Roman imperial power to persuade the cities and provinces of the East toassimilate their lunar calendars to the solar Julian one (cf Stern Calendars in Antiquity277ndash278 on the Asian calendar reform) As I noted in Bennett Alexandria and theMoon agradual reform of just the type that Stern deprecates intended to run over four decades

66 bennett

even though the Macedonian year on which it was originally based was beingdecoupled from the solar year If the arguments presented in this chapter arecorrect the reform also adjusted Egyptian year numbering so that financialyear numbers ceased to be a full year ahead of the Macedonian regnal yearTo the extent that accession-based dating was still used by the Egyptians thereform may also have required that coregency-based dates be used for all pur-poses henceforth

These aspects of the reform simplified the systems of dating that had grownup as a result of the coregency Theymarked the first steps in a process that sawan attempt to introduce a leap day into the Egyptian calendarwith the Canopicreform andwhichultimately resulted in the abandonment of the financial yearand the absorption of the Macedonian calendar by the Egyptian one But theneed for them ultimately came from Soterrsquos decision to base the Egyptian taxyear on his Macedonian regnal year

Bibliography

Assar GRF 2003 ldquoParthian Calendars at Babylon and Seleucia on the Tigrisrdquo Iran 41171ndash191

Belmonte JA 2009 ldquoThe Egyptian Calendar Keeping Marsquoat on Earthrdquo in In Searchof Cosmic Order Selected Essays on Egyptian Archaeoastronomy edited by JA Bel-monte and M Shaltout 75ndash131 Cairo Supreme Council of Antiquities Press

Bennett CJ 2011 Alexandria and the Moon An Investigation Into the Macedonian Cal-endar of Ptolemaic Egypt Leuven Peeters

Bennett CJ 2008 ldquoEgyptian Lunar Dates and Temple ServiceMonthsrdquo BibliothecaOri-entalis 65 525ndash554

Bickerman EJ 1980Chronology of theAncientWorld Revised edition LondonThamesand Hudson

Blois F de 1996 ldquoThe Persian Calendarrdquo Iran 34 39ndash54Boiy T 2010 ldquoLocal and Imperial Dates at the Beginning of theHellenistic Periodrdquo Elec-

trum 18 9ndash22Britton JP 2007 ldquoCalendars Intercalations and Year-Lengths in Mesopotamian As-

tronomyrdquo in Calendars and Years Astronomy and Time in the Ancient Near Eastedited by JM Steele 115ndash132 Oxford Oxbow Books

was attempted in 18th century Sweden and the partial recovery of the seasonal alignmentof the Roman calendar between 190 and 168 immediately following the passage of the LexAcilia of 191 seems hard to explain any other way Stern offers no alternative explanationfor the sudden appearance of Philadelphusrsquo excess intercalations


Burstein SM 1984 ldquoCallisthenes and Babylonian Astronomy A Note on FGrH 124 T3rdquoEacutechos du monde classique 28 71ndash74

Byrne SG 20067 ldquoFour Athenian Archons of the Third Century BCrdquo MediterraneanArchaeology 1920 169ndash179

Clagett M 1995 Ancient Egyptian Science II Calendars Clocks and Astronomy Phila-delphia American Philosophical Society

Davesne A and G Le Rider 1989 Le treacutesor de Meydancıkkale (Cilicie Tracheacutee 1980)Paris Eacuteditions Recherche sur les Civilisations

Depauw M et al 2007 A Chronological Survey of Precisely Dated Abnormal Hieraticand Demotic Sources Version 10 KoumllnLeuven Trismegistos Online Publicationsaccessed July 18 2016 httpwwwtrismegistosorgtopphp

Depuydt L 2012 ldquoWhy Greek Lunar Months Began a Day Later than Egyptian LunarMonths Both Before First Visibility of the New Crescentrdquo in Living the Lunar Calen-dar edited by J Ben-Dov et al 119ndash171 Oxford Oxbow Books

Depuydt L 2009 ldquoFrom Twice Helix to Double Helix A Comprehensive Model forEgyptian Calendar Historyrdquo Journal of Egyptian History 2 115ndash157

Depuydt L 2008 From Xerxesrsquo Murder (465) to Arridaiosrsquo Execution (317) Updates toAchaemenid Chronology (including errata in past reports) Oxford British Archaeo-logical Reports

Depuydt L 1997 ldquoThe Time of Death of Alexander the Great 11 June 323BC (ndash322) ca400ndash500PMrdquo DieWelt des Orients 28 117ndash135

Edgar CC 1918 ldquoOn theDating of Early Ptolemaic Papyrirdquo Annales du Service desAntiq-uiteacutes de lrsquoEacutegypte 17 209ndash223

Gardiner AH 1945 ldquoRegnal Years and Civil Calendar in Pharaonic Egyptrdquo Journal ofEgyptian Archaeology 31 11ndash28

Glanville SRK 1939 Catalogue of Demotic Papyri in the British Museum I A Thebanarchive of the reign of Ptolemy I Soter London British Museum Publications

Goldstein BR andAC Bowen 1989 ldquoOn Early Hellenistic Astronomy Timocharis andthe First Callippic Calendarrdquo Centaurus 32 272ndash293

Grzybek E 1990 Du calendrier maceacutedonien au calendrier ptoleacutemaiumlque problegravemes dechronologie helleacutenistique Basel F Reinhardt

Habicht C 1997 Athens fromAlexander to Antony Cambridge MA Harvard UniversityPress

Hatzopolous MB 1996 Macedonian Institutions under the Kings Athens De BoccardHazzard RA 2000 Imagination of a Monarchy Studies in Ptolemaic Propaganda To-

ronto Phoenix Supplementary Volume 37Hazzard RA 1987 ldquoThe Regnal Years of Ptolemy II Philadelphosrdquo Phoenix 41 140ndash

158Hornung E et al 2006 ldquoMethods of Dating and the Egyptian Calendarrdquo in Ancient

Egyptian Chronology edited by E Hornung et al 45ndash51 Leiden Brill

68 bennett

Krauss R 2006 ldquoLunar Days LunarMonths and the Question of the Civil based LunarCalendarrdquo in Ancient Egyptian Chronology edited by E Hornung et al 386ndash391 Lei-den Brill

Kuhlmann KP 1998 ldquoPtolemaismdashThe Demise of a Spurious Queen (Apropos JE43610)rdquo in Stationen Beitraumlge zur Kulturgeschichte Aumlgyptens Rainer Stadelmanngewidmet edited by H Guksch and D Polz 469ndash472 Mainz von Zabern

Lambert SD 2010 ldquoAthenian Chronology 3521ndash3221BCrdquo in Philathenaios Studies inHonour of Michael J Osborne edited by A Tamis C Mackie and S Byrne 91ndash102Athens Greek Epigraphic Society

Morgan JD 1996 ldquoThe Calendar and the Chronology of Athensrdquo American Journal ofArchaeology 100 395

Muhs BP 2005 Tax Receipts Taxpayers and Taxes in Early Ptolemaic Thebes ChicagoThe Oriental Institute

Muhs BP 1998 ldquoThe Chronology of the Reign of Ptolemy II Reconsidered The Evi-dence of the NHb and NHt Tax Receiptsrdquo in The Two Faces of Graeco-Roman EgyptGreek and Demotic and Greek-Demotic Studies Presented to PW Pestman edited byAMFW Verhoogt and SP Vleeming 71ndash86 Leiden Brill

Neugebauer O 1957 The Exact Sciences in Antiquity Providence Brown UniversityPress

Oppen de Ruyter B van 2010 ldquoThe Death of Arsinoe II Philadelphus The EvidenceReconsideredrdquo Zeitschrift fuumlr Papyrologie und Epigraphik 174 139ndash150

Parker RA 1959 A Vienna Demotic Papyrus on Eclipse- and Lunar-Omina ProvidenceBrown University Press

Parker RA 1950 The Calendars of Ancient Egypt Chicago University of Chicago Ori-ental Institute

Parker RA andWH Dubberstein 1942 Babylonian Chronology 626BCndashAD75 ChicagoUniversity of Chicago Press

Pritchett WK 2001 Athenian Calendars and Ekklesias Amsterdam JC GiebenRea JR et al 1994 ldquoA Tax Receipt from Hellenistic Bactriardquo Zeitschrift fuumlr Papyrologie

und Epigraphik 104 261ndash280Samuel AE 1972 Greek and Roman Chronology Munich BeckSamuel AE 1962 Ptolemaic Chronology Munich BeckSenior RC and A Houghton 1999 ldquoTwo Remarkable Bactrian Coinsrdquo ONS Newsletter

159 11ndash12Spalinger AJ 2002 ldquoAncient Egyptian Calendars How Many Were Thererdquo Journal of

the American Research Center in Egypt 39 241ndash250Spalinger AJ 1998 ldquoChronological Remarksrdquo Bulletin de la Socieacuteteacute drsquoEacutegyptologie 22 51ndash

58Stern S 2012 Calendars in Antiquity Empires States and Societies Oxford Oxford Uni-

versity Press


Stern S 2008 ldquoThe Babylonian Month and the New Moon Sighting and PredictionrdquoJournal for the History of Astronomy 39 19ndash42

Stern S 2000 ldquoTheBabylonianCalendar at ElephantinerdquoZeitschrift fuumlrPapyrologieundEpigraphik 130 159ndash171

Thiers C 2007 Ptoleacutemeacutee Philadelphe et les precirctres drsquoAtoum de Tjeacutekhou Nouvelle eacuteditioncommenteacutee de la laquostegravele de Pithomraquo (CGC 22183)Montpellier Universiteacute Paul Valeacutery

Vleeming SP 1994OstrakaVaria TaxReceipts and Legal Documents onDemotic GreekandGreek-DemoticOstraka Chiefly of the Early Ptolemaic Period fromVarious Collec-tions (PL Bat 26) Leiden Brill

Waerden BL van der 1960 ldquoGreek Astronomical Calendars and their Relation to theGreek Civil Calendarsrdquo Journal of Hellenic Studies 80 168ndash180


chapter 4

The Role of Coinage in the Political Economy ofFourth Century Egypt

Henry P Colburn

The arrival of Ptolemy I Soter was indisputably a turning point in themonetaryhistory of Egypt For thousands of years the Egyptian economy had operated inkind with grain and precious metal bullion serving as the most typical but byno means only forms of money yet at the time of Ptolemyrsquos death in 282BCEEgypt had a trimetallic system of coinage analogous to those of many Greekcities and other Hellenistic kingdoms But these were not the first coins tobe struck in Egypt rather a variety of small issues including gold coins imi-tation Athenian tetradrachms and fractions in silver and bronze were struckthere since the beginning of the fourth century In the absence of institu-tions that supported the exclusive use of coins as money which accordingto the recent seminal study by Sitta von Reden were critical for the transi-tion to a monetized economy these coins were used alongside other forms ofmoney such as grain and bullion1 This has made them difficult to interpretby means of the normal methodologies employed by numismatists and as aresult they remain poorly understood Yet as coins these issues clearly rep-resent an important stop on the road to monetization As von Reden herselfhas stated ldquohellip the monetary developments within Egypt immediately beforethe Macedonian conquest were an important precondition for the Ptolemiesto succeedrdquo2

It is the purpose of this chapter to re-examine the use of these coins withinthe context of the political economy of fourth century Egypt The use of the

I am grateful to Damien Agut-Labordegravere Carmen Arnold-Biucchi Gunnar Dumke Wolf-gang Fischer-Bossert Christelle Fischer-Bovet Don Jones Cathy Lorber Andy MeadowsKen Sheedy Peter van Alfen Terry Wilfong and Agnieszka Wojciechowska for sharing theirresearch and insights with me this paper has benefited enormously for it I am also gratefulto Paul McKechnie and Jenny Cromwell for the opportunity to participate in the Sydney con-ference and to contribute to its published proceedings and to Sebastiaacuten Encina for helpingme to procure some of the images published here

1 Von Reden Money in Ptolemaic Egypt2 Von Reden Money in Ptolemaic Egypt 33

the role of coinage in the political economy of egypt 71

term ldquopolitical economyrdquo signals a theoretical approach that focuses on theldquorelationship betweenpolitical organization and the social organizationof pro-duction exchange and consumptionrdquo3 Such an approach has obvious rele-vance to even a largely monetized society since coins are clearly a productof interaction between political power and economic conditions Howeverit has frequently been applied to societies that did not use coins at all andeven to societies that had recourse only to what has been called ldquolimited usemoneyrdquo ie items suitable to only some of the various purposes of money4In an imperfectly monetized economy such as that of fourth century Egyptcoins fall into this category and by reconstructing the flows of food staplesand the objects that served as more durable forms of wealth it becomes pos-sible to understand the role played by coins within the political economy Thisapproach is particularly appropriate given that the monetization of the Egyp-tian economy under Ptolemy and his successors was very much politicallymotivated5

Thus it is necessary at the outset to construct a model of the political econ-omy of Late Period Egypt that elucidates the roles played by staples andwealthobjects including coins in production and economic exchange This is fol-lowed by a presentation of the numismatic evidence for coin use in the fourthcentury including the distribution and content of hoards and examinationsof individual issues especially the imitation Athenian tetradrachms so preva-lent in this period To accommodate changes in political circumstances and toillustrate their economic effects the Second Persian Period and the period inwhich Egypt was a part of Alexanderrsquos empire are treated separately Finallyin order to understand the relationship between the political economy of thefourth century and themonetary reforms of the Ptolemies the continuities andchanges that occur in the early Ptolemaic economy are examined

The fourth century in Egypt is often characterized as a period of politicalturbulence Manetho attributes three dynasties to the sixty years between theoverthrow of the Achaemenids in 404 and their return in 3432 warfare andinfighting were endemic6 This turbulence however belies a period of numis-

3 Stein ldquoUnderstanding Ancient State Societies in the OldWorldrdquo 3564 Earle Bronze Age Economics 20 von Reden Money in Classical Antiquity 3ndash65 Von Reden Money in Ptolemaic Egypt Manning ldquoCoinage as lsquoCodersquo in Ptolemaic Egyptrdquo The

Last Pharaohs 130ndash1386 Perdu ldquoSaites and Persiansrdquo 153ndash157 Kienitz Die politische Geschichte Aumlgyptens 76ndash112 see

also Ruzicka Trouble in theWest Depuydt ldquoNew Daterdquo has argued convincingly for a date of340339 instead of 34342 This shortens the overall duration of the Second Persian Period byat least two years but does not significantly affect the conclusions drawn here

72 colburn

matic vibrancy in which the Egyptians experimented with the use and produc-tion of coinage in response to changing political and economic circumstancesThis experimentation represents a crucial step in themonetizationof theEgyp-tian economy and it provided an important foundation for Ptolemy I Soterrsquosmonetary reforms

1 The Political Economy of the Egyptian Late Period

The political economies of pre-modern states commonly consist of systemsof staple and wealth finance ldquoStaple financerdquo refers to a system in which pay-ments aremade in food staples usually grain7 Such systemsare typical of manyancient states and empires where coins did not serve as the primary form ofmoney Given Egyptrsquos agricultural fertility and relative poverty of silver staplefinance clearly played a major role from even the earliest periods and contin-ued to do so under Roman Byzantine and Arab rule when tribute paymentswere made in grain despite the prevalent use of coins as money in those peri-ods Alongside staple finance there also existed a system of wealth financeldquoWealth financerdquo involves transactions made in specialized objects that couldnot serve as staples In ancient Egypt these could have included a variety ofdurable goods but precious metals were especially useful and desirable in thiscontextWealth objects can provide various advantages over staples especiallytheir storability (they donot spoil) and their transportability (grain is bulky andtherefore expensive tomove long distances especially overland) They also cansupport certain state functions such as construction projects At some pointwealth objects need to be converted into staples and this conversion typicallyrequires the existence of some sort of market system Indeed most ancientstate economies comprised a combination of both staple and wealth financeand understanding the role played by coins in the Egyptian economy requiresan understanding of the interaction of staple and wealth finance there

A comprehensive model of the political economy of the Egyptian Late Pe-riod is clearly a major desideratum The difficulty of building such a modelhowever is best summed up by Christopher Eyre

Evidence for the working of the Egyptian economymdashboth textual andarchaeologicalmdashis considerable in quantity although it tends to be frag-

7 DrsquoAltroy and Earle ldquoStaple FinanceWealth Finance and Storagerdquo 188 EarleHowChiefs Cometo Power 70ndash75 Bronze Age Economics 191ndash234


mentary unprocessed and often can seem intractable In particular ittypically does not fit conveniently into an easy theoretical structure8

Certainly this is the case for the Late Period from which many documents inabnormal hieratic and Demotic survive But these are by and large documentspertaining to the business of individuals they include land leases tax receiptsletters accounts wills and so forth They are enormously useful for writingsocial history but it is difficult to identify overarching economic structures fromthese documents alone The model presented in this chapter then is derivedfrom evidence from the New Kingdom and later down to the death of Alexan-der Its purpose is to show the logical relationships between the producers andconsumers of both staple and wealth goods in order to understand how coinsfit into the political economy of Egypt

11 Staple FinanceEgyptrsquos primary form of wealth in antiquity was grain This was due to theenormous fertility of the Nile river valley and the relative consistency and pre-dictability of Nile floods Until the Hellenistic period the primary staple cropswere emmer wheat (triticum dicoccum) and hulled barley (hordeum vulgare)with emmer becoming particularly prevalent in the New Kingdom and later9Thus usufruct of land and access towaterwere key to the productionof staples

In theory the pharaoh owned all the land in Egypt in practice he neededsome infrastructure by which he could exploit it and this was provided bythe temples and perhaps also by other institutions such as the army10 Thepharaoh assigned various tracts of farmland to the temples in the guise of dona-tions recorded on stelae set up in the temples and at other relevant locations11The temples in turn allotted this land to various temple officials and otherpeople and noted their names and titles as well as the plots allotted to them

8 Eyre ldquoThe Economy Pharaonicrdquo 3079 Murray ldquoCereal Production and Processingrdquo 511ndash51310 Farmlandwas allotted to Egyptian soldiers (Hdt 2168 Fischer-Bovet ldquoEgyptianWarriorsrdquo)

and also to foreign mercenaries as noted by Herodotus (2154 see further Austin Greeceand Egypt in the Archaic Age 15ndash22 and Agut-Labordegravere ldquoPlus que des mercenairesrdquo) andimplied by the usufruct of land by the Jewish garrison at Elephantine (Porten Archivesfrom Elephantine passim see also Kaplan ldquoCross-Cultural Contacts among MercenaryCommunitiesrdquo) Although some of this land fell under the administrative purview of tem-ples (as per the soldiers listed as cultivators in PReinhardt) this represents another way inwhich the pharaoh could exploit Egyptrsquos agricultural wealth

11 Meeks ldquoLes donations aux temples dans lrsquoEacutegypterdquo

74 colburn

and their expected yields in land lists such as Papyrus Reinhardt a tenth cen-tury hieratic land list recording the lands assigned to the domain of Amun inUpper Egypt12 These individuals (called ldquocultivatorsrdquo in PReinhardt) paid thetemple a portion of their harvest this payment appears in Demotic land leasesand tax receipts as the ldquoharvest-taxrdquo (šmw)13 This grain was then stored in tem-ple granaries which in some cases were quite large the Ramesseum at Thebesfor example could store up to 16 million litres of grain14 Temples also leasedwater rights to cultivators this is best attested by the fifth century Demoticostraca from Ayn Manawir in the Kharga Oasis which refer to the leasing ofwater rights by the temple of Osiris usually for a specific number of days permonth in exchange for a portion of the harvest15

Since many of the so-called ldquocultivatorsrdquo were precluded from farming theland themselves because of their personal status or other responsibilities theymade agreements with others to oversee the actual work again dividing theyield between them at an agreed rate some of these agreements survive inthe form of Demotic land leases16 The lessees in these documents also tendto have titles suggestive of statuses incompatible withmanual labour and theypresumablymade further sharecropping agreementswith other people furtherdown the social pyramid17 These sharecroppers in turn brought staples intotheir local village economies where they consumed someof them stored someof them and used some of them to pay for goods and services

Egyptian temples thus operated essentially as institutional lessors derivingtheir income from farmland they permitted others to work in exchange for apercentage of the harvest These stores of staples were used to fund templeoperations but they must have also been available to the pharaoh as well insome manner The nature of the economic relationship between the pharaohand the temples is not always clear in large part because the textual referencesto this relationship are usually couched in religious terms that obscure the eco-

12 Vleeming Papyrus Reinhardt see also the documents published in Gasse Donneacutees nou-velles administratives et sacerdotales

13 Muumlller-Wollermann ldquoSteuern Zoumllle und Tributerdquo 90ndash91 Agut-Labordegravere ldquoThe Saite Peri-odrdquo 1018ndash1020 Monson ldquoEgyptian Fiscal Historyrdquo 7ndash8

14 Kemp Ancient Egypt 257 Examples of temple storehouses from the New Kingdomthrough the Late Period are collected and discussed by Muumlller-Wollermann ldquoDie oumlkono-mische Bedeutung von Tempelschatzhaumlusenrdquo Traunecker ldquoLes lsquotemples hautsrsquo de BasseEacutepoquerdquo and Berg ldquoThe 29th Dynasty Storehouse at Karnakrdquo

15 Chauveau ldquoLes qanāts dans les ostraca de Manacircwarrdquo16 Hughes Saite Demotic Land Leases Donker van Heel Djekhy amp Son 101ndash11317 Eyre ldquoHow Relevant was Personal Statusrdquo


nomic aspects The idiosyncratic Demotic document PRylands 9 (written inthe reign of Darius I but describing events in the late Saite period) seems toindicate that the pharaoh could and did levy taxes on temples18 But the his-toricity of this document which hasmany literary features remains uncertainAt any rate the pharaoh was the chief priest of every Egyptian temple andwhen he ldquodonatedrdquo land to support individual temples he was not so muchdepriving himself of its produce as he was deputizing local priestly elites toadminister and exploit it on his behalf in exchange for a cut of the proceedsan arrangement typical of pre-modern agrarian states and empires19 What-ever the precise mechanism was for the pharaoh to draw on their resourcesEgyptian temples were in effect a system of dispersed storehouses of staplesa common feature of many staple finance systems such as that of the InkaEmpire which reduced the costs of transporting bulky staples and instead per-mitted them to be stored closer to where they might be utilized in furtheranceof royal projects20 As Barry Kemp put it (somewhat anachronistically) ldquomajortemples were the reserve banks of their dayrdquo21

Sometimes when the pharaoh was politically weak the larger temples be-came essentially independent polities certainly this was the case with thetemple of Amun in Thebes during the Third Intermediate Period22 Yet onthe whole the relationship between them was stable if not always harmo-nious and this stability was conceptualized in such religious terms as maatthe cosmic balance which it was the pharaohrsquos duty to maintain through justrule and obeisance to the gods23 These stores of grain were distributed by thepharaoh and temples alike to people involved in publicworks projects and oth-ers acquired grain by way of sharecropping agreements Staples served as boththe primary form of sustenance for many Egyptians and also the primary formof wealth This latter point as well as the segment of the population involvedin the cultivation or production of other goods or in the service sector impliesthere must have been somemarket exchange in grain at the village level sincethere had to be some mechanism by which those without access to staples

18 Agut-Labordegravere ldquoThe Saite Periodrdquo 1010ndash1017 Monson ldquoEgyptian Fiscal Historyrdquo 8ndash919 Bang The Roman Bazaar 93ndash9720 See eg LeVine Inka Storage Systems Janssen ldquoThe Cost of Nile-Transportrdquo calculates the

cost of transporting grain on the Nile in the later New Kingdom at 10 of the overallcargo further costs would be incurred in moving it to and from the river and storing it ina granary

21 Kemp Ancient Egypt 25722 Jansen-Winkeln ldquoDer Thebanische lsquoGottesstaatrsquo rdquo23 Assmann Marsquoat 201ndash236

76 colburn

could acquire them and those with access could exchange them for goods andservices24 This is rather a crucial point for this model because it shows howwealth objects could potentially circulate even at the level of the village econ-omy and indeed this is attested in the evidence forwealth finance as discussedbelow

Grain was by far the most prevalent form of money in Egyptrsquos staple financesystem but therewere limitations to its utility asmoney Staples by their naturediminished in value as they increased in quantity since a household couldonly consume somuch grain in a given period of time Furthermore there wasalways the problem of spoilage even in a dry climate like Egyptrsquos25 On accountof these limitations grain was at best limited-use money and for wealthierindividuals and institutions wealth objects were generally more desirable thanstaples26

12 Wealth FinanceAlthough food staples dominated the ancient Egyptian economy wealth prod-ucts also played an important role one which is key to understanding coin usesince coins were essentially wealth products Nearly any form of durable goodcould serve as a wealth product but by the New Kingdom at least (and prob-ably earlier) precious metals were the wealth product of choice Unlike grainmetal had a high value for its weight making it more worthwhile to transportand it was reusable ie it could bemelted down andmade into something elseAlso it did not spoil Its main disadvantage was that it was not edible so thosepeople who did not produce their own staples relied on payments in staples orhad to purchase them via market exchange By necessity systems of staple andwealth finance operated side by side in Egypt

Gold and copper occur naturally in Egypt and the pharaoh organized expe-ditions into the eastern desert and the Sinai Peninsula as well as to Nubia inorder to procure them He did however sometimes assign mining commis-sions to certain temples as evidenced by the Great Harris Papyrus27 But silverwas the wealth object of choice and it does not occur naturally in Egypt inany great quantitymdashso the Egyptiansmust have acquired a significant amountof it from abroad In the New Kingdom Egypt received silver as tribute from

24 Eyre ldquoThe Market Women of Pharaonic Egyptrdquo and ldquoThe Village Economy in PharaonicEgyptrdquo 53ndash55 Kemp Ancient Egypt 302ndash335

25 Adamson ldquoProblems over Storing Food in the Ancient Near Eastrdquo26 For lsquolimited use moneyrsquo see Earle Bronze Age Economics 20 and von Reden Money in

Classical Antiquity 3ndash627 Grandet Le Papyrus Harris I 238


vassal states in the Levant28 As Egyptian power waned in the beginning ofthe first millennium tribute gave way to trade This period was the heyday ofPhoenician commercial expansion in the Mediterranean and although thereis limited direct evidence for the importation of silver into Egypt it is not atall unreasonable to suppose it took place especially as prior to the advent ofcoinage silver bullionwas the commonest form of payment29 Egypt producedseveral mostly unique goods namely linen natron alum and papyrus whichwere highly desirable as exports30 Temples were certainly involved in the pro-duction of linen since there are land leases and tax receipts in Demotic andabnormal hieratic in which the harvest tax is paid in flax31 There is no directevidence of their involvement in the production of any of the other exportsbut these occurred naturally and could be collected by individuals individualswho needed to procure staples in order to feed themselves and their families Itstands to reason that they turned to temples to trade these goods especially asmost villagers would have had only limited need of natron alum or papyrusand would have been able to collect small quantities of these themselves Inessence temples converted their surplus stores of staples into durable goodswhich they then sold to foreignmerchants in exchange for silver (among otherthings)

Foreign trade also provided silver to the temples and to the pharaoh for thatmatter in the form of customs duties TADAE C37 an Aramaic customs docu-ment dating to 475 makes reference to import duties paid in gold silver and inkind and the stelae of Nectanebo I erected at Naucratis andHeracleion-Thonisseem to indicate duties paid in gold silver and wood to both the pharaohand the temple of Neith in Sais32 This last document provides an importantclue as to the relationship between the pharaoh the temples and foreignmerchants According to Miriam Lichtheimrsquos re-examination of Nectaneborsquos

28 Pons Medallo ldquoTrade of Metals between Egypt and Other Countriesrdquo 12ndash1629 Le Rider Le naissance de lamonnaie 1ndash39 see Pernigotti ldquoPhoenicians and Egyptiansrdquo for

Phoenician trade and interaction with Egypt30 The importation of linen and alum to Babylon in the sixth century is attested in two

cuneiform tablets (Oppenheim ldquoEssay onOverlandTraderdquo) and anAramaic customsdoc-ument from Elephantine dating to 475 indicates that Greek and Phoenician merchantsexported natron in some quantity (TADAE C37 see Yardeni ldquoMaritime Trade and RoyalAccountancyrdquo Briant and Descat ldquoUn registre douanier de la satrapie drsquoEacutegypterdquo KuhrtThe Persian Empire 681ndash703 Cottier ldquoRetour agrave la sourcerdquo)

31 Donker van Heel Djekhy amp Son 73ndash99 Hughes Saite Demotic Land Leases32 Muumlller-Wollermann ldquoSteuern Zoumllle undTributerdquo 94ndash100 Lichtheim ldquoThe Naucratis Stela

Once Againrdquo Yoyotte ldquoAn Extraordinary Pair of Twinsrdquo von Bomhard The Decree of Sais

78 colburn

decree the temple of Neith at Sais received one-tenth of the customs duty rev-enues fromNaucratis and Heracleion-Thonis with the other nine-tenths goingto the ldquokingrsquos domainrdquo This arrangement appears to be another example ofthe pharaoh giving a temple a cut of the customs revenues in exchange forthe templersquos cooperation in their collection analogous to the practice of allot-ting arable land to temples and permitting them to collect the tax revenuesfrom them in exchange for political and financial support This system proba-bly existed as early as the Saite period since some of the individuals with titlesidentifying themas customs officials also had titles indicating responsibility formaking offerings to temples33

There is also some evidence for temple stores of wealth in the form ofsilver bullion According to the Pseudo-Aristotelian Economics (1350bndash1351a)the fourth century BCE pharaoh Tachos in preparation for his invasion ofAchaemenid holdings in the Levant demanded a forced loan of bullion fromthe temples34 This move was part of a larger package of financial reformsenacted by Tachos for this same purpose and a recent study of the tenth chap-ter of the Demotic Chronicle argues that these reformswere prefigured by sim-ilar such measures under his predecessor Nectanebo I35 This episode impliesthat temples stored some portion of their wealth in silver rather than stapleson which the pharaoh could draw if he was sufficiently powerful or sufficientlydesperate This is also suggested by the weight standards used for silver Begin-ning with PBerlin 3048 dating to 827 marriage contracts include referencesto weighed quantities of silver which typically were to be paid to the wife inthe event of divorce as do loan agreements and the penalty clauses in con-tracts such as land leases and sale agreements36 In the earliest documentssilver is weighed against the ldquostonesrdquo (ie weights) of the treasury of the tem-ple of Heryshaf in Thebes (in Demotic they are simply called the ldquostones ofthe treasury of Thebesrdquo) by the fifth century the stones of the temple of PtahinMemphis supplanted those of Heryshaf37 That these weight standards wereassociatedwith various temples rather than the pharaoh suggests not only thatthe templeswere themajor users of silver bullion but that theywere intimately

33 Agut-Labordegravere ldquoThe Saite Periodrdquo 1006 Posener ldquoLes douanes de la Meacutediterraneacuteerdquo 12134 Will ldquoChabrias et les finances de Tachocircsrdquo Davies ldquoAthenian Fiscal Expertiserdquo 491ndash493

Monson ldquoEgyptian Fiscal Historyrdquo 13ndash16 cf Polyaenus Strat 311535 Agut-Labordegravere ldquoLrsquooracle et lrsquohopliterdquo36 Luumlddeckens Aumlgyptische Ehevertraumlge Vleeming The Gooseherds of Hou 87 103ndash10537 Vleeming The Gooseherds of Hou 87ndash89 Muumlller-Wollerman ldquoDie oumlkonomische Bedeu-

tung von Tempelschatzhaumlusenrdquo 177ndash178 Vargyas From Elephantine to Babylon 165ndash167Jurman ldquo lsquoSilver of the Treasury of Herishef rsquo rdquo 60ndash63


linked with the use of silver in public perception It has even been suggestedthat the temples acted as guarantors of fineness though this has been dis-puted38

During the period of Achaemenid rule in Egypt (c 525ndash404) the economicrelationship between the pharaoh and the temples underwent a somewhatsignificant change with respect to wealth finance39 According to Herodotus(3921) Egypt paid 700 Babylonian talents of silver per year in tribute to theGreat King Setting aside the uncertainties as to the source for this figure andits accuracy the payment of tribute in silver required the conversion of grainEgyptrsquos primary form of wealth into silver on a scale not previously neces-sary The mechanism by which the satrap acquired silver for this purpose isnot directly attested however financial oversight of the temples is suggestedindirectly by a couple of sources One of the texts on the verso of the DemoticChronicle refers to a decree of Cambyses regulating temple incomes40 It hasbeen argued that the purpose of this decree was to increase the economic effi-ciency of temple estates presumably with a view towards generating moretribute41 Also PBerlin 13536 a Demotic letter from a ranking administratorin the satrapal government to the priests of the temple of Khnum in Elephan-tine seems to indicate that the temple was audited which suggests that thesatrap operating in the Great Kingrsquos stead drew on temple stores of silver inorder to make tribute payments42 This created an additional onus for tem-ples to convert grain into silver and in addition to the export of natron linenand papyrus (by now the primary writing medium in the Greek world) thiswas achieved by selling grain to the Greeks especially the burgeoning Athe-nian Empire Indeed hoards of Greek coins in Egypt begin around 500 andthe Athenian tetradrachm quickly became the most common coin in Egypt tosuch an extent that by the last decade of the fifth century the ldquostater of Ioniardquooccurs inDemotic andAramaic documents usuallywith a specified equivalent

38 Muumlller-Wollermann ldquoAumlgypten auf dem Weg zur Geldwirtschaftrdquo 1353 Vleeming TheGooseherds of Hou 87ndash89 adamantly disputes that temples had any concern for the fine-ness of their silver whereas Vargyas From Elephantine to Babylon 165ndash176 argues that thetempleof Ptahactually issueda sort of proto-coinageby stamping ingots of specificweightand fineness

39 Monson ldquoEgyptian Fiscal Historyrdquo 9ndash1340 Kuhrt The Persian Empire 125ndash12641 Agut-Labordegravere ldquoLe sens du Deacutecret de Cambyserdquo and ldquoLe titre du lsquodeacutecret de Cambysersquo rdquo42 Fried The Priest and the Great King 80ndash81 cf Chauveau ldquoLa chronologie de la corre-

spondence dite lsquode Pheacuterendategravesrsquo rdquo for P Berlin 13536 see Zauzich Papyri von der InselElephantine

80 colburn

value expressed in deben or shekels43 Around the same time the earliest imita-tionAthenian tetradrachmswerebeing struck inEgypt44 By the fourth centuryEgypt had to compete with the Bosporus as an exporter of grain to the Greekworld but Egyptrsquos other major exports were still very much in demand andas illustrated by the case of Tachos discussed above the pharaoh still neededsilver and he leaned on the temples to get it

Finally it is also worth examining the use of precious metal bullion aswealth products by individuals Silver and copper especially are used as unitsof account as early as the New Kingdom45 This does not however mean thatsuch metals were used for everyday transactions Staples continued to serve asthe most common form of payment of wages as at Deir el-Medina and sincethese wages were scaled according to rank and occupation the implication isthat they served as both sustenance and currency But there is evidence forthe use of silver bullion as early as the fourteenth century the period in whichthe earliest securely dated Hacksilber hoard occurs such hoards continue wellinto the Late Period though by their very nature these hoards are difficult todate precisely46 Also as mentioned above beginning in the ninth century sil-ver bullion occurs in marriage contracts and other documents though it is notalways clear if it is the actual form of wealth or simply a unit of account Agree-ments detailing loans of silver such as PBM 10113 PHou 12 and TADAE B31 and42 are less equivocal especially when compared to contemporary documentssuch as PHou 13 and TADAE B313 that are specifically loans of grain47 At anyrate it is clear that by the fourth century silver bullion in the form of Hack-silber circulated among individual Egyptians as an important form of moneythough its circulation was limited since people without recourse to farmlandrequired staples rather than silver However the use of silver by temples wouldalso have led to its dissemination among the people most closely involved in

43 The Demotic documents are ostraca from Ayn Manawir in the Kharga Oasis (ChauveauldquoLa premiegravere mention du stategravere drsquoargent en Eacutegypterdquo 138ndash140 Agut-Labordegravere ldquoLrsquoorge etlrsquoargentrdquo) and the Aramaic documents are papyri from Elephantine (TADAE A42 B312B46 B45 Porten et al The Elephantine Papyri in English nos B14 B45 and B51)

44 Colburn ldquoThe Archaeology of Achaemenid Rule in Egyptrdquo 352ndash387 see further below45 Janssen ldquoOn Prices andWagesrdquo46 Jurman ldquoSilver of the Treasury of Herishefrdquo 56ndash57 Vargyas From Elephantine to Babylon

147ndash164 van Alfen ldquoHerodotusrsquo lsquoAryandicrsquo Silver and Bullion Userdquo Kroll ldquoA Small Find ofSilver Bullionrdquo

47 Donker van Heel Djekhy amp Son 35ndash39 Vleeming The Gooseherd of Hou 156ndash188 Portenet al The Elephantine Papyri in English nos B34 B46 and B48


temple activities and by extension people tasked with carrying out pharaonicprojects (such as invading the Achaemenid Empire) when such projects madeuse of temple resources Moreover since a person and his family could only eator store somuch grain wealthier Egyptians especially had the samemotivationto convert staples to silver as did the temples indeed many of these peoplewere associated with temples by virtue of the titles offices and prebends theyheld

In the context of the Egyptian political economy coins were wealth objectsthat served as one of several forms of money In other words they were moneyby virtue of their metal content not of the images stamped on them This lastpoint is especially crucial to understanding theways inwhich people and insti-tutions made use of coins since these uses were not necessarily those typicalof coins in Greece Asia Minor and the Levant

2 The Coins of Fourth Century Egypt

The evidence for coins and their use in fourth century Egypt derives primar-ily from hoards found there and from the individual issues which have beenattributed to it based on their findspots types and legends The hoards whichare comprised overwhelmingly of Athenian tetradrachms provide a sense ofthe distribution and manner of coin use in Egypt The prominence of thetetradrachm was a result of its unique role within the political economy itcould serve equally well as a coin and as a specific quantity of silver bullionThis uniqueness led to the production of imitation Athenian tetradrachms inEgypt itself making them the first coins struck there The special role of thetetradrachm is further underscored by the other coin issues of this periodwhichwere generally short-lived by its adoption by the Achaemenid satraps ofthe Second Persian Period and by the lack of any attempt to supplant it duringthe reignof Alexander It required themajor economic reformsof thePtolemiesto finally bring about its replacement in the last decades of the fourth century

21 HoardsThere are some nineteen coin hoards dating to the fourth century prior to thedeath of Alexander known from Egypt (Table 41)48 They come exclusivelyfromtheNileDeltawith the exceptionof IGCH 1651 fromBeniHasanandCoinH10422 which was purchased by the excavators of Karanis in the Fayum Over-

48 See also Duyrat ldquoLe treacutesor de Damanhourrdquo 31ndash32

82 colburn

whelmingly these hoards containAthenian tetradrachms save for those datingto c 330 which contain issues of Philip II and thus likely postdate the arrivalof Alexander but whose contents seem largely to reflect earlier circulation Inaddition to Athenian tetradrachms Phoenician coins also appear in several ofthe hoards albeit in small numbers

table 41 Fourth century coin hoards

Reference49 Burial date Findspot Coins Hacksilber

10438 Late 5thndashearly 4th cen Egypt 3146 g AR164910441 Early 4th cen Tell el-Maskhuta 6000+ AR 4500+ g AR501660 4th cen Memphis 39 AR1648 4th cen51 Naucratis 65 AR1661 4th cen Naucratis 12 AR10439 4th cen Memphis 13 AR10442 4th cen Fayum 347 AR1652 360 Naucratis 83 AR ldquoa fewrdquo8125 350 Egypt 201 AR166310443 Mid 4th cen52 Athribis 700 AR10444 Mid 4th cen Egypt 9+ AR10445 Mid 4th cen Egypt 15+ AR1651732 34153 Beni Hasan 77 AR 2 AR

49 References are to IGCH and CoinH50 This is a reference to the ten silver bowls and other fragments of vessels found at Tell el-

Maskhuta in 1947 and now in the Brooklyn Museum The precise relationship of thesevessels to the hoard of tetradrachms also found there is not entirely clear but RabinowitzldquoAramaic Inscriptionsrdquo 1ndash2 associates them because the Museum purchased with thebowls several gold-mounted agate stones and such stones were described as having beenfound with the coin hoard

51 This date is based on the eleven Athenian tetradrachms (BM 190503091ndash11) from thishoard in the British Museum which both Andy Meadows and I believe to be fourth cen-tury Egyptian imitations rather than fifth century Attic issues as believed by both Jenkins(in IGCH) and Head ldquoCoins Discovered on the Site of Naukratisrdquo 9 neither of whom hadthe benefit of modern scholarship on this topic

52 This date is derived from the inclusion of imitative pi-style tetradrachms in this hoard(Nicolet-Pierre ldquoRetour sur le treacutesor de Tel el-Athribrdquo) which must postdate the firstissuance of these coins at Athens in 353 (see Kroll ldquoThe Reminting of Athenian SilverCoinagerdquo Flament Le monnayage en argent drsquoAthegravenes 125ndash130)

53 Elayi and Elayi Treacutesors de monnaies pheacuteniciennes et circulation moneacutetaire 294


Reference Burial date Findspot Coins Hacksilber

1653 33354 Giza 2 AR1662 33355 Nile Delta 60 AR1654 330 Damanhur 11+ AU1655 330 Alexandria 4+ AU1656 330 Nile Delta 9 AU AR1657 330 Egypt 60 AU1658 330 Memphis 38 AUVan Alfen Late 4th cen Egypt 3993 g AR2004ndash2005b

The presence of bullion and Hacksilber in some of these hoards as well as thecuts and countermarks that appear on many of the coins is consistent withthe use of coins as bullion as are the references in Demotic and Aramaic doc-uments to ldquostaters of Ioniardquo being equivalent to certain weights of silver56 Formost Egyptians coins would have been the same as any other piece of silverand accordingly they were cut up to make specific quantities of metal testedfor purity (again by cutting) andmelted down entirely tomake something elseThismeans thatmany of the coins imported into Egypt (or produced there seebelow)were ultimately destroyedThis list of hoards therefore underrepresentsthe extent of coin use in Egypt but at the same time demonstrates the limiteduse of coins as coins rather than as bullion

The distribution of these hoards is highly suggestive of the use of coins beinglimited primarily to Lower Egypt This is presumably due to the people andinstitutions of the Nile Delta having closer connections to regions and indi-viduals for whom coins were the primary form of money such as the Greeksand from themid-fifth century the Phoenicians and Palestinians aswellManyof these connections would have been commercial in nature with temples

54 Elayi and Elayi Treacutesors de monnaies pheacuteniciennes et circulation moneacutetaire 151ndash15255 The inclusion of issues of Sabaces (see below) in this hoard makes a burial date of 333

most likely though it could also have been buried a few years later56 Chauveau ldquoLa premiegravere mention du stategravere drsquoargent en Eacutegypterdquo ldquoIoniardquo was the normal

metonym for Greece in both Egyptian and Aramaic and ldquostaterrdquo refers to the most preva-lent coin in a given context which in the Classical period was undoubtedly the Atheniantetradrachm

84 colburn

exporting grain or other items and importing silver in the form of coins how-ever by this time there weremany resident foreigners in Lower Egypt soldiersin particular whose familiarity with coinagemay have also bolstered the circu-lation of coins as such57 The presence of coin hoards in the north is probablyalso due to the frequent military conflicts between Egypt and the AchaemenidEmpire in the fourth century since such conditions are a major contributorto the deposition and failure to recover coin hoards58 Upper Egypt was neverunder direct military threat by the Persians so there was less reason for hoardsto be hidden at all and this along with the references to the stater in theDemotic papyri (all of which come from southern Egypt) suggests that thedifferences in coin use between Upper and Lower Egypt may have been lesspronounced than the hoards alone would indicate

22 Athenian and Egyptian TetradrachmsThough the earliest Egyptian hoards dating to the late sixth and early fifth cen-turies included coins minted throughout the easternMediterranean and fromas farwest at Sicily andMagnaGraecia after 480 theAthenian tetradrachmhada ldquovirtual monopolyrdquo in Egyptian hoards59 Its popularity was due to the relia-bility and conservatism of its type and fineness it always featured the head ofAthena and owl types and it always contained 172g of silver Indeed Athensmay have minted coins deliberately for export especially in exchange for thegrain it needed to sustain its population and other aspects of Athenian impe-rialismmay also have furthered its use beyond Attica60 The changes to Egyptrsquosand Athensrsquo political circumstances in the fourth century seem not to haveaffected the tetradrachmrsquos popularity it remained themost frequent and often-times the only coin in hoards of the fourth century and it continued to appearin Demotic documents While some of these coins were doubtlessly struckin Athens many were imitation Athenian tetradrachms that is tetradrachms

57 For these foreigners see Vittmann Aumlgypten und die Fremden58 These conflicts are given detailed treatment in Ruzicka Trouble in theWest59 Thompson et al An Inventory of Greek Coin Hoards 225 Colburn ldquoThe Archaeology of

Achaemenid Rule in Egyptrdquo 354ndash35860 Kroll ldquoMinting for Exportrdquo see also van Alfen ldquoThe Coinage of Athensrdquo 92ndash97 and ldquoXeno-

phon Poroi 32 and Athenian lsquoOwlsrsquo rdquo and the list of hoards containing tetradrachms inFlament Le monnayage en argent drsquoAthegravenes 173ndash232 It is well beyond the scope of thispaper to consider all the problems of the Athenian grain supply and Coinage Decree inany detail for a recent discussionwith reference to numismatic evidence seeKroll ldquoWhatabout Coinagerdquo


with the same types weight and fineness as Athenian ones61 This was in fact awidespread phenomenon in the easternMediterranean during the fourth cen-tury to such an extent that in 3754 Athens enacted a law (the so-called Law ofNicophon) that appointed ldquoapproversrdquo (dokimastai in this case public slaves)in the Agora and Piraeus whose job it was to validate coins bearing the Athe-nian types62 The details of the law are still subject to debate but it clearlyresponds to a situation in which Athenian issues and imitations of them werecirculating side by side at Athens itself and were sufficiently indistinguishablefrom each other so as to require the intervention of a civic official63 The ques-tions of where why and in what quantities these imitation tetradrachms wereminted has much exercised scholars regardless it is clear that tetradrachmsboth Athenian and imitation played an important role as wealth products inthe Egyptian political economy

The importance of the tetradrachmderives from the fact that those Egyptianinstitutions (ie temples) and individuals seeking to convert staples to wealthproducts would have had recourse to Mediterranean trade Although by thistime the Bosporus had also become a major exporter of grain to Athens Egyptwas certainly still involved in this trade64 This is best attested by the pseudo-Demosthenic law court speech Against Dionysodorus (7) in which two foreign-ers resident at Athens sue a merchant for not importing grain to Athens fromEgypt as per the terms of their bottomry agreement Also the description ofthe schemes of Cleomenes of Naucratis in the pseudo-Aristotelian Economicsrefers to the export of grain by Egyptians (1352andashb) Moreover Athens was notthe only city in need of Egyptian exports Many cities in the Aegean and AsiaMinor for example also needed to import grain and although they too wouldalso have had access to shipments from the Bosporus there is no reason toassume they did not import it from Egypt as well Dionysodorus the defen-dant in the speech referred to above apparently took his shipload of grain toRhodes rather thanAthensThese samecitieswould alsohaveneeded to importpapyrus and other Egyptian goods as well as would those along the Levantinecoast

61 For imitation coinages see the important discussion in van Alfen ldquoProblems in AncientImitative and Counterfeit Coinagerdquo

62 SEG 2672 Rhodes and Osborne Greek Historical Inscriptions no 25 For an overview ofimitation Athenian tetradrachms see van Alfen ldquoMechanisms for the Imitation of Athe-nian Coinagerdquo 65ndash84

63 See most recently Psoma ldquoThe Law of Nicophonrdquo64 Bissa Governmental Intervention and Foreign Trade 153ndash203

86 colburn

Thus foreign coins were imported into Egypt where they served as wealthproductsManywould have been treated as bullion orHacksilber and choppedup or melted down Athenian tetradrachms however were treated differentlyat least by a significant segment of the population Their survival in hoardssuggests they circulated as coins and as bullion this is also supported by the ref-erences to them in fourth centuryDemotic papyri such as PCairo 50145 (datingto 367) PLonsdorfer 1 (366) P Berlin 23805 (343) and PLibbey (337)65 In thesedocuments five staters (ie tetradrachms) are equated to one deben of silver orone stater is equated to two kite Thedebenwas anEgyptianunit of weight equalto about 91g five Athenian tetradrachms of 172g apiece are equal to 86g Thedifference is just enough to require definition in a contract The kite was onetenth of a deben and therefore two kite weighed 182g or one gram more thana full weight tetradrachm The closeness of these equivalencies alongside thereliability of the coinrsquos type and fineness made the tetradrachm interchange-able as a coin to those familiar with it and as bullion to those who were not

Indeed repeated exposure to the tetradrachm would have caused thoseEgyptians who treated it as bullion to come to recognize it In this respect itwas a bullion coin akin to the Maria Theresa thaler of more recent historywhich circulated on three continents well into the twentieth century66 In factthe aptness of this comparison goes even further since the widespread accep-tance and circulation of the Maria Theresa thaler caused it to be minted allover Europe (not just in Austria) and in India as well just as the Atheniantetradrachm which was widely imitated in the Mediterranean came to be thefirst coin minted in Egypt itself67

The minting of imitations of Athenian tetradrachms begins in the last de-cade of the fifth century and continues throughout the period of Egyptrsquos inde-pendence in the fourth century Two distinct categories of anonymous imita-tions can be attributed to this period68The earlier categorywas first postulated

65 Chauveau ldquoLa premiegravere mention du stategravere drsquoargent en Eacutegypterdquo 142 for PCairo 50145see Cruz-Uribe ldquoVariardquo 6ndash17 for PLonsdorfer 1 see Luumlddeckens Aumlgyptische Ehevertraumlge20ndash21 for PBerlin 23805 see Zauzich ldquoEin demotisches Darlehenrdquo for PLibbey see Cruz-Uribe ldquoPapyrus Libbeyrdquo

66 Tschoegl ldquoMaria Theresarsquos Thalerrdquo I am grateful toMarkWinfield for suggesting this com-parison

67 For an overview of imitations of Athenian tetradrachms see van Alfen ldquoMechanisms forthe Imitation of Athenian Coinagerdquo 65ndash84

68 Following the typology established by van Alfen ldquoProblems in Ancient Imitative andCounterfeit Coinagerdquo lsquoanonymousrsquo imitations share exactly the same types as Atheniantetradrachms and are distinct from lsquomarkedrsquo imitations such as the gold stater of Tachos


figure 41 AR imitation Athenian tetradrachm (Buttrey Type X)

by TV Buttrey in two papers examining a hoard of 347 tetradrachms (CoinH10442) purchased by the excavators of Karanis in the Fayum during the 1934ndash1935 field season and now the KelseyMuseum of Archaeology at the Universityof Michigan69 Buttrey identified three different styles in the hoard all withprofile eyes which he arbitrarily labelled as Types X B and M (Figures 41ndash43)and based on numerous die links in Types X and B their unusual stylistic fea-tures and the hoardrsquos Egyptian origin he argued that these three styles werepart of a larger coinage of imitation Athenian tetradrachms minted in Egyptin the fourth century rather than in Athens Coins of these styles appear inmost of the fourth century Egyptian hoards as well as in various other hoardsthroughout theNear Eastern andMediterraneanworlds indicating both amas-sive output and a very wide distribution The Egyptian origin of these coins issupported by a ldquocube dierdquo from Egypt known from an electrotype now in theBritish Museum70 The cube has three obverse dies engraved on it all with theAthena type of the Athenian tetradrachm More importantly two of these diesseem to be related to Type M and the third to Type B Moreover three reversedies are also known fromEgypt one fromAthribis and two fromSaisThese dies

or the tetradrachms bearing the names of Artaxerxes Sabaces and Mazaces (on whichsee below)

69 Buttrey ldquoPharaonic Imitations of AthenianTetradrachmsrdquo and ldquoSeldomWhat They Seemrdquosee now Nicolet-Pierre ldquoLes imitations eacutegyptiennes des teacutetradrachmes atheacutenensrdquo vanAlfen ldquoThe lsquoOwlsrsquo from the 1989 SyriaHoardrdquo 16ndash20 vanAlfen ldquoMechanisms for the Imita-tion of Athenian Coinagerdquo 66ndash70 Kroll ldquoAthenian Tetradrachm Coinagerdquo 12ndash15 ColburnldquoThe Archaeology of Achaemenid Rule in Egyptrdquo 371ndash379

70 Meadows ldquoAthenian Coin Dies from Egyptrdquo

88 colburn

figure 42 AR imitation Athenian tetradrachm (Buttrey Type B)

indicate the minting of imitation Athenian tetradrachms in Lower Egypt andwithout a die study to suggest otherwise they provide sufficient confirmationof Buttreyrsquos attribution as least for Types B and M

Nevertheless there have been several challenges to this attribution CarmenArnold-Biucchirsquos re-examination of the FayumHoard (CoinH 10442) indicatesthere are actually fewer die links than Buttrey had originally identified71 Thislessens the probability that these coins were minted in Egypt but it does notprove anything either way Themost strenuous objections however have beenmade by Christophe Flament who argues for an Athenian origin for all of But-treyrsquos styles His argument is worth summarizing here and it proceeds alongseveral lines First of all he argues that Types B and M are earlier than previ-ously believed72 This is because the hoard excavated at Naxos on Sicily (CoinH10378) which contains coins of these types was found in a context that couldnot date later than 402 Flament insists that they must predate the Sicilianexpedition of 415 this assumes an Athenian origin (resulting in a circular argu-ment) but it does seem likely B and M were being minted in the 410s This re-dating does not directly challenge the Egyptian attribution of these coins but itdoes require them to have been minted during the last decade of Achaemenidrule in Egypt

71 Arnold-Biucchi ldquoLes monnayages royaux helleacutenistiquesrdquo 91 She is preparing a full publi-cation of this hoard and I am grateful to her for discussing her preliminary findings withme

72 Flament ldquoImitations atheacuteniennes oumonnaies authentiquesrdquo 1ndash3 and Lemonnayage enargent drsquoAthegravenes 79ndash91


figure 43 AR imitation Athenian tetradrachm (Buttrey Type M)

This re-dating also permits Flament to argue that the unusual stylistic fea-tures of these coins were the result of less accomplished die engravers whowere employed at Athens because of exigent circumstances following the Pelo-ponnesian War an argument which he also makes in support of an Athenianorigin for coins of Buttreyrsquos Type X73 But as Anderson and van Alfen point outAthenian coins were rarely struck from carelessly made dies even at times ofcrisis and they were always stylistically related to preceding issues74 Flamentalso cites CoinH 515 a hoard from the Piraeus containing not only coins ofTypes B and M but also drachms of similar styles75 He argues that since frac-tions do not travel as far from their place of origin as staters do these coinsmust have been produced at Athens This argument is undermined by CoinH10439 which also contains imitation Athenian drachms and was excavated atthe Temple of Apis in Memphis76

Finally Flament argues that the high lead content and low gold content ofcoins of Types B and M from the Tell el-Maskhuta hoard (IGCH 1649) deter-mined by means of PIXE is consistent with the metal content of earlier Athe-nian coins undoubtedly produced from Laureion silver77 The reason for the

73 Flament ldquoImitations atheacuteniennes ou monnaies authentiquesrdquo 7 ldquoQuelques considera-tions sur les monnaies atheniennesrdquo 92ndash97

74 Anderson and van Alfen ldquoA Fourth Century BCE Hoardrdquo 165 cf Kroll ldquoAthenian Tetra-drachm Coinagerdquo 12ndash13

75 Flament ldquoUn treacutesor de teacutetradrachmes atheacuteniensrdquo76 Jones and Jones ldquoThe Apis House Projectrdquo 107ndash11077 Flament ldquoLrsquoargent des chouettesrdquo Flament and Marchetti ldquoAnalysis of Ancient Silver

Coinsrdquo

90 colburn

high lead content is that Laureion silver was obtained from galena rather thanfrom gold which was themain source of silver in Egypt On the whole thoughEgypt is quite poor in silver and by the early fourth century the Egyptians hadbeen importing silver from the Greek world in the form of coins for a hundredyears Though some of this silver ended up as tribute for the AchaemenidGreatKing the rest would have provided the metal for minting coins Therefore Fla-mentrsquos findings do not prove that the specimens from IGCH 1649 were in factminted in Athens only that the silver used is potentially from Laureion Analy-ses of themetal content of Type X coins indicate higher elemental percentagesthan are normal for Laureion silver suggesting the metal used came from else-where78 Especially in light of the dies found in Egypt Flamentrsquos reattributionof the Buttrey types to Athens is not compelling though the research support-ing it is informative in a number of ways

The other category of Egyptian imitations consists of imitations of the pi-style tetradrachms minted in Athens in the second half of the fourth cen-tury These coins were first minted at Athens in 353BCE as part of an effort toincrease revenues by demonetizing and re-striking the existing silver coinageand at least initially they were produced in great numbers79 They have anumber of distinctive features including folded flans and the floral helmetelement on the obverse type which gives these coins their modern name (Fig-ure 44) Giovanni Dattari in his publication of the Tell el-Athrib hoard (IGCH1663) was the first to suggest that coins of this style were imitated in Egypt(even though the pi-style was not a recognized phenomenon at the time) twomore hoards from Egypt (CoinH 10444 and 445) also contain pi-style imita-tions80 The existence of Egyptian imitations has been further confirmed bythe recent discovery of another cube die in Egypt in the course of the under-water excavations atHeracleion-Thonis on theCanopic branch of theNile Thiscube has three individual dies two of which are clearly for making pi-styletetradrachms81 A full die study of the pi-style issues will be necessary to dis-tinguish with confidence between coinsminted in Athens and thoseminted in

78 Flament ldquoQuelques consideacuterations sur lesmonnaies atheniennesrdquo 92ndash97 Kroll ldquoAthenianTetradrachmCoinagerdquo 12ndash15 Flament argues that these coinswere struck at Athens underduress when it was necessary to use stores of imported silver

79 Kroll ldquoThe Reminting of Athenian Silver Coinagerdquo80 Dattari ldquoComments on a Hoard of Athenian Tetradrachmsrdquo see also Nicolet-Pierre ldquoRe-

tour sur le treacutesor de Tel el-Athribrdquo CoinH 10444 and 445 are published by van Alfen ldquoTwoUnpublished Hoardsrdquo



figure 44 AR possible imitation Athenian tetradrachm (pi style)

Egypt Nevertheless these imitations demonstrate both the continuous mint-ing of tetradrachms in Egypt throughout the first half of the fourth century andthe receptiveness of Egyptian moneyers to changes to the issues of the Athe-nian mint

The question of why imitation tetradrachmswereminted both in Egypt andelsewhere has much exercised scholars Bound up in this question is also thematter of whominted them The twomost common explanations are that theywere minted in order to pay Greek mercenaries and that they were minted inresponse to local shortages of actual Athenian issues82 Both of these explana-tions are worth revisiting here since the Buttrey types and pi-style imitationsunlike many of the other imitation Athenian tetradrachms minted in the east-ernMediterranean are anonymous imitations rather than clearly labelled localissues inspired by Athenian coins Indeed of all the known imitation Atheniancoins those minted in Egypt would have been best suited to the payment ofGreek mercenaries who demanded their wages in familiar and internationallyrespected currency

However there is in fact very little evidence that Greek mercenaries wereever in a position tomake suchdemands References in textual sources indicatetheywere generally exploited by their employers and often paid less frequentlythan promised83 They continued to serve on individual campaigns in hope of

82 See vanAlfen ldquoMechanisms for the Imitation of AthenianCoinagerdquo for an effective demo-lition of both of these explanations

83 Trundle Greek Mercenaries 102ndash103

92 colburn

booty or finally getting paid when the fighting was over If they did not mutinyfor not being paid at all then surely they would not mutiny for being paid insomething other than what appeared to be Athenian tetradrachms MoreoverGreek mercenaries had served in Egypt under the Saite pharaohs in the sixthcentury prior to the advent of coin use there84 Soldiers in Egyptwere generallyremunerated with usufruct of land ie with the capacity to produce staplesrather than in silver and this is no surprise given Egyptrsquos wealth of the for-mer and poverty of the latter Finally in the fourth century mercenaries wereemployedby thepharaohs todefendagainst Persian incursions and in the caseof Tachos for a pre-emptive invasion If imitation tetradrachms were mintedfor the purposes of paying these mercenaries presumably the minting wouldtake place under the authority and supervision of the pharaoh But as Mead-ows has argued based on the coin dies from Egypt the minting of these coinsseems to have been thework of itinerantmoneyers rather than of a centralizedminting authority85

It is of course plausible and even likely that coins were used to pay merce-naries in Egypt on occasion especially in the event of mobilization Chabriasand Agesilaus the Greek generals employed by Tachos in the fourth centuryBCE were most probably paid not in land but in precious metal some of itundoubtedly coins Likewise the ten thousand Greek mercenaries hired byTachos could well have been paid initially in tetradrachms struck in Egypt forthis purpose86 But this would have created only sporadic bursts of mintingrather than a steady output of coins and these bursts would presumably coin-cide closely with periods of Egyptian military activity as documented fromother sources On the whole mercenaries cannot have been the prime moti-vation for the production of imitation Athenian tetradrachms in Egypt or else-where in the eastern Mediterranean

The other common explanation is that imitation tetradrachms weremintedto supplement the supply of genuine Athenian issues especially when Athe-nian output was interrupted or lessened Peter van Alfen has challenged thisexplanation by demonstrating that the production of imitation tetradrachmsdoes not coincidewith known shortages or lapses inAthenian coin productionthis is true of the anonymous imitations minted in Egypt as well87

84 Kaplan ldquoCross-Cultural Contacts among Mercenary Communitiesrdquo Vittmann Aumlgyptenund die Fremden 199ndash209 Agut-Labordegravere ldquoPlus que des mercenairesrdquo

85 Meadows ldquoAthenian Coin Dies from Egyptrdquo86 The number of mercenaries is given by Diod 1592287 Van Alfen ldquoMechanisms for the Imitation of Athenian Coinagerdquo


These two explanations are not entirely wrong since either could accountfor the striking of tetradrachms on discrete occasions but they both assumethat these coins were struck with a view to them serving exclusively as coinsamong people familiar with their use This assumption is not appropriatefor fourth century Egypt Rather Athenian tetradrachms whether they wereminted in Athens or Egypt were wealth products and were used by Egyptiansas a durable and portablemeans of storingwealth In this respect theywere nodifferent from Hacksilber or silver statuettes or the silver bowls from Tell el-Maskhuta Since temples were the major economic actors and had incentivesto store their wealth as silver rather than grain it follows that they were theprimary users of silver wealth objects including coins This is suggested by theidentification of metrological systems for weighing silver bullion with certainmajor temples and further implied by the author of the pseudo-AristotelianEconomicsrsquo (1351a) description of Tachosrsquo forced loan of bullion from the tem-ples in order to help finance his military campaigns88 It stands to reasonthen that the tetradrachms minted in Egypt were produced by temples andother institutions from their silver stores This suggestion is supported by anunpublished ostracon of late fifth century date from the Kharga Oasis (OMan7547) which refers to ldquostaters of the temple of Ptahrdquo89 This could simplymean that the stater had been fully assimilated into the templersquos metrologi-cal system but it also suggests that the author of this text associated Atheniantetradrachmswith this Egyptian temple rather thanwith Athens Furthermorealthoughmany Egyptian sites had temples it is nevertheless worth noting thatthe coin dies from Egypt all come from places with well-known (or at leastwell-documented) Late Period temples and the findspot of the cube die fromHeracleion-Thonis suggests it was at least associated with the nearby templeand may have even been deposited there90

Why temples actually struck their own tetradrachms has to do with theiradvantages over other wealth objects even other silver ones As already dis-cussed above the weight of the tetradrachm permitted it to fit with some easeinto the existing metrological system making it interchangeable as a coin andas bullion even an Egyptian unfamiliar with the use of coins would not neces-

88 Vleeming The Gooseherds of Hou 87ndash89 Vargyas From Elephantine to Babylon 165ndash176Monson ldquoEgyptianFiscalHistoryrdquo 13ndash16Davies ldquoAthenianFiscal Expertiserdquo 491ndash493WillldquoChabrias et les finances de Tachocircsrdquo

89 Agut-Labordegravere ldquoLrsquoorge et lrsquoargentrdquo 79ndash8090 Meadows ldquoAthenian Coin Dies from Egyptrdquo For the temples at Sais and Athribis see

Leclegravere Les villes de Basse Eacutegypte 168ndash182 243ndash255

94 colburn

sarily have any reason to chop up a tetradrachmThis is why it survives in Egyp-tian hoards but other coins such as those from Asia Minor where the Chianstandard was in widespread use during the fourth century do not91 The Athe-nian tetradrachm was the most versatile wealth object available in Egypt andthis contributed significantly to its desirability It is also worth noting that thetemples like the civicmints of theGreekworld couldhave turned a small profitstriking tetradrachms If five tetradrachms (86g) were equal to one deben (91g)of silver as indicated by theDemotic papyri then the temples could potentiallyhave pocketed the 5g difference This would have defrayed the cost of produc-tion and contributed to their overall appeal as a wealth object

The Athenian tetradrachm has the distinction of being the first coin struckin Egypt Its popularity there was due to its roles as a wealth object and bullioncoin and its utility for users of coins and users of bullion alike In this respectit served as a bridge between Egyptian systems of wealth finance that hadexisted since the New Kingdom (if not earlier) and typically Greek approachesto money and it provided a foundation on which the Ptolemies were later tobuild

23 Other Egyptian IssuesThe Athenian tetradrachm was not the only coin struck in Egypt before thePtolemies there were also two different gold issues and several assorted frac-tions Unlike the tetradrachms these issues represented attempts by issuingauthorities (especially the pharaohs Tachos and Nectanebo II) to introducea full system of coinage to Egypt especially since none of these issues seemsto have been intended to supplant the tetradrachm These attempts howeverwere unsuccessful because these coins did not share the tetradrachmrsquos dualfunctionality as bullion and coin and many of these other issues were con-verted to Hacksilber just like most of the other coins that found their way toEgypt in this period

One of the gold issues is known only from a single example This is the goldstater of Tachos now in the British Museum (Figure 45)92 This coin features ahelmeted Athena on the obverse and an owl and papyrus plant on the reverseThe reverse also includes the Greek legend ΤΑΩ which is understood to be areference to Tachos This coin weighs 83g which puts it in line with the Per-sian standard rather than the Attic It is difficult to say much about this coin

91 See Meadows ldquoThe Chian Revolutionrdquo for the use of the Chian standard in Asia Minor92 BM 192508081 van Alfen ldquoThe lsquoOwlsrsquo from the 1989 Syria Hoardrdquo 23 Nicolet-Pierre ldquoLes

monnaies en Eacutegypterdquo 12 Muumlller-Wollermann ldquoForeign Coins in Late Period Egyptrdquo 322


figure 45 AU stater of Tachos

given its status as a singleton but it does seem to fit a broader pattern of fourthcentury pharaonic coinage for which the other gold issue under discussion isthe prime evidence

This other issue consists of a series of gold staters with a prancing horse onthe obverse and a hieroglyphic inscription on the reverse (Figure 46)93 Thehieroglyphic inscription consists of the signs nfr (the windpipe and heart ofa cow) meaning ldquogoodrdquo and nbw (a necklace with pendants hanging off it)meaning ldquogoldrdquo Together they can be read as a simple adjectival sentence ieldquothe gold is goodrdquo94 The prancing horse has strikingly close parallels amongthe gold coins issued by Dionysius I at Syracuse at the very end of the fifthcentury but it is a sufficiently generic motif that the resemblance is probablycoincidental The weights of these coins vary from 79 to 89g making it diffi-cult to identify the standard on which they were minted The daric is a distinctpossibility and the Attic standard has also been suggested since this was thestandard on which Philip II struck his gold staters95 Whatever the intended

93 Bolshakov ldquoThe Earliest Known Pharaonic Coinrdquo van Alfen ldquoThe lsquoOwlsrsquo from the 1989Syria Hoardrdquo 23ndash24 Nicolet-Pierre ldquoLes monnaies en Eacutegypterdquo 12ndash13 Muumlller-WollermannldquoForeign Coins in Late Period Egyptrdquo 323 Dumke ldquoGutes Goldrdquo Faucher et al ldquoLes mon-naies en or aux types hieacuteroglyphiques nwb nfrrdquo

94 Dumke ldquoGutesGoldrdquo Harris Lexicographical Studies 34ndash35 I amgrateful toTerryWilfongfor discussion and explication of this inscription

95 Nicolet-Pierre ldquoLesmonnaies en Eacutegypterdquo 13 A list of weights is given in Faucher et al ldquoLesmonnaies en or types hieacuteroglyphiques nwb nfrrdquo 148ndash151 155

96 colburn

figure 46 AU stater of Nectanebo II

standardwas it was not adhered to very strictly Some forty-seven examples areknown albeit from only six dies (three obverse and three reverse) suggestingan issue of limited size96

These coins were attributed to Nectanebo II by Kenneth Jenkins and thisattribution has stuck97 The basis for it is the presence of one of them in IGCH1654 a hoard consisting primarily of gold staters of Philip II This provides arough terminus ante quem for the issue of about 330 and assuming that theAchaemenid satraps of Egypt during the Second Persian Period did not mintgold coins Nectanebo II is the most likely candidate his long reign makes thisattribution more probable Jenkins also uses the similarity in fabric betweenthese nfr nbw staters and Philiprsquos gold issues as a dating criterion Certainly thisattribution is reasonable enough and it raises the question of what role thesecoins played in the political economy of the fourth century As gold coins theywould have been far too valuable for use in interpersonal transactions and theunevenness of the weights would have further inhibited their use as anythingother than bullion Thus it is difficult to understand these coins in a strictlyeconomic context

It light of this difficulty Gunnar Dumkersquos recent re-examination of the polit-ical function of these coins is especially appealing98 He argues that these coinsserved to bridge the gap between the Greek mercenaries serving in Egypt

96 Faucher et al ldquoLes monnaies en or types hieacuteroglyphiques nwb nfrrdquo 161ndash16397 Jenkins ldquoGreek Coins Recently Acquired by the British Museumrdquo 150 see further Faucher

at al ldquoLes monnaies en or types hieacuteroglyphiques nwb nfrrdquo 159ndash16098 Dumke ldquoGutes Goldrdquo


especially high status ones like Agesilaus and the Egyptian elite The hiero-glyphs which quoted a phrase going back to the New Kingdom served to linkNectanebo to earlier powerful pharaohs and the horse which appears in vari-ous guises on a variety of Greek coins is a reference to agonistic competitionand by extension to the glory of victory Thus these coins were presented asmarkers of royal esteemwhichwere intelligible toEgyptians aswealthproductsand to Greeks (and Phoenicians) as coins that they were presented only to asmall number of people explains the limited overall size of the issue It is worthnoting here as well that the gold coins issued by Darius I around 500 have beeninterpreted similarly since they served as a vehicle for disseminating imperialideology especially to the local elites of Asia Minor who were already famil-iar with the phenomenon of royal coinage99 Also with few exceptions goldcoins in the Greek world were minted exclusively by kings like Darius Diony-sius I or Philip II or by cities facing fiscal emergencies so Nectaneborsquos issuingof gold coins (and Tachosrsquo as well) was in essence an announcement to theeastern Mediterranean world of his royal status an announcement very muchin keeping with his other activities such as his extensive temple building100Furthermore as will be seen below Nectaneborsquos use of coins as an integrativeforce in his kingdom prefigures Ptolemaic objectives for monetization albeiton a much more limited scale

In addition to these two gold issues several different fractional issues in bothsilver and bronze are attributed to fourth century Egypt (Table 42)101 Someof these can be associated with specific individuals otherwise they are nearlyimpossible to date with any precision Furthermore many of them are single-tons which further limits what can be said about them The silver fractionsinclude several examples featuring Athena on the obverse and an owl on thereverse Some also bear the hieroglyph wꜥh meaning ldquolastingrdquo on the reverseOn one coin the ethnic reads ΝΑΥ instead of ΑΘΕ leading to the suggestionthat this coin was issued by the city of Naucratis102 There are also two silvercoins minted from the same die with Athena on the obverse and two eaglesframing the hieroglyph nfr on the reverse As a result of this inscription these

99 Nimchuk ldquoThe lsquoArchersrsquo of Dariusrdquo Vargyas From Elephantine to Babylon 130ndash140100 For the minting of gold coins in the Classical period see Melville Jones ldquoAncient Greek

Gold Coinagerdquo For Nectaneborsquos temple construction activities seeMinas-Nerpel this vol-ume

101 Van Alfen ldquoThe lsquoOwlsrsquo from the 1989 Syria Hoardrdquo 20ndash24 Muumlller-Wollermann ldquoForeignCoins in Late Period Egyptrdquo 321ndash322 I have not included the fractions which van Alfenconsiders not to have been minted in Egypt

102 Bussi ldquoNaukratis e lrsquoinizio della monetazione ellenisticardquo

98 colburn

table 42a Fourth century fractional issues in silver by weight

Reference Seriesissuer Type Weight(g)

Van Alfen ldquoThe lsquoOwlsrsquo rdquo 32 Mazaces Athenaowl 409Van Alfen ldquoThe lsquoOwlsrsquo rdquo 23 misc Athenaowl 388Van Alfen ldquoThe lsquoOwlsrsquo rdquo 23 misc Athenaowl 088Van Alfen ldquoThe lsquoOwlsrsquo rdquo 30 Sabaces triremeheroic encounter 070Van Alfen ldquoThe lsquoOwlsrsquo rdquo 22 Naucratis Athenaowl 064Van Alfen ldquoThe lsquoOwlsrsquo rdquo 23 misc Athenaowl 057Van Alfen ldquoThe lsquoOwlsrsquo rdquo 24 ldquoNectanebo IIrdquo Athenanfr 056Goyon ldquoLa plus ancienne () misc owl (obv illegible) 056monnaie frappeacutee en EacutegypterdquoVan Alfen ldquoThe lsquoOwlsrsquo rdquo 20 wꜥh Athenaowl 053Van Alfen ldquoThe lsquoOwlsrsquo rdquo 20 wꜥh Athenaowl 050Van Alfen ldquoThe lsquoOwlsrsquo rdquo 24 ldquoNectanebo IIrdquo Athenanfr 050Van Alfen ldquoThe lsquoOwlsrsquo rdquo 20 wꜥh Athenaowl 048Van Alfen ldquoThe lsquoOwlsrsquo rdquo 20 wꜥh Athenaowl 042Van Alfen ldquoThe lsquoOwlsrsquo rdquo 30 Sabaces triremeheroic encounter 041

coins have been attributed to Nectanebo II as have a series of bronze fractionsfeaturing a leaping gazelle or goat on the obverse and a set of balance scaleson the reverse103 However none of the three known examples of the bronzeissues are even said to come from Egypt so the attribution is tenuous (thoughit is retained in the table for ease of reference)

When sorted by weight some distinct denominations can be identifiednamely silver drachms and obols104 Some of the smaller silver fractions espe-cially thewꜥh seriesmaybeunderweight obols Perhaps theywere evendeliber-ately underweight in order to constitute a twentieth of a kite of silver and weretherefore minted to fit in with the Egyptian system of weighed bullion ratherthanwith any one systemof coinage However on thewhole the small numberof examples of each of these fractions and the wide variety in weight indicatethat these fractional issues were small and likely ephemeral There is also vari-

103 Weiser Katalog ptolemaumlischer Bronzemuumlnzen no 1 Ronde ldquoContribution au monnayagepreacute-alexandrinrdquo Dumke ldquoGutes Goldrdquo 84ndash87

104 CoinH 515 and 10439 also contain drachms though their weights are not recorded


table 42b Fourth century fractional issues in bronze by weight

Reference Seriesissuer Type Weight (g)

Van Alfen ldquoThe lsquoOwlsrsquo rdquo 24 ldquoNectanebo IIrdquo goatbalance 431Van Alfen ldquoThe lsquoOwlsrsquo rdquo 24 ldquoNectanebo IIrdquo goatbalance 425Van Alfen ldquoThe lsquoOwlsrsquo rdquo 24 ldquoNectanebo IIrdquo goatbalance 256Van Alfen ldquoThe lsquoOwlsrsquo rdquo 31 Sabaces lionarcher 152Van Alfen ldquoThe lsquoOwlsrsquo rdquo 31 Sabaces male headarcher 151Van Alfen ldquoThe lsquoOwlsrsquo rdquo 32 Mazaces male headarcher 141Van Alfen ldquoThe lsquoOwlsrsquo rdquo 31 Sabaces lionarcher 118Van Alfen ldquoThe lsquoOwlsrsquo rdquo 31 Sabaces male headarcher 107BM G0793 Mazaces male head (rev illeg) 107Van Alfen ldquoThe lsquoOwlsrsquo rdquo 31 Sabaces male headarcher 098

ety in the issuers A number of these fractions can be attributed to Sabaces andMazaces the last two Achaemenid satraps (see below)

The ephemerality of these gold and fractional issues illustrates the natureof coin use in fourth century Egypt The Athenian tetradrachm was a bullioncoin and amounts of silver that were not easily divisible by 172g were madeup with a combination of tetradrachms and Hacksilber as suggested by theiroccurrence together in hoards (see Table 41) Thus fractional coins thoughuseful for this purpose were not necessary and many of them were probablycut up or melted down rather swiftly after minting Even a Greek or Phoeni-cian widely versed in the coinages of their respective homelands would nothave recognized these coins and would therefore have had no basis for trust-ing their weight or metal content The gold coins would not have circulatedmuch anyway and therefore would have had a negligible impact on Egyptianmonetary practice and their purpose was related to prestige rather than to anyspecific economic goal The Athenian tetradrachm was the only coin widelyused in Egypt as such and this situation prevailed through the Second PersianPeriod and up to the beginning of the reign of Ptolemy I Indeed the coins dis-cussed in the following section demonstrate the success of the tetradrachm asa formof money in fourth century Egypt even in the face of significant politicalchanges

100 colburn

figure 47 AR tetradrachm of Artaxerxes III

3 The Second Persian Period

In 3432 the Achaemenids took control of Egypt once more and ruled it untilthe arrival of Alexander in 332 though during this period a shadowy figurenamed Khababash was recognized as pharaoh probably between 338 and336105During this short periodAthenian tetradrachms primarily pi-style tetra-drachms and imitations of them continued to play an important role in theEgyptian political economy Additionally three series of marked imitationAthenian tetradrachms were issued bearing the names of Artaxerxes Sabacesand Mazaces in place of the usual ethnic ΑΘΕ on the reverse106 These tetra-drachms suggest continuities with the preceding period in the Egyptian polit-ical economy and they raise the same questions as the other imitations dis-cussed above namely where and why were they struck

All of these coins share the same types as the Athenian tetradrachm on thewhole resembling on stylistic grounds those of the fourth century rather thanthe fifth (Figures 47ndash48)107They also all seem tobe aspiring to theAtticweight

105 Depuydtrsquos proposal for 34039 as the start of the Second Persian Period has much to rec-ommend it seeDepuydt ldquoNewDaterdquo ForKhababash see Burstein ldquoPrelude toAlexanderrdquo

106 lsquoMarkedrsquo refers to the fact that the legends on these coins indicate their non-Athenianorigin see van Alfen ldquoProblems in Ancient Imitative and Counterfeit Coinagerdquo 333ndash336

107 Formuch of what follows see vanAlfen ldquoThe lsquoOwlsrsquo from the 1989 Syria Hoardrdquo 24ndash32 seealso Anderson and van Alfen ldquoA Fourth Century BCE Hoardrdquo 163ndash164 van Alfen ldquoMech-anisms for the Imitation of Athenian Coinagerdquo 71ndash73 and the forthcoming die study of


figure 48 AR tetradrachm of Sabaces

standard though certain individual examples are somewhat light The coinsin the name of Artaxerxes are clearly attributable to Artaxerxes III becauseof the inclusion in the 1989 Syria hoard (CoinH 8158) which must date to the330s of some very fresh examples of them108 Van Alfen has distinguished fourdifferent variations of this coin among the twenty-three known examples ofit Three of these (van Alfenrsquos Types IndashIII) bear inscriptions that clearly readldquoArtaxerxes pharaohrdquo in Demotic Coins of the fourth variation (Type IV) havemultiple unintelligible inscriptions some of which seem to consist of Aramaicletters These coins have close stylistic affinities to those of Type III which isthe reason for their attribution to Artaxerxes A few examples also include thewords ankh wedj seneb again in Demotic a pious Egyptian vow that followsthe pharaohrsquos name and means ldquolife prosperity healthrdquo109

Coins of Type I are distinguished from the other three variations by theirfifth century appearance in keeping with the Buttrey types Types IIndashIV bear astrong resemblance to the pi-style tetradrachms minted at Athens starting in353 Sabaces andMazaces were the penultimate and final Achaemenid satrapsof Egypt serving under Darius III and are known from the Greek accountsof Alexanderrsquos campaigns110 Both issued pi-style tetradrachms bearing their

these issues by AgnieszkaWojciechowska which is to be published soon I am grateful toher for sharing an advance version of it with me

108 VanAlfen ldquoThe lsquoOwlsrsquo from the 1989 SyriaHoardrdquo 14Moslashrkholm ldquoACoin of Artaxerxes IIIrdquo109 Vleeming Some Coins of Artaxerxes 1ndash4110 See references in HeckelWhorsquosWho in the Age of Alexander the Great 156 246

102 colburn

names in Aramaic At least fifty-five examples of Sabacesrsquo coins are known inthree varieties and at least eight in the name of Mazaces no doubt reflectinghis short tenure as satrap In addition to the names these coins are distinguish-able by symbols on the reverse that always co-occur with one of the namesFor Sabaces this symbol might represent a lightning bolt Mazacesrsquo symbol is araised dot

The coins of Artaxerxes especially present a number of peculiarities that aredifficult to explain This is the only issue on which the name of an individualGreat King is given so it does not fit the prevailing pattern of the Achaemenidimperial issues It is also the only issue bearing an inscription in Demoticwhich despite the coinrsquos clearly Greek appearance seems to indicate that anEgyptian audience was intended Scholarly opinion thus diverges between theview that these coins were meant to reinforce Egyptrsquos subjugation in a man-ner intelligible to the Egyptians themselves and the view that these coins weremeant to be familiar and therefore reassuring to the Egyptians so that theywould be accepting of foreign rule111 There is also the problem of explainingthe four variations on this coin Van Alfen suggests that these are chronologicalvariations and that the transition fromType I toTypes IIndashIV reflects an attemptto imitate more closely the pi-style tetradrachms minted at Athens beginningin 353112 However as he notes this does not explain the differences in theDemotic inscriptions Instead these variations can be explained by decentral-izedminting As has been argued above theminting of imitation tetradrachmsin Egypt in the first half of the fourth century was carried out by travelingmon-eyers in the employ of temples and other institutions with stores of bullionAs shown by the Heracleion die this practice continued well into mid-centurywhen imitations of pi-style tetradrachms were being made Enterprising mon-eyers or their priestly employers may have produced these dies in response tothe change in regime This explains the choice of Demotic as the language ofthe inscription and the variations in the inscription reflect the hands of differ-ent die carvers113

The coins of Sabaces and Mazaces do seem to belong to a single mint andthis along with their Aramaic inscriptions indicates centralized productionunder the aegis of the satrap The impetus for this centralized production isnot known but it is quite possible that Sabaces was familiar with the coinsissued byAchaemenid satraps throughout thewestern half of the empire in the

111 Eg van Alfen ldquoThe lsquoOwlsrsquo from the 1989 Syria Hoardrdquo 41 Mildenberg ldquoMoney Supplyunder Artaxerxes III Ochusrdquo 281ndash282

112 Van Alfen ldquoThe lsquoOwlsrsquo from the 1989 Syria Hoardrdquo 42113 Vleeming Some Coins of Artaxerxes 1ndash2


fourth century and regarded the absence of centralized minting in Egypt as adeficiency Accordingly he began issuing coins in his own name but retainedthe type and weight of the Athenian tetradrachm because of its trenchancy inEgypt He also issued fractions as part of his effort to supply Egypt with a cur-rency The Sidonian appearance of some of his fractional issues may providesome hint as to where Sabaces developed his notions of coinage namely whileserving in some imperial capacity in Phoenicia which by this time featuredseveral mints and widespread familiarity with coined money Mazaces whosucceeded Sabaces when the latter led the Egyptianmilitary contingent to faceAlexander at Issus in 333 seems to have followed closely theminting practice ofhis predecessor Furthermore neither satrap seems to have actively prohibitedthe minting of imitation Athenian tetradrachms by temples (or anyone else)presumably they saw no need to upset existing economic structures

The persistence of the Athenian tetradrachm as the prototype for fourthcentury Egyptian issues under Achaemenid rule is indicative of its continuedspecial status in Egypt Its role as a point of conversion between coin users andbullion users is attested once more in a Demotic marriage contract PLibbeydating to the first year of PharaohKhababash (probably 337)wherein the equa-tion of five staters to the deben is repeated once more114 As before the appealof this coin was its versatility as both coin and bullion and the issues in thenames of Artaxerxes Sabaces and Mazaces circulated alongside anonymousimitations in Egypt and further afield in theNear East as indicatedby thehoardevidence (IGCH 1662 CoinH 7188 8158 10244) The presence of these coins inSyria and Mesopotamia may be the result of their use for tribute paymentsthough the Sabaces andMazaces issues may also have served as loot or pay forAlexanderrsquos army and been transported eastwards as a result

4 Egypt under Alexander

Under Alexander Egypt was initially divided into two satrapies but when thesatrap of Lower Egypt Petisis resigned the two satrapies were recombinedunder Doloaspis formerly satrap of Upper Egypt By 3287 Doloaspis had beenreplacedbyCleomenes of Naucratis a financial official of somekindwho ruledEgypt until Ptolemy had him killed early in his reign115 For themost part these

114 Cruz-Uribe ldquoPapyrus Libbeyrdquo115 Burstein ldquoAlexanderrsquos Organization of Egyptrdquo Baynham ldquoCleomenes of Naucratisrdquo Mon-

son ldquoEgyptian Fiscal Historyrdquo 16ndash18

104 colburn

eleven years are invisible in the numismatic record Martin Price has suggestedthat three small bronze coins excavated at Saqqara as well as two other exam-ples known to him featured portraits of Alexander in large part because heinterpreted the headdress on the obverse as an Achaemenid royal tiara116 Hebelieved these coinswereminted atMemphis prior to the establishment of theAlexandria mint and thus date to the brief period Alexander spent in Egypt in3321 This identification however is tenuous Theminting of such coinswouldhave been quite exceptional for Alexander during his lifetime since the coinsthat do depict him are all posthumous (with the possible exception of the so-called ldquoPorus medallionsrdquo) The identification of the headdress is also muchless certain than Price asserts and could well be a Phrygian cap an attribute ofmany mythological figures Finally it would be somewhat odd for these coinsto be struck on their own rather than as part of a trimetallic or bimetallic mon-etary system In short given these uncertainties and the limited number ofexamples these coins cannot be taken as firm evidence that Alexandermintedcoins in Egypt117

Theother coinageof Alexander associatedwithEgypt andCleomenes inpar-ticular comprises five issues of Alexander tetradrachms identified by EdwardNewell in the Damanhur hoard (IGCH 1664) and dated by him to 3265 Thoughthis attribution is sound enough given that the hoard was buried in Egyptc 318 it is more probable that these Egyptian issues were minted in the yearsimmediately before the burial of the hoard Thus it is possible that Cleomenesminted Alexander tetradrachms starting in 324 but these coins need not dateto Alexanderrsquos or to Cleomenesrsquo lifetime Rather it seems that Cleomenesand Petisis and Doloaspis before him did not mint coins in their own namesbut instead continued the fourth century practice of using imitation Athe-nian tetradrachms struck by the temples This is in keeping with Alexanderrsquospractice of maintaining rather than uprooting existing economic and admin-istrative practices in Egypt and elsewhere in his empire118

As the first coin struck in Egypt and the most widely used there the Athe-nian tetradrachm became an important form of money during the fourth cen-tury Since it was a bullion coin rather than a fiduciary coinage its importanceillustrates simultaneously the extent of the use of coins as money and also itslimitations It was not until the Ptolemaic period that institutions were intro-duced that supported the use of coins as money and in the absence of these

116 Price ldquoA Portrait of Alexander the Great from Egyptrdquo117 Le Rider Alexander the Great 171ndash179118 Le Rider Alexander theGreat 191ndash197 for IGCH 1664 seeDuyrat ldquoLe treacutesor deDamanhourrdquo

and Visonagrave ldquoTwenty-Two Alexandersrdquo


institutions coins continued to bewealth products circulating alongside otherforms of money But as is examined further in the next section the productionand use of the tetradrachm in the fourth century had an appreciable impact onthe efforts of the Ptolemaic kings to monetize the Egyptian economy

5 Continuity and Change in the Early Ptolemaic Economy

Ptolemyrsquos arrival and assumption of power in Egypt following the death ofAlexander is typically regarded as a critical juncture in the monetary historyof Egypt This is incontrovertible but as recent research has shown the mon-etization of the Egyptian economy was effected slowly and only with muchconcerted effort beginning with Ptolemy himself and continuing at least tothe end of the third century if not later119 The steps taken by the Ptolemaicrulers in furtherance of this goal were not made in isolation but were insteadtaken in reaction to prevailing economic conditions Thus an examination ofcontinuity and change is illustrative of the impact of the political economy ofthe fourth century on the creation of the economy of Hellenistic Egypt

One of the first and most obvious changes was the establishment of a royalmint first in Memphis and shortly thereafter in Alexandria At first the mintissued tetradrachms on the Attic weight standard in keeping with the normalpractice of both Alexander and the rest of the successor kingdoms but thisalso meant that these new tetradrachms could function in the existing wealthfinance system since the equivalency of one deben to five staters still appliedAt the same time the Athenian tetradrachmdisappears entirely fromEgyptianhoards The abruptness of this disappearance can only be intentional presum-ably the result of a deliberate policy to demonetize them ordered by Ptolemyboth to undermine templeminting operations and to provide silver for his newcoinage120 Indeed it is quite likely that temple bullion stores were tapped bythe royal mints at least initially and these would have included many of theAthenian tetradrachms circulating in Egypt at the time Around 305 Ptolemyintroduced the first of his reduced weight silver issues with a tetradrachmof 157g and this was further reduced in subsequent years to 149g and ulti-mately 142g by about 294121 These reductions are typically interpreted as partof a closed currency system in which foreign coins had to be exchanged for

119 Von Reden Money in Ptolemaic Egypt120 I owe the suggestion of a deliberate politicallymotivated demonetization of theAthenian

tetradrachm to Cathy Lorber and I am grateful to her for sharing her ideas with me121 Lorber ldquoA Revised Chronologyrdquo and ldquoThe Coinage of the Ptolemiesrdquo 211ndash214

106 colburn

Ptolemaic ones with the same face value but of lower weight thus bolsteringEgyptrsquos limited silver supplies andproviding a tidy profit to the royal treasury122However these reductions would also have driven any remaining full weighttetradrachms Athenian and Ptolemaic alike out of circulation entirely as perGreshamrsquos Law Indeed von Reden has even argued that the closed currencysystem in Egypt was not a deliberate policy but rather a result of reducedweight tetradrachms forcing the foreign Attic weight ones out of circulation123These reductions would also have competed with the use of bullion as moneyfor the same reason and this had the added benefit of protecting silver coinsfrom being cut up into Hacksilber once they came into the possession of some-one who used bullion rather than coins as money

At any rate the deliberateness of this displacement of temple coin issues byroyal ones is suggested by other reforms aimed at undermining the economicpower of the temples This is nicely demonstrated by the case of the apomoiraa harvest tax in kind on vineyards and orchards According to PRevenue Lawsunder Ptolemy II the collection of this tax was made the responsibility of taxfarmers instead of temple personnel with most of the proceeds going to sup-port the state cult of Arsinoe II and only a small portion being returned to thetemples themselves124 In the context of the staple finance model articulatedabove this was not a major change as the pharaoh was simply replacing thetemples as the infrastructure he used to exploit the agricultural wealth of Egyptwith an institution more directly under his control This was also the purposeof the royal mint

Yet despite these reforms there are nevertheless clear continuities in therole played by temples in the political economy of Ptolemaic Egypt There isgood evidence that one temple continued to strike its own coins down intothe second century In the winter of 2008ndash2009 the remains of a mint werediscovered in a mudbrick structure in the temple of Amun at Karnak125 Thesize of the structure and the remains there are suggestive of a modest opera-tion and not an official mint but this scale is seemingly commensurate withthe temple minting operations of the fourth century with bronze playing agreater role than it had previously Similarly the ldquostones of Ptahrdquo continued tobe used as a weight standard for silver in Demotic documents with the lat-

122 De Callatayuml ldquoLrsquo instauration par Ptoleacutemeacutee Ier Soter drsquoune eacuteconomie moneacutetaire fermeacuteerdquo123 Von Reden Money in Ptolemaic Egypt 43ndash48124 Clarysse and Vandorpe ldquoThe Ptolemaic Apomoirardquo see Vandorpe ldquoThe Ptolemaic Epi-

grapherdquo and ldquoAgriculture Temples and Tax Lawrdquo and Thompson ldquoEconomic Reforms inthe Mid-Reign of Ptolemy Philadelphusrdquo for examples of other similar measures

125 Faucher et al ldquoUn atelier moneacutetairerdquo


est instance dating to 21CE126 The use of this phrase in the Ptolemaic period isoften regarded as ameaningless archaism and though the language of Demoticcontracts is often oblique by modern legal standards the long survival of thisphrase indicates the longevity of the association of the temple of Ptah with sil-ver bullionCertainly there is goodevidence that temples continued to functionas economic institutions In PElephGr 10 dating to 222 a Greek letter fromone fiscal administrator to his subordinate in Edfu there are clear referencesto banks and granaries within the temple there and other documents indicatetheproductionof beer linen andpapyrus there aswell127This letter andotherslike it indicate state (ie pharaonic) oversight (if not outright control) of theseeconomic functions apparently to a greater degree than in earlier periods butthe practice of using temple infrastructure to support the pharaohrsquos economicactivities has clear precedents in earlier periods

There are also continuities and changes evident in the use of coins by indi-viduals As in earlier periods coinhoardswere largely restricted toLowerEgyptbetween 323 and 31BCE only twelve hoards are known fromUpper Egypt withfive of them coming from inside or around the Karnak temple and two morefromKarnakandLuxor generally128 Likewise amajority of the excavatedPtole-maic coins also occur in Lower Egypt129 Given the conventional wisdom thatthe deposition and failure to recover coin hoards typically accompanies polit-ical instability the absence of many hoards in Upper Egypt despite the occur-rence of several revolts there is highly suggestive of the limited use of coinsor at the very least in light of the excavated coins a preference for the stor-age of wealth in forms other than coinage130 Greek veterans and immigrantssettling in the Delta and the Fayum would be more predisposed towards theuse of coins than the Egyptians and this no doubt bolstered the number of

126 Vargyas From Elephantine to Babylon 165 the document is PMichigan 347 (LuumlddeckensAumlgyptische Ehevertraumlge 180ndash183)

127 Manning ldquoThe Capture of the Thebaidrdquo 7ndash8 see also Monson ldquoEgyptian Fiscal Historyrdquo23ndash24 Manning The Last Pharaohs 117ndash120 and Clarysse ldquoThe Archive of the PraktorMilonrdquo

128 Duyrat ldquoLe treacutesor deDamanhourrdquo The hoards are IGCH 1670 (c 305BCE fromQift)CoinH10448 (c 240 from Tuna el-Gebel) CoinH 10450 (late 3rd cen from Luxor) CoinH 10451and 452 (c 205 from Karnak temple) CoinH 10453 (c 205 from Nag Hammadi) CoinH10454 (c 200 from Karnak temple) IGCH 1702 (c 180 from Asyut) CoinH 10459 (c 150ndash125 fromKarnak temple) IGCH 1708 (c 144 fromQena) CoinH 364 (c 100 fromKarnak)and CoinH 10463 (c 59 from Karnak temple)

129 Faucher ldquoCirculation moneacutetaire en Eacutegypte helleacutenistiquerdquo130 For the revolts see Veacuteiumlsse Les ldquoreacutevoltes eacutegyptiennesrdquo

108 colburn

hoards in the north but as in earlier periods thiswider use of coinswasmainlya result of closer contacts with coin-using foreign merchants Egypt also con-tinued to export grain under the Ptolemies and there can be little doubt thatpapyrus natron linen and now cotton were also exported abroad131 For rea-sons of distance and uninterest the people and temples of Upper Egypt did notparticipate in Mediterranean trade to the same degree though this may be inpart explained by a focus instead on trade to the south and east regions thatwere also new to coinage and undergoing comparable changes

In addition to the hoards there are also textual references that provideclues as to the extent and nature of coin use by individuals Of particularnote is the persistence of the equivalency of one deben of silver to five staters(ie tetradrachms) in Demotic documents which occurs as late as 60BCE132This is especially noteworthy in light of the reductions of the weight of thetetradrachmunder Ptolemy I and the introductionof large bronze issues underPtolemy II and III which were intended to supplant silver coins in regularuse133 It is not clear whether this was simply an anachronistic way of refer-ring to coins or if the weight of the deben was actually pegged to that of thetetradrachm Regardless these references are suggestive of an approach to coinuse that still treated them as bullion rather than coins at least in writing134 Itis interesting too that the largest bronze coins issued under Ptolemy III werethe same weight as the old fourth century deben there was also a 72g bronzecoin which would have been roughly the same weight as five of the reducedweight tetradrachms If one of these two coins was actually intended to be adeben then therewas seemingly someattempt to relate thenewbronze coins tothe old pre-coinage weight system It has even been suggested that the bronzecoinage which was fiduciary was deliberately made the same weight as theamount of silver it supposedly represented135 Likewise as noted above refer-ences to the ldquostones of Ptahrdquo as a weight standard for silver also continue intothe Roman period Again it is difficult to determine whether this was a tra-ditional way of referring to coined money or if it actually indicates the use ofbullion probably it refers to the use of coins as bullion with bronze largely

131 Buraselis ldquoPtolemaic Grain Seaways and Powerrdquo132 In PCairo 50149 (Luumlddeckens Aumlgyptische Ehevertraumlge 136ndash139) I know of some forty-

seven occurrences dating to between 315 and 60BCE see discussions in Maresch Bronzeund Silber 21ndash51 and Hayden ldquoDemotic lsquoMarriage Documentsrsquo rdquo

133 Lorber ldquoDevelopment of Ptolemaic Bronze Coinagerdquo and ldquoThe Coinage of the Ptolemiesrdquo216ndash218 von Reden Money in Ptolemaic Egypt 58ndash78

134 Hayden ldquoDemotic lsquoMarriage Documentsrsquo rdquo135 Gorre ldquoPBerlin 13593rdquo 83ndash85 see also Picard ldquoRemarques sur la monnaie de bronzerdquo


replacing silver in the early second century136 At the very least these refer-ences to deben show that among certain segments of the Egyptian populationcoins were still regarded as bullion

The foregoing continuities and changes illustrate the various ways in whichthe political economy of the fourth century affected the monetary reformsmade by the early Ptolemaic rulers Since the Ptolemies sought tomonetize theEgyptian economy as part of a political agenda they had to target their reformsat institutions that promoted alternatives to the normalGreek practice of usingcoins exclusively asmoney137 Foremost among such institutions were the tem-ples which struck imitation Athenian tetradrachms that served as both coinsand bullion and in the case of the temple of Ptah also set theweight standardsused for silver bullion This made them direct competitors with the Ptolemaicregime whose goal was to create a monetary system focused on the pharaohand the court at Alexandria Accordingly these were the institutions that thePtolemies sought most to undermine and neutralize by integrating themmoreclosely into their own power structures138 But the production of these bullioncoins by temples also provided a crucial bridge between coins and bullion thatif not exploited deliberately by the Ptolemies nevertheless furthered the pro-cess of monetization Finally the incompleteness of themonetization of Egyptin the face of measuresmdashsuch as the introduction of a poll tax payable exclu-sively in bronze coinsmdashdeliberately designed to propagate the use of coins asmoney attests to both the variability of Egyptian responses to Ptolemaic ruleand the inveteracy of certain economic behaviours behaviours originating inthe political economy of the fourth century and earlier periods139

Abbreviations

CoinH Coin Hoards vols 1ndash10 1975ndash2010 London Royal Numismatic Society NewYork American Numismatic Society

IGCH Thompson M et al (eds) 1973 An Inventory of Greek Coin Hoards New YorkAmerican Numismatic Society httpcoinhoardsorg

136 Manning ldquoCoinage as lsquoCodersquo in Ptolemaic Egyptrdquo 96ndash97137 The political aspects of monetization are especially emphasized by von Reden Money

in Ptolemaic Egypt and Manning ldquoCoinage as lsquoCodersquo in Ptolemaic Egyptrdquo and The LastPharaohs 130ndash138

138 Manning The Last Pharaohs 73ndash116139 For the Ptolemaic lsquosalt taxrsquo (actually a poll tax) see von Reden Money in Ptolemaic Egypt

65ndash67 Monson ldquoEgyptian Fiscal Historyrdquo 19

110 colburn

TADAE Porten B and A Yardeni 1986ndash1999 Textbook of Aramaic Documents fromAncient Egypt 4 vols Jerusalem Hebrew University

Bibliography

Adamson PB 1985 ldquoProblems over Storing Food in the Ancient Near Eastrdquo DieWelt desOrients 16 5ndash15

Agut-Labordegravere D 2014 ldquoLrsquoorge et lrsquoargent les usages moneacutetaires agrave ʿAyn Manacircwir agravelrsquoeacutepoque perserdquo Annales histoire sciences sociales 69 75ndash90

Agut-Labordegravere D 2013 ldquoThe Saite Period The Emergence of a Mediterranean Powerrdquoin Ancient Egyptian Administration edited by JC Moreno Garciacutea 965ndash1027 LeidenBrill

Agut-Labordegravere D 2012 ldquoPlus que des mercenaires Lrsquo inteacutegration des hommes deguerre grecs au service de la monarchie saiumlterdquo Pallas 89 293ndash306

Agut-Labordegravere D 2011 ldquoLrsquooracle et lrsquohoplite les eacutelites sacerdotales et lrsquoeffort de guerresous les dynasties eacutegyptiennes indignesrdquo Journal of the Economic and Social Historyof the Orient 54 627ndash645

Agut-Labordegravere D 2005a ldquoLe sens du Deacutecret de Cambyserdquo Transeuphrategravene 29 9ndash16Agut-Labordegravere D 2005b ldquoLe titre du lsquodeacutecret de Cambysersquo rdquo Revue drsquoEacutegyptologie 56

45ndash54Anderson L and PG van Alfen 2008 ldquoA Fourth Century BCE Hoard from the Near

Eastrdquo American Journal of Numismatics 20 155ndash198Arnold-Biucchi C 2006ndash2007 ldquoLesmonnayages royaux helleacutenistiques Seacutelinonte Lysi-

maque et les imitations atheacuteniennes du deacutebut du IVe srdquoAnnuaire de lrsquoEacutecole pratiquedes hautes eacutetudes section des sciences historiques et philologiques reacutesumeacutes des con-feacuterences et travaux 139 87ndash91

Assmann J 2006 Marsquoat Gerechtigkeit und Unsterblichkeit im alten Aumlgypten2 MunichBeck

Austin MM 1970 Greece and Egypt in the Archaic Age Cambridge Cambridge Philo-logical Society

Bang PF 2008The RomanBazaar A Comparative Study of Trade andMarkets in aTrib-utary Empire Cambridge Cambridge University Press

Baynham E 2015 ldquoCleomenes of Naucratis Villain or Victimrdquo inGreece Macedon andPersia Studies in Social Political andMilitary History in Honour of Waldemar Heckeledited by T Howe et al 127ndash134 Oxford Oxbow

Berg D 1987 ldquoThe 29th Dynasty Storehouse at Karnakrdquo Journal of the American Re-search Center in Egypt 24 47ndash52

Bissa EMA 2009 Governmental Intervention and Foreign Trade in Archaic and Classi-cal Greece Leiden Brill


Bolshakov AO 1992 ldquoThe Earliest Known Pharaonic Coinrdquo Revue drsquoEacutegyptologie 43 3ndash9

Bomhard A-S von 2012 The Decree of Sais Oxford Oxford Centre for MaritimeArchaeology

Briant P and R Descat 1998 ldquoUn registre douanier de la satrapie drsquoEacutegypte agrave lrsquoeacutepoqueacheacutemeacuteniderdquo in Le commerce en Eacutegypte ancienne edited by N Grimal and B Menu59ndash104 Cairo Institut franccedilais drsquoarcheacuteologie orientale

Buraselis K 2013 ldquoPtolemaic Grain Seaways and Powerrdquo in The Ptolemies the Sea andtheNile Studies inWaterbornePower editedbyK Buraselis et al 97ndash107 CambridgeCambridge University Press

Burstein SM 2008 ldquoAlexanderrsquos Organization of Egypt A Note on the Career ofCleomenes of Naucratisrdquo in Macedonian Legacies Studies in Ancient MacedonianHistory and Culture in Honor of Eugene N Borza edited by T Howe and J Reames183ndash194 Claremont Regina


Bussi S 2010 ldquoNaukratis e lrsquoinizio della monetazione ellenisticardquo Rivista italiana dinumismatica e scienze affini 111 471ndash476

Buttrey TV 1984 ldquoSeldomWhat They Seem The Case of the Athenian Tetradrachmrdquo inAncient Coins of the Graeco-RomanWorld The Nickle Numismatic Papers edited byW Heckel and R Sullivan 292ndash294 Waterloo Ontario Wilfred Laurier UniversityPress

Buttrey TV 1982 ldquoPharaonic Imitations of Athenian Tetradrachmsrdquo in Actes du 9egravemecongregraves international de numismatique Berne Septembre 1979 edited by T Hackensand R Weiller 137ndash140 Louvain-la-Neuve Association Internationale des Numis-mates Professionnels

Callatayuml F de 2005 ldquoLrsquo instauration par Ptoleacutemeacutee Ier Soter drsquoune eacuteconomie moneacute-taire fermeacuteerdquo in Lrsquoexception eacutegyptienne Production et eacutechangesmoneacutetaires en Eacutegyptehelleacutenistique et romaine edited by F Duyrat and O Picard 117ndash134 Cairo Institutfranccedilais drsquoarcheacuteologie orientale

Chauveau M 2001 ldquoLes qanāts dans les ostraca de Manacircwarrdquo in Irrigation et drainagedans lrsquoAntiquiteacute qanāts et canalisations souterraines en Iran en Eacutegypte et en Gregraveceedited by P Briant 137ndash142 Paris Thotm

Chauveau M 2000 ldquoLa premiegravere mention du stategravere drsquoargent en Eacutegypterdquo Transe-uphrategravene 20 137ndash143

Chauveau M 1999 ldquoLa chronologie de la correspondance dite lsquode Pheacuterendategravesrsquo rdquo RevuedrsquoEacutegyptologie 50 269ndash271

Clarysse W 2003 ldquoThe Archive of the Praktor Milonrdquo in Edfu an Egyptian ProvincialCapital in the Ptolemaic Period edited by K Vandorpe andW Clarysse 17ndash27 Brus-sels Koninklijke Vlaamse Academie van Belgieuml voorWetenschappen en Kunsten

112 colburn

Clarysse W and K Vandorpe 1998 ldquoThe Ptolemaic Apomoirardquo in Le culte du souveraindans lrsquoEacutegypte ptoleacutemaiumlque au IIIe siegravecle avant notre egravere actes du colloque interna-tional Bruxelles 10 mai 1995 edited by H Melaerts 5ndash42 Leuven Peeters

Colburn HP 2014 The Archaeology of Achaemenid Rule in Egypt Dissertation Univer-sity of Michigan httpsdeepbluelibumicheduhandle202742107318

Cottier M 2012 ldquoRetour agrave la source A Fresh Overview of the Persian Customs Regis-ter TAD C37rdquo in Stephanegravephoros de lrsquo eacuteconomie antique agrave lrsquoAsie Mineure edited byK Konuk 53ndash61 Pessac Ausonius

Cruz-Uribe E 1981ndash1982 ldquoVariardquo Serapis 7 1ndash22Cruz-Uribe E 1977ndash1978 ldquoPapyrus Libbey a Reexaminationrdquo Serapis 4 3ndash10DrsquoAltroy TN and T Earle 1985 ldquoStaple Finance Wealth Finance and Storage in the

Inka Economyrdquo Current Anthropology 26 188ndash206Dattari G 1905 ldquoComments on a Hoard of Athenian Tetradrachms Found in Egyptrdquo

Journal international drsquoarcheacuteologie numismatique 8 103ndash114Davies J 2004 ldquoAthenian Fiscal Expertise and Its Influencerdquo Mediterraneo Antico 7

491ndash512Depuydt L 2010 ldquoNew Date for the Second Persian Conquest End of Pharaonic and

Manethonian Egypt 34039BCrdquo Journal of Egyptian History 3 191ndash230Donker van Heel K 2012 Djekhy amp Son Doing Business in Ancient Egypt Cairo Ameri-

can University in Cairo PressDumke G 2011 ldquoGutes Gold Uumlberlegungen zum Sinnhorizont der nbw nfr-Praumlgungen

des Nektanebos IIrdquo in Geld als Medium in der Antike edited by B Eckhardt andK Martin 59ndash92 Berlin Verlag Antike

Duyrat F 2005 ldquoLe treacutesor de Damanhour (IGCH 1664) et lrsquoeacutevolution de la circula-tion moneacutetaire en Eacutegypte helleacutenistiquerdquo in Lrsquoexception eacutegyptienne Production eteacutechanges moneacutetaires en Eacutegypte helleacutenistique et romaine edited by F Duyrat andO Picard 17ndash51 Cairo Institut franccedilais drsquoarcheacuteologie orientale

Earle T 2002 Bronze Age Economics The Beginnings of Political Economies BoulderWestview Press

Earle T 1997 How Chiefs Come to Power The Political Economy in Prehistory StanfordStanford University Press

Elayi J and AG Elayi 1993 Treacutesors de monnaies pheacuteniciennes et circulation moneacutetaireVendashIVe siegravecles avant J-C Paris Gabalda

Eyre CJ 2010 ldquoThe Economy Pharaonicrdquo in A Companion to Ancient Egypt edited byAB Lloyd 291ndash308 Chichester Wiley-Blackwell

Eyre CJ 2004 ldquoHowRelevantwasPersonal Status to theFunctioningof theRural Econ-omy in Pharaonic Egyptrdquo in La deacutependance rurale dans lrsquoAntiquiteacute eacutegyptienne etproche-orientale edited by B Menu 157ndash186 Cairo Institut franccedilais drsquoarcheacuteologieorientale

Eyre CJ 1999 ldquoThe Village Economy in Pharaonic Egyptrdquo in Agriculture in Egypt From


Pharaonic to Modern Times edited by AK Bowman and E Rogan 33ndash60 OxfordOxford University Press

Eyre CJ 1998 ldquoTheMarketWomen of Pharaonic Egyptrdquo in Le commerce en Eacutegypte anci-enne edited byN Grimal andBMenu 173ndash191 Cairo Institut franccedilais drsquoarcheacuteologieorientale

Faucher T 2011 ldquoCirculation moneacutetaire en Eacutegypte helleacutenistiquerdquo in Nomisma la circu-lation moneacutetaire dans le monde grec antique edited by T Faucher et al 439ndash460Athens Eacutecole franccedilaise drsquoAthegravenes

Faucher T et al 2012 ldquoLes monnaies en or aux types hieacuteroglyphiques nwb nfrrdquo Bulletind lrsquo Institut franccedilais de lrsquoarcheacuteologie orientale 112 147ndash169

Faucher T et al 2011 ldquoUn ateliermoneacutetaire agrave Karnak au IIe s av J-CrdquoBulletin d lrsquo Institutfranccedilais de lrsquoarcheacuteologie orientale 111 146ndash166

Fischer-Bovet C 2013 ldquoEgyptianWarriors The Machimoi of Herodotus and the Ptole-maic Armyrdquo Classical Quarterly 63 209ndash236

Flament C 2007 Le monnayage en argent drsquoAthegravenes de lrsquo eacutepoque archaiumlque agrave lrsquo eacutepoquehelleacutenistique c 550ndashc 40 av J-C Louvain-la-Neuve Association de numismatiqueprofesseur Marcel Hoc

Flament C 2007 ldquoLrsquoargent des chouettes bilan de lrsquoapplication desmeacutethodes de labo-ratoire aumonnayage atheacutenien tirant parti de nouvelles analyses reacutealiseacutees aumoyende la meacutethode PIXErdquo Revue belge de numismatique et de sigillographie 153 9ndash30

Flament C 2007 ldquoQuelques consideacuterations sur les monnaies atheniennes eacutemises auIVe srdquoNumismatica e antichitagrave classiche 36 91ndash105

Flament C 2005 ldquoUn treacutesor de teacutetradrachmes atheacuteniens disperseacutes suivi de consideacutera-tions relatives au classement agrave la frappe et agrave lrsquoattribution de chouettes agrave des atelierseacutetrangersrdquo Revue belge de numismatique et de sigillographie 151 29ndash38

Flament C 2003 ldquoImitations atheacuteniennes ou monnaies authentiques Nouvelles con-sideacuterations sur quelques chouettes atheacuteniennes habituellement identifieacutees commeimitationsrdquo Revue belge de numismatique et de sigillographie 149 1ndash10

Flament C and P Marchetti 2004 ldquoAnalysis of Ancient Silver Coinsrdquo Nuclear Instru-ments andMethods in Physics Research B 226 179ndash184

Fried LS 2004 The Priest and the Great King Temple-Palace Relations in the PersianEmpire Winona Lake Eisenbrauns

Gasse A 1988 Donneacutees nouvelles administratives et sacerdotales sur lrsquoorganisation dudomaine drsquoAmon XXendashXXIe dynasties agrave la lumiegravere des papyrus Prachov Reinhardt etGrundbuch (avec eacutedition princeps des papyrus Louvre AF 6345 et 6346ndash7) Cairo Insti-tut franccedilais drsquoarcheacuteologie orientale

Gorre G 2010 ldquoPBerlin 13593 nouvelle interpreacutetationrdquo Archiv fuumlr Papyrusforschungund verwandte Gebiete 56 77ndash90

Goyon G 1987 ldquoLa plus ancienne () monnaie frappeacutee en Eacutegypte un tritemorionrdquo Bul-letin d lrsquo Institut franccedilais de lrsquoarcheacuteologie orientale 87 219ndash223

114 colburn

Grandet P 1994 Le PapyrusHarris I BM9999 Volume 1 Cairo Institut franccedilais drsquoarcheacute-ologie orientale

Harris JR 1961 Lexicographical Studies in Ancient EgyptianMinerals Berlin AkademieVerlag

Hayden B 2015 ldquoDemotic lsquoMarriage Documentsrsquo as Evidence for the Perception andUse of Coinage amongEgyptians in the Ptolemaic Periodrdquo in Proceedings of theTenthInternational Congress of Egyptologists University of the Aegean Rhodes 22ndash29 May2008 edited by P Kousoulis and N Laziridis 751ndash761 Leuven Peeters

Head BV 1886 ldquoCoins Discovered on the Site of Naukratisrdquo Numismatic Chronicle 61ndash18

HeckelW 2006WhorsquosWho in the Age of Alexander the Great Prosopography of Alexan-derrsquos Empire Malden Blackwell

Hughes GR 1952 Saite Demotic Land Leases Chicago Oriental Institute of the Univer-sity of Chicago

Jansen-Winkeln K 2001 ldquoDer Thebanische lsquoGottesstaatrsquo rdquo Orientalia 70 153ndash182Janssen JJ 1994 ldquoThe Cost of Nile-Transportrdquo Bulletin de la Socieacuteteacute eacutegyptologique de

Gegraveneve 18 41ndash47Janssen JJ 1988 ldquoOn Prices andWages in Ancient Egyptrdquo Altorientalische Forschungen

15 10ndash23JenkinsGK 1955 ldquoGreekCoinsRecentlyAcquiredby theBritishMuseumrdquoNumismatic

Chronicle 15 131ndash156Jones M and A Milward Jones 1988 ldquoThe Apis House Project at Mit Rahinah Prelim-

inary Report of the Sixth Season 1986rdquo Journal of the American Research Center inEgypt 25 105ndash116

Jurman C 2015 ldquo lsquoSilver of the Treasury of Herishef rsquo Considering the Origin and Eco-nomic Significance of Silver in Egypt During the Third Intermediate Periodrdquo in TheMediterraneanMirror Cultural Contacts in the Mediterranean Sea Between 1200 and750BC edited by A Babbi et al 51ndash68 Mainz Verlag des Roumlmisch-GermanischenZentralmuseums

Kaplan P 2003 ldquoCross-Cultural Contacts amongMercenary Communities in Saite andPersian Egyptrdquo Mediterranean Historical Review 181 1ndash31

Kemp BJ 2006 Ancient Egypt Anatomy of a Civilization2 London RoutledgeKienitz FK 1953 Die politische Geschichte Aumlgyptens vom 7 bis zum 4 Jahrhundert vor

der Zweitwende Berlin Akademie VerlagKroll JH 2011 ldquoThe Reminting of Athenian Silver Coinage 353BCrdquo Hesperia 80 229ndash

259Kroll JH 2011 ldquoMinting for Export Athens Aegina and Othersrdquo in Nomisma la circu-

lationmoneacutetaire dans lemonde grec edited by T Faucher et al 27ndash38 Athens Eacutecolefranccedilaise drsquoAthegravenes

Kroll JH 2011 ldquoAthenian Tetradrachm Coinage of the First Half of the Fourth CenturyBCrdquo Revue belge de numismatique et de sigillographie 157 3ndash26


Kroll JH 2009 ldquoWhat about Coinagerdquo in Interpreting the Athenian Empire edited byJ Ma et al 195ndash209 London Duckworth

Kroll JH 2001 ldquoA Small Find of Silver Bullion from Egyptrdquo American Journal of Numis-matics 13 1ndash20

Kuhrt A 2007 The Persian Empire A Corpus of Sources from the Achaemenid PeriodLondon Routledge

Leclegravere F 2008 Les villes deBasseEacutegypte au Iermilleacutenaire av J-C analyse archeacuteologiqueet historique de la topographie urbaine Cairo Institut franccedilais drsquoarcheacuteologie orien-tale

Le Rider G (transWE Higgins) 2007 Alexander the Great Coinage Finances and Pol-icy Philadelphia American Philosophical Society

Le Rider G 2001 La naissance de la monnaie pratiques moneacutetaires de lrsquoOrient ancienParis Presses universitaires de France

LeVine TY (ed) 1992 Inka Storage Systems Norman University of Oklahoma PressLichtheim M 1976 ldquoThe Naucratis Stela Once Againrdquo in Studies in Honor of George

R Hughes January 12 1977 edited by JH Johnson and EF Wente 139ndash146 ChicagoOriental Institute of the University of Chicago

Lorber CC 2012 ldquoThe Coinage of the Ptolemiesrdquo in The Oxford Handbook of Greek andRoman Coinage edited byWE Metcalf 211ndash234 Oxford Oxford University Press

Lorber CC 2005 ldquoA Revised Chronology for the Coinage of Ptolemy Irdquo NumismaticChronicle 165 45ndash64

Lorber CC 2005 ldquoDevelopment of Ptolemaic Bronze Coinage in Egyptrdquo in Lrsquoexceptioneacutegyptienne Production et eacutechanges moneacutetaires en Eacutegypte helleacutenistique et romaineedited by F Duyrat and O Picard 135ndash157 Cairo Institut franccedilais drsquoarcheacuteologie ori-entale

Luumlddeckens E 1960 Aumlgyptische Ehevertraumlge Wiesbaden HarrassowitzManning JG 2011 ldquoThe Capture of the Thebaidrdquo in Perspectives on Ptolemaic Thebes

edited by PF Dorman and BM Bryan 1ndash15 Chicago Oriental Institute of the Uni-versity of Chicago

Manning JG 2010 The Last Pharaohs Egypt under the Ptolemies 305ndash30BC PrincetonPrinceton University Press

Manning JG 2008 ldquoCoinage as lsquoCodersquo in Ptolemaic Egyptrdquo in The Monetary Systemsof the Greeks and Romans edited by WV Harris 84ndash111 Oxford Oxford UniversityPress

Maresch K 1996 Bronze und Silber Papyrologische Beitraumlge zur Geschichte der Waumlh-rung im ptolemaumlischen und roumlmischen Aumlgypten zum 2 Jahrhundert n Chr OpladenWestdeutscher Verlag

Meadows A 2011 ldquoAthenian Coin Dies from Egypt The New Discovery from Herak-leionrdquo Revue belge de numismatique et de sigillographie 157 95ndash116

Meadows A 2011 ldquoThe Chian Revolution Changing Patterns of Hoarding in 4th-

116 colburn

Century BCWesternAsiaMinorrdquo inNomisma la circulationmoneacutetaire dans lemondegrec edited by T Faucher et al 273ndash295 Athens Eacutecole franccedilaise drsquoAthegravenes

Meeks D 1979 ldquoLes donations aux temples dans lrsquoEacutegypte du Iermilleacutenaire avant J-Crdquo inState and Temple Economy in the Ancient Near East Proceedings of the InternationalConference Organized by the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven from the 10th to the 14th ofApril 1978 edited by E Lipiński 605ndash687 Leuven Peeters

Melville Jones JR 1999 ldquoAncient Greek Gold Coinage up to the Time of Philip ofMacedonrdquo in Travaux de numismatique grecque offerts agrave Georges Le Rider edited byM Amandry and S Hurter 257ndash275 London Spink

Mildenberg L 1998 ldquoMoney Supply under Artaxerxes III Ochusrdquo in Studies in GreekNumismatics in Memory of Martin Jessop Price edited by R Ashton and S Hurter277ndash286 London Spink

Monson A 2015 ldquoEgyptian Fiscal History in a World of Warring States 664ndash30BCErdquoJournal of Egyptian History 8 1ndash36

Moslashrkholm O 1974 ldquoA Coin of Artaxerxes IIIrdquo Numismatic Chronicle 14 1ndash4Muumlller-Wollermann R 2007 ldquoAumlgypten auf dem Weg zur Geldwirtschaftrdquo in Proceed-

ings of the Ninth International Congress of Egyptologists edited by J-C Goyon andC Cardin 1351ndash1359 Leuven Peeters

Muumlller-Wollermann R 2007 ldquoSteuern Zoumllle und Tribute in der aumlgyptischen Spaumltzeitrdquoin Geschenke und Steuern Zoumllle und Tribute antike Abgabenformen in Anspruch undWirklichkeit edited by H Klinkott et al 87ndash106 Leiden Brill

Muumlller-Wollermann R 2007 ldquoDie oumlkonomische Bedeutung von Tempelschatzhaumlusenrdquoin Das Heilige und dieWare Zum Spannungsfeld von Religion und Oumlkonomie editedby M Fitzenreiter 171ndash179 London Golden House

Muumlller-Wollermann R 2007 ldquoForeign Coins in Late Period Egyptrdquo in Moving acrossBorders Foreign Relations Religion and Cultural Interactions in the Ancient Mediter-ranean edited by P Kousoulis and K Magliveras 317ndash326 Leuven Peeters

Murray MA 2000 ldquoCereal Production and Processingrdquo in Ancient Egyptian Materialsand Technology edited by PT Nicholson and I Shaw 505ndash536 Cambridge Cam-bridge University Press

Nicolet-Pierre H 2005 ldquoLesmonnaies en Eacutegypte avant Alexandrerdquo in Lrsquoexception eacutegyp-tienne Production et eacutechanges moneacutetaires en Eacutegypte helleacutenistique et romaine editedby F Duyrat and O Picard 7ndash16 Cairo Institut franccedilais drsquoarcheacuteologie orientale

Nicolet-Pierre H 2003 (2005) ldquoLes imitations eacutegyptiennes des teacutetradrachmes atheacute-niens drsquoeacutepoque classique (VendashIVe s av J-C)rdquo Archaiologike Ephemeris 142 139ndash154

Nicolet-Pierre H 2001 (2003) ldquoRetour sur le treacutesor de Tel el-Athrib 1903 (IGCH 1663)conserveacute agrave AthegravenesrdquoArchaiologike Ephemeris 140 173ndash187

Nimchuk CL 2002 ldquoThe lsquoArchersrsquo of Darius Coinage or Tokens of Royal Esteemrdquo inMedesandPersians Reflections onElusiveEmpires editedbyMC Root 55ndash79Wash-


ington Freer and Sackler Gallery Smithsonian Institution and Department of theHistory of Art University of Michigan

Oppenheim AL 1967 ldquoEssay on Overland Trade in the First Millennium BCrdquo Journalof Cuneiform Studies 21 236ndash254

Perdu O 2010 ldquoSaites and Persiansrdquo in A Companion to Ancient Egypt edited byAB Lloyd 140ndash158 Chichester Wiley-Blackwell

Pernigotti S 1999 ldquoPhoenicians and Egyptiansrdquo in The Phoenicians edited by S Mos-cati 591ndash610 New York Rizzoli

Picard O 1998 ldquoRemarques sur la monnaie de bronze dans lrsquoEacutegypte lagiderdquo in Com-merce et artisanat dans lrsquoAlexandrie helleacutenistique et romaine actes du colloque organ-iseacute par le CNRS le Laboratoirede ceacuteramologiedeLyonet lrsquoEacutecole franccedilaisedrsquoAthegravenes 11ndash12 deacutecembre 1988 edited by J-Y Empereur 409ndash417 Athens Eacutecole franccedilaise drsquoAthegrave-nes

Pons Mellado E 2006 ldquoTrade of Metals between Egypt and Other Countries from theOld until the New Kingdomrdquo Chronique drsquoEacutegypte 81 7ndash16

Porten B 1968 Archives fromElephantine The Life of a JewishMilitary Colony BerkeleyUniversity of California Press

Porten B et al 1996TheElephantine Papyri in EnglishThreeMillennia of Cross-CulturalContinuity and Change Leiden Brill

Posesner G 1947 ldquoLes douanes de laMeacutediteraneacutee dans lrsquoEacutegypte saiumlterdquo Revue de philolo-gie de litteacuterature et drsquohistoire anciennes 73 117ndash131

Price MJ 1981 ldquoA Portrait of Alexander the Great from Egyptrdquo Norsk NumismatiskTidsskrift 10 24ndash37

Psoma S 2011 ldquoThe Lawof Nicophon (SEG 2672) andAthenian Imitationsrdquo Revuebelgede numismatique et de sigillographie 157 21ndash30

Rabinowitz I 1956 ldquoAramaic Inscriptions of the FifthCentury BCE fromaNorth-ArabShrine in Egyptrdquo Journal of Near Eastern Studies 15 1ndash9

Reden S von 2010 Money in Classical Antiquity Cambridge Cambridge UniversityPress

Reden S von 2007 Money in Ptolemaic Egypt from the Macedonian Conquest to theEnd of the Third Century BC Cambridge Cambridge University Press

Rhodes PJ and R Osborne 2003 Greek Historical Inscriptions 404ndash323BC OxfordClarendon Press

Ronde A 2005 ldquoContribution au monnayage preacute-alexandrin en Eacutegypte (une eacutemissionde petits bronzes sous Nectanebo II)rdquo Bulletin de la Socieacuteteacute franccedilaise de numisma-tique 60 2ndash3

Ruzicka S 2012 Trouble in theWest Egypt and the Persian Empire 525ndash332BCE OxfordOxford University Press

Stein GJ 2001 ldquoUnderstanding Ancient State Societies in the OldWorldrdquo in Archaeol-ogyat theMillenniumASourcebook edited byGM FeinmanandTD Price 353ndash379New York Kluwer Academic Plenum Publishers

118 colburn

Thompson DJ 2008 ldquoEconomic Reforms in the Mid-Reign of Ptolemy Philadelphusrdquoin Ptolemy II Philadelphus and HisWorld edited by P McKechnie and P Guillaume27ndash38 Leiden Brill

Traunecker C 1987 ldquoLes lsquotemples hautsrsquo de Basse Eacutepoque un aspect du fonction-nement eacuteconomique des templesrdquo Revue drsquoEacutegyptologie 38 147ndash162

Trundle M 2004 Greek Mercenaries From the Late Archaic Period to Alexander Lon-don Routledge

Tschoegl AE 2001 ldquoMaria Theresarsquos Thaler A Case of International Moneyrdquo EasternEconomic Journal 27 443ndash462

van Alfen PG 2012 ldquoThe Coinage of Athens Sixth to First Century BCrdquo in The OxfordHandbook of Greek and Roman Coinage edited by WE Metcalf 88ndash104 OxfordOxford University Press

van Alfen PG 2012 ldquoXenophon Poroi 32 and Athenian lsquoOwlsrsquo in Aegean-Near East-ern Long Distance Traderdquo in I ritrovamenti monteli e i processi storico-economici nelmondo antico edited by M Asolati and G Gorini 11ndash32 Padova Esedra

van Alfen PG 2011 ldquoMechanisms for the Imitation of Athenian Coinage Dekeleia andMercenaries ReconsideredrdquoRevue belge de numismatique et de sigillographie 157 55ndash93

van Alfen PG 2005 ldquoProblems in Ancient Imitative and Counterfeit Coinagerdquo in Mak-ingMoving andManaging TheNewWorld of Hellenistic Economies 323ndash31BC editedby ZH Archibald et al 322ndash354 Oxford Oxbow Books

van Alfen PG 2004ndash2005 ldquoHerodotusrsquo lsquoAryandicrsquo Silver and Bullion Use in Persian-Period Egyptrdquo American Journal of Numismatics 16ndash17 7ndash46

van Alfen PG 2004ndash2005 ldquoA New Athenian lsquoOwlrsquo and Bullion Hoard from the NearEastrdquo American Journal of Numismatics 16ndash17 47ndash61

van Alfen PG 2002 ldquoThe lsquoOwlsrsquo from the 1989 Syria Hoard with a Review of Pre-Macedonian Coinage in Egyptrdquo American Journal of Numismatics 14 1ndash57

van Alfen PG 2002 ldquoTwoUnpublished Hoards and Other Owls from Egyptrdquo AmericanJournal of Numismatics 14 59ndash71

Vandorpe K 2005 ldquoAgriculture Temples and Tax Law in Ptolemaic Egyptrdquo Cahiers derecherches de lrsquo Institut de papyrologie et drsquoEacutegyptologie de Lille 25 165ndash171

Vandorpe K 2000 ldquoThe Ptolemaic Epigraphe or Harvest-Tax (shemu)rdquo Archiv fuumlr Papy-rusforschung und verwandte Gebiete 46 169ndash232

Vargyas P 2010 From Elephantine to Babylon Selected Studies of Peacuteter Vargyas onAncient Near Eastern Economy edited by Z Csabai Budapest LrsquoHarmattan and theUniversity of Peacutecs

Veacuteiumlsse A-E 2004 Les ldquoreacutevoltes eacutegyptiennesrdquo recherches sur les troubles inteacuterieurs enEacutegypte du regravegne de Ptoleacutemeacutee III Evergegravete agrave la conqecircte romaine Leuven Peeters

Visonagrave P 2004ndash2005 ldquoTwenty-Two Alexanders in Ann Arborrdquo American Journal ofNumismatics 16ndash17 63ndash73


Vittmann G 2003 Aumlgypten und die Fremden im ersten vorchristlichen JahrtausendMainz am Rhein von Zabern

Vleeming SP 2001 Some Coins of Artaxerxes and Other Short Texts in Demotic ScriptFound on Various Objects and Gathered fromMany Publications Leuven Peeters

Vleeming SP 1993 Papyrus Reinhardt An Egyptian Land List from the Tenth CenturyBC Berlin Akademie Verlag

Vleeming SP 1991TheGooseherds of Hou (PapHou) ADossier Relating toVariousAgri-cultural Affairs from Provincial Egypt of the Early Fifth Century BC Leuven Peeters

Weiser W 1995 Katalog ptolemaumlischer Bronzemuumlnzen der Sammlung des Instituts fuumlrAltertumskunde der Universitaumlt zu Koumlln OpladenWestdeutscher Verlag

Will Eacute 1960 ldquoChabrias et les finances de Tachocircsrdquo Revue des Eacutetudes Anciennes 42 254ndash275

Yardeni A 1994 ldquoMaritime Trade and Royal Accountancy in an Erased Customs Ac-count from 475BCE on the Aḥiqar Scroll from Elephantinerdquo Bulletin of the AmericanSchools of Oriental Research 293 67ndash78

Yoyotte J 2006 ldquoAnExtraordinaryPair of TwinsThe Steles of thePharaohNektanebo Irdquoin Egyptrsquos Sunken Treasures edited by F Goddio and M Clauss 316ndash323 MunichPrestel

Zauzich K-Th 1993 Papyri von der Insel Elephantine Volume 3 Berlin Akademie Ver-lag

Zauzich K-Th 1980 ldquoEin demotisches Darlehen vomEnde der 30 Dynastierdquo Serapis 6241ndash243


chapter 5

Pharaoh and Temple Building in the FourthCentury BCE

MartinaMinas-Nerpel

1 Introduction

The fourth century BCE was a period of widespread transformation markedby the transition from the Oriental empires to the Hellenistic states in whichEgypt played a central role After the first Persian Period (525ndash4041) theTwenty-eighth (405401ndash399) and Twenty-ninth Dynasties (399ndash380) wereshort-lived and seem to have been undermined by competition for the throne1The rulers were also struggling to repel Persian invasions It is therefore notastonishing that there are very few traces of temple building or decorationfrom this short period which might nonetheless have paved the way for fur-ther developments2 According to Neal Spencer significant temple buildingwasprobably planned in theTwenty-ninthDynasty but there is noway toprovethis He suggests thatmuch of the cultural renaissancewhich is attested for theThirtieth Dynasty may ldquorepresent a flourishing of trends nascent in the previ-ous dynastyrdquo3

Nectanebo I Nekhetnebef (380ndash362) and Nectanebo II Nekhethorheb (360ndash342) of the Thirtieth Dynasty were the last great native pharaohs of Egypt

I am most grateful to Paul McKechnie and Jennifer A Cromwell for the invitation to a verystimulating conference to John Baines for reading a draft of the chapter and his valuablecritical remarks to Francisco Bosch-Puche for sending me his articles on Alexander (ldquoTheEgyptian Royal Titulary of Alexander the Greatrdquo I and II) before publication to Dietrich Rauefor information onHeliopolis toDaniela Rosenow for fig 53 and toTroy L Sagrillo for fig 55

1 All dates according to von Beckerath Handbuch der aumlgyptischen Koumlnigsnamen For the his-torical background see Ruzicka Trouble in theWest Egypt and the Persian Empire 35ndash48

2 Collected by Kienitz Politische Geschichte Aumlgyptens 122ndash123 Traunecker ldquoEssai sur lrsquohistoirede la XXIXe Dynastierdquo 407ndash419 ArnoldTemples of the Last Pharaohs 99ndash105 Bloumlbaum ldquoDennich bin ein Koumlnig helliprdquo 347ndash350 see also Phillips Columns of Egypt 157ndash158 and fig 306ndash307For the context seeMyśliwiecTwilight of Ancient Egypt 158ndash176 and Ladynin ldquoLate DynasticPeriodrdquo

3 Spencer A Naos of Nekhthorheb 47

pharaoh and temple building in the fourth century bce 121

Nectanebo I a general from Sebennytos in the Delta usurped the throne fromNepherites II the last king of the Twenty-ninth Dynasty andwas crowned kingof Egypt at Sais the former capital city of theTwenty-sixthDynasty in thewest-ern Delta4 The key political event in his eighteen-year reign was the defeat ofthe Persian forces attempting to invade Egypt in 373 For Egypt Nectanebo Ibegan a period of great prosperity which is reflected in massive temple con-struction from the first cataract region to the Delta as well as in the oasesof the western desert (for details see below) His co-regent for two years andsuccessor Teos (or Tachos 36462ndash360) moved into Palestine but soon in360 his nephew Nectanebo II was placed on the throne Nectanebo II con-tinued the building activity on a large scale The Thirtieth Dynasty left animpressive legacy of temple construction at the major sites of Egypt so thatthe sacred landscape changed considerably and with long-lasting effects5 Thislegacy also demonstrates the economic effectiveness of the Thirtieth DynastyNectanebo II the last native pharaoh repelled a Persian invasion in 350 andruled until 342 when Artaxerxes III conquered Egypt and the second PersianPeriod of Egypt began

In the turmoil of the second Persian Period from 343 to 332 no temple seemsto have been built at least nothing has been found so far Unfinished buildingprojects of theThirtieth Dynasty were only completed after the liberation fromthe Persians mainly in the early Ptolemaic period

With the victories of Alexander the Great the Persian Empire disintegratedand he took the land by the Nile without resistance6 Under his reign Egyptiantemples were extended and decorated at crucial points (see below) Althoughhis twoMacedonian successors never visited Egyptmdashneither his brother PhilipArrhidaios nor his son Alexander IVmdashtheir cartouches can be found on someEgyptian monuments which suggests that the building projects continued

4 Nectanebo I took the throne name Kheperkara (von Beckerath Handbuch der aumlgyptischenKoumlnigsnamen 226ndash227) which refers back to Senwosret I of the Twelfth Dynasty It seemsthat he wanted to evoke the grandeur of his predecessors referring to a time before the Per-sian rulers conquered Egypt Artistic traditions of the Twenty-sixth Dynasty were taken upagain and developed (Spencer A Naos of Nekhthorheb 47)

5 For collections of data and short discussions of the construction programmes of the Thir-tieth Dynasty see Bloumlbaum ldquoDenn ich bin ein Koumlnig helliprdquo 351ndash360 Jenni Die Dekoration desChnumtempels 87ndash100 Spencer ANaosof Nekhthorheb 47ndash52 For thehistorical backgroundsee also Ruzicka Trouble in theWest Egypt and the Persian Empire 145ndash198

6 Houmllbl History of the Ptolemaic Empire 9ndash12 77ndash80 Chauveau ldquoLrsquoEacutegypte en transitionrdquo dis-cusses the transition of Egypt from Persian to Macedonian rulers See also Ruzicka Troublein theWest Egypt and the Persian Empire 199ndash209

122 minas-nerpel

probably under some influence from Ptolemy the Satrap who ruled Egypt defacto as absolute autocrat

The Ptolemies carried to fruition the political aspiration of the ThirtiethDynasty the creation of a oncemore powerful Egyptian empire that dominatedthe EasternMediterranean for a time Large new temples were built and unfin-ished sacred projects were completed Ptolemy I Soter following Alexanderrsquosexample recognized temple building as a critical element in Egyptian kingshipand engaged with it perhaps not on the same scale as his son and successorPtolemy II7 but quite noticeably

This essay does not present a complete list of temple building sites in Egyptof the fourth century BCE but rather concentrates on some major sites wheretemple construction was undertaken looking into specific features that weredeveloped and asking why and how far sacred landscapes in Egypt changedin this period of transition under the last native pharaohs Alexander and hisimmediate successors including Ptolemy I Soter as well as reflecting on possi-ble (cross-) cultural relevance especially for the usurpers andor foreign rulersof the period

When looking at the sites we need to bear inmind that only a small propor-tion of ancient temples is preserved due to the normal reuse of older templesas building material during antiquity and subsequent periods the burning ofstone for lime earthquakes and other factors that changed the landscape sub-stantially not only for modern visitors but already in antiquity This is espe-cially true for sites in the Delta a bias that considerably distorts our picture ofthe construction programmes Before exploring specific sites and their templebuildings I give a short description of the Egyptian temple as the reflection ofthe cosmos in order to outline the religious and cultural basis on which thesetemples were built

7 Ptolemy II Philadelphosrsquo building programme has never been discussed in a dedicated publi-cation as has beendone for Ptolemy I Soter (Swinnen ldquoSur la politique religieuse dePtoleacutemeacuteeIerrdquo) Ptolemy VI Philometor andPtolemy VIII Euergetes II (Minas ldquoDieDekorationstaumltigkeitrdquo1 and 2) and Ptolemy IX Soter II and Ptolemy X Alexander I (Caszligor-Pfeiffer ldquoZur Reflex-ion ptolemaumlischer Geschichterdquo 1 and 2) Chauveau ldquoLrsquoEacutegypte en transitionrdquo 390ndash395 andBloumlbaum ldquoDenn ichbin einKoumlnighelliprdquo 361ndash363 andLadynin ldquoTheArgeadai building program inEgyptrdquo 223ndash228 present lists of attestations for the Macedonian rulers Alexander the GreatPhilip Arrhidaios and Alexander IV see Bosch-Puche (ldquoEgyptian Royal Titulary of Alexanderthe Greatrdquo I and II) for Alexander the Great


2 The Egyptian Temple as Model of the Cosmos

Temples are amongst the most striking elements in the ancient Egyptian civil-isation from the Old Kingdom to the Roman era The temples of the Graeco-Roman period include some of the best-preserved examples of religious archi-tecture and texts from antiquity King and templemdashor in modern terms stateand churchmdashshould not be seen as in opposition8 since ldquoboth kingship andtemple were brought to life sustained and celebrated in the central high-cultural products of Egyptian civilizationrdquo9

Cosmological associations vouchsafed the integrity of the temple whichserved as an image of the world10 Every single temple mirrored the cosmosand was amicrocosm in itself as well as the earthly residence of its main deityThe ancient Egyptians re-enacted creation by ceremonially founding and con-structing a temple and in the process re-establishing maat (universal order)As part of this cosmic meaning the daily repetition of the solar cycle was rep-resented in the temple The inner sanctuary symbolizes the primeval moundof earth that emerged from Nun the marshy waters at creation The cosmicdimension of the temple is further reflected in the depiction of the ceiling assky theplant decorationon thebase of thewall and the columnsof thepillaredhalls which have the forms of aquatic plants In theGraeco-Romanperiod theyoften have composite capitals which bring together different vegetal elementsand also form a point of contact with Hellenistic architecture11

The ritual scenes show two categories of protagonists involved one or sev-eral deities and the pharaoh in traditional Egyptian regalia nomatter whetherit was a native or a foreign king It was a requirement of temple decorationto show the pharaoh performing the rituals that would guarantee the exis-tence of Egypt The king presents diverse offerings ranging from real objectssuch as food flowers or amulets to symbolic acts like smiting the enemies orpresenting maat12 Further topics of the temple decoration included festivalsfoundation and protection of the temple and its gods in accordance with thetheological system of each temple

8 As for example by Huszlig Der makedonische Koumlnig9 Baines ldquoTemples as Symbolsrdquo 21610 Hornung Idea into Image 115ndash129 For a detailed study based on the temple of Horus at

Edfu see Finnestadt Image of theWorld11 McKenzie Architecture of Alexandria and Egypt 122ndash13212 Graefe ldquoDie Deutung der sogenannten lsquoOpfergabenrsquo rdquo

124 minas-nerpel

With the temples the cosmic cycle was extended into history13 The kingscould be presented as the sons and successors of the creator gods eternallyre-enacting creation thus fulfilling maat and protecting Egypt Since the tem-ple reflects the entire cosmos and functions according to the same principlesconstructing templeswas away to demonstrate and to reaffirm the royal statusThiswas especially important for usurpers and foreign rulers whowere keen tobe legitimized Even if the rulers of the Twenty-eighth to the Thirtieth Dynastywere considered as native pharaohs14 they were usurpers and needed to belegitimized in their role as pharaoh as did Alexander and the Ptolemies

The Egyptian temples of the Hellenistic period are the principal survivingmonuments of the Ptolemies in the country so it seems obvious that theserulers attached great importance to these enormous buildings Yet these for-eign rulers probably knew little of their symbolism and they could not readtheir inscriptions The Egyptian elite must have stimulated the building anddecoration policy since their life focused around the temples which were fun-damental to native Egyptian culture15 It is therefore not surprising that fromthe very beginning of their rule in Egypt the Ptolemaic rulers supported theEgyptian sacred complexes and initiated a gigantic programme of temple con-struction and decoration thus securing maat and the support of the nativepriesthood This policy is already attested on the Satrap Stele dating to 311when Ptolemy son of Lagos was not yet ruling over Egypt as king but only asgovernor for Alexander IV Ptolemy confirms a donation of land to the gods ofButo and therefore obtains their support and that of their priests (see furthersection 4)16

13 Assmann ldquoDer Tempel der aumlgyptischen Spaumltzeitrdquo 1414 According to Assmann Herrschaft und Heil 237 the Libyan (Twenty-second and Twenty-

third) and Kushite (Twenty-fifth) Dynasties were not perceived as foreign rulers only thePersian and Greek Vittmann Aumlgypten und die Fremden 141ndash142 considers Amyrtaios thesole ruler of theTwenty-eighthDynasty of Libyanorigin but calls the rulers of theTwenty-ninth and Thirtieth Dynasties the last native pharaohs except for ephemeral local kingsEven if some might regard the rulers of the Twenty-sixth and Twenty-eighth to Thirti-eth Dynasties as foreigners (see for example Jansen-Winkeln ldquoDie Fremdherrschaftenin Aumlgyptenrdquo 18) it is irrelevant to their roles as kings For usurpers foreign kings andtheir choice of legitimizing royal names in the Late Period see Kahl ldquoZu den Namenspaumltzeitlicher Usurpatorenrdquo

15 Baines ldquoTemples as Symbolsrdquo 216 231 See also Minas-Nerpel ldquoEgyptian Temples of theRoman Periodrdquo

16 For the text of the Satrap Stele see Sethe Hieroglyphische Urkunden der griechisch-roumlmi-schen Zeit (= Urk II) 11ndash22 For a photograph see Kamal Stegraveles ptoleacutemaiques et romaines


3 Temple Construction in the Thirtieth Dynasty

31 The Nile DeltaUnder the kings of the Twenty-sixth Dynasty many temples were constructedat Sais and elsewhere in the Delta17 but not much survives After the inter-ruption of the first Persian rule and the short-reigning Twenty-eighth andTwenty-ninth Dynasties the kings of the Thirtieth Dynasty took up templebuilding where the Twenty-sixth Dynasty had left off and started some grandnew projects many of which were completed or extended by the early Ptole-maic rulers

311 Sebennytos and Behbeit el-HagarSebennytos modern Samannud is in the centre of the Delta and was the cap-ital of the Twelfth nome of Lower Egypt (see Figure 51) As the home of theThirtieth Dynasty kings it was a powerful city where much temple construc-tion was undertaken but the site is heavily ruined A temple for Onuris mighthave existed there in the Saite period18 but the earliest surviving architecturalremains of a large temple date to the reign of Nectanebo II The majority ofthe dated reliefs bear the names of Philip Arrhidaios Alexander IV Ptolemy IIand Ptolemy X Alexander II19 Two naoi of Nectanebo II were dedicated toOnuris-Shu which together with other remains points to amajor temple of theThirtieth Dynasty that was further extended in theMacedonian and Ptolemaicperiods

In antiquity a legend developed around the completion of the temple ofOnuris-Shu Egyptian Per-Shu in Greek Phersos Onuris appeared in Nectane-borsquos dream complaining to Isis that his temple hadnot yet been finishedWhenNectanebo II woke up he immediately sent for the high priest and arranged forthe decoration to be completed This narrative of clear Egyptian origin is onlyattested in a Greek translation20 except for a few small Demotic fragments

II pl LVI (CGC 22182) New translation commentary and analysis Schaumlfer MakedonischePharaonen See also Ockingarsquos contribution in this volume

17 El-Sayed Documents relatifs agrave Sais18 Spencer ldquoTemple of Onuris-Shurdquo 719 Arnold Temples of the Last Pharaohs 127ndash128 140ndash141 158 Spencer ldquoTemple of Onuris-

Shurdquo 7ndash820 Attested on the Greek manuscript PLeiden I 396 see Gauger ldquoTraum des Nektanebosrdquo

189ndash219 esp 196 col III 6ndash15 ldquoIch [Onuris] bin nun auszligerhalb meines eigenen Tem-pels und das Werk im Allerheiligsten ist nur halbvollendet wegen der Schlechtigkeit desTempelvorstehers DieHerrscherin derGoumltter houmlrte dieWorte antwortete aber nichts Als

126 minas-nerpel

figure 51 Map of the Nile Deltaafter Arnold Temples of the Last Pharaohs fig XVI on p 20

which contain either some words of Nectaneborsquos dream or excerpts from thebeginning of its sequel21

Already in the time of Piye of the Twenty-fifth Dynasty Behbeit el-Hagarbegan to rival Sebennytos22 The once large but now completely ruined tem-ple of Isis and the family of Osiris at Behbeit el-Hagar is located just to the northof the powerful city Sebennytos (Figures 51 and 52)

The history of the place is poorly known but the first mention of Per-hebitis not earlier than the reign of Amenhotep III of the Eighteenth Dynasty23 TheIseum situated near the modern village was uniquely constructed entirely ofhard stone but earthquakes heavily damaged the site and agriculture as well

(Nektanebos) den Traum sah erwachte er und befahl eilend zu schicken nach Sebenny-tos zumHohenpriester und zumPropheten des Osnurisrdquo See also Huszlig DermakedonischeKoumlnig 133ndash134 (with further references) and below section 4 with note 102

21 Ryholt ldquoNectaneborsquos Dreamrdquo 222 225ndash22822 Bianchi ldquoSebennytosrdquo 76623 Favard-Meeks ldquoTemple of Behbeit el-Hagarardquo 102 and ldquoBehbeit el-Hagarrdquo 174


figure 52 Ruins of the Iseum at Behbeit el-Hagarphotograph author

as a cemetery gradually encroached on the precinct More than half of thearchaeological area has now been lost24 Inside the temenos wall which stillsurvives on three sides is a big mound of huge and small granite blocks soentangled that a plan is difficult to propose and must remain hypothetical25A dromos can be distinguished with one sphinx surviving It leads to a templefaccedilade followed by columned hall and the sanctuary of Isis a goddess whosecult was much promoted in the Thirtieth Dynasty Behind the sanctuary arechapels dedicated to cults of various aspects of Osiris The presence of a hugestaircase suggests that some of the Osirian chapels were located on the roof acharacteristic feature of late Egyptian temples

Since a block of this temple was reused in a temple dedicated to Isis andSerapis in Rome either at the time of its first foundation in 43BCE or whenrenovated under Domitian (AD81ndash96) the collapse of the temple at Behbeit

24 Favard-Meeks ldquoTemple of Behbeit el-Hagarardquo 102 and ldquoPresent State of the Site of Behbeitel-Hagarrdquo 31

25 For a plan with a hypothetical suggested layout see Favard-Meeks ldquoTemple of Behbeitel-Hagarardquo 102 105 fig 2

128 minas-nerpel

el-Hagar could not have taken place later than the first century AD26 It seemsthen to have been abandoned and used as a quarry

The temple had been dedicated under Nectanebo II but there is evidencethat its construction was planned already under Nectanebo I27 On the surviv-ing reliefs the names of Nectanebo II and those of Ptolemy II Philadelphosand Ptolemy III Euergetes are well attested but not of Ptolemy I Soter28 Thiscovers a period of construction and decoration of roughly 140 years from 360to 221BCE According to textual information it is fairly certain that the lastkings of the Twenty-sixth Dynasty undertook earlier temple construction atthis site29

312 BubastisAnother important location for the Thirtieth Dynasty is Bubastis a city inthe eastern Delta The ruins of the ancient town Per-Bastet now Tell Basta30where the goddess Bastet was venerated as described by Herodotus (II 138) areincreasingly threatened by the modern city of Zagazig Although monumentsfrom all ancient Egyptian periods are attested31 Bubastis probably gained itsgreatest importance in the Twenty-second Dynasty the Libyan period when itwas the royal residence The vast ruins of Tell Basta encompass today aroundseventy hectares dominated by the main temple roughly 220times70m littered

26 Favard-Meeks ldquoPresent State of the Site of Behbeit el-Hagarrdquo 3327 Favard-Meeks ldquoTemple of Behbeit el-Hagarardquo 103 For the constructions under Nectane-

bo II see Favard-Meeks ldquoLes constructions de Nectaneacutebo II agrave Behbeit el-Hagarardquo28 The name of Ptolemy I might have been attested somewhere else in the now destroyed

buildings Swinnen ldquoSur la politique religieuse de Ptoleacutemeacutee Ierrdquo 118 connected cautiouslya naos found at Mit Ghamr (see Habachi ldquoNotes on the Delta Hermopolisrdquo 458ndash461)inscribed with Soterrsquos cartouches with Behbeit el-Hagar although the findspot is rathercloser to Tell el-Moqdam (11km distance) ancient Leontopolis (Gomaagrave ldquoTell el-Moqdamrdquo351) see fig 51 for amap of theDelta The naos is dedicated to Isis andOsiris who are bothmistress and master of a place called Djehuty which might be connected to Behbeit el-Hagar (see Zivie ldquoA propos du toponyme ḏbtrdquo 206ndash207) Mit Ghamr is also not far fromHermopolis Parva which was the capital of the Fifteenth Lower Egyptian nome whereonly a mound of huge red and black granite blocks remains of the main temple of Thothwhich in the Thirtieth Dynasty probably extended or replaced the Twenty-sixth Dynastytemple (Arnold Temples of the Last Pharaohs 108)

29 Favard-Meeks ldquoTemple of Behbeit el-Hagarardquo 103 and ldquoBehbeit el-Hagarrdquo 17430 Leclegravere Villes de basse Eacutegypte vol 1 363ndash39131 Spencer A Naos of Nekhthorheb 39 Rosenow ldquoGreat Temple of Bastetrdquo 11 Leclegravere Villes

de basse Eacutegypte vol 1 117


figure 53 Ruins of the temple at Bubastisphotograph Daniela Rosenow

withmore than 4000 stone fragments mainly of red granite32 As at Behbeit el-Hagar the visitor to the temple today sees only a large area of blocks andbrokenmonuments due to an earthquakeprobably around2000years ago (Figure 53)

The late temple was begun in the Twenty-second Dynasty under Osorkon Iand extended significantly under Osorkon II33 with further work being under-taken byNectanebo II In his reign a separate hall of roughly 60times60mwas con-structed in the westernmost area where a number of shrines were situated34Fragments of at least eight huge naoi for secondary deities were arrangedaround the red granite naos of Bastet

32 Tietze ldquoNeues Exemplar des Kanopus-Dekretsrdquo 3 Since 1991 archaeological and epi-graphic fieldworkhas beenundertakenby theTell Basta Project which is a jointmission oftheUniversity of PotsdamGermany the Egyptian SupremeCouncil and the Egypt Explo-ration Society

33 Spencer A Naos of Nekhthorheb 40 Arnold Temples of the Last Pharaohs 12934 Rosenow Das Tempelhaus des Groszligen Bastet-Tempels Rosenow ldquoGreat Temple of Bastetrdquo

12 ldquoNekhethorheb Templerdquo 43 See plan in Spencer A Naos of Nekhthorheb 91 figs 22ndash23 At present it is not known exactly how the Thirtieth Dynasty building related to or

130 minas-nerpel

In 2004 an exciting discovery was made a fragment of a stele comprisinga duplicate of the Canopus decree dating to year 9 of Ptolemy III Euergetes I(238) was found in situ in the entrance area of the Bubastis temple which datesto the reign of Osorkon II35 It was located around 2mnorth of themain axis ofthe temple not far from statues of Osorkon II and his queen The fragment ofblack granite is around 1m high 84cmwide and 65cm thick The fact that thisdecreewasdiscoveredhere indicates that in the third century BCE the templeofBastet still belonged to the sanctuaries of the first three categories mentionedin the last line of each version of the text36 So far no other trace of Ptolemaicactivity has been found at Bubastis Furthermore this is the first time that theexact original location within a temple of one of the synodal decrees has beenestablished

313 Saft el-HennaNot far from Bubastis roughly 10km east of Zagazig Saft el-Henna is locatedancient Per-SopduwhereNectanebo I hadbegun a temple of which only tracessurvive The presence of a stele of Ptolemy II suggests that the site was stillimportant in the Ptolemaic Period37 The temple was dedicated to the falcon-god Sopdu the guardian of Egyptrsquos eastern borders Again several monolithicnaoi are known to come from this location all dating to Nectanebo I38

A naos is the ritual heart of a temple a shrine in the most sacred locationin which the image of the principal deity was placedmdashor those of further godsalso venerated there Because it is monolithic hard stone it formed the mostpowerful level of protection39 of the (wooden) statue within This might be

was incorporated into the Twenty-second Dynasty structures The remains could be seenas replacing or extending an existing building or as a completely new temple (Spencer ANaosof Nekhthorheb 39ndash42 Rosenow ldquoNektanebos-Tempelrdquo ldquoSanctuairedeNectanebo IIrdquoand ldquoNekhethorheb Templerdquo)

35 See Tietze et al ldquoEin neues Exemplar des Kanopus-Dekretsrdquo 1ndash29 for an archaeologicalreport on the find and the edition of the texts

36 Pfeiffer Dekret von Kanopos 65 194ndash19737 Arnold Temples of the Last Pharaohs 13038 Gomaagrave ldquoSaft el-Hennardquo 351ndash352 Virenque ldquoLes quatre Naos de Saft el-Hennehrdquo 19ndash28

First the so-called naos of Sopdu (CGC 70021) second the naos found in el-Arish butoriginally from Saft el-Henna now in the Ismailia Museum (no 2248) third fragments ofa naos of Shu found in several places in the Delta including site T at Abuqir by Goddioand his team now in the Louvre D 37 and in Alexandria JE 25774 (see Leitz AltaumlgyptischeSternuhren 3ndash57 Goddio and Clauss Egyptrsquos Sunken Treasures no 31ndash34 pp 46ndash53 Seethe edition in von Bomhard Naos of the Decades) and fourth a naos of Tefnut

39 Spencer A Naos of Nekhthorheb 50 Virenque ldquoLes quatre Naos de Saft el-Hennehrdquo 27calls these naoi from Saft el-Henna ldquofortresses miniaturerdquo


especially true in Saft el-Hennawhichwas in the first line of any possible Asianinvasion and thus strategically vital The Delta in particular needed to be rein-forced against Persian attacks and this might also be a reason why the easternDelta received so much attention under the Thirtieth Dynasty if the view ofstrategic support is correct One might also view the monolithic naoi as piecesof extravagant expenditure on the gods rather than ldquostrategicrdquo buildings whichwere specifically safeguarded because of worries about security

Naoi not only displayed the theology of a specific temple their inscriptionsalso legitimized the Thirtieth Dynasty rulers connecting them to the gods40This legitimation was of utmost importance in a period when Egypt was sooften threatened by Persian invasions In addition Nectanebo I had usurpedthe throne of Egypt and needed to prove his legitimacy which is one probablereason behind his vast building programme41 A political meaning can thus beattributed to the religious texts on the naoi The shrines of Saft el-Henna arecultic instruments intended to protect the kings magically and to legitimizetheir rule against obstacles whether political or metaphysical This profusionof monolithic naoi is not attested from earlier periods and seems to be specificto the Thirtieth Dynasty42

314 Naukratis and Thonis-HerakleionThe emporium of Naukratis situated on the east bank of the now vanishedCanopic branch of the Nile some 80km south-east of Alexandria and around15km from Sais was established in the late seventh century BCE and was inexistence until at least the seventh century AD43 It functioned as the port of theTwenty-sixth Dynasty royal city of Sais and remained a busy centre of industry

40 Schneider ldquoMythos und Zeitgeschichterdquo 207ndash242 in the case of the el-Arish naos the kingwas connected to Shu and Geb

41 See Schneider ldquoMythos und Zeitgeschichterdquo 207ndash242 (esp 242) and Rondot ldquoUnemono-graphie bubastiterdquo 249ndash270 (esp 270) who have put this in context in their examinationsof naoi from Saft el-Henna and Bubastis

42 Spencer A Naos of Nekhthorheb 64ndash65 appendix 4 provides a list of Thirtieth Dynastytemple naoi altogether thirty-six of which two thirds (twenty-four) come from the Deltaone third (twelve) from Bubastis alone Klotz ldquoNaos of Nectanebo Irdquo adds another one ofNectanebo I from Sohag Gabra ldquoEin vergessener Naos Nektanebos Irdquo yet a further onenow housed in Old Cairo in the entry area of the Coptic Museum See Thiers ldquoNaos dePtoleacutemeacutee II Philadelpherdquo 259ndash265 for a list of monolithic royal naoi from Pepi I to theRoman period

43 AncientNaukratis has been a focus of interdisciplinary research at the BritishMuseum forseveral years see Thomas and Villing ldquoNaukratis revisited 2012rdquo 81ndash125 While Naukratiswas chosen as a trade centre for the Greeks in Egypt an Egyptian townmust have already

132 minas-nerpel

and a thriving emporium as well as a locus of cross-cultural exchange formuchof its history44 In the Thirtieth Dynasty it was the chief Greek town in Egyptand a flourishing trading post

Naukratis contained several temples of Greek gods as well as amonumentalEgyptian temple but hardly anything can be seen there today45 The NaukratisStele of Nectanebo I now in the Egyptian Museum in Cairo was found 1899 inthe temple precinct It is a round-topped finely carved stele of black granitealmost 2m high and 88cm wide46 In the lunette under the winged sun diskNectanebo I is shown presenting offerings to the enthroned goddess Neith intwo almost symmetrical scenes47 Below is the inscription in fourteen columnsdated to the kingrsquos year 1 (380BCE)48 The stelersquosmain pragmatic content is thatthe kingrsquos decree granted the temple one-tenth of the revenue derived from theseaborne imports that were subjected to custom tax plus one-tenth of the rev-enue obtained from the tax on locallymanufactured goods49 By dedicating thestele with the decree inscribed the perpetual donation is consecrated and thekingrsquos devotion to the goddess displayed

In 2000 Franck Goddiorsquos underwater mission succeeded in identifying thesite of Thonis-Herakleion in the Bay of Abukir not only the city itself but alsothe harbour and the main Egyptian temple of Amun-Gereb In May 2001 God-diorsquos team discovered at Thonis-Herakleion a stele of Nectanebo I a perfectduplicate of the Naukratis Stele50 Not only the material and dimensions butalso the images and the texts are identical except for one difference the nameof the city where the stelaemdashand hence the decree of Saismdashshould be placedwas changed providing the full original designation of Thonis-Herakleion51The composition and excellent craftsmanship of the stelae demonstrate that

existed there see Leclegravere Villes de basse Eacutegypte vol 1 117 Yoyotte ldquoLrsquoAmon de Naukratisrdquo129ndash136 Yoyotte Histoire geacuteographie et religion de lrsquoEacutegypte ancienne esp chapters 45ndash47

44 Pfeiffer ldquoNaukratisHeracleion-Thonis andAlexandriardquo For the economicbackground seeMoumlller Naukratis

45 Spencer ldquoEgyptian Temple and Settlement at Naukratisrdquo 31ndash4346 For the dimension and the summary of the find circumstances see von Bomhard Decree

of Saiumls 5ndash7 1547 See von Bomhard Decree of Saiumls 16ndash21 (figs 22ndash29) 29ndash47 for an analysis of the iconog-

raphy and its symbolism48 For the translations see the new edition by von Bomhard Decree of Saiumls See also Licht-

heim Ancient Egyptian Literature III 86ndash8949 Col 8ndash12 see von Bomhard Decree of Saiumls 72ndash8450 For a comparative study of both stelae and an analysis of both the inscriptions and the

iconography see von Bomhard Decree of Saiumls51 Col 13ndash14 see von Bomhard Decree of Saiumls 86ndash88 Yoyotte ldquoLe second affichagerdquo 320


they were produced by one of the best workshops of the period The sophisti-cated language and the allusions to the mythical role and importance of Neithsuggest that a priest of her temple at Sais probably drafted the text The tem-ple depended on income fromNaukratis andThonis and their trade since theywereEgyptrsquosmain tradingposts on theMediterranean at that timeNectanebo Ipromulgated the decree in his first year of reign specifying his decision toincrease the share of royal revenues which was allocated to the temple ofNeith at Sais After the foundation of Alexandria and the subsequent devel-opment of its port which transformed the Mediterranean metropolis into thegreatest emporium of the ancient world Thonis-Herakleion declined but thetrade and business of the Greeks of Naukratis continued to increase under thePtolemies52

The discovery of the Thonis and the Naukratis Stelae is quite extraordinarytwo identical versions of the same decree connecting two cities preservedintact on both sites both copies found in situwhere they had been set up in theThirtieth Dynasty They provide important insights not only into the templesand their economic significance but also into the communication between thepharaoh and the temple the state and its subjects the divine and the humanworld The audience was not the Greek-speaking population of the sites atNaukratis and Thonis Thus it was not necessary to create bilingual decrees atleast for this purpose Both stelae were set up to render the royal decree sacredand to immortalizeNectaneborsquos recognition by ldquohismotherrdquo the goddessNeithso that she would protect his kingship The king repays her by caring for hertemples and cults The Sais decree captures the building work of Nectanebo Iand the gift in return by the gods of Egypt skilfully53

Just-hearted on the path of god he [Nectanebo I] is the one who buildstheir54 temples the onewho perfects their wall who supplies the offeringtablet who multiplies the requirements of the rites who procures obla-tion of all kind Unique god of multiple qualities it is for him that work

52 Von Bomhard Decree of Saiumls 114 (with further references)53 Decree of Sais col 5ndash6 translation by von Bomhard Decree of Saiumls 66ndash6854 The singular ldquogodrdquo (wꜣt nṯr ldquopath of godrdquo) is followed by a plural resumptive pronoun

(ḥwwt=sn ldquotheir templesrdquo) The alteration of singular and plural is a very interesting pointand should be noted in discussions whether there was a single god See for example Ass-mannMoses the Egyptian 168ndash207 especially his chapter ldquoConceiving theOne inAncientEgyptian Traditionrdquo and Baines ldquoPresenting and Discussing Deitiesrdquo (with further refer-ences)

134 minas-nerpel

the rays of the disk it is to him that the mountains offer what they con-tain that the sea gives its flow hellip

32 HeliopolisThe ancient site of Heliopolis city of the sun-god and one of the most impor-tant religious and intellectual centres of ancient Egypt is located at the north-eastern edge of Cairo Occupied since predynastic times with extensive build-ing programmes during the dynastic periods especially the Middle and NewKingdoms it is almost completely destroyed today Its landscape and archi-tectural layout is often based on decontextualized objects since the temenoswas robbed of its monuments in the later periods of ancient Egyptian historyin order to embellish other places such as Alexandria other buildings weresubsequently reused for the construction of medieval Cairo The growingmod-ern suburbs of Matariya Ain Shams and Arab el-Hisn with their house con-structions and modern garbage dumps threaten most of the remaining struc-tures of ancient Heliopolis A circular structure in the eastern section of thetemenos about 400m in diameter is the most remarkable remain within thetemple areaThe function date andarchitectural context of the so-called ldquoHighSand of Heliopolisrdquo is unclear and under investigation of an Egyptian-Germanarchaeological mission55

The temple area of Heliopolis was enclosed by two parallel courses of mudbrick walls of different dates measuring about 1100m east to west and 900mnorth to south According to Dietrich Raue the outer wall dates to the Thirti-eth Dynasty The original height of no less than 20m is estimated on the basisof contemporary constructions at Karnak and Elkab (see below 33 and 34)56In spring 2015 the Egyptian-German mission discovered several basalt blocksdepicting a geographic procession which once belonged to the soubassementdecoration of a hitherto unknown temple of Nectanebo I57 Considering the

55 SeeAshmawyandRaue ldquoTheTempleof Heliopolis Excavations 2012ndash14rdquo 8ndash11 and ldquoReporton theWork of the Egyptian-GermanMission atMatariyaHeliopolis in Spring 2012rdquo Ash-mawy Beiersdorf andRaue ldquoTheThirtiethDynasty in theTemple of Heliopolisrdquo 13ndash16 ForHeliopolis in general see also Raue Heliopolis und das Haus des Re

56 Ashmawy et al ldquoReport on the Work of the Egyptian-German Mission at MatariyaHeliopolis in Spring 2014rdquo 19ndash21 (with figs 13ndash15) section 4 ldquoThe Enclosure Walls ofHeliopolisrdquo I am very grateful to D Raue for sharing his information on Heliopolis withme in May 2015

57 Ashmawy Beiersdorf and Raue ldquoReport on theWork of the Egyptian-GermanMission atMatariya Heliopolis in Spring 2015rdquo 5ndash6 (with fig 5)


importance of Heliopolis as a cult centre it does not surprise that the first kingof the Thirtieth Dynasty devoted considerable architectural work to this site

33 The Theban AreaIn the Theban area large numbers of attestations of the Thirtieth Dynasty sur-vive58 so that I can only mention a few sites The Bucheum for example wascreated under Nectanebo II attesting to support of the animal cults whichbecame increasingly popular from the Late Period onwards (see also Tuna el-Gebel section 4) From the reign of the last native pharaoh until AD340 forclose to 700 years the Buchis bulls a manifestation of Montu were buried atArmant59

A major undertaking under Nectanebo I was to link the two temple com-plexes of Luxor and Karnak with a sacred avenue60 It wasmdashbesides the unfin-ished first pylon of Karnak which is very likely to be a Thirtieth Dynasty struc-ture61mdashthe largest project in Thebes by a Thirtieth Dynasty king and has beenalmost fully excavated in recent years The paved middle part of the road is 5ndash6m wide and 2km long Both sides are lined by sphinxes facing the middle ofthe road (fig 55)

Many sphinx statues from the reign of Nectanebo I have been unearthed sofar numbering farmore than a thousand In addition the processional waywasbordered on the east and west by brick walls of which almost nothing is leftOn the base of one of the sphinxes in the western row the processional avenueis described ldquoHe [Nectanebo I] built a beautiful road for his father Amun bor-dered by walls planted with trees and decorated with flowersrdquo62

58 Arnold Temples of the Last Pharaohs 115ndash119 131ndash13359 Mond and Myers Bucheum Goldbrunner Buchis For the Buchis Stele from year 9 of

Nectanebo II see Mond and Myers Bucheum III pl xxxvii1 For the animal cults underAlexander the Great also that of Buchis see Bosch-Puche ldquoAlejandro Magno y los cul-tos a animalesrdquo For the latest attested Buchis stele see Mond and Myers Bucheum IIIpl xlvi20 (Stele of anunknownemperor) for thedateof the stele seeHoumllbl Altaumlgypten imRoumlmischenReich II 44ndash45 and fig 35 the bull died in year ldquo57 of Diocletianrdquo (340CE underConstantius II Diocletiandied in 313) For further details of the latest attestedBuchis stelesee Grenier ldquoRemarques sur les datations et titulaturesrdquo 273ndash276

60 Abd el-Razik Darstellungen und Texte Cabrol Les voies processionnelles 35ndash37 145ndash149283ndash296

61 Spencer A Naos of Nekhthorheb 4962 Translation by Abd el-Razik Darstellungen und Texte 157 On a further sphinx Abd el-

Razik Darstellungen und Texte 157 read ldquohellip a road which he built for his father Amun tocelebrate the beautiful feast of procession in Ipt-Rst (Luxor) No roadmore beautiful hasever existed beforerdquo

136 minas-nerpel

figure 54 Map of upper Egyptafter Arnold Temples of the Last Pharaohs fig XVIII onp 22


figure 55 Sphinx avenue linking the temples of Luxor and Karnakphotograph Troy L Sagrillo

Other sacred avenues in the Theban area and in Egypt were embellishedor renovated during the Thirtieth Dynasty63 The avenue between Luxor andThebes in particular provides an important glimpse of the interaction betweensacred spaces and urban development The brick walls physically separatedsacred and profane areas This separation was also emphasized by the hugenew brick enclosure wall around the complex of Amun at Karnak64

34 ElkabAs is evident in Heliopolis and Karnak another typical project of the ThirtiethDynasty was to construct new enclosure walls that created significantly largersacred areas Spencer has identified these as the ldquomost lasting legacy of the 30thDynasty construction workrdquo65 A good example is the enclosure wall at Elkab(fig 56) the present-day nameof the ancient Egyptian townof the vulture god-dessNekhbet on the east bank of theNile about 15kmnorth of Edfuwhichhadbeen inhabited since prehistory Together withWadjit of Lower Egypt Nekhbet

63 Spencer A Naos of Nekhthorheb 4964 Arnold Temples of the Last Pharaohs 115 Spencer A Naos of Nekhthorheb 4965 Spencer A Naos of Nekhthorheb 49

138 minas-nerpel

figure 56 Elkab enclosure wallphotograph author

was the tutelary goddess of Egyptian kings and regarded as the Upper Egyptiangoddess par excellence

Elkab has a vast almost square enclosurewall of 550times550m By surroundingthe area with a massive brick wall a significantly larger sacred space was cre-ated The purpose of this enclosure cannot yet be identified clearly It couldhave been a temple or even a town wall since the temple complex withinit was itself provided with two further brick enclosure walls66 According toSpencer the majority of temple enclosures should be interpreted as sacredstructures with no practical defence purpose intended at the time of con-struction They should be seen as monumental reaffirmations of sacred spaceextended beyond anything encountered before67 This is yet another innova-tion of the Thirtieth Dynasty later followed in the planning of Graeco-Roman

66 Depuydt Archaeological-topographical Surveying of Elkab map ldquoElkabrdquo See also RondotldquoUne monographie bubastiterdquo 270

67 Spencer ANaos of Nekhthorheb 50 DeMeulenaere ldquoUn geacuteneacuteral du Deltardquo 209 suggestedthat the great enclosure wall was a defence structure ordered by Nectanebo II against fur-ther Persian invasions which seems quite unlikely


temples Numerous bark stations and small temples in the vicinity of the hugeenclosure wall suggest intense processional activities similar to those betweenLuxor and Karnak as well as other places in the Theban area68

Within the enclosure wall adjacent to a New Kingdom temple to Sobek atemple for Nekhbet had been built during the reigns of Darius I of the firstPersian Period and Hakoris of the Twenty-ninth Dynasty reusing blocks fromstructures of the New Kingdom and later69 Nectanebo I and II restored andembellished the temple During the Thirtieth Dynasty a birth house was alsoadded focusing on Nekhbetrsquos character as a goddess who assisted at divineand royal births70 Since Elkabwas the sanctuary of the Upper Egyptian crownthis action exemplifies the desire to establish the legitimacy of the ThirtiethDynasty

Birth houses (also known asmammisis) like that at Elkab were added to lateEgyptian temples as subsidiary buildings dedicated to the divine child of alocal triad71 They were often erected in front of and facing the main templeand scenes that relate to the birth and nurturing of the child god dominatetheir decoration Since the divine child was identified with the king in a num-ber of aspects birth houses were probably also places devoted to the cult ofthe living ruler The oldest surviving securely identified birth house was builtunder Nectanebo I at Dendera72 According to Arnold there are slightly earlierexamples dating to the Twenty-ninth Dynasty73 for example the birth house ofHarpara at the east side of the Amun-Ra-Montu temple at Karnak which wasbegun in the reign of Nepherites I and enlargedunderHakoris andNectanebo IThis finding supports Spencerrsquos opinion that much of the cultural renaissancethat is attested for the Thirtieth Dynasty may continue trends of the previousdynasty74

68 Arnold Temples of the Last Pharaohs 13469 Limme ldquoElkabrdquo 46870 Arnold Temples of the Last Pharaohs 119 133 pl XII on p 16 Spencer A Naos of Nekhtho-

rheb 4871 For an overview of the birth houses see Arnold Temples of the Last Pharaohs 285ndash288

Kockelmann ldquoBirth house (Mammisi)rdquo72 Arnold Temples of the Last Pharaohs 115 28573 Daumas Les mammisis 54 Arnold Temples of the Last Pharaohs 101ndash103 288 There may

also have been simple forerunners of this temple type dating to the Ramesside period butthey are lost (Arnold Temples of the Last Pharaohs 286) Birth houses are attested in textsof the end of the New Kingdom from Abydos and Thebes (de Meulenaere ldquoIsis et Moutdu Mammisirdquo)


140 minas-nerpel

It seems thus that the last native dynasties put emphasis on the legitimationderived from birth houses and this was further pursued under the PtolemiesUnder Nectanebo I these edifices were rather straightforward in design morelike a shrinewith a forecourt and an access path Under the Ptolemies this tem-ple type was enlarged and its architectural features further developed so thatthe birth houses turned into proper temples suitable for a daily cult ritual75gaining even more importance

35 ElephantineThe island of Elephantine is situated in the Nile opposite the city of Aswanancient Syene just north of the first cataract At the south-east corner of theisland a very large new temple for the ram god Khnum enclosed by a templewall was built under Nectanebo II replacing a predecessor of the New King-dom with Twenty-sixth Dynasty additions76 Although the temple is ruinedand its remains might appear rather modest today much information aboutit has been extracted through careful excavation and recording In 1960 Rickepublished a first study and in 1999 Niederberger produced a more detailedarchaeological and architectural presentation77

The situation on Elephantine island is quite unique Under the last nativepharaoh the temple area was expanded to the north-west beyond the NewKingdomKhnum temple where the temple of Yahweh in 410 destroyed underDarius II had been located78 Because the temple was considerably larger thanits predecessor housing areas inhabited by ethnic Aramaeans at the rear ofthe temple were levelled79 As Spencer points out in his review of Nieder-bergerrsquos study it is rare that a stone temple reveals the plan and elements ofwall decoration and architecture with a clear visible relationship to the adja-cent urban environment80 This is particularly true of the Late Period since

75 Daumas Les mammisis 86 9676 Arnold Temples of the Last Pharaohs 13477 Ricke Tempel Nektanebosrsquo II also included a short discussion of the Thirtieth Dynasty

changes at the temple of Satet on Elephantine Niederberger Der Chnumtempel 113ndash137sets this structure in the wider context of temple buildings at the Late andGraeco-Romanperiods Jenni Dekoration des Chnumtempels 87ndash100 publishes the decoration of theKhnum temple including a list of all architectural monuments dating to the reign ofNectanebo II See Spencer ANaos of Nekhthorheb 47ndash52 for a discussion of temple build-ing in Egypt in the Thirtieth Dynasty

78 Niederberger Der Chnumtempel 1379 Spencer Review of Niederberger 274 2006a 48 See Niederberger Der Chnumtempel 108

Abb 108 for the foundation of the temple80 Spencer Review of Niederberger 273


significant temples of the time are often overlaid by structures of the PtolemaicandRomanperiods Elephantine is one of very few siteswhere temple and con-temporary settlement have been excavatedwithmodern expertise In additionthe temple of Khnum is the only Thirtieth Dynasty temple whose ground plancan be more or less established from preserved foundations It is also the onlytemple of this period for which an internal plan of rooms can be reconstructed

Fragments of three Thirtieth Dynasty naoi were recovered within the tem-ple81 Like so many temples of the last native dynasty the temple of Khnumwas not finished before the second Persian period The grand main portalstill standing today was therefore decorated under Alexander IV Alexanderthe Greatrsquos son (see section 4) and the temple was further extended underPtolemaic and Roman rule exemplifying the importance of the region in theseperiods Syene was probably the important place and Elephantine the sacredarea82 According to Niederberger the Iseum at Behbeit el-Hagar in the Delta(section 311 above) had a similar ground plan Because of the similarities ofthe two temples which are located at the opposite ends of Egypt he postulatesthe same master plan for both temples83 However Elephantine was a provin-cial location so was Behbeit el-Hagar but still near Sais We can assume thatthemaster plans if they existed were devised in the cultural centre whichwasin the north The most creative regions must have been in the Delta and hugetemple complexes like Behbeit el-Hagar demonstrate this In addition we donot have enough evidence to be sure of what a typical ThirtiethDynasty templelooked like We only have Behbeit el-Hagar and Elephantine but the plan forthe Delta temple is very hypothetical84 Therefore caution is required in posit-ing a typical temple plan of the Thirtieth Dynasty since there are not sufficientsurviving examples

From the layout of the Khnum temple we can extract two specific architec-tural features for the Thirtieth Dynasty First an ambulatory was introducedaround the sanctuary a feature that continued in the temples of the Graeco-Roman period Second the open-air room associated with Re was transformedto a small solar or NewYearrsquos court fromwhich the wabet chapel or ldquopure hallrdquoan elevated room is reached by steps Here the cult image of the main deity

81 Niederberger Der Chnumtempel 86ndash9182 Minas ldquoDie Dekorationstaumltigkeitrdquo Teil 2 100ndash102 Coppens Wabet 19 Arnold Temples of

the Last Pharaohs 134 Under Augustus further extensions were added including a mon-umental platform (Houmllbl Altaumlgypten im Roumlmischen Reich II 29ndash33)

83 Niederberger Der Chnumtempel 11884 Spencer Review of Niederberger 276ndash277 See also YoyotteHistoire geacuteographie et religion

de lrsquoEacutegypte ancienne esp chapters 34 and 46

142 minas-nerpel

of the temple was set down and clothed In the court some of the New Yearrsquosoffering took place before the priests carried the cult image up to the roof viathe staircases Predecessors of the wabet and the New Yearrsquos court are found inthe solar courts of New Kingdom cult temples The wabet as reconstructed forthe Khnum temple represents the earliest known example that had an adjoin-ing court85

The main cult axis developed already in the later New Kingdom but it ischaracteristic of the temples from the Thirtieth Dynasty onwards86 The lastnative ruler thus not only continued traditions but also developed somethingnew a standardized conception of temple building on which those of theGraeco-Roman period were based87

In this context composite capitals should be mentioned since these tooare distinctive features of temples constructed or extended from the ThirtiethDynasty until the Roman period88 Traditionally the capitals of columns in anyone rowwere uniform but from theThirtieth Dynasty onwards different capi-tal types were combined according to rules of axial correspondence89 In 2009Fauerbach devoted a study to the creation of composite capitals in the Ptole-maic period floral capitals were not based on grids but on complex drawingsthat were divided to show both plan and elevation She describes the five stepsfor creating such capitals90 and she is able to prove fromdrawings on the pylonof Edfu temple that the Egyptians of the second century BCEwere familiarwiththe use of scale drawings

36 PhilaePhilae an island in the Nile at the south end of the first Nile cataract wassacred to Isis In the 1970s the architectural structures of the original islandwere moved to their present location on the island of Agilkia when Philae wasbecoming permanently flooded by the construction of the Aswan High Dam91

85 According to CoppensWabet 221 the complex of wabet and court is situated at the end ofa development that started at least a millennium earlier The New Kingdom solar courtsseem to be the simpler forerunners of this structure

86 Niederberger Der Chnumtempel 113ndash114 12187 Assmann ldquoDer Tempel der aumlgyptischen Spaumltzeitrdquo 10ndash11 (and Moses the Egyptian 179)

states that the late Egyptian temples follow in fact a ldquoeinheitlichen Baugedanken dheinem kanonischen Planrdquo much more closely than the temples of the earlier periods

88 Phillips Columns of Egypt 16189 For example Arnold Temples of the Last Pharaohs 149 McKenzie Architecture of Alexan-

dria and Egypt 122ndash13290 Fauerbach ldquoCreation of an Egyptian Capitalrdquo 11191 Winter ldquoPhilaerdquo 1022ndash1028 Locher Topographie und Geschichte 121ndash158 provides a sum-

mary of the topography and history of Philae and a useful bibliography


The temple of Isis and its associated structures are the dominant monumentson the island Philaersquos history before the Thirtieth Dynasty is hardly known92the extant structures aremainlyGraeco-Romanandbelong to thepolicy of pro-moting Isis93

Under Nectanebo I a project was developed to enlarge the sanctuary of Isisat Philaewhose cult seemed tohave gained importance in all of Egypt as is alsoshown by the Iseum of Behbeit el-Hagar in the Delta (see above section 311)A gate had been erected which is now placed in the first pylon of the temple ofIsis initiated under Ptolemy II Philadelphos and replacing an earlier temple94Originally the gatewaywas set in a brick enclosurewall it is not connectedwiththe pylonrsquos two towers which were probably built under Ptolemy VI Philome-tor95 The precise extent of the sacred enclosure under Nectanebo I remainsunknown since later buildings obliterated all earlier traces In contrast to thetemple of Isis at Behbeit el-Hagar where the existing temple of the ThirtiethDynasty was expanded and decorated under Ptolemy II and Ptolemy III thetemple of Isis at Philae built under Ptolemy II was a new and integrally plannedarchitectural unit

The main building of the Thirtieth Dynasty at Philae is a 76times115m kiosknow located at the south end of the island which originally stood at a differentplace It stands on a platform and consists of a rectangle of four by six columnsTheir capitals display a combination of Hathor and composite floral capitals(fig 57)

The kiosk seems to have been moved in the mid-second century BCE andturned 180 degrees as has been established from details of its decoration96Shape and location seem to suggest that the building served in its new posi-

92 Blocks of Taharqa of the Twenty-fifth Dynasty have been found but a kiosk built underPsammetik II of the Twenty-sixth Dynasty is the oldest building that certainly belongs toPhilae (Haeny ldquoArchitectural History of Philaerdquo 201ndash202)

93 For the hymns to Isis in her temple at Philae see Žabkar Hymns to Isis See also FissololdquoIsis de Philaerdquo Arsinoe II shared as a synnaos thea the temple with Isis and participatedin her veneration As a living and deceased queen Arsinoe II provided a vital image forthe Ptolemaic dynasty offering legitimacy for herself her brother-husband Ptolemy IIand their successors through iconographic and textual media She was given epithets thatwere used not only for later Ptolemaic queens but also for Isis Arsinoersquos connection withIsis might well have contributed to the decision to enlarge the temple at Philae consider-ably under Ptolemy II For an analysis see Minas-Nerpel ldquoPtolemaic Queens as Ritualistsand Recipients of Cults The Cases of Arsinoe II and Berenike IIrdquo (esp section 2)

94 Winter ldquoPhilaerdquo 1022 (J) Vassilika Ptolemaic Philae 25ndash2795 Minas ldquoDie Dekorationstaumltigkeitrdquo Teil 2 102ndash10396 Winter ldquoPhilaerdquo 1022 (A) Haeny ldquoArchitectural History of Philaerdquo 204ndash206 224

144 minas-nerpel

figure 57 Philae kiosk of Nectanebo Iphotograph author

tion as a way station but according to Arnold it previously could have beenthe ambulatory of a birth house97 This interpretation seems unlikely thoughsince such a structure would have been very small

Niederberger connects the construction programmes of Elephantine andPhilae and concludes that both the Nectanebos had to concentrate on one ofthe two sites at the expense of the other for kings like them residing in theDelta would not have had the means to conduct two large projects98 This isin his eyes the reason why the Khnum temple could not have been plannedunder Nectanebo I Indeed his cartouches are not preserved but this idea israther perplexing as Spencer also points out since evidence from elsewhere inEgypt suggests that temples were built at sites near to one another under theThirtieth Dynasty99

97 Arnold Temples of the Last Pharaohs 11998 Niederberger Der Chnumtempel 1499 Spencer Review of Niederberger 276 In addition Nectanebo I erected a gate on Elephan-

tine that was an extension to the New Kingdom structure (Arnold Temples of the LastPharaohs 119)


4 Temple Construction and Decoration from Alexander to Ptolemy ISoter

No traces of temple building during the second Persian period are currentlyknown and this is not surprising since in times of such turmoil no templewall was decorated This situation changed under Alexander the Great whorealized the importance of maintaining the integration of ldquochurch and staterdquoWith his alleged coronation as pharaoh atMemphis100 and subsequent consul-tation of the oracle in Siwa Oasis in theWestern Desert where he was declaredthe son of Zeus-Ammon Alexander demonstrated that he was willing to actas pharaoh and be legitimized by Egyptian godsmdashuseful for someone whowasabout to conquer theworld A legitimate pharaohhad to care for Egypt by fight-ing against its enemies and by providing temples and cults for the gods and hefulfilled these tasks which benefited those whose service he required that isthe Egyptian elite

In addition a legendary link to Nectanebo II was established in the Alexan-der Romance a popular novel of the Hellenistic world Alexander the Great isconnected with his ldquorealrdquo father the last native pharaoh of Egypt Nectanebo IIis described as a powerfulmagicianwho causedOlympias Alexanderrsquosmotherto believe that she had been impregnated by the Egyptian god Amun101 A fur-ther narrative ldquoNectaneborsquos Dreamrdquo was most probably also translated intoGreek from an Egyptian original This prophecy concerning the demise ofEgyptrsquos last native pharaoh was used as nationalistic propaganda against thePersian rulers who conquered Egypt so that it can be assumed that the authorcame from the Egyptian elite or priesthood Its sequel as Ryholt states wasused in favour of Alexander the Great which underlines the sophisticated useof political propaganda102

100 Winter ldquoAlexander der Groszlige als Pharaordquo 205ndash207 provides an overview of the evidenceContra Burstein ldquoPharaoh Alexanderrdquo who does not believe that Alexander was crownedin Egypt See also Pfeiffer ldquoAlexander der Groszlige in Aumlgyptenrdquo For a discussion of Alexan-der as pharaoh and the attestations of his royal titulary see Bosch-Puche ldquoEgyptian RoyalTitularyrdquo I and II (hieroglyphic sources) Bosch-Puche and Moje ldquoAlexander the GreatrsquosNamerdquo (contemporary demotic sources)

101 For the context of the Graeco-Egyptian Alexander Romance and its Egyptian origins ofAlexanderrsquos birth legend seeHoffmann ldquoDer Trug des Nektanebosrdquo 165ndash166 348ndash349 Fora translation and analysis of the Greek version see Dowden ldquoPseudo-Callisthenesrdquo andJasnow ldquoGreek Alexander Romancerdquo

102 Ryholt ldquoNectaneborsquos Dreamrdquo For the Greek version of Nectaneborsquos Dream see Gauger

146 minas-nerpel

Alexanderwas perceived andpromoted as the liberator from the Persians Inhis reign Egyptian temples in the Delta Hermopolis Magna the Theban areaand Baharia Oasis were extended and embellished103 Particularly significantis the bark sanctuary built within the Luxor temple dedicated to the state godAmun104 Luxor temple was of utmost importance for the ideology of kingshipDuring the Opet festival at Luxor the king was worshiped as the living royalka the chief earthly manifestation of the creator god As a godrsquos son Alexan-der was himself a god His ldquovisible activities in the human world had invisiblecounterparts in the divine world and his ritual actions had important conse-quences for the two parallel interconnected realmsrdquo105 It is very significantthat Alexander decided no doubt on advice from the priests to rebuild a barkshrine in precisely this temple He was thus connected with the great nativerulers of Egypt and their ka by renovating the divine temple of Luxor106 Theancestral ka of the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Dynasty kings was reborn inAlexander and he was associated once more with Amun first in his Libyanform of Ammon in Siwa nowwith Amun-Re the all-powerful Creator and kingof gods

Under Alexanderrsquos direct successors his brother Philip Arrhidaios (323ndash317)and his son Alexander IV (317ndash310) Egyptian temples continued to be deco-rated107 Work accomplished under them includes the decoration of the barksanctuary of Philip Arrhidaios in Karnak perhaps already constructed under

ldquoTraum des Nektanebosrdquo See also Hoffmann ldquoDer Trug des Nektanebosrdquo 162ndash165 348 Seeabove section 311 above (with notes 20ndash21)

103 For a list of attestations of Alexanderrsquos building activity at Egyptian temples see ArnoldTemples of the Last Pharaohs 138 Winter ldquoAlexander der Groszlige als Pharaordquo BloumlbaumldquoDenn ich bin ein Koumlnig helliprdquo 361 Chauveau ldquoLrsquoEacutegypte en transitionrdquo 390ndash393 SchaumlferldquoAlexander der Groszlige Pharao und Priesterrdquo Bosch-Puche ldquoEgyptian Royal Titulary ofAlexander the Greatrdquo I and II Ladynin ldquoThe Argeadai building program in Egyptrdquo

104 Abd el-Razik Darstellungen und Texte Waitkus Untersuchungen zu Kult vol I 45ndash60vol II 60ndash89

105 Bell ldquoNew Kingdom ⟨Divine⟩ Templerdquo 180106 Bell ldquoLuxor Templerdquo and Bell ldquoNew Kingdom ⟨Divine⟩ Templerdquo Contra Waitkus Unter-

suchungen zu Kult 280ndash281 who assumes that the ka does not play an overly importantrole in the temple of Luxor

107 For a list of attestations see Bloumlbaum ldquoDenn ich bin ein Koumlnig helliprdquo 362 (Philip Arrhidaios)362ndash363 (Alexander IV) Chauveau ldquoLrsquoEacutegypte en transitionrdquo 393ndash395 (Philip Arrhidaios)395ndash396 (Alexander IV) Ladynin ldquoThe Argeadai building program in Egyptrdquo 223ndash228(Alexander III to Alexander IV)


Nectanebo II108 andof a gate at the temple of KhnumonElephantine109whichwas inscribed with the names of Alexander IV (fig 58)

The amount of building work undertaken in the relatively short Macedo-nian period is in no way comparable with that of the thirty-seven years ofthe Thirtieth Dynasty either in the amount or in inventiveness Alexander theGreat used the ideas of Egyptian divine kingship for his own purpose and thusfulfilled the requirements Under his two immediate successors Egyptian king-ship cannot have played the samemajor role but the native priests had at leastenough funds to continue with the building work although Philip Arrhidaiosand Alexander IV a relatively small child never visited Egypt Ptolemy theSatrap who ruled the country in their name as an absolute autocrat must havehad input into thedecisionsThe Satrap Stele shows that by 311 hewas in chargeOne can also imagine the Ptolemies as believers in religion in general wouldhave accepted the local gods and assumed they should support them Duringhis reign as Ptolemy I (306ndash2832)muchemphasiswasput on religiouspoliticsas the creation or at least active promotion of the cult of the Graeco-Egyptiangod Serapis attests From Ptolemy II onwards that cult was closely connectedwith the ruler-cult110

When they assumed power the Ptolemies had to establish a stable politicalbase It was therefore necessary to respond to the needs of the Egyptian pop-ulation to which the native priesthoods held the key On the Satrap Stele it isreported that Ptolemy the Satrap attended to the needs of the Egyptian templesalready when governor111 The stele was once set up in a temple according toits texts presumably in Buto in the Delta but was discovered in 1870 in Cairore-built in a mosque It is now housed in the Egyptian Museum (CGC 22182)Its date in line 1 the first month of Akhet year 7 of Alexander IV (Novem-berDecember 311) is also the terminus ante quem for themove of the capital toAlexandria described in line 4 ldquoPtolemymoved his residence to the enclosureof Alexander on the shore of the great sea of the Greeks (Alexandria)rdquo

108 Barguet Le temple drsquoAmon-Recirc 136ndash141 For further references see Arnold Temples of theLast Pharaohs 140 Chauveau ldquoLrsquoEacutegypte en transitionrdquo 394 Bloumlbaum ldquoDenn ich bin einKoumlnig helliprdquo 362 no Ar-PA-010

109 Bickel ldquoDekoration des Tempeltoresrdquo According to Arnold Temples of the Last Pharaohs141 several relief blocks at Sebennytos in the Delta (see fig 51) with the name of Alexan-der IV confirm that the decoration of the granite walls of the temple of Nectanebo II forOsiris-Shu suspended in 343 when the Persians re-conquered Egypt was resumed Seealso section 31 above

110 Pfeiffer ldquoThe God Serapisrdquo111 For references to the Satrap Stele see Section 2 above including n 16

148 minas-nerpel

figure 58 Elephantine temple of Khnum gate of Alexander IVphotograph author

For the present discussion the last section of the Satrap Stele (lines 12ndash18)in which the earlier donation of Khababash probably a native rival king dur-ing the Persian occupation is of particular importance Ptolemy reaffirms thepriests in their possession of certain areas of the Delta in order to support the


temple of Buto In return the priests reassure him of divine support which ofcourse implies their own support This example is a key to understanding theeffort which went into constructing temples and thus caring for the Egyptiancults according to the principle do ut des the Ptolemaic ruler would be blessedand supported by the Egyptian deities and thus by the clergy

Alexander the Greatrsquos benevolent attitude to the Egyptian temples and cultsmust have served as a crucial model for Ptolemy I Soter and his successors Thelatter not only developed huge new projects but also continued with large-scale temple building and decoration where Thirtieth Dynasty projects hadbeen interrupted by the second Persian occupation Since Soterrsquos reign wasovershadowed by wars against the other Diadochoi and much of the coun-tryrsquos resources was spent on developing Alexandria and on founding PtolemaisHermiou in Upper Egypt it is not surprising that his building projects did notequal those of the Thirtieth Dynasty or the later Ptolemaic rulers especiallyPtolemies VI Philometor and VIII Euergetes II112However his nameappears onseveral chapels temple reliefs and stelae Swinnen published in 1973 a study ofthe religiouspolitics of Ptolemy I Soter including a list of placeswhereEgyptiantemples were extended or embellished during his rule At the following placesfrom north to south Soterrsquos names are preserved113 Tanis perhaps Behbeitel-Hagar114 Terenouthis at the western edge of the Delta where a temple forHathor-Therenouthis was begun Naukratis115 where a presumably unfinishedEgyptian temple of the Thirtieth Dynasty was located Tebtynis where a newtemple for the local crocodile god Soknebtunis was built blocks are attestedfrom Per-khefet probably near Oxyrhynchos Sharuna where a temple wasbegun under Ptolemy I and decorated under Ptolemy II Cusae (el-Quseia)where a Hathor temple was built Tuna el-Gebel Hermopolis possibly Edfu116and Elephantine

112 Minas ldquoDie Dekorationstaumltigkeitrdquo Teil 1 and Teil 2113 Swinnen ldquoSur la politique religieuse de Ptoleacutemeacutee Ierrdquo 118 Further refined by ArnoldTem-

ples of theLast Pharaohs 154ndash157 See alsoDerchain ZweiKapellen 4 n 10ndash11 who referredto possible building activities in Akhmim and Medamud but the evidence is unclear

114 See n 27 above Swinnen ldquoSur la politique religieuse de Ptoleacutemeacutee Ierrdquo 118 cautiouslyconnected a naos found at Mit Ghamr inscribed with Soterrsquos cartouches with Behbeitel-Hagar Arnold Temples of the Last Pharaohs 154ndash157 does not list the site

115 See also YoyotteHistoire geacuteographie et religion de lrsquoEacutegypte ancienne 309 (with further ref-erences)

116 In 1984 at least thirty-nine decorated and undecorated blocks from earlier structureswere excavated under the pavement of the Ptolemaic forecourt of the Edfu temple Manyfragments can be assigned to a Kushite Sed-festival gate Others bear inscriptions of aSeventeenth Dynasty king Thutmose III (Eighteenth Dynasty) Saite kings (Twenty-sixth

150 minas-nerpel

Most traces of Soterrsquos building programme come from Middle Egypt espe-cially from Sharuna and Tuna el-Gebel Hermopolis and its necropolis Tunael-Gebel were vibrant cult places at the time of transition from the ThirtiethDynasty to the early Hellenistic period and Soterrsquos building activity in this areademonstrates that the Ptolemies often built at places favoured by the ThirtiethDynasty Khemenu Greek Hermopolis was the capital of the Fifteenth UpperEgyptiannomeandhadbeen an important administrative centre since an earlydateThe inhabitants of Hermopolis apparently assistedNectanebo I thenonlya general against Nepherites II the last king of the Twenty-ninth Dynastyand Nectanebo I therefore embellished the site with massive temple buildingsthat are mostly lost but described in the text of a limestone stele now in theEgyptian Museum Cairo (JE 72130) The stele is 226m high and inscribed withthirty-five lines of hieroglyphic text117 Also under Nectanebo I the temple ofNehemet-away was constructed and the temple of Thoth renovated Nehemet-away was a creator goddess and consort of Thoth according to the stele bothdeities were responsible for Nectaneborsquos ascent to the throne (section C l 9ndash11)118The inscriptionnot only gives technical details of the temple constructionand decoration but also attests to the use of royal propaganda including thedivine selection of the king by a god and goddess as well as rewards to thelocal priesthood for their support in gaining the throne The temple of Thothwas further expanded under Nectanebo II and Philip Arrhidaios119

Tuna el-Gebel and Hermopolis continued to play an important role intothe Roman period Monuments include a wide variety of funerary chapels inthe form of small temples at the necropolis of Tuna el-Gebel of which thatof Petosiris high priest of Thoth is the best preserved and highly innovativeconstructed around 300BCE120

Dynasty) and the thronename stp-n-rꜥmrj-jmn This thronenamecouldbelong toAlexan-der the Great Philip Arrhidaios or Ptolemy I Soter indicating that the current temple isbased on foundations that includeMacedonian or early Ptolemaic blocks See Leclant andClerc ldquoFouilles et travaux 1984ndash85rdquo 287ndash288 1987 349 fig 56ndash59 on pls 43ndash45 ArnoldTemples of the Last Pharaohs 50 von Falck ldquoGeschichte des Horus-Tempelsrdquo (with fur-ther references but not to the Macedonian-Ptolemaic throne name or structure) PatanegraveMarginalia 33ndash36 (colour plates) I thank John Baines and ErichWinter for sharing theirphotographs of this throne name with me

117 Roeder ldquoZwei hieroglyphische Inschriftenrdquo 375ndash442 See also Grallert BauenmdashStiftenmdashWeihen 503ndash504 672 Klotz ldquoTwo Overlooked Oraclesrdquo

118 Roeder ldquoZwei hieroglyphische Inschriftenrdquo 390ndash391119 Arnold Temples of the Last Pharaohs 111 131 See Kessler ldquoHermopolisrdquo 96120 Lefebvre Tombeau de Petosiris Cherpion et al Le tombeau de Peacutetosiris agrave Touna el-Gebel

For an overview and the context see Lembke ldquoPetosiris-Necropolisrdquo 231ndash232


Tuna el-Gebel is also famous for its animal cemeteries and the burial ofmummified ibises the sacred animals of Thoth The practice begun in theTwenty-sixth Dynasty and the cult received increasing attention under theThirtieth Dynasty whose reforms of animal cults were continued under thePtolemies121 Several underground chapels cased with limestone blocks wereconnected to the subterranean Ibiotapheion These which belong to the timeof Ptolemy I are decorated in partly well preserved colours on which the gridsystemstill survives in somecases In comparison to the rest of Soterrsquos construc-tion work two relatively well preserved cult chapels for Thoth in his form ofOsiris-Ibis and Osiris-Baboon from Tuna el-Gebel now housed in the Roemer-and Pelizaeus-Museum Hildesheim (fig 59) and in the Egyptian MuseumCairo

They exemplify strong royal support for the animal cult at the beginning ofthe Ptolemaic period at a site where reliefs in Hellenizing style are attested forthe first time in Petosirisrsquo tomb chapel122 The surviving reliefs in the chapelshow the king offering to Thoth in several manifestations Isis Harsiese andfurther deities123 Kessler assumes that these chapels were part of a largerconstruction project that probably also included the above-ground wabet andthe great temple of Thoth When exactly in the reign of Ptolemy I Soter theproject was begun remains unclear Kessler suggests 300ndash295 but the planningmight have started as early as the reign of Philip Arrhidaios when Ptolemywasalready ruling Egypt as satrap and involved in the cult politics124

None of Soterrsquos temples survives Only blocks or traces of buildings are pre-served most of them coming from Middle Egypt This pattern distorts thepicture of the construction and decorationwork under Ptolemy I125 The socio-cultural context of the Egyptian temples in the Ptolemaic period their functionas centres of learning that produced vast numbers of hieroglyphic and liter-ary texts and their artistic aspects are almost exclusively known through later

121 Kessler Die heiligen Tiere 194ndash219 223ndash244122 ForPetosirisrsquo input into thebuilding anddecorationprogramme seeKesslerTunael-Gebel

II 126ndash131123 Derchain Zwei Kapellen Karig ldquoEinige Bemerkungenrdquo KesslerTuna el-Gebel II 2 demon-

strates that the reliefs published byDerchain belong to the ldquoPaviankultkammer G-C-C-2rdquo inTuna el-Gebel and adjusts Derchainrsquos sequence of scenes

124 Kessler Tuna el-Gebel II 130 The cartouches of Alexanderrsquos brother Philip Arrhidaios areattested inside the great temple of Hermopolis

125 Derchain Zwei Kapellen 4ndash5 assumed that the centre of Soterrsquos construction work was inMiddle Egypt since most finds come from there (see map on his p 5)

152 minas-nerpel

figure 59 Tuna el-Gebel chapel of Ptolemy I Soter now in Roemer- and Pelizaeus-Museumphotograph Roemer- and Pelizaeus-Museum Hildesheim

examples almost completely in southern Upper Egypt126 The cultural centrehowever was in the north and the most creative regions were probably in theDelta and theMemphite area Therefore one could assume that temples in thenorthwere larger andmore richly decorated than those in the provincial southThe bias towards the south causes well-known problems of interpretation

According to a mythical text in the temple of Horus at Edfu monumentaltemple architecture was developed north of Memphis near the sanctuary ofImhotep close to Djoserrsquos pyramid dating to the Third Dynasty127 The current

126 Finnestad ldquoTemples of the Ptolemaic and Roman Periodsrdquo 198 227ndash232127 Wildung Imhotep und Amenhotep 146 paragraph 98


Ptolemaic temple at Edfu replaced a much older construction that seems tohave had a link to Memphis128 The enclosure wall is said to be a similar con-struction to that first begun by those of old ldquolike what was on the great groundplan in this book which fell from heaven north of Memphisrdquo (mj wn ḥr snṯ wrn mḏꜣt tn hꜣjt n pt mḥt jnb ḥḏ)129 Another text in the same temple statesthat the pattern which the Ptolemaic builders followed when constructing thisenclosure wall was derived from ldquothe book of designing a templerdquo (šfdt n sšmḥwt-nṯr) which Imhotep himself was supposed to have composed130

We also learn from the Edfu text that temple architecture was canonicalwhichmeans that the temple can be understood as the three-dimensional real-ization of what was written in ldquothe bookrdquo One might wonder whether thisinscription refers to the ldquoBook of the Templerdquo131 a handbook or manual thatas Quack establishes describes how the ideal Egyptian temple should be builtand operated This book is attested in over forty fragmentary manuscriptsdemonstrating itswide and supra-regional distribution in antiquityThemostlyunpublished papyri all date to the Roman period but the manualrsquos origin pre-dates the foundation of Edfu in 237BCE

5 Conclusion

As Spencer emphasizes the temple complexes of the Late Period especiallythose of the Thirtieth Dynasty should be seen as ldquoemblems of Egyptian cul-turerdquo132 With the enclosure walls encircling layers of dark rooms halls andcorridors the sanctuaries in the temples of the last native dynasty were muchmore protected than earlier ones thus enhancing the feeling of seclusion Andin themost sacred area of these fortress-like temples were placed the naoi Thedivineworldwas shielded from thehumanworld creating a protected dwellingspace of the divine with its protection emphasized by the darkness of theentire temple structure especially the sanctuary The only light filled structureswere the pronaoi colonnaded courts and the rooftop with its kiosk necessary

128 See n 116 above for comments on archaeologically attested earlier structures129 Edfou VI 6 4 Translation by author See Blackman and Fairman ldquoMyth of Horus at Edfurdquo

36130 Edfou VI 10 10 Translation by author See Blackman and Fairman ldquoMyth of Horus at Edfurdquo

36131 Quack ldquoDie Theologisierung der buumlrokratischen Normrdquo132 Spencer A Naos of Nekhthorheb 51

154 minas-nerpel

for the New Year festival and for greeting the rising sun Assmann states thatthis defensive character might reflect political circumstances especially afterthe Persian occupation133 but thismight be a retrospective construction basedon our knowledge of how Egyptian civilisation came to an end before the firstcentury or even a bit later temple construction could have felt like a goldenage On the other hand and on a more practical level the fourth century was atime of fortification building134 and the temple enclosure walls seem to havebeen used by Ptolemaic garrisons with the Ptolemaic kings reinforcing the linkbetween the army and the temples135

A general increase in decoration within temples can be discerned from theOld Kingdom onwards culminating in the large Graeco-Roman period tem-ples The temple walls were decorated on an unprecedented scale with scenesand inscriptions that provide manifold insights into the religious thinking ofthe priests cult topography mythology religious festivals daily cults the rulercult and building history as well as the functions of various rooms The textsdisplay the codification of knowledge on an unprecedented scale The periodsof foreign rule over Egypt seemed to have reduced the self-evident implicationsof temples andmade it necessary to transcribe priestly knowledge on the tem-ple walls exceeding what was necessary for ritual purposes This developmentwas accompanied by the evolution of the writing system the Egyptian scholarpriests of the Graeco-Roman period developed for the indigenous temples ahighly intellectual very artificial language and a vastly expanded hieroglyphicwriting system

Averydistinctive feature that exemplifies thenewdegreeof codification andorganization is the framing column in ritual offering scenes Graeco-Romanperiod temples exhibit a highly meaningful organisation of these and theywere distributed in registers over entire walls The so-called Randzeile or fram-ing column of the Graeco-Roman period temple reliefs started to developinto its distinctive formula already in the Thirtieth Dynasty as Winter estab-lished136 According to Baines who studied New Kingdom forerunners thereremains a salient distinction between the designs of the NewKingdom and the

133 Assmann Das kulturelle Gedaumlchtnis 179 ldquoDie Architektur ist gepraumlgt durch Sicherheits-vorkehrungen die von einem tiefen Gefaumlhrdungsbewuszligtsein einer Art ldquoProfanisierungs-angstrdquo diktiert sindrdquo

134 See for example the fortification of Pelusium Diodorus Siculus Bibliotheca historicaXV 42 13 See Carrez-Maratray Peacuteluse et lrsquoangle oriental du delta Egyptien 93 no 149

135 See Dietze ldquoTemples and Soldiers in Southern Ptolemaic Egyptrdquo 77ndash89 (especially p 88)136 Winter Untersuchungen 19 67


Graeco-Roman period137 Those of the New Kingdom lack an overall schemaand appear relatively free although they are not undisciplined or randomIn comparison the Graeco-Roman forms are highly systematized and com-prehensive following much more rigid frameworks This development had itsstarting point at least in theThirtiethDynasty perhaps already in theprecedingTwenty-ninth Dynasty but in any case after the first Persian period

Temples of the last native dynasty embodied the sense of identity of theEgyptian elite We should assume non-royal involvement in temple buildingand Spencer sees in it one of the main reasons that the traditional forms ofEgyptian cult places persisted through periods of foreign occupation138 This isalso true for theHellenistic andRomanperiod139 As hieroglyphic Egyptian andDemotic developed they hardly took in Greek vocabulary This does show thecommitment to traditional culture Most relevant evidence for example fromEdfu and Dendera is a bit later than what is considered here but it must havehad a point of departure within the fourth century BCE

Ptolemaic temple plans are clearly connected to those of the Thirtieth Dy-nasty It seems that amaster planwasdeveloped including important elementslike the enclosurewall the axis thewabet the birth house and the ambulatoryaround the sanctuary as well as the sequence of halls corridors and roomsmdashfeatures that were developed under the last native pharaohs or at least are forthe first time attested from the Thirtieth Dynasty The reasons for this continu-ity might have been to avoid any break from past principles140 and to connectthemselves to legitimate rulersmdashor on a more practical level because mosttemples of the Old to the New Kingdom had long since disappeared whereastemples of the Thirtieth Dynasty were still standing when the Ptolemies andlater the Roman emperors ruled Egypt This pattern also relates to the fact thatin the Thirtieth Dynasty older temples were commonly razed to the ground tobuild new ones ideally at a larger scale

Ptolemy I Soterrsquos name is not attested so far in the huge temple complexesof the Thirtieth Dynasty discussed at the beginning of this chapter but thename of his son and successor Ptolemy II is At Tell Basta no traces of thePtolemaic period were known until the copy of the Canopus decree was foundin 2004 The Satrap Stele from the area of Buto is another lucky piece of evi-dence that considerably changed our view of the early Hellenistic period in

137 Baines ldquoKing Temple and Cosmosrdquo 31138 See Spencer A Naos of Nekhthorheb 51 Spencer ldquoSustaining Egyptian Culturerdquo 441ndash446

for a discussion of the king as the initiator of temple construction139 See Minas-Nerpel ldquoEgyptian temples of the Roman Periodrdquo140 Niederberger Der Chnumtempel 122

156 minas-nerpel

Egypt and Soterrsquos involvement with and perception by the native priesthoodas chances of survival often influence our picture From rather few survivingtemple blocks some stelae and chapels we know that Ptolemy I Soter followedAlexander in promoting native cults and in supporting the temples thus fulfill-ing his role as pharaoh However only his successor succeeded in leaving hugetemples in Egypt that spring immediately to mind Athribis Dendera EdfuKom Ombo and Philae to mention the obvious ones Only under Ptolemy IIwas the ruler cult established in the Egyptian temples141 but without Ptolemy Iand the Macedonian dynasty its inauguration would not have been possibleOnce again a royal line was established that would leave in Egypt its mas-sive imprint through temple complexes often larger than anythingwhichwentbefore These structures took into account the architectural developments ofthe last native dynasties of Egypt

Bibliography

Abd el-Razik M 1984 Die Darstellungen undTexte des Sanktuars Alexander des Groszligenim Tempel von Luxor Mainz Philipp von Zabern

Abd el-RazikM 1968 ldquoStudy onNectanebo Ist in LuxorTemple andKarnakrdquoMitteilun-gen des Deutschen Archaumlologischen Instituts Abteilung Kairo 23 156ndash159

Arnold D 1999 Temples of the Last Pharaohs New York and Oxford Oxford UniversityPress

Ashmawy A and D Raue 2015 ldquoThe Temple of Heliopolis Excavations 2012ndash14rdquo Egyp-tian Archeology 46 8ndash11

Ashmawy A and D Raue 2017 ldquoReport on theWork of the Egyptian-German MissionatMatariya Heliopolis in Spring 2012rdquo online httpwwwheliopolisprojectorgwp‑contentuploads2017072nd‑season_Matariya_2012‑spring‑englishpdf

Ashmawy A et al 2017 ldquoReport on the Work of the Egyptian-German Mission atMatariya Heliopolis in Spring 2014rdquo online httpwwwheliopolisprojectorgwp‑contentuploads2017074th‑season_Matariya_2014‑spring‑englishpdf

Ashmawy A M Beiersdorf and D Raue 2015 ldquoThe Thirtieth Dynasty in the Temple ofHeliopolisrdquo Egyptian Archaeology 47 13ndash16

Ashmawy A M Beiersdorf and D Raue 2017 ldquoReport on the Work of the Egyptian-German Mission at Matariya Heliopolis in Spring 2015rdquo onlinehttpwwwheliopolisprojectorgwp‑contentuploads2017075th‑season_Matariya_2015‑spring‑englishpdf

141 Minas Die hieroglyphischen Ahnenreihen Pfeiffer Herrscher- und Dynastiekulte


Assmann J 2000 Herrschaft und Heil Politische Theologie in Altaumlgypten Israel undEuropa Muumlnchen Carl Hanser

Assmann J 1997a Moses the Egyptian The Memory of Egypt in Western MonotheismCambridge MA and London Harvard University Press

Assmann J 1997bDas kulturelle Gedaumlchtnis Schrift Erinnerung und politische Identitaumltin fruumlhen Hochkulturen Muumlnchen Beck

Assmann J 1992 ldquoDer Tempel der aumlgyptischen Spaumltzeit als Kanonisierung der kul-turellen Identitaumltrdquo inTheHeritage of Ancient Egypt Studies inHonour of Erik Iversenedited by J Osing and EK Nielsen 9ndash25 Copenhagen Museum Tusculanum

Baines J 2011 ldquoPresenting and Discussing Deities in New Kingdom and Third Inter-mediate Period Egyptrdquo in Reconsidering the Concept of Revolutionary Monotheismedited by B Pongratz-Leisten 41ndash89 Winona Lake Indiana Eisenbrauns

Baines J 1997 ldquoTemples as Symbols Guarantors and Participants in Egyptian Civiliza-tionrdquo in The Temple in Ancient Egypt New Discoveries and Recent Research edited byS Quirke 216ndash241 London British Museum Press

Baines J 1994 ldquoKing Temple and Cosmos An Earlier Model for Framing Columns inthe Temple Scenes of the Graeco-Roman Periodrdquo in Aspekte spaumltaumlgyptischer KulturFestschrift fuumlr Erich Winter zum 65 Geburtstag edited by M Minas and J Zeidler23ndash33 Mainz Philipp von Zabern

Barguet P 1962 Le temple drsquoAmon-Recirc agrave Karnak Essai drsquoexeacutegegravese Le Caire Institut Fran-ccedilais drsquoArcheacuteologie Orientale

Beckerath J von 1999 Handbuch der aumlgyptischen Koumlnigsnamen2 Mainz Philipp vonZabern

Bell L 1997 ldquoThe New Kingdom ⟨Divine⟩ Temple The Example of Luxorrdquo in Temples ofAncient Egypt edited by BE Shafer 127ndash184 London and New York Tauris

Bell L 1985 ldquoLuxorTemple and theCult of theRoyalKardquo Journal of NearEasternStudies44 251ndash294

Bianchi RS 1984 ldquoSebennytosrdquo in Lexikon der Aumlgyptologie V edited by W Helck andWWestendorf 766ndash767 Wiesbaden Harrassowitz

Bickel S 1998 ldquoDie Dekoration des Tempeltores unter Alexander IV und der Suumldwandunter Augustusrdquo in Die Dekoration des Chnumtemples auf Elephantine durch Nek-tanebos II edited by H Jenni 115ndash159 Mainz Philipp von Zabern

Blackman AM and HW Fairman 1942 ldquoThe Myth of Horus at EdfumdashIIrdquo Journal ofEgyptian Archaeology 28 32ndash38

Bloumlbaum AI 2006 ldquoDenn ich bin ein Koumlnig der die Maat liebtrdquo Herrscherlegitimationim spaumltzeitlichen Aumlgypten Eine vergleichende Untersuchung der Phraseologie in denoffiziellenKoumlnigsinschriften vomBeginnder 25 Dynastie bis zumEndedermakedonis-chen Herrschaft Aachen Shaker

Bomhard A-S von 2012 The Decree of Saiumls The Stelae of Thonis-Heracleion and Nau-cratis Oxford Oxford Centre for Maritime Archaeology

158 minas-nerpel

Bomhard A-S von 2008TheNaos of the Decades Oxford Oxford Centre forMaritimeArchaeology

Bosch-Puche F and J Moje 2015 ldquoAlexander the Greatrsquos Name in ContemporaryDemotic Sourcesrdquo Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 101 340ndash348



Bosch-Puche F 2012 ldquoAlejandro Magno y los cultos a animales sagrados en EgiptordquoAula Orientalis 30 243ndash277

Burstein SM 1991 ldquoPharaoh Alexander A Scholarly MythrdquoAncient Society 22 139ndash145(reprinted in SM Burstein 1995 Graeco-Africana Studies in the History of GreekRelations with Egypt and Nubia 53ndash61 New Rochelle NY Caratzas)

Cabrol A 2001 Les voies processionnelles de Thegravebes Leuven PeetersCarrez-Maratray J-Y 1999 Peacuteluse et lrsquoangle oriental du delta Egyptien aux eacutepoques

grecque romaine et byzantine Le Caire Institut Franccedilais drsquoArcheacuteologie OrientaleCaszligor-Pfeiffer S 2008a ldquoZur Reflexion ptolemaumlischer Geschichte in den aumlgyptischen

Tempeln aus der Zeit Ptolemaios IX Philometor IISoter II und Ptolemaios XAlexander I (116ndash80 vChr) Teil 1 die Bau- und Dekorationstaumltigkeitrdquo Journal ofEgyptian History 1 (1) 21ndash77

Caszligor-Pfeiffer S 2008b ldquoZur Reflexion ptolemaumlischer Geschichte in den aumlgyptischenTempeln aus der Zeit Ptolemaios IX Philometor IISoter II und Ptolemaios XAlexander I (116ndash80 vChr) Teil 2 Kleopatra III und Kleopatra Berenike III imSpiegel der Tempelreliefsrdquo Journal of Egyptian History 1 (2) 235ndash265

Chauveau M 2006 ldquoLrsquoEacutegypte en transition des Perses aux Maceacutedoniensrdquo in La transi-tion entre lrsquo empire acheacutemeacutenide et les royaumes heacutelleacutenistiques (vers 350ndash300 av J-C)Actes du colloque organiseacute au Collegravege de France par la ldquoChaire drsquoHistoire et Civilisa-tion du Monde Acheacutemeacutenide et de lrsquoEmpire drsquoAlexandrerdquo et le ldquoReacuteseau InternationaldrsquoEacutetudes et de Recherches Acheacutemeacutenidesrdquo (GDR 2538 CNRS) 22ndash23 novembre 2004edited by P Briant 75ndash404 Paris de Boccard

Cherpion N et al 2007 Le tombeaudePeacutetosiris agraveTouna el-Gebel releveacute photographiqueLe Caire Institut Franccedilais drsquoArcheacuteologie Orientale

Coppens F 2007 The Wabet Tradition and Innovation in the Temples of the Ptolemaicand Roman Period Prague Czech Institute of Egyptology Charles University

Daumas F 1958 Les mammisis drsquoEacutegypte et de Nubie Paris La SocieacuteteacuteDepuydt F 1989 Archaeological-topographical Surveying of Elkab and Surroundings

Bruxelles Fondation Egyptologique Reine EacutelisabethDerchain P 1961ZweiKapellendesPtolemaumlus I Soter inHildesheim HildesheimAugust

Lax


Dietze G 2000 ldquoTemples and Soldiers in Southern Ptolemaic Egypt Some EpigraphicEvidencerdquo in Politics Administration and Society in the Hellenistic and RomanWorldProceedings of the International Colloquium Bertinoro 19ndash24 July 1997 edited byL Mooren 77ndash89 Leuven Peeters

Dowden K 2008 ldquoPseudo-Callisthenes Alexander Romancerdquo in Collected AncientGreek Novels2 edited by BP Reardon 650ndash735 Berkeley and London University ofCalifornia Press

Falck M von 2010 ldquoBeitraumlge zur Geschichte des Horus-Tempels von Edfu Ein Fundwiederverwendeter Blockfragmente im groszligen Hofrdquo in Edfu Materialien und Stu-dien edited by D Kurth andWWaitkus 51ndash63 Gladbeck PeWe

Fauerbach U 2009 ldquoThe Creation of an Egyptian Capitalrdquo in 7 AumlgyptologischeTempelt-agung Structuring Religion edited by R Preys 95ndash111 Wiesbaden Harrassowitz

Favard-Meeks C 2003 ldquoLes constructions de Nectaneacutebo II agrave Behbeit el-Hagarardquo inEs werde niedergelegt als Schriftstuumlck Festschrift fuumlr Hartwig Altenmuumlller zum 65Geburtstag edited by N Kloth et al 97ndash108 Hamburg Buske

Favard-Meeks C 2002 ldquoThe Present State of the Site of Behbeit el-Hagarrdquo BritishMuseum Studies in Ancient Egypt and Sudan 3 31ndash41

Favard-Meeks C 2001 ldquoBehbeit el-Hagarrdquo in The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient EgyptI edited by DB Redford 174ndash175 New York Oxford University Press

Favard-Meeks C 1997 ldquoThe Temple of Behbeit El-Hagarardquo in The Temple in AncientEgypt New Discoveries and Recent Research edited by S Quirke 102ndash111 LondonBritish Museum Press

Favard-Meeks C 1991 Le temple de Behbeit el-Hagara Essai de reconstitution et drsquo inter-preacutetation Hamburg Buske

Finnestad RB 1997 ldquoTemples of the Ptolemaic andRomanPeriods AncientTraditionsinNewContextsrdquo inTemples of Ancient Egypt edited byBE Shafer 185ndash237 LondonIB Tauris

Finnestad RB 1985 Image of theWorld and Symbol of the Creator On the Cosmologicaland Iconological Values of the Temple of Edfu Wiesbaden Harrassowitz

Fissolo J-L 2011 ldquoIsis de Philaerdquo Egypte Afrique et Orient 60 3ndash16Gabra G 2012 ldquoEin vergessener Naos Nektanebos I in Alt-Kairordquo Studien zur Altaumlgyp-

tischen Kultur 41 137ndash138Gauger J-D 2002 ldquoDer lsquoTraum des NektanebosrsquomdashDie griechische Fassungrdquo in Apo-

kalyptik und Aumlgypten Eine kritische Analyse der relevanten Texte aus dem griech-isch-roumlmischen Aumlgypten edited by A Balsius and BU Schipper 189ndash219 LeuvenPeeters

Goldbrunner L 2004 Buchis Eine Untersuchung zur Theologie des heiligen Stieres inTheben zur griechisch-roumlmischen Zeit Turnhout Brepols

Gomaagrave F 1986 ldquoTell el-Moqdamrdquo in Lexikon der Aumlgyptologie IV edited byW Helck andWWestendorf 351ndash352 Wiesbaden Harrassowitz

160 minas-nerpel

Gomaagrave F 1984 ldquoSaft el-Hennardquo in Lexikon der Aumlgyptologie IV edited by W Helck andWWestendorf 351ndash352 Wiesbaden Harrassowitz

Goddio F and M Clauss 2006 Egyptrsquos Sunken Treasures Munich and London PrestelGraefe E 1993 ldquoDie Deutung der sogenannten lsquoOpfergabenrsquo der Ritualszenen aumlgyp-

tischer Tempel als lsquoSchriftzeichenrsquo rdquo in Ritual and Sacrifice in the Ancient Near EastProceedings of the International Conference Organized by the KU Leuven from the 17thto the 20th of April 1991 edited by J Quaegebeur 143ndash156 OLA 55 Leuven Peeters

Grallert S 2001 BauenmdashStiftenmdashWeihen Aumlgyptische Bau- und Restaurierungsinschrif-ten von den Anfaumlngen bis zur 30 Dynastie Berlin Achet

Grenier J-C 2003 ldquoRemarques sur les datations et titulatures de trois steles romainesdu BucheumrdquoBulletin de lrsquo Institut Franccedilais drsquoArcheacuteologie Orientale 103 267ndash279

Griffith FLl 1890 Mound of the Jew and the City of Onias Belbeis Samanood AbusirTukh El Karmus 1887 The Antiquities of Tell el Yahucircdicircyeh andMiscellaneousWork inLower Egypt During the Years 1887ndash1888 London Egypt Exploration fund

Habachi L 1956 ldquoNotes on the Delta Hermopolis Capital of the XVth nome of LowerEgyptrdquo Annales du Service des Antiquiteacutes de lrsquoEacutegypte 53 441ndash480

Haeny G 1985 ldquoA Short Architectural History of Philaerdquo Bulletin de lrsquo Institut FranccedilaisdrsquoArcheacuteologie Orientale 85 197ndash233

Hoffmann F 2007 ldquoDer Trug des Nektanebosrdquo in Anthologie der demotischen Literaturedited by F Hoffmann and JF Quack 165ndash166 and 348ndash349 Berlin LIT

Houmllbl G 2004 Altaumlgypten im Roumlmischen Reich II Die Tempel des roumlmischen NubienMainz Philipp von Zabern

Houmllbl G 2001 A history of the Ptolemaic Empire London RoutledgeHoumllbl G 2000 Altaumlgypten imRoumlmischenReich IDer roumlmische Pharao und seineTempel

Mainz Philipp von ZabernHuszlig W 1994 Der makedonische Koumlnig und die aumlgyptischen Priester Studien zur Ge-

schichte des ptolemaiischen Aumlgypten Stuttgart SteinerJansen-Winkeln K 2000 ldquoDie Fremdherrschaften in Aumlgypten im 1 Jahrtausend v Chrrdquo

Orientalia 69 1ndash20Jasnow R 1997 ldquoThe Greek Alexander Romance and Demotic Egyptian Literaturerdquo

Journal of Near Eastern Studies 56 95ndash103Jenni H 1998 Die Dekoration des Chnumtempels auf Elephantine durch Nektanebos II

Mainz Philipp von ZabernKahl J 2002 ldquoZu den Namen spaumltzeitlicher Usurpatoren Fremdherrscher Gegen- und

Lokalkoumlnigerdquo Zeitschrift fuumlr aumlgyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde 129 31ndash42Kamal A 1904ndash1905 Stegraveles ptoleacutemaiques et romaines Catalogue geacuteneacuteral des antiquiteacutes

Eacutegyptiennes du Museacutee du Caire nos 22001ndash22208 2 vol Le Caire Institut FranccedilaisdrsquoArcheacuteologie Orientale

Karig JS 1962 ldquoEinige Bemerkungen zu den ptolemaumlischen Reliefs in HildesheimrdquoZeitschrift fuumlr aumlgyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde 88 17ndash24


Kessler D 2001 ldquoHermopolisrdquo in The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt II edited byDB Redford 94ndash97 New York Oxford University Press

Kessler D 1998 Tuna el-Gebel II Die Paviankultkammer G-C-C-2 Hildesheim Gersten-berg

Kessler D 1989 Die heiligen Tiere und der Koumlnig I Beitraumlge zu Organisation Kult undTheologie der spaumltzeitlichen Tierfriedhoumlfe Wiesbaden Harrassowitz

Kienitz FK 1953 Die politische Geschichte Aumlgyptens vom 7 bis zum 4 Jahrhundert vorder Zeitenwende Berlin Akademie-Verlag

Klotz D 2011 ldquoA Naos of Nectanebo I from theWhite Monastery Church (Sohag)rdquo Goumlt-tinger Miszellen 229 37ndash52

Klotz D 2010 ldquoTwoOverlooked Oraclesrdquo Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 96 247ndash254Kockelmann H 2011 ldquoBirth house (Mammisi)rdquo in UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology

edited byWWendrich Los Angeles httpescholarshiporgucitem8xj4k0wwLadynin IA 2014 ldquoThe Argeadai Building Program in Egypt in the Framework of

Dynastiesrsquo XXIXndashXXX Temple Buildingrdquo in Alexander the Great and Egypt HistoryArt TraditionWarschau Breslau 1819 Nov 2011 edited byV Grieb et al Philippika75 221ndash240Wiesbaden Harrassowitz

Ladynin IA 2013 ldquoLate Dynastic Periodrdquo in UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology editedbyWWendrich Los Angeles httpescholarshiporgucitem2zg136m8

Leclant J and G Clerc 1987 ldquoFouilles et travaux en Eacutegypte et au Soudan 1985ndash1986rdquoOrientalia 56 292ndash389


Leclegravere F 2008 Les villes de basse Eacutegypte au Ier milleacutenaire av J-C Le Caire InstitutFranccedilais drsquoArcheacuteologie Orientale

Lefebvre G 192324 Le tombeau de Petosiris IndashIII Le Caire Institut Franccedilais drsquoArcheacuteo-logie Orientale

Leitz C 1995 Altaumlgyptische Sternuhren Leuven PeetersLembke K 2010 ldquoThe Petosiris-Necropolis of Tuna el-Gebelrdquo in Tradition and Trans-

formation Egypt under Roman Rule Proceedings of the International ConferenceHildesheim 3ndash6 July 2008 edited byK LembkeMMinas-Nerpel and S Pfeiffer 231ndash254 Leiden and Boston Brill

Lichtheim M 1980 Ancient Egyptian Literature III The Late Period Berkeley and LosAngeles University of California Press

Limme LJH 2001 ldquoElkabrdquo in The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt I edited byDB Redford 467ndash469 New York Oxford University Press

Locher J 1999 Topographie und Geschichte der Region am ersten Nilkatarakt in griech-isch-roumlmischer Zeit Stuttgart and Leipzig Teubner

McKenzie J 2007 The Architecture of Alexandria and Egypt c 300BC to AD700 NewHaven and London Yale University Press

162 minas-nerpel

Meulenaere H de 1986 ldquoUn geacuteneacuteral du Delta gouverneur de la Haute Eacutegypterdquo Chro-nique drsquoEacutegypte 61 203ndash210

Meulenaere H de 1982a ldquoNaukratisrdquo in Lexikon der Aumlgyptologie edited by W HelckandWWestendorf 360ndash361 Wiesbaden Harrassowitz

Meulenaere H de 1982b ldquoIsis et Mout du Mammisirdquo in Studia Paulo Naster oblata IIOrientalia antiqua edited by J Quaegebeur 25ndash29 Leuven Peeters

Minas-NerpelM (in press for 2018ndash19) ldquoPtolemaicQueens as Ritualists andRecipientsof Cults The Cases of Arsinoe II and Berenike IIrdquo Submitted to Ancient Society

Minas-Nerpel M 2012 ldquoEgyptian Temples of the Roman Periodrdquo in The Oxford Hand-book of Roman Egypt edited by C Riggs Oxford Oxford University Press

MinasM 2000DiehieroglyphischenAhnenreihenderptolemaumlischenKoumlnige EinVergle-ichmit den Titeln der eponymen Priester in den demotischen und griechischen PapyriMainz Philipp von Zabern

Minas M 1997 ldquoDie Dekorationstaumltigkeit von Ptolemaios VI Philometor and Ptole-maios VIII Euergetes II an aumlgyptischen Tempeln Teil 2rdquo Orientalia LovaniensiaPeriodica 28 87ndash121

Minas M 1996 ldquoDie Dekorationstaumltigkeit von Ptolemaios VI Philometor and Ptole-maios VIII Euergetes II an aumlgyptischenTempeln Teil 1rdquoOrientalia Lovaniensia Peri-odica 27 51ndash78

Moumlller A 2000 Naukratis Trade in Archaic Greece Oxford Oxford University PressMond R and OH Myers 1935 The Bucheum New York Alma Egan Hyatt FoundationMyśliwiec K 2000 The Twilight of Ancient Egypt The First Millennium BCE Ithaca NY

Cornell University PressNiederberger W 1999 Der Chnumtempel Nektanebos II Architektur und baugeschicht-

liche Einordnung Mainz Philipp von ZabernPatanegrave M 2007 Marginalia Genegraveve Tellus NostraPfeiffer S 2014 ldquoAlexander der Groszlige in Aumlgypten Uumlberlegungen zur Frage seiner

pharaonischen Legitimationrdquo in Alexander the Great and Egypt History Art Tra-dition WarschauBreslau 1819 Nov 2011 edited by V Grieb et al Philippika 7589ndash106 Wiesbaden Harrassowitz

Pfeiffer S 2010 ldquoNaukratis Heracleion-Thonis and Alexandria Remarks on the Pres-ence and Trade Activities of Greeks in the North-west Delta from the Seventh Cen-tury BC to the End of the Fourth Century BCrdquo in Alexandria and the North-westernDelta Joint Conference Proceedings of Alexandria lsquoCity and Harbourrsquo (Oxford 2004)and lsquoTheTrade andTopography of EgyptrsquosNorth-westDelta 8thCentury BC to 8thCen-tury ADrsquo (Berlin 2006) edited by D Robinson andW AndrewWilson 15ndash24 OxfordSchool of Archaeology University of Oxford

Pfeiffer S 2008a ldquoThe God Serapis his Cult and the Beginnings of the Ruler Cult inPtolemaic Egyptrdquo in Ptolemy II Philadelphus and his World edited by P McKechnieand P Guillaume 387ndash408 Leiden and Boston Brill


Pfeiffer S 2008b Herrscher- und Dynastiekulte im Ptolemaumlerreich Systematik und Ein-ordnung der Kultformen Muumlnchen Beck

Pfeiffer S 2004 Das Dekret von Kanopos (238 v Chr) Kommentar und historische Aus-wertung eines dreisprachigen Synodaldekretes der aumlgyptischen Priester zu Ehren Pto-lemaiosrsquo III und seiner Familie Muumlnchen and Leipzig Saur

Phillips JP 2002 The Columns of Egypt Manchester PeartreeQuack JF 2009 ldquoDie Theologisierung der buumlrokratischenNorm Zur Baubeschreibung

in Edfu im Vergleich zum Buch vom Tempelrdquo in 7 Aumlgyptologische TempeltagungStructuring Religion Leuven 28 Septemberndash1 Oktober 2005 edited by R Preys 221ndash229 Wiesbaden Harrassowitz

Raue D 1999 Heliopolis und das Haus des Re Eine Prosopographie und ein Toponym imNeuen Reich ADAIK 16 Berlin Achet

Ricke H 1960 Die Tempel Nektanebosrsquo II in Elephantine Schweizerisches Institut fuumlraumlgyptische Bauforschung und Altertumskunde

Roeder G 1954 ldquoZwei hieroglyphische Inschriften aus Hermopolis (Oberaumlgypten)rdquoAnnales du Service des Antiquiteacutes de lrsquoEacutegypte 52 315ndash442

Rondot V 1989 ldquoUne monographie bubastiterdquo Bulletin de lrsquo Institut Franccedilais drsquoArcheacuteo-logie Orientale 89 249ndash270

RosenowD 2008aDasTempelhaus desGroszligenBastet-Tempels inBubastisDissertationzur Erlangung des akademischen Grades doctor philosophiae (Dr phil) HumboldtUniversity of Berlin (online httpsedochu‑berlindehandle1845217739)

Rosenow D 2008b ldquoThe Great Temple of Bastet at Bubastisrdquo Egyptian Archaeology 3211ndash13

Rosenow D 2006a ldquoLe sanctuaire de Nectanebo II agrave Boubastis eacutetat preacutesent interpreacute-tation et reconstitution drsquoun temple de Basse Eacutepoque dans le Deltardquo Egypte Afriqueet Orient 42 29ndash40

Rosenow D 2006b ldquoThe Nekhethorheb Templerdquo in ANaos of Nekhthorheb fromBubas-tis Religious Iconography and Temple Building in the 30th Dynasty edited byNA Spencer 43ndash46 London British Museum Press

Rosenow D 2003 ldquoDer Nektanebos-Tempelrdquo in Tell Basta vorlaumlufiger Bericht der XIVKampagne edited by C Tietze 115ndash133 Potsdam Universitaumlt Potsdam

Ruzicka S 2012 Trouble in theWest Egypt and the Persian Empire 525ndash332BCE Oxfordet al Oxford University Press

Ryholt K 2002 ldquoNectaneborsquos Dream or the Prophecy of Petesisrdquo in Apokalyptik undAumlgypten Eine kritische Analyse der relevanten Texte aus dem griechisch-roumlmischenAumlgypten edited by A Balsius and BU Schipper 221ndash241 Leuven Peeters

Sayed (el-) R 1975 Documents relatifs agrave Sais et ses diviniteacutes Le Caire Institut FranccedilaisdrsquoArcheacuteologie Orientale

Schaumlfer D 2011Makedonische Pharaonenundhieroglyphische StelenHistorischeUnter-suchungen zur Satrapenstele und verwandten Denkmaumllern Leuven Peeters

164 minas-nerpel

Schaumlfer D 2007 ldquoAlexander der Groszlige Pharao und Priesterrdquo in Aumlgypten unter fremdenHerrschern zwischen persischer Satrapie und roumlmischer Provinz edited by S Pfeiffer54ndash74 Frankfurt Verlag Antike

Schneider T 1998 ldquoMythos und Zeitgeschichte in der 30 Dynastie Eine politische Lek-tuumlre des lsquoMythos von den Goumltterkoumlnigenrsquo rdquo in Ein aumlgyptisches Glasperlenspiel Aumlgyp-tologische Beitraumlge fuumlr Erik Hornung aus seinem Schuumllerkreis edited by A Brodbeck207ndash242 Berlin Mann

Sethe K 1904 Hieroglyphische Urkunden der griechisch-roumlmischen Zeit Leipzig Hin-richs

Spencer NA 2011 ldquoThe Egyptian Temple and Settlement at Naukratisrdquo BritishMuseumStudies in Ancient Egypt and Sudan 17 31ndash43

Spencer NA 2010 ldquoSustaining Egyptian Culture Non-Royal Initiatives in the LatePeriod Temple Buildingrdquo in Egypt in Transition Social and Religious Development ofEgypt in the FirstMillenniumBCE Proceedings of an International Conference PragueSeptember 1ndash4 2009 edited by L Bareš F Coppens and K Smolaacuterikovaacute 441ndash490Prague Czech Institute of Egyptology Faculty of Arts Charles University in Prague

Spencer NA 2006a A Naos of Nekhthorheb from Bubastis Religious Iconography andTemple Building in the 30th Dynasty London British Museum

Spencer NA 2006b ldquoEdouard Naville et lrsquoEgypt Exploration Fund A la deacutecouverte destemples de la XXXe dynastie dans le Deltardquo Egypte Afrique et Orient 42 11ndash18

Spencer NA 2003 Review of Niederberger Der Chnumtempel Journal of EgyptianArchaeology 89 273ndash278

Spencer NA 2000 Sustaining Egyptian Culture Royal and Private Construction Initia-tives in the First Millennium BC PhD dissertation University of Cambridge

Spencer NA 1999 ldquoThe temple of Onuris-Shu at Samanudrdquo Egyptian Archaeology 147ndash9

SwinnenW 1973 ldquoSur la politique religieuse de Ptoleacutemeacutee Ierrdquo in Les Syncreacutetismes dansles Religions Grecque et Romaine Colloque de Strasbourg 9ndash11 Juin 1971 113ndash133 ParisPresses universitaires de France

Thiers C 1997 ldquoUn naos de Ptoleacutemeacutee II Philadelphe consacreacute agrave Sokarrdquo Bulletin delrsquo Institut Franccedilais drsquoArcheacuteologie Orientale 97 253ndash268

Thomas RI and A Villing 2013 ldquoNaukratis Revisited 2012 Integrating New Fieldworkand Old ResearchrdquoBritish Museum Studies in Ancient Egypt and Sudan 20 81ndash125

Tietze C ER Lange K Hallof 2005 ldquoEin neues Exemplar des Kanopus-Dekrets ausBubastisrdquoArchiv fuumlr Papyrusforschung und verwandte Gebiete 51 1ndash30

Tietze C 2001 ldquoBubastisrdquo in The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt I edited byDB Redford 208ndash209 New York Oxford University Press

Traunecker C 1979 ldquoEssai sur lrsquohistoire de la XXIXe Dynastierdquo Bulletin de lrsquo Institut Fran-ccedilais drsquoArcheacuteologie Orientale 79 395ndash436

Vassilika E 1989 Ptolemaic Philae Leuven Peeters


Verhoeven Ursula 2008 ldquoNeueTempel fuumlr Aumlgypten Spuren desAugustus vonDenderabisDendurrdquo in AugustusmdashDerBlick vonaussenDieWahrnehmungdesKaisers indenProvinzen des Reiches und in den Nachbarstaaten Akten der internationalen Tagungan der Johannes Gutenberg-Universitaumlt Mainz vom 12ndash14 Oktober 2006 edited byD Kreikenbom 229ndash248 Wiesbaden Harrassowitz

Virenque H 2006 ldquoLes quatre Naos de Saft el-Henneh un rempart theacuteologique con-struit par Nectanebo Ier dans le Delta orientalrdquo Egypte Afrique et Orient 42 19ndash28

Vittmann G 2003 Aumlgypten und die Fremden im ersten vorchristlichen JahrtausendMainz Philipp von Zabern

Waitkus W 2008 Untersuchungen zu Kult und Funktion des Luxortempels GladbeckPeWe

Wildung D 1977 Imhotep und Amenhotep Gottwerdung im alten Aumlgypten Muumlnchenund Berlin Deutscher Kunstverlag

Winter E 2005 ldquoAlexander der Groszlige als Pharao in aumlgyptischen Tempelnrdquo in AumlgyptenGriechenland Rom Abwehr und Beruumlhrung Staumldelsches Kunstinstitut und StaumldtischeGalerie 26 November 2005ndash26 Februar 2006 edited by H Beck et al 204ndash215 Tuumlb-ingen ErnstWasmuth

Winter E 1982 ldquoPhilaerdquo in Lexikon der Aumlgyptologie IV edited byW Helck andWWest-endorf 1022ndash1028 Wiesbaden Harrassowitz

Winter E 1968 Untersuchungen zu den aumlgyptischen Tempelreliefs der griechisch-roumlmi-schen Zeit Wien H Boumlhlau Nachf

Yoyotte J 2013 Histoire geacuteographie et religion de lrsquoEacutegypte ancienne Opera selecta Leu-ven Peeters

Yoyotte J 2001 ldquoLe second affichage du deacutecret de lrsquoan 2 de Nekhetnebef et la deacutecou-verte de Thocircnis-Heacuteracleacuteionrdquo Eacutegypte Afrique et Orient 24 25ndash34

Yoyotte J 1983 ldquoLrsquoAmon de Naukratisrdquo Revue drsquoEgyptologie 34 129ndash136Žabkar LV 1988Hymns to Isis inHerTemple at Philae Hanover and London University

Press of New EnglandZivie A-P 1970 ldquoA propos du toponyme ḏbtmentionneacute dans les Textes des Pyramidesrdquo

Revue drsquoEacutegyptologie 22 206ndash207


chapter 6

The Satrap Stele of Ptolemy A Reassessment

Boyo G Ockinga

The so-called ldquoSatrap Stelerdquo (CGC 22263) is themost significant native Egyptiansource on Ptolemy from the period before he assumed the kingship1 The texthas eighteen lines the first and the beginning of the second give the titulary ofAlexander IV this is followed by a list of Ptolemyrsquos epithets and from the endof line 3 to the end of line 6 we have an account of Ptolemyrsquos military exploitsMost of the text lines 7 to 18 focuses on Ptolemyrsquos benefactions for the godsand temples of Buto

As D Schaumlfer argues the activities of Ptolemy recorded on the Satrap Steleare those traditionally expected of an ancient Egyptian king namely takingcare of theneeds of the gods andprotectingEgypt from foreign foes2 If Ptolemyis shown as acting like a king do the epithets and the phraseology that referto him also describe him in royal terms This paper will examine in detail thelanguage used in the text to refer to Ptolemy so providing the basis for anevaluation of the ancient author(s) understanding of his position at the time3

1 For a recent English translation see Ritner ldquoThe Satrap Stelerdquo A good photograph of the stelecan be found in Grimm Alexandria Abb 33 p 36 The most recent comprehensive study ofthe stele is by SchaumlferMakedonischePharaonenundhieroglyphische Stelen who also providesa facsimile copy of the hieroglyphic text with transliteration and translation as well as a veryextensive bibliography (pp XIIIndashXLVI) In the same year that her work appeared Morenzoffered a detailed discussion of what he refers to as the ldquoHymn to Ptolemyrdquo at the beginningof the text dealing in particular with the allusions to the classical literary compositions TheStory of Sinuhe and the Prophecy of Neferty found in the various epithets applied to PtolemyMorenz ldquoAlte Huumlte auf neuen Koumlpfenrdquo The studies of both Schaumlfer andMorenz only becameavailable tome after this paper was delivered (September 2011) andmany of the observationsmade by Morenz in particular on the allusions to the classical literary texts The Tale of Sin-uhe and the Prophecy of Neferty coincide with mine For a discussion of the identity of thePersianḪšryšꜣ and a detailed analysis of lines 8ndash11 of the stele (Urk II 1615ndash186) see LadyninldquoAdversary Ḫšryš(ꜣ) His Name and Deeds according to the Satrap Stelardquo which also includesan extensive bibliography on the stele For a reappraisal of Ptolemy see now the new study byIanWorthington Ptolemy I King andPharaoh of Egyptwho discusses the stele on pgs 122ndash125

2 Schaumlfer Makedonische Pharaonen und hieroglyphische Stelen 1933 Schaumlfer certainly recognizes that the language used to refer to Ptolemy also calls tomind royal

phraseology and that the literary form of the section of the text that deals with Ptolemyrsquos

the satrap stele of ptolemy a reassessment 167

Section 1 considers the implications of the designation ldquogreat chiefrdquo Section 2examines in detail the 13 epithets used to describe Ptolemy against the back-ground of their earlier usage Section 3 discusses the royal phraseology thatappears in the main text4 In Section 4 the institutional memory underlyingthe authorsrsquo use of older literary traditions is examined Finally Section 5 con-siders what the epithets and phraseology can tell us of the Egyptian priestsrsquoperception of Ptolemy drawing into the discussion the controversial questionof whether in lines 8ndash12 he is referred to as ḥm=f ldquoHisMajestyrdquo and concludingby considering the significance of the empty cartouches

1 The Introduction to the Text

Ptolemy had exercised real power in Egypt since becoming satrap in 323BCEyet the stele recognizes Alexander IV a ca 10-year-old boy as the legitimateking The royal cartouches in the lunette of the stele may curiously be emptybut the text proper is dated to the seventh year (311BCE) of Alexanderrsquos reignand begins like every traditional royal inscription with his official five-fold tit-ularyWe also note that the text presents Alexander as fulfilling all the require-ments of a legitimate Egyptian king he is one ldquoto whom the office of his fatherwas givenrdquo the reference being to his earthly father Alexander III he is also Stp-n-Imnw ldquothe chosen one of [the state god] AmunrdquoWhile the beginning of linetwo clearly states ldquoHe [Alexander] is the king [nsw] in the Two Lands [Egypt]and the foreign landsrdquo (thus also recognizing him as the legitimate king of therest of Alexanderrsquos empire) it notes that ldquoHis Majesty is amongst the Asiatics5while there is a great chief in EgyptmdashPtolemy [is] his namerdquo ie the king doesnot reside in Egypt while Ptolemy does

The term ldquogreat chiefrdquo used to designate Ptolemy is of interest His positionwas an unusual one the closest ancient Egyptian equivalent would have beenthe Viceroy of Nubia (ldquoKingrsquos son of Kushrdquo) but the authors of the text chose aterm that in New Kingdom Egypt was used for foreign rulers for example theHittite king6 in the mid-eighth century BCE in the account of the conquest

benefactions for the gods of Buto is that of the Koumlnigsnovelle or ldquoroyal noveletterdquo (194) inher chapter II 613 she also discusses some of the details of the phraseology used howeverconsiderably more parallels can be identified

4 These were not discussed by Schaumlfer Makedonische Pharaonen und hieroglyphische Stelen5 The term Stt here denotes the former Persian Empire here including Macedon see Ladynin

ldquoAdversary Ḫšryš(ꜣ) His Name and Deeds according to the Satrap Stelardquo 109 n 556 WB I 32920 KRI II 2268 and passim (Hittite treaty) II 23414 and passim (Hittite Marriage

168 ockinga

of Egypt by the Nubian king Piankhi the term is used of some of the Egyptianrulers of theDelta principalities7 Some three centuries later a similar situationwas to arise with the position of Cornelius Gallus the first Prefect of Egypt andfor him the designation wr ldquochiefrdquo was also chosen qualified in his case not bythe adjective ꜥꜣ ldquogreatrdquo but wsr ldquomightyrdquo8

Ptolemy may only be styled ldquogreat chiefrdquo but following the titulary of Alex-ander IV the text continues with seventeen epithets that all praise Ptolemy infulsome terms and provide a valuable insight into how he was viewed by theinfluential priestly class9

2 The Epithets of Lines 2ndash3

(1) si rnpi pw ḳn m gbꜣwy=f ldquoHe is a youthful man strong in his two armsrdquo Theclosest parallels with regard to grammatical structure as well as content refernot to a king but to non-royal personages In the so-called Prophecy of Nefertya Middle Kingdom text (ca 2000BCE) set in the reign of the Fourth-Dynastyking Snefru we read that at the kingrsquos request for a skilled scribe his officialstell him of a lector priest of exceptional ability ldquoThere is a great lector priest ofBastet sovereign our lord Neferty is his namerdquonḏspwḳngbꜣ=f sš pw iḳr ḏbꜣw=fldquohe is a citizen strong in respect of his arm he is a scribe excellent in respectof his fingersrdquo We have in the first clause a bi-partite pw-sentence followed byan adjectival phrase that qualifies the predicate (ḳn gbꜣ=f ) which is very sim-ilar to the statement in the Satrap Stele Probably also influenced by the text

stele) When he is referred to as an enemy for example in the record of Ramesses IIrsquos battleof Kadesh he is usually the ldquomiserable fallen onerdquo (KRI II 161 and passim) or at best the wrẖsi ldquothe miserable chiefrdquo (KRI II 164 2015)

7 Urk III 121 and 4328 Urk II I 35 Hoffmann et al Die dreisprachige Stele des C Cornelius Gallus 72 f9 Ladynin ldquoAdversary Ḫšryš(ꜣ) His Name and Deeds according to the Satrap Stelardquo 102 113

argues that the influence of the Graeco-Macedonian elite can be detected in the stelersquos ide-ological trend it was their intention to confer on the satrap ldquoan image appropriate in tradi-tional Egyptian texts to a Pharaoh onlyrdquo Schaumlfer ldquoNachfolge und Legitimierung inAumlgypten imZeitalter der Diadochenrdquo 451 observes that the authors of the text skilfully present Ptolemyas someone who would be a good and legitimate pharaoh Although only directly accessibleto the educated priestly class she sees the text as a piece of propaganda in his favour whosemessage would also have been disseminated orally at least in the territory of Buto


of the Prophecy of Neferty Senenmut the well-known official who served Hat-shepsut is called nḏs ḳn gbꜣ=f šmsi nsw ḥr ḫꜣs(w)t rsy(w)t mḥty(w)t iꜣbty(w)imnty(w) ldquoa citizen strong in respect of his arm one who followed the king inthe northern southern eastern and western foreign land(s)rdquo10 Here the termis probably also used in a general sense emphasizing the efficiency of Senen-mut rather than hismilitary prowess even if following the kingmay have takenhim on campaigns

What we do encounter in royal phraseology is the youthful vigour attributedto Ptolemy The expression si rnpi ldquoyouthful manrdquo11 is not found but the adjec-tive rnpi ldquoyouthfulrdquo is well attestedwith other nouns A synonymous expressionis sfy rnpi ldquoyouthful youngmanrdquo where ḥwn is replaced by sfy Ramesses III is asfy rnpi ḳn mi Bꜥl ldquoyouthful young man strong like Baalrdquo this is followed by theepithet nsw ꜥrꜥr sḫrw nb sḥw ldquoa king who carries out plans lord of counselrdquo12This juxtaposition of the qualities of youthfulness strength and good coun-sel is also found in the Satrap Stele where si rnpi pw ḳn m gbꜣwy=f ldquohe is ayouthful man strong in his two armsrdquo is followed by ꜣḫ sḥ ldquoeffective of coun-selrdquo (see below) These three qualities are also juxtaposed in another text ofRamesses III he is ḥwn nṯry sfy špsy wr pḥty nḫt ꜥw srḫy tnr nb sḥw mn-ib spdsḫrw siꜣ ꜥnḫmi Mḥy ip mi Šw sꜣ Rꜥw ldquoa divine youth splendid youngman greatof strength strong of arm strong counsellor lord of counsels firm heartedacute of plans one who perceives life like lsquothe Fillerrsquo13 discerning like Shu theson of Rerdquo14

Another synonymous expression is ḥwn rnpi ldquoyouthful young manrdquo whichis used of Ramesses II the king is described as ip m ib=f ḥr smnḫ s[ḫrw] mi Ptḥ grg tꜣ m šꜣꜥ ldquodiscerning of mind realizing plans like Ptah who founded theearth at the beginningrdquo The text then continues isk ḥm=f m ḥwn rnpi ṯmꜣ ꜥwldquoNow His Majesty was a youthful young man strong-armedrdquo15 Here too wis-dom youth and strength appear together

10 Urk IV 4141711 The choice of si ldquomanrdquo rather than ḥwn ldquoyoungmanrdquo or sfy ldquoyouthrdquo may very well be delib-

erate Ptolemy was a man of 42 when he gained control of Egypt and by the time the steletext was composed he was in his 50s

12 Medinet Habu second court south side KRI V 2515 DZA 2599154013 A reference to the god of learning Thoth who in themyth healed (ldquofilledrdquo) the injured eye

of Horus14 KRI V 59715 Temple of Ramesses II at Abydos interior of court North Wall KRI II 5359ndash10 DZA

25991570

170 ockinga

The expression nb rnpi ldquoyouthful lordrdquo also emphasizes the youthfulness ofthe king In the record of the battle of Kadesh we read ist ḥm=f m nb rnpi pri-ꜥw iwty snnw=f ldquoNow His Majesty (Ramesses II) was a youthful lord activewithout his secondrdquo16 Similar ideas are encountered in several inscriptions ofRamesses III he is nb rnpi nḫt ꜥwmi Itmw ldquoa youthful lord mighty of arm likeAtumrdquo17 nb rnpi pri ꜥw sr n=f nḫtwm ẖt ldquoa youthful lord active for whom vic-torywas foretold in thewombrdquo18 snḏ=f šfyt=f m ikmḥrKmt nswbity nb rnpi ṯḥnḫꜥiw mi iꜥḥ ldquothe fear of him and the awe of him are a shield over Egypt Kingof Upper and Lower Egypt a youthful lord gleaming of appearances like themoonrdquo19 In almost all of these examples albeit usingdifferent vocabulary to theSatrap Stele the youth of the king is combined with reference to his strength

The expression ḳngbꜣ ldquostrong of armrdquowhich is very close to the Satrap Stelersquosḳn m gbꜣ=f ldquostrong in respect of his armrdquo appears very frequently in images ofthe king in the texts of Ramesses III at Medinet Habu In an inscription onthe south outer wall the king is ldquothe perfect god who smites the Meshwesh[Libyans] who destroys the nose of the Nubiansrdquo and ḳn gbꜣ dr ḫꜣswt ldquostrongarmed who subdues the foreign landsrdquo20 In the Second Court south side theking is ldquoone who is prepared like a bull ḳn gbꜣ dm ḥnty strong armed sharp ofhornsrdquo21 On the north inner side of the first pylon the defeated enemies referto the king as Mnṯw ḳn gbꜣ ldquoMont [the war god] strong armedrdquo22

The word gbꜣ is regularly used when referring to the kingrsquos military activityIn a rhetorical text over defeated Libyan foes the king is said to be ldquoMont whenhe sets out who shines upon horse who charges into hundreds of thousandsmighty of arm who stretches out the arm (pd gbꜣ) [and] sends his arrow tothe place he wishedrdquo23 Another rhetorical text above the king refers to him asldquoThe king a divine falcon who seizes the one who attacks him potent mightywho relies upon his strong arm raging great of strength who slew the Mesh-weshwho are crushed andprostrate before his horses a brave onewho chargesinto the multitude like one rejoicing [so that they are] destroyed slaughteredand cast down in their place relaxed of arm (gbꜣ) his arrow having been sent

16 KRI II 5 sect717 Medinet Habu southern outer wall Palace window of appearance KRI V1022ndash3 DZA

2599145018 Medinet Habu 2nd LibyanWar Year 11 Inscription KRI V 5910ndash12 DZA 2599146019 Medinet Habu 1st LibyanWar Year 5 Inscription KRI V 2016ndash211 DZA 2599148020 KRI V 10112ndash13 DZA 30637630 MH II pl 11421 KRI V 234ndash5 DZA 3063764022 KRI V 65623 KRI V 142ndash3


where he [wishes]rdquo24 In the context of a speech by the king to the princes andofficials in which he enumerates all that he has done he claims ldquoI have res-cued my infantry [I have protected] the infantry my arm (gbꜣ) has shieldedthe peoplerdquo25

(2) ꜣḫ sḥ ldquoeffective of counselrdquo Qualities incorporating the term sḥ ldquocounselrdquoare found in association with the king from the New Kingdom onward26 butthe epithet has its origins in the phraseology of Middle Kingdom officials inwhich they refer to themselves as counsellors The closest to ꜣḫ sḥ ldquoeffective ofcounselrdquo is found in an inscription of the nomarchHapi-Djefai who claims thathe is rḏin nb=f wrt=f iḳr sḥ mwḏtn=f ldquoone whose greatness his lord [the king]caused excellent of counsel in what he [the king] commanded himrdquo27 Herethe adjective iḳr ldquoexcellentrdquo is used rather than the Satrap Stelersquos ꜣḫ ldquoeffectiverdquo

The qualities an official has as a counsellor can be expressed in other waysfor example with the epithet nb sḥ ldquolord of counselrdquo in a section of text wherehe speaks of himself as a judge Hapi-Djefai says ink hellip ꜥḳꜣ ib iwty gsꜣ=f nb sḥ ldquoIwas hellip straightforward one without favouritism lord of counselrdquo28

Officials also describe themselves as sḥy ldquocounsellorrdquo using a nisbe nounderived from sḥ In his tomb at Deir Rifeh Nefer-Khnum is said to be wrmrwtyꜥꜣ šfyt sḥy ldquomuch loved greatly respected a counsellorrdquo29 The term sḥy is alsoattested in a non-royal text of the early first millennium BCE In his biograph-ical inscription the official Djedkhonsiuefankh (Twenty-second Dynasty) saysof himself ḏi=i ḏd=tn ḥsiy r=i n wr ḫprt n=i nḥpn wi Ḫnmwm ꜣḫ ib m sḥy mnḫspw ldquoI will cause that you [future readers of his biography] will say ldquoA favoured

24 KRI V 4312ndash1525 KRI V 179ndash1026 See the references to sḥ nb sḥ iḳr sḥ in Blumenthal Untersuchungen zum aumlgyptischen

Koumlnigtum des Mittleren Reiches I27 Griffith The Inscriptions of Siucirct and Decircr Ricircfeh pl 9 Line 350 Urk VII 667 In statements

about the officialrsquos qualities as a counsellor we also encounter sḫrw in place of sḥ anotherof Hapi-Djefairsquos epithets is sḫntiy ḥr mnḫ sḫrw=f ldquoone who was promoted because of theeffectiveness of his plansrdquo (GriffithThe Inscriptions of Siucirct andDecircrRicircfeh pl 9 line 339UrkVII 6611ndash12) See also Doxey Egyptian Non-Royal Epithets in the Middle Kingdom p 274220

28 Griffith The Inscriptions of Siucirct and Decircr Ricircfeh pl 5 line 249 Urk VII 5917ndash1829 Griffith The Inscriptions of Siucirct and Decircr Ricircfeh pl 16 Tomb I line 19

172 ockinga

onerdquo concerning me because of the great [things] that happened to me [Thegod] Khnum formed me as one usefully minded as a counsellor effective ofdeedsrdquo30

It is in theNewKingdom thatwe first find references to the kingrsquos qualities asa counsellor and sḥy is also used of him On the Beth Shan stele Ramesses II issḥy rs-tpmnḫsḫrwpḥty sḫr rḳyw=f ldquoa counsellorwatchful effective of plans amighty one who fells his enemiesrdquo31 On the Hittite marriage stele Ramesses IIis sḥy ip ib ldquoa counsellor considered of thoughtrdquo32 Ramesses III is said to besḥy mnḫ sḫrw spd hpw ldquoa counsellor efficient of plans effective of lawsrdquo33 Aswe have already seen above in the discussion of si rnpy ldquoyouthful manrdquo theconcept of king as counsellor is associated with references to his martial qual-ities Ramesses III is sfy rnpi ḳn mi Bꜥl nsw ꜥrꜥr sḫrw nb sḥw ldquoyouthful youngman strong like Baal a king who carries out plans lord of counselrdquo34

We find exact parallels for the Satrap Stelersquos ꜣḫ sḥ in the Late Period In col-umn 2 of the Shellal stele of Psamtek II (and its copy in Karnak Twenty-sixthDynasty) the king is nṯr nfr ꜣḫ sḥ nsw ḳnmꜥr spw ṯmꜣ ꜥw ḥwi pḏt psḏt ldquothe per-fect god effective of counsel a strong king successful of deeds strong armedwho smites theninebowsrdquo35On the statueof Darius (Twenty-seventhDynasty)found at Susa he is said to be nb ḏrt dꜣr pḏt psḏt ꜣḫ sḥ mꜥr sḫrw nb ḫpš ꜥḳ=f mꜥšꜣt sti r mḏd nn whin šsr=f ldquolord of [his own] hand who subdues the NineBows effective of counsel successful of plans lord of the scimitar when heenters into the masses who shoots to hit [the mark] without his arrow goingastrayrdquo36 In the Thirtieth Dynasty it is applied to the king in an inscription ofNectanebos I on the shrine of Saft el Henneh the king is designated nṯr nfr ꜥꜣpḥty ṯmꜣ-ꜥw dr ḫꜣswt ꜣḫ sḥ ldquoThe perfect god great of strength strong armedwho quells the foreign lands effective of counselrdquo37

30 CGC 559 Jansen-Winkeln Aumlgyptische Biographien der 22 und 23 Dynastie vol 1 9ndash24vol 2 433ndash440

31 KRI II 1501332 KRI II 235 11ndash1233 Medinet Habu second court south side Inscription of Year 5 KRI V 219 DZA 28709540

MH I Pl 27ndash2834 Medinet Habu second court south side KRI V2515 DZA 2599154035 Der Manuelian Living in the Past 341 and pl 16 (Shellal stele) and 354 and pl 17 (Karnak

stele)36 Column3of Text 2 (on the third foldof the garment)Yoyotte ldquoUne statuedeDariusdeacutecou-

verte agrave Suserdquo 25537 CGC 70021 Roeder Naos 62 sect2951 DZA 28708910


A little later it is found in non-royal texts In the tomb of Petosiris a contem-porary of Ptolemy the epithet is applied to him and his wife Petosiris is ꜣḫt sḥm niwt=f ꜥꜣ ḥswt m spꜣt=f wr mrwt ḫr ḥr nb ldquoeffective of counsel in his citygreat of favour in his nome great of affection with everyonerdquo38 The epithet istwice applied to Petosirisrsquo wife spd rꜣ nḏmmdw ꜣḫt sḥmtrf=s ldquoskilled of speechsweet of words effective of counsel in her writingsrdquo39 ꜣḫt rꜣ nḏm mdw ꜣḫt sḥm drf=s ldquouseful of speech sweet of words useful of counsel in her writingsrdquo40We also encounter it in a non-royal text at the end of the Ptolemaic period Thelady Taimhotep (reign of Cleopatra VII) is said to be spd rꜣ nḏm mdw=s ꜣḫ sḥldquoeffective of speech pleasant with respect to her words effective of counselrdquo41

In Ptolemaic royal texts epithets formedwith sḥ are not uncommon QueenBerenike (wife of Ptolemy III) is said to be ꜣḫ sḥ ldquouseful of counselrdquo42 This maybe influenced by the queen being identified with Isis who can have the epi-thetmnḫ sḥ ldquoeffective of counselrdquo eg in Philae43 Ptolemy XIII is said to be spdsḫrw mnḫ sḥ ldquoefficient of plans effective of counselrdquo44 At Edfu the king is iḳrsḥ ldquoexcellent of counselrdquo and mnḫ sḥ ldquoeffective of counselrdquo45 Cleopatra VII issaid to be ꜣḫ sḥ ldquouseful of counselrdquo in an inscription on the outer east wall ofthe temple of Dendera46 Later still the Roman emperor Domitian is describedas being ꜣḫ sḥ m irin=f nb ldquoeffective of counsel in all that he has donerdquo on theobeliscus Pamphilius (Piazza Navona Rome)47

(3) There are two possible readings for the first sign in this epithet sḫm theadjective verb ldquoto be mightyrdquo and the noun ḫrp ldquoone who controls controllerrdquoderived from the verbal root ldquoto controlrdquo Taking the firstmeaning48 sḫmmšꜥw

38 Lefebvre Le tombeau de Petosiris II 75 text 1023 DZA 2870886039 Lefebvre Le tombeau de Petosiris II 29 text 58840 Lefebvre Le tombeau de Petosiris II 35 text 618ndash9 DZA 2870885041 British Museum EA 147 line 3 DZA 2870888042 Urk VIII 451343 LGG III 3151 similarlymnḫt sḫrw ldquoeffective of plansrdquo LGG III 315244 De Morgan Catalogue des monuments et inscriptions de lrsquoEacutegypte antique pp 169 754

DZA 2870864045 Edfu III 18115 IV 35416 see alsoWilson A Ptolemaic Lexicon 89046 DZA 2870895047 Grenier ldquoLes inscriptions hieacuteroglyphiques de lrsquoobeacutelisque Pamphilirdquo 941 DZA 2870884048 As for example Ritner ldquoThe Satrap Stelerdquo

174 ockinga

ldquomighty of armiesrdquo would be an epithet unique to the Satrap Stele Presumablyit is understood as a demonstration of the power of Ptolemy in which case itstands in stark contrast to the situation in ancient Egypt where the king doesnot derive power from his army but is himself a power that protects it Forexample Ramesses II is mki mšꜥ=f ldquoone who protects his armyrdquo49 sbty ḏr m-rk mšꜥ=f ldquoa strong wall around his armyrdquo50 and šdi mšꜥ=f ldquoone who rescueshis armyrdquo If one were to translate ldquocontroller of armiesrdquo51 we would be dealingwith a title that is otherwise unattested52 although there are many other titlesformedwith ḫrp53 One factor against interpreting the expression as a title hereis that it would be the only one in what is otherwise a sequence of epithets

(4) wmt ib ldquostout heartedrdquo This is an expression that is not found in non-royalcontexts The oldest attestation of this designation for the king comes from theMiddle Kingdom Tale of Sinuhe (58ndash61) in the encomium on king Sesostris Iwmt-ib pw mꜣꜣ=f ꜥšꜣt n rḏin=f ḥmsiw ḥꜣ ib=f wdi-ḥr pw mꜣꜣ=f iꜣbtyw() rš=f pwhꜣit=f ⟨r⟩ rꜣ-pḏtyw ldquoHe is one stout of heart when he sees themasses he doesnot let slackness surround his heart eager when he sees the easterners() it ishis joy when he descends on the lsquobow peoplersquo [foreigners]rdquo The epithet is verywell attested in royal texts from the Ramesside Period onwards Of Ramesses IIit is said in the Poemof the battle of Kadesh ḥm=f mnb rnpi pri-ꜥw iwty snnw=fḫpšwy=f wsr(w) ib=f wmt(w) ldquoHis majesty was a youthful lord active with-out his second his arms strong his heart stoutrdquo54 In the inscription recordingthe siege of Dapur Ramesses II is nṯr nfr tnr ḳn ḥr ḫꜣswt wmt-ib m skyw mn ḥrhtr ldquothe strong perfect god mighty over the foreign lands stout of heart in thefrayrdquo55 In the year 8 inscription atMedinet Habu it is said of Ramesses III šwyt

49 KRI II 918 19510 206 220650 KRI II 6851 As do Schaumlfer Makedonische Pharaonen p 68 andMorenz ldquoAlte Huumlte auf neuen Koumlpfenrdquo

pp 118 and 124 (ldquoHeerfuumlhrerrdquo)52 The reference given by Schaumlfer (Urk IV 9665) is not a title but part of an epithet Intef is

mḥ ib ny nswm ḫrp mšꜥw=f ldquoconfidant of the king in controlling his armiesrdquo53 For NewKingdom examples see nos 1517ndash1559 in Al-Ayedi Index of Egyptian Administra-

tive Religious andMilitary Titles of the New Kingdom54 KRI II 6 sectsect7ndash8 similarly 120 sect89 1531155 KRI II 1739


ḫpš=k ḥr tp mnfyt=k i-šm=sn mḥ(w) m pḥty=k ib=k wmt(w) sḫrw=k mnḫ(w)ldquothe shadow of your mighty arm is over your army they come being filled withyour power your heart being stout your plans effectiverdquo56 It is also found usedof Nectanebos I on the shrine from Saft el Henneh wmt-ib pw hellip n ꜥn m ꜣts(ꜣ)s(ꜣ)y ldquostout hearted hellip without turning back in the moment of attackrdquo57Here we have an echo of words describing the king in the classic text of Sin-uhe (57) ꜥḥꜣ-ib pw m ꜣt sꜣsꜣ ꜥn pw n rḏin=f sꜣ=f ldquohe is a steadfast one in thetime of attack he is one who returns he does not turn the backrdquo wmt ib isalso well attested as an epithet for the king in Graeco-Roman temple inscrip-tions58

(5) mn ṯbwty ldquofirm footedrdquo This epithet is very well-attested in the phraseol-ogy of royal officials in the Twelfth Dynasty where it appears in the contextof statements in which the official stresses his loyalty to the king59 The armyscribe Mentuhotep for example refers to himself as mn ṯbwt hr nmtwt mḏḥwꜣwt nt nb tꜣwy ldquofirm footed easy of gait who adheres to the ways of the Lordof theTwoLands [the king]rdquo60 It is not used in thisway for officials in later peri-ods nor is it found in royal phraseology however in the Graeco-Roman periodit is used to describe deities61

56 KRI V 2716ndash28157 CGC 70021 Roeder Naos 62 sect2951 DZA 2050528058 Otto Gott undMensch nach den aumlgyptischen Tempelinschriften 11859 Doxey Egyptian Non-Royal Epithets in the Middle Kingdom 6860 Louvre C176 Pierret Recueil drsquo inscriptions ineacutedites 35 DZA 24026890 Similarly Lou-

vre C170 Pierret Recueil drsquo inscriptions ineacutedites 63 DZA 24026870 Gardiner and PeetInscriptions of Sinai pl XLIII no 150 DZA 24026840 Stele Leiden V7 DZA 24026900Hammamat 108 4ndash5 Couyat and Montet Les inscriptions hieacuteroglyphiques et hieacuteratiquesdu Ouacircdi Hammacircmacirct 76 DZA 24026910 stele CGC 20080 Lange and Schaumlfer Grab- undDenksteine des Mittleren Reichs 96 DZA 24026920 stele CGC 20318 Lange and SchaumlferGrab- und Denksteine des Mittleren Reiches p 331 DZA 24026930 Stele of Sobek-khuManchester line 10 Sethe Aumlgyptische Lesestuumlcke 8218 DZA 24026950

61 LGG III 284a

176 ockinga

(6) tkn62 n(n) rḏi(t) sꜣ=f ldquoone who attacks without turning his backrdquo The wordtkn which in its transitive usage has the basic meaning ldquoto approachrdquo and canbe used in the sense of approaching in a hostile manner63 is not attested as anaction of the king until the Late Period and Ptolemaic Period when it occurs inroyal names in one of the ldquoTwo Ladiesrdquo names of Nectanebos II shr ib nṯrw tknḫꜣswt ldquowho satisfies the hearts of the gods and attacks the foreign landsrdquo64 inone of the Horus names of Alexander III ḥḳꜣ nḫt tkn ḫꜣswt ldquoStrong Ruler whoattacks the foreign landsrdquo65 and in the Horus name of Ptolemy VI dwnty tknḫryw=f ldquothe triumphant one who attacks his enemiesrdquo66

The phrase n(n) rḏi(t) sꜣ=f ldquowithout turning his backrdquo is found in the enco-mium on king Sesostris I in the Tale of Sinuhe (56ndash58) ꜥḥꜥ ib pw m ꜣt sꜣsꜣ ꜥnpw n rḏin=f sꜣ=f ldquohe is one upright of heart in the time of attack he is onewho counter attacks who does not turn his backrdquo Like the previous phrasemnṯbwty ldquofirm footedrdquo we also encounter it in the text of the stele of Sobek-khuwho recounts his bravery in battle ꜥḥꜥn sḫin=i ꜥꜣmw ꜥḥꜥn rḏin=i iṯitw ḫꜥw=f inꜥnḫ 2 ny mšꜥ nn tšit ḥr ꜥḥꜣ ḥr=i ḥsꜣ(w) n rḏi=i sꜣ=i n ꜥꜣmw ldquoThen I struck downan Asiatic Then I caused that his equipment be taken by twomen of the armywithout ceasing from fighting My face was ferocious [and] I did not turn myback to an Asiaticrdquo67

62 Recently the sign has at times been read as a separate word of unknown readingKaplony-Heckel in TUAT I p 615 translates it as ldquoder Zornigerrdquo Ritner ldquoThe Satrap Stelerdquo asldquothe powerfulrdquo Schaumlfer Makedonische Pharaonen 69 leaves the question of the reading ofthe sign openThe interpretation of the translator of theWoumlrterbuchZettel (DZA 31152110)is to be preferred The unusual sign is noted but not seen as a separateword rather as partof tkn which is translated ldquoder sich in den Kampf stuumlrztrdquo This interpretation is also fol-lowedbyMorenz ldquoAlteHuumlte auf neuenKoumlpfenrdquo p 117who also discusses themetaphoricalsignificance of the sign of the lion holding two sticks

63 It can take a direct object (WB V 3347) or the object is introduced by a preposition (mWBV 33414 r WB V 33421)

64 Von Beckerath Handbuch der aumlgyptischen Koumlnigsnamen 229 3 N365 Von Beckerath Handbuch der aumlgyptischen Koumlnigsnamen 233 1 H366 Rochemonteix Le temple drsquoEdfou I 302 DZA 3115210067 Line 10 Sethe Aumlgyptische Lesestuumlcke 8312ndash14 DZA 28869340


(7) ifn ḥr n rḳyw=f m ꜥḥꜣ=sn ldquowho faces up to68 his opponents when they fightrdquoThis epithet is only attested hereThe verb ifn is also of some interest It is foundin the Old Kingdom Pyramid Texts where it has the meaning ldquoto turn aroundrdquobut disappears from use for 2000 years to reappear in the Satrap stele The onlyreference the WB (I 7013) gives for ifn ḥr is our example For ifn ldquosich umwen-denrdquo the references are all to the PyramidTexts69 it is not listed in the standardMiddle Egyptian dictionaries70 nor is it attested in Late Egyptian71

(8) ꜥḳꜣ ḏrt ḫfꜥ n=f šmrt n(n) sṯi(t) r thi ldquoprecise of hand when he has graspedthe bow without shooting to failrdquo ꜥḳꜣ ḏrt is an unusual combination of adjec-tive and noun Usually the adjective ꜥḳꜣ is found as a predicate in adjectivalsentences with abstract concepts such as ib or ḥꜣty ldquoheartthoughtmindrdquo nsldquotonguespeechrdquo or rꜣ ldquospeechrdquo72 šmrt is an interesting word It first appearsin the post-Amarna period Its oldest known attestation is in the Amduat inthe tomb of Sety I where the sun god says to the gods who support him ḫꜣḫ nšsrw=ṯn spdn ꜥbbwt=ṯnpdn šmrwt=tn ldquospeed to your arrows sharpness to yourspears tension to your bowsrdquo73 Although the epithet with this precise word-ing is not attested in the known sources the king as bearer of the šmrt is Weencounter the word several times in descriptions of the king in the historicalinscriptions of Ramesses III at Medinet Habu In an inscription recording thefirst Libyan war he is smn wnmy pd šmrt ldquoenduring of arm who strings and

68 Lit ldquowho turns the face towardsrdquo for the usage of the preposition n see Gardiner Egyp-tian Grammar sect 1641 Ritnerrsquos ldquoThe Satrap Stelerdquo translation ldquowho strikes the facerdquo doesnot suit the basic meaning of ifn ldquoto turn aroundrdquo

69 The same applies to the references in Hannig AumlgyptischesWoumlrterbuch I70 Hannig AumlgyptischesWoumlrterbuch II Faulkner Concise Dictionary of Middle Egyptian71 It is not in Lesko A Dictionary of Late Egyptian72 Apart from the Satrap Stele the only example I have found where it is used of part of

body is in an epithet of Ptolemy IX from Edfu (DZA 22029190) where the subject is rdwyldquotwo feetrdquo ꜥḳꜣ rdwym ꜣḫt nḥḥ ldquoprecise of feet in the lsquohorizon of eternityrsquo (temple)rdquo whichpresumably refers to correct behaviour in the performance of temple ritual

73 Amduat 10th Hornung Das Amduat vol 2 p 175 DZA 30119730

178 ockinga

bears the bowrdquo74 On the inner face of the southern first pylon he is nꜥš gbꜣw pdẖr šmrt ptr=f ḥḥw n ḥr=f mi dfdf ldquostrong of arm who strings and bears the bowhe seeing millions before him like mistrdquo75 As in the Satrap stele in this contextwe also encounter the king as bearer of the šmrtwho does not miss his targetalthough different vocabulary is used (whi rather than thi)76 In a text on thesouthern colonnade at Medinet Habu Ramesses III is wr ḫpšwy ḳnyw pd šmrti-di=f šsr r st=f n whin=f ldquogreat of strong arms who strings the bow withoutit failing he sends the arrow to its placerdquo77 In texts relating to his Syrian warshe is nsw tnr [] pd ẖr šmrt šsr=f mḫꜣ n whin=f ldquothe king strong of [] whostrings and bears the bow his burning arrow it does not failrdquo78 In the Graeco-RomanPeriod šmrt is used to designate the bow that the king hands to the godswith which the kingrsquos enemies are then slain79

(9) ꜥḥꜣm sẖꜥ=f imitw ꜥḥꜣ n(n) ꜥḥꜥmhꜣw=f ldquowho fightswith his sword in themidstof battle there being none who can stand in his presencerdquo The image of theking as a fighter in close combat is well attested but as with the previous epi-thet some of the vocabulary of the Satrap Stele is new in particular sẖꜥ ldquosworddaggerrdquo or similar which is only attested here The reading of the first word isuncertain but clearly must refer to close combat80

The secondpart of the image iswell attested81 It appears in theMiddleKing-dom Tale of Sinuhe (B55ndash56) in the encomium on king Sesostris I iꜥi-ḥr pw tšꜣwpwt n ꜥḥꜥn=tw m hꜣw=f ldquoan avenger is he who smashes foreheads one can-not stand up in his presencerdquo In the Gebel Barkal stele of Thutmosis III of theEighteenth Dynasty the king is ꜥḥꜣwty pri-ꜥw ḥr pri nn ꜥḥꜥ m hꜣw=f ldquoan activefighter on the battlefield there is none who can stand in his presencerdquo82 On

74 KRI V 16775 KRI V 585ndash6 DZA 3011980076 This is the only example of sṯi r thi in the WB Zettelarchiv (WB V 31915)77 KRI V 496 DZA 3011979078 KRI V 821279 For examples from Edfu seeWilson A Ptolemaic Lexicon 101380 DaumasValeurs phoneacutetiques des signes hieacuteroglyphiques lists the sign as A 433 and gives the

readings mn and ḫḫṯ but they do not give any meanings of the words and they are notlisted in the WB

81 WB II 477782 Urk IV 1229 17ndash18


the Amada stele of his son Amenhotep II we find a slight variation the kingis ḫꜥr mi ꜣby hb=f pri n wnt ꜥḥꜣ m hꜣw=f ldquoone who rages like a leopard when hetreads the battlefield there is none who can fight in his presencerdquo83 Althoughnot attested in an epithet of the king on the Piankhy stele the king assures hisarmy ir ꜥḳ wꜥ im=tn ḥr sꜣw n(n) ꜥḥꜥ=tw m hꜣw=f ldquoif one among you enters thedefences one will not stand in his presencerdquo84

Interestingly it is not attested in Ramesside texts but we do find it in laterPtolemaic and Roman texts used both of the king as well as of the god Horuswhom the king represents on earth On a fragmentary stele of Ptolemy I or IIoccurs n(n) [ꜥḥꜥ m hꜣ]w=f snḏ=f pẖr(w) m tꜣw nbw ldquothere is none [who standsin his vic]inity the fear of him circulates in all landsrdquo85 In an inscription ofPtolemy III on the propylon in front of the temple of Mont in Karnak thekings is šsm-ꜥw ḫrp ib smn ṯbwty sḫ ḥr pri n(n) ꜥḥꜥ m hꜣw=f ldquostrong of armself-controlled firm-footed who smites on the battlefield there being nonewho can stand in his presencerdquo86 In an inscription from Edfu of the time ofPtolemy IV the god Horus is sti šsr r ḥꜥw ḫftyw=f wr pḥty iṯi m sḫm=f n ꜥḥꜥ=twm hꜣw=f ldquoone who shoots the arrow into the body of his enemies great ofstrength who captures through his might one cannot stand in his presencerdquo87In an inscription from the mammisi at Edfu (reign of Ptolemy VI) it is said ofHorusmꜣ=sn s(w)mwr pḥty n ꜥḥꜥ ḫftyw=f mhꜣw=f ldquothey see him as one great ofstrength his enemies not being able to stand in his presencerdquo88 On the obeliskof Pamphilius Domitian is ṯmꜣ ꜥwwy sḫr ḫftyw nḫt ꜥw iri m ꜥw=f n ꜥḥꜥ=tw mhꜣw=f ldquostrong of arms who fells the foe powerful of arm who acts with hisarm one not having stood in his presencerdquo89

(10) pri ꜥw ldquoactiverdquo This is the most frequently attested epithet of the kingIts earliest attestation is again in the Tale of Sinuhe (B51ndash52) nḫt pw grt iri m

83 Urk IV 12907ndash1084 Urk III34485 Berlin AumlM 14400 Urk II 22886 Urk VIII 1520ndash2187 Rochemonteix Le temple drsquoEdfou I 150 DZA 2632428088 Chassinat Le Mammisi drsquoEdfou 55 DZA 2632432089 DZA 26324310 Iversen Obelisks in Exile I 76ndash92 Roullet The Egyptian and Egyptianizing

Monuments of Imperial Rome No 72 fig 86 Grenier ldquoLes inscriptions hieacuterogliphiques delrsquoobeacutelisque Pamphilirdquo 941

180 ockinga

ḫpš=f pri-ꜥw nn twt n=f ldquohe is indeed a warrior who acts with his strong arman active one there not being his likerdquo In the Eighteenth Dynasty we find theterm used of Amenhotep II (Sphinx stele) where he has the epithet pri-ꜥw mi Mnṯw ldquoenergetic likeMontrdquo90 In an inscription from the divine birth narrativein the temple of Luxor Amenhotep III is nṯr nfr mity Rꜥw itiy nḫt pri-ꜥw ldquotheperfect god the likeness of Re the powerful ruler activerdquo91

It is often encountered in the Ramesside period very frequently in texts ofSeti I for example in one accompanying the battle with Libyans on the outernorthern wall of the great hypostyle hall at Karnak kfꜥ ḥr ḫꜣst nb pri-ꜥw iwtysnnw=f ldquowho makes captives in every foreign land active without his sec-ondrdquo92 The importance Seti placed on the need for the king to be active isreflected in one of his inscriptions at Kanais (Redesiyeh) where he makes thegeneral statement sbḳ wsḫ tꜣ nsw m pri-ꜥw ldquofortunate and spacious is the landwhen the king is activerdquo93

His successors seem to have taken this to heart since they regularly use theepithet of Ramesses II for example we read ist ḥm=f m nb rnpi pri-ꜥw iwtysnnw=f ldquoNow His Majesty was a youthful lord active without his secondrdquo94The DZA has nine attestations from the war reliefs of Ramesses III at MedinetHabu95

It is also well-attested in later Graeco-Roman inscriptions96 again of theking as well as of the god For example on the Berlin stele fragment of anearly Ptolemy (I or II) pri-ꜥw iwty mity=f Mnṯw pw m ḥꜥw=f ldquoactive withouthis equal he is Mont in personrdquo97 as an epithet of Ptolemy Philadelphus onthe Mendes stele nsw nḫt sḫm pḥty pri-ꜥw iṯi m sḫm=f ldquostrong king mighty ofstrength active who seizes through his mightrdquo98 as an epithet of Ptolemy IVin Edfu the king is snn ny Ḥrw šsp ny Bḥdty pri-ꜥw ḳn twt sw r ḳmꜣ sw ldquothelikeness of Horus the image of Behedety active strong he is like the one whocreated himrdquo99

90 Urk IV 1281791 DZA 2150911092 KRI I 212ndash3 further examples KRI I 121 173 2411 4213 779 808 10210 1111493 KRI I661494 KRI II 5 sect7 compare also DZA 21509250 Luxor KRI II 2066 28416 (pri-ꜥwmswḥt) 291195 DZA 21509150 DZA 21509160 DZA 21509170 DZA 21509190 DZA 21509200 DZA

21509210 DZA 21509230 DZA 21509240 DZA 2150972096 SeeWilson A Ptolemaic Lexicon 35797 Berlin AumlM 14400 Urk II 2212ndash1398 Urk II 354ndash599 Rochemonteix Le temple drsquoEdfou I 2811 DZA 21509130 The WB Zettelarchiv has five


The term is also well-attested in the Graeco-Roman temples as an epithetof the god Horus For example at Edfu Horus is smꜣ ḫꜣswt nṯr ꜥꜣ hellip pri-ꜥw ptptIwntyw ḫbi Ḫꜣrw sḫr sṯtyw ldquothe one who slaughters the foreign lands the greatgodhellip active who treads down the bowmen who destroys the Syrians and castdown the Asiaticsrdquo100

(11) n ḫsftw ꜥwwy=f ldquoa champion whose arms are not repulsedrdquo This is a wellattested epithet of the king in the New Kingdom Amenhotep II iri=f tꜣš=fr mrr=f nn ḫsf ꜥw=f ldquohellip he making his border as he desires there being norepelling of his armrdquo101 Amenhotep III spd ꜥbwynnḫsf ꜥw=f m tꜣwnbw ldquosharp-horned there is no repulsing his arms in all landsrdquo102 Seti I iri tꜣšw=f r ḏḏ ḥr=fn ḫsf ꜥw=f m tꜣw nbw ldquowho sets his borders to where he turns his head whosearm is not repulsed in all the foreign landsrdquo103 Ramesses II iri tꜣšw=f r ḏḏ ḥr=fn ḫsf ꜥw=f m tꜣw nbw ldquowho sets his borders to where he turns his head whosearm is not repulsed in all the foreign landsrdquo104 Ramesses III nn ḫsf=tw ꜥw=kmi irin=k mnww m Ipt-swt n it=k Imnw ldquoyour arm will not be repulsed inas much as you have made monuments in Karnak for your father Amunrdquo105Ramesses IX iw Imnwm sꜣw ḥꜥw=[k] psḏt=f ḥr dr ḫftyw=k ḫꜣst nbt ẖr ṯbwty=k

further attestations from Edfu Dendera and Philae Rochemonteix Le temple drsquoEdfou I2708 DZA 21509390 30917 DZA 21509410 Mariette Dendera II 736 DZA 21509450Philae DZA 21509680 DZA 21509690

100 Rochemonteix Le temple drsquoEdfou I 12510 = DZA 21509330 there are four further exam-ples from Edfu and Dendera Rochemonteix Le temple drsquoEdfou I 654 = DZA 21509340Rochemonteix Le temple drsquoEdfou I 2776 = DZA 21509420 Rochemonteix Le templedrsquoEdfou I 14 13ndash14 = DZA 21509430 Mariette Dendera III 73 = DZA 21509440

101 Amada stele Urk IV 1298 9 DZA 21521840102 Luxor architrave DZA 21521850103 War reliefs of Seti I Karnak DZA 21521830104 Karnak war reliefs KRI II 1667 DZA 21521750 Further examples are listed in Meeks

Annee Lexicographique III 224 KRI II 14815 16816 2428 41513 44513 46816 5759 Kar-nak architrave text DZA 21521760

105 Karnak station temple in chapel of Khons DZA 21521730 See also DZA 21521770 aspeech of Amun Karnak temple DZA 21521780 war reliefs from the temple of AmunKarnak DZA 21521790 DZA 21521810 and DZA 21521800 from the Karnak temple ofRamesses III

182 ockinga

n ḫsftw ꜥw=[k] ldquoAmun is the protection of your limbs his ennead drivesoff your enemies every foreign land is under your feet your arm not beingrepulsedrdquo106

(12) n(n) ꜥn m pri m rꜣ=f ldquothere is no reversal of what issues from his mouthrdquoThis phrase stressing the authority of Ptolemyrsquos commands is not attested inthe repertoire of earlier royal phraseology but the irreversibility of the com-mand of god is encountered on a stele of Ramesses IV at Karnak Itmw ḏd=f mḫrtw ḥr-ꜥw nn ꜥntw wḏ mi ḏdn=f ldquoAtum saying as an oracle immediately lsquothedecree will not be reversed according to what he has saidrsquo rdquo107 In a prayer tothe gods on behalf of the king on a stele now in Berlin (AumlM 2081) the petitionerexpresses his certainty that the gods will help nm ꜥn sḫrw=tn ntn nꜣ nbw ny pttꜣ dꜣt i-ir=tw m pꜣ i-ḏd=tn ldquoWho will reverse your counsel You are the lords ofheaven earth and netherworld it is that which you say that one doesrdquo108 It isa quality often attributed to the gods in Graeco-Roman temple inscriptions109The Satrap Stele seems to be the first attestation of this quality being attributedto the king In an inscription at Edfu it is a gift that Horus grants Ptolemy IVḏin=(i) n=kmꜣꜥtm ib=khellip n ꜥn n pri(t)m rꜣ=k ldquoI have placed truth in your hearthellip there is no reversal of that which issues from your mouthrdquo110

(13) iwty mityt=f m tꜣwy ḫꜣswt ldquowho has no equal in the Two Lands or the for-eign countriesrdquo iwty mity=f is a well-attested expression111 and is one that isfound in the phraseology of non-royal texts from the Middle Kingdom112 and

106 Karnak relief of the High Priest of Amun Amenhotep KRI VI 54010f DZA 21521900 Seealso KRI VI 5505 f

107 KRI VI 54ndash5 See also Otto Gott undMensch 18 where the verb ḫsf is used in place of ꜥn108 DZA 21725620 Roeder Aumlgyptische Inschriften II 188ndash189 line 9 KRI VI 4404ndash5109 Otto Gott undMensch 106ndash107110 Rochemonteix Le temple drsquoEdfou I 564ndash5 Otto Gott undMensch 65ndash66111 WB II 399112 Hatnub 163 Anthes Die Felsinschriften von Hatnub 36 DZA 23881030 Hatnub 233

Anthes Felsinschriften vonHatnub 52 DZA 23881040 Siut I 349ndash350 GriffithThe Inscrip-tions of Siucirct and Decircr Ricircfeh pl 9 DZA 23881070


the New Kingdom113 as well as royal texts114 It is also attested used of the kingin Ptolemaic texts In an inscription that can probably be attributed to Ptolemywhen he became king he is pri ꜥw iwty mity=f Mntw pw m hꜥw=f ldquoactivewithout his equal he is Mont [god of war] in personrdquo115 In an inscription ofPtolemy III on the propylon in front of the temple of Mont in Karnak the kingis nḏty iwty mityt=f swsḫ Kmt sḥwn ḫꜣswt ldquoa protector without his equal whoexpands Egypt and reduces the foreign landsrdquo116

3 Royal Phraseology in theMain Text

Although there is a concentration of royal phraseology at the beginning of thetext whichmaywell have been intended to balance the titulary of Alexander IVwith which the inscription begins we also find interesting examples of royalphraseology in the following narrative sections in which the satraprsquos achieve-ments are recounted The first is found in line 5 in the section that deals withhis Syrian campaign In the account of his offensive an image is used that isattested in royal inscriptions of the Ramesside period117 In the Satrap Stele itis said of Ptolemy

(14) ꜥḳ=f m-ẖnw=sn ib=f sḫm mi ḏrt m-ḫt šfnw ldquohe entered among them [theenemy] his heart powerful like a bird of prey after small birdsrdquo118 The word šfnin the Satrap Stele is probably identical with the earlier šf that also designatessmall birds It is only attested twice and in both cases it appears in similes inroyal texts that also describe the warlike activity of the king using the image ofa bird of prey hunting small birds

113 Text of prince Amunhirkhopeshef KRI II 51010 DZA 23881150114 Ramesses II battle of Kadesh KRI II 611 DZA 23881130 KRI II 768 DZA 23881140115 Urk II 2212116 Urk VIII 1520ndash21117 Schaumlfer Makedonische Pharaonen 105ndash106 discusses the identity of the šfnw-birds but

not the precursors of the bird metaphors that can be found in pharaonic royal phraseol-ogy

118 Urk II 15 6ndash8

184 ockinga

In a text that accompanies war reliefs of Ramesses II in Karnak the king isone who119

smꜣ tꜣw ḫꜣswt bšṯw ḥdb(w) ḥr snf=snmi [nty] n ḫpr ini(w) wrw=snm sḳrꜥnḫ mi bik ḥḳꜣn=f tꜣwy wrw=sn ꜥrf(w) m ḫfꜥ=f mi bik ḥptn=f šfw

hellip slays the flat lands and the hill countries the rebels cast down in theirblood like that which does not exist their chief having been broughtas captives like a falcon after he has ruled the Two Lands their chiefsenclosed in his grasp like a falcon when he has grasped sparrows hellip

In the year 11 inscription of Ramesses III atMedinet Habu the king is describedas follows120

swmi Bꜥl m ꜣt nšny=f mi bik m ḫpw šfw tnr ḥr ḥtr kfꜥ ḥr rdwy=f ḫfꜥn=f wrwm ꜥwy=f

He is like Baal at the moment of his fury like a falcon among small birdsand sparrows strong on the chariot who seizes on his two feet he havinggrasped the chiefs with his hands

As has often been remarked the literary genre of the main part of the textwhich deals with the restoration to the temples of Buto of the property thathad been taken from them is that of a particular type of royal compositionwhich Egyptologists refer to as the Koumlnigsnovelle or ldquoroyal noveletterdquo121 Thesetexts have a typical structure which in brief runs as follows the king is goingabout his royal business his officials attending on him He is told of a problemthat needs to be dealt with He confers with his officials decides on a course ofaction and gives orders for it to be carried out His commands are executed hisplans succeed everyone rejoices praising the king The opening of this sectionof the text at the beginning of line 7 also contains another typical example ofroyal phraseology

119 KRI II 1539ndash10 = DZA 30049270 In place of [nty] KRI II 1539 restoresmw120 KRI V 446ndash9 = DZA 30049260 For further pharaonic falcon imagery used of the kingrsquos

horses (where the small birds are however not designated as šf ) see Gillen ldquo lsquoHis horsesare like falconsrsquo War imagery in Ramesside Textsrdquo

121 See Loprieno ldquoThe lsquoKingrsquos Novelrsquo rdquo


(15) wn wr pn ꜥꜣ ḥr ḥḥi ꜣḫw m⟨n⟩ nṯrw nw Šmꜥw Mḥw ldquoThis great chiefwas seeking what is beneficial for the gods of Upper and Lower Egyptrdquo Weencounter here the classic formulation ḥḥi ꜣḫw ldquoseeking what is beneficialrdquo todescribe one of the core functions of the king namely to care for the needs ofthe gods122 It is well attested in New Kingdom royal inscriptions for examplein an inscription of Amenhotep III in which he refers to the construction of hisfunerary temple in western Thebes irin ḥm=i n ḥnty ḥr ḥḥi ꜣḫwt n it=i ImnwldquoMy Majesty acted for eternity seeking what is useful for my father Amunrdquo123In a text of Sety I from East Silsileh we have the formulation that is more typ-ical for the Koumlnigsnovelle ist ḥm=f ꜥnḫw wḏꜣw snbw m niwt rsyt ḥr irit ḥsiysw it=f Imnw-Rꜥw nsw nṯrw sḏr rs tp ḥr ḥḥi ꜣḫw n nṯrw nbw Tꜣ-mri ldquoNow HisMajesty may he live be prosperous and healthy was in the southern city doingthat for which his father Amun-Re King of the Gods would praise him spend-ing the night awake seekingwhat is beneficial for all the gods of Egyptrdquo124 Fromthe reign of Taharka (Twenty-fifth Dynasty) isk [r]=f ḥm=f mrr nṯr pw wrš=f m[rꜥw s]ḏr=f [m] grḥ ḥr ḥḥi ꜣḫwt n nṯrw ldquoNow His Majesty he is one who lovesgod he being watchful by day and waking at night seeking what is beneficialfor the godsrdquo125 In line 3 of the Tanis stele of Psametik II we have a similar for-mulation is[k r=f ḥm]=f mrr nṯr pw r iḫt nbt wnn=f ḥr iri(t) ꜣḫw(t) smnḫtḥwt=sn wꜣi r mrḥ sḏfꜣ hellip [=s]n ḥr swꜣḏ wḏḥ[w=s]n() ldquoNow His Majesty he isonewho loves godmore than anything he doingwhat is beneficial restoringtheir temples which had fallen into ruin provisioning their [hellip] causing theiroffering tables() to flourishrdquo126 Closer to the time of Ptolemy on the shrine ofNectanebos I from Saft el Henneh themonument is described as iritn ḥm=f ḥrḥḥi ꜣḫw(t) n itw=f ldquothat which HisMajesty did in seeking what is beneficial for

122 WB III 15117ndash18123 Urk IV 16732 = DZA 27270030124 KRI I 608ndash9 Another example preserved in four versions (from the reigns of Sety I

Ramesses II Merenptah Ramesses III) is KRI I 8713ndash884 For examples in inscriptionsof Ramesses II see KRI II 18312 5155 53511 6049 For an example from an inscription ofRamesses III see KRI V 2912ndash3 where instead of ꜣḫw ldquowhat is usefulrdquo the object of thekingrsquos seeking is spw mnḫw ldquoeffective deedsrdquo compare WB III 1522

125 The text is attested on several monuments of the king a stele from Upper Egypt and onefrom Kawa Jansen-Winkeln Inschriften der Spaumltzeit 122 5ndash7 136 2ndash3

126 DerManuelian Living in the Past 367ndash368 and pl 18 For the continuation of the text witha statement concerning the rewarding of the king for his actions see below

186 ockinga

his fathers [the gods]rdquo127 and on the Naucratis stele of Nectanebos II the king issaid to be one rs ḥr ḥḥi ꜣḫw(t)mḫmw=sn ldquowhowakes seekingwhat is useful fortheir [the godsrsquo] shrinesrdquo128 The tradition continues in the Ptolemaic period Inan inscription at Edfu Ptolemy IV is nṯr nfr nḏty nṯrw rs ḥr ḥḥi ꜣḫw(t)=sn ldquothegood god protector of the gods watchful in seeking what is useful for themrdquo129

The next example of typical royal phraseology in this section of the textis found in lines 17ndash18 where Ptolemy is said to be rewarded by the gods ofButo for confirming the donation made to them by the earlier native pharaohChababash

(17ndash18) isw n nn irin=f di(w) n=f ḳn nḫtm nḏm-ib iw snḏ=f m-ḫt ḫꜣswtmi ḳd=snldquoThe reward for this which he did might and victory in joy was given him thefear of him being throughout the foreign lands in their entiretyrdquo130 Parallelsfor the king being rewarded for his actions for the gods are also attested in thepharaonic period for example from the reign of Seti I isw iry ḥḥ m rnpwt nḥḥḏt m hꜣbw-sd ꜣwi ib=f ḥr st Ḥrw mi Rꜥw nb ldquothe reward thereof [in this casemaking a statue] a million in years eternity and everlastingness in festivals ofrenewal joy upon the throne of Horus like Re dailyrdquo131 In a speech of Amunfrom a section of the Khons temple in Karnak that was decorated under Pin-odjem (Twenty-first Dynasty) the god recounts the benefactions done for himand concludes isw iry m ꜥnḫ wꜣs ny Ḥrw mꜣꜥ ḫrw ldquoThe reward thereof is thelife and dominion of Horus justifiedrdquo132 On a shrine of Taharka from the tem-ple of Kawa (Twenty-fifth Dynasty) isw m nn irin=f m rdit n=f ꜥnḫ ḏd wꜣs nbsnb nb ꜣwt ib nb ḫꜥi(w) ḥr st Ḫrw mi Rꜥw ldquoThe reward for this which he did isthe giving to him of all life stability and dominion all joy having appearedupon the throne of Horus like Rerdquo133 In the Twenty-sixth Dynasty from thereign of Psametik I we encounter the concept in line 14 of the Adoption Steleof Nitokris isw nn ḫr Imnw kꜣ pty=f Mnṯw nb ns(w)t tꜣwy m ꜥnḫ ḥḥ ḏd ḥḥ wꜣs

127 CGC 70021 Roeder Naos DZA 27270040128 Line 5 hieroglyphic text Brunner Hieroglyphische Chrestomathie pl 25 DZA 27270130129 Rochemonteix Le temple drsquoEdfou I 140 = DZA 27270190130 Urk II 217ndash9131 KRI I 1088ndash9132 Jansen-Winkeln Inschriften der Spaumltzeit I 112133 The inscription appears twice on the shrine Jansen-Winkeln Inschriften der Spaumltzeit III

15218ndash19 and 1542ndash3


ḥḥ snb ꜣwt ib nb ldquoThe reward of this from Amun Bull of his two heavens andMontu lord of the throne(s) of the Two Lands was millions of life millions ofstability millions of dominion all health and joyrdquo134 In line 4 of the Tanis steleof Psametik II following on from the description of his benefactions (for thetext see above) iri(w)135n=f iswm[ḳ]nnḫt ldquoA rewardof strength andmightwasmade for himrdquo136 In the Thirtieth Dynasty on the shrine of Saft el Henneh ofNectanebos I three texts refer to the kingrsquos reward for hisworks for the gods iswiry nn ḫr sꜣ=snmriy=sn rdit n=f iꜣwt n(t) Rꜥw ldquothe reward thereof [for] this fortheir beloved son [is] the giving to himof the office of Re [ie the kingship]rdquo iswirymnsyt ꜥꜣt ḫꜣswt nb(wt) ẖr ṯbwty=f ꜥnḫmi Rꜥw ḏt ldquothe reward thereof beinga great kingship all foreign lands under his feet like Re foreverrdquo137 and iri=tnn=f isw iry m ḥḳꜣ tꜣwy ldquothey [the gods] will grant him the reward thereof [iesupplying the altars of the gods and granting them fields to provision them]namely the rulership of the two landsrdquo138 Again this phraseology is also foundin Ptolemaic temple inscriptions a procession of deities address themoon god(Khons) saying mi m ḥtp ḫni=k ꜣḫt=k mꜣ=k nn iri n=k sꜣwy=k di=k n=w isw mrdi(t)=sn m nsyt n(t) Rꜥw ḥnꜥ ꜣḫt=f ldquoCome in peace that you may alight onyour horizon and see this which your two children (Ptolemy III and Berenike)have done for you May you grant them the reward for their gift() namely thekingship of Re and his uraeusrdquo139

4 The Nature of the Usage of Early Literary Traditions

The text betrays a high degree of literary competence on the part of the scribe(or scribes) who composed it He (or they) were clearly well versed in the tradi-tional phraseology of royal texts but although the text is heavily influenced byearlier literary traditions it is clear that its composer(s) did not slavishly followthemOn the contrary theywere quite creative as we have seen there is hardlya single casewherewecanpoint to anadoptionverbatimof earlier phraseology

134 Der Manuelian Living in the Past 310 and pl 13135 I would see in this a Perfect Passive sḏm=f form as in the Satrap Stele rather than a

sḏmn=f as in Der Manuelian Living in the Past 369 n 270136 Der Manuelian Living in the Past 368 and pl 18137 CGC 70021 Roeder Naos DZA 21300950 DZA 21300970 and DZA 21301830138 KRI I 21013 Examples from texts of Ramesses II KRI II 32310 51210 63514 7426139 On the propylon in front of the Khons temple Karnak Urk VIII 4511ndash13 Further exam-

ples Philae DZA 21299990 (Euergetes II) Edfu DZA 21300030 (Ptolemy IX) KomOmboDZA 21300080

188 ockinga

The last two examples of phraseology discussed (15) and (16) are relativelywellattested in royal inscriptions from theNewKingdomonward (although there isa gap between theTwenty-first and theTwenty-fifth Dynasties) Of the epithetsin lines 2 and 3 apart from (2) ꜣḫ sḥ ldquoeffective of counselrdquo which also appears intexts of Psametik II and Darius I (Twenty-sixth and Twenty-Seventh Dynastiessee above) the only ones attested post New Kingdom occur in inscriptions ofthe Thirtieth Dynasty kings Nectanebos I and II in addition to (2) ꜣḫ sḥ ldquoeffec-tive of counselrdquo we also find (4) wmt ib ldquostout-heartedrdquo and the word tkn ldquoonewho attacksrdquo that is part of (6) This cannot only be the result of the relativedearth of extensive royal texts from the post-New Kingdom period in whichone might expect to find them There are none in the very long text of the tri-umphal stele of Piankhy for example or in the longer royal inscriptions of theTwenty-fifth Dynasty Nubian rulers even though some of their inscriptions inparticular Piankhyrsquos triumphal stele contain many allusions to classical textsnor in the royal inscriptions of the Twenty-sixth Dynasty140

Of particular interest is that some of the closest parallels are to be found notin royal texts but in literary works of theMiddle Kingdom141 In the Prophecy ofNeferty the sage is described as nḏs pwḳn gbꜣ=f sš pw iḳr ḏbꜣw=f ldquohe is a citizenstrong in respect of his arm he is a scribe excellent in respect of his fingersrdquoa formulation that closely resembles phrase (1) of the Satrap Stele si rnpi ḳn mgbꜣ=f ldquoA youthful man strong of armrdquo

It is also noticeable that there are parallels and close echoes of phrases thatare found in the encomium on king Sesostris I in the classic Middle EgyptianTale of Sinuhe

Satrap Stele Sinuhe

wmt ib ldquostout heartedrdquo wmt ib pwmꜣꜣ=f ꜥšꜣt ldquohe is stout-hearted when he sees the multituderdquo(B58ndash61)

140 See Grimal ldquoBibliothegraveques et propaganda royale agrave lrsquoeacutepoque Eacutethiopiennerdquo Jasnow ldquoRe-marks on Continuity in Egyptian Literary Traditionrdquo

141 These parallels have also been noted by Morenz ldquoAlte Huumlte auf neuen Koumlpfenrdquo whichcame to my attention after the presentation of this paper in September 2011 (see n 1)


Satrap Stele Sinuhe

tkn n(n) rḏi(t) sꜣ=f ldquoone who attackswithout turning his backrdquo

ꜥḥꜥ ib pwm ꜣt sꜣsꜣ ꜥn pw n rḏin=f sꜣ=fldquohe is one upright of heart in the timeof attack he is one who counterattacks he not turning his backrdquo(B56ndash58)

ꜥḥꜣ m sẖꜥ=f imitw ꜥḥꜣ n(n) ꜥḥꜥ m hꜣw=fldquowho fights with his sword in themidst of battle there being none whocan stand in his presencerdquo

iꜥi-ḥr pw tšꜣ wpwt n ꜥḥꜥn=twm hꜣw=fldquoan avenger is he who smashes fore-heads one not standing up in hispresencerdquo (B55ndash56)

pri ꜥw ldquoactiverdquo nḫt pw grt iri m ḫpš=f pri-ꜥw nn twtn=f ldquohe is indeed a warrior who actswith his strong arm an active onethere not being his likerdquo (B51ndash52)

It is unlikely that all of this is simply coincidental rather we can draw severalconclusions from the data One can argue that it points to the institutionalmemory of the scribal class The scribes of the Late Period must have beenfamiliar with the Middle Kingdom literary compositions and the literary par-allels are an interesting indicator of the sorts of texts that were being read andthe level of scribal education142 Yet in the Satrap Stele we encounter culturalcontinuity not justwithMiddleKingdom literary compositions As theparallelsillustrate there is also continuity with the royal phraseology of the New King-

142 On the range of texts available to scribes in the Late Period and their use of earlier literarytexts in their compositions see Grimal ldquoBibliothegraveques et propaganda royale agrave lrsquoeacutepoqueEacutethiopiennerdquo 41ndash48 Eyre ldquoIs historical literature lsquopoliticalrsquo or lsquoliteraryrsquordquo 429 and JasnowldquoRemarks on Continuity in Egyptian Literary Traditionrdquo The use of a rare archaic wordsuch as ifn in (7) a word otherwise only attested in the Old Kingdom Pyramid Texts mayalso be an indicator of the erudition of the scribe as is the creative way in which theyused the older materialmdashrather than direct quotation we encounter subtle echoes andallusions to the earlier works Becker Identitaumlt und Krise 98ndash113 discusses the use of ear-lier textual sources in inscriptions of the Twenty-second Dynasty On the use of old textsin ancient Egypt in general see Osing ldquoAlte Schriftenrdquo

190 ockinga

dom Some of the examples of this namely (15) and (16) are quite well attestedin the period between the end of the New Kingdom and Thirtieth Dynastyothers (2) (4) and (6) are less often encountered Some (8) (11) and (14) areotherwise only found in New Kingdom royal inscriptions

This raises the question of how this institutional memory was preservedand transmitted In the case of the literary texts it is well known that theywere utilized in the scribal schools143 Less often mentioned is that in theRamesside Period at least texts whose subject is the king and which providedexamples of royal phraseology were also amongst thematerial used in schoolsSeveral appear in the so-called Late Egyptian Miscellanies a text that praisesRamesses II as a warrior144 texts in praise of KingMerenptah145 a model letterof adulation to pharaoh146 a text in praise of Merenptah and his residence147and royal titularies148 Even though we do not have concrete examples it ispossible that texts of this kind were used in scribal education in later timesas well There may well have been papyrus copies of royal inscriptions avail-able to scribes as is the situation in the Nineteenth Dynasty with the record ofRamesses IIrsquos battle of Kadesh although this may be a special case influencedby that kingrsquos particular interest in publicizing the event As for the question ofwhat motivated the copyists of the Kadesh text Eyre thinks the kingrsquos wish topublicize the event is more likely than the idea that it reflects the literary inter-ests of the copyists149 In the case of the much earlier Carnarvon Tablet (earlyNewKingdom) with its copy of part of the text of the first stele of Kamose Gar-diner suggested that the motive for making the copy was a literary one sincethe reverse of the tablet bears a literary text a copy of the beginning of the

143 For an outline of what was taught in the schools see Fischer-Elfert ldquoEducationrdquo144 pAnastasi II 25ndash36 Gardiner Late Egyptian Miscellanies 13 transl Caminos Late Egyp-

tianMiscellanies 40145 pAnastasi II 36ndash54 Gardiner Late Egyptian Miscellanies 14ndash15 transl Caminos Late

Egyptian Miscellanies 43ndash44 pSallier I 87ndash91 Gardiner Late Egyptian Miscellanies 86ndash87 transl Caminos Late EgyptianMiscellanies 323ndash325

146 pAnastasi II 56ndash64 Gardiner Late Egyptian Miscellanies 15ndash16 transl Caminos LateEgyptian Miscellanies 48ndash50 Another copy of the text is in pAnastasi IV 56ndash512 Gar-diner Late EgyptianMiscellanies 40 transl Caminos Late EgyptianMiscellanies 153

147 pAnastasi III 72ndash710 Gardiner Late Egyptian Miscellanies 28ndash29 transl Caminos LateEgyptianMiscellanies 101ndash103

148 pSallier IV vs 163ndash174 Gardiner Late EgyptianMiscellanies 97ndash98 transl Caminos LateEgyptian Miscellanies 367ndash368 Leiden 348 vs 41ndash56 Gardiner Late Egyptian Miscella-nies 132ndash133 transl Caminos Late EgyptianMiscellanies 489ndash491

149 Eyre ldquoIs historical literature lsquopoliticalrsquo or lsquoliteraryrsquordquo 427


Teaching of Ptahhotep150 However here too the motives may have been closerto those of the copyists of the Kadesh record reflecting the warrior ethos ofthe time and the extract from Ptahhotep may be an indication that the ori-gin of the tablet should be sought in a school context As Eyre suggests in thecase of the Kadesh record it does seem less likely that scribes copied histori-cal inscriptions directly from temple walls although this cannot be completelyruled out151Whatever the nature of the transmission it is clear that the authorof the Satrap Stele did not simply copy the older phraseology as is illustratedfor example by (14) where the image of the bird of prey attacking smaller birdsis used but the wording is quite different from the Twentieth Dynasty precur-sors

5 The Perception of Ptolemy by the Egyptian Priests at Sais

The allusion to the Prophecy of Nefertymaywell have a deeper significance thansimply reflecting the education of the author of the Satrap Stele and his admi-ration for the literary quality of the classic works Morenz proposes that thereis a deliberate intention to present Ptolemy as filling the role of Ameny152 theking who Neferty foretold would come from the south and deliver Egypt fromits misfortunes153 One could go further and suggest that the echoes of theroyal phraseology in Sinuhersquos hymn to Sesostris I Amenemhetrsquos son and suc-cessor were aimed at drawing a parallel between Sesostris and Ptolemymdashjustas Sesostris as crown prince led the army of Egypt while his father Amenemhetldquowas in the palacerdquo so too did Ptolemy while king Alexander IV was ldquoamongstthe Asiaticsrdquo

Almost all the phraseology applied to Ptolemy is typical of that used in royalinscriptions154 and there can be no doubt that on the Satrap Stele although hedoes not have the official legal position of king Ptolemy is primarily spoken ofin royal terms The text is replete with traditional Egyptian royal phraseology

150 Gardiner ldquoThe Defeat of the Hyksos by Kamōserdquo 109151 Gardiner ldquoThe Defeat of the Hyksos by Kamōserdquo thinks it quite plausible that the text of

the tablet is a direct copy from a stele152 Ie Amenemhet I the founder of the Twelfth Dynasty153 Morenz ldquoAlte Huumlte auf neuen Koumlpfenrdquo 124154 The only non-royal example is the Middle Kingdom expression mn ṯbwty ldquofirm footedrdquo

which is used of the gods in the Ptolemaic temple texts 5 of the epithets (1 2 5 6 and 13)are applied to both the king and officials

192 ockinga

that can be traced back to earlier royal inscriptions As we have seen many ofthe epithets are also to be found applied to the king in later Ptolemaic and insome cases Roman inscriptions Thus it seems fair to conclude that as far asthe authors of the text were concerned although Ptolemy may not have beenking de jure he certainly was de facto

As mentioned in the introduction the term most commonly used to desig-nate Ptolemy is ldquogreat chiefrdquo There has been some controversy over the ques-tion of whether the term ḥm=f ldquoHis Majestyrdquo is ever applied to him in thesection of the text that records Ptolemyrsquos reconfirmation of title to propertythat had been granted to the gods of Buto by Chababash and subsequentlyconfiscated by the Persian ldquoXerxesrdquo155 The crucial question revolves around theidentity of the person referred to as ḥm=f in lines 8ndash12 The first editor of thetext Brugsch156 understood the term to refer to Ptolemy However the subse-quent reading of Wilcken157 who interpreted it as referring to Chababash hasenjoyed greater support and is also followed by Schaumlfer in her latest study onthe stele158 In his translation of the text Ritner with some hesitation againtook up Brugschrsquos interpretation and saw ḥm=f as referring to Ptolemy159 Theonly argument that Schaumlfer musters against Ritnerrsquos view is that it is not clearwhy ldquothe priestsrdquo160 speak of the territory having ldquoformerlyrdquo (tp ꜥw) belonged tothe gods of Buto if it hadonly been given to themshortly before thePersiankingconfiscated it However the adverb ldquoformerlyrdquo need not refer to a time beforeChababash it could simply refer to the time before Ptolemy ie before the timein which the conversation took place The sequence of events could be recon-structed as follows Ptolemywas looking for benefactions that he could bestowon the gods of Egypt his entourage brought up the subject of ldquothe land of Edjordquothat Chababash had given to the gods of Buto Ptolemy asks for more informa-tion fromhis entourage and they repeat that the land had formerly belonged tothe gods of Buto and go on to relate how the Persian king had revoked the grantthat Chababash had made161 Ptolemy then asks that the priests of Pe and Dep

155 On the identity of Ḫšryš(ꜣ) see Ladynin ldquoAdversary Ḫšryš(ꜣ) His Name andDeeds accord-ing to the Satrap Stelardquo 98ndash101 who convincingly argues that he should be identified withArtaxerxes III

156 Brugsch ldquoEin Decret Ptolemaiosrsquo des Sohnes Lagi des Satrapenrdquo157 Wilcken ldquoZur Satrapenstelerdquo158 Schaumlfer Makedonische Pharaonen 145 note j159 See his commentary in note 9 to his translation160 In fact it is not the priests who say this but ldquothose whowere beside him [HisMajesty]rdquo ie

the royal entourage the priests are not summonsed until a little further on in line 9161 Ladynin ldquoAdversary Ḫšryš(ꜣ) His Name and Deeds according to the Satrap Stelardquo 103ndash108


be brought to provide further information specifically about the consequencesof this action by the Persian On hearing of the punishment meted out on thePersian by the godHorus Ptolemy expresses the wish ldquoto be placed on the pathofrdquo the god (who is also referred to as ldquoHis Majestyrdquo) ie he wishes to submitand be loyal to the god at which the priests advise him to donate the prop-erty to the gods ldquoa second timerdquo (ie after the first time of Chababash) whichPtolemy proceeds to do

For Schaumlfer another hurdle to accepting a scenario in which Ptolemy isreferred to as ldquoHis Majestyrdquo is that the Egyptian priests would never have daredto jeopardize good order by bestowing the title of ḥm=f ldquoHis Majestyrdquo on any-one other than the legitimate king162 Yet later in the text in line 17 the titleḥḳꜣ ꜥꜣ ny Kmt ldquogreat ruler of Egyptrdquo is unambiguously used for Ptolemy a titlethat as Schaumlfer herself points out163 is clearly royal

I would suggest that the way in which Ptolemy is referred to is intentionalHe is only spoken of as ldquoHis Majestyrdquo in that part of the text that deals specif-ically with the decision-making process concerning the return of the propertyof the gods and their temples The ancient Egyptian priests who composed thetext had very sound reasons for doing this According to the Egyptian ideologyof kingship it was only the king who could regulate the affairs of the gods hewas the only intermediary between them and humankind he built their tem-ples and he provided them with offerings His duties are encapsulated in thewords of an inscription in the temple of Amun at Luxor that dates from thereign of Amenhotep III (Eighteenth Dynasty) but which may have its originsin the Middle Kingdom ldquoRe has placed King NN in the land of the living foreternity and all time for judging men for making the gods content for cre-ating Truth for destroying evil He gives offerings to the gods and invocationofferings to the blessed spiritsrdquo164

Here the duty of the king to care for the gods is clearly expressed Thewordsof Amun to the gods in theNewKingdomversion of themyth of the birth of thedivine king also emphasize this aspect of the duties of the king Amun explainsto the council of gods the benefits that the new king that he will engender willbring ldquoshe165will build your sanctuaries shewill dedicate your temples [she

sees the confiscation by Artaxerxes III of temple lands in Buto as being a policy imple-mented in the whole of Egypt

162 Schaumlfer Makedonische Pharaonen 146163 Schaumlfer Makedonische Pharaonen 176ndash177164 Assmann Der Koumlnig als Sonnenpriester 22 Parkinson Voices from Ancient Egypt 38ndash40165 The feminine pronoun is used because the text refers to thewomanHatshepsut who took

on the male office of kingship

194 ockinga

will maintain] your offerings she will richly provide [your altars]rdquo166mdashwordsthat clearly indicate that the chief duty of the ruler is to provide for the gods

Thus it was not the satrap who could make decisions of this nature thataffected the gods it was only the king Therefore although Ptolemy was de juresatrap by making such a decision he was no longer fulfilling the role of satrapbut acting out the role of king and could therefore be referred to by a royal titleḥm=f in this section of the text Once the theological decision has been madethat the gods are to again receive the property that had been taken from themand Ptolemy sets the administrative process in motion for it to be realized wenotice that he is again referred to as ldquothe great chiefrdquo and the command ismadeby order of Ptolemy the satrap167

This brings us back to the question of the empty cartouches Why are theynot inscribed with the names of Alexander IV or of Ptolemy Could this bebecause the central event that the stele seeks to perpetuate the restoration ofthe property of the gods of Buto was enacted through an ambivalent powerand authority and not clearly by a single individual The de jure king had neverset foot in Egypt and lived ldquoamongst the Asiaticsrdquo as the text states the satrapPtolemy even if hewasnot the kingde jure was acting as the kingde factomdashandaswe have seen in one place is even given the royal designation ldquothe great rulerof Egyptrdquo For the Egyptian priests this ambivalence was probably not such aproblem from a theological point of view For them it was the divine officeof kingship that mattered not the individual who happened to be seated onthe throne The true king of Egypt was the heavenly king the god in particu-lar Horus of whom the earthly king was only a reflection168 The Satrap Stelealsomakes this quite clear in the way it describes Horus The priests say of himldquoHorus the son of Isis the son of Osiris ruler of rulers the Upper Egyptian Kingof Upper EgyptianKings the Lower EgyptianKing of Lower EgyptianKings theprotector of his father the Lord of Pe the foremost of the gods who came intoexistence afterward since whom there is no kingrdquo169 Even Ptolemy himself inhis response to the priests seems to acknowledge this ldquoThis god active andstrong amongst the gods a king has not appeared since him Grant that I maybe placed upon the path of His Majesty that I may live upon itrdquo170

166 Urk IV 2175ndash8 Brunner Die Geburt des Gottkoumlnigs 14167 The Persian word is used transliterated as ḫšdrpn WB III 3398168 On the ideology of kingship in the Late Period see Ritner ldquoKhababash and the Satrap

Stela A Grammatical Rejoinderrdquo 136169 Satrap Stele line 10ndash11 Urk II 1715ndash183170 Satrap Stele line 11ndash12 Urk II 188ndash11


Abbreviations

AumlM Aumlgyptisches Museum Berlin (= Aumlgyptisches Museum und Papyrussammlungder Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin)

CGC Lange H et al 1901ndash Catalogue geacuteneacuteral des antiquiteacutes eacutegyptiennes du Museacuteedu Caire Cairo Institut franccedilais drsquoarcheacuteologie orientale

DZA Digitales Zettelarchiv of the Thesaurus Linguae Aegyptiae (Ancient EgyptianDictionary Project Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences and Humani-ties) httpaaew2bbawdetlaservletS05d=d001amph=h001

Edfu Chassinat E 1892ndash1933 Le temple de Edfou 8 vols Cairo Institut franccedilaisdrsquoarcheacuteologie orientale

KRI Kitchen KA 1969ndash1990 Ramesside Inscriptions Historical and Biographical7 vols Oxford Blackwell

LGG Leitz C 2002ndash2003 Lexikon der aumlgyptischen Goumltter und Goumltterbezeichnungen8 vols Leuven Peeters

MH I Houmllscher U et al 1930 The Excavation of Medinet Habu Volume I Earlier His-torical Records of Ramses III Chicago Oriental Institute

MH II Houmllscher U et al 1932 The Excavation of Medinet Habu Volume II The LateHistorical Records of Ramses III Chicago Oriental Institute

TUAT I Kaiser O 1982ndash1985 Texte aus der Umwelt des alten Testaments Bd 1 Rechts-und Wirtschaftsurkunden Historisch-chronologische Texte Guumltersloh GMohn

Urk Sethe K et al 1903ndash1957Urkunden des aumlgyptischen Altertums 8 vols LeipzigHinrichs

WB Erman A and W Grapow 1854ndash1937 Woumlrterbuch der aumlgyptischen Sprache 7vols Berlin Berlin-Brandenburgische Akademie derWissenschaften

Bibliography

Al-Ayedi AR 2006 Index of EgyptianAdministrative Religious andMilitaryTitles of theNew Kingdom Ismailia Obelisk

Anthes R 1928 Die Felsinschriften von Hatnub Leipzig Koumlniglich Preussische Aka-demie derWissenschaften

Assmann J 1970 Der Koumlnig als Sonnenpriester Gluumlckstadt JJ AugustinBecker M 2012 Identitaumlt und Krise Erinnerungskulturen im Aumlgypten der 22 Dynastie

Hamburg BuskeBeckerath J von 1999 Handbuch der aumlgyptischen Koumlnigsnamen Mainz von ZabernBlumenthal E 2008 Untersuchungen zum aumlgyptischen Koumlnigtum des Mittleren Rei-

ches I Die Phraseologie TextstellenRegisterWort- undPhrasenregister Leipzig Saumlch-sische Akademie derWissenschaften zu Leipzig

196 ockinga

Brugsch H 1871 ldquoEin Decret Ptolemaiosrsquo des Sohnes Lagi des Satrapenrdquo Zeitschrift fuumlrAumlgyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde 9 1ndash13

Brunner H 1986 Die Geburt des Gottkoumlnigs2 Wiesbaden HarrassowitzBrunner H 1992 Hieroglyphische Chrestomathie2 Wiesbaden HarrassowitzCaminos RA 1954 Late EgyptianMiscellanies London Oxford University PressChassinat E 1939 LeMammisi drsquoEdfou Cairo Institut franccedilais drsquoarcheacuteologie orientaleCouyat J and P Montet 1912 Les inscriptions hieacuteroglyphiques et hieacuteratiques du Ouacircdi

Hammacircmacirct Cairo Institut franccedilais drsquoarcheacuteologie orientaleDaumas F 1988Valeurs phoneacutetiques des signes hieacuteroglyphiques drsquoeacutepoqueGreacuteco-Romain

1 vol Montpellier Universiteacute de MontpellierMorgan J de 1894ndash1909 Catalogue des monuments et inscriptions de lrsquoEacutegypte antique

1 Seacuter Haute Eacutegypte t 2 Ombos Vienna HolzhausenDer Manuelian P 1994 Living in the Past Studies in Archaism of the Egyptian Twenty-

sixth Dynasty London and New York Kegan PaulDoxey DM 1998 Egyptian Non-Royal Epithets in the Middle Kingdom Leiden BrillEyre C 1996 ldquoIs Egyptian Historical Literature lsquoHistoricalrsquo or lsquoLiteraryrsquordquo in Ancient

Egyptian Literature History and Forms edited by A Loprieno 415ndash434 Leiden BrillFaulkner RO 1962 Concise Dictionary of Middle Egyptian Oxford Griffith InstituteFischer-Elfert H-W 2001 ldquoEducationrdquo in Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt vol 1

edited by DB Redford 438ndash442 New York Oxford University PressGardiner AH 1916 ldquoThe Defeat of the Hyksos by Kamōse The Carnarvon Tablet No Irdquo

Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 3 95ndash110Gardiner AH 1937 Late Egyptian Miscellanies Brussels Fondation eacutegyptologique

Reine ElisabethGardiner AH 1957 Egyptian Grammar3 Oxford Oxford University PressGardiner AH andTE Peet 1917 Inscriptions of Sinai Part I London Egypt Exploration

FundGillen T 2007 ldquo lsquoHis Horses Are Like FalconsrsquoWar Imagery in Ramesside Textsrdquo in Pro-

ceedings of the Fourth Central European Conference of Young Egyptologists editedby K Endreffy et al 133ndash146 Budapest Chaire drsquoeacutegyptologie de lrsquouniversiteacute EoumltvoumlsLoraacutend de Budapest

Grenier J-Cl 1987 ldquoLes inscriptionshieacuteroglyphiquesde lrsquoobeacutelisquePamphilirdquoMeacutelangesde lrsquo eacutecole franccedilaise de Rome Antiquiteacute 99 937ndash961

Griffith FLl 1889 The Inscriptions of Siucirct and Decircr Ricircfeh London TruumlbnerGrimal N 1980 ldquoBibliothegraveques et propaganda royale agrave lrsquoeacutepoque Eacutethiopiennerdquo in Livre

du centenaire de lrsquo Institut Franccedilais drsquoArcheacuteologie Orientale edited by J Vercoutter37ndash48 Cairo Institut franccedilais drsquoarcheacuteologie orientale

Grimm G 1998 Alexandria Die erste Koumlnigsstadt der hellenistischen Welt Mainz vonZabern

Hannig R 2003ndash2006 AumlgyptischesWoumlrterbuch 3 vols Mainz von Zabern


Hoffmann F et al 2009 Die dreisprachige Stele des C Cornelius Gallus Uumlbersetzungund Kommentar Berlin de Gruyter

Hornung E 1963DasAmduat Die Schrift des verborgenenRaumesWiesbaden Harras-sowitz

Iversen E 1968 Obelisks in Exile vol 1 the Obelisks of Rome Copenhagen GadJansen-Winkeln K 1985 Aumlgyptische Biographien der 22 und 23 Dynastie Wiesbaden

HarrassowitzJansen-Winkeln K 2009 Inschriften der Spaumltzeit 3 vols Wiesbaden HarrassowitzJasnow R 1999 ldquoRemarks on Continuity in Egyptian Literary Traditionrdquo in Gold of

Praise Studies on Ancient Egypt in Honor of Edward FWente edited by E Teeter andJA Larson 193ndash210 Chicago Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago

Klinkott H 2007 ldquoXerxes in Aumlgypten Gedanken zum negativen Perserbild in derSatrapenstelerdquo in Aumlgypten unter fremden Herrschern zwischen persischer Satrapieund roumlmischer Provinz edited by Stefan Pfeiffer 34ndash53 Frankfurt Verlag Antike

Ladynin I 2005 ldquoAdversary Ḫšryš(ꜣ) His Name and Deeds according to the SatrapStelardquo Chronique drsquoEacutegypte 80 87ndash113

Lange HO and H Schaumlfer 1902 Grab- und Denksteine desMittleren Reichs imMuseumvon Kairo No 20001ndash20780 Berlin Reichsdruckerei

Lefebvre G 1923 Le tombeau de Petosiris vol 2 Cairo Institut franccedilais drsquoarcheacuteologieorientale

Lesko LH 1982ndash1990 A Dictionary of Late Egyptian 5 vols Berkeley BC ScribeLoprienoA 1996 ldquoThe lsquoKingrsquosNovelrsquo rdquo in AncientEgyptianLiteratureHistoryandForms

edited by A Loprieno 277ndash295 Leiden BrillMariette A 1870ndash1875 Dendeacuterah description geacuteneacuterale du grand temple de cette ville 6

vols Paris FranckMeeks D 1982 Anneacutee Lexicographique vol 3 Paris Imprimerie de la MargerideMorenz L 2011 ldquoAlte Huumlte auf neuen Koumlpfenrdquo in Literatur und Religion im Alten Aumlgyp-

ten edited by H-W Fischer-Elfert and TS Richter 110ndash125 Leipzig and StuttgartSaumlchsiche Akademie derWissenschaften zu Leipzig

Osing J 1975 ldquoAlte Schriftenrdquo in Lexikon der Aumlgyptologie vol 1 edited by W Helck andE Otto 149ndash154 Wiesbaden Harrassowitz

Otto E 1964 Gott und Mensch nach den aumlgyptischen Tempelinschriften der griechisch-roumlmischen Zeit Heidelberg Winter

Parkinson RB 1991 Voices from Ancient Egypt London British Museum PressPierret P 1878 Recueil drsquo inscriptions ineacutedites du Museacutee Eacutegyptien du Louvre vol 2 Paris

Franck amp ViewegRitner RK 2003 ldquoThe Satrap Stelerdquo in The Literature of Ancient Egypt edited by WK

Simpson 392ndash397 New Haven and London Yale University PressRitner RK 1980 ldquoKhababash and the Satrap Stela A Grammatical Rejoinderrdquo Zeit-

schrift fuumlr aumlgyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde 107 135ndash137

198 ockinga

Rochemonteix M le marquis de (= Freacutedeacuteric Joseph Maxence Reneacute de Chalvet) 1892Le temple de Edfou vol 1 Cairo Institut franccedilais drsquoarcheacuteologie orientale

Roeder G 1914 Naos (Catalogue Geacuteneacuteral du Museacutee du Caire 70001ndash70050) LeipzigBreitkopf and Haumlrtel

Roeder G 1924 Aumlgyptische Inschriften aus den Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin vol 2Leipzig Hinrichs

Roullet A 1972 The Egyptian and Egyptianizing Monuments of Imperial Rome LeidenBrill


Schaumlfer D 2014 ldquoNachfolge und Legitimierung in Aumlgypten im Zeitalter der Diadochenrdquoin The Age of the Successors and the Creation of the Hellenistic Kingdoms edited byH Hauben and A Meeus 441ndash452 Louvain Peters

Sethe K 1924 Aumlgyptische Lesestuumlcke zum Gebrauch im akademischen Unterricht Textedes Mittleren Reiches Leipzig Hinrichs

Wilcken U 1897 ldquoZur Satrapenstelerdquo Zeitschrift fuumlr Aumlgyptische Sprache und Altertums-kunde 35 81ndash87

Wilson P 1997 A Ptolemaic Lexikon A Lexicographical Study of the Texts in the Templeof Edfu Leuven Peeters

Worthington I 2016 Ptolemy I King and Pharaoh of Egypt Oxford OUPYoyotte J 1972 ldquoUne statue de Darius deacutecouverte agrave Suserdquo Journal Asiatique 260 253ndash

266


chapter 7

Identity and Cross-cultural Interaction in EarlyPtolemaic Alexandria Cremation in Context

Thomas Landvatter

1 Introduction

The nature of the relationship between Egyptians and immigrant groups inAlexandria has long been a point of contestation among historians and clas-sicists with scholarly opinion vacillating between arguments for intense cul-tural mingling and strict ethnic separation Until the last two decades or sothe latter school held sway Peter Fraserrsquos comment that ldquothe gulf betweenGreek and Egyptian was almost complete in normal social intercourse of themiddle and upper classesrdquo1 represented something of a consensus2 Howeverthis thesis of cultural and social separation has been effectively challengedand even in earliest Alexandria a binary construction of strict ldquoEgyptianrdquo andldquoGreekrdquo ethnic identities would have been unlikely3 Based on literary evidence

1 Fraser Ptolemaic Alexandria vol 1 702 For instance Samuel stated explicitly that ldquowe now understand that native culture and litera-

ture flourished alongside theGreek and that the twohad very little influence over eachotherrdquo(SamuelThe Shifting Sands of History 9) Bingen envisioned two discrete cultural zones withno situation that ldquofavoured major cultural transfersrdquo and in which even mixed marriagesldquowould probably sooner or later insert the new domestic cell into one of the two groupsrather than the otherrdquo (BingenHellenistic Egypt 246) As has been noted it cannot be a coin-cidence that this theory was first put forward by scholars working in two countries Canadaand Belgium which were experiencing large scale separatist movements and ethnic conflictat the time (Larsquoda ldquoEncounterswithAncient Egyptrdquo 163 SamuelThe Shifting Sands of History10 himself states his own bias in this respect) This general discussion regarding the nature ofcultural interaction ismirrored in the intense debates of the existence or non-existence of anldquoAlexandrian stylerdquo among art historians and archaeologists SeeHardiman ldquo lsquoAlexandrianismrsquoagainrdquowhodiscusses extensively ldquoAlexandrianismrdquo and thehistory of debates surrounding theterm

3 Ritner ldquoImplicit Models of Cross-Cultural Interactionrdquo provides an early but pointed critiqueof the ldquoseparatenessrdquo model Moyer Egypt and the Limits of Hellenism 1ndash41 provides a dis-cussion of Classical scholarsrsquo engagement with Egypt and the development and consequentresponse to the ldquoseparatistrdquomodel (see particularly his critique of FraserMoyer Egypt and the

200 landvatter

specifically relating to the city and extrapolating from papyrological sourcesfrom elsewhere in Egypt4 it is clear that Alexandria was quite heterogeneousImmigrants both fromwithin Egypt and from thewider easternMediterraneanformed the cityrsquos population including Jews Syrians Egyptians Persians Thra-cians and Macedonians5 as well as a highly diverse Greek population6 Giventhe scale and intensity of Graeco-Macedonian settlement inEgypt7 interactionbetween immigrants and the indigenous population was inevitable and neces-sary for society to function even in a Greek foundation such as AlexandriaIndeed archaeological survey work in the western Nile Delta has revealed theprofound impact that Alexandriarsquos foundation had on the surrounding land-scape demonstrating that the city was bound-up with the Egyptian country-side in ways that belie models of strict social separation8

Limits of Hellenism 23ndash24) For work challenging this model see eg Stephens Seeing Dou-ble (in literary studies) Manning Land and Power in Ptolemaic Egypt and The Last Pharaohs(relating to the Ptolemaic state) Moyer ldquoCourt Chora and Culturerdquo (on Egyptians and titlesrelated to the Ptolemaic court) and Baines ldquoEgyptian Elite Self-Presentationrdquo (on Egyptianelitesrsquo negotiation and formulation of identity) Recent archaeologicalwork inAlexandria hasalso indicated the strikingly Egyptian character of the city especially with respect to monu-mental architecture and statuary See for example Goddio Alexandria The Submerged RoyalQuarters andAbd El-Maksoud et al La fouille du Boubasteion drsquoAlexandrie andAbd el-Fattahet al Deux inscriptions greques du Boubasteion drsquoAlexandrie

4 Our knowledge of the exact composition of Alexandriarsquos population is incomplete asmost ofour evidence for immigration during the Ptolemaic period relates to Egypt as a whole ratherthan Alexandria alone

5 Fraser Ptolemaic Alexandria vol 1 38ndash60 treats the problem of the composition of Alexan-driarsquos population in detail Some of the cityrsquos constituent groups are well known from theliterary sources in particular the Egyptians and Jews (eg Strabo 17112 quoting Polybius onEgyptians mercenaries and Alexandrians of Greek descent Josephus Bell Jud 2188 on theJewish Quarter) The question of ethnic origin in Ptolemaic Egypt is a complicated one notleast as official designations of origin in government documents eventually ceased to haveany connection with actual origin and had more to do with tax status and occupation SeeClarysse andThompsonCounting thePeople vol 2 123ndash205 alsoYiftach-Firanko ldquoDid BGU III2367Workrdquo

6 Mueller ldquoGeographical Information Systems (GIS) in papyrologyrdquo 77 identifies individualsfrom the regions of Cyrenaica Caria Pamphylia Thrace Crete Attika Thessaly Ionia andspecifically from the cities of CyreneAthensHeracleiaMiletos SyracuseMagnesia CorinthChalcis Aspendos and Argos

7 Recent estimates for the number of Greeks in Egypt are those of Fischer-Bovet ldquoCounting theGreeks in Egyptrdquo 152 who settles on 5 of the total population of Egypt with immigrationceasing in the 3rd century BCE Though smaller than other estimates 5 is still a significantportion of the population

8 Based on his own as well as previous surveys of the western Nile Delta Trampier ldquoThe

identity and cross-cultural interaction in alexandria 201

figure 71 Map of Alexandria with locations of major cemeteriesFig 28 in McKenzie The Architecture of Alexandria and Egypt

Though the diversity of the population in Alexandria and Ptolemaic Egyptas a whole is well attested this fact does not always influence the analysis ofAlexandrianmaterial culture and behaviour There is often an implicit assump-tion of the primary importance of Greek and Egyptian ethnic identities suchthat the material culture of Alexandria is analysed through a Greek-Egyptianbinary the study of material culture through the lens of this binary then reifiesthe importance of ethnic identity in scholarly analysis The initial underlyingassumption of the importance of ethnicity is in part due to disciplinary train-ing since Egyptologists and classical archaeologistsart historians specialize inunderstanding specific ldquoGreekrdquo and ldquoEgyptianrdquo styles In a multicultural con-text such as Alexandria a scholar can easily fall into what Richard Neer callsldquoa naiumlve embrace of Volksgeisterrdquo9With two contrasting ldquonationalrdquo styles in thesame place the style of an object becomes emblematic of a people and so theobjects become a stand-in for the ethnic group In essence the pot becomesthe person This paradigm encourages the expectation that cultural interactioncan only be observed in the ldquoHellenizationrdquo or ldquoEgyptianizationrdquo of artefactsart and architecture through the appearance of explicit ldquoEgyptianrdquo motifs in aldquoGreekrdquo milieu or vice versa With such an understanding of Greek and Egyp-

Dynamic Landscape of the Western Nile Deltardquo 340 concludes that ldquosettlement exploded inthe western Delta during the Ptolemaic period perhaps in large part due to the rising fortuneof Alexandria as the new political and commercial centre of Egyptrdquo

9 Neer ldquoConnoisseurship and the Stakes of Stylerdquo 11

202 landvatter

tianmaterial culture a gulf between the two perceived groups seems apparentas long as there is no obvious ldquomixingrdquo of Greek andEgyptian styles or practices

However what we call ldquoGreekrdquo and ldquoEgyptianrdquo material culture is not em-blematic necessarily of an ethnic identity Rather to call something ldquoGreekrdquoor ldquoEgyptianrdquo is scholarly shorthand for a group of attributes that originatedin particular geographic regions under particular socio-cultural circumstancesThe relationship between a real ldquoethnicrdquo identity and material culture is thusnever straightforward particularly in instances of cross-cultural interaction10In the first place acculturation (ie ldquoHellenizationrdquo or ldquoEgyptianizationrdquo) is notthe only potential result individuals and groups can react in a variety of waysto cross-cultural contact ranging from the adoption of unfamiliar practicesidentities and material culture to their outright rejection In between there isthe important possibility of the creation of new social structures behavioursand material culture traditions My present concern is the nature of social andindividual identity in early Alexandria as manifested in mortuary practiceswithout relying on a model that assumes the primary importance of a pre-determined ethnic identity11

The archaeological remains of mortuary practice are particularly useful forexamining social identity due to the nature of funerary behaviour itself Theburial practices of a society are a set of behaviours for the treatment of thedead A given burial is an archaeological event either single or multi-stagedenactedby those burying the deceasedwithin the bounds of their societyrsquos con-ception of what constitutes proper burial ritual A burial is thus the result ofintentional and circumscribed action it is not the result of random behaviourbut rather results from a series of choices of behaviour made within particularboundaries As these choices are made and performed by the survivors of the

10 The tenuous relationshipbetweenmaterial culture ldquoarchaeological culturesrdquo and real eth-nic groups has been commented upon frequently Jones for instance notes that ldquothereis rarely a one-to-one relationship between representations of ethnicity and the entirerange of cultural practices and social conditions associatedwith a particular ethnic grouprdquo(Jones Archaeology of the Ethnicity 128) Emberling however notes that while ethnicityis flexible and not always salient there are reasons to think that ldquosome aspects of materialculture are more likely than others to mark ethnic differencerdquo (Emberling ldquoEthnicity inComplex Societiesrdquo 325)

11 Archaeology has the ability to challenge the assumed importance of historically attestedethnic identities For instance Vossrsquos work at the Presidio de San Francisco (Voss TheArchaeology of Ethnogenesis) works to trace cultural identity formation through the ar-chaeological record to challenge the state-imposed ethnic distinctions in colonial Califor-nia


deceased the behaviours associated with a given burial are consistent with therelationship between the deceased and society that is the treatment of thedeceased will be consistent with certain aspects of hisher social identity Byobserving patterns in aspects of mortuary practice across a number of gravesit is possible to identify recognized social distinctionsidentities If a pattern isfound it must be meaningful in some respect because the actions that createda pattern were intentional12 The analysis of funerary practice as a system thushas the potential to shed light on the social life of an ancient society

Until recent decades and in particular until the excavations by the Cen-tre drsquoEacutetudes Alexandrines13 material culture relating to Alexandrian funerarypractices tended to be treated as works of Greek art first and foremost ratherthan as components of a funerary system For example until recently the studyof cremation practice in Alexandria14 was long tangential to the study of a classof cinerary urn common in Alexandria the so-called ldquoHadra vasesrdquo These urnswere largely viewed by scholars as ldquoGreekrdquo vasesmdashthat is as art objectsmdashandhave been treated largely on an art-historical level focusing in particular onstylistic development15 Treatments of the vases as contextualized objects havebeenbasedonahellenocentric historical frameworkHadra vaseswere thought

12 The basis for this approach rooted in North American processual archaeology can befound in a wide array of anthropological literature See in particular Beck RegionalApproaches to Mortuary Analysis Binford ldquoMortuary Practicesrdquo Brown Approaches tothe Social Dimensions of Mortuary Practices Chapman et al The Archaeology of DeathOrsquoShea Mortuary Variability and Villagers of the Maros Saxe ldquoSocial Dimensions of Mor-tuary Practicesrdquo For criticisms of this approach from a post-processual perspective seeHodder Symbolic andStructuralArchaeology and ldquoSocial Structure andCemeteriesrdquo Pear-son ldquoMortuary practices society and ideologyrdquo and The Archaeology of Death and Burial

13 Empereur and Nenna Neacutecropolis 1 and Neacutecropolis 2 in particular but also especially AlixldquoLes enfants dans la neacutecropole greacuteco-romainerdquo which treats the childrenrsquos burials fromGabbari in great detail

14 The work of Greacutevin and Bailet (ldquoFouille drsquohydries funeacuteraires agrave creacutemationrdquo ldquoAlexandrieune eacutetude pionniegravere en archeacuteologierdquo and ldquoLe creacutemation en Eacutegypterdquo) has been particularlyimportant for our understanding of Ptolemaic-period cremation practice especially froma bioarchaeologicalphysical-anthropological perspective

15 Hadra vases first began being published in the late 19th century both from museum col-lections and objects that were the result of both legal and illicit excavations The firstpublication was that of Merriam in 1885 (ldquoInscribed Sepulchral Vasesrdquo) Early work invari-ably focused on the dates and inscriptions present on a minority of the vases Pagen-stecher ldquoDie Gefaumlsse in Stein und Tonrdquo attempted to construct a stylistic developmentbut retracted it Scholars through the 1960s attempted to construct a stylistic grouping andchronology Cook in 1968 (ldquoAHadraVase in the BrooklynMuseumrdquo) assumed that produc-tion started at the end of the 4th century and ended in the middle of the 2nd century

204 landvatter

at one time to be trophies by analogy with the Panathenaic amphorae whichwere then sold second-hand to be used as cinerary urns16 while others thoughtthat they were made by refugees from Thebes based on stylistic similaritywith Boeotian vessels17 Though these theories have since been discreditedthey demonstrate the extent to which since their discovery the Hadra vaseswere considered to be ldquoGreekrdquo objects divorced from their AlexandrianmdashandEgyptianmdashcontextWhen cremation practices are considered in the context ofa system of Alexandrian funerary practice however we can consider the impli-cations for our understanding of social identity in the early city one that canbe more nuanced than simply ldquoGreekrdquo versus ldquoEgyptianrdquo

In what follows the focus is the cemetery of Shatby (also transliteratedas ldquoChatbyrdquo and ldquoSciatbirdquo) which has generally been considered the earliestattested cemetery of Alexandria and very likely where the first inhabitants ofthe new city were buried The most recent dating of the cemetery has placedits use from the late fourth to the first half of the third century BCE withsome burials perhaps extending after that making it particularly long-livedcompared to other known cemeteries in Alexandria however it remains theearliest attested18 By analysing cremation burials in the context of the sys-

This chronology has been refined by Enklaar ldquoThe Hadra Vasesrdquo See also Cook InscribedHadra Vases and Cook ldquoAn Alexandrian Tomb-Group Re-examinedrdquo

16 This was based on similarities between several scenes on the hydriae to those on Pana-thenaic amphorae and the presence of an inscription on one vase (formerly Berlin 3767see Pagenstecher ldquoDated Sepulchral Vasesrdquo 402)Πύλων ἀγῶνι ἔγραψε (ldquoPylon painted [it]for [the] gamerdquo) Pagenstecher ldquoDie Gefaumlsse in Stein und Tonrdquo 33 first proposed that thisvase indicated that hydriae were originally ldquoprize vasesrdquo a view echoed and expanded onby Guerini Vasi di Hadra 11 who related the Hadra vases to the hydriae in the processionof Ptolemy II described in Athenaeus (Deipnosophistae 199) and Callaghan ldquoThe TrefoilStylerdquo 25 Enklaar ldquoTheHadraVasesrdquo 80ndash81 has proven this interpretation incorrect citingthe lack of ldquosporting scenesrdquo on the hydriae (only seven out of several hundred examples)and the fact that hydriae as a type are never attested as prize-vessels He also suggestedthat one could read the inscription in question simply as ldquoPylon painted [it] for AgonrdquotakingἌγωνι as a personal name

17 The similarities between Boeotian vessels and the Hadra vases was much discussed inthe early literature (see Pagenstecher ldquoDated Sepulchral Vasesrdquo and Roumlnne and Fraser ldquoAHadra-vase in the AshmoleanMuseumrdquo) Fraser Ptolemaic Alexandria vol 1 139 explicitlystates the possibility that they were made by immigrant Theban craftsmen

18 On the dating of the cemetery see in particular Coulson ldquoChatby Reconsideredrdquo RotroffHellenistic Pottery 29ndash31 and Tezgoumlr Tanagreacuteennes drsquoAlexandrie 18 See also TkaczowThe Topography of Ancient Alexandria 168ndash169 and Venit Monumental Tombs of AncientAlexandria 192


tem of funerary practice in this cemetery and by taking into account the socialand cultural context of earliest Alexandria we can begin to speculate as to thesocial meaning ascribed to cremation and the social identities that the prac-tice potentially reflects I argue that the place of cremation practice within thesystemof funerary behaviour represented at the Shatby cemetery canbeunder-stood as reflective of the social environment of the early settlers of Alexandriarather than simply an importation of Greek and Macedonian practice I alsoargue that perhaps counter intuitively cremation may demonstrate engage-ment with indigenous Egyptians and their culture cremation is in every waythe rejection of Egyptian notions concerning the correct treatment of the deadand so may have come to signify an ldquoimmigrantrdquo or ldquonon-Egyptianrdquo identityrather than strictly a ldquoGreekrdquo or ldquoMacedonianrdquo one The nature of the data fromthe Shatby cemetery means that my analysis is suggestive rather than conclu-sive indeed an analysis that is fully in linewith the approach to burial practicesoutlined above cannot be done due to the nature of the extant data19 Howeverit provides an avenue for rethinking the connections between cultural identityand burial practice in Ptolemaic Egypt

The Shatby cemetery (see fig 71) was excavated by Evaristo Breccia in theearly twentieth century with a final publication in 191220 The remains of thiscemetery are still extant though poorly preserved (fig 72 presents a recentview of the site) Breccia did not mention the total number of graves exca-vated and he only published a selection of undisturbed tomb assemblagessixteen complete assemblages with several others that are at least partiallyreconstructable21 As a result it is not possible to determine the percentageof intact versus disturbed grave assemblages or of intact burials with gravegoods versus those without any objects at all22 While an extensive plan of thecemetery is included in Brecciarsquos final publication it is generally not possible

19 The raw data fromAdrianirsquos excavations of theManara cemetery another early Ptolemaiccemetery inAlexandriamayprovide such adataset for amorequantitative analysisMuchof this data was published in Nenna ldquoLa fouille du secteur el-Manarardquo after I first pre-sented this paper

20 See Breccia ldquoLa Necropoli di Sciatbirdquo and La Necropoli di Sciatbi21 All of Brecciarsquos reported burials briefly described and with contents listed and catego-

rized are presented in the appendix referencewill bemade to these assemblages by gravenumber throughout

22 Breccia provided an account of only one burial foundwithout objects at Shatby Since theprimary goal of these excavations was the acquisition of objects for the Graeco-RomanMuseum burials without objects were severely underreported such graves would nothave been given any attention

206 landvatter

figure 72 View of Shatby in 2012 focusing on Hypogeum APhoto by the author

to associate specific graves described by Breccia in his report with those rep-resented on the plan The exception is for what Breccia called ldquoSection Ardquo ofthe cemetery he included a plan of this part of the cemetery in his prelimi-nary 1905 publication of the site in which each tomb is numbered23 Fig 73 isBrecciarsquos map from 1912 with the tombs from ldquoSection Ardquo numbered accordingto the earlier 1905 plan Two tombs Breccia describes in full tombs 23 and 32Section A can be located on fig 73 no other burials reported by Breccia can bepositively located Despite these limitations the published burial assemblagesare very informative and allow for a qualitative assessment of early Alexan-drian burial practices In the following discussion I concentrate on cremationburials in three aspects the proportion of cremations versus inhumations theburial assemblage including a discussion of the urns themselves and chrono-logical issues and funerary architecture I will then discuss cremation at Shatbyin relation to the social environment of early Alexandria

23 Breccia ldquoLa Necropoli di Sciatbirdquo


2 Cremation and Inhumation

In the Shatby cemetery the main distinction in body treatment is betweencremation and inhumation no mummifications from the Ptolemaic periodwere recorded at the site24 Cremations were always rarer than inhumationsBreccia25 estimated that there were eight or ten inhumations for every cre-mation in Shatby This proportion accords to some extent with other Ptole-maic period cemeteries in Alexandria such asHadrawhere the proportionwasten inhumations per cremation26 At the nearby site of Plinthine twenty-onepercent of tombs were cremations and another thirteen percent were mixedcremationsinhumations27 Among the fully recorded and reported graves thatBreccia reports from Shatby there are two single-interment cremations28 twomultiple-interment cremations29 and twomixed cremationinhumation buri-als30 for a total of six graves with nine cremation interments There are moreinhumations recorded with ten single interments31 and the two noted in amixed-type context32 Breccia didnot report proportions of multiple versus sin-gle interments Among the reported burial assemblages there are examples ofmultiple-cremation interments andmixed inhumation-cremation intermentsBreccia does describe multiple-interment inhumations but he does not pro-vide a detailed description of a grave assemblage for that type of burial33 Hedoes however describe inhumations in the same grave buried side by side andin one case two burials one on top of the other he also describes mixed-ageburials referring to burials of adults and juveniles together34

24 Mummifications are noted in Alexandria (see Venit Monumental Tombs of Ancient Alex-andria as well as Empereur and Nenna Neacutecropolis 1 and Neacutecropolis 2) Among the earliestcemeteries there is only one reference to ldquomummified bodiesrdquo in the Hadra cemetery inLe Museacutee 1 26 which refer to potentially Roman period burials The context was heavilydisturbed and is unclear overall

25 Breccia La Necropoli di Sciatbi xxiiindashxxiv26 Annuaire 1 18ndash1927 Annuaire 4 140ff28 Tomb 32 section A Tomb 16 Section B29 Tomb 35ndash37 section B tomb 12 section C30 Tomb 26 section C tomb 40 section C31 Tomb 23 section A tomb 5 section B tomb 8 section B tomb 14 section B tomb 15 sec-

tion B tomb 15a section B tomb 29 section B tomb 46 section B tomb 25 section C tomb50 section C

32 Again Tomb 26 section C tomb 40 section C33 See Breccia La Necropoli di Sciatbi xviii fig 534 Breccia La Necropoli di Sciatbi xviii

208 landvatter

figure 73 Plan of Shatby cemeteryMain plan from Breccia La Necropoli di Sciatbi Table A withtombs in Section A numbered according to earlier plan in 1905preliminary publication


According to Brecciarsquos own observations on body treatment the publishedShatby burials represent at the same time both an over- and underrepresenta-tion of cremation burials In line with scholarly concerns of the time Brecciarsquosprimary focus was the objects themselves rather than discrete archaeologicalcontexts The reported assemblages are thus selective such that cremationsor mixed interments are over one-third of the total burial assemblages fullydescribed in the final publication since they were seen as intrinsically inter-esting proportionally then we have more cremation burials described thanwould be expected given Brecciarsquos own assessment of the ratio of cremationto inhumation However there were very clearly numerically many more cre-mation burials found at Shatby Breccia includes forty-seven cinerary urns inthe catalogue of objects from his excavations35 no less than fourteen of whichhave been identified as Hadra hydriae36

3 Cremations Urns and the Burial Assemblage

The most distinctive object of a cremation burial is of course the urn Thestudy of cremation practice in Alexandria has been particularly tied to thestudy of the cinerary urns themselves especially the aforementioned ldquoHadravasesrdquo37 Though not the most common and though there are many examplesof cinerary urns in non-ceramic materials38 Hadra vases are the best-knownclass of urn The term ldquoHadra vaserdquo has actually been applied to two related butdistinct groups of vessels the so called ldquowhite-groundrdquo made of a red friableclay of Egyptian origin and probablymade inAlexandria and the ldquoclay-groundrdquovessels made of a hard granular pink to buff fabric fromCrete andwhich havebeen found across the Eastern Mediterranean though the vast majority werefound in Alexandria39

35 Breccia La Necropoli di Sciatbi catalogue nos 40ndash8636 Enklaar ldquoThe Hadra Vasesrdquo 5637 See above n 8 and 938 See Parlasca ldquoAlexandrinische Aschenurnenrdquo for an overview of these These include

glass alabaster bronze and faience vessels39 These correspond to Brecciarsquos urn categories ldquoγrdquo and ldquoδrdquo (see Breccia La Necropoli di Sci-

atbi 26ndash27) The Optical Emission Spectroscopy of PJ Callaghan demonstrated defini-tively that the clay ground vessels were produced on Crete around Knossos not in Egyptand were only imported to Alexandria (Callaghan and Jones ldquoHadra hydriae and CentralCreterdquo)

210 landvatter

Only the ldquoclay-groundrdquo vessels the vessels which are most often referredto as Hadra vases have been studied properly40 Both types were present inthe Shatby cemeterywith the locally-made ldquowhite-groundrdquo vessels outnumber-ing importedHadra vases41 The production of ldquowhite-groundrdquo vessels predatesthat of theHadra vases indicating that therewas probably from the foundationof the city a large local industry devoted to the production of cinerary urnswhich was then supplemented by a growing import industry42 Both ldquowhite-groundrdquo and Hadra vases were specifically produced as cinerary vessels andso were specifically funerary objects Their inclusion thus indicates a certainlevel of personal or familial wealth on the part of the deceased they possessedenough resources to purchase an entirely non-utilitarian object

In contrast to cremation burials with their specific receptacles for the de-ceased Breccia reported no sarcophagi or coffins associated with inhumationburials though he states rightly that this may be preservation bias43 For exam-ple several elements of gilded decorative plaster were recovered in one tombwhich were analogous to those found on contemporary wooden coffins else-where44This implies that at least for inhumationburials some resourceswouldhave been spent on expensive mortuary receptacles along the lines of cineraryurns though one would expect a wood and stucco coffin to in fact cost morethan anurn No graveswere fully published that contained the remains of thesecoffins

40 According to Enklaar ldquoTheHadraVasesrdquo decoration on the ldquoWhite Groundrdquo vessels is gen-erally not well preserved which would explain why no one has properly looked at themattempts at a chronology based on stylistic development would likely be impossible

41 Enklaar ldquoChronologie et peintures des hydries de Hadrardquo 106 n 142 Breccia observed that both types of vessel were often found together (See Breccia La

Necropoli di Sciatbi 33 ff) As stated above their clay indicates that the ldquowhite-groundrdquovessels were made in Alexandria and at Shatby these vases were far more numerous thanldquoclay-groundrdquo vessels but are rare in the later parts of the Hadra cemetery (Enklaar ldquoTheHadraVasesrdquo 5 n 6 and ldquoChronologie et peintures des hydries deHadrardquo n 1) It thus seemsvery likely that white-ground vessels preceded the heyday of clay-ground ones perhapsroughly in the 1st half of the 3rd cent BCE (Enklaar ldquoThe HadraVasesrdquo) In addition two ofEnklaarrsquos vase groupings are definite imports the ldquoDrdquo (production begins c 230BCE) andthe ldquoLrdquo (production begins c 260BCE) A third grouping Enklaarrsquos ldquoSrdquo group (productionbegins 4th century BCE) also appears to be of Cretan origin though they were not testedthrough Optical Emission Spectroscopy Enklaarrsquos fourth group ldquoBLrdquo (production begins240s BCE) is of a lower quality and seem to be local imitations of the imported vessels SeeEnklaar ldquoThe Hadra Vasesrdquo 6ndash13 23ndash27

43 Breccia La Necropoli di Sciatbi xxiindashxxiii44 See Breccia La Necropoli di Sciatbi xxiindashxxiii plate LXXIX


Urns of course are just one element of an assemblage of grave goods How-ever Breccia only fully described a small selection of full burial assemblagesand did not cross-reference these lists with items in the catalogue of objectshence it is nearly impossible to associate specific objects with specific buri-als45 Tezgoumlr reconstructed fourteen assemblages of figurines that belong tospecific burials from Shatby and was at times able to link these figurines withother objects including two with cinerary urns (Ensembles 03 and 07)46 how-ever these assemblages are not necessarily complete47 The paucity of fullydescribed grave assemblages obviously precludes a quantitative analysis ofthe material Yet even a qualitative assessment of the assemblages allows usto consider whether cremation and inhumation assemblages are fundamen-tally differentmdashthat is whether the choice of cremation or inhumation dic-tated the choice of objects in a burial assemblage Table 71 presents all ofthe attested object types from the burial assemblages reported by Breccia atShatby and whether they appear in cremation burials inhumation burials orin a mixed inhumationcremation context In parentheses is the number ofgraves in which that type appears Though the sample size is very small (n =16) there are no object types (discounting urns) unique to cremation burialsamong the reported assemblages from Shatby48 This suggests that inhumationburials and cremation burials are utilizing the samemortuary logic in the con-struction of the grave assemblage the choice of cremation does not dictatethe use of grave goods that are fundamentally different from those includedin inhumation burials

A serious deficiency in this data is the inability to talk about the chrono-logical development of the burial assemblage there are simply not enoughfully reconstructable burial assemblages with dateable material to adequately

45 Breccia did appear to register objects from individual burial assemblages in successionsuch that successive inventory numbers may indicate objects that belong to the sameburial assemblage though with no indication when one assemblage would end andanother would begin With further research it may be possible to reconstruct more com-plete assemblages

46 Tezgoumlr Tanagreacuteennes drsquoAlexandrie 23ndash2547 Ensemble 03 Urn Alex 10549 (Breccia LaNecropoli di Sciatbi cat no 41) Figurines 10542

10543 10544 10545 10550 10551 10552 10553 10554 Ensemble 07 Urn Alex 17963 (Brec-cia La Necropoli di Sciatbi cat no 83) Figurines 17964ndash17967 Ensemble 07 also appearsin Breccia La Necropoli di Sciatbi fig 16 and may represent a complete assemblage SeeTezgoumlr Tanagreacuteennes drsquoAlexandrie 24

48 This also appears to be the case in the slightly later Hadra cemetery fromwhich there arefar more attested burial assemblages

212 landvatter

table 71 Object types with number of graves in which they appear (ldquoincidencesrdquo) inparentheses and whether a type appears in a cremation burial inhumation burialor mixed-type context The type ldquovesselsrdquo includes all ceramic and alabaster vesselsthe italicized types are the different categories of vessel for which a function could bedetermined based on the Shatby site report

Object type (incidences) Cremation Inhumation Mix

Coin (2) YesDisk (1) YesKnife (1) YesFigurine (5) Yes Yes YesLamp (4) Yes YesMirror (2) Yes YesPin (1) YesTongs (1) YesWreath (5) Yes Yes YesVessel (11) Yes Yes Yes

Amphora (1) YesDish (3) Yes YesDrinking Vessel (4) Yes YesLibation Vessel (2) Yes YesUnguent Vessel (5) Yes Yes Yes

discuss the development of burial practice over time in Shatby Neverthelessdateablematerial at least exists allowing chronology to be discussed in generalterms Tezgoumlr has developed a relative chronology of Tanagra figurines found inAlexandria with one figurine fromEnsemble 07 in Shatby being placed in Seacuterie12 just over midway through her sequence Another figurine from the Hadracemetery unfortunatelywithout context belongs to the same series and so theburial associatedwith Ensemble 07must date sometime after the Hadra ceme-tery was first opened in the second quarter of the third century BCE precisedating however remains elusive49 TheHadra vases excavated at Shatby can bedated somewhatmore precisely so one can get some sense of the chronologicalspan of when cremation was used in Shatby Table 72 derived from and usingEnklaarrsquos 1992 study of the Hadra Vases lists all of the identifiable Hadra Vasesexcavated at Shatby using Enklaarrsquos terminology for style and shape of each

49 Tezgoumlr Tanagreacuteennes drsquoAlexandrie 19ndash22


table 72 Hadra vases from Shatby cemetery arranged in ascending chronological orderDerived from Enklaar 1992 56 table 8 with information added from elsewhere in hiswork Style shape painter and decoration categories are Enklaarrsquos as are thesuggested dates The corresponding catalogue number in Breccia La Necropoli diSciatbi is included Number 19100 marked with a was found in room h ofHypogeum A

Inv no Type Style Shape Painter Date (BCE) Inscription Brecciadecoration catalogue

no

15610 hydria Simple Cretan O-Hydria 4th c 7616094 hydria Laurel P1 Pioneer 2 270ndash260 Μυρτοῦς 7110458 hydria Laurel L2 Ivy 260sndash240 6910522 amphora Laurel L2 Laurel W 260sndash240 7819098 hydria Laurel L2 260sndash240 6619093 hydria Laurel Big Leaves before 250 6815521 hydria Laurel L3 Big Leaves c 250 7410276 hydria Simple Cretan Spiral pre-240 τελυελ 7219095 hydria Laurel L9 Bead and Reel c 240 7319092 hydria Laurel L10 240ndash235 Ἀντίπατρος 6519100 hydria Laurel L1 Droplets 240ndash230 6719102 hydria Laurel L4 Droplets c 235 7519091 hydria Simple Cretan Spiral 225ndash175 κυχ 7719094 hydria Laurel Ἀντόρεος

vessel The dates are derived from his dates of styles and painters as well as theoccasional object found in association As can be seen the vases span muchof the third century BCE from 270 at the earliest to the early second century atthe latest The trueHadra hydriae (as opposed to theCretan household hydriaeEnklaarrsquos ldquoSimpleCretanrdquo group) all belong toEnklaarrsquos earliest style the Laurel(ldquoLrdquo) group and donot include any of the Branchless Laurel (ldquoBLrdquo) groupwhichwere probably local imitations of the more expensive Cretan imports Consis-tent with Shatbyrsquos date cremations in Hadra vases tend to be relatively earlymost date prior to 240BCE less than 100 years after Alexandriarsquos foundationNone of theseHadra vases can be conclusively linked to Brecciarsquos fully reportedassemblages so we are still left with only impressions of Shatbyrsquos chronologyas a whole rather than of burial assemblages in particular

214 landvatter

table 73 Association of cremation and inhumation burials with agiven tomb type Tomb types are categorized by architecturetype and single interment versus multiple interment

Tomb type Cremation Inhumation

Fossa (Single) Yes YesFossa (Multiple) Yes YesFossa w monument (Single) Yes YesFossa w monument (Multiple) Yes NoSingle Interment Hypogeum No YesMultiple Interment Hypogeum Yes Yes

4 Cremations and Funerary Architecture

Neither mode of interment cremation or inhumation seems to have beenexclusive to a specific type of burial architecture (see table 73) Architecturallythe tombs excavated by Breccia at Shatby can be sorted into two basic typesfossa (ldquopitrdquo) burials and hypogea which are more complex underground rock-cut structures primarily differentiated from the fossae by the presence of sub-terranean architecture in addition to the burial chamber itself Fossa burials50were generally rectangular or trapezoidal (ie wider at the head and narrowerat the feet) and ranged in depth from 04m to 15m cut into the bedrock Gen-erally these graves were covered with three to five rock slabs These were byfar the most common type of burial at Shatby Fossae were often surmountedby a funerary monument and could have an inset funerary stele Unlike thefossae themselves which were fairly uniform the funerary monuments seemto have varied widely in size51 As might be expected those graves associatedwith monuments seem to have richer burial assemblages52

There were two varieties of hypogeum in Shatby The primary distinctionwas between hypogea meant for single interments and those constructed formultiple interments The most basic form of hypogeum was a loculus cut intothe rock and open to a small vestibule approached by a rock-cut staircase The

50 See in particular Breccia La Necropoli di Sciatbi xviindashxix51 Detailed descriptions of these types are found in Breccia La Necropoli di Sciatbi and

Annuaire 352 Compare eg tomb 23 section A (no monument) and tomb 25 section C (with monu-

ment) the latter having a gilded wreath


loculus chamber was sealed from the staircase by a slab while the approachto the chamber was filled in with sand and soil and so was not meant to beaccessed again The size of a loculus chamber itself was comparable to that ofthe fossa graves These types required more effort than a simple fossa how-ever and clearly drew on the funerary vocabulary of Macedonia where under-ground chamber tombs were common among the elite53 These can be seen asa lower-effort version of a similar type The second type of hypogeum consistsof large elaborate complexes explicitly meant for multiple interments Thereare two large elaborate hypogea in Shatby labelled ldquoArdquo and ldquoBrdquo the former beingthe more architecturally elaborate A plan of Shatby Hypogeum A is presentedin fig 7454 At least one cremation in a Hadra vase was found in Hypogeum Ain a small niche in room h along with several inhumation burials55 This Hadravase Inv No 19100 dates between 240 and 230BCE (see Table 72)

Stefan Schmidt reassessed Hypogeum ldquoArdquo at Shatby and suggested that thisand other hypogea like it were used by voluntary associations that is non-kin based groups which as a part of their function often pooled resources tocover burial costs56 He argued that individuals in Alexandria were forced tocreate new ways of distinguishing themselves in a new urban environmentin the absence of the social ties that had existed in their old cities57 Whilethere is no direct evidence for the existence of private voluntary associationsin Alexandria itself there are numerous examples of such groups throughoutthe Eastern Mediterranean Rhodes in particular has been a major source ofbothepigraphic andarchaeological information regarding their activities58 ForEgypt during the Ptolemaic period we have documentary evidence inDemotic

53 The most famous of these are at the royal necropolis of Vergina See Andronikos Vergina54 These communal burial structures are the first of many similar structures present in

all excavated Alexandrian cemeteries The later Hadra cemetery included a number ofhypogea that are not as elaborate in terms of architecture or decoration but includemul-tiple loculi ranging from two to ten or more There are more elaborate structures as wellelsewhere in the city at Mustafa Kamel and Anfushy (See Annuaire 2 and 4) The moreelaborate structures are particularly distinguished by their decoration and the presenceof designated spaces for ritual use See Venit Monumental Tombs of Ancient Alexandriafor the most complete survey as well as Empereur and Nenna Neacutecropolis 1 and Neacutecropolis2 for Gabbari

55 Breccia La Necropoli di Sciatbi xlv cat no 67 plate XLI 54 See also Enklaar ldquoThe HadraVasesrdquo 78 and Appendix C

56 Schmidt ldquoNekropolismdashGrabarchitektur und Gesellschaftrdquo 139ndash141 15357 Schmidt ldquoNekropolismdashGrabarchitektur und Gesellschaftrdquo 15358 See Schmidt ldquoNekropolismdashGrabarchitektur und Gesellschaftrdquo Fabricius Die hellenistis-

chen Totenmahlreliefs

216 landvatter

figure 74 Plan of Hypogeum AFrom Breccia La Necropoli di Sciatbi Table I with labelingredone for clarity

and Greek attesting to such associations including some which have funeraryobligations spelled out in their bylaws59 That both inhumations and crema-tions are found in the monumental Hypogeum ldquoArdquo is particularly significant60Taking Schmidtrsquos suggestion that this structure was used by a voluntary non-kin based association to be correct it seems that inhumation or cremation didnotmarkmembership in such a group nor that the use of one or the other wasrequired by the group for inclusion in their burial

59 Schmidt ldquoNekropolismdashGrabarchitektur und Gesellschaftrdquo 139ndash141 153 While there is nodirect evidence for the existence of private associations in Alexandria itself there isample evidence of such groups throughout the Eastern Mediterranean (eg Rhodes seeFabricius Die hellenistischenTotenmahlreliefs and Fraser Rhodian FuneraryMonuments)largely derived from funerary monuments and in Egypt where papyrological evidence isabundant In Egypt during the Ptolemaic period for example we have documentary evi-dence from Tebtunis attesting to three such associationsrsquo activities (see Monson ldquoEthicsand Economics of Ptolemaic Religious Associationsrdquo and Muhs ldquoMembership in PrivateAssociationsrdquo) Involvement in membersrsquo funerals was standard practice for private asso-ciations For a full treatment of the evidence for private associations in the Greek worldsee Poland Geschichte des Griechische Vereinswesens and for organizations in the Romanperiod East see van Nijf The Civic World of Professional Associations (for their funeraryfunctions in particular in this period see 31ndash69)

60 See Breccia La Necropoli di Sciatbi xlv for the inhumations and cremations in room h ofHypogeum A


5 Cremation in Context

Though there are few reported assemblages from Shatby we can still roughlycharacterize the place of cremation in the system of mortuary practice duringthe third century BCE in that cemetery First of all cremations are not neces-sarily connected to any particular religious belief this is demonstrated by thepresence of inhumations and cremations in the same graveWere there specificreligious associations with cremation one would expect cremation burials tobe segregated in someway Breccia himself rejected a connection to any partic-ular religious belief from the very beginning and believed that the choice wassimply a practical one cremation being more convenient in some instances61In fact overall cremation burials were not treated in a substantively differentmanner from inhumation burials Cremations are not associated exclusivelywith any particular type of grave structure treatment or assemblage of gravegoods Cremation burials are found singly and in multiple in pit tombs andin communal burial hypogea and with inhumation burials Variability amongcremation burials too is similar to variability among inhumation graves Bothcremation and inhumation graves have similar ranges of grave goodsmdashfromno grave goods to gildedwreaths However this characterizationmust be takenwith caution given the lack of chronological control over the Shatby material

Given the variety of ways in which a particular cinerary urn could be in-terned cremation itself was not likely associated with any one specific groupThis includes membership in any specific voluntary association or other non-kin associated groupmdashor for that matter any kin-based one either There wasno requirement of either inhumation or cremation for inclusion in a multiple-interment hypogeum or even in the joint cremation-inhumation fossa tombswhich are most probably family graves We also know that cremation was atleast eventually used by a variety of groups in Alexandria as awhole since thereare inscribedvases (thoughnot fromShatby)which indicate that theybelongedto foreign officials and dignitaries who died in Alexandria or to speakers ofnon-Greek languages one Hadra vase has a Punic inscription while anothercontained the remains of a Galatian woman62

61 Breccia La Necropoli di Sciatbi xxxiii62 Alex 5286 number 131 and Alex 4565 respectively in Enklaar ldquoThe Hadra Vasesrdquo The

inscription of the former (in transliteration) reads Ihm bn ythns[d] ldquo(urn) for Hima sonof Yathansidrdquo (see also Enklaar ldquoThe Hadra Vasesrdquo 18) The latter inscription readsΟὔδοριςΓαλάτη ldquoOudoris Galatian womanrdquo See Enklaar ldquoThe Hadra Vasesrdquo 78 for a summary ofsome of these issues

218 landvatter

Though inhumations and cremations are treated in a similarmanner overallin some respects cremations were quite distinctive As stated above cremationburials make up between one-eighth and one-tenth of all burials in Shatby Inaddition though the actual interment of the cinerary urn could be relativelysimple the act of cremation itselfmdashand likely its attendant ceremonymdashwasquite expensive given the cost of a pyre and would have required significantlymore expenditure than a simple interment Furthermore even if a particulargrave monument associated with a specific burial was subdued cremationswould have been significantly more visible at the moment of the ritual thefuneral pyre would be quite obvious though ephemeral This was not a cere-mony that could be conducted in private without anotherrsquos knowledge cre-mation was meant to be seen

Since cremation was of course not a funerary practice indigenous to EgyptMacedonian practice is the likely immediate precedent for Alexandrian cre-mation63 During the mid-to-late fourth century about seven to eight per centof burials in Macedonia were cremations Cremation was not gender specificas both male and females appear It was also used across the socio-economicspectrum elaborate royal burials were cremations but there were also sim-ple primary cremations entailing the burial on the site of the pyre as well asmore elaborate secondary cremations with deposition of cremations in urnsCremation burial assemblages were not categorically different from those ofinhumations types of objects were roughly equivalent64 Alexandrian crema-tion practice at Shatby does bear some relation to the practices in Macedoniaat the end of the fourth century As in Macedonia cremation cannot strictlybe tied to a vertical socio-hierarchical distinction cremation itself was moreexpensive than a simple inhumation but by itself it does not seem to marka decidedly different socio-economic category Most likely cremation marks asocial identity that cross-cuts the socio-economic hierarchy at least to a pointthe identityrsquos material manifestation was only available to those who couldafford the cremation itself But no matter the socio-economic status of thedeceased the cremation rite itself would have been visible to all The expenseassociated with the funeral pyre itself was a limiting factor but beyond thatexpense thereweremanyopportunities for elaboration andvariation It is strik-

63 Macedonian cremation practice is obscure due to its publication history but more infor-mation is becomingaccessibleGuimier-Sorbets andMorizot ldquoDesbucircchers deVergina auxhydries de Hadrardquo has summarized much of this information on Macedonian cremationand compared it to Alexandrian practices The information presented here on Macedo-nian cremation is largely derived from this article

64 Guimier-Sorbets and Morizot ldquoDes bucircchers de Vergina aux hydries de Hadrardquo 139


ing that in both Macedonia and Alexandria that the number of cremationswere relatively low at ten percent or less cremation was never the dominantpractice

However the particular context of early Alexandriamight indicate a sharplydifferent understanding of what cremation signalled in an Egyptian milieuversus a Macedonian one even though the percentage of cremation burialsin Alexandria and Macedonia are roughly equivalent Alexandriarsquos populationwas defined by a large influx of non-Egyptian individuals who were suddenlyconfronted by an alien cultural tradition particularly related to funerary cus-toms the Ptolemaic ruling class was of course a part of this foreign influx Inthis context cremation when practiced in Alexandria likely took on a specificlocal meaning cremation was the complete antithesis of the funerary beliefsand customs of the indigenous Egyptian cultural tradition which emphasizedthe preservation of the body Given that cremation seems to cross-cut socio-economic boundaries that it does not seem to mark belonging in any par-ticular family or voluntary association and that the early social environmentof Alexandria was characterized by a large immigrant population it may bethat cremation marks an explicit rejectionmdashthat is resistancemdashto Egyptianfunerary practices and beliefs In early Alexandria a declaration of differencefrom the surrounding indigenous milieu was a potentially important identityto broadcast and one that would not have been restricted to a specific socio-economic class or even ethnic group Such ameaning could not be understoodin Macedonia where immigrants were likely far fewer in number and wherethere was an indigenous tradition of cremation including among the highestelites But in a city with a large Egyptian population and which had a cer-tain Egyptian character from its very foundation (as is demonstratedmore andmore by recent archaeological work)65 cremation was a strong statement ofseparation Context here helps determine the meaning of practice

Though I argue that cremation would have inevitably been understood insomeway as a rejection of Egyptian customs the practice was almost certainlymultivalent In the initial stages of Shatbyrsquos use andAlexandrian funerary prac-tice in general cremation perhaps was primarily either a positive or neutralsignal indicating affiliationwith aMacedonian identity besides other connota-tions of social and economic standing Alexandrian practice however did notsimplymimic theMacedonian there is an enormous spike in the popularity ofcremations during the Hellenistic period in Macedonia representing forty per

65 See above n 3

220 landvatter

cent of burials in some cases66 which never becomes the case in AlexandriaIn addition given the social context of Alexandria and that cremation seemsto act as an independent variable in mortuary practice that cross-cuts verticalsocial hierarchies I would argue that cremation took on quite quickly more ofa connotation of ldquonot-Egyptianrdquo as opposed to ldquoGreekrdquo or even ldquoMacedonianrdquocremation emphasizes a dichotomy of ldquoimmigrantrdquo versus ldquoindigenousrdquo Thisis emphasized by the fact that the groups we know used the practice throughinscriptions are defined precisely by being non-indigenous foreign officials asindicated on several inscribed Hadra vases as well as mercenaries and non-Greek residents though cremation was not restricted solely to them Crema-tion marks them as people who died away from ldquohomerdquo wherever that ldquohomerdquomight be This is complementary not contradictory to seeing cremation as arejection of Egyptian practice with cremation in general signalling a disas-sociation from the land in which one was buried or at least where one haddied67

That cremation represents a ldquonon-indigenousrdquo identity is supported by thelater history of the practice in both Alexandria and elsewhere in the EasternMediterranean Mummification becomes more frequent over time while cre-mation does not seem to have been practiced on as large a scale as in the Ptole-maic period68 Production of Hadra vases seems to endby the late third centuryBCE69 A reduction in cremations may represent the fact that as time went ona ldquonon-indigenousrdquo identity was no longer useful because the population waslargely descended from populations who had lived in Egypt for generations

66 Guimer-Sorbets and Morizot ldquoDes bucircchers de Vergina aux hydries de Hadrardquo 13967 On a practical level cremation in the Hellenistic and Roman periods was used as ameans

for transporting deceased back to their place of origin See Tybout ldquoDead Men Walk-ingrdquo for a largely epigraphic approach to this issue Alexandria of course could also behome see Bernand Inscr meacutetriques 62 a 3rdndash2nd century inscription from Alexandriafor a person who died abroad in Caria and who was then cremated and returned home toAlexandria for burial

68 Morris Death-Ritual and Social Structure 53 states that cremation had basically dis-appeared by the Roman period Venit ldquoThe Stagni Painted Tombrdquo 666 indicates thatcremation and inhumation were more common than mummification in Roman periodAlexandria but her reasons for stating so are obscure Rowe ldquoNew Excavations at Kom el-Shukafardquo 37ndash39 reports finding cinerary urns in Kom esh-Shoqafa but does not give anyspecific numbers though the impression one gets is that they were a distinct minoritycompared to inhumation graves

69 See Enklaar ldquoChronologie et peintures des hydries de Hadrardquo for an in depth discussionof the chronology


Shatby presents us with a difficult dataset and understanding the develop-ment of cremationrsquos place in Alexandrian funerary practice as well as moreof the nuances of what cremation might be signalling over time will requiremore analysis of other attested cemeteries in particular the material fromAdrianrsquos excavations in Hadra for which we have greater chronological controlHowever I still argue that cremation could have communicated the potentialsocial signal of ldquonon-indigenousrdquo even in the early phases of Shatbyrsquos use Thedevelopment of new identities surrounding non-kin groupmembership by themid-third century BCE (as seen in the construction of Hypogeum A) indicatessignificant social shifts among immigrant groups during the first few decadesfollowing Alexandriarsquos founding Immigrants were assessing their new socialsituation and new social structures and identities were developing as a resultPart of that assessment would inevitably be coming to terms with indigenousEgyptian culture and cremation would have been a significant way for peopleto signal identity in the context of that confrontation We can thus potentiallysee in the Shatby cemetery cross-cultural interaction affecting individual andsocial identity even in the absence of objects and practices of an obviouslyldquoGraeco-Egyptianrdquo style

6 Appendix Summaries of Complete Burial Assemblages as Reportedin Breccia La Necropoli di Sciatbi70

Tomb 5 Section BType inhumation Number of Burials 1 Structure fossa (direction N-S) Dimen-

sions L-165m W-065m D 09mDescription No monument above Head oriented towards the south Grave

mostly closed by four slabs but towards the head the grave was carved intothe rock forming a slightly arched cavity Skull well preserved as a result

Contents 1 object 1 type

Object Type Material

1) jar (crude round bodied placed at head) vessel clay

70 Descriptions are abbreviated translations of Brecciarsquos original text Tombs 23 and 32 insection A (both marked with ) can be located on fig 73

222 landvatter

Tomb 8 Section BType inhumation Number of Burials 1 Structure fossa (direction E-W)Description No monument above Grave filled with sand Head oriented to-

wards the east Traces of fabric adhering to the surface towards top of graveContents 5+ objects 4 types


1) mirror (circular short foot infixed into the baseplaced to the right of the head)

mirror bronze

2) pin pin bronze3)ndash4) knives knife iron5) conical disks (hole in centre) disk bone

Tomb 12 Section C (See Fig 17)Type cremation Number of Burials 2 Structure fossa with 310m high monu-

mentDescription two cinerary urns in square chamber at centre of monument one

on top of the other separated by a slabContents 2 objects 1 type


1) kalpis-shaped cinerary urn top (covered with layer oflime garland of flowers painted on sides as if hang-ing from handles)

urn clay

2) cinerary urn bottom (Hadra vase black on a yellow-clay base)

urn clay

Tomb 14 Section BType inhumation Number of Burials 1 Structure fossa (direction NE-SW)

Dimensions L-18m W-045m D-092mDescription Nomonument above Devoid of soil or sand Skeleton intactContents 0 objects 0 types



Dimensions L-16m W-04m D-07mDescription No monument above Grave closed by four short thin slabs Half

full of topsoil and sandContents 3+ objects 2 types


1) ldquonails and bronze coinsrdquo (indeterminatenumber found dispersed in the fill)

coin nail bronze

2) kantharos (small painted white) drinking vessel clay3) skyphoskothon (not painted) drinking vessel clay

Tomb 15a Section B (15a in Breccia ldquoLa Necropoli di Sciatbirdquo a Second15 in Breccia La Necropoli di Sciatbi)

Type inhumation Number of Burials 1 Structure fossa (direction N-S) Dimen-sions L-08m W-05m D-03m

DescriptionHead oriented north Grave one-third full of soil and sandContents 3 objects 2 types


1)ndash2) coins coin bronze3) figurine (head separated from body female

with a bird under left arm no traces of colour)figurine clay

Tomb 16 Section BType cremation Number of Burials 1 Structure fossaDescription rectangular pitContents 126 objects 2 types

224 landvatter


1) cinerary urn (amphora-form) urn clay2)ndash126) small bronze nails (around the urn) nail bronze

Tomb 23 Section AType inhumation Number of Burials 1 Structure fossa (direction N-S) Dimen-

sions L-18m W-07m 055mDescription No monument above Grave carved into the rock covered by four

slightly thick partly broken slabs Filled with sandy loam Head orientednorth skeleton damaged Either female or young male (nb this is Brecciarsquosdetermination the skeleton has not been subjected to modern physical-anthropologicalbioarchaeological recording methods)

Contents 6 objects 2 types


1)ndash3) oinochoe (small painted black wribbed belly towards the middle placedby the feet)

libation vessel clay

4) kantharos (small painted black placedby the feet)

drinking vessel clay

5)ndash6) paterae (rough placed behind the head) libation vessel clay

Tomb 25 Section CType inhumation Number of Burials 1 Structure fossa w monument (direc-

tion N-S) Dimensions L-21m W-08m D-115mDescription Grave located about half-under monument and was closed by

recessed slabs No soil found in grave Skeleton supine arms at sidesContents 7 objects 5 types



1) half-wreath of gilded bronzeleavesgilded terracotta grains(placed on the neck)

wreath claybronzegold

2) jar (dark grey tall cylindrical neckwidening towards the top tall cylin-drical handles at shoulder bodytapers into funnel placed in the NWcorner at the head)

vessel clay

3)ndash5) saucers (black placed at right fore-arm)

dish clay

6) alabastron (on chest bw spinal col-umn and left femur)

unguent vessel alabaster

7) lamp (black placed in SE corner atthe foot)

lamp clay

Tomb 26 Section CType cremation and inhumationNumber of Burials 2 Structure fossa (NE-SW)

tangent to a monument Dimensions L-21m W-08m D-10mDescription Grave tangent to but not underneath monument Half full of dirt

and sandContents 20 objects 5 types


1)ndash12) pots (in the fill) vessel clay13)ndash14) cups (black in the fill) drinking vessel clay15)ndash16) lamps (black placed on the right) lamp clay17) lamp (PhoenicianCypriot type placed

on the right side)lamp clay

18)ndash19) two figurines (placed around the feet) figurine clay20) cinerary urn (decorated with linear

and floral motifs yellowish clay back-ground placed in SE corner)

urn clay

226 landvatter

Tomb 32 Section AType cremation Number of Burials 1 Structure fossaDescription Grave a circular pit with no monument aboveContents 19 objects 3 types


1)ndash5) female figurines (some with traces of colourall wrapped in a himation heads made sepa-rate from bodies high in fill)

figurine clay

6) fragmentary statue (high in fill) figurine clay7)ndash9) female figurines (similar to but with smaller

feet than 1ndash5 high in fill)figurine clay

10) semi-recumbent figurine (high in fill) figurine clay11)ndash18) pots (black high in fill) vessel clay19) kalpis-shaped cinerary urn (black with

ribbed body with garlands of lanceolateleaves and with other ornaments on the neckorifice and handles all superimposed on redplaced 13 down into pit)

urn clay

Tomb 39 Section BType inhumation Number of Burials 1 Structure fossa (direction E-W) tan-

gent to a monument Dimensions L-11m W-06m D-13mDescription Grave covered with four slabs with recessed lid Head oriented

towards the east spine is hunchbackedContents 7 objects 6 types


1) half-wreath of gilded leaves wgilded terracotta berries (placed nextto the right hand)


2) amphora (dark with neck wideningtowards the top long cylindrical han-dles and tapering body towards thebottom placed in SW corner)

amphora clay



3)ndash4) pots (crude placed towards thefeet)

vessel clay

5) cup (placed towards the feet) drinking vessel clay6) alabastron (placed toward the feet) unguent vessel alabaster7) lamp (black placed towards the feet) lamp clay

Tomb 40 Section CType cremation and inhumation Number of Burials 2 Structure fossa (direc-

tion N-S) tangent to a monument Dimensions L-20m W-05m D-08mDescription Grave had non-recessed cover made of large and heavy slabs tan-

gent to a monument Head oriented south Grave full of sand and soilContents 17 objects 8 types


1) cinerary urn (04m high w remainsof gilding all over placed on its sideby the head)

urn claygold

2) alabastron (large high quality) unguent vessel alabaster3)ndash5) alabaster vessels (smaller) vessel alabaster6) alabaster vessel (fragmentary) vessel alabaster7)ndash8) terracotta alabastralacrimatoi unguent vessel clay9) alabaster vase (014m high 012m

diameter nearly cylindrical trun-cated cone placed near the feet bythe pit wall)

vessel alabaster

10) bronze mirror (placed near the feetby the pit wall)

mirror bronze

11) plate (black placed near the feet bythe pit wall)

dish clay

12) plate (red placed near the feet by thepit wall)

dish clay

13) hydria (small black placed near thefeet by the pit wall)


228 landvatter

(cont)


14) garland of gilded bronze leaves wgilded terracotta berries placed bythe head)

wreath terracottabronzegold

15) tongs tongs iron16) black bucchero pot (unpainted) vessel clay

Tomb 46 Section BType inhumation Number of Burials 1 Structure fossa (direction E-W) with a

high monument Dimensions L-215m W-07m D-15mDescriptionGravewith a cover that is flush (recessed 03m)monument above

Empty of sandand soil Skeleton intact in supinepositionwith arms at sideshead oriented east



1) gilded terracotta berries and gildedbronze leaves (placed over face)

wreathleaves claybronzegold

2) bronze nail through piece of wood (cof-fin remnant)

nail bronze

3) mouth of terracotta alabastron (in placeof heart)

unguent vessel clay

4) alabastron w intact foot (in SW corner) unguent vessel alabaster5) lamp (black in SW corner) lamp clay

Tomb 50 Section CType inhumation Number of Burials 1 Structure fossa (direction NE-SW) wo

monumentDescription Grave is covered with un-recessed slabs and irregular blocks Full

of sandContents 4 objects 2 types



1) saucer (yellow found in the fill) dish clay2) male figurine (young boy half-lying on his right

side holding a duck in his arms placed to theright of the head)

figurine clay

3) dish (w remains of coloured paste placed to theright of the head)

dish clay

4) female figurine placed to the right of the head) figurine clay

Tombs 35ndash37 Section BType cremation Number of Burials 3 Structure fossa with a high monumentDescription Grave is a small rectangular pit with a large monument above

Housed threeurns arranged side-by-sidewithinwhichwas amixture of ashsand and ldquopiecesrdquo (bone fragments)



1) cinerary urn urn clay2) cinerary urn (fragmentary) urn clay3) cinerary urn urn clay4) terracotta and bronze wreaths (small

bunches of gilded terracotta berries onbronze stems within a casing of bronzetriangular leaves resembling ivy)

wreath bronzeclaygold

5) alabastron fragments unguent vessel clay6) terracotta heads figurine clay

Abbreviations

Annuaire 1 Adriani A 1934 Annuario del Museo Greco-Romano vol 1 [1932ndash1933]Alexandria Whitehead Morris

Annuaire 2 Adriani A 1936 Annuaire de Museacutee Greacuteco-Romain vol 2 [193334ndash193435] Alexandria Whitehead Morris

230 landvatter

Annuaire 3 Adriani A 1940 Annuaire de Museacutee Greacuteco-Romain vol 3 [1935ndash1939]Alexandria Whitehead Morris


Le Museacutee 1 Breccia E 1932 Le Museacutee Greacuteco-Romain (1925ndash1931) Bergamo IstitutoItaliano drsquoArti Grafiche

Bibliography

Abd El-Fattah A Abd el-Maksoud M and Carrez-Maratray J-Y 2014 ldquoDeux inscrip-tions grecques du Boubasteion drsquoAlexandrierdquo AncSoc 44 149ndash177

Abd El-Maksoud M Abd El-Fattah A and Seif El-Din M 2012 ldquoLa fouille du Bouba-steion drsquoAlexandrie Preacutesentation preacuteliminairerdquo in Lrsquoenfant et lamort dans lrsquoAntiqui-teacute III Lemateacuteriel associeacute aux tombes drsquoenfants edited by A Hermary and C Dubois427ndash446 Arles

Alix G et al 2012 ldquoLes enfants dans la neacutecropole greacuteco-romaine du Pont de Gab-bari agrave Alexandrie probleacutematiques et eacutetudes de casrdquo in Lrsquoenfant et la mort danslrsquoAntiquiteacute II Types de tombes et traitement du corps des enfants dans lrsquoantiquiteacutegreacuteco-romaine actes de la table ronde internationale organiseacutee agrave Alexandrie CentredrsquoEacutetudes Alexandrines 12ndash14 novembre 2009 edited by M-D Nenna 79ndash137 Alexan-dria Centre drsquoEtudes Alexandrines

Andronikos M 1984 Vergina The Royal Tombs and the Ancient City Athens EkdotikeAthenon

Baines J 2004 ldquoEgyptian Elite Self-Presentation in the Context of Ptolemaic Rulerdquo inAncient Alexandria between Egypt and Greece editedWV Harris and G Ruffini 33ndash61 Leiden Brill

Beck LA ed 1995 RegionalApproaches toMortuaryAnalysis NewYork PlenumPressBernand E 1969 Inscriptions meacutetriques de lrsquoEacutegypte greacuteco-romaine recherches sur la

poeacutesie eacutepigrammatique des grecs en Eacutegypte Paris Belles lettresBinford LR 1971 ldquoMortuary Practices Their Study and Their Potentialrdquo in Approaches

to the Social Dimensions of Mortuary Practices edited by JA Brown 6ndash29Washing-ton Society of American Archaeology

Bingen J (ed RS Bagnall) 2007 Hellenistic EgyptMonarch Society Economy CultureEdinburgh Edinburgh University Press

Bowman AK 1986 Egypt after the Pharaohs Oxford Oxford University PressBreccia E 1912 La Necropoli di Sciatbi Cairo Institut franccedilais drsquoarcheacuteologie orientaleBreccia E 1905 ldquoLa Necropoli di Sciatbirdquo Bulletin de la Socieacuteteacute royale drsquoarcheacuteologie

drsquoAlexandrie 8 55ndash100Brown JA ed (1971) Approaches to the Social Dimensions of Mortuary Practices Mem-


oirs of the Society of American Archaeology 25 Washington Society for AmericanArchaeology

Callaghan PJ 1980 ldquoThe Trefoil Style and Second-Century Hadra Vasesrdquo Annual of theBritish School at Athens 75 33ndash47

Callaghan PJ and RE Jones 1985 ldquoHadra Hydriae and Central Crete A Fabric Analy-sisrdquo Annual of the British School at Athens 80 1ndash18

Chapman R et al eds 1981TheArchaeology of Death NewYork Cambridge UniversityPress

Cook BF 1968 ldquoA Hadra Vase in the Brooklyn MuseumrdquoBrooklyn Museum Annual 10114ndash138

Cook BF 1966a InscribedHadraVases in theMetropolitanMuseumof Art (TheMetropo-litanMuseum of Art Papers no 12) New York Metropolitan Museum of Art

Cook BF 1966b ldquoAn Alexandrian Tomb-Group Re-examinedrdquo American Journal ofArchaeology 70 325ndash330

Coulson WDE 1987 ldquoChatby Reconsideredrdquo The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 73234ndash236

Emberling G 1997 ldquoEthnicity in Complex Societies Archaeological Perspectivesrdquo Jour-nal of Archaeological Research 54 295ndash344

Empereur J-Y and M-D Nenna eds 2003 Neacutecropolis 2 2 vols Cairo Institut franccedilaisdrsquoarcheacuteologie orientale

Empereur J-Y andM-D Nenna eds 2001 Neacutecropolis 1 Cairo Institut franccedilais drsquoarcheacute-ologie orientale

Enklaar A 1992 The Hadra Vases PhD Diss University of AmsterdamEnklaar A 1985 ldquoChronologie et peintures des hydries de Hadrardquo Bulletin Antieke

Beschaving 60 106ndash151Fabricius J 1999 Die hellenistischen Totenmahlreliefs Grabrepraumlsentation undWertvor-

stellungen in ostgriechischen Staumldten Muumlnchen F PfeilFischer-Bovet C 2011 ldquoCounting the Greeks in Egypt Immigration in the First Century

of Ptolemaic Rulerdquo in Demography and the Graeco-Roman World New Insights andApproaches edited by C Holleran and A Pudsey 135ndash154 Cambridge CambridgeUniversity Press

Fraser PM 1977 Rhodian Funerary Monuments Oxford Clarendon PressFraser PM 1972 Ptolemaic Alexandria 3 vols Oxford Clarendon PressGoddio F 1998 Alexandria The Submerged Royal Quarters London PeriplusGreacutevin G and P Bailet 2002 ldquoLa creacutemation en Eacutegypte au temps des Ptoleacutemeacuteesrdquo in

La Mort nrsquoest pas une fin edited by A Charron 62ndash65 Arles Editions du Museacutee delrsquoArles Antique

Greacutevin G andP Bailet 2001a ldquoFouille drsquohydries funeacuteraires agrave creacutemation drsquoeacutepoque ptoleacute-maiumlquerdquo in Neacutecropolis 1 (Eacutetudes alexandrines 5) edited by J-Y Empereur and M-D Nenna 291ndash294 Cairo Institut franccedilais drsquoarcheacuteologie orientale

232 landvatter

Greacutevin G and P Bailet 2001b ldquoAlexandrie une eacutetude pionniegravere en archeacuteologie Lesrites de la cremationrdquo Archeacuteologia 381 48ndash53

Guerini L 1964Vasi diHadra tentativo di sistemazione cronologica di una classe ceram-ica (Studi Miscellanei 8) Rome LrsquoErma di Bretschneider

Guimier-Sorbets A-M and Y Morizot 2005 ldquoDes bucircchers de Vergina aux hydries deHadra deacutecouvertes reacutecentes sur la creacutemationenMaceacutedoine et agraveAlexandrierdquo in Entremondes orientaux et classiques la place de la cremation edited by L Bachelot et al137ndash152 Strasbourg Universiteacute Marc Bloch

Hardiman CI 2013 ldquo lsquoAlexandrianismrsquo again Regionalism Alexandria and Aestheticsrdquoin Belonging and Isolation in theHellenisticWorld edited by SL Ager and RA Faber199ndash222 Toronto University of Toronto Press

Hodder I ed 1982 Symbolic and Structural Archaeology NewYork Cambridge Univer-sity Press

Hodder I 1980 ldquoSocial Structure and Cemeteries A Critical Appraisalrdquo in Anglo-SaxonCemeteries 1979 The fourth Anglo-Saxon symposium at Oxford edited by T Watts161ndash170 Oxford BAR

Jones S 1997 The Archaeology of Ethnicity New York RoutledgeLarsquoda C 2003 ldquoEncounters with Ancient Egypt The Hellenistic Greek Experiencerdquo in

Ancient Perspectives on Egypt edited by RMatthews and C Roemer 57ndash69 LondonUniversity College London Press

Manning JG 2010 The Last Pharaohs Egypt under the Ptolemies 305ndash30BC OxfordOxford University Press

Manning JG 2003 Land and Power in Ptolemaic Egypt The Structure of Land TenureCambridge Cambridge University Press

McKenzie J 2007TheArchitecture of AlexandriaandEgypt C 300BC to AD700NewHaven Yale

Merriam AC 1885 ldquoInscribed Sepulchral Vases from Alexandriardquo American Journal ofArchaeology 1 18ndash33

Monson A 2006 ldquoThe ethics and economics of Ptolemaic religious associationsrdquo Anc-Soc 36 pp 221ndash238

Morris I 1992 Death-Ritual and Social Structure in Classical Antiquity CambridgeCambridge University Press

Moyer I 2011a Egypt and the Limits of Hellenism Cambridge Cambridge UniversityPress

Moyer I 2011b ldquoCourt Chora and Culture in Late Ptolemaic Egyptrdquo American Journalof Philology 132 15ndash44

Mueller K 2005 ldquoGeographical Information Systems (GIS) in Papyrology MappingFragmentation and Migration Flow to Hellenistic Egyptrdquo Bulletin of the AmericanSociety of Papyrologists 42 63ndash92

Muhs B 2001 ldquoMembership in Private Associations in Ptolemaic Tebtunisrdquo Journal ofthe Economic and Social History of the Orient 441 1ndash21


Neer R 2005 ldquoConnoisseurship and the Stakes of Stylerdquo Critical Inquiry 321 1ndash26Nenna M-D 2012 ldquoLa fouille du secteur el-Manara dans la neacutecropole de Hadra (Alex-

andrie) en 1940 lrsquoapport des documents drsquoarchives (carnet de fouilles des inspec-teurs du Museacutee greacuteco-romain drsquoAlexandrie et photographies de Loukas Benakis)rdquoin Lrsquoenfant et la mort dans lrsquoAntiquiteacute II Types de tombes et traitement du corps desenfants dans lrsquoantiquiteacute greacuteco-romaine Actes de la table ronde internationale organ-iseacutee agrave Alexandrie Centre drsquoEacutetudes Alexandrines 12ndash14 novembre 2009 edited by M-D Nenna 209ndash252 Alexandria Centre drsquoEacutetudes Alexandrines

OrsquoShea JM 1996 Villagers of the Maros A Portrait of an Early Bronze Age Society NewYork Plenum Press

OrsquoShea JM 1984 Mortuary Variability An Archaeological Investigation Orlando Aca-demic Press

Pagenstecher R 1913 Die griechisch-aumlgyptische Sammlung von Ernst von Sieglin Teil 3Die Gefaumlsse in Stein und Ton Knochenschnitzereien Leipzig Giesecke amp Devrient

Pagenstecher R 1909 ldquoDated Sepulchral Vases from Alexandriardquo American Journal ofArchaeology 13 387ndash416

Parlasca K 2010 ldquoAlexandrinische Aschenurnenrdquo Chronique drsquoEacutegypte 85 278ndash294Pearson MP 1999 The Archaeology of Death and Burial College Station Texas AampM

PressPearson MP 1982 ldquoMortuary Practices Society and Ideology An Ethnoarchaeologi-

cal Studyrdquo in Symbolic and Structural Archaeology edited by I Hodder 99ndash114 NewYork Cambridge University Press

Poland T 1909 Geschichte des Griechische Vereinswesens Leipzig TeubnerRitner RK 1992 ldquoImplicit Models of Cross-Cultural Interaction a Question of Noses

Soap and Prejudicerdquo in Life in aMulti-Cultural Society Egypt from Cambyses to Con-stantine and Beyond edited by J Johnson 283ndash290 Chicago Oriental Institute

Roumlnne T and PM Fraser 1953 ldquoA Hadra-Vase in the Ashmolean Museumrdquo Journal ofEgyptian Archaeology 39 84ndash94

Rotroff SI 1997 The Athenian Agora Vol 29 Hellenistic Pottery Athenian and ImportedWheelmade TableWare and RelatedMaterial Princeton American School of Classi-cal Studies at Athens

Rowe A 1942 ldquoNew Excavations at Kom el-Shukafardquo Bulletin de la Socieacuteteacute royale drsquoar-cheacuteologie drsquoAlexandrie 35 3ndash45

Samuel AE 1989The Shifting Sands of History Interpretations of Ptolemaic Egypt Lan-ham University Press of America

Saxe AA 1970 Social Dimensions of Mortuary Practices PhDDiss University of Michi-gan

Schmidt S 2010 ldquoNekropolismdashGrabarchitektur und Gesellschaft im hellenistischenAlexandreiardquo in Alexandreia und das ptolemaumlische Aumlgypten Kulturbegegnungen inHellenistischer Zeit edited by GWeber 136ndash159 Berlin Verlag Antike

234 landvatter

Stephens SA 2003 SeeingDouble Intercultural Poetics in Ptolemaic Alexandria Berke-ley University of California Press

Tezgoumlr DK 2007 Tanagreacuteennes drsquoAlexandrie Figurines de terre cuite helleacutenistiquesdes neacutecropoles orientales Museacutee greacuteco-romain drsquoAlexandrie Cairo Institut franccedilaisdrsquoarcheacuteologie orientale

Tkaczow B 1993 The Topography of Ancient Alexandria an Archaeological Map Wars-zawa Zaklad Archeologii Sroacutedziemnomorskiej Polskiej Akademii Nauk

Trampier J 2010 The Dynamic Landscape of theWestern Nile Delta from the New King-dom to the Late Roman Periods PhD Diss University of Chicago

Tybout R 2016 ldquoDead Men Walking The Repatriation of Mortal Remainsrdquo in Migra-tion and Mobility in the Early Roman Empire edited by L de Ligt and LE Tacoma390ndash437 Leiden Brill

van Nijf O 1997The CivicWorld of Professional Associations in the Roman East Amster-dam JC Gieben

Venit MS 1999 ldquoThe Stagni Painted Tomb Cultural Interchange and Gender Differ-ence in Roman AlexandriardquoAmerican Journal of Archaeology 1034 631ndash669

Venit MS 2002 Monumental Tombs of Ancient Alexandria The Theatre of the DeadCambridge Cambridge University Press

Voss B 2008 The Archaeology of Ethnogenesis Berkeley CaliforniaYiftach-Firanko U 2014 ldquoDid BGU III 2367 workrdquo in Identifiers and Identification

Methods in the Ancient World Legal Documents in Ancient Societies III edited byM Depauw and S Coussement 103ndash118 Leuven

Index of Names and Subjects

Abrocomas 30ndash33Abuqir 130n38accounts 73acculturation 202Achaemenes son of Darius 29Achaemenid history new 2Achaemenids 49 50 65 71 78

communications system 8empire 81 84postal service 8roads 8rule 7 79 88 103

Achoris (Hakor) 33n27 139Acre 35 42administration 11 13 21 46Adoption stele of Nitokris 186Aegean 12 27 85Agathocles king of Sicily 14n32Agathocles son of King Lysimachus 14n32Agesilaus 92Agilkia 142agriculture 46Ain Shams 134Akhmin 12alabastron 225 227ndash229Alcetas 41Alexander III the Great viii 1 4 6ndash12 14ndash

16 18 22 28 30 39 49 52 53 55ndash57 81100 101 103 104 121 122 124 135 167176

capture of Tyre 4conquest of Egypt 2corpse of 10 39cult of 10death of 1 73empire of 71hearse of 10mausoleum of 10ring of 1 40

Alexander IV 4 9 14 56ndash58 121 124 125 146150 151 166 168 183 191 194

Alexander V of Macedon 14n32Alexander-Romance 145Alexandria 1 3 4 5 9ndash11 13 15n34 17ndash20 22

38 43 47 53 54 57 65 83 104 105 109130n38 131 133 134 145ndash153 199ndash234

Library 1 17 22Museum 17 22Temples 38

alum 77Amada stele 179Amasis II (= Ahmose II) 17ambulatories 141Amduat 177Amenemhet 191Amenhotep II 179ndash181Amenhotep III 18 126 180 181 185 195Amenhotep high priest of Amun 182n106Ameny 191Amphipolis 51Ammon 18 145 146amphorae 204 212 213 224 226Amun (equivalent in interpretatio Graeca to

Ammon) 11 18 74 75 106 132 135 137139 145 146 167 181 182 185ndash187193

Amun-Re 146 185Amyrtaeus (Amenirdisu) 28 124n14anatomy 1Anemhor II high priest of Ptah 62n53Anglo-Dutch wars 27animal cult 135 151Antigonia on the Orontes 42Antigonid kingdomempire 2 56Antigonids 22Antigonus I Monophthalmus 13 14 41 42 57Antigonus II Gonatas 51Antigonus III Doson 57Antioch 42 52Antiochus I Soter 52Antiochus III the Great 52Antiochus IV Epiphanes 9 40n66Antipater 41Antony (Marcus Antonius) 1Anu 39Anubis 19Apis 9 10 18 19 38

bull 10apomoira 106aposkeuai (= goods possessions of soldiers)

16Arab el-Hisn 134

236 index of names and subjects

Arabia 8n6 10arable land 77Arab rule in Egypt 72Arabs 21Aramaeans 140Aramaic 7 8 20

dates 57archive the 1architecture

burial 214funerary 206Hellenistic 123subterranean 214

Argos 200n6Ariobarzanes 35Aristazanes 37Armant 135army 64 73 154 179Arrian 11Arsacids 52Arsinoe II Philadelphus daughter of Ptol-

emy I and Berenice I 14n32 64 106143n93

Aspendus 200n6Artaxerxes II Mnemon 2 3 28ndash31 33ndash36Artaxerxes III Ochus viii 2 3 18 29ndash32 34ndash

37 100 101 103 121ldquoArtaxerxes pharaohrdquo 101Ashmunein 19

see alsoHermopolis MagnaAsia Minor 81 85 94Asiatics 167 176 181 191 194assemblages

burial 211 214grave 205 207 211tomb 205ndash207 209

Aswan see SyeneAthena 84 87 94 97 98Athens Athenians 16 18 30 32 36 48 49

90 200n6Athenian agora 85Athenian empire 79athletes 38Athribis 82 87 156

see also Tell el-AthribAttica 200n6Attic standard 94 95Atum 182Austria 86

Ayn Manawir 74

Baal 169 172 184Babylon Babylonia 5 10 27 29 39 40Babylonian talents 79Bactria 27 28 50Bagoas 37balance scales 98barbarians 30 36Barca 29Bardiya 28barque chapel 18barque stations 138Bastet 128 129 168Behbeit el-Hagar 125ndash128 141 143 149

temple of Isis and family of Osiris 126141 143

Behedety 180benefactions 166 167n3 186 187 192Beniout 20Beni Hasan 81 82Berenice I second wife of Ptolemy I Soter

13n26 14n32Berenice II wife of Ptolemy III Euergetes

173 187Beroia 57Bessus 28Beth Shan stele 172bilingual decrees 133birth houses 139 140 144 155 179body treatment 209Boeotia 16Boeotian vessels 204bones 222 229ldquobook of designing a templerdquo 153ldquoBook of the Templerdquo 153Bosporus 80 85bottomry agreement 85bronze 70 71 97ndash99 104 106 108 109

209n38 222ndash229Bubastis 128 130 131n42Bucheum 61n50 135Buchis bull 61n50 135Buchis stele 135n59bullion 70 77 78 80 81 86 93 94 96 98

99 102ndash109bureaucracy 46 50 53 58 65burial

mixed-age 207

index of names and subjects 237

practice 212ritual 202royal 218

Buto 11 19 124 147 148 155 166ndash168 184 186192 193n161 194

Byzantine rule in Egypt 72

Caesar (Caius Julius Caesar) 1Cairo 131n42 134 147calendars 3

Babylonian 3 47ndash49 54Egyptian 3 46Greek 48Hyksos 47Macedonian 47Olympian 51Zoroastrian 47

Callippus 50Callisthenes 50Cambyses vii 5 17 18 79Canopus decree 130 155capitals

composite 142 143floral 142

Caria 200n6Carnarvon tablet 190cartonnage 21cartouches 121 128n28 144 149n114 155n124

167 194Caspian Gates 16Cassander 14 40 43 51 57Cassandreia 51cattle counts 46ceilings 123cemeteries 4 127 151 201 204ndash208 210ndash215

217 221census 22Chababash see KhababashChabrias 92Chalcis 200n6chamber tombs 215chapels 18 19 127 141 149ndash152 156 181n105Chian standard 94ldquochiefrdquo (wr) 168 184Chiotes 8Cilicia 22 34 36clay-ground vessels 209 210Cleomenes of Naukratis satrap () of Egypt

8 38 39 85 103 104

Cleopatra VII 1 173cleruchic settlement 16closed currency system 105codification of knowledge 154coffins 210 228coins coinage 3 7 14ndash17 21 22 28 51n25 57

59n48 70ndash119 212 223Croeseid 28Pharaonic 95Ptolemaic 14

colonization 5colonnaded courts 153columned halls 127Constantinus Cephalas 34Constantius II 135n59consumers 73consumption 71ldquocontroller of armiesrdquo 174Copais Lake 16copper vii 12 76 80coregency 54 59ndash62 64ndash66Corinth 200n6corn 12Cornelius Gallus 168Cos 20cosmic cycle 124cosmology 123cosmos 122 123cotton 108courtiers 43creation 123creator gods 124cremation 4 199ndash234Crete 200n6 209crocodiles 2 9cultivators 74cult topography 154cultural mingling 199cultural renaissance 120cultural separation 199Cunaxa 27 29 30Cuneiform dates 57cups 225 227Cusae (= el-Quseia) 149

temple of Hathor 149customs

duties 77 132officials 78

Cyprus 12 16 36 37 41 42


Cyrenaica Cyrene 13 14 20 29 200n6Cyrus I 28Cyrus the Younger 28 30 35

daily cults 154Damanhur 83 104Dapur 174daric 95Darius I 17 75 97 139 172 188Darius II 28 140Darius III 28 101Datames 31 35 36n39datasets 221deben 80 86 94 103 105 108 109Deir-el-Medina 80Deir Rifeh 171Delphi 35Demeter 18Demetria of Cos 20Demetrias 51Demetrius I Poliorcetes 12ndash14 42 43 48 51

57Demetrius of Phaleron 17Demosthenes 32demotic writing system 155Dendera 139 155 156 173diadochoi see successorsdie links 59n48 87 88die studies 88dies 89 90 92 93 96 102

cube die 87 90 93Diocletian 135n59Dionysius I of Syracuse 95 97Dionysodorus 85dishes 212 225 227 229disks 132 134 212 222Djedkhonsiuefankh 171Djehuty 128n28Djoser 46

pyramid 152dokimastai 85Doloaspis 38 103Domitian 127 173 179double dates 47 53ndash55do ut des 149drachms 89 98drinking vessels 212 223ndash225 227dromos 127ducks 229

dynastiesThird 152Fourth 168Twelfth 175Fifteenth 3Seventeenth 149n116Eighteenth 126 146 180Nineteenth 146 190Twentieth 191Twenty-first 186 188Twenty-second 124n14 129 171 189n142Twenty-third 124n14Twenty-fifth 126 185 186 188Twenty-sixth vii 7 124 125 128 131 140

172 186 188Twenty-seventh 2 4 7 188Twenty-eighth 3 5 28 34 120 121 124ndash

126Twenty-ninth 5 120 121 124 125 139 150

155Thirtieth 3ndash5 7 34 120ndash122 124 125 127

129 131ndash135 137ndash139 141ndash144 149 150153ndash155 172 187 190

eagle 97Ptolemaic 14 42

earthquakes 122East Silsileh 185Ecbatana 52n28economic prosperity 15Edfu 107 123n10 137 142 149 152 153 155

156 173 177n72 178n79 179ndash182 186187n139

birth house 179temple of Horus 152

Edjo land of 192Egypt Egyptians passimEgyptian empire 122Egyptianization 202Eirene daughter of Ptolemy I and Thais

14n32el-Arish 130n38ldquoEldorado on the Nilerdquo 27Elephantine 8 20 29 49 140

temple of Khnum 79 140ndash142 147temple of Satet 140n77temple of Yahweh 140

elephants 9Eleusis (Alexandrian) 18


Elite 976 168n9Egyptian 19 75 97 124 145 155

el-Kab 134 137ndash139embalmers 10emmer wheat (triticum dicoccum) 73enclosure walls 137ndash139 143 153ndash155Eordea 8Epaminondas 30Ephemerides 50Epithets 143n93 166ndash169 171 173ndash175 177ndash

181 188 191n154 192equestrian 38equinox

autumn 65vernal 49

era 52Seleucid 56

Eratosthenes 1Ethiopia 31ethnic identities 199 201 202ethnic origin 200n5ethnic separation 199Euclid 1Eumenes 41Eunostus king of Soli (Cyprus) 14n32eunuchs 29Europe 86Eurydice first wife of Ptolemy I Soter

14n32exchange 71exports 77

Fayum 16 53 81 82 87 88hoard 107

festivals 123fiduciary coinage 104 108Fifteenth Upper Egyptian nome 150figurines 211 212 223 225 226 229

Tanagra 212fineness (of silver) 79 84ndash86First Cataract region 121fish 29flax 77floral helmet element 90folded flans 90Fort of Camels 40fossa tombs 214 215 217 221ndash229fractional issues 97ndash99 103Freud Sigmund 19

friends (= Hellenistic courtiers) 6 39 42funerary

behaviour 202 205beliefs 219chapels 150monuments 214obligations 216practices 204vocabulary 215

Gabbari 203n13Gabiene 41Galatians 217galena 90games 9 38

musical contests 9 38garbage dumps 134garlands 222 226 228Gaza 42

Strip 12gazelles 98Gebel Barkal stele 178Gela 20generals 6 10 32 36 92 121Giza 83goats 98gold 28 39 70 76 77 82n50 86n68 90 94ndash

99 225ndash229goods and services 74 76Graeco-Egyptian style 221Graeco-Roman period 123 140n77 141 142

154 155 175 178grain 29 70 72ndash76 80 81 84 85 93 108 111

225Granicus river battle of 49grave goods 205 211 217graves 203 205ndash207 210ndash212 214 215 217

218 220ndash229ldquogreat chiefrdquo 167 168 185 192 194Great King (= king of Persia) 29n17 79 90

102ldquogreat ruler of Egyptrdquo 193Greece European Greece 29 30 33 81Greek

art 203cities 70gods 132

ldquoGreek millenniumrdquo in Egypt 27Greekness 12


Greeks 10 15 19 21 29n12 36 37 39 54 6179 83 91 92 97 131n43 133 147 200n7

Greshamrsquos Law 106

Hacksilber 80 83 86 93 94 99 106Hadra 207 210n42 211n48 212 215n54

218n63 221vases 4 203 204 209 210 212 213 215

217 220 222Hapi-Djefai 171Harmodios and Aristogeiton 12Harpara 139Harsiese 151harvest tax 74Hathor 143 149Hatshepsut 169hegemony 30Heliopolis 134 135 137Hellenistic

architecture 123period 124states 120

Hellenization 202Hellenizing style 151Hent 39Hephaistos 11Heracleia 200n6Herakleides of Temnos 20Heracleion vii 90 102 131ndash133Hermopolis Magna (Khemenu) 146 149 150

temple of Nehemet-Away 150temple of Thoth 150see also Ashmunein

Hermopolis Parvatemple of Thoth 128n28

Herodas of Syracuse 31Herodotus vii 11 29 79 128Heroonpolis 8n6Herophilus 1hieroglyphic writing system 154 155ldquoHigh sand of Heliopolisrdquo 134Hindu Kush 27his majesty (ḥm=f ) vii 39 167 169 170 174

180 185 192ndash194Hittites 167 172

marriage stele 172Holy Land 43horses 95ndash97Horus 180ndash182 186 193 194

hulled barley (hordeum vulgare) 73hydriae 204n16 209 213 227Hyksos 3 47 65hypogeum tombs 206 213ndash217 221

Ibiotapheion 151ibises 151identity 166n1 183n117 192 219 221

cultural 205Egyptian elite 155 200n3ethnic 201 202Greek or Macedonian 5 205 219immigrant 205non-Egyptian 205non-indigenous 5 220social and individual 202ndash204 218

Idumea 55Imhotep 152 153imitation 3 70 71 76 80ndash82 84ndash92 100

102ndash104 109immigrants 17 19 21 107 199 200 204n17

205 219ndash221imports 77 83ndash86 90 132 210 213India 86industry 210infantry 171infrastructure 73inhumation 206 207 209ndash212 214ndash218

220ndash228Inka empire 75innovation 7 14 22 55ndash57 138institutional memory 4 167 189 190intercalation 49ndash52

biennial 54ndash56 65Ionia 36 200n6

see also stater of IoniaIphicrates 31 34 35Ipsus 27 43irrigation 15Iseum see Behbeit-el-HagarIsis 4 9 19 38 127 142 143 151 173 194

Lady of Yat-Wadjat 9n13Isocrates 30 32 33Issus 103

jars 32 221 225Jews 8 21 29 73n10 200Joppa 42Judith and Holophernes 36


Kadeshbattle of 170 174 190 191Poem of the battle of 174

kalpis 222 226Kamose 190Kanais (= Redesiyeh) 180kantharoi 223 224Karanis 81 87Karnak 134 135 137 172 181 182 184

barque-sanctuary of Philip Arrhidaeus146

first pylon 135hypostyle hall 180processional way Karnak-Luxor 135temple of Amun 106 107 137 139temple of Khons 186temple of Mont 179 183

Khababash 32 37 100 103 148 186 192 193194n168

Khirbet-el-Kocircm 55Khnum 172Khons 187kingship 4 57 122 123 133 146 147 166 187

193 194Kingrsquos Peace 33kiosks 143 144 153kite 62 63 86 98knives 212 222Kom Ombo 156Koumlnigsnovelle 184 185kothon 223

Lachares 48n16Lacrates of Thebes 36lacrimatoi 227lamps 212 225 227 228land

leases 73 74 78survey 22

Laomedon of Mitylene 41Late EgyptianMiscellanies 190Late Period 73 93 135 140 153 172 176 188Laureion 89 90Law of Nicophon 85legitimation (of power kingship etc) 65

124 131 133 139 143n93 145letters 73Leuctra 30 36Levant 77 78 81 85

Lex Acilia 66libation vessels 212 224 227Libya Libyans 10 29 170

war 170n18 170n19ldquolife prosperity healthrdquo 101 185lime 122linen 77 107 108loan agreements 78loans 80loculus 214 215Lower Egypt 185

Twelfth nome 125Fifteenth nome 128n28

lunettes 132 167Luxor 18 107 135 180

barque-sanctuary of Amun 146processional way Karnak-Luxor 135sacred avenue Luxor-Thebes 137

Lycia 22Lydia 27 28 36Lysandra daughter of Ptolemy I and Bere-

nice I 14n32Lysimachus king of Macedon and Thrace

14n32 43 57

maat 75 123 124Macedon Macedonians passimMacedonian period 125Magas 13Magna Graecia 84Magnesia 200n6mammisis see birth housesManara cemetery 205n19Mandrocles of Magnesia 35Manetho of Sebennytus priest of Heliopolis

2 17 18 47 71Mantinea 30 36Maria Theresa thaler 86market system 72 75markets 27marriage contracts 7 20 78 80 103Masistes 28Matariya 134Mazaces 3 99ndash103material culture 202Medinet Habu 170 174 177 178 180 184Mediterranean 11 77 122

trade 108World 87


Memphis vii 3 8ndash11 16 18 19n50 20 29 3840 78 82 83 89 104 145 152 153

temple of Apis 89temple of Ptah 78WhiteWall 29

Memphite area 152Mendes stele 180Menelaus brother of Ptolemy I Soter 13 16Mentor of Rhodes 37Mentuhotep 175mercenaries 6 32 34n31 35 36 73n10 91

92 96 220Merenptah 190Mersa Matruh 13Mesopotamia 103Meshwesh see LibyansMetonic cycle 50Meydancıkkale hoard 59n48microcosm 123Middle Egypt 150 151Middle Kingdom 168 171 174 178 182 188

189 193migration 5Miletus 200n6mints 91 94 102ndash106mirrors 212 222 227Mit Ghamr 128n28Moeris Lake 29monarchy personal 13monetization 22 70ndash119money 70ndash119moneyers 91

itinerant 92 102month names

Addaru II 52n29Aiaru 55Akhet 147Anthesterion 48Arahsammu 52Artemisios 49 52n28 61Boedromion 48Daisios 49 52n29 54Dios 52 54 56Dystros 52n28 54 59 60 65Epeiph 55 62Hekatombaion 48Hyperberetaios 55Loios 52n29Mecheir 58

Mounichion 48Ololos 51n25Panemos 52n28 55 56Phamenoth 47 62Pharmouthi 62n53Tammuz 55Tashritu 52Thoth 46 61 65Tybi 58n46 61

Montu 135 170 179 180 183 186mortuary

logic 211practices 202receptacles 210

mud-brick walls 134mummification 18 207 220mutiny 92Mysteries Eleusinian 48mythology 154

nails 8 223 224 228naoi 125 129ndash131 141 153

monolithic 131natron 77 108Naucratis vii 38 82 97 131ndash133 149

stele see Nectanebo decreeNaxos (Sicilian) 88Near Eastern world 87Nectanebo I (Nekhetnebef) vii 4 7 19 78

120 121 128 130ndash135 139 140 143 150172 175 185 187 188

Nectanebo II (Nekhethorheb) 7 19 31 3637 41 94 96ndash98 120 121 125 128 129135 138n67 139 140 145ndash147 150 176186 188

Nectanebo decree aka Naucratis stele 3839 77 132 186

ldquoNectaneborsquos Dreamrdquo 125 126 145Nefer-Khnum 171Neferty 168Neith vii 39 132 133Nekhbet 137 139Nepherites I 139Nepherites II 121 150New Kingdom 46 73 76 80 94 97 134 139

140 142 154 155 171 172 181 183 185188ndash190 193

New Year festival 154New Yearrsquos courts 141 142


New Yearrsquos Day 46New Yearrsquos offering 141 142nḥb tax 58ndash61 63 65nḥt tax 58 61 63Nicostratus of Argos 37Nile viii ix 2 8 10 11 15 22 23 27 40 42 73

75 81 83 90 111 114 121 125 126 131 137140 142 200 201

Canopic branch 90Delta 10 81 83 121 122 125 131 141 143

146 148 152 200flood 11Valley 8

nisbe nouns 171Nitokris 186nomarchs 8n6 38Nubia Nubians 76 168 170 188

rulers 188viceroy of 167

Nun 123

obeliscus Pamphilii 173 179obols 98Octavian 10oenochoe 224Old Kingdom 46 123 154 155 177Olympias mother of Alexander III the Great

145Olympic Games 30Onnophris 20Onuris 125opet festival 146Ophellas 13orchards 106Oriental empires 120Orontes 32n25Osiris 74 107n109 127 194

Osiris-Baboon 151Osiris-Ibis 151

Osorkon I 129Osorkon II 129 130ostraca passimowls 84 94 97 98Oxyrhynchus 149

Palatine Anthology 34Palestine 121Palestinians 83Pamirs 27

Pamphylia 200n6Panathenaic amphorae 204Panhellenism 30papyri passimParaetonium 3Parthians 52n28paterae 224patronage 17 18Pe and Dep 192Pe lord of 194Peiraeus 85 89Peloponnesian war 29 89Pelusium vii 36penalty clauses 78Pepi I 131n42Perdiccas III king of Macedon 368ndash359

57Perdiccas recipient of Alexander the Greatrsquos

ring 1 2 39ndash41Per-hebit 126Per-khefet 149Persepolis 28Persia Persians vii viii 1 2 3 4 7 8 11 15ndash

22 27ndash29 31ndash38 47 49 51 71 77 79 8184 92 94 96 99 100 120 121 125 131139 141 145 146ndash149 154 155 192 193200

Persian Egypt 2 5Persian empire 28 49 121Persian forces 121Persian invasions 120 121 131Persian period

first 120 139 155second 121 141 145 149

Persian rulers 145Persian standard 94Petisis high priest of Thoth 38 103 150

tomb chapel at Tuna el-Gebel 151Petosiris 19 20 37 173Peucestas son of Macartatus 8pharaoh vii 1 3 4 7 11 12 15 18 19 22

27 28 33n27 35ndash37 62 71 73ndash8092 94 97 100 101 103 106 107109 115 119 120ndash165 168n9 186190

Pharnabazus 31ndash35Pharos 15n34Pherendates satrap of Egypt 37Phersos 125


Philae 142 156 173kiosk of Nectanebo II 143 144temple of Isis 143

Philip II 16 50 51 53n29 54 57 82 95ndash97Philip III Arrhidaeus 6ndash8 57 121 125 146

150 151Philip V 56 57Philippi 16Philiscus of Abydos 35Philophron 36Philotera daughter of Ptolemy I and Bere-

nice I 14n32Phoenicia Phoenicians 12 30 31 35ndash37 41

43 77 82 83 97 99 103 225phraseology 166 167 169 171 175 182ndash184

186ndash191Phrygian cap 104Piankhy 168

stele 179 188Piazza Navona 173Pi-emroye (= Naucratis) 39Pinodjem 186Piye 126pillared halls 123pins 212 222plant decoration 123plates 227Plinthine 207political economy 3 70ndash119political propaganda 145poll tax 109Polybius 15 30Porphyry 57ldquoPorus medallionsrdquo 104Posidippus 8pots 201 225ndash228precious metal 70 72 76 80 92prefect of Egypt 38n55 168priests priesthood 2 4 5 8 10 12n21 17ndash19

37 62n53 75 79 102 124 125 133 142145ndash148 150 154 156 167 168 182n106191ndash194

princes 13producers 73production 71pronaoi 153property tax 62Prophecy of Neferty 166n1 168 169 188 191prytanies 48

Psammenitus (= Psammetichus III =Psamtik III) vii 17

Psamtek I 186Psamtek II 172 185 186Ptah 11Ptolemaic period 13 20 104 107 121 125 130

140ndash142 151 155 173 176 186 200n4201n8 203n14 207 215 216n59 220

Ptolemaic ruling class 219Ptolemaieia 55Ptolemais daughter of Ptolemy I and

Berenice I 14n32Ptolemais Hermeiou 12 149Ptolemies viii 1 2 9 10 13 15 17 18 19n50

43n95 56 70 71 81 94 105n121 108 109122 124 133 139 140 147 149ndash151 155

dynastic cult of 10Ptolemy I Soter son of Lagus viii 1 2 4 6ndash

22 39 41ndash43 46 54ndash66 70ndash72 99 105122 124 128 145 147ndash152 155 156 166ndash198

Kheperkare-Setepenamun 62Setepenre-Meriamun 62Lord of the Two Lands 11cult of 12image of 15personal qualities 6 7 40

Ptolemy II Philadelphus 14n32 16n41 17 2122 50 53ndash56 58ndash66 106 108 122 125128 130 143 147 149 155 156 179 180

Ptolemy III Euergetes 108 128 130 143 179183 187

Ptolemy IV Philopator 179 180 182 186Ptolemy VI Philometor 143 149 176 179Ptolemy VIII Euergetes II 149Ptolemy X Alexander II 125Ptolemy XIII Philopator 173Ptolemy Ceraunus son of Ptolemy I and Eury-

dice 14n32purchase tax 62Pyramid Texts 46 177 189n142pyres 218

qanāts 15

Ramesses II 169 170 172 174 180 181 184 190Ramesses III 169 170 172 174 177 178 180

181 184Ramesses IV 182


Ramesses IX 181Ramesside period 139n73 174 179 180 183

190Randzeile (framing columns) 154Re 141 186 187reform

Canopic 66calendrical 65 66monetary 72

religious belief 217religious politics 149Rhodes 43 85 215Rhosaces 36ritual 4 12 123 130 140 143 146 154 177n72

202 215n54 218Roman Romans 38n55 53 65 72 108

123 124n15 131n42 141ndash143 150 153155 173 179 192 207n24 216n59220n67

emperors 155era 123 131n42 140 141

Rome 1 13 14 127 173Temple of Isis and Serapis 127

Roxane daughter of Oxyartes 9 28Royal ka 146royal status 124ruler cult 147 154 156

Sabaces 3 83n55 99ndash103Sacae 27sacred landscape 121 122sacred space 138Saft el-Henna (= Per-Sopdu) 130 131 172 175

185 186Sahara 15 18Sais 17 77 87 121 125 131ndash133 141

decree 133temple of Neith 17 77 132 133

Saitekings 7 46 92 149n116nobles 17period 75 125

Salamis 43sale agreements 78Salitis 47salt tax 58Samaria 42Saqqara 8 104Sarapis (= Serapis) 18 19 64 147

Sardis 28 52n28Satet 140n77satraps 2 7 11 13 14 28ndash31 34ndash39 41 56

79 81 96 99 101ndash103 122 147 151 167168n9 183 194

satrapies 7n4 9 10 27ndash29 35 39n58 41 103Satrap stele 4 7n4 10ndash12 19 42 124 147 148

155 166ndash198satrapsrsquo revolts 35saucers 225 229scale drawings 142scribal schools 190scribes 63Sea of the Greeks (= Mediterranean Sea) 39

147Sebennytos (= Samannud) 121 125 126

147n109Second Persian Period 71 81 96 99 100ndash103

121 141 145sed festival 149n116Seleucid kingdomempire 2Seleucus I Nicator 6n3 12 13 40 41 43 52

53 56 57 65Senenmut 169Sesostris I 176 178 188 191Sety I 177 180 185 186sharecroppers sharecropping 74Sharuna 149 150Shatby (= Chatby = Sciatbi) 4 199ndash234Shellal stele 172ships 12 31Shu 130n38 169Sicily 84Sidonians 38silver 29 39 62 70 72 76ndash84 86 89 90 92ndash

94 97ndash99 105ndash109 113Silver Shields 41Sinai Peninsula 76Siwa seeWestern Oasesskeletons 222 224 228skyphos 223Snefru 168Sobek 139Sobek-Khu stele 176social

distinctions 203identities 203 205segregation 64separation 199


Sogdians 27Sohag 131n42Soknebtunis 149solar

courts 141 142cycle 123

Sopdu 130sources 7 31ndash34Sparta Spartans 30 35 36ldquospear-wonrdquo territory 10 15 41sphinxes 127 135staircases 127staple finance 72 73 75 76 106staples 71ndash78 80 81 85 92state and church 123 145ldquostater of Ioniardquo (= Athenian tetradrachm)

79 83 86staters of the temple of Ptah 93statues 12 15n34 17 130 135 172 186 226statuettes 93Step Pyramid 46ldquostones of Ptahrdquo 106 108ldquostones of the Treasury of Thebesrdquo 78succession 6 10 22 211successor kingdoms 7 105successors 43 149Susa 172Syene (Aswan) 140 141

Aswan High Dam 142symbolism 124Syncellus George 17n44 31 34synchronicity 35synodal decrees 130Syracuse 95 200n6Syria Syrians 2 10 12 22 30 41ndash43 45

87 94 95 97 100ndash103 178 181 183200

hoard 101invasion of 12Koile Syria 12Syrian Gates 30

Tachos (= Teos) 2 31 35 37 41 78 8086n68 92ndash95 97 121

Taharka 185 186Taimhotep 173Tale of Sinuhe 174ndash176 178 179 188 191Tanis 149

stele 185 186

Tarasius patriarch of Constantinople 34Tathotis 20taxation 58 59 63 65tax receipts 73Teaching of Ptahhotep 191Tebtynis 149Tefnut 130n38Teinti 62 63Tell Basta (= Per-Bastet) 128 129 155Tell el-Athrib 90Tell el-Maskhuta 82 93Tell el-Moqdam 128n28temenos 134Temnos 20temples 3 4 8 9 11 12 15 17 18 21 22 38

47 61n50 63 64 73ndash81 83 85 89 9394 97 102ndash109 120ndash135 137ndash156 166169 173 175ndash177 179ndash187 191 193 195197 198

construction 120 121 125 128 131 141145ndash156

decoration 4 120 121 123 124 125 128134 135 139ndash141 143 145ndash147 149ndash152154 186

faccedilades 127Graeco-Roman 138 143 154 175plans 155reliefs 149 154walls 138 139

Terenouthis 149Temple of Hagar-Therenouthis 149

tetradrachms 3 59 70 71 79ndash94 99ndash106108 109

imitation 3 70 71 76 80ndash82 84ndash92 100102ndash104 109

pi-style 82n52 90 91 100ndash102Thais former concubine of Alexander

mother of Ptolemy Irsquos daughter Eirene14n32

Theban area (in Egypt) 135 137 146Thebes (in Egypt) 11 12 62 63 74 75 78 135

137 139n73 185Ramesseum 74temple of Amun 75temple of Heryshaf 78

Thebes (in Greece) 30 35 36 204theology 131Theoxena daughter of Ptolemy I and

Berenice I 14n32


Thessaly 200n6Third Diadoch war 42Third Intermediate Period 75Thonis seeHeracleionThoth 37 151

ldquothe Fillerrdquo 169Thrace Thracians 200Thutmose III 149n116 178tiara 104Tithraustes 31ndash33timber 12Timocharis 50Timotheus the Eumolpid 18titulary 11n19 17 145n100 166ndash168 183

190tongs 212 228town walls 138trade competition 27transformation 120triads 139tribute 27 72 79Triparadeisos 9 41Tuna el-Gebel 135 149 150

animal cemeteries 151tomb chapel of Petosiris 151

Two Lands vii 11 12 20 167 175 182 187lord of 11 175

Tyre 38 41siege of 49

Udjahorresne 17 18unguent vessels 212 225 227ndash229Upper Egypt 152 185uraeus vii 187urns 203 206 209ndash211 217n62 218

cinerary 203 204 209ndash211 217 218220n68 222 224ndash227 229

usufruct of land 73 92usurpers 124

vicar of Bray 17vineyards 106Vienna demotic omen papyrus 47

Volksgeister 201voluntary associations 215ndash217 219

wabet chapel 141 142 151 155Wadi Gadid 15Wadjit 137Wages 80warfare 71wealth 3 8 11 15 22 32n25 71ndash73 75 76

78ndash81 85 86 92ndash94 97 105ndash107 112210

wealth finance 72 76 79 94 105weight standards 109Western Oases 15 121

Bahariya 18 146Dakhla 18Kharga 18 74 93Siwa 13 18 38 145

1515

white-ground vessels 209 210wills 73wood 77wreaths 212 214n52 217 225 226 228 229writing systems

hieroglyphic 154demotic 155

Xenophon 30 32ldquoXerxesrdquo (= Artaxerxes) 192

yearEgyptian 61financial 58 60 65 66regnal 46 53 56 58ndash66tax 58ndash60 64 65ldquowanderingrdquo 46

Zagazig 128 130Zenon archive 53 54Zeus Ammon 145Zeus Basileus 38Zeus Soter 15n34

MnemosyneSupplements

history and archaeologyof classical antiquity

Series Editor

Hans vanWees (University College London)

Associate Editors

Jan Paul Crielaard (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam)Benet Salway (University College London)

volume 415

The titles published in this series are listed at brillcommns‑haca


Edited by


LEIDEN | BOSTON














Contents







Henry P Colburn




Thomas Landvatter


Preface






viii preface





Bibliography






Figures













p 22) 136










Tables
















Introduction

Paul McKechnie





2 mckechnie






introduction 3





4 mckechnie




introduction 5



Bibliography






Press

7 Hdt 135ndash36


chapter 1


Dorothy J Thompson











8 thompson


















10 thompson












12 thompson


















14 thompson















16 thompson
















18 thompson

















20 thompson

















22 thompson





Bibliography61















24 thompson



















New York Routledge





















26 thompson








chapter 2


Paul McKechnie





28 mckechnie
















objectrdquo

30 mckechnie









Date Source Details













32 mckechnie


Date Source Details


Trogus Prologue 10

















34 mckechnie














36 mckechnie






40 DS 1640341 DS 1640542 DS 1647643 DS 1644144 DS 16472









50 DS 16442

38 mckechnie

















40 mckechnie




















42 mckechnie









Bibliography








44 mckechnie































chapter 3


daggerChris Bennett














48 bennett













50 bennett















52 bennett















54 bennett














56 bennett











58 bennett
















60 bennett










62 bennett













64 bennett




6 Conclusions










66 bennett



Bibliography






























68 bennett

















versity Press








chapter 4


Henry P Colburn












72 colburn















74 colburn














76 colburn
















78 colburn












80 colburn














82 colburn


















84 colburn












86 colburn














88 colburn













Coinsrdquo

90 colburn














92 colburn












94 colburn














96 colburn














98 colburn














100 colburn














102 colburn













104 colburn













106 colburn














108 colburn










Abbreviations







110 colburn


Bibliography































112 colburn



































114 colburn






































116 colburn



































118 colburn






























chapter 5


MartinaMinas-Nerpel

1 Introduction














122 minas-nerpel













124 minas-nerpel
















126 minas-nerpel













128 minas-nerpel
















130 minas-nerpel

















132 minas-nerpel

















134 minas-nerpel

















136 minas-nerpel







138 minas-nerpel















140 minas-nerpel
















142 minas-nerpel



















144 minas-nerpel













146 minas-nerpel
















148 minas-nerpel











150 minas-nerpel
















152 minas-nerpel








5 Conclusion





154 minas-nerpel














156 minas-nerpel


Bibliography



























158 minas-nerpel
















Lax


















160 minas-nerpel








































162 minas-nerpel

































164 minas-nerpel

































chapter 6


Boyo G Ockinga














168 ockinga
















25991570

170 ockinga















172 ockinga















174 ockinga












61 LGG III 284a

176 ockinga













178 ockinga






81 WB II 477782 Urk IV 1229 17ndash18







180 ockinga















182 ockinga















184 ockinga

















186 ockinga













188 ockinga




Satrap Stele Sinuhe





Satrap Stele Sinuhe








190 ockinga


















192 ockinga














194 ockinga







Abbreviations












Bibliography






196 ockinga






































198 ockinga











266


chapter 7


Thomas Landvatter

1 Introduction





200 landvatter













202 landvatter













204 landvatter














206 landvatter











208 landvatter









210 landvatter














212 landvatter










no



214 landvatter


















216 landvatter











218 landvatter









65 See above n 3

220 landvatter

















222 landvatter





mirror bronze







urn clay


urn clay









coin nail bronze









224 landvatter





















vessel clay


dish clay




lamp clay









urn clay

226 landvatter




figurine clay





urn clay








amphora clay




vessel clay







urn claygold



vessel alabaster


mirror bronze


dish clay


dish clay



228 landvatter

(cont)













nail bronze


unguent vessel clay









figurine clay


dish clay










Abbreviations



230 landvatter




Bibliography































232 landvatter





































234 landvatter















16 18 22 28 30 39 49 52 53 55ndash57 81100 101 103 104 121 122 124 135 167176




38 43 47 53 54 57 65 83 104 105 109130n38 131 133 134 145ndash153 199ndash234



Ammon) 11 18 74 75 106 132 135 137139 145 146 167 181 182 185ndash187193



16Arab el-Hisn 134














Ayn Manawir 74








mixed-age 207



Buto 11 19 124 147 148 155 166ndash168 184 186192 193n161 194









8 38 39 85 103 104






Cyprus 12 16 36 37 41 42









126Twenty-ninth 5 120 121 124 125 139 150





156 173 177n72 178n79 179ndash182 186187n139







Elite 976 168n9Egyptian 19 75 97 124 145 155



autumn 65vernal 49

era 52Seleucid 56



Fayum 16 53 81 82 87 88hoard 107









154 155 175 178grain 29 70 72ndash76 80 81 84 85 93 108 111







Greeks 10 15 19 21 29n12 36 37 39 54 6179 83 91 92 97 131n43 133 147 200n7



218n63 221vases 4 203 204 209 210 212 213 215







180 185 192ndash194Hittites 167 172


















Khababash 32 37 100 103 148 186 192 193194n168










lunettes 132 167Luxor 18 107 135 180




14n32 43 57



trade 108World 87










Montu 135 170 179 180 183 186mortuary



nails 8 223 224 228naoi 125 129ndash131 141 153



120 121 128 130ndash135 139 140 143 150172 175 185 187 188




140 142 154 155 171 172 181 183 185188ndash190 193




75 81 83 90 111 114 121 125 126 131 137140 142 200 201


146 148 152 200flood 11Valley 8



Nun 123











first 120 139 155second 121 141 145 149













37 62n53 75 79 102 124 125 133 142145ndash148 150 154 156 167 168 182n106191ndash194




140ndash142 151 155 173 176 186 200n4201n8 203n14 207 215 216n59 220



43n95 56 70 71 81 94 105n121 108 109122 124 133 139 140 147 149ndash151 155








qanāts 15








202 215n54 218Roman Romans 38n55 53 65 72 108

123 124n15 131n42 141ndash143 150 153155 173 179 192 207n24 216n59220n67

emperors 155era 123 131n42 140 141









79 81 96 99 101ndash103 122 147 151 167168n9 183 194















87 94 95 97 100ndash103 178 181 183200




stele 185 186














Berenice I 14n32

















1515







Edited by


LEIDEN | BOSTON














Contents







Henry P Colburn




Thomas Landvatter


Preface






viii preface





Bibliography






Figures













p 22) 136










Tables
















Introduction

Paul McKechnie





2 mckechnie






introduction 3





4 mckechnie




introduction 5



Bibliography






Press

7 Hdt 135ndash36


chapter 1


Dorothy J Thompson











8 thompson


















10 thompson












12 thompson


















14 thompson















16 thompson
















18 thompson

















20 thompson

















22 thompson





Bibliography61















24 thompson



















New York Routledge





















26 thompson








chapter 2


Paul McKechnie





28 mckechnie
















objectrdquo

30 mckechnie









Date Source Details













32 mckechnie


Date Source Details


Trogus Prologue 10

















34 mckechnie














36 mckechnie






40 DS 1640341 DS 1640542 DS 1647643 DS 1644144 DS 16472









50 DS 16442

38 mckechnie

















40 mckechnie




















42 mckechnie









Bibliography








44 mckechnie































chapter 3


daggerChris Bennett














48 bennett













50 bennett















52 bennett















54 bennett














56 bennett











58 bennett
















60 bennett










62 bennett













64 bennett




6 Conclusions










66 bennett



Bibliography






























68 bennett

















versity Press








chapter 4


Henry P Colburn












72 colburn















74 colburn














76 colburn
















78 colburn












80 colburn














82 colburn


















84 colburn












86 colburn














88 colburn













Coinsrdquo

90 colburn














92 colburn












94 colburn














96 colburn














98 colburn














100 colburn














102 colburn













104 colburn













106 colburn














108 colburn










Abbreviations







110 colburn


Bibliography































112 colburn



































114 colburn






































116 colburn



































118 colburn






























chapter 5


MartinaMinas-Nerpel

1 Introduction














122 minas-nerpel













124 minas-nerpel
















126 minas-nerpel













128 minas-nerpel
















130 minas-nerpel

















132 minas-nerpel

















134 minas-nerpel

















136 minas-nerpel







138 minas-nerpel















140 minas-nerpel
















142 minas-nerpel



















144 minas-nerpel













146 minas-nerpel
















148 minas-nerpel











150 minas-nerpel
















152 minas-nerpel








5 Conclusion





154 minas-nerpel














156 minas-nerpel


Bibliography



























158 minas-nerpel
















Lax


















160 minas-nerpel








































162 minas-nerpel

































164 minas-nerpel

































chapter 6


Boyo G Ockinga














168 ockinga
















25991570

170 ockinga















172 ockinga















174 ockinga












61 LGG III 284a

176 ockinga













178 ockinga






81 WB II 477782 Urk IV 1229 17ndash18







180 ockinga















182 ockinga















184 ockinga

















186 ockinga













188 ockinga




Satrap Stele Sinuhe





Satrap Stele Sinuhe








190 ockinga


















192 ockinga














194 ockinga







Abbreviations












Bibliography






196 ockinga






































198 ockinga











266


chapter 7


Thomas Landvatter

1 Introduction





200 landvatter













202 landvatter













204 landvatter














206 landvatter











208 landvatter









210 landvatter














212 landvatter










no



214 landvatter


















216 landvatter











218 landvatter









65 See above n 3

220 landvatter

















222 landvatter





mirror bronze







urn clay


urn clay









coin nail bronze









224 landvatter





















vessel clay


dish clay




lamp clay









urn clay

226 landvatter




figurine clay





urn clay








amphora clay




vessel clay







urn claygold



vessel alabaster


mirror bronze


dish clay


dish clay



228 landvatter

(cont)













nail bronze


unguent vessel clay









figurine clay


dish clay










Abbreviations



230 landvatter




Bibliography































232 landvatter





































234 landvatter















16 18 22 28 30 39 49 52 53 55ndash57 81100 101 103 104 121 122 124 135 167176




38 43 47 53 54 57 65 83 104 105 109130n38 131 133 134 145ndash153 199ndash234



Ammon) 11 18 74 75 106 132 135 137139 145 146 167 181 182 185ndash187193



16Arab el-Hisn 134














Ayn Manawir 74








mixed-age 207



Buto 11 19 124 147 148 155 166ndash168 184 186192 193n161 194









8 38 39 85 103 104






Cyprus 12 16 36 37 41 42









126Twenty-ninth 5 120 121 124 125 139 150





156 173 177n72 178n79 179ndash182 186187n139







Elite 976 168n9Egyptian 19 75 97 124 145 155



autumn 65vernal 49

era 52Seleucid 56



Fayum 16 53 81 82 87 88hoard 107









154 155 175 178grain 29 70 72ndash76 80 81 84 85 93 108 111







Greeks 10 15 19 21 29n12 36 37 39 54 6179 83 91 92 97 131n43 133 147 200n7



218n63 221vases 4 203 204 209 210 212 213 215







180 185 192ndash194Hittites 167 172


















Khababash 32 37 100 103 148 186 192 193194n168










lunettes 132 167Luxor 18 107 135 180




14n32 43 57



trade 108World 87










Montu 135 170 179 180 183 186mortuary



nails 8 223 224 228naoi 125 129ndash131 141 153



120 121 128 130ndash135 139 140 143 150172 175 185 187 188




140 142 154 155 171 172 181 183 185188ndash190 193




75 81 83 90 111 114 121 125 126 131 137140 142 200 201


146 148 152 200flood 11Valley 8



Nun 123











first 120 139 155second 121 141 145 149













37 62n53 75 79 102 124 125 133 142145ndash148 150 154 156 167 168 182n106191ndash194




140ndash142 151 155 173 176 186 200n4201n8 203n14 207 215 216n59 220



43n95 56 70 71 81 94 105n121 108 109122 124 133 139 140 147 149ndash151 155








qanāts 15








202 215n54 218Roman Romans 38n55 53 65 72 108

123 124n15 131n42 141ndash143 150 153155 173 179 192 207n24 216n59220n67

emperors 155era 123 131n42 140 141









79 81 96 99 101ndash103 122 147 151 167168n9 183 194















87 94 95 97 100ndash103 178 181 183200




stele 185 186














Berenice I 14n32

















1515



















Contents







Henry P Colburn




Thomas Landvatter


Preface






viii preface





Bibliography






Figures













p 22) 136










Tables
















Introduction

Paul McKechnie





2 mckechnie






introduction 3





4 mckechnie




introduction 5



Bibliography






Press

7 Hdt 135ndash36


chapter 1


Dorothy J Thompson











8 thompson


















10 thompson












12 thompson


















14 thompson















16 thompson
















18 thompson

















20 thompson

















22 thompson





Bibliography61















24 thompson



















New York Routledge





















26 thompson








chapter 2


Paul McKechnie





28 mckechnie
















objectrdquo

30 mckechnie









Date Source Details













32 mckechnie


Date Source Details


Trogus Prologue 10

















34 mckechnie














36 mckechnie






40 DS 1640341 DS 1640542 DS 1647643 DS 1644144 DS 16472









50 DS 16442

38 mckechnie

















40 mckechnie




















42 mckechnie









Bibliography








44 mckechnie































chapter 3


daggerChris Bennett














48 bennett













50 bennett















52 bennett















54 bennett














56 bennett











58 bennett
















60 bennett










62 bennett













64 bennett




6 Conclusions










66 bennett



Bibliography






























68 bennett

















versity Press








chapter 4


Henry P Colburn












72 colburn















74 colburn














76 colburn
















78 colburn












80 colburn














82 colburn


















84 colburn












86 colburn














88 colburn













Coinsrdquo

90 colburn














92 colburn












94 colburn














96 colburn














98 colburn














100 colburn














102 colburn













104 colburn













106 colburn














108 colburn










Abbreviations







110 colburn


Bibliography































112 colburn



































114 colburn






































116 colburn



































118 colburn






























chapter 5


MartinaMinas-Nerpel

1 Introduction














122 minas-nerpel













124 minas-nerpel
















126 minas-nerpel













128 minas-nerpel
















130 minas-nerpel

















132 minas-nerpel

















134 minas-nerpel

















136 minas-nerpel







138 minas-nerpel















140 minas-nerpel
















142 minas-nerpel



















144 minas-nerpel













146 minas-nerpel
















148 minas-nerpel











150 minas-nerpel
















152 minas-nerpel








5 Conclusion





154 minas-nerpel














156 minas-nerpel


Bibliography



























158 minas-nerpel
















Lax


















160 minas-nerpel








































162 minas-nerpel

































164 minas-nerpel

































chapter 6


Boyo G Ockinga














168 ockinga
















25991570

170 ockinga















172 ockinga















174 ockinga












61 LGG III 284a

176 ockinga













178 ockinga






81 WB II 477782 Urk IV 1229 17ndash18







180 ockinga















182 ockinga















184 ockinga

















186 ockinga













188 ockinga




Satrap Stele Sinuhe





Satrap Stele Sinuhe








190 ockinga


















192 ockinga














194 ockinga







Abbreviations












Bibliography






196 ockinga






































198 ockinga











266


chapter 7


Thomas Landvatter

1 Introduction





200 landvatter













202 landvatter













204 landvatter














206 landvatter











208 landvatter









210 landvatter














212 landvatter










no



214 landvatter


















216 landvatter











218 landvatter









65 See above n 3

220 landvatter

















222 landvatter





mirror bronze







urn clay


urn clay









coin nail bronze









224 landvatter





















vessel clay


dish clay




lamp clay









urn clay

226 landvatter




figurine clay





urn clay








amphora clay




vessel clay







urn claygold



vessel alabaster


mirror bronze


dish clay


dish clay



228 landvatter

(cont)













nail bronze


unguent vessel clay









figurine clay


dish clay










Abbreviations



230 landvatter




Bibliography































232 landvatter





































234 landvatter















16 18 22 28 30 39 49 52 53 55ndash57 81100 101 103 104 121 122 124 135 167176




38 43 47 53 54 57 65 83 104 105 109130n38 131 133 134 145ndash153 199ndash234



Ammon) 11 18 74 75 106 132 135 137139 145 146 167 181 182 185ndash187193



16Arab el-Hisn 134














Ayn Manawir 74








mixed-age 207



Buto 11 19 124 147 148 155 166ndash168 184 186192 193n161 194









8 38 39 85 103 104






Cyprus 12 16 36 37 41 42









126Twenty-ninth 5 120 121 124 125 139 150





156 173 177n72 178n79 179ndash182 186187n139







Elite 976 168n9Egyptian 19 75 97 124 145 155



autumn 65vernal 49

era 52Seleucid 56



Fayum 16 53 81 82 87 88hoard 107









154 155 175 178grain 29 70 72ndash76 80 81 84 85 93 108 111







Greeks 10 15 19 21 29n12 36 37 39 54 6179 83 91 92 97 131n43 133 147 200n7



218n63 221vases 4 203 204 209 210 212 213 215







180 185 192ndash194Hittites 167 172


















Khababash 32 37 100 103 148 186 192 193194n168










lunettes 132 167Luxor 18 107 135 180




14n32 43 57



trade 108World 87










Montu 135 170 179 180 183 186mortuary



nails 8 223 224 228naoi 125 129ndash131 141 153



120 121 128 130ndash135 139 140 143 150172 175 185 187 188




140 142 154 155 171 172 181 183 185188ndash190 193




75 81 83 90 111 114 121 125 126 131 137140 142 200 201


146 148 152 200flood 11Valley 8



Nun 123











first 120 139 155second 121 141 145 149













37 62n53 75 79 102 124 125 133 142145ndash148 150 154 156 167 168 182n106191ndash194




140ndash142 151 155 173 176 186 200n4201n8 203n14 207 215 216n59 220



43n95 56 70 71 81 94 105n121 108 109122 124 133 139 140 147 149ndash151 155








qanāts 15








202 215n54 218Roman Romans 38n55 53 65 72 108

123 124n15 131n42 141ndash143 150 153155 173 179 192 207n24 216n59220n67

emperors 155era 123 131n42 140 141









79 81 96 99 101ndash103 122 147 151 167168n9 183 194















87 94 95 97 100ndash103 178 181 183200




stele 185 186














Berenice I 14n32

















1515




