Arameans in Egypt, in: Angelika Berlejung et al., eds., Wandering Arameans: Arameans Outside Syria. Textual and Archaeological Perspectives, Leipziger Altorientalistische Studien 5, Wiesbaden 2017, 229-279

Leipziger Altorientalistische Studien Herausgegeben von Michael P. Streck Band 5 2017 Harrassowitz Verlag . Wiesbaden Wandering Arameans: Arameans Outside Syria Textual and Archaeological Perspectives Edited by Angelika Berlejung, Aren M. Maeir and Andreas Schüle 2017 Harrassowitz Verlag . Wiesbaden Cover illustration: Bronze Horse Frontlet from the Heraion of Samos, Greece, with an inscription of Hazael, from the Samos Archaeological Museum. Photograph by Aren M. Maeir. Bibliograische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliograie; detaillierte bibliograische Daten sind im Internet über https://dnb.dnb.de abrufbar. Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek he Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliograie; detailed bibliographic data are available in the Internet at https://dnb.dnb.de . For further information about our publishing program consult our website https://www.harrassowitz-verlag.de © Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden 2017 This work, including all of its parts, is protected by copyright. Any use beyond the limits of copyright law without the permission of the publisher is forbidden and subject to penalty. This applies particularly to reproductions, translations, microfilms and storage and processing in electronic systems. Printed on permanent/durable paper. Printing and binding: Hubert & Co., Göttingen Printed in Germany ISSN 2193-4436 ISBN 978-3-447-10727-3 Contents Figures .................................................................................................................. VI Abbreviations ....................................................................................................... VII Foreword .............................................................................................................. IX I. Syria and Palestine Jonathan S. Greer – Grand Rapids, USA The Cult at Tel Dan: Aramean or Israelite? .......................................................... 3 Holger Gzella – Leiden New Light on Linguistic Diversity in Pre-Achaemenid Aramaic: Wandering Arameans or Language Spread? ........................................................................... 19 Yigal Levin – Ramat-Gan “My Father was a Wandering Aramean”: Biblical Views of the Ancestral Relationship between Israel and Aram ................................................................. 39 Aren M. Maeir – Ramat-Gan Can Material Evidence of Aramean Influences and Presence in Iron Age Judah and Israel be Found? .................................................................................. 53 Andreas Schüle – Leipzig Balaam from Deir Allā – A Peripheral Aramean? ................................................ 69 Omer Sergi – Tel Aviv The Battle of Ramoth-gilead and the Rise of the Aramean Hegemony in the Southern Levant during the Second Half of the 9th Century BCE ....................... 81 II. Mesopotamia and Egypt Angelika Berlejung – Leipzig and Stellenbosch Social Climbing in the Babylonian Exile ............................................................. 101 Johannes Hackl – Leipzig Babylonian Scribal Practices in Rural Contexts: A Linguistic Survey of the Documents of Judean Exiles and West Semites in Babylonia (CUSAS 28 and BaAr 6) ..................................................................................... 125 VI Figures Takayoshi M. Oshima – Leipzig How “Mesopotamian” was Ahiqar the Wise? A Search for Ahiqar in Cuneiform Texts ................................................................................................... 141 Michael P. Streck – Leipzig Late Babylonian in Aramaic Epigraphs on Cuneiform Tablets ............................ 169 K. Lawson Younger, Jr. – Deerfield, IL Tiglath-Pileser I and the Initial Conflicts of the Assyrians with the Arameans .... 195 Günter Vittmann – Würzburg Arameans in Egypt ............................................................................................... 229 Index of Bible Verses ........................................................................................... 281 Index of Places and Proper Names ....................................................................... 285 Index of subjects (selected)................................................................................... 296 Figures Figure 1: Map of sites mentioned in “Evidence of Aramean Influence in Iron Age Judah and Israel”. ......................................................................... 61 Figure 2: Pottery and objects of possible Aramean origin/influence from Tell es-Safi/Gath: a-c) pottery stands found with the fill of the Aramean siege trench; d) glazed vessel found within the fill of the Aramean siege trench; e) incised stone objects discovered on site. ............................... 62 Figure 3: View, looking east, of the Iron Age IIA fortifications of the lower city of Gath (2015 season of excavations). ................................ 63 Figure 4: The seal of Ahīqam (courtesy Cornelia Wunsch). ............................... 114 Figure 5: Distribution of text types. .................................................................... 127 Figure 6: Use of the unorthodox sign values. ..................................................... 128 Figure 7: Use of otherwise unattested sign values. ............................................ 128 Figure 8: Examples for variation in word choice. .............................................. 135 Figure 9: Analysis of orthographies and effetiva pronuncia. ............................. 147 Figure 10: Names and their definitions in the Uruk List. .................................... 149 Figure 11: Chronicles arrangement according to regnal years. ............................ 201 Figure 12: Geographic delimits according to A.087.3 and A.0.87.4. .................. 208 Abbreviations VII Figure 13: Summary of Assyrian fort systems. .................................................... 211 Figure 14: Map of Assyrian fort systems. ............................................................. 212 Figure 15: Military action against Karduniaš according to A.0.87.4 and the Pakute Inscription. .................................................................. 213 Figure 16: Chronology of the interactions of Tiglath-pileser I and Marduk-nādin-aḫḫē. ............................................................................ 221 Figure 17: Depictions of Semites on Egypto-Aramaic stelae: (a) TAD D20.3 (details, from Lidzbarski 1898, II, pl. 28); (b) TAD D20.6 (author’s drawing); (c) TAD D20.4 (from Aimé-Giron 1939, Pl. 3 No. 114). ....................................................................................... 236 Figure 18: Chahapi (detail from stela Berlin 2118; author’s drawing). .................. 237 Figure 19: Find-spots of Aramaic texts. ................................................................ 238 Figure 20: Detachment commanders. ..................................................................... 239 Figure 21: House-owners at Elephantine (dark grey: Egyptians; middle grey: Iranians; light grey: the “half-Egyptian” Harwodj). ............................ 243 Figure 22: a) Genealogy of Yedaniah and Mibṭaḥiah; (b) Mibṭaḥiah’s slaves. Women’s names in italics; EGYPTIAN NAMES in capitals. ............. 245 Figure 23: Genealogy of Yehoyishmac: Women’s names in italics; EGYPTIANNAMES in capitals. ............................................................................. 246 Figure 24: Graffito of Petechnum in the chapel of Amenophis III at Elkab (author’s photograph). ......................................................................... 251 Figure 25: Offering table from Saqqara (Louvre AO 4824; author’s photograph). ........................................................................... 257 Abbreviations For abbreviations see: Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart (RGG), 4th edition; Theological Realenzyklopädie (TRE), abbreviations, 2nd revised and enlarged edition, compiled by Siegfried M. Schwertner; Lexicon of Assyriology and Near Eastern Archaeology (www.rla.badw.de). Foreword The present volume contains the updated versions of the papers presented at the workshop "Wandering Arameans: Arameans Inside and Outside of Syria", held at the Faculty of Theology of the University of Leipzig in October 2014. The intention of the workshop was to explore Aramean cultures and their impact on their neighbors, including linguistic influence. The idea was to address some of the primary desiderata in current research on the Arameans and so to build a basis for a project proposal submitted to the Minerva Foundation on this and related topics, to be implemented at the University of Leipzig and Bar-Ilan University. The workshop brought together scholars from these two institutions, as well as from the University of Würzburg. In addition to the papers presented at the workshop, we invited four additional contributions to broaden the scope of our endeavor (Greer, Sergi, Gzella, and Younger). The volume is divided into two sections: I. II. Syria and Palestine Mesopotamia and Egypt This division reflects the areas in which one sees the presence of Arameans or of their language, Aramaic, in the first millennium BCE. One of the outcomes of this workshop was that the “Aramean question” is a broad and complex field that touches on many issues (e.g., the presence of ethnical markers, the category of ethnicity in general, history, settlement patterns, archaeology, epigraphy, religion, and sociology) that calls for interdisciplinary work at a highly specialized level. In this perspective, it became clear that future research has to start from the following assumption: Arameans (including the Aramaic languages) in Syria, Palestine, Mesopotamia, and Egypt cannot be treated as a single entity but have to be carefully distinguished. The contributions of this volume show that identifying “Arameans” and defining pertinent identity markers are difficult tasks. The interactions between the Arameans, including the Aramaic languages, and their neighbors were complex and depended on the specific cultural and historical circumstances. As a result of the 2014 workshop we decided to limit further research to the interaction between the Aramean states in Syria and the states in Palestine from the end of the 2nd to the late 1st millennium BCE. Correspondingly, we put the focus of the projected Minerva Center on the following preliminary working question: can the rise, flourishing, and decline of Aram and Israel, as independent political entities, be attributed to their autonomous decision making or to their interdependency – or to a combination of both factors? Thus, the articles of the first part of this volume became the foundation for our current research, which will be continued within the framework X Foreword of the Minerva Center for the Relations between Israel and Aram in Biblical Times (RIAB; aramisrael.org). We are grateful to the authors of the papers in this volume for their contributions from their particular fields of expertise and their inspiring comments and discussions during the workshop. In addition, we want to thank Prof. Michael P. Streck as the editor-in-chief of the “Leipziger Altorientalistische Studien” for accepting our volume into this series. We want to thank Felix Hagemeyer and Philipp Roßteuscher for collecting and editing the essays. We are particularly grateful to Vivian-Sarah Klee, who took on the laborious task of putting the pieces together and of creating the indices. We wish to express our thanks to all our helping hands. Last but not least, our thanks go to the Minerva Foundation and the Minerva Center for the Relations between Israel and Aram in Biblical Times that supported the publication process financially. Leipzig/Ramat-Gan, September 2016 Angelika Berlejung Aren M. Maeir Andreas Schüle Arameans in Egypt* Günter Vittmann – Würzburg As an Egyptologist I am particularly interested in the relations between the Aramaic sources and their authors with Egyptian language and civilization, and it is consequently above all from this angle that I will be trying to highlight the material. In doing so, I will concentrate, with a few exceptions, on the sources of Pre-Hellenistic Egypt. The reason for this is, of course, the well-known fact that the overwhelming majority of Aramaic documents from Egypt dates to the First Persian Period (526– 404/401 BCE 1), when Egypt was a satrapy of the Achaemenid empire and Aramaic served as a lingua franca among non-Egyptians and, to a smaller degree, was also used in the correspondence between the Persian authorities and Egyptians.2 Speaking about Arameans in Egypt is not quite as easy as it might seem at first sight. Most recently, Alejandro Botta3 underlined, as did already others before him, the fact that the ethnicity of individuals mentioned in Aramaic documents from Egypt is frequently difficult, or even impossible, to determine, neither the Aramaic script itself nor proper names always being a reliable guide as to ethnicity (Arameans frequently concealed themselves behind Egyptian or even Babylonian proper names). When dealing with foreigners in Late Period Egypt, we may well speak e.g. of “Phoenicians in Egypt” or “Carians in Egypt”, based on the safe assumption that inscriptions in Phoenician or Carian characters, as well as inscriptions containing clearly identifiable Phoenician or Carian proper names, must be considered as evidence for the respective civilizations. With the rather numerous Aramaic texts from Egypt, however, the situation is different and each case has to be examined individually as far as possible. Frequently, especially in Elephantine but also in Memphis, we can observe that the Aramaic documents concern a mixed population: Arameans, Judeans, who spoke Aramaic as well but who had their own religious traditions and their specific proper names, Egyptians and members of other ethnicities such as Babylonians and Iranians (Persians, Choresmians, Caspians, Bactrians, Hyrcanians)4. The question has been * I am obliged to Andrew Monson for kindly revising my English. 1 All historical dates in this contribution are BCE unless indicated otherwise. For the dating of the Persian conquest to 526 (and not 525), see Quack 2011a. 2 For the use of Aramaic in the Achaemenid Empire, see Gzella 2015, 157–211. 3 Botta 2014, 368. 4 For the Aramaic evidence, see Porten/Lund 2002, 439–441. Another Hyrcanian (Wrg˹ny˺) is attested in a demotic document, again from Saqqara: he was a cavalryman with an Egyptian name like his mother, whereas the father bore an Iranian name (Smith/Martin 2009, 17–18, no. 17, line 1) and 62 top with reference to the Aramaic source. 230 Günter Vittmann asked whether a strict ethnic distinction between Judeans and Arameans is always possible, necessary and useful, the less so since such distinctions are often blurred in the documents themselves. Michael Weigl recently stated as follows: “Aber auch die von den antiken Bewohnern der Kolonien verwendete Begrifflichkeit ist oft verschwommen und mehrdeutig, sodass „Syene“ und „Elephantine“ ebenso wie „aramäisch“ und „judäisch“ mitunter als austauschbare Begriffe erscheinen. Die messerscharfe, präzise Trennung zwischen „judäischen“ und „aramäischen“ Personen- und Gottesnamen, sowie die darauf basierende ethnische Differenzierung zwischen „Juden“ und „Aramäern“, auf die manche Historiker heftig insistieren, vermag daher nicht richtig zu überzeugen.“5 Although as an Egyptologist I am not able to decide such a problem which has to be tackled by specialists in the field, I believe Weigl’s statement should be modified. It is true that a Judean and worshipper of Yāhû could eventually, in an administrative text, be labeled as “Aramean”, simply because he spoke Aramaic,6 and at another time as “Judean”,7 but would a speaker of Aramaic without Judean background in ethnogeographical, cultural and sociological respect ever have been designated as yhwdy/yehūdāy? Probably not.8 It is true that there is one case in which a woman with the Egyptian name Eswēre seems to have been labeled as yhwdyh – “Judean”,9 but the reason is simply that her next relatives (father, brothers and sisters, but presumably not the mother; Fig. 22a) were Judeans. The documents know “Arameans of/in Yeb” but no “Judeans of/in Syene.”10 Only when Swn was used, as seems possible, as a general term for Syene proper and Elephantine,11 could Judeans be called “Syenites”.12 Since evidently not all Aramaic 5 Weigl 2010, 26–27. 6 E.g. Meshullam, who plays a prominent role in the Archive of cAnani, was variously designated as “Judean of the fortress of Elephantine” and as “Aramaean of Syene”, cf. Porten 2011, 186 fn. 8. All examples for ’rmy in TAD are listed in Porten/Lund 2002, 439. A convenient list of “Persons designated as Aramaeans in Aramaic texts from Elephantine” is found in Winnicki 2009, 267–269. 7 In two documents from 459, Maḥseiah, the father of Mibṭaḥiah (cf. genealogy below, Fig. 21a), is called “Judean, hereditary-property-holder (mhḥsn) in Elephantine the fortress of the detachment of Haumadata” and “Ju[daean o]f Elephantine of the detachment of Haumadata” (Porten/Yardeni 1989, 22–25 [B2.3:2]. 26–28 [B2.4:2]; Porten 2011, 166 [B25]). 173 [B26]). From 449 onwards he appears as “Aramaean of Syene of the detachment of Varyazata” (Porten/Yardeni 1989, 30–33 [B2.6:2–3]. 34–37 [B2.7:2]; Porten 2011, 178 [B28] and Pl. 1; 185 [B29]). 8 Cf. Nutkowicz 2015, 45: “Pour autant, si tout Judéen peut être cité comme Araméen, la réciproque ne s’applique pas.” 9 Porten/Yardeni 1989, 126–127 (B5.5:2); Porten 2011, 258–260 (B49). See Nutkowicz 2015, 31. 10 As pointed out by Kratz 2011, 422 (with references in fn. 5). 11 For this possibility see Kratz 2011, 422. 12 Porten/Yardeni 1986, 78–79 (A4.10:6); Porten 2011, 152–153 (B22): Five well-known individuals from Elephantine are called “Syenians (swnky’) who are hereditary-property-holders in Elephantine”. See Porten 2003, 452 (also Porten 2011, 152 fn. 8) with biblical evidence for Syene Arameans in Egypt 231 speaking inhabitants of Elephantine and Syene had the same Judean background, and since there is no cogent reason to assume that they all were worshippers of Yāhû, I continue to use the terms “Judean” (so rather than “Jewish” or “Jew”, which is now widely considered to be an anachronism for the pre-Hellenistic period)13 and “Aramean” in contexts in which choice of name and preferred religious orientation point into the respective direction.14 In my opinion, the use of the compound “Judaeo-Aramean” should better be restricted to (attributive) adjectives comprising Judeans and Arameans alike, e.g. “the Judaeo-Aramean community of Elephantine”, but “Judeans and Arameans of Elephantine”. Egyptian Terminology Regarding the question of the first appearance of Arameans (including members of populations that spoke Aramaic without being “Arameans proper”) in Egypt it is a fact that with the Aramaic texts themselves we do not come back earlier than towards the end of the sixth century, in other words, the beginning of the 27th Dynasty (First Persian Period). This holds certainly true for Elephantine but apparently also for other sites which furnished far less material, the oldest firmly dated Aramaic document from Egypt being the land lease papyrus Bauer-Meissner from Korobis in Middle Egypt (515).15 The reasons for this chronological restriction are not fully clear: even if we take into account that with the Achaemenid period a massive influx of soldiers from all parts of the Empire came into the country and that the number of foreigners became considerably larger than before, we should expect to find some direct evidence for the preceding period, the 26th dynasty. The date of the foundation of the military colony at Elephantine is much debated; estimations vary between the first half of the seventh century (emigrations of Judeans under Manasseh) and the second half of the sixth century.16 At any rate, it should have existed already before the Persian conquest in 526, since in the two drafts of the letter of the Judean community of Elephantine to Bagavahya, governor of Judah, it is expressedly affirmed that the temple of Yāhû, which had been built by their fathers in the days of the “king(s) of Egypt”, unlike the and the “Syenians” (swnyym). 13 Cf. Becking 2003, 206–208; 2008, 184–185; 2011 (calls them “Yehudites”); Rohrmoser 2014, 6. Lepper (2015) speaks of the “aramäo-jüdische Gemeinde von Elephantine”. 14 For various interpretations of the terms “Jew”, “Judean”, “Aramean” in the Aramaic documents from Elephantine cf. Kratz 2011, 421–423; Johnson 1999, 216–218; Schütze 2012, 290. Outside Elephantine, there is one isolated instance of ’rmy as a designation of a man with Egyptian name: ’rmy Pṭyḥr “(the) Aramean Petehor” Segal 1983, 97 (no. 77), a 1 (no filiation). 15 Porten/Yardeni 1989, 12–13 (B1.1); Porten/Szubin 1994. For the approximately contemporaneous Hermopolis letters see below and fn. 137. Note, however, that for palaeographical reasons Garbini (2006, 150) dates papyrus Bauer-Meissner to the reign of Darius II (= 417). 16 A useful overview on the different opinions is offered by Rohrmoser 2014, 73–81. 232 Günter Vittmann “temples of the gods of Egypt” was neither destroyed nor damaged by Cambyses.17 Most scholars take this claim serious,18 and also in the recommandation for the reconstruction of the temple by Bagavahya and Delaiah it was said that the temple “was built formerly before Cambyses” (bnh hwh mn qdmn qdm knbwzy).19 As far as I can see, the interesting thesis of Bob Becking20 that the said affirmation is a case of “invented tradition” and “hyperbolic appropriation of history“ and that the Judeans of Elephantine were all recruited by the Persians themselves, the temple of Yāhû consequently not yet having existed at all in the 26th dynasty, thus far did not find much resonance,21 but it is to be hoped, and also to be expected, that it will be subjected to a critical analysis. In 592, when Psammetichus II led his famous campaign against Nubia,22 he brought with him Greek, Carian and Phoenician soldiers, who left several inscriptions on the legs of the colossal statue of Ramesses II, but there is not a single Aramaic graffito.23 The much discussed letter of Aristeas,24 which was probably written in the second century, records two waves of immigrations of Judean military colonists for the Pre-Ptolemaic Period: one that entered the country “with the Persian”, and an earlier one that had been “sent in order to fight against the king of the Ethiopians together with Psammetichus” (§13).25 We also have the statements of the Old Testament about 17 Porten/Yardeni 1986, 68–75 (A4.7, lines 13–14; A4.8, lines 12–13); Lindenberger 2003, 73. 75 (no. 34); Porten 2011, 143–144 (B19); 148 (B20). Rohrmoser (2014, 397–407) offers transcriptions and translations of both texts. 18 See e.g. Dion 2002, 243: “On ne doit pas douter de cette allégation, car ses auteurs n’auraient pu l’inventer sans risque”. An analogous line of argumentation is pursued by Jansen-Winkeln (2002, 316) concerning the Judeans’ statement that the Persian destroyed Egyptian temples. An official petition, he plausibly argues, certainly was “keine gute Gelegenheit, den Persern Untaten zu unterstellen, die sie nicht begangen hatten”. 19 Porten/Yardeni 1986, 76–77 (A4.9), lines 4–5; Porten 2011, 150–151 (B21); Rohrmoser 2014, 408–409. 20 Becking 2011, 405; cf. already Becking 2003, 208; 226. I do not understand, however, his argument against the thesis that Judeans could have fled to Egypt after 587: he says that Jer 44 mentions only places in Northern Egypt settled by Judean refugees (2003, 207–208), but Patrōs is the “Southern Country” (< PA-tA-rsj) and includes Syene/Elephantine, cf. Vittmann 1998, 287–290. 21 Rohrmoser 2014 does not mention Becking’s theory. Cf. however Kratz 2011, 423. 22 Cf. Kahn 2008, 145–147. 23 Pace Vlassopoulos (2013, 44) (he quotes Kaplan 2003, who, however, did not make this mistake). See also correctly Schmidt 2010, 330. 24 A handy edition with a useful introduction is Brodersen 2008. The question of the value as a historical source is discussed by Pfeiffer/Recklinghausen 2010. 25 The identity of that Psammetichos is a matter of discussion, it could be Psammetichus I (664– 610) (Sauneron/Yoyotte 1952; Porten 1968, 11–12; 1984, 379; Kahn 2007; 2008, 145–146), Psammetichus II (595–589, e.g. Weigl 2010, 24) or even Psammetichus son Theokles, who in the famous Greek graffito from Abu Simbel (cf. Agut-Labordère 2012, 294–295) is mentioned as a military commander (Modrzejewski 1997, 23–25; Rozen 2008, 52). In the latter case, this would not affect the dating under Psammetichus II. Arameans in Egypt 233 the stay of Judeans in various parts of Egypt,26 but obviously they did not leave datable written remains. Primary sources in Egyptian scripts are not unequivocally clear and explicit. Several abnormal hieratic legal documents from Thebes, two from about 727 BCE (years 21 and 22 of Pianchi) and two more from 688 and 685 BCE (reign of Taharka) mention “men of the Northern region” (rmT a-mHtj) who were sold as slaves.27 As that term may refer both to the Delta and to Syria-Palestine it is well possible that those people had been taken prisoners in Syria-Palestine in the course of the Kushite-Assyrian conflict and brought to Egypt as far south as Thebes, but it is difficult to tell what their ethnicity was and which language they spoke: they have purely Egyptian names, which possibly conceals a foreign origin. The authors of the Egyptian texts were not too much concerned about terminological precision. Especially hieroglyphic texts as late as in the Ptolemaic Period would use outdated and sometimes rather general terms that did not bother about changes in ethnic and geographic realities.28 Thus, in an inscription from the time of King Apries (589–570 BCE), mention is made of aAmw (“Aamu”) and STtjw (“Setjetiu”),29 and it has repeatedly been proposed that this refers to Jews and Arameans respectively.30 It must be stressed, however, that we are dealing with traditional and rather general Egyptian terms for “Asiatics”. In a somewhat earlier Theban inscription from the time of Psammetichus I (664–610 BCE), the Egyptian military officer Djedptahiufanch is said to have led the auxiliary contingents (Tst) of the Aamu. In his publication of this monument, De Meulenaere rightly commented that “(l)e terme aAmw désigne des Asiatiques sans qu’il soit possible de l’appliquer à un peuple déterminé”.31 A naophorous statue from year 39 of Amasis (532 BCE) or somewhat later was placed by its owner Sematauitefnachte, the “overseer of the gate of the Temehu-Libyans” and “overseer of the foreign countries (or: the foreigners)32 of the STtjw”, in the temple of Neith at Sais.33 STt and STtjw, traditionally translated as “Asia” and “Asiatics”, unspefically refer to areas and peoples in the north east of 26 Isa 11:11 concerning Egypt, Patrōs and Kush, and in Jer 44:1. 15 concerning Egypt with Migdol, Taḥpanḥēs, Memphis and Patrōs (see above fn. 20). Cf. van der Veen 2014, 385. 27 For hieroglyphic transcriptions see Jansen-Winkeln 2007, 361–363; Jansen-Winkeln 2009, 212– 214; 216–219; for translations, Menu 1985, 74–76 (documents nos. 1–2); 77–78 (nos. 4–5). For the historical context of these documents see the seminal study by Quaegebeur 1995. See also Winnicki 2009, 170. 28 Note e.g. the use of the obsolete term #tA at a time when the Hittites had long since ceased to exist; cf. Kockelmann/Rickert 2015, 57–58 (44). 29 Jansen-Winkeln 2014, 409 (statue Louvre A 90, line 6). There is no modern complete edition of this important document, but a publication is being prepared by Olivier Perdu (Paris). 30 Porten 1968, 15; 1984, 379; Botta 2014, 366; Nutkowicz 2015, 14 fn. 5. 31 De Meulenaere 1965, 24 (e). For the text see now Jansen-Winkeln 2014, 201–202 (334). 32 xAs.wt “foreign countries” can also be used in the sense of xAstj.w “foreigners”. 33 Bresciani 1967; Jansen-Winkeln 2014, 500–501 (211) with further references. 234 Günter Vittmann Egypt,34 which is why the Persian king could be denoted as HqA n STt “ruler of Asia”.35 When the Egyptians, e.g. in demotic administrative documents, wanted to be more precise, they would often use less general terms,36 but even then we have to be cautious and to look whether a term really has the same meaning which is suggested by its etymology, or whether the significance has shifted. In a still mostly unpublished early demotic papyrus that relates to a military campaign of Amasis against Nubia, fourteen individuals and their fathers with partly Semitic, partly Egyptian names are labeled by the term ʾISwr.37 In the preliminary report38 this was understood as “Assyrian” with reference to descendants of Assyrian soldiers that several decades before had stood in Egyptian service. However, though etymologically ʾISwr goes back to “Assur” – Esarhaddon is designated as pAwrʾISwr “the great of Assur” in late Demotic literary texts,39 and Nineveh is said to be situated in the “territory/nome/country of Assur” (tS pA ʾISar)40 –, we know that it also means “Syria”41 and could be used in the more specific sense of “Aramean”: the “script of Ashur” is definitely not cuneiform but Aramean writing.42 Thus, Porten’s opinion that ʾISr in that early demotic papyrus refers to Arameans43 or, as one could put it more exactly, speakers of Aramaic,44 is very possible. Akkadian names do not necessarily point to ethnic Assyrians or Babylonians, since Arameans often would carry East Semitic names. Unfortunately, exact reading of the names and even more their linguistic 34 Cf. Schäfer 2011, 63–64. These terms are not used in demotic. According to Zauzich 1992, 362 (d)), sDm mnv in the early demotic papyrus mentioned below could be a non-etymological spelling of sTtj mntj “Asiatic” (see also Nutkowicz 2015, 14–15 fn. 5). I prefer to understand the two demotic nouns simply in their usual meaning “servant” and “guardian”. 35 Perdu 1985, 103 and 105–106 (i). 36 E.g. Wynn “Greek” (literally “Ionian”) and Mdy “Persian” (literally “Mede”). 37 P. Berlin P 13615, VI 18–VII 11. Isolated foreign names also occur in other parts of these two columns. I am much obliged to Karl-Theodor Zauzich for providing his facsimiles and notes concerning the respective passages. 38 Zauzich 1992. 39 Ryholt 2004, 485. In Aramaic, “Assyria”, in accordance with the phonetic rules, is spelt ’twr (Porten/Yardeni 1993, 24–35 [C1.1] passim). 40 Papyrus Vienna D 10000; II 23–24 (so-called “lamb of Bokchoris”). I now believe Hoffmann and Quack 2007, 183 are right with their reading “Assyrien” and not “Amoriter” although this is not fully excluded, see fn. 41. 41 In demotic writing, ʾISr and ʾImr (“Amor, Amurru”) can sometimes be confounded. – Another widespread term which is used with reference to „Syria/Phoenicia“ is £r < #Arw “Charu”, cf. Gardiner 1947, I, 180–187; Quaegebeur 1995, 263–269; Winnicki 2009, 145–156. In the Greek version of the Canopus decree from 238 demotic pA tS ʾISr pA tS nA £r.w “the region of the Syrian (and) the region of the Charu-(people)” it is equated with Συρία καὶ Φοινίκη in the Greek version (and the obsolete terms RTnw and Kft(jw) in the hieroglyphic), see Spiegelberg 1922, 10–11; 68; Pfeiffer 2004, 93–95. 42 Steiner 1993. See also Recklinghausen 2005, 151. 43 Porten 1968, 15; 1984, 379. See also Botta 2014, 366. 44 Cf. Johnson 1999, 214–215. Arameans in Egypt 235 affiliation are often problematic. For a better assessment, however, we have to wait for the complete publication of the whole document which is currently being prepared by Karl-Theodor Zauzich. The same element ʾISwr, ʾISr is also found in many place names in various areas of Egypt: @.t-n-iSr “The ‘house’ of the Syrian/Aramean”; PA-sbt-n-nA-iSwr.w “The wall/fortification of the Syrians” = Συρίων κώμη; vA-mAj.t-nA-iSwrw „The island of the Syrians”; vA-mtn.t-n-nA-iSwr.w „The settlement of the Syrians”; NA.w-nA-iSr “Those of the Syrians” and others.45 As these toponyms, some of them denoting several places, are only attested from the early Ptolemaic Period onwards, it is not certain how much older they really are. It is well possible, however, that at least some of them relate to Syro-Aramaic settlements that had been established long befor their actual attestation. The use of the root ’rm with reference to Arameans or Aramaic speaking people in Egyptian sources is very rare. For the Ptolemaic Period, from 167, there is one single example of the proper name PA-irm “The Aramean” (with the determinative of foreign countries).46 In the so-called Satrap stela from the late fourth century there is an ethnonym , which presumably reads ʾ Irm.w “Arameans”47 and forms part of the term pA tS n ʾ IrmA.w “the region of the Arameans” in Syria-Palestine. Can we discern Arameans in Egypt on the basis of pictorial evidence? The figures on some Memphite Egypto-Aramaic funerary stelae from the Achaemenid Period48 show a hairdress of the traditional “Semitic type” (Fig. 17), which is markedly distinct from the representations of Carians49 or Persians50 on contemporaneous stelae of the same area. It is also different, however, from the manner the Syro-Phoenician Chahapi51 (Fig. 18) is represented some two centuries later on his well-known Memphite funerary stela, where we see the owner clad in a non-Egyptian, “Syrian” garment. 45 See the chapter „Toponyms that allude to Syrians“ in Winnicki 2009, 159–175, and the respective entries in Verreth 2011, 328; 443; 493–494; 600–602; 629; 675. 46 Lüddeckens et al. 1980–2000, 157; cf. Recklinghausen 2005, 151 fn. 20. The name-bearer had a son with the Egyptian name PA-hb. 47 Recklinghausen 2005, 149–153; Pfeiffer/Recklinghausen 2010, 410–411; Schäfer 2011, 108– 109; 127–131. 48 Formerly Berlin 7707 (dated 482); Vatican 22787; see Vittmann 2003, 107 Fig. 47 and Pl. 12. For the accompanying texts, see Porten/Yardeni 1999, 254–257 (D20.3–6, including a fourth fragmentary stela). 49 For the stelae of Carians, see Vittmann 2003, 155–179 passim. 50 For the stela of Djedherbes, see below with fn. 170. 51 Vittmann 2003, 72 Fig. 33. 236 Günter Vittmann Figure 17: Depictions of Semites on Egypto-Aramaic stelae: (a) TAD D20.3 (details, from Lidzbarski 1898, II, pl. 28); (b) TAD D20.6 (author’s drawing); (c) TAD D20.4 (from Aimé-Giron 1939, Pl. 3 No. 114). Arameans in Egypt 237 Figure 18: Chahapi (detail from stela Berlin 2118; author’s drawing). In the text it is stated that he held military and priestly offices (in the Egyptian cult!) in “the land of Yehud” (PA-tA-yht),52 a term which probably refers to the Judean quarter at Memphis, the ’Ιουδαίων στρατόπεδον/castra Iudaeorum.53 The interesting question of to what extent this Egyptian “land of Yehud”, which recalls the similar “city of Yehud” (Āl-Yāhūdu) with its Judean population in Babylonia,54 was open to nonJews in the Ptolemaic Period, cannot be pursued in the frame of this contribution. 52 The correct reading (“Yehud”, not “Yahu”) now becomes definitely clear from a hieratic fragment of the Ptolemaic Book of the Dead of Chonsuiu in the Bodleian Library which contains the ), apparently part of a title of the owner, a words […] pAAtA Yhv ( contemporary of Chahapi. The document will be published by Ulrike Jakobeit (Würzburg), to whom I owe the knowledge of this important evidence (Jakobeit 2016). For the designations of (Judeans and) Jews in Egyptian language see Recklinghausen 2005 and Zauzich 2013; for Jews in the Early Ptolemaic Period see Pfeiffer and Recklinghausen 2010. 53 Cf. Winnicki 2009, 242. 54 Cf. Lemaire 2014, 413–414 with further references, and A. Berlejung in this volume. 238 Figure 19: Find-spots of Aramaic texts. Günter Vittmann Arameans in Egypt 239 Find Places (see Map Fig. 19) The large bulk of Aramaic papyri and ostraca was discovered at Elephantine, and together with the Hermopolis papyri, is a famous and much-used source for the life of Judeans, Arameans and others who resided there in the First Persian Period throughout the fifth century, as members of the local frontier garrison, one of three whose existence already was known to Herodotus (II 30), the two others being Daphnai and Marea.55 The garrison (ḥyl/ḥail), whose leader belonged to the Persian ethno-class, consisted of several detachments or companies (sg. dgl/degel56) that were commanded by members of different ethnicities (most of the bearers have Iranian and Akkadian names, Fig. 20), never Egyptians or Judeans. The total population of the military colony of Elephantine has been calculated at approximately 2500 to 3000 individuals.57 The men lived there with their families and received a salary (prs) from the government. There are several cases for colonists who owned landed property in Elephantine,58 which was presumably granted to them as a loan by the Crown in a similar way like the cleruchs in the Saite Period and later.59 Elephantine: ʼdnnbw Iddinnabu (Akkadian; B2.9:2 etc.) ʼrtbnw Artabanu (Iranian; B2.2:3) ʼtrwprn Atrofarna (Iranian; B2.2:9) Hwmdt Haumadata (Iranian; B2.3:2; B2.4:2) Wryzt Varyazata (Iranian; B2.1:2 etc.) Nbwkdry Nabukudurri (Akkadian; B3.12:3) Nmsw Namasava (Iranian; B3.4:2) Memphis: Wydrn Vidarna (Iranian; C3.8 IIIB:36 [p. 202]) Bgpt Bagapata (Iranian; C3.8 IIIA:7.9 [p. 197]) Byt’lšgb Betelshagab (Aramaic; B8.6:8) Nbwšzb Nabushezib (Akkadian; B8.4:13) Figure 20: Detachment commanders. The traditional view that Judeans lived on Elephantine island (Aram. yb/yēb = Eg. Abw, demotic yb) and Arameans on the other side of the Nile, in Syene (Aram. 55 56 57 58 Cf. Kaplan 2003; Pétigny 2014. Cf. Porten 1968, 28–35. Knauf 2002, 181, followed by Rohrmoser 2014, 81–82. The technical term for an owner of landed property or fields was mhḥsn, a term which is discussed in the doctoral thesis of Alexander Schütze (2011; to be published in due course). 59 Cf. Porten 1968, 300. 240 Günter Vittmann swn/swēn = Eg. swnw) has recently been challenged60 and should indeed not been taken too strictly, but it must be repeated that the designation “Judean of Syene” is unknown. The documents show that the members of the various population groups were in close contact with each other (and not only in Elephantine). For example, in 402 the “Judean of the detachment of Nabukudurri” aAnani son of Ḥaggai borrowed grain from an “Aramean of Syene of that detachment” with the Egyptian name PHnwm b. Bs’, i.e. Pachnum (Pa-Xnm) son of Besa (Bs).61 Arameans not infrequently functioned as witnesses in contracts concluded among Judeans, and there were also some Egyptians living in the settlement; we will come back to these aspects shortly. In my opinion, however, the existence of close contacts between Judeans and Arameans in Elephantine does not automatically permit the conclusion that one can level the differences in designating them all indistinctly as Judaeo-Arameans:62 In a list concerning the disbursement of barley to the garrison of Syene (datable to 400) there appears only one individual with – at least from the onomastical point of view – Yahwist background (one Ḥaggai son of Šêmacia[h]).63 In reading the Hermopolis letters, one gets the strong impression that the world of the addressees, who lived in Luxor and Syene, is rather different from the picture offered by most of the documents from Elephantine, and not only because of the banal fact that Syene/Aswan is separated from Elephantine by the river. There is no direct or indirect mention of Yāhû, the personal names are linguistically Aramaic, Babylonian and Egyptian. Although the Judeans of Elephantine, as is well-known, were no strict monotheists (“Die Juden von Elephantine waren keine Monotheisten”64) because they also worshipped gods other than their main god Yāhû65 – the so-called Collection List also contains contributions for Eshembethel and Anatbethel,66 and oaths could be sworn by the life of a goddess Anatyāhû67 –, the other gods mentioned in the Hermopolis letters never appear in Elephantine, and vice versa. Priests of Yāhû are regularly designated as khn, those of other gods as kmr.68 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 See now the critics of the traditional view by Rohrmoser 2014, 7. Porten/Yardeni 1989, 98–100 (B3.13); Porten 2011, 251–253 (B46). As done e.g. by Rohrmoser 2014. Porten/Yardeni 1993, 222–225 (C3.14); Ḥaggai son of Shemaciah is found in line 3. Knauf 2002, 184. For the religion of the Judeans of Elephantine cf. Dion 2002; Becking 2003; Rohrmoser 2014. Porten/Yardeni 1993, 234 (C3.15), lines 127–128; cf. Rohrmoser 2014, 139–144. An interesting explanation is offered by Becking (2011, 413–414), who takes them as protective deities of the marzēaḥ. 67 Porten/Yardeni 1989, 146–147 (B7.3), line 3; Porten 2011, 265 (B52). 68 Porten/Lund 2002, 154–155 (khn); 159–160 (kmr); Rohrmoser 2014, 220–221. Arameans in Egypt 241 The degree of literacy was probably not low: only five witnesses out of 130 that appear in the Elephantine documents did not sign personally.69 There is a fragmentary ostracon with the first seven letters of the Phoenician(!) alphabet written twice.70 Apart from various letters, name-lists and other documents, there are three large archives, all of them covering nearly the whole fifth century: the Yedaniah Communal Archive (419/418 BCE – after 407 BCE),71 so named after the leader of the Jewish community and concerning various events such as the destruction of the temple of Yāhû, the best-known document being the famous (first draft of a) “letter to Bagoas”/Bagavahya,72 the governor of Judah (407 BCE); the Mibṭaḥiah Archive (471– 410 BCE),73 and the aAnaniah Archive (456–402 BCE).74 The archives of Mibṭaḥiah, probably the aunt of the aforementioned Yedaniah, and of aAnaniah, a “servitor (lḥn) of Yāhû the God”, give valuable details about the topography of the Jewish settlement, the houses of the inhabitants, the temple of Yāhû and other buildings.75 A special point of interest is the role played by certain individuals with Egyptian names and their relations to Judeans and Arameans. According to the archives of Mibṭaḥiah and aAnaniah, there were three houses of Egyptians in the colony, and they lived next door to Judeans and Iranians (Fig. 21): ’spmt b. Ppṭawnyt, i.e. Espmēt (NspA-mtr) son of Peftuauneit (PAj⸗f-TAw-a.wj-n.t), was a “boatman of the rough water” (mlḥ zy my’ qSy’),76 and so were the two brothers Pḥy77 and Pmt Pamēt (Pa-mtr), sons of a woman called Twy’ Tawē (va-wA).78 The third Egyptian house owner was Ḥwr b. Pṭ’sy, i.e. Hor (Or) son of Peteēse (PA-dj-As.t), a gardener of the god Chnum (gnn zy Ḥnwm ’lh’).79 The owner of a fourth house, a direct neighbour of Mibṭaḥiah’s 69 Knauf 2002, 182; followed by Lemaire 2014, 412. 70 Röllig 2013, 189–190 (no. 19) and Pl. 35 (d). 71 Porten/Yardeni 1986, 52–79 (A4.1–10); Lindenberger 2003, 61–79; Porten 2011, 126–153 (B13– 22). 72 Porten/Yardeni 1986, 68–71 (A4.7); Lindenberger 2003, 72–76 (no. 34); Porten 2011, 143–149 (B19); reconstructed vocalization (and translation) Beyer (2011, 18–20). In accordance with the three latter publications, the reconstructed Old Persian form Bagāvahyā (Tavernier 2007, 141 (4.2.294)) is to be preferred to the widespread artificial rendering “Bagohi” (biblical Bigvai). The strange claim of Garbini (1993, 103–123; 2006, 152–153), according to whom certain passages of these texts (some proper names such as Bagoas and Sanballat) were inserted by a modern hand prior to their publication, seems to have been widely ignored. 73 Porten/Yardeni 1989, 15–51 (B2.1–11); Porten 2011, 154–202 (B23–33). 74 Porten/Yardeni 1989, 52–100 (B3.1–13); Porten 2011, 203–253 (B34–46). 75 For the harmonization of philological and archaeological evidence see Pilgrim 1998; 2002; 2003; see also Rohrmoser 2014, passim. 76 Porten/Yardeni 1989, 20–21 (B2.2), lines 10–11; p. 22–25 (B2.3), lines 7–8; Porten 2011, 162 (B24); 167 (B25). The title is a translation of demotic nf pA mw bin, cf. Martin 2011, 345 fn. 2. The same individual is attested in Lozachmeur 2006, no. 220, cv 3. 77 This could be Pa-Hy, Pa-Xy or (less probably) Pa-HA.t. 78 Porten/Yardeni 1989, 94–97 (B3.12), line 20; Porten 2011, 248 (B45). 79 Porten/Yardeni 1989, 86–89 (B3.10), line 10; p. 90–93 (B3.11), line 6; Porten 2011, 238 (B43); 242 (B44). The Egyptian equivalents for gnn “gardener” (attested only here) are kAry and kAmy, 242 Günter Vittmann house, was called Ḥrwṣ,80 which is probably best understood as a – well attested – rendering of the very common Egyptian name ¡r-wDA Harwodj “Horus is safe”.81 He was priest (kmr) of a deity whose name is heavily damaged and difficult to restore. Cowley’s proposal to read 82 as “priest of the gods Chnum and Sati(?)”83 would make excellent sense in this area but has been contested, as there are palaeographical and other obstacles that speak against this convenient solution. Harwodj’s father has the Semitic name Palṭu, which makes the problem of identification even more intricate. The other proposal to introduce an obscure deity Han or Hanu in combination with a variant form of Anat (“Ḥ[an and At]ti”)84 has little to recommend itself. What is more, the identification of the half-damaged letter behind the heth as a nun is dubious, which is why the TAD85 cautiously left it unread. The end after the lacuna, however, fits well with the traditional reading ty. If we agree with the TAD in reading the last word as singular ’lh’ “the god” and not as a plural ’lhy’ “the gods” (but is this really impossible?), it must be a male – and hardly an Egyptian – divinity, but I am unable to make any reasonable suggestion. So the passage will remain a riddle as before. It should be noted, however, that we do not learn anything about the relations of these house owners with their neighbours and their attitude towards them, they are just neutrally mentioned as neighbours as was the habit of Aramaic and demotic contracts concerning any houses which formed the object of the transactions. 80 81 82 83 84 85 see Gardiner 1947, I 96*–97* [224–225]; Abd er-Raziq 1979. For archaeological and philological evidence for temple gardens see Wilkinson 1998, 119–144. Thus read by Porten/Yardeni 1989, 34–37, line 15 (B.2.7); Porten 2011, 187 (B29); read “Mardûk” (mrdwk) by Grelot 1972, 187 (h) (following Kraeling 1953, 78 fn. 11), and ’srwk(?) by Cowley 1923, 37 (13, line 15); 40. The alternative Semitic explanation (Vittmann 2002, 91; Porten 2011, 187 fn. 33) seems to me less probable. My facsimile has been made from Sayce/Cowley (1906), unnumbered plate (E, line 15). Cowley 1923, 37 (13, line 15); 38; 40. This idea had first been suggested by Kraeling (1953, 78 fn. 11); followed by Grelot (1972, 187) (“Ḥānu et aAttî”) and fn. h; Porten 1968, 94 and 165; Modrzejewski 1997, 31 (“Hannu and aAtti”). Porten subsequently abandoned this reading. A decisive role in Kraeling’s proposal played the alleged presence of a god Han in ostracon Clermont-Ganneau 70, but there undoubtedly the scribe intended to write “Chnum”, see Lozachmeur 2006, 236. Porten and Lund 2002, 159 s.v. kmr (bottom left) read kmr zy ḥn[w]m ’lh’. Porten/Yardeni 1989, 34 (line 15). Arameans in Egypt 243 Figure 21: House-owners at Elephantine (dark grey: Egyptians; middle grey: Iranians; light grey: the “half-Egyptian” Harwodj). A fragmentary household list from Elephantine is also noteworthy inasmuch as all preserved personal names – about ten – are Egyptian, probably referring to “true Egyptians” living at Elephantine.86 Especially interesting is the case of a certain ’sḥwr b. Ṣḥ’, i.e. µsḥōr (Ns-Hr) son of Djeḥo (Ed-Hr)87. He was a “builder of the King” (’rdkl zy mlk’), married into a Judean family – he became husband of Mibṭaḥiah88 – and adopted, or was given, the Hebrew name Nathan.89 The children of the couple received the Hebrew names Yedaniah and Maḥseiah (Fig. 22a). From his original name and that of his father, we would 86 Porten/Yardeni 1993, 205–207 (C9). Household lists are attested in Egypt from the Middle Kingdom to the Graeco-Roman Period, see Collier/Quirke 2004, 110–117; Demarée 2011; Clarysse/Thompson 2006. 87 Porten/Yardeni 1989, 30–33 (B2.6); 40–43 (B2.9); Porten 2011, 178–184 (B28); 192–195 (B31). Note that the element Hr in both names is not the same (“Horus” in one case, “face” in the other one). Both names and especially Ed-Hr were most common in Late Period Egypt. 88 For women in Elephantine see Azzoni 2012 and especially Nutkowicz 2015. 89 Porten 2011, 178 fn. 2: “Had he ‘converted’?”. 244 Günter Vittmann suppose him to have been an Egyptian, and I have little doubt he really was. For sure, there are several examples of Egyptian names in Judean families, probably a result of intermarriages.90 Thus, a certain !wSa/Hosea was married to a woman named ’sr šwt/Esershōt (As.t-rS.v “Isis rejoices”)91. There is no reason why Esḥōr should have been such an exception. With Arameans, however, Egyptian names were far more common. So, as comparable adoptions of foreign names for Egyptians in the pre-Hellenistic period, and particularly on Egyptian soil, are otherwise unattested, was Esḥōr alias Nathan rather an Aramean after all? In my view, this is not probable: another individual with whom Mibṭaḥiah had a lawsuit had apparently also an Egyptian name (Py’ son of Pḥy92), bore the same title as Esḥōr and was sworn an oath by Mibṭaḥiah in the name of the Egyptian local goddess Satis,93 who had her own temple at Elephantine. However, we are frequently faced with similar cases of onomastic intermingling and should always be aware of this fundamental problem, i.e. a possible discrepancy of linguistic affiliation and ethnicity. A similar situation is found in the archive of aAnani with its presence of slaves with Egyptian names in non-Egyptian households. The best known example is Tmt/Tpmt, i.e. Tamēt/Tapmēt, daughter of Ptw Patou, the “handmaiden/servantwoman” (’mh) of Meshullam (Fig. 23). The two former names are Egyptian: vamtr/va-pA-mtr94 means “She of the (holy) staff” (of Chnum, with a particular local background), Pa-tA.wj “He of the two countries”. As was common practice in Egypt, Tamēt was branded on her right hand as the property of her lord.95 It was only many years after her marriage with cAnaniah that she and the daughter who originated from this marriage were manumitted. 90 Cf. Nutkowicz 2008; Grätz 2011. For intermarriages in Late Period Egypt cf. Vittmann 2003, 318 (index s.v. “Mischehe”). 91 Porten/Yardeni 1986, 60–61 (A4.4), line 5; Lindenberger 2003, 69 (no. 32); Porten 2011, 135 (B16). 92 For possible explanations of these two names see Porten 2002, 318 and 316. 93 Porten/Yardeni 1989, 38–39 (B2.8), line 5; Porten 2011, 190 (B30). According to Azzoni (2000) the oath by Satis does not mean that Mibṭaḥiah adopted the religion of her Egyptian husband but that, as a woman, she was simply devoted to a female divinity. 94 The transcription with final r is a convention of demotists, in actual pronunciation there was no [r] here (the “classical” equivalent is mdw “staff”). – Both spellings have the same meaning; the fuller form Tpmt regularly appears from the moment of her manumission onwards, see Fig. 23. For Demotic examples of names relating to the divine staff from Elephantine cf. Martin 2011, 378–379 (s.v. “Espemet”); 384 (s.v. “Tapemet”). 95 The Aramaic term for “to mark with a slave mark; brand” is sṭr; “slave mark, brand” is šnyth, see Porten/Yardeni 1989, xxxvi and xlii (index s.v.), e.g. 128–129 (B5.6), line 3 ’mt[’] &zyl\y zy sṭyrh a l šmy “the maidservant of mine who is branded on my name”. Arameans in Egypt 245 c. Women’s Figure 22: Genealogy Yedaniah and Mibṭaḥiah; (b) Mibṭaḥiah’s slaves. Women’s names in Figure 23: (a) Genealogy of of Yehoyishma names in italics; EGYPTIAN NAMES in capitalics; EGYPTIAN NAMES in capitals. itals. Another case are the brothers Pṭwsyry Petosiri, Bl’ Belle and Lylw Lilu and their mother Tb’ Taba96 (Fig. 22b) Again, all four have Egyptian names: PA-dj-wsir “He whom Osiris has given”, Bl “Blind”, Lylw “Child” and va-bA/by (not translatable). 96 Porten/Yardeni 1989, 48–51 (B2.11); Porten 2011, 200–202 (B33). The father is not mentioned anywhere, cf. below fn. 224. 246 Günter Vittmann Figure 23: Genealogy of Yehoyishmac. Women’s names in italics; EGYPTIAN NAMES in capitals. The first two of them were apportioned among two brothers, the sons of Mibṭaḥiah from whom they had inherited them (the slaves were branded with the word lmbṭḥyh “belonging to Mibṭaḥiah”). The division of the third brother and the mother was scheduled for the future. As a working hypothesis we may assume that slaves with Egyptian names that lived in non-Egyptian households were Egyptians97 although this cannot be strictly proved. In an ostracon letter from Elephantine, in a clearly Judean milieu, the sender urges the necessity for an additional branding of “our Tṭwsry” (vAdj-wsir),98 a servant girl (alymh), with the name of her owner, without supplying, however, any information about her parentage for being unnecessary in the given context. 97 See e.g. Porten 1968, 80. 98 Porten/Yardeni 1999, 161–162 (D7.9 concave); Lindenberger 2003, 47 (no. 18). For an Arameans in Egypt 247 The conditions under which enslavement of Egyptians may have occurred have not yet been fully explored.99 If we consider, however, that the members of the frontier garrison at Elephantine enjoyed a privileged status, perhaps in some way comparable to the specialized craftsmen that had settled six hundred years before in Deir el-Medineh in Thebes, and were probably better off than many poor Egyptians, or people encumbered with debts, it is conceivable that a well-to-do Aramaic, or whatever foreign language, speaking household would take profit of their labour power, by inheritance, sale or even self-sale. Over the last decades, ongoing excavations of the German Archaeological Institute and the Swiss Institute have greatly contributed towards happily combining the papyrological and archaeological evidence and led to a better understanding both of the topography of the foreign colony of Elephantine and also the background of the destruction of the temple of Yāhû by the Persian garrison commander on instigation of the Egyptian priests of Chnum (we now know that, indeed, the destroyed temple was rebuilt).100 Recent work also made it possible to identify the remains of the “fortress of Elephantine” so frequently mentioned in the documents.101 Unlike Elephantine, the situation for fieldwork in Syene is far more difficult due to the extension of the modern city. The sanctuaries of their various deities (Bethel, Banit, Nabu and others102) mentioned in the documents are lost, but recently remains of the houses of the Arameans at Syene were discovered.103 Judeans and Arameans were rather mobile; we encounter them as far as Memphis and Migdol in the Eastern Delta. Good examples for this mobility are the so-called Hermopolis letters to which we will have to come back later, and a letter found in Elephantine and dispatched in Migdol (taking Jer 44.46 and Hdt. II 159,2 together, we learn about the presence of Judeans in the frontier fortress, which also left archaeological traces). In that letter,104 Oshea son of Pṭ[…] writes to his son Shelomam, who normally was stationed in Migdol but had left first for Memphis and then for Elephantine. Oshea’s father almost certainly had an Egyptian name (probably PA-dj-[Xnm], see fn. 222), which even with Judeans was not as rare as one would think at first sight (see below). We have also seen that they would occasionally swear an oath by an Egyptian deity, or express greetings in the name of Yāhû and Chnum at the same time.105 This peaceful coexistence of the two gods, i.e. between Egyptians and Judeans, was subsequently strongly affected by the activities of the Judean ambassador interpretation see Porten 1968, 204; Lindenberger 2003, 41–42. For slavery in Ancient Egypt cf. Bakir 1952; Vittmann 2006a. For the archaeological aspects cf. Pilgrim 1998; 2003; Rosenberg 2004. Pilgrim 2013. Cf. Porten 1969. Pilgrim et al. 2008, 315–318; 325–327. Porten/Yardeni 1986, 30–33 (A3.3); Lindenberger 2003, 36–38 (no. 10); Porten 2011, 108 110 (B8). 105 Porten/Yardeni 1999, 172 (D7.21); see now Lozachmeur 2006, 236–237 (70); Pls. 138–139. 99 100 101 102 103 104 248 Günter Vittmann Ḥananiah in Egypt (“You know Chnum is against us since the day Ḥananiah has been in Egypt until now”106). Recent research has much contributed towards elaborating the role of this person,107 which is mentioned only twice in the Elephantine papyri. Apparently, the mission of Ḥananiah, who visited Egypt sometime between 419 and 411 with the consent of the Persian government, was similar to that of Nehemiah and Ezra, though far less ambitious in terms of changes or modifications in the religious and social fields. Although there are no sources which inform us about Ḥananiah’s activities that provoked the hatred of the Egyptian priests, Kottsieper’s108 thesis that the main purpose of Ḥananiah’s mission was to obtain the official recognition of the Judean community of Elephantine and parity with the military colony of Syene by the Persian government is attractive. Certainly, however, there must have been several reasons that ultimately, in 410, when the Satrap was absent from Egypt, led to the destruction of the Yāhû temple at Elephantine by the local Persian governor Vidranga and his son Nafaina on instigation of the priests of Chnum. Xenophobia or religious zeal in certain Egyptian circles might have played a role but hardly the decisive one. It has frequenly been maintained that sheep offerings were considered a serious offence by the priests of Chnum, whose sacred animal was the ram,109 but the texts do not provide any information about the real motives. Pierre Briant assumed that the destruction had a juridical background, the inability of the Judeans to prove their rights to build a wall that blocked the public road.110 The Egyptians, in their turn, blocked the access to a well that was vital for the members of the garrison.111 Whatever the direct and indirect reasons for the destruction of the temple, it has been stated that apart from the clash with the priests of Chnum, the documents from Elephantine “mirror a peaceful cohabitation of various groups of people”.112 It has to be kept in mind, however, that the conflict is exclusively known from the Judean side, since any complementary information from the Egyptian side is lacking.113 Although for Aswan we do not have Egypto-Aramaic stelae such as those from Memphis/Saqqara discussed below, there is reason to assume that also here Arameans were open-minded towards Egyptian religion and funerary practices. This conclusion 106 Porten/Yardeni 1986, 58 (A4.3), line 7; Lindenberger 2003, 67–68 (no. 31); Kottsieper 2006, 361; Porten 2011, 132–133 (B15); Rohrmoser 2014, 388–390. 107 Kottsieper 2002, 150–158; Kratz 2011; Rohrmoser 2014, 252–253; 343–347. 108 Kottsieper 2002, 157. 109 E.g. Porten 1968, 286; Dunand/Zivie-Coche 2006, 328 fn. 53 (the latter authors admit, however, that political motives are equally possible). For a critical discussion, see now Rohrmoser 2014, 244–251. See also Schütze 2012, 300–301. 110 Briant 1996. For the subject cf. Schütze 2012. 111 Porten/Yardeni 1986, 62 (A4.5), lines 6–8; Lindenberger 2003, 70–71 (no. 33); Porten 2011, 137 (B17, still with the unchanged translation “that well they stopped up”); Kottsieper 2006, 362 (taking into account the discussion by Pilgrim 2003, 303–304 and fn. 2); Rohrmoser 2014, 259–263. 112 Becking 2008, 188. 113 As rightly observed by Rohrmoser 2014, 240–241. Arameans in Egypt 249 is suggested by three anthropoid sandstone sarcophagi inspired by Egyptian style.114 The owners had partly Egyptian (“Horus”), partly Semitic names (Abutai daughter of Shamashnuri; Shabbatai). One of the sarcophagi shows working scenes that normally would not have been illustrated on an authentic Egyptian object of this kind. The wailing-women which are found in a similar guise in other stelae (see below) deserve attention as well. All the material from Elephantine and Aswan available up to end of the past millennium is collected in TAD.115 A most welcome addendum is represented by the long-awaited publication of the Clermont-Ganneau collection – altogether more than 300 items – by Hélène Lozachmeur in 2006.116 In the last quarter of the twentieth century, 47 more ostraca and jar inscriptions, 22 in Aramaic and 24 in Phoenician, have been discovered in Elephantine.117 They are of interest for onomastic and prosopographic studies. Immediately after the end of the First Persian Period, Aramaic documentation from Elephantine stops. The latest dated text is a damaged letter118 in which a man named Yislaḥ is informed by his subordinate Shewa son of Zekariah that King Amyrtaios (404–398 BCE) is “brought to Memphis” and that “King Nepherites sat (upon the throne) [in] (the month of) Epiph”. Nothing is known about the fate of the members of the garrison. Whereas Redford119 believes that they “were probably arrested and disarmed, if not put to death”, Rohrmoser120 conceives of a far less dramatical scenario and thinks that their work contracts simply were not extended. Archaeology, too, seems to confirm the abandonment of the garrison with the end of the 27th dynasty: Some of the buildings of the “Aramean quarter” came to be reused as stables.121 One would expect Judeans and Arameans also to be occasionally mentioned in Demotic papyri from the late sixth down to the fourth century from Elephantine. Disappointingly however, I am aware of only one single exception kindly brought to my attention by K.-Th. Zauzich, who is about to publish it shortly.122 This letter, which for palaeographic reasons and its format can be dated to the fifth century, was written 114 Porten/Yardeni 1999, 247–248 (D18.16–18); Porten/Gee 2002, 273–279; Vittmann 2003, 113 114 with Fig. 53–54. 115 Lepper 2015, 259 n. 13, in a rather general and unspecified way, blames the TAD as being “nicht besonders zuverlässig” (in a similar vein p. 261; see also Joisten-Pruschke 2009 and Garbini 2006, 169; 373). Such unfair critics do not do justice to the great value and use of that fundamental publication, for which we should be grateful to the editors. 116 The Judean milieu of these ostraca has been explored by Lemaire 2011. 117 Published by Röllig 2013. 118 Porten/Yardeni 1986, 46–47 (A3.9), regrettably omitted in Porten 2011. According to Kraeling 1953, 283 the letter “may have been written at Thebes, Abydos, or even at Memphis”. 119 Redford 2011, 318. 120 Rohrmoser 2014, 81. 121 Krekeler 1996, 111; cf. also Schütze 2012, 290. 122 Papyrus Berlin P 23592. I am obliged to Karl-Theodor Zauzich for making accessible to me this document and allowing me to use it for this conference. 250 Günter Vittmann by an Egyptian in Memphis to a lady in Elephantine. In style and content it is not dissimilar to the Aramaic Hermopolis letters: one topic is the wish to obtain “a small thing” and the necessity of finding trustworthy people that could bring it, while several persons are to receive greetings. On the verso of the papyrus, towards the end in line 7, we read “I greet Peteese (with a lacuna, then the illegible end of a personal name) and YhyHy”. The latter name (written )123 can be analyzed as 124 *Yhwyḥyh “May Yāhû live”, a Wunschname which is not attested but structurally and semantically unproblematic (compare Yhwyšmc “May Yāhû hear”125). For this reason it is unnecessary to propose an incorrect Demotic rendering of Yhwḥy Yehoḥay “Yāhû is living”126. Going downstream, we pass Edfu, from where we have a lengthy account papyrus,127 nine tombstones128 and about fourteen ostraca dating to the third century.129 It is only a few years ago that an ostracon in Vienna, a receipt of salt-tax, turned out to have two texts that were written within ten years: first in Aramaic; and later, after the Aramaic text had been effaced, in Demotic.130 The two tax-papers are obviously sisters, and the wording – as may be expected – is more or less identical in both languages, a circumstance which may excuse the inclusion in this contribution in spite of its late date. To the east of Edfu, in Bir Samut,131 a station near the gold mines on the road from Edfu to the Red Sea, together with many Greek and Demotic ostraca, also three Aramaic items were found by the French Archaeological Mission of the Eastern Desert in 2014 and 2015.132 Certain names may suggest the involvement of members of an 123 The bipartite sign at the end is the early demotic personal determinative. 124 See Noth 1928, 195–220. 125 Porten/Lund 2002, 359–360. From a much later period, one may compare Yhwycmd, see Teixidor 1986, 195 (37) (“Que Yahô effectue la résurrection”). 126 See Teixidor 1986, 432 (72); Albertz/Schmitt 2012, 574 (I owe the latter reference to Bezalel Porten). 127 Porten/Yardeni 1993, 258–267 (C3.28) and xix (Edfu/Ṭbh is mentioned in line 128). This document contains many Hebrew and Greek personal names; cf. Honeyman 2003. 128 Porten/Yardeni 1999, 262–264 (D21.7–15). According to the authors, the tombstones could also belong to the early second century. 129 Porten/Yardeni 1999, 190–192 (D7.55–57); 196–204 (D8.3–11); 205 (D8.13); 211 (D9.15). 130 Porten/Yardeni 2004/2005. 131 Cf. Brun et al. 2013; Redon 2014. 132 I am obliged to Marie-Pierre Chaufray, who sent me a photograph of one of them, and to Bérangère Redon and André Lemaire for further details. The ostraca are to be published by André Lemaire. Arameans in Egypt 251 Arab tribe in that area. Like the Edfu ostraca, they can be dated to the third century BCE. Figure 24: Graffito of Petechnum in the chapel of Amenophis III at Elkab (author’s photograph). Not far to the north of Edfu is Elkab, where during a visit to the fine chapel of Amenophis III in summer 2003 I happened to notice an apparently unrecorded and unpublished Aramaic graffito (Fig. 24), an isolated example for the presence of an Aramaic visitor: brk Pṭḥnm br Pḥnm(?) “Blessed is Petechnum son of Pachnum(?)”. From the names (Eg. PA-dj-Xnm and Pa-Xnm), which are also attested in other Aramaic sources, it is probable that the man came from Elephantine, but the father’s name and the rest of the inscription will have to be checked on the basis of fresh photographs and a collation with the original. It is surprising that we do not have Aramaic documents and inscriptions from Thebes, nor are there Demotic or other sources that would confirm the presence of Judeans and Arameans in the pre-Hellenistic period. Part of the Hermopolis papyri, however, are addressed to members of an Aramaic community at Luxor, without arriving there (see below), and a papyrus from Elephantine informs us about the arrest 252 Günter Vittmann of several Judean people at the gate of Thebes for having plundered several houses in Elephantine.133 Leaving for the moment the Eastern desert with the Wadi Hammamat aside, we make a short stop in Abydos with its famous temple of Osiris built by Seti I, the father of Ramesses II, about 1300 BCE. Here there is a corridor, which in the first millennium attracted a lot of pilgrims from all over Egypt: Carians, Greeks, Phoenicians and Arameans, all very faintly engraved, often difficult to recognize. The Aramaic graffiti are all rather short and mostly formed according to the scheme brk NN qdm ’wsry (or similar) “blessed is NN before Osiris”134. The authors of these graffiti are only identified by their names and frequently the name of the father. It is difficult to tell, however, where they lived and from which places in Egypt they came. It need not have been far-away Elephantine, of course, but sometimes it may well have been so. As certain Phoenician graffiti at the same place indicate the residence of their writers (Heliopolis in one case, Memphis in another one),135 there is no reason to doubt that also some Arameans might have come from the Syro-Phoenician settlements such as the Τυρίων στρατόπεδον and the Συροπερσικὸν ἄμφοδον in the north of the country.136 Going farther, we finally reach Hermopolis, where in 1945 a set of eight letters137 was discovered in a jar. These letters had been written in Memphis by Aramaic soldiers to their families in Luxor and Aswan. Although they certainly date to the first decades of Persian rule, several linguistic and graphic features show them to represent a pre-Achaemenid stage of Aramaic.138 It is certainly no exaggeration to say that for the daily life of Arameans this is the richest source, with their requests for commodities, complaints about laziness in providing this and that, lack of interest in the fate of others, and so on. By the way, these documents are also important for epistolography and the issue of contact between Egyptian and Aramaic language. To give an example, the formula usually translated as “I blessed you by god X that he may show me your face in peace” (brktk l-X zy yḥwny ’pyk bšlm) is adapted from the Egyptian formula and should rather be understood as a relative phrase “(…) god X who will” etc.139 As 133 Porten/Yardeni 1986, 60–61 (A4.4); Lindenberger 2003, 68–70 (no. 32); Porten 2011, 134 135 (B16); Rohrmoser 2014, 391–393 (note that her alternative proposal [392 fn. 97] to read dbrw with Grelot 1972, 397 (g) is not possible, the second letter is clearly k). 134 Porten/Yardeni 1999, 270–277 (D22.9–27) passim. For “Osiris” in the TAD (outside personal names) cf. Porten/Lund 2002, 425. 135 Donner/Röllig 2002, 13, no. 49 (34) and (36). 136 Cf. Winnicki 2009, 162. 137 Porten/Yardeni 1986, 9–23 (A2.1–7); Lindenberger 2003, 29–36 (nos. 3–9); Porten 2011, 90– 107 (B1–7). On the contents of these letters see also Porten 1968, 264–272. 138 Gzella 2015, 169 fn. 536; 178 (certain grammatical features are “indicative of a preAchaemenid regional variety”); 187; 388 (“a pre-Achaemenid form of Aramaic”). 139 See Depauw 2006, 179–180. An analogous translation of the Aramaic formula is given by Schwiderski 2000, 126–127. Arameans in Egypt 253 Egyptologists we should be able to explain bynbn, a word that occurs in one of the letters and looks Egyptian: “And now, let them bring us a chest (’rwn) and a bynbn”.140 Obviously it is to be connected with bnbn “beam” (see fn. 140). There were many persons with Egyptian names in the households of these people but it seems evident that only Arameans, no genuine Egyptians, were involved: although Egyptian names are widespread, there are always relatives with Semitic names (see below). Therefore it is probable that also the many individuals that appear without explicit affiliation (frequently as addressees of greetings) are Aramean members of the family, although it cannot be excluded that occasionally – and then perhaps especially in the case of women – “true” Egyptians entered the family by intermarriage. As the material is not sufficient to establish more extensive genealogies, this issue is difficult to decide on the basis of names alone. It was common to address people as “brother” or “sister” without implying a direct relationship. Next to Elephantine in quantity, but mostly rather poorly preserved, are the Aramaic documents from the north of the country with Memphis/Saqqara and the surrounding area (Abusir141), which is not surprising as here was the seat of administration of Egypt as a Persian satrapy. There is, however, also a fragmentary ostracon from +600 BCE, which by its very discovery testifies to the presence of an Aramaic speaking community at Saqqara141a. Concerning the numerous more or less fragmentary Aramaic texts from the animal necropolis at Saqqara North, which originally had been published by Segal (1983), only some of them have been incorporated in TAD.142 The documents include a conveyance of slaves143 and court records concerning slaves (one of them being a Cretan), assaults, and other topics.144 Unlike the Elephantine papyri, individuals with Semitic names are apparently always Arameans, there are no typically Judean names. Iranians and “genuine” Egyptians occur, too. 140 Porten/Yardeni 1986, 18–19 (A2.5), line 5; Porten 2011, 103 (B5, in both publications left untranslated and not incorporated in the lists mentioned below fn. 184); Lindenberger 2003, 35 no. 8, with uncommented translation “a plank of …-wood”. Whatever the exact meaning of bynbn in this context, the observation of the ed. princ. (Bresciani/Kamil 1966, 406) that it is to be identified with bnbn “Balken,” Erman/Grapow (1926–1963, 459:16) is undoubtedly correct. 141 Dušek/Mynářová 2013, 65–69 (with publication of two Aramaic graffiti). For phonetic reasons, the authors’ interpretation of Bysn brt Tḥwt as “Bysn, daughter of TA-(n.t)-Hw.t” (67) is impossible. The second name is perhaps simply a hypocoristicon of a theophoric name with “Thot”; alternatively, it could also be the female name TA-Xwtj (Ranke 1935, 366:13.24). 141a Aimé-Giron 1931, 4–5 (No. 2) and Pl. I; Garbini 2006, 149 and Fig. 55. Not in TAD. 142 Segal 1983, texts 1–10 and sixteen more were included in Porten/Yardeni 1989, viii (concordance) and Porten/Yardeni 1993, viii (concordance). The vocabulary of the omitted texts has not been incorporated by Porten/Lund 2002, but see Schwiderski 2008 and 2004. 143 Porten/Yardeni 1989, 128–129 (B5.6). 144 Porten/Yardeni 1989, 149–173 (B8.1–12). The Cretan slave (abd krtk zyly “a Cretan slave of mine”) vbrḥš appears in B8.3 (p. 155). 254 Günter Vittmann The find-spot of the so-called Driver Letters145 is unknown, but it is probable that it was in or around Memphis. The letters were written in the name of the satrap Arsames during his stay outside Egypt and concern the administration of his landed property by his Egyptian steward (pqyd) Nechthor. These letters, like the recently published letters from Bactria,146 were written on leather. Although they contain plenty of precious information on the situation in Lower Egypt in the late fifth century (e.g. there is a frequently misread mention of the rebellion of Inaros, and the presence of numerous slaves from Asia Minor is also noteworthy but hardly astonishing at that period147) they do not concern Arameans or Judeans, which is why we need not go into details. There are several funerary stelae inscribed in Aramaic and of clearly non-Egyptian workmanship. These objects have been mainly found in the area of Memphis/Saqqara in the north of the country. A rare example, remarkable in several respects, is a stela which is dated to the fourth regnal year of Xerxes (482 BCE)148 and testifies to the adoption of certain Egyptian religious beliefs by the Arameans,149 a feature shared with many other foreigners in Late Period Egypt. Curiously, the Semitic name of one of the owners, the lady ’ḥtbw Achatabu (“the father’s sister”),150 in the Graeco-Roman period became extremely frequent in the Fayyum, when it was borne by Egyptians of both sexes (%tbA/Σαταβους and similar). Presumably, the foreign origin of this name had soon been forgotten; there is even a god with this name, probably a deified ‘saint’.151 The clumsy shape of Osiris is noteworthy, and the retrograde(!) hieroglyphs naming the owner AXtAbw are misplaced between the figures of Isis and Nephthys. It is interesting that in addition to the simple adoption of Egyptian funerary practices and an awareness of the particular role of Osiris also certain ethical concepts connected with the afterlife were apparently influenced by Egyptian ideas. The best example is the so-called stela from Carpentras in southern France,152 where we read: „(1) Blessed is Taba, the daughter of Pahapi, the excellent one (tmnḥ’ = tA mnX.t) of Osiris the god. (2) She did not do anything wicked, never did she slander anybody. (3) Be blessed before Osiris, receive water before Osiris! (4) Follow the justified ones 145 Porten/Yardeni 1986, 102–129 (A6.3–16); Lindenberger 2003, 85–101 (nos. 37–47). 146 Naveh/Shaked 2012. 147 Porten/Yardeni 1986, 110–111 (A6.7); 126–127 (A6.15); Lindenberger 2003, 88–89 (no. 40); 98–99 (no. 47); Kottsieper 2006, 365; 367–368. 148 Berlin 7707 (lost due to war damage); Porten/Yardeni 1999, 254–255 (D20.3); Vittmann 2003, 107 Pl. 47; Donner/Röllig 2002, 65 (no. 267; corrected reading); Botta 2014, 374–375. 149 Cf. Donner 1969; see also Caramello 2015. 150 See Müller/Vittmann 1993, 7–8. 151 Cf. Schentuleit 2007, 102–103. Deified individuals in Ancient Egypt have been studied by Alexandra von Lieven in her still unpublished Habilitationsschrift. 152 Porten/Yardeni 1999, 254–255 (D20.5); Porten/Gee 2001, 295–301; Donner/Röllig 2002, 65 (no. 269); Morenz 2002; Vittmann 2003, 110 and 108, Fig. 48. Arameans in Egypt 255 (nmaty = nA mAatj.w) and [be] among the praised ones (ḥsyh = Hsy) [of Osiris]!“ Here, also some Egyptian technical terms were adopted such as tmnH “the adorer” (of a goddess), “the praised one (ḥsy) of Osiris”. This phenomenon is not unique with Aramaic inscriptions, we find it also in the inscription on the sarcophagus of the South Arabian incense trader Zaydil from Saqqara.153 The integration of the definite article (more examples below under “Egypto-Aramaic language contacts”) is an interesting but not unique linguistic feature when compared with the same phenomenon in Coptic and Spanish.154 Some other inscribed and decorated Egypto-Aramaic funerary stelae are preserved in the Vatican (Fig. 17b),155 in Brussels,156 and in Hamm.157 The Vatican stela belonged to cnḥḥpy Anchhapi (anX-Hp), the excellent one (mnḥh = mnX) of Osiris, son of Tḥbs Tachebes (va-Xbs). Both names are common with Egyptians, especially the first one, but they were also used by non-Egyptians.158 A Phoenician jar inscription from Elephantine nicely shows the difference with Aramaic renderings of the latter name: cnḥḥpy and similar in Aramaic but ckḥpy in Phoenician.159 The owner of the stela in Brussels was Tm’ daughter of Bkrnp Bakrenef (BAk-rn⸗f). The workmanship is rather crude, and the same holds true for the stela in Hamm which belonged to a man with the Egyptian name Ḥpymn Hapimen ("p-mn), son of ’ḥmnyš Achamanish (the name of the owner is frequently found in the area Memphis-Saqqara and also in a Carian inscription from there!160). There is also a fragment of a stela from Saqqara (Fig. 17c) with representations of wailing women such as are found on some stelae for other foreigners of the first millennium, and the inscription brk Pṭ’s[y] br Yh’[---] “Blessed is (be) Peteese son of Yeha[---]”.161 It is a pity that the father’s name is incompletely preserved, which makes it difficult to assess whether the first element is really yh (instead of yhw) “Yāhû” as envisaged by Aimé-Giron.162 A rare case for a 153 Vittmann 2003, 184–185. 154 In both languages with integration of the Arabic definite article al, e.g. (Late) Coptic almiret (Richter 2001, 88 (8)) “heritage” < al-mīrāt; Spanish ataúd “coffin” < at-tābūt. 155 Vatican 22787, Porten/Yardeni 1999, 257 (D20.6); Vittmann 2003, 109 Fig. 49 and Pl. 12. 156 Porten/Yardeni 1999, 252 (D20.2); Vittmann 2003, 106 and Pl. 11. 157 Hamm 5773, see Vittmann 2003, 111 with Fig. 51 and Pl. 13a (ed. princ.); Falck/Fluck 2004, 47–48 (14). 158 For Anchhapi see next note; for Tachebes ony may quote vXbt in Minaean inscriptions, see Müller/Vittmann 1993, 2–3. 159 Röllig 2013, 190 (no. 20) without explanation, but k as a Phoenician rendering of Egyptian X is normal, and the n preceding x could be omitted in the foreign renderings (Aram. cḥḥpy, Greek Αχοαπις). 160 See Vittmann 2002, 91. 161 Porten/Yardeni 1999, 254–255 (D20.4). 162 Aimé-Giron 1939, 42 fn. 3 compares yhw’wr/yhh’wr, cf. Porten/Lund 2002, 358 (“Yeho’ur”, attested several times at Elephantine). Yh as an element of theophoric names is otherwise only used at the end of names, but no other explanation lends itself. 256 Günter Vittmann man with Egyptian name and a Yahwist father’s name is Ḥwr br Nryh “Hor son of Neriah”.163 An iconographic curiosity is a stela that combines elements of funerary stelae (with the canopic jars under the bier, a common motive on stelae of foreigners in Egypt) and of donation stelae (Pharaoh making offerings to a god).164 This odd combination is sufficient proof that the stela was produced by foreigners for foreigners, i.e. the lady whose name has been added: Šmyty Smithis (^smt.t), a good Egyptian female name. With the exception of the stela of Achatabu and Hor, which has (non-bilingual!165) texts in hieroglyphs and in Aramaic, all the other five Egypto-Aramaic stelae are inscribed in Aramaic only. A more outward and rather superficial sign of influence of Egypt on Arameans is the occasional use of mummy-labels such as have been found in Saqqara, together with some ceramic sarcophagi, and exceptionally also in Elephantine.166 However, the adoption of religious customs and beliefs is clearly not restricted to death and funeral, we find it occasionally also in the world of the living. Whereas with regard to the Carpentras stela an overly sceptic student might argue that it is widely believed that life in the other world depends on behavior in life and consequently the contents of the inscription do not hint to a particular Egyptian influence, there are several documents that show beyond doubt that non-Egyptians relied on divine assistance and protection: we already had a look at Aramaic graffiti in Abydos with the typical formula “blessed be NN before Osiris” and other gods. In addition, we may mention the offering table (ḥtpy < Htp.t) dedicated by Abiṭab son of Banit to Osiris-Apis (Fig. 25).167 In the quarries of the Wadi Hammamat in the eastern desert, non-Egyptian expedition members also trusted on protection by Min.168 However, there is a conspicuous scarcity of votive offerings donated by Arameans to Egyptian gods: leaving aside the silver bowls from Tell el-Maskhuta,169 whose donors belonged to an Arab tribe, I only know 163 Porten/Yardeni 1993, 278 (C4.6), line 3. The reading Nryh (as against the alternative reading Pdyh) is corroborated by the attestation of a Natan son of Neriah and his brother Hor in Lozachmeur 2006, 417 (no. x4, convex, lines 5–6). 164 Porten/Yardeni 1999, 285 (D22.54); Vittmann 2003, 111–112 with Fig. 52 (location unknown). 165 The only common element of both texts is the name of the second owner; see above. 166 For the mummy labels – mostly ceramic – see Porten/Yardeni 1999, 238. 249–250 (D19.1–7), for the sarcophagi (equally ceramic) ibid. 238–246 (D18.1–14); Porten/Gee 2001, 270–273; Cotelle-Michel 2004, 274–275; Sabbahy 2013–2014. 167 Louvre AO 4824: Porten/Yardeni 1999, 252–253 (D20.1); Donner/Röllig 2002, 65 (no. 268). 168 Porten/Yardeni 1999, 278–279 (D22.28–32), with the formula brk NN lmn “blessed be NN by Min”. 169 Porten/Yardeni 1999, 231–233 (D15.1–4); Vittmann 2003, 181 and figs. 91a–c. Garbini 2006, 159 strangely considers these bowls to be modern forgeries. Arameans in Egypt 257 the offering table just mentioned (in comparison, pre-Hellenistic Greeks, Carians and Phoenicians left far more material). Figure 25: Offering table from Saqqara ( Louvre AO 4824; author's photograph). But let us go back to Saqqara. In 1994, a small funerary stela was discovered which differs in several respects from the other stelae. It was made for a Persian with the rare Egyptian name Ed-Hr-bs, son of a man with the Iranian name Artama and an Egyptian woman called vA-nfr-Hr.170 What makes this stela so unique is the confluence of several different cultural traditions: Egyptian, Egypto-Aramaic, Northern Aramaic/SyroHittite, Persian, and others. Some years later, in 2005, an undecorated Aramaic funerary stela was discovered at Saqqara South (Lozachmeur/Dobreff 2008). The inscription reads: “Blessed (brkh) be Ṣrwscm&n/k/Ø(?)\ before Osiris. May he give her calm(?) water to drink”. Because of the use of ayin, the name of the woman should preferably be Egyptian or Semitic, but I am unable to offer a reasonable suggestion. Unlike Elephantine, we have a few Demotic documents of presumably the Achaemenid period, with the mention of Semites. A small papyrus,171 dated by the editors “Uncertain, but probably the fifth through the first half of the third centuries BC”, contains the following oracular question: “My great lord (a deity is invoked, probably Osiris-Apis), o may he celebrate millions of sed-festivals. If Gyg, the Syrian (tA iSwr), the wife of Brq [goes (or the like)] 170 This stela (Cairo JE 98907) has been much discussed since it was first published by Mathieson et al. (1995); cf. recently Wasmuth 2005 (making a comparison with other stelae of foreigners in Late Period Egypt); Vittmann 2006b, 566–568; Miller 2011, 105–107. 171 Smith/Davies 2014, 281–283 (no. 9). 258 Günter Vittmann to the land of Syria (pA tA $r) in the first month of the inundation season (i.e. Thoth, the first month of the year), let this document be brought to me”. The name Gyg (with the determinative for foreign names) is difficult to analyze, an explanation on the basis of a Northwest Semitic language is not within eyeshot. The name of the husband, however, is clearly Semitic; the spelling with q is no obstacle against taking brq as a Demotic spelling for the root brk “to bless”, though a direct parallel for Brk as a complete personal name is not attested in Aramaic sources from Egypt.172 A recently published Demotic papyrus of the Ptolemaic period from the Fayyum mentions a Nbwbrq[s] Nabubarakos,173 the Greek rendering of the same name that is also known from an Aramaic fragment from Elephantine. Alternatively, one might relate Brq with Brq’ “Lightning”.174 The special interest of the oracle-question from Saqqara, however, undoubtedly rests in the fact that the practice of addressing an oracular question to a deity was also open to foreigners, and that the request could be written in Egyptian. A group of Demotic papyri from Saqqara175 complements the information that can be gained from the Aramaic papyri from the same area in terms of Persian military and administrative titles, terms of buildings(?) and prosopography, which shows the importance of taking sources in both languages into account: Military and administrative titles: Hrj H<p>vX, probably a partial translation of Old Persian *haftaxva-pātā (or similar) “lord of the haftaxva”, in Aramaic transliteration hptḥpt’, which denotes a special function of the rb ḥyl’ “garrison commander”.176 – pvprs *patifrāsa “investigator, interrogator”, Aramaic ptprs, ptyprs.177 A building or settlement: tA HmwDn (with house determinative) = tḥmwṣn; both the etymology and the specific meaning are unclear.178 Prosopography: As noted by the editors,179 it is highly probable that ArSm Arshama and Mspv Misapata, who appear in the document just quoted, are identical with the 172 The name could also be Phoenician, of course, see Benz 1972, 101. 173 Monson 2014, 84 (line 16 of the document) and 86 with reference to Porten/Yardeni 1999, 219 (D11.12) (Nbwbrk, son of Nbwšz[b]). 174 This proper name is attested in Lozachmeur 2006, 212–214 (no. 42), cc 4; see there the comment on p. 512; also Benz 1972, 292 and Hamilcar’s cognomen Barcas. 175 Smith/Martin 2009, passim. 176 Smith/Martin 2009, 49–50 (no. 11), line 1. Same title 60–61 (no. 17), line 2 (the editors’ reading Hrj ⌈…⌉ is to be corrected accordingly). 177 Smith/Martin 2009, 25 and 27 (no. 2), line 6. For the Aramaic evidence cf. Tavernier 2007, 428 (4.4.7.83). 178 Smith/Martin 2009, 31–39 (no. 4), col. II 2 and verso II 10. In the commentary on p. 35, reference is made to the Aramaic rendering in Segal 1983, 43–44 (no. 27), lines 1 and 4. There seem to be close relations between the two documents. Both texts mention judges and other officials of the Persian administration, and the unclear term is apparently a place (or an institution) in which something is written: in both documents, tA HmwDn/tḥmwṣn is probably connected with the verb “to write” (ktyb “was written”/sX(?)) and the preposition “in” (b/n). 179 Smith/Martin 2009, 39. See also Schmitt/Vittmann 2013, 70–71 (40). Arameans in Egypt 259 famous Satrap ’ršm and his official Mspt mentioned in the Driver letters (TAD A6.15). It will be easily seen, however, that these documents do not shed light on the relations between Egyptians and Arameans or other Semitic populations. At the end of this section, we have to mention a short Aramaic graffito in the Wadi Sura in the area of Gilf el-Kebir (utmost southwest of Egypt) which has been read Kbwd’ and dated to the end of the 6th or beginning of the 5th century BCE.180 Egyptian-Aramaic Language Contacts I already mentioned the occasional borrowing of Egyptian words into Aramaic such as ḥtpy “offering table” (cf. Fig. 25) or the unclear noun bynbn from the Hermopolis papyri, and expressions from the sphere of religion and funerals like nmcty, tmnḥ, ḥsy. Other expressions are tgm “castor” (dgm); tḥyt “court” (tA Xyt). Terms such as qnḥnty “shrine of (the) god” (*qnH-nTr),181 tm’nwty “city(?) of (the) god” (*dmj(?) nTr), tšṭrs “the southern district, Teshtores” (tA StA rsj) or the title psḥmṣnwty “the scribe of the divine book” (pA sX mDA.t-nTr) and, hitherto not recognized, psḥḥnty “the templescribe” (pA sX H.t-nTr)182 are good evidence for language contact. However, they can hardly be considered as loan-words but rather as proper names, more or less on the same level as personal names. Compared with loans from Old Iranian, the number of real loan-words from Egyptian is rather small. In their Grammar of “Egyptian Aramaic”,183 Muraoka and Porten184 list 46 words (the Egyptian month names, which had been adopted by Arameans and Judeans in Egypt,185 not being included), 47 words from Akkadian and 72 from Old Persian.186 Out of the 46 words, no less than eight 180 Lemaire 2007, 213. 181 Although the etymology is beyond doubt, no Egyptian evidence is available. 182 The reading is certain. Lozachmeur 2006, 230 (62 cv, 4) translates „mon cadeau de pâque/ pascal?“, see also Lemaire 2011, 370. Although the context is very poorly preserved, the analysis of this word as given above cannot be doubtful. 183 This term is used for convenience although it is a misnomer “because it does not refer to any clearly-defined linguistic category” (Gzella 2015, 160). 184 Muraoka/Porten 2003, 351–354. The first edition (Muraoka/Porten 1998, 370–377) had registered 37 words from Egyptian, 37 from Akkadian and 72 from Old Persian. See also Muchiki 1999, 156–158 (“Divine Names”); 159–164 (“Geographical Names”); 165–176 (“Loan Words”); 176–178 (“Month Names”). 185 Double dating with Babylonian and Egyptian month names is frequent. When only one dating system is used, it is mostly the Egyptian one, cf. for both systems many examples in Porten/Yardeni 1989, passim. In the Bagoas letters, only the Babylonian month names are used. 186 For Lepper 2015, 266–267 this and Iranian theophoric names are signs for Persian influence on life in Egypt, which, she believes, is stronger than admitted by the present writer and others. Such phenomena, however, may show some Iranian impact on non-Egyptians in Elephantine (and elsewhere) but not, of course, on Egyptian life proper. The common view of a minimal influence of Persia on Egyptian civilization is based on sufficient evidence and hardly needs 260 Günter Vittmann are nautical terms that are attested only in the so-called boat repair papyrus.187 In the field of documentary and juridical texts, it is noteworthy that, as convincingly demonstrated by Alejandro Botta188 and Alexander Schütze,189 several terms and legal phrases have been translated from Demotic into Aramaic. Porten’s question “Who is the borrower and who the lender?”190 can now be answered: Egypt was the giving part. Phonetic renderings of Egyptian technical terms, however, are rare. A good example is interestingly found in the earliest dated document, the papyrus Bauer-Meissner from Middle Egypt (Korobis): it is the term šwnby (Demotic Sw nby “emptiness on account of damage”), which is attested in land leases191 and refers to the bad state of the field. Concerning Aramaic translations of certain Egyptian expressions (‘calques’), the term bb’ ym’ “the gates of the sea”192 deserves particular mention as it is obviously an almost literal translation of aAwj wAD-wr “the doorwings of the sea”, which refers to the harbour of Thonis in the Nile delta. A fine example for Egypto-Aramaic language contact was identified by Richard Hughes, who showed that a Demotic administrative letter from the reign of Darius I was translated from Aramaic.193 Speakers and/or writers of Aramaic apparently found some interest in Egyptian literature:194 The dipinti in a tomb at Sheikh Fadl195 in Middle Egypt contain a difficult and badly damaged text which clearly belongs to the so-called Cycle of Inaros – Petubastis, figures of Egyptian history of the Third Intermediate Period that were the subject of many tales and stories written down much later in the Graeco-Roman Period.196 The dipinti at Sheikh Fadl, from presumably the fifth century, are by far the earliest preserved example. thorough revision. 187 An authorization by the satrap Arshama to repair a large ceremonial boat, see Porten/Yardeni 1986, 96–101 (A6.2); Lindenberger 2003, 101–105 (no. 49); Porten 2011, 116–123 (B11). 188 Botta 2009; Botta 2013a. 189 Schütze 2011. 190 Porten 1992. 191 First recognized by Quack 1992 (for the whole document see above fn. 15; for the meaning of Sw nby see Felber 1997, 140–141). – Whether ’qns in the same document is really a transliteration of demotic n (qns =) gns (Muraoka/Porten 2003, 353 and already Grelot 1972, 73 (i); for this and other possibilities see Hoftijzer/Jongeling 1995, 1017–1018) is uncertain. 192 Segal 1983, 41–43 (text 26, not included in TAD), line 13. For the interpretation of this important document and the term bby ym’ see Briant/Descat 1998, 93–94. 193 Hughes 1984. See also Schwiderski 2000, 191 fn. 453; Schütze 2009, 383 (in the transcribed and translated passage read “Gemneit” instead of “Gemeint”). For a fresh commented translation of that document see Martin 2011, 291–292 (C2). 194 For this subject, cf. most recently Quack 2011b. 195 Porten/Yardeni 1999, 287–298 (D23.1); for the interpretation see Holm 2007 (contrary to what is suggested there on p. 201 fn. 37, the connection with the Inaros tales was independently recognized both by Vittmann 2003, 104 and Ryholt 2004, 496). 196 For these stories, cf. Quack 2009, 50–70 (with mention of the Aramaic text on p. 50); for fresh translations of the three best-known stories, see Agut-Labordère/Chauveau 2011, 67–143. For Arameans in Egypt 261 The other document that shows a strong impact of Egyptian literature on Aramaic is a very fragmentary papyrus which was said to come from Saqqara. It had originally been acquired in 1825/26 from an antiquities dealer and thus belongs to the earliest finds of Aramaic papyri. Porten,197 who recently reedited and studied the papyrus in detail, found that it contained two different tales, one on the recto and the other on the verso. On the recto are the remains of a story about a magician Hor son of Punesh and his encounter with the (anonymous) King. Apart from the phrase “your bones shall not go down to Sheol” with, according to Porten, the only West Semitic example for Sheol “contemporary with the Bible”,198 the person of the magician and the Egyptian loan tshr’ (= tA shr.t) zy mlk’ “the boat of the King” deserve attention. The latter term is found in a well-known Demotic tale (Setna 1, III 23 and passim),199 and Ḥwr br Pwnš, i.e. Hor son of Pwonesh ("r sA PA-wnS), as a “magician of Pharaoh”, is the hero of a fragmentary Demotic tale to be published by Karl-Theodor Zauzich.200 Hor was still known at a much later date: it has been noticed that under a slightly distorted name (Hor son of Paneshe, "r sA PA-nSê) he reappears in the famous second tale of Setne, where once again he is represented as an excellent magician. The verso of the papyrus, perhaps not by mere coincidence, contains an apocalyptical text which Porten neutrally calls “The demise of righteousness”.201 This literary composition, too, does not lack general parallels in Egyptian literature, but too little is preserved to make sure that Aramaic is really the recipient. The famous Words of Ahiqar, the earliest preserved version of which was discovered in Elephantine,202 probably originated in Northern Syria. The embedding of the proverbs in a frame story recalls the Demotic instructions of Anchsheshonqi, but this similarity is too general and unspecific to assume a true case of mutual influence.203 It is well possible, however, that there is some Egyptian and Aramaic interaction regarding the proverbs.204 Some very short and meager fragments of a Demotic version can be dated to the Roman period.205 There are some rare examples of Aramaic written in demotic script and Egyptian language written in Aramaic. The most famous example for the former is of course the “Struggle for the Prebend of Amun” there is now a fresh translation by Stadler 2015. Porten 2004. Porten 2004, 439. Latest translation of the two Setne stories: Vittmann 2015, 386–418. Zauzich 1978, 36; Ryholt 2012, 14. Porten 2004, 445–455; 462–466. Porten/Yardeni 1993, 23–53 (C2.1); Niehr 2007; Weigl 2010; see also T. Oshima in this volume. 203 Cf. for this issue (convincingly in my opinion) Quack 2011b, 384–385. 204 Cf. Quack 2002, 339–340. See also Görg 2002, who for the noun ḥnt in the proverbs (according to the context “servant-woman” or the like, in parallel with clym “servant”) proposes a somewhat forced but perhaps not altogether impossible Egyptian etymology (*Hnwt.t). 205 Quack 2011b, 376–378 (with translations). 197 198 199 200 201 202 262 Günter Vittmann the lengthy papyrus Amherst 63 in Demotic script and Aramaic language which has now been known for seventy years but still awaits full publication:206 Concerning the work on this document, Richard Steiner said that the “decipherment of the text has been a long and painful process of trial and error, which began in the early decades of this century and will no doubt continue well into the next millennium”.207 Regarding contents, the texts of what Bob Becking called “eine Art religiöser Bibliothek einer multikulturellen westsemitischen Gruppe in Ägypten”208 stand in the Near Eastern tradition, and apart from questions that are connected with the writing system there is hardly anything on which the Egyptologist could give a competent statement. For palaeographic reasons I would agree to a date somewhere in the second half of the fourth century. Steiner209 now proposes a compromise: “This largely poetic text is the liturgy of the New Year’s festival of an Aramaic-speaking community in Upper Egypt, perhaps in Syene. It seems to have been dictated by a priest of the community, possibly at the beginning of the third century BCE, to an Egyptian scribe trained in the fourth century BCE.” The writing system is characterized by the use of “alphabetic signs” on one hand and some complex spellings such as mn on the other one; there is also a word divider, the “man with hand to mouth determinative”. Some groups have been much discussed: for the god’s name (written , and similar) the readings Horus,210 Yāhû211 and El have been proposed. The first of these suggestions must be strictly excluded, and El is written differently in other places of the document. Thus we are left with the identification of Yāhû/YHWH as first proposed by Zauzich.212 The only other text in Demotic script that possibly contains Aramaic elements is an apparently early Demotic magical spell against stings of scorpions in the quarries of the Wadi Hammamat in the Eastern desert.213 Both the heading and the instructions about what the victim of the sting has to do are given in normal Demotic, but the spell is clearly non-Egyptian and maybe indeed more than simple magical gibberish. Interestingly, the document uses the same type of word-dividers as papyrus Amherst 63. The introduction of the charm kpbw kpbar kpatrm is explained by R. Steiner as “Hand 206 The only attempt at a complete translation is Steiner 1997; Steiner/Nims 2017. For a discussion of several problems see Rösel 2000 and references there quoted. A critical edition is being prepared by Tawny Holm (https://cams.la.psu.edu/directory/tawny-holm/MyCV, accessed July 23, 2016). 207 Steiner 1997, 309. 208 Becking 2003, 223. 209 Steiner 1997, 310. 210 Steiner 1997, 314; 318; 321; 322; followed by Botta 2014, 377. 211 Zauzich 1985. 212 Zauzich 1985; slightly modified by Rösel 2000. 213 Vittmann 1984; 2003, 118 Fig. 57. A translation perhaps too confidently based on the analysis of Steiner (2001) is offered by Fischer-Elfert (2005, 65 and 143–144) (33). For a short and general overview on spells against snakes and scorpions in Ancient Egypt see Maaßen 2015. Arameans in Egypt 263 of my father, hand of Baal, hand of Attar, my mother”, a keen proposal which is as difficult to prove as it is to disprove. For an interpretation on the basis of Aramaic, however problematic and uncertain in detail, one may refer to the existence of several Aramaic graffiti from the Achaemenid Period in the same area such as an abecedary and an inscription dated to year 29 of Darius (493 BCE).214 The greywacke quarries were much exploited throughout Egyptian history, and as we know from several hieroglyphic graffiti, not least in the Persian Period.215 Without known parallel is a small leather fragment in Berlin with text in Aramaic script but in a non-Semitic language. In the editio princeps in 1999,216 the language was said to be unknown, and the few names of gods that could be recognized at that time – Amun, Satis, Osiris and Nabu(?)217 – are of little help in identifying the language in which the document was written. There are, however, some elements that are linguistically clearly Egyptian (Hr tnw r.r⸗j “be careful of me”; r ir an wSb “in order to revenge”; probably also nTr.wiw⸗tn dj “gods, while you are here”, possibly oby Ro “chapel of Re”), so the text is perhaps some kind of invocation. The mention of Osiris Espmet in line 5 is very interesting as this is the earliest example of the divinization of an individual (Ns-pA-mtr in Demotic) which is otherwise known only from a much later period.218 It is a pity that the text is so short and so badly preserved, which makes progress problematic and difficult. Proper Names Aramaic texts from Egypt are a prolific source for those interested in onomastics and, as is to be expected, they contain many linguistically Egyptian names, some of them not directly known from Egyptian sources.219 For a more profound study of the relations between Egyptians and Arameans and other Semites, it would be necessary to distinguish between full-fledged Egyptians on one hand and Arameans and Judeans with Egyptian names on the other one, which unfortunately is frequently impossible. As a rule, we are entitled to assume that an individual born in a traditional Egyptian 214 Porten/Yardeni 1999, 278–279 (D22.28–35). This fact was already pointed out by Steiner 2001, 267; see also Vittmann 2003, 119. 215 See the overview by Vittmann (2011, 417–418, table 3). 216 Porten/Yardeni 1999, 137 (D6.2). Photograph and discussion Vittmann 2003, 117 Fig. 56; 118–119. For some further comments, see Quack 2004, 361. 217 As a part of the group nbwtqt. TAD cautiously gives the waw as uncertain. Nabu (Porten/Lund 2002, 427) had a temple at Syene (Porten 1968, 165–166; Porten 1969, 119) and often appears in personal names (Porten/Lund 2002, 377–379). 218 Cf. Hoffmann 2009. 219 For Egyptian names in Aramaic texts see Vittmann 2002 and Porten 2002 (with translations). See also Muchiki 1999, 63–156 (to be used with caution; cf. additions and corrections by Porten 2002, 309–310. 264 Günter Vittmann milieu, from a “genuine” Egyptian family, would not have had a Northwest Semitic (nor an Iranian, or whatever) name, at least in the pre-Ptolemaic Period (with Ptolemaic Egypt the case was different, but this need not bother us here). The only apparent case for an Egyptian with an additional foreign name in pre-Hellenistic first millennium is the architect Esḥōr son of Djeḥo, whom we have already mentioned before. The other way, i.e. a non-Egyptian being given by his parents, or adopting on his own, an Egyptian name, was not uncommon and testifies to some degree of cultural adaptation as we have seen in the case of funerary stelae etc., the exact extent of adaptation being usually difficult to assess. In Late Period Egypt, there are several patterns of name-giving in families of nonEgyptian descent which may show different degrees of cultural adaptation.220 A): father with foreign name, mother with Egyptian name, son/daughter with Egyptian name. B): both parents with foreign name, son/daughter with Egyptian name. C): parents and son/daughter all have Egyptian names. D): all have foreign names. A combination of type B and D results if the son has a double name (i.e. a foreign and an Egyptian name). A fifth pattern is easily ignored as it does not seem to fit into the scheme of gradual cultural assimilation within a family: E): Father with Egyptian name, son with foreign name. In applying these patterns to the Aramaic sources, we are faced with the fact that the names of women, and consequently also the mothers, are rarely mentioned. Another problem is constituted by the circumstance that it is only in a few cases that we can pursue name-giving over more than two generations. ad A/B: There are enough examples, of course, for sons with Egyptian and fathers with Aramaic names, but as far as I can see there is not even one case that would make clear whether case A or B was pertinent. I restrict myself to a selection: ’sḥwr (Ns-Hr) son of crwd (D22.29, Wadi Hammamat; see above and fn. 214) Ḥrwṣ ("r-wDA) son of Byt’lšzb (A2.5:5–6, Hermopolis) Ḥrwṣ ("r-wDA) son of Plṭw (B2.7:15; see above and fn. 80–81) Pṭ’sy (PA-dj-As.t) son of Ntyn (C4.8:2 [p. 280], Elephantine) P⌈ny⌉t (Pa-n.t) son of Nbwyhb and father of Psmšk (C4.9:2 [p. 281]) 220 The patterns A–D are discussed in Vittmann (2003, 239–241) by means of various sources for foreigners in Late Period Egypt. Several detailed lists are to be found in Porten 2002, 297–327. Arameans in Egypt 265 Psmy (abbreviation of PsmTk) son of Nbwntn (and father of Mkbnt) (A2.3:14; A2.2:18) (Hermopolis) In the corpus there are four individuals with an Egyptian name and a ‘Jewish’ father’s name: ’swry (As.t-wr.t) daughter of Gmryh and sister of Mpṭḥyh (B5.5:2; see above with fn. 9; below with fn. 229, and Fig. 21) Ḥwr (Or) son of Nryh and brother of Ntn (C4.6:3; see above and fn. 163) Pṭ’s[y] (PA-dj-As.t) son of Yh’[---] (D20.4; see above with fn. 161 and Fig. 16c) Ttw (vwtw) son of Ḥgy (Lozachmeur 2006, 401, no. 266, cv 4) ad C): Given the predilection of the Arameans in Egypt for Egyptian names, this scheme makes it sometimes difficult for us to distinguish ‘real’ Egyptians from nonEgyptians.221 Concerning the owners of the above-mentioned Egypto-Aramaic funerary stelae, the situation is reasonably clear: had Anchhapi son of Tachebes, the owner of the Vatican stela, been Egyptian, he would have had his stela made by Egyptian craftsmen and inscribed in Egyptian language, not in Aramaic. The explicit designation of Pachons son of Besa as “Aramean” and a member of a degel (see above) does not leave any doubt that he was not Egyptian. On the other hand, the four abovementioned owners of three houses in Elephantine, i.e. the boatmen Espmēt, Pḥy and his brother Pamēt, and the gardener of the god Chnum Hor, are generally assumed to have been Egyptians. Other cases of this model that certainly refer to Arameans (or more cautiously, non-Egyptian speakers of Aramaic): Pṭ’sy (PA-dj-As.t) son of Ḥrwṣ ("r-wDA) (C3.14:5 [p. 222; 225], in a list concerning the disbursement of barley to the garrison of Syene, dated to 400). Pṭn’sy (PA-dj-n⸗j-As.t) son of Pṭsry (PA-dj-wsir) (D22.20, graffito in Abydos) Psmšk (PsmTk) son of P⌈ny⌉t (Pa-n.t) son of Nbwyhb (C4.9:2 [p. 281]). The name of the grandfather (Nabuyehab “Nabu has given”) makes it fairly sure that we deal with a family of non-Egyptian origin. All other names of that document – a list of names – are purely Egyptian, and it is impossible to decide who of them was a “fullfledged” Egyptian and who was not. The case of Pṭy (PA-dj) son of Wḥprc (WAH-ib-ro) and T&ḥ\n’ (vA-Hn⸗w) in line 1 (with unusual mention of the mother’s name) might point to an advanced stage of cultural assimilation of non-Egyptians but this is equally uncertain. ad D): The most common model, which does not need any references. 221 Porten 1992, 302–307 presents various extensive lists of “true Egyptians”. 266 Günter Vittmann ad E): This model, which is easily overlooked as it does not fit into the Egyptologist’s preconceived concept of cultural assimilation, is very frequent in the Aramaic texts. No less than seven examples are found in the Hermopolis letters: ’šh son of Pṭḥnb (PA-dj-Xnm) (A2.1:11–12) Bntsr son of Tby (Ta-by) sister of Nbwšh (A2.2:5) Mkbnt son of Psmy (abbreviation of PsmTk), grandson of Nbwntn (A2.2:18) Nbwšzb/Nbwšh son of Pṭḥnm (PA-dj-Xnm) (A2.1:15; A2.5:10) c dr son of Psy (Pa-sy) (A2.1:11) c qbh son of Wḥprc (WAH-ib-ra) (A2.4:6) Š’l son of Pṭḥrṭys (PtH-ir-dj-s) (A2.1:11). Other examples: Byt’lšzb son of Wḥprc (WAH-ib-ra) (D9.10:7, Elephantine) Ḥrmntn son of Pṭsy (PA-dj-As.t) (D18.6, sarcophagus from Saqqara) Mptḥ daughter of Ṭsty (ej-sTj.t) (C3.15:86 [p. 232]) Nbwdlh son of Spmt (Ns-pA-mtr) (D9.10:5, Elephantine) Nbwntn son of ’sḥwr (Ns-Hr) (D22.30, graffito in the Wadi Hammamamat) Tm’ daughter of Bkrnp (BAk-rn⸗f) (D20.2, see above and fn. 156) Interestingly, persons with ‘Jewish’ names and a linguistically Egyptian father’s or mother’s name are less rare than would be expected (all examples are from Elephantine):222 ’wšc son of Pṭ[…] (PA-dj-[…]) (A3.3:14) Šryh daughter of Hwšc son of Ḥrmn ("r-mn) (C3.15:4 [p. 226; 228], Elephantine, collection account). Hwšc son of Pṭḥnwm (PA-dj-Xnm) (B2.2:17; to be identified with ’wšc son of Pṭ[…]?)223 Ḥnn son of Pḥnm (Pa-Xnm) (C4.6:5 [p. 278]) 222 Cf. Porten 1968, 148–149 fn. 132 (list of individuals with Hebrew names and non-Hebrew father’s names). 223 Cf. Porten/Lund 2002, 341. Arameans in Egypt 267 Ygdl son of Psmy (< PsmTk) (Lozachmeur 2006, 296, no. 143, cc 1; Röllig 2013, 193, no. 32:3) Ydnyh son of Pḥnm (Pa-Xnm) (Lozachmeur 2006, 254, no. 96:4) Ydnyh son of Tḥw’ (Ta-Hr) (B3.9:3)224 Yhwyšmc daughter of cnny/cnnyh and Tmt (Ta-mtr) (Fig. 22) Mḥsyh and Ydnyh, sons of ’sḥwr (Ns-Hr) alias Ntn (Fig. 21a) Mlkyh son of Nprprc (Nfr-ib-ra) Lozachmeur 2006, no. 215, cv 2 (see excursus below) c nnyh son of Psmšk (PsmTk) (D9.10:8) For the sake of comparison, we may mention a Phoenician votive statuette of Harpokrates from Egypt with a lengthy genealogy. The ancestors have Egyptian names in three generations, whereas the next three generations, including the donor, bear Phoenician names: the donor is cbd’šmn son of cštrtytn son of Mgn son of Ḥnts (Eg. @nvs “Lizard”)225 son of Pṭbnṭṭ (Eg. PA-dj-bA-nb-Dd.t “He whom the Ram of Mendes has given”) son of Pšmḥy (Eg. PA-Sr-mHy(.t) “The son of (the goddess) Mehit”).226 It would be interesting to know whether name-giving for the new-born child in general was mostly the matter of the father or whether it was more or less well-balanced: sometimes the father, sometimes the mother. For ancient Egypt, there are texts of the Late Period that underline the important role of the mother in name-giving (“the name which was given to you by your mother”),227 and the same has recently been shown for the Old Testament.228 Thus, returning to Mibṭaḥiah’s second husband Esḥōr son of Ṣeḥa called Natan, the Semitic name for his two children might have been given by his Judean wife. In cases in which a man with a Semitic name had a child with an Egyptian name, this may sometimes have been a consequence of mixed marriages. Unfortunately, with the available material this possibility is hard to verify as the mother’s name is rarely given. A niece of Mibṭaḥiah bore the common Egyptian name Eswēre,229 which stands in contrast with the fact that Eswēre’s father Gemariah and 224 This Yedaniah was a slave (clym), which is the reason why he was identified by the mother’s name (Porten 2011, 234 fn. 9; 201 fn. 14). 225 For this name see Lüddeckens et al. 1980–2000, 786 and probably one more example in Smith/Martin 2009, 53 (no. 13), line 2. 226 Donner/Röllig 2002, 14 (no. 52) (with obsolete incorrect renderings of the Egyptian names; to be corrected in accordance with Teixidor 1986, 213 (124) and Vittmann 1989, 91 and 94). See also Winnicki 2009, 282 (with old reading Pšm[…]y). 227 Posener 1970 (also discussing the expression rn=f n mw.t=f “his name from his mother”); Martin 2011, 340. 228 Bridge 2014. 229 Porten/Yardeni 1989, 126–127 (B5.5:2); Porten 2011, 258–260 (B49). The designation of Eswēre as ’ḥth “her sister” (i.e. of Mipṭaḥiah [sic], the homonymous niece of the famous 268 Günter Vittmann her three known brothers and sisters – one of them being the famous Yedaniah, the leader of the Judean community – all had Hebrew names.230 The name of Gemariah’s wife is unknown, so we can only speculate if Eswēre possibly owed her name to an Egyptian marriage of her father. At any rate, however, mixed marriages did not imply that names were necessarily determined by the ethnicity of the wife: Tamēt’s children had the Semitic names Yehoyishmac (from cAnani) and Pilṭi (from a previous marriage to an unknown husband; see Fig. 23). Excursus: Remarks on Egyptian Names in the Clermont-Ganneau Ostraca Most of the Egyptian proper names registered by Lozachmeur231 are already wellknown. There are, however, some new names which look Egyptian but are not yet contained in the list compiled by Porten (2002, 311–327). The discussed names are arranged according to the readings by the editor. – ’rp’nḥr “’Arapanaḥor, Ûrpanaḥor” p. 390, no. 254, cv 1: In light of Late Period names of the type “ʾI.ir⸗f-aA/aw-n-deity” “He will grow for god X”232 it is tempting to take as a rendering of *ʾI.ir⸗f-aA-n-Hr “Irefaaenhor”. Admittedly, the spelling of the element aA/aw with aleph instead of ayin is awkward, and according to the editor “Horus” is usually written ḥwr at Elephantine. Both counterarguments, however, are not cogent: Egyptian iaH “moon” is always represented by Aramaic ’ḥ,233 and there is even one case for omission of ayin in Wḥprmnyt = WAH-ib-ra-mr-nt.234 As to ḥr instead of ḥwr, there were no firm rules for the use of matres lectionis when transliterating foreign names: The author herself discusses two examples for ’sḥr and ’sḥnm (instead of ’sḥr and ’sḥnwm) in her material.235 A problem, however, would be the rendering of i.ir⸗f by ’rp, i.e. with preservation of the [r], where I would rather expect *’p (> Coptic ϵϥ⸗). 230 231 232 233 234 235 Mibṭaḥiah) has erroneously been skipped in the quoted translations, although it is extant in the facsimile and in the text reproduction of the former publication. For Eswēre’s designation yhwdyh(?) see above, fn. 9. See the genealogical table in Porten 2011, 176. Where Lozachmeur’s translations of Egyptian names differ from those in Porten 2002, the latter should be followed. Ranke 1935, 40:8–10.13; Lüddeckens et. al. 1980–2000, 69; Jansen-Winkeln 2014, 1206. The first | is often omitted in writing. See Porten 2002, 311; 315 (Nḥms’ḥ); 317 (Pṭ’ḥ). Porten 2002, 312 bottom. Lozachmeur 2009, 494. Arameans in Egypt 269 – Wnḥnsrṭ[…] “?” p. 284, no. 130, cc 2: Although I do not know what to do with the first three signs of what is preserved from this line ( ),236 Lozachmeur’s reading ḥnsrṭ for the following signs is certain. This leads inevitably to a reconstruction Ḥnsrṭ[ys] Ḫnsw-ir-dj-s237 “Chons is he who gave him”, a frequent Late Period name, whose Aramaic rendering is found here for the first time. – Nwrprc “Nûrparâ (?)” p. 361–362, no. 215, cv 2, and p. 513: The editor quotes the earlier reading nprpd/ḥ by Dupont-Sommer. If we concede that the slight differ- ence in length between the second and the fourth letter of is not necessarily decisive, we may well read nprpr&c\, which unlike nwrprc makes very good sense as a rendering of the current Egyptian name Nfr-ib-ra “Neferibre” (Grecized Νεφερπρης).238 In Aramaic, this was so far unattested, but compare the similar formation Wḥprc WAH-ib-rc.239 Nprprc is the father of a man with the Hebrew name Mlkyh; see for similar cases above. – Pṭmnpy “Paṭamnapi”(!) p. 441, no. J1, cc 1, and p. 500: The identification with PA-dj-imn-ipy240 (reconstructed pronunciation Petamenōfi) is correct, but the author’s alternative analysis of the theophoric element mn as Min is erroneous. – Qrṭys “Qe/arṭaïs ?” p. 397, no. 262, cv 1, and p. 503: If this group is preceded, as proposed by the editor, by a beth (according to Pls. 262–263 the sign is rather damaged), the name must be reconstructed as [S]&b\qrṭys *cbk-ir-dj-s “Sobekirdis”.241 The rendering of “Sobek” with a final qoph is also attested in two documents from Elephantine and Saqqara which mention the name Pṭysbq PA-dj-sbk.242 – Tṭpskmḥ p. 291, no 138, cc 1, and p. 505 with a very fanciful Egyptian explanation “v# - tj - p. # - sk - m Hj” (sic) “Celle qui ha donnée … d’en haut”. The name (written ) is to be analyzed as *TA-dj-pA-sgmH “She whom the (holy) spear has given”. The sgmH -spear is a cult object and attribute of Horus of Edfu, who can himself be called pA sgmH “the spear”.243 The particular interest of the Aramaic attestation from the Achaemenid period lies not at least in the fact that it antedates the Egyptian evidence from Ptolemaic Edfu. 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 Lozachmeur 2006, 284 fn. 255: “Nom composé égyptien?”. Ranke 1935, 270:21–22; Lüddeckens et. al. 1980–2000, 877. Ranke 1935, 194:13; Lüddeckens et. al. 1980–2000, 617. Several examples above; see Porten 2002, 313 and Lozachmeur 2006, 495. Cf. Lüddeckens et al. 1980–2000, 282–283. This is an addendum onomasticis. Cf. Porten 2002, 318; Porten/Yardeni 1993, 207 (Elephantine); 239:12 (Saqqara). Erman/Grapow 1926–1963, IV, 321:11; Wilson 1997, 943–944; Leitz 2002, 676–677. 270 Günter Vittmann Bibliography Abd er-Raziq, M. 1979: Die altägyptischen Weingärten (k#nw/k#mw) bis zum Ende des Neuen Reiches, Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Abteilung Kairo 35, 227– 247. Agut-Labordère, D. 2012: Plus que des mercenaires! L’intégration des hommes de guerre grecs au service de la monarchie saïte, Pallas 89, 293–306. —./Chauveau, M. 2011: Héros, magiciens et sages oubliés de l’Égypte ancienne: Une anthologie de la littérature en écriture démotique, Paris. Aimé Giron, N. 1931: Textes araméens d’Égypte, Le Caire. —. 1939: Adversaria Semitica, Bulletin de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale 38, 1– 63. Albertz, R./Schmitt, R. 2012: Family and Household Religion in Ancient Israel and the Levant, Winona Lake. Azzoni, A. 2000: Un giuramento ebraico ad Elefantina d’Egitto, Acme 53, 265–271. —. 2012: Women of Elephantine and Women in the Land of Israel, in: Botta 2013b, 3–12. Bakir, A. M. 1952: Slavery in Pharaonic Egypt (Supplément aux Annales du Service des Antiquités de l’Égypte 18), Le Caire. Becking, B. 2003: Die Gottheiten der Juden in Elephantine, in: M. Oeming/K. Schmid (eds.), Der eine Gott und die Götter: Polytheismus und Monotheismus im antiken Israel (AThANT 82), Zürich, 203–226. — . 2008: Sabbath at Elephantine: A Short Episode in the Construction of Jewish Identity, in: A. Houtman et al. (eds.), Empsychoi Logoi: Religious Innovations in Antiquity, Studies in Honour of Pieter Willem van der Horst (Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity 73), Leiden/Boston, 177–189. — . 2011: Yehudite Identity in Elephantine, in: Lipschits et al. 2011, 403–419. Benz, F. L. 1972: Personal Names in the Phoenician and Punic Inscriptions (Studia Pohl 8), Rome. Beyer, K. 2013: Der Wandel des Aramäischen veranschaulicht durch Transkriptionen alter aramäischer Texte, in: Botta 2013b, 13–28. Botta, A. F. 2009: The Aramaic and Egyptian Legal Traditions at Elephantine: an Egyptological Approach, London/New York. — . 2011: Aspectos de la vida cotidiana en la colonia judía de Elefantina, Antiguo Oriente 9, 63–84. — . 2013a: Three Additional Aramaic-Egyptian Parallel Legal Terms/Formulae, in: Botta 2013b, 29–37. — . 2013b (ed.): In the Shadow of Bezalel. Aramaic, Biblical, and Near Eastern Studies in Honor of Bezalel Porten (Culture and History of the Ancient Near East 60), Leiden. — . 2014: Egypt, in: H. Niehr (ed.), The Aramaeans in Ancient Syria (HdO section 1, vol. 106), Leiden/Boston, 366–377. Bresciani, E. 1967: Una statuetta della XXVI dinastia con il cosiddetto “abito persiano”, Studi Classici e Orientali 16, 273–280. Arameans in Egypt 271 — ./Kamil, M. 1966: Le lettere aramaiche di Hermopoli, in: Atti della Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, anno 363, serie ottava, Memorie Classe di Scienze morali, storiche e filologiche 12 (1965–1966), 361–428. Briant, P. 1996: Une curieuse affaire à Éléphantine en 410 av. n.è.: Widranga, le sanctuaire de Khnûm et le temple de Yahweh, Méditerranées 6/7, 115–135. — ./Descat, R. 1998: Un registre douanier de la satrapie d’Égypte à l’époque achéménide, in: N. Grimal/B. Menu (eds.), Le commerce en Égypte ancienne (Bibliothèque d’Étude 121), Le Caire, 59–104. Bridge, E. J. 2014: A Mother’s Influence: Mothers Naming Children in the Hebrew Bible, VT 64, 389–400. Brodersen, K. 2008: Aristeas: Der König und die Bibel, Griechisch/Deutsch (Reclams Universal-Bibliothek 18576), Stuttgart. Caramello, S. 2015: Aramaic Speaking People in Egypt: Religion and Ethnicity, in: P. Kousoulis/N. Lazaridis (eds,), Proceedings of the Tenth International Congress of Egyptologists University of the Aegean, Rhodes 22-29 May 2008 (OLA 241), Leuven/Paris/Bristol, 605– 614. Clarysse, W./Thompson, D. J. 2006: Counting the People in Hellenistic Egypt, Cambridge. Collier, M./Quirke, S. 2004: The UCL Lahun Papyri: Religious, Literary, Legal, Mathematical and Medical (BAR International Series 1209), Oxford. Cotelle-Michel, M. 2004: Les sarcophages en terre cuite en Égypte et en Nubie de l’époque prédynastique à l’époque romaine, Dijon. Cowley, A. 1923: Aramaic Papyri of the Fifth Century B.C., Oxford. Demarée, R./Valbelle, D. 2011: Les registres du recensement du village de Deir el-Médineh (Le « Stato Civile »), Leuven/Paris/Walpole, MA. Depauw, M. 2006: The Demotic Letter: A Study of Epistolographic Scribal Traditions Against Their Intra- and Intracultural Background (Demotische Studien 14), Sommerhausen. Dion, P.-E. 2002: La religion des papyrus d’Éléphantine: un reflet du Juda d’avant l’exil, in: U. Hübner/E. A. Knauf (eds.), Kein Land für sich allein: Studien zum Kulturkontakt in Kanaan, Israel/Palästina und Ebirnâri für Manfred Weippert zum 65. Geburtstag (OBO 186), Freiburg (Schweiz)/Göttingen, 243–254. Donner, H. 1969: Elemente ägyptischen Totenglaubens bei den Aramäern Ägyptens, in: Religions en Égypte hellénistique et romaine: Colloque de Strasbourg 16–18 mai 1967, Paris, 35–44. — ./Röllig, W. 2002: Kanaanäische und aramäische Inschriften, Band 1. 5., erweiterte und überarbeitete Auflage, Wiesbaden. Dunand, F./Zivie-Coche, C. 2006: Hommes et dieux en Égypte 3000 a.C. – 395 p.C. (Anthropologie religieuse), Paris. Dušek, J./Mynářová, J. 2013: Phoenician and Aramaic Inscriptions from Abusir, in: Botta 2013b, 53–69. Erman, A./Grapow, H., 1926–1963: Wörterbuch der ägyptischen Sprache, Berlin/Leipzig. 272 Günter Vittmann von Falck, M./Fluck, C. 2004: Die ägyptische Sammlung des Gustav-Lübcke-Museums Hamm, Bönen. Felber, H. 1997: Demotische Ackerpachtverträge der Ptolemäerzeit: Untersuchungen zu Aufbau, Entwicklung und inhaltlichen Aspekten einer Gruppe von demotischen Urkunden (Ägyptologische Abhandlungen 58), Wiesbaden. Fischer-Elfert, H.-W. 2005: Altägyptische Zaubersprüche (Reclams Universal-Bibliothek 18375), Stuttgart. Garbini, G. 1993: Aramaica (Studi Semitici, nuova serie 10), Roma. — . 2006: Introduzione all’epigrafia semitica (Studi sul Vicino Oriente antico 4), Brescia. Gardiner, A. H. 1947: Ancient Egyptian Onomastica, Oxford. Görg, M. 2002: Zu einem Lehnwort in Achiqar IX (53) 5, BN 114/115, 38–39. Grätz, S. 2011, The Question of “Mixed Marriages” (Intermarriage): The Extra-Biblical Evidence, in: C. Frevel (ed.), Mixed Marriages: Intermarriage and Group Identity in the Second Temple Period (Library of Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies 547), New York, 192– 204. Grelot, P. 1972: Documents araméens d’Égypte, Paris. Gzella, H. 2015: A Cultural History of Aramaic: From the Beginnings to the Advent of Islam, (HdO I/111), Leiden/Boston. Hoffmann, F. 2009: Die Datierung des Ostrakons Brooklyn 12768 630 und der Kult des OsirisEspmetis auf Elephantine in römischer Zeit, in: D. Kessler et al. (eds)., Texte – Theben – Tonfragmente: Festschrift für Günter Burkard (ÄAT 76), Wiesbaden, 206–213. — ./Quack, J.F. 2007: Anthologie der demotischen Literatur (Einführungen und Quellentexte zur Ägyptologie 4), Berlin. Hoftijzer, J./Jongeling, K. 1995: Dictionary of the North-West Semitic Inscriptions (HdO I/21), Leiden/New York/Köln. Holm, T. L. 2007: The Sheikh Faḍl Inscription in Its Literary and Historical Context, Aramaic Studies 5, 193–224. Honeyman, S. 2003: Noms sémitiques à Edfou et Thèbes, Bulletin of the American Society of Papyrologists 40, 63–118. Hughes, G. R. 1984: The So-called Pherendates Correspondence, in: H.-J. Thissen/K.-Th. Zauzich (eds.), Grammata demotika: Festschrift für Erich Lüddeckens zum 15. Juni 1983, Würzburg, 75–86. Jakobeit, U. 2016: Das jüdische Viertel Yht in Memphis – ein weiterer Beleg, in: S. L. Lippert et al. (eds.), Sapientia Felicitas: Festschrift für Günter Vittmann zum 29. Februar 2016 (Cahiers « Égypte Nilotique et Mediterranéenne » 14), Montpellier, 261–269. Jansen-Winkeln, K. 2002: Die Quellen zur Eroberung Ägyptens durch Kambyses, in: T. A. Bács (ed.), A Tribute to Excellency: Studies Offered in Honour of Ernő Gaál, Ulrich Luft and László Török (Studia Aegyptiaca 17), Budapest, 309–319. — . 2007: Inschriften der Spätzeit, II: Die 22.–24. Dynastie, Wiesbaden. — . 2009: Inschriften der Spätzeit, III: Die 25. Dynastie, Wiesbaden. — . 2014: Inschriften der Spätzeit, IV: Die 26. Dynastie, Wiesbaden. Arameans in Egypt 273 Johnson, J. H. 1999: Ethnic Considerations in Persian Period Egypt, in: E. Teeter/J. A. Larson (eds.), Gold of Praise: Studies on Ancient Egypt in Honor of Edward F. Wente (Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 58), Chicago, 211–222. Joisten-Pruschke, A. 2009: Über den wissenschaftlichen Umgang mit den aramäischen Papyri und Ostraka von Elephantine, BN 142, 79–98. Kahn, D. 2007: Judean Auxiliaries in Egypt’s Wars Against Kush, JAOS 127, 507–516. — . 2008: Some Remarks on the Foreign Policy of Psammetichus II (595–589 B.C.) in the Levant, Journal of Egyptian History 1, 139–157. Kaplan, Ph. 2003: Cross-Cultural Contacts Among Mercenary Communities in Saite and Persian Egypt, Mediterranean Historical Review 18, 1–31. Knauf, E. A. 2002: Elephantine und das vor-biblische Judentum, in: R. G. Kratz (ed.), Religion und Religionskontakte im Zeitalter der Achämeniden (Veröffentlichungen der Wissenschaftlichen Gesellschaft für Theologie 22), Gütersloh, 179–188. Kockelmann, H./Rickert, A. 2015: Von Meroe bis Indien: Fremdvölkerlisten und nubische Gabenträger in den griechisch-römischen Tempeln, Soubassementstudien V (Studien zur spätägyptischen Religion 12), Wiesbaden. Kottsieper, I. 2002: Die Religionspolitik der Achämeniden und die Juden von Elephantine, in: R. G. Kratz (ed.), Religion und Religionskontakte im Zeitalter der Achämeniden (Veröffentlichungen der Wissenschaftlichen Gesellschaft für Theologie 22), Gütersloh, 150–178. — . 2006: Hebräische, transjordanische und aramäische Briefe, in: B. Janowski/G. Wilhelm (eds.), Texte aus der Umwelt des Alten Testaments: Neue Folge 6, Gütersloh, 357–383. Kraeling, E. G. 1953: The Brooklyn Museum Aramaic Papyri: New Documents of the Fifth Century B.C. from the Jewish Colony at Elephantine, New Haven. Kratz, R. G. 2011: Judean Ambassadors and the Making of Jewish Identity: The Case of Hananiah, Ezra, and Nehemiah, in: Lipschits et al. 2011, 421–444. Krekeler, A. 1996: Stadtgrabung am Westkom von Elephantine/Wohnbauten des 1. Jahrtausends v. Chr., in: M. Bietak (ed.), Haus und Palast im Alten Ägypten (Untersuchungen der Zweigstelle Kairo des Österreichischen Archäologischen Instituts 14), Wien, 107–115. Leitz, Chr. 2002 ed.: Lexikon der ägyptischen Götter und Götterbezeichnungen, VI: h – s (OLA 115), Leuven/ Paris/ Dudley, MA. Lemaire, A. 2007: La diffusion de l’alphabet dans le méditerranéen, in: R. Viers (ed.), Langues et écritures de la Méditerranée : Actes du Forum des 9, 10 et 11 mars 2001 Maison du Séminaire, Nice, Paris, 199–227. — . 2011: Judean Identity in Elephantine: Everiday Life according to the Ostraca, in: Lipschits et al. 2011, 365–373. — . 2014: Fifth- and Fourth-Century Issues: Governorship and Priesthood in Jerusalem, in: B. T. Arnold/R. S. Hess (eds.), Ancient Israel’s History: An Introduction to Issues and Sources, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 406–425. 274 Günter Vittmann Lepper, V. 2015: Die aramäo-jüdische Gemeinde von Elephantine: Ein ägyptologischer Ansatz, in: L. D. Morenz/A. El Hawary (eds.), Weitergabe: Festschrift für die Ägyptologin Ursula Rößler-Köhler zum 65. Geburtstag (Göttinger Orientforschungen, IV, Reihe Ägypten, 53), Wiesbaden, 255–274. Lidzbarski, M. 1898: Handbuch der nordsemitischen Epigraphik, Weimar. Lindenberger, J. M. 2003: Ancient Aramaic and Hebrew Letters, 2nd Ed. (Writings from the Ancient World 14), Atlanta. Lipschits, O. et al.( eds.), 2011: Judah and the Judeans in the Achaemenid Period: Negotiating Identity in an International Context, Winona Lake. Lozachmeur, H. 2006: La collection Clermont-Ganneau: Ostraca, épigraphes sur jarre, étiquettes de bois (Mémoires de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres 35), Paris. —./Dobreff, V. 2008: Nouvelle inscription funéraire araméenne à Saqqâra, Comptes rendus des séances de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, 152e année, N. 2, 911-927. Lüddeckens, E. et al. 1980–2000: Demotisches Namenbuch, Wiesbaden. Maaßen, I. 2015: Schlangen- und Skorpionbeschwörung über die Jahrtausende, in: A. Jördens (ed.), Ägyptische Magie und ihre Umwelt (Philippika 80), Wiesbaden, 171–187. Martin, C. 2011: The Demotic Texts, in: Porten et al. (eds.) 2011, 276–384. Mathieson, A. et al. 1995: A Stela of the Persian Period from Saqqara, JEA 81, 23–41. Menu, B. 1985: Cessions de services et engagements pour dette sous les rois kouchites et saïtes, Revue d’Égyptologie 36, 73–87. de Meulenaere, H. 1965: La statue du général Djed-Ptah-iouf-ankh (Caire JE 36949), Bulletin de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale 63, 19–32. Miller, M. C. 2011: “Manners Makyth Man”: Diacritical Drinking in Achaemenid Anatolia, in: E. S. Gruen (ed.), Cultural Identity in the Ancient Mediterranean, Los Angeles, 97–134. Modrzejewski, J. M. 1997: The Jews in Egypt: From Rameses II to Emperor Hadrian, Princeton. Monson, A. 2014: Syrians in the Fayyum: A Survey of Crops on Cleruchic Land, in: S. L. Lippert/M. A. Stadler (eds.), Gehilfe des Thot: Festschrift für Karl-Theodor Zauzich zu seinem 75. Geburtstag, Wiesbaden, 81–87. Morenz, L. 2002: Ein tiefgreifender interkultureller Kontakt: Die ägyptische Unschuldserklärung im aramäischen Text der Stele von Carpentras (KAI 269), WZKM 92, 81–90. Muchiki, Y. 1999: Egyptian Proper Names and Loanwords in North-West Semitic (Society of Biblical Literature, Dissertation Series 173), Atlanta. Müller, W. W./Vittmann, G. 1993: Zu den Personennamen der aus Ägypten stammenden Frauen in den sogenannten „Hierodulenlisten“ von Macīn, Orientalia 62, 1–10. Muraoka, T./Porten, B. 2003: A Grammar of Egyptian Aramaic (HdO I/32), revised edition, Leiden/New York/Köln. Naveh, J./Shaked, Sh. 2012: Aramaic Documents from Ancient Bactria (Fourth Century BCE.) from the Khalili Collections, London. Niehr, H. 2007: Aramäischer Ahiqar (Jüdische Schriften aus hellenistisch-römischer Zeit, Neue Folge 2, Lfg. 2), Gütersloh. Arameans in Egypt 275 Noth, M. 1928: Die israelitischen Personennamen im Rahmen der gemeinsemitischen Namengebung, Stuttgart. Nutkowicz, H. 2008: Les mariages mixtes à Éléphantine à l’époque perse, Transeuphratène 36, 125–139. — . 2015: Destins de femmes a Éléphantine au Ve siècle avant notre ère, Paris. Perdu, O. 1985: Le monument de Samtoutefnakht à Naples, Revue d’Égyptologie 36, 89–113. Pétigny, A. 2014: Des étrangers pour garder les frontières de l’Égypte aux Ve et IVe siècle av. J.C., in: A.-E. Veïsse/S. Wackenier (eds.), L’armée en Égypte aux époques perse, ptolémaïque et romaine (Cahiers de l’atelier Aigyptos 2), Genève, 5–43. Pfeiffer, St. 2004: Das Dekret von Kanopos (238 v. Chr.): Kommentar und historische Auswertung eines dreisprachigen Synodaldekretes der ägyptischen Priester zu Ehren Ptolemaios’ III. und seiner Familie (Archiv für Papyrusforschung, Beiheft 18), München/Leipzig. von Pilgrim, C. 1998: Textzeugnis und archäologischer Befund: Zur Topographie Elephantines in der 27. Dynastie, in: H. Guksch/D. Polz (eds.), Stationen: Beiträge zur Kulturgeschichte Ägyptens Rainer Stadelmann gewidmet, Mainz, 485–497. — . 2002: VI. Das aramäische Quartier im Stadtgebiet der 27. Dynastie, Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Abteilung Kairo 58, 192–197, in: G. Dreyer et al. (eds.), Stadt und Tempel von Elephantine: 28./29./30. Grabungsbericht, 157–225. — . 2003: Tempel des Jahu und „Straße des Königs“ – ein Konflikt in der späten Perserzeit auf Elephantine, in: S. Meyer (ed.), Egypt – Temple of the Whole World: Ägypten – Tempel der Gesamten [sic] Welt, Studies in Honour of Jan Assmann (Studies in the History of Religions 97), Leiden, 303–317. — . 2013: Die „Festung“ von Elephantine in der Spätzeit – Anmerkungen zum archäologischen Befund, in: Botta 2013b, 205–213. —./et al. 2008: The Town of Syene. Report on the 5th and 6th Season in Aswan, Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Abteilung Kairo 64, 305–356. Porten, B. 1968: Archives from Elephantine: The Life of an Ancient Jewish Military Colony, Berkeley/Los Angeles. — . 1969: The Religion of the Jews of Elephantine in Light of the Hermopolis Papyri, JNES 28, 116–121. — . 1984: The Jews in Egypt, in: W. D. Davies/L. Finkelstein (eds.), The Cambridge History of Judaism, I: Introduction; The Persian Period, Cambridge, 372–400. — . 1992: Aramaic-Demotic Equivalents: Who is the Borrower and Who the Lender?, in: J. H. Johnson (ed.), Life in a Multi-Cultural Society: Egypt from Cambyses to Constantine and Beyond (Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 51), Chicago, 259–264. — . 2002: Egyptian Names in Aramaic Texts, in: K. Ryholt (ed.), Acts of the Seventh International Conference of Demotic Studies Copenhagen, 23–27 August 1999 (CNI Publications 27), Copenhagen, 283–327. — . 2003: Settlement of the Jews at Elephantine and the Arameans at Syene, in: O. Lipschits/J. Blenkinsopp (eds.), Judah and the Judeans in the Neo-Babylonian Period, Winona Lake, 451–470. 276 Günter Vittmann — . 2004: The Prophecy of Ḥor bar Punesh and the Demise of Righteousness: An Aramaic Papyrus in the British Library, in: F. Hoffmann/H. J Thissen (eds.), Res severa verum gaudium: Festschrift für Karl-Theodor Zauzich zum 65. Geburtstag am 8. Juni 2004 (Studa demotica 6), Leuven/Paris/Dudley, MA, 427–466. — . 2011: The Aramaic Texts, in: Porten et al. 2011, 75–275. — ./Gee, J. 2001: Aramaic Funerary Practices in Egypt, in: P. M. M. Daviau et al. (eds.), The World of the Aramaeans: Studies in History and Archaeology in Honour of Paul-Eugène Dion (JSOT.S 325), Sheffield, II, 270–307. —./Lund, J. 2002: Aramaic Documents from Egypt: A Key-Word-in-Context Concordance, Winona Lake. —./Szubin, H.Z. 1994: An Aramaic Joint Venture Agreement (A New Interpretation of the Bauer-Meissner Papyrus), in: S. Allam (ed.), Grund und Boden in Altägypten (rechtliche und sozio-ökonomische Verhältnisse): Akten des internationalen Symposions Tübingen 18.–20. Juni 1990, Tübingen, 65–95. —./Yardeni, A. 1986: Textbook of Aramaic Documents from Ancient Egypt, 1. Letters, Winona Lake. —./— . 1989: Textbook of Aramaic Documents from Ancient Egypt, 2. Contracts, Winona Lake. —./––. 1993: Textbook of Aramaic Documents from Ancient Egypt, 3. Literature, Accounts, Lists, Winona Lake. —./—. 1999: Textbook of Aramaic Documents from Ancient Egypt, 4. Ostraca & Assorted Inscriptions, Winona Lake. —./—. 2004/2005: Two Aramaic Salt-tax Receipts by the Scribe Joseph, Enchoria 29, 55–59. —. with J. J. Farber/C. J. Martin/G. Vittmann et al. 2011: The Elephantine Papyri in English: Three Millennia of Cross-Cultural Continuity and Change, 2nd revised edition, Atlanta. Posener, G. 1970: Sur l’attribution d’un nom à un enfant, Revue d’Égyptologie 22, 204–205. Quack, J. F. 1992: Ein demotischer Ausdruck in aramäischer Transkription, WdO 23, 15–20. —. 2004: review of Vittmann 2003, JAOS 124, 360–361. —. 2009: Einführung in die altägyptische Literaturgeschichte III: Die demotische und gräkoägyptische Literatur (Einführungen und Quellentexte zur Ägyptologie 3), 2nd revised edition, Münster. –—. 2011a: Zum Datum der persischen Eroberung Ägyptens unter Kambyses, Journal of Egyptian History 4, 228–246. –—. 2011b: The Interaction of Egyptian and Aramaic Literature, in: Lipschits et al. 2011, 375– 401. Quaegebeur, J. 1995: À propos de l’identification de la « Kadytis » d’Hérodote avec la ville de Gaza, in: K. van Lerberghe/A. Schoors (eds.), Immigration and Emigration within the Ancient Near East, Festschrift E. Lipiński (OLA 65), Leuven, 245–270. Ranke, H. 1935: Die ägyptischen Personennamen, I. Verzeichnis der Namen, Glückstadt. von Recklinghausen, D. 2005: Ägyptische Quellen zum Judentum, ZÄS 132, 147–160. Arameans in Egypt 277 —. 2010: Inversion des Exodus: Aus der Sklaverei in die Freiheit: Juden im frühptolemäischen Ägypten, in: H. Knuf et al. (eds), Honi soit qui mal y pense: Studien zum pharaonischen, griechisch-römischen und spätantiken Ägypten zu Ehren von Heinz-Josef Thissen (OLA 194), Leuven/Paris/Walpole, MA, 405–418. Redford, D. 2011: Some Observations on the Traditions Surrounding “Israel in Egypt”, in: Lipschits et al. 2011, 279–364. Richter, T. S. 2001: Arabische Lehnworte und Formeln in koptischen Rechtsurkunden, Journal of Juristic Papyrology 31, 75–89. Röllig, W. 2013: Neue phönizische und aramäische Krugaufschriften aus Elephantine, in: D. Raue et al. (eds.), The First Cataract of the Nile: One Region – Diverse Perspectives (Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Abteilung Kairo, Sonderschrift 36), Berlin, 185–203. Rösel, M. 2000: Israels Psalmen in Ägypten? Papyrus Amherst 63 und die Psalmen XX und LXXV, VT 50, 81–99. Rohrmoser, A. 2014: Götter, Tempel und Kult der Judäo-Aramäer von Elephantine. Archäologische und schriftliche Zeugnisse aus dem perserzeitlichen Ägypten (AOAT 396), Münster. Rosenberg, S. G. 2004: The Jewish Temple at Elephantine, Near Eastern Archaeology 67, 4– 13. Rozen, M. 2008: People of the Book, People of the Sea: Mirror Images of the Soul, in: M. Rozen (ed.), Homelands and Diasporas: Greeks, Jews and Their Migrations, New York, 3581 and 333–347 (notes). Ryholt, K. 2004: The Assyrian Invasion of Egypt in Egyptian Literary Tradition: A survey of the narrative source material, in J. G. Dercksen (ed.), Assyria and Beyond: Studies Presented to Mogens Trolle Larsen, Leiden, 483–510. —. 2012: Narrative Literature from the Tebtunis Temple Library (CNI Publications 35), Copenhagen. Sabbahy, L. 2013–2014: The Archaeological Context of Jéquier’s “Cimetière Araméen” at Saqqara, Journal of the Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities 40, 57–69. Sauneron, S./Yoyotte, J. 1952: Sur la politique palestinienne des rois saïtes, VT 2, 131–136. Sayce, A.H./Cowley, A.E. 1906: Aramaic Papyri Discovered at Assuan, London. Schäfer, D. 2011: Makedonische Pharaonen und hieroglyphische Stelen: Historische Untersuchungen zur Satrapenstele und verwandten Denkmälern (Studia Hellenistica 50), Leuven/ Paris/Walpole, MA. Schentuleit, M. 2007: Satabus aus Soknopaiu Nesos: Aus dem Leben eines Priesters am Beginn der römischen Kaiserzeit, Chronique d’Égypte 82, 101–125. Schmitt, R./Vittmann, G. 2013: Iranisches Personnamenbuch VIII: Iranische Namen in ägyptischer Nebenüberlieferung (Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophischhistorische Klasse, Sitzungsberichte, 842), Wien. Schmitz, Ph. C. 2010: The Phoenician Contingent in the Campaign of Psammetichus II Against Kush, Journal of Egyptian History 3, 321–337. 278 Günter Vittmann Schütze, A. 2009: Schreiberämter in den aramäischen Urkunden aus dem Ägypten des fünften Jahrhunderts v.Chr., in: D. Kessler et al. (eds.), Texte – Theben – Tonfragmente. Festschrift für Günter Burkard (ÄAT 76), Wiesbaden, 377–384. —. 2011: Ägypten unter der Herrschaft der Achämeniden: Studien zur Verwaltung und Gesellschaft einer Provinz des Perserreiches, Dissertation, Leipzig. —. 2012: Die Zerstörung des Jahu-Tempels von Elephantine: Ein Beispiel urbaner Interaktion im Ägypten des 5. Jhs. v.Chr., in: C. Rödel-Braune/C. Waschke (eds.), Orte des Geschehens. Interaktionsräume als konstitutive Elemente der antiken Stadt, Berlin, 286–304. Schwiderski, D. 2000: Handbuch des nordwestsemitischen Briefformulars: Ein Beitrag zur Echtheitsfrage der aramäischen Briefe des Esrabuches (BZAW 295), Berlin/New York. —. 2004: Die alt- und reichsaramäischen Inschriften. The Old and Imperial Aramaic Inscriptions, II: Text und Bibliographie (Fontes et Subsidia ad Bibliam pertinentes 2), Berlin/New York. —. 2008: Die alt- und reichsaramäischen Inschriften. The Old and Imperial Aramaic Inscriptions, I: Konkordanz (Fontes et Subsidia ad Bibliam pertinentes 4), Berlin/New York. Segal, J. B. 1983: Aramaic Texts from North Saqqâra (Texts from Excavations 6), London. Smith, H. S./Davies, S. 2014: Demotic Papyri from the Sacred Animal Necropolis at North Saqqara: Pleas, Oracle Questions and Documents Referring to Mummies, in: M. Depauw/Y. Broux (eds.), Acts of the Tenth International Congress of Demotic Studies Leuven, 26–30 August 2008, (OLA 231), Leuven/Paris/Walpole, MA, 263–317. —./Martin, C.J. 2009: Demotic Papyri from the Sacred Animal Necropolis of North Saqqara: Certainly or Possibly of Achaemenid Date, in: P. Briant/M. Chauveau ( eds.), Organisation des pouvoirs et contacts culturels de l’empire achéménide: Actes du colloque organisé au Collège de France par la « Chaire d’histoire et civilisation du monde achéménide et de l’empire d’Alexandre » et le « Réseau international d’études et de recherches achéménides » (GDR 2538 CNRS), 9–10 novembre 2007 (Persika 14), Paris, 23–78. Spiegelberg, W. 1922: Der demotische Text der Priesterdekrete von Kanopus und Memphis (Rosettana) mit den hieroglyphischen und griechischen Fassungen und deutscher Übersetzung nebst demotischem Glossar, Heidelberg. Stadler, M. A. 2015: Der Kampf um die Pfründe des Inaros (P. Spiegelberg), in: B. Janowski/D. Schwemer (eds.), Texte aus der Umwelt des Alten Testaments, Neue Folge 8: Weisheitstexte, Mythen und Epen, Gütersloh, 418–437. Steiner, R. C. 1993: Why the Aramaic Script Was Called “Assyrian” in Hebrew, Greek, and Demotic, Orientalia 62, 80–82. —. 1997: The Aramaic Text in Demotic Script, in: W. W. Hallo (ed.), The Context of Scripture, I. Canonical Compositions from the Biblical World, Leiden/Boston, 309–327. —. 2001: The Scorpion Spell from Wadi Hammamat: Another Aramaic Text in Demotic Script, JNES 60, 259–268. —./Nims C. F. 2017: The Aramic Text in Demotic Script: Text, Translation, and Notes, www. Academia.edu/31662776/ (uploaded on Feb. 28, 2017). TAD, see under Porten/Yardeni. Arameans in Egypt 279 Tavernier, J. 2007: Iranica in the Achaemenid Period (ca. 550–330 BC.): Lexicon of Old Iranian Proper Names and Loanwords, Attested in Non-Iranian Texts (OLA 158), Leuven/Paris/Dudley, MA. Teixidor, J. 1986: Bulletin d’épigraphie sémitique (1964–1980) (Institut Français d’Archéologie du Proche-Orient, Bibliothèque Archéologique et Historique 127), Paris. van der Veen, P. 2014: Sixth Century Issues: The Fall of Jerusalem, the Exile, and the Return, in: B. T. Arnold/R. S. Hess (eds.), Ancient Israel’s History: An Introduction to Issues and Sources, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 383–405. Verreth, H. 2011: Toponyms in Demotic and Abnormal Hieratic Texts from the 8th Century BC till the 5th Century AD (Topos Online Publications 5), Version 1.0, Köln/Leuven. Vittmann, G. 1984: Ein Zauberspruch gegen Skorpione im Wadi Hammamat, in: H.-J. Thissen/K.-Th. Zauzich (eds.), Grammata demotika: Festschrift für Erich Lüddeckens zum 15. Juni 1983, Würzburg, 245–256. —. 1989: Zu den in den ägyptischen Inschriften enthaltenen phönikischen Personennamen, Göttinger Miszellen 113, 91–96. —. 1998: Der demotische Papyrus Rylands 9 (ÄAT 38), Wiesbaden. —. 2002: Ägyptische Onomastik der Spätzeit im Spiegel der nordwestsemitischen und karischen Nebenüberlieferung, in: M. P. Streck/St. Weninger (eds.), Altorientalische und semitische Onomastik (AOAT 296), Wiesbaden, 85–107. —. 2003: Ägypten und die Fremden im ersten vorchristlichen Jahrtausend (Kulturgeschichte der antiken Welt 97), Mainz. —. 2006a: Ägypten: Vom Alten Reich bis in die Spätzeit, in: H. Heinen et al. (eds.), Handwörterbuch der antiken Sklaverei (Forschungen zur antiken Sklaverei, Beiheft 5), CD-ROMLieferung I, Stuttgart. —. 2006b: Zwischen Integration und Ausgrenzung: Zur Akkulturation von Ausländern im spätzeitlichen Ägypten, in R. Rollinger/B. Truschnegg (eds.), Altertum und Mittelmeerraum: Die antike Welt diesseits und jenseits der Levante, Festschrift für Peter W. Haider zum 60. Geburtstag (Oriens et Occidens 12), Wiesbaden, 561–595. —. 2011: Ägypten zur Zeit der Perserherrschaft, in: R. Rollinger et al. (eds.), Herodot und das Persische Weltreich: Akten des 3. Internationalen Kolloquiums zum Thema “Vorderasien im Spannungsfeld klassischer und altorientalischer Überlieferungen” Innsbruck, 24.–28. November 2008 (Classica et Orientalia 3), Wiesbaden, 373–429. —. 2015: Demotische Texte, in: B. Janowski/D. Schwemer (eds.), Texte aus der Umwelt des Alten Testaments, Neue Folge 8: Weisheitstexte, Mythen und Epen, Gütersloh, 348–418; 438–444. Vlassopoulos, K. 2013: Greeks and Barbarians, Cambridge. Wasmuth, M. 2005: Integration of Foreigners: New Insights from the Stela Found in Saqqara in 1994, in: J. Curtis/S: J. Simpson (eds.), The World of Achaemenid Persia: History, Art and Society in Iran and the Ancient Near East, London, 535–543. Weigl, M. 2010: Die aramäischen Achikar-Sprüche aus Elephantine und die alttestamentliche Weisheitsliteratur (BZAW 399), Berlin/New York.