A Cult of Isis at Philae After Justinian

A Cult of Isis at Philae after Justinian? Reconsidering "P. Cair. Masp.
" I 67004
Author(s): Jitse H. F. Dijkstra
Reviewed work(s):
Source: Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik, Bd. 146 (2004), pp. 137-154
Published by: Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn (Germany)
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20191757 .
Accessed: 16/10/2012 14:25
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn (Germany) is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access
to Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik.
http://www.jstor.org
137
A Cult of Isis at Philae After Justinian?

Reconsidering P. Cair.Masp. I 67004
Introduction1
Jean Maspero, the father of Late Antique papyrology, wrote about the first volume of his Papyrus grecs
'J'ai ?tre non seulement ? ceux qu'int?resse aux
(1911): l'espoir qu'il pourra utile, l'Egypte, mais aussi
historiens de l'empire d'Orient en g?n?ral'.2 Today his magnum opus, which consists of a large part of
the sixth-century archive of the lawyer and poet Dioscorus of Aphrodite,3 is still regarded as
authoritative. However grand of Maspero may be, his edition does not conform
the achievement to the
standards scholars nowadays require of papyrological editions. Probably due to the concise nature of the
general catalogue of the Egyptian Museum at Cairo, in which series Papyrus grecs appeared, the text
does not contain a translation and the commentary is limited. Additionally, since the 1980s, several
scholars have reached new
insights about Dioscorus and his world.4 Dioscorus is now no longer
stigmatised as the 'Worst Poet of Antiquity',5 but reinstated as a lawyer in the changing world of Late
Antiquity.6 In a recent book, Fournet has shown that the literary texts in the archive of Dioscorus can on
the one hand be placed in the tradition of a group of classicising Egyptian poets, but that on the other
hand the poems had a more practical function.7 All in all, a re-edition of the archive is needed. Fournet
has done this for most of the literary texts, whereas the documents are still waiting for republication.8
This tries to take a step in that direction by reconsidering
article just one of these papyri, P. Cair.
Masp. I 67004. After a few remarks about the content of the text, I will give a description of the
papyrus, revised text with critical apparatus, concise commentary to account for the revisions, and a
translation. As was already recognised by Wilcken in 1913, but never scrutinised since, this text is a
1 I to express
would like my thanks to Jan N. Bremmer, Jean-Luc Fournet and Annette Harder for reading, and
commenting on, earlier drafts, and especially to Peter van Minnen who first that I take on this text and continued
suggested
thinking about itwith me for the last four years. Iwould also like to thank Christopher Lillington-Martin for correcting my
English.
2 J. =
Maspero, Papyrus grecs d'?poque byzantine, 3 vols. (Cairo, 1911-6 P.Cair.Masp.) l.iv. Several preliminary
publications preceded this publication.
3 In the archive
of Dioscorus, the village is called kcouti 'Aippo?irn?, 'village of Aphrodite'. However, among most
scholars the name 'Acppo?iTcb used in Greek texts of the early Arab period is current. Cf. the remarks J.-L. Fournet,
by
'Appendice sur le nom d' 'Acppo?irn?kcouti', REG 105 (1992) 235-6.
4 J.G.
Keenan, 'The Aphrodite Papyri and Village Life in Byzantine Egypt', BSAC 26 (1984) 51-63 and 'Village
Shepherds and Social Tension in Byzantine Egypt', YCS 28 (1985) 245-59; L.S.B. Ma?Coull, Dioscorus of Aphrodito. His
Work and His World (Berkeley, 1988); B. Verbeeck, 'Dioskoros: dorpshoofd, dichter en notaris', in P.W. Pestman (ed.),
Familiearchieven uit het land van Pharao (Zutphen, 1989) 138-62; T. Gagos, P. van Minnen, Settling a Dispute. Toward a
Legal Anthropology of Late Antique Egypt (Ann Arbor, 1994); C.A. Kuehn, Channels of Imperishable Fire. The Beginnings
of Christian Mystical Poetry and Dioscorus of Aphrodito (New York, 1995).
5 J.
Maspero, 'Un dernier po?te grec de Dioscore, fils d'Apollos', REG 24 (1911) 426-81; H.J.M. Milne,
l'Egypte.
Catalogue of the Literary Papyri in the British Museum (London, 1927) 68; H.I. Bell, 'An Egyptian Village in the Age of
Justinian', JHS 64 (1944) 21-36; Al. Cameron, Literature and Society in the Early Byzantine World (London, 1985) Ch. I
('Wandering Poets: A Literary Movement in Byzantine Egypt', 19651). Cf. B. Baldwin, 'Dioscorus of Aphrodito: The Worst
Poet of Antiquity?', Pap.Congr. XVII, 2 vols. (Naples, 1984) 2.327-31.
6 P. van
Minnen, 'Dioscorus and the Law', in A.A. MacDonald, M. Twomey, G.J. Reinink (eds.), Learned Antiquity:
Scholarship and Society in theNear East, theGreco-Roman World, and theEarly Medieval West (Louvain, 2003) 115-34.
7 J.-L.
Fournet, Hell?nisme dans VEgypte du VF si?cle. La biblioth?que et V uvre de Dioscore d'Aphrodite, 2 vols.
(Cairo, 1999 = P.Aphrod.Lit.).
8 Cf.
J.G. Keenan, 'On the Cairo Maspero Papyri', Pap.Congr. XIX, 2 vols. (Cairo, 1992) 1.85-94. Dr.
Currently,
Fournet is working on a re-edition of the petitions in the Dioscorus Archive.
138 /. H. F. Dijkstra
strikingly late witness of paganism in Egypt.9 In the last section, I will argue that 'the sanctuaries' (x?
?ep?) mentioned in the text refer to none other than the temple of Isis at Philae. This suggestion was,
again, first made by Wilcken and expanded upon by Kirwan in an article of as long ago as 1937, but
apparently their observations have not received the attention they deserved since then.10 If true, this
interpretation offers new perspectives on the closing of the Isis temple, commonly considered as the end
of Ancient Egyptian religion. I by no means pretend to give a definitive edition of this complicated text;
Imerely hope that this article will open up the discussion.
Content
The text is a petition of the councillors of Omboi in the southern Thebaid addressed to the highest
authority in the province, the governor or dux}1 It is part of a group of 35 petitions which have all been
written by Dioscorus.12 Except three petitions which fall into an earlier period of Dioscorus' activity,13
the remainder belongs as a notary at the ducal court in the capital of the
to the time Dioscorus worked
province, Antinoopolis (ca. 565-573).14 most productive period, for not only did he
It was Dioscorus'
write a wide variety of documents, he also composed the bulk of his poems in this period. Most of the
petitions are addressed to dux Athanasius of the Thebaid who came from a powerful local family.15
From the state in which the texts have come down to us, it appears that all these petitions were drafts
which werenot handed in as such but, presumably upon approval of the petitioners, replaced by clean
copies and presented to the dux.
The petitions can usually be divided into five parts, starting with a formal address to the dux written
in an imitation of chancellery style (in our text, 1.1) and an introduction of the petitioners (1. 2). What
follows is a prooimion in which the petitioners draw attention to the injustice that has befallen them and
plea that the dux in his charity and justice will redress their grievances (11. 3-6). The least formulaic part
is the narratio in which the case is set forth and strong rhetorical language is used to put the petitioners'
in a favourable light (11. 6-18). In the conclusion, the petitioners come to their actual request. If
position
their request is granted, it allows them to live peacefully and to pay taxes (11. 18-21). At the end of the
petition, the dux is invoked in the plural.
Owing to their unfinished and fragmentary few of the petitions

state, only contain all five parts.
Although it is not the best preserved of the petitions, P.Cair.Masp. I 67004 has all these parts. This
circumstance allows us to reconstruct at least the outline of the case. The councillors of Omboi ask the
name is not mentioned text but who is
dux to take action against a man whose in the transmitted
nicknamed cb|Lio9(xyo? 'Eater of Raw Meat' in 1. 14, to whom I will refer below, slightly anachroni
stically, as 'Cannibal'.16 Firstly, they charge him with leading a group of Blemmyes from the right path
9U. Wilcken,
'PapyrusUrkunden XV, Archiv 5 (1913) 442-9 at 444: 'Derwichtige Text bedarf noch eindringenden
Studiums'. Cf. W.Gr. 1134-5.
10 on and Christian Nubia
Wilcken, 'Papyrus Urkunden XV, 443-4; L.P. Kirwan, Studies the History of Late Antique
(Aldershot & Burlington, 2002) Ch. XXV ('Studies in the Later History of Nubia', 19371) at 89. Cf. A.M. Demicheli,
Rapporti di pace e di guerra dell'Egitto romano con le populazioni dei deserti Africani (Milan, 1976) 193-4.
11 Kom not a village of the same name situated north of Nagada, cf. A. 'Kom
Modern Ombo, (in Greek) Gutbub,
Ombo', Lex?g. Ill (1980) 675-83 and F. Goma?, 'Ombos', Lex?g. IV (1982) 567-9.
12
P.Cair.Masp. I 67002-67009, 67011-67022, II 67205, III 67279, 67283, 67348, 67352, 67354; P.Flor. Ill 295-6;
P.Hamb. Ill 230; P.Lond. V 1674-1678; SB V 8938 (= P.Walters 1). I leave out here SB XIV 11856 which lacks toomany
structural features to identify it with as a petition, cf. J.-L. Fournet, '? propos de SB XIV 11856 ou quand la po?sie
certainty
rencontre le document', BIFAO 93 (1993) 223-35.
13
P.Cair.Masp. I 67019, III 67283; SB V 8938.
14MacCoull, Dioscorus, 47-56; Fournet, Hell?nisme, 321-4.
15 328-9.
Fournet, Hell?nisme,
16 The word is connected with as an epithet of Dionysus, see C. 'The Raw and the
cojxocpayo? savageness, e.g. Segal,
Cooked in Greek Literature', CJ 69 (1973-4) 289-308; M. D?tienne, Dionysos mis ? mort (Paris, 1977) passim', A. Henrichs,
'GreekMaenadism from Olympias toMessalina', HSPh 82 (1978) 121-60 at 150-2 and 'Human Sacrifice inGreek Religion:
A Cult of Isis at Philae after Justinian? 139
and reinstalling their old sanctuaries (x? iep?, 1. 9) by consecrating shrines (otjkoU?, 1. 8) with demons
and wooden statues (?aifioai Kal ôavoi?).17 In exchange, a group of Blemmyes, from of old dwellers
of the Eastern Desert, conspire with Cannibal (8ia[rc]pa^?|i?[v]oc oDVO|i?vo[ia]v, 1. 11) to plunder the
countryside with him. At the end of this section (11. 7-12), Cannibal is compared to the Israelite king
Jerobeam set up two golden
I who heifers in Bethel and Dan as a substitute for the temple at
Jerusalem.18 By this deed, Jerobeam acted on his own account and ignored God. Cannibal acts in the
same way (a?TOv[o]|i?[a]c xp?Tcco, 1. 11) which implies that, just as predicted regarding the Israelite
king, the wrath of God (and the dux) will be upon his family.19
But another comparison, now from real life, shows that the behaviour of Cannibal is even worse
than Jerobeam's (rc?j?ov xotrcjao], 1. 12), for a certain Collouthos, apparently a well known figure of
the past (to[t]8), came to a similar agreement with a band of outlaws (11. 12-4).20 He also raided the
countryside with a group of Blemmyes and in exchange erected a building for them, possibly pagan as
in the case of Cannibal. However, Cannibal again behaved worse, which leads us to the second, more
fundamental complaint of the councillors (11. 14-6). When the councillors, who were responsible for tax
collection in the region, were in Antinoopolis for official taxation business (?r||ioaia? %p[??oc? ev]e[K?v,
1. 14), Cannibal acted independently for the second time (ocwovojicuv, 1. 15). Now he collected the taxes
of the ordinary people, appropriated the taxes (a7cf|T[r|a?v], ?oruxc? o?K?uoo?|i?voc), with his band of
outlaws spent these taxes for themselves (?8a7i?vcoaav ei? ?a[a)T]o\)?) and even stripped the taxpayers'
vineyards of their produce (x? a[\i]n?k\Ka a[m]&v %[co]p?aa7c[?Tp?]yriG?v), thus damaging the
incomes of the public treasury. We have reached the climax of the petition: Cannibal not only ruined the
countryside, he also disturbed what it is all about in these petitions: the collection of taxes. The narratio
ends with some
additional crimes committed by Cannibal (11. 16-8) like the violation of his own
daughter, again a typical feature of the barbarian,21 and an incident concerning the imperial standards
(x? i?p? g?kvoc, 1. 17), about which more is said below.

When going through such a petition, the modern reader is often struck by its elaborate rhetorical
style. In fact, this is one of the main features of Late Antique petitions and appears, for example, in the
increasing use of formulae and a completely new part of the petition, the prooimion. Beside the
rhetorical dimension, a second phenomenon took place on the level of language which Fournet
described as 'literarisation of the genre'. In Late Antiquity, the dividing line between documents like
petitions, testaments and letters on the one hand, and literature on the other became blurred. Thus, Late
Antique scribes like Dioscorus make constant use of literary quotations and allusions in composing their
documents. Not only does Dioscorus refer to classical sources, mainly Homer,22 he also draws on his
Three Case Studies', in J. Rudhardt, O. Reverdin (eds.), Le sacrifice dans VAntiquit? (Geneva, 1981) 195-242 at 220; J.N.
Bremmer, 'Greek Maenadism Reconsidered', ZPE 55 (1984) 267-86 at 275-6; B.D. Shaw, Rulers, Nomads, and Christians
in Roman North Africa (Aldershot and Brookfield, 1995) Ch. VI ('"Eaters of Flesh, Drinkers of Milk": The Ancient
Mediterranean Ideology of the Pastoral Nomad', 1982/3l). Dioscorus uses the word in both the documents (P.Cair.Masp. I
67002.iii 15) and the poems (P.Aprodit.Lit. IV 3 A r?, col. I 6) to stereotype the 'bad guys'.
I7On the
Blemmyes, see R.T. Updegraff, A Study of theBlemmyes (AnnArbor and London, 1978) and 'TheBlemmyes
I:The Rise of the Blemmyes and theRoman Withdrawal from Nubia under Diocletian', ANRWII 10.1 (1988) 45-106 (with
additional remarks by L. T?r?k; not yet continued); M. Weber, 'Blemmyer', RAC Suppl. Lf. 9 (2002) 7-28.
lgLXXReg. Ill 12.26-32.
l9LXXReg. Ill 13.33-4.

20 saw this Collouthos as the subject of the petition but Wilcken,
Maspero 'Papyrus Urkunden XV, 443 already
remarked: 'Aber das geht schon wegen des Fehlens des Artikels vor dem Namen nicht; der Mann mu? schon in Z. 6 genannt
sein'. However, if the name of our man was mentioned in the text at all is doubtful. Cf., most recently, R. Alston, The City in
Roman and Byzantine Egypt (London, 2002) 90 who maintains thatCollouthos is themain figure of the petition.
21
E.g. J.N. Bremmer, 'Oedipus and the Greek Oedipus Complex', in J.N. Bremmer (ed.), Interpretations of Greek
Mythology (London, 1987) 41-59 at 49-51.
22 J.-L.
Fournet, 'L'?hom?risme? ? l'?poque protobyzantine: l'exemple de Dioscore d'Aphrodite', Kt?ma 20 (1995)
305-15 and Hell?nisme, 673-5.
biblical learning.23 Conversely, many of the poems of Dioscorus look like petitions in their phraseology
and vocabulary.24 The poems seem to be the ultimate embodiment of the 'literarisation' of the Late
Antique petition and to have had a practical function by accompanying the documents when handed
over to the dux.25
These developments can clearly be discerned in P.Cair.Masp. I 67004. To take a closer look at the
narratio, Dioscorus time and again uses words a strong negative moral connotation to refer to
with
Cannibal in order to show that he disturbs the peace and breaks the laws. Not only do these words match
the classical representation of the barbarian;26 they also have the strong Christian connotation of some
one who lives beyond the law of God, a vice which is made explicit in the comparison with Jerobeam.27
This mixture of classical and biblical learning returns on a more lexical level. For example, in one and
the same line
(1. 4) Dioscorus uses both a typically biblical expression and alludes to Sophocles.28
Homeric language is also present, like the already mentioned cbjiocpayo? in 1. 14 (and (binocpaycov (?) in 1.
10)29 and vr|7ri(?v t8k[vco]v in 1. 14.30 Moreover, y?coa[aai?] in 1. 18 almost certainly refers to a
Homeric expression which is quoted in an anthology in Dioscorus' possession.3! Dioscorus used the
anthology for composing his documents,32 and the infinitive ?iccppaoai with which y?, a[aai?] is
combined in our text and which is also mentioned close by in the anthology supports this supposition.33
Dioscorus certainly did not compose every petition de novo. Some phrases and formulae are coming
back time and again, and Dioscorus constantly reshaped these according to the aim of the petition.
Among the many cross-references and similarities between the petitions, P.Cair.Masp. I 67004 has a
special connection to P.Cair.Masp. I 67002. Not only do passages in P.Cair.Masp. I 67002 have a large
amount of words in common with our text,34 which suggests that Dioscorus borrowed from the former
during his composition of the latter, these texts also share a common theme. P.Cair.Masp. I 67002 is a
petition against Menas, pagarch of Antaiopolis, who among other hideous crimes disturbed the tax
collection of Dioscorus (i) and the village of Aphrodite (ii-iii). Like Cannibal and the Blemmyes, Menas
raided the countryside with his bands.35 These bands are compared to barbarians three times.36 Such a
23 A. 'Zwischen Formeln und k?nstlerischer Neutestamentliche Elemente in den

Papathomas, juristischen Sch?pfung.
Urkunden des sp?tantiken Dichters und Notars Flavius Dioskoros von Aphrodito', Hermes 128 (2000) 481-99; J.H.F.
Dijkstra, 'AWorld Full of theWord. The Biblical Learning of Dioscorus', inMacDonald, Twomey & Reinink, Learned
Antiquity, 134-46
24 IV 1-16. Cf. Fournet, 259-64.
PAphrod.Lit. Hell?nisme,
2^ J.-L. 'Notes sur des du Bas Empire', 28 (1998) 'Entre document et
Fournet, critiques p?titions JJurPap 7-18,
litt?rature: la p?tition dans l'antiquit? tardive', in Proceedings of the XXe Congr?s International des ?tudes Byzantines, Paris
2001, forthcoming and 'Between Literary Tradition and Cultural Change. The Poetic and Documentary Production of
Dioscorus of Aphrodite', inMacDonald, Twomey & Reinink, Learned Antiquity, 101-14. Cf. H. Zilliacus, Zur Abundanz der
sp?tgriechischen Gebrauchs spr?che, Commentationes Humanarum Litterarum 41.2 (Helsinki, 1967) 15-7; A.B. Kovelman,
'FromLogos toMyth: Egyptian Petitions of the 5th-7th Centuries', BASP 28 (1991) 135-52.
26 the motifs of eating raw meat and incest. Cf. 51: 'For the Greeks, and
E.g. Bremmer, 'Oedipus', incest, parricide
cannibalism were the great taboos which marked off the civilized from the rest of the world'.
27 See 'World Full of theWord', for a detailed analysis of theway Dioscorus displays his biblical learning in
Dijkstra,
this petition.
28 Biblical Allusion to Sophocles: ... ?vanav'kav, cf. Soph.Ph. 877-8 Kai v?>v ercei?fi
expression: etc' ahrfieiaq. W|6r|?
...
TO\)?? TOt> KOCKO?)5oK?l/A,r|8n TI? ElVOClKOCVaTtOgAa ?T|, X8KVOV
29 Uom.Il. 16.157.
5.782, 7.256, 11.479, 15.592,
30 Hom.Il. Od.
2.136, 4.238, 5.782, 6.95, 276, 310, 7.256, 10.479, 11.113, 15.592, 17.223, 18.514, 22.63, 24.730;
12.42, 14.264, 17.433. Cf. Fournet, '? propos de SB XIV 11856', 226-7.
31 Hom.il. 2.489.
32 III 67295.28. Cf. Gagos & Van Minnen, a Dispute, 671.
P.Cair.Masp. Settling 22; Fournet, Hell?nisme,
33 III 67295.31.
P.Cair.Masp.
34 I 67002.? 3-5 and iii 3-4.
E.g. P.Cair.Masp.
35 I 67002.? 23-iii cf. I 67004.10-1.
P.Cair.Masp. 4, 12-4,
36
P.Cair.Masp. I 67002.? 24, iii 3, 22.
comparison is also made petition in the Dioscorus

in another archive, equally referring toMenas,37 and
in P.Cair.Masp. I 67004 (11. 11 and
itself 12).
However, in the case of our text, the difference is that the bands Cannibal conspires with are not
only barbarians in a metaphoric sense, they are 'real barbarians', to be more precise, Blemmyes (xo??
TiToi B?iiiDGi, 1. 9).38 Although in two poems the topos occurs of the dux putting an end to
?ap?dpoic
fear of the Blemmyes, in one poem Athanasius himself,39 this does not necessarily mean that the
Blemmyes mentioned in the documents, and in P.Cair.Masp. in particular, are all metaphorical
I 67004
figures.40 For example, in 1. 11, after having described the destructions caused by Cannibal and the
Blemmyes, Dioscorus first refers to barbarians in a metaphoric sense (they acted worse than barbarians
do, rcAiov ?ap?japcov]) and continues by mentioning the actual situation, that is, that Cannibal had
made an agreement with the Blemmyes (xo?? [eip]r||Li?(voi?)?ap?apo[i]c). Cannibal's behaviour is
even worse than Menas', as is well summarised in the phrase |iiô?ap?apo[c k]oci |iiJ;[??,]?,r|v (1. 14):
he does not only behave like a barbarian, he actually mingles with them (he is a 'half barbarian') and
their pagan practices ('half pagan').4! Exactly the religious dimension shows that more than a topos
was involved in our petition.
Description
The papyrus consists of three fragments.42 The space between the first two fragments is about 3 to 5
letters and between the second and third about 0 to 5 letters. From a reconstruction of 1. 1 the papyrus
measures ca. 31 x 98 cm.43 Between the first two fragments and the third one, which have been
conserved under two separate glass plates, over time a difference in colour has emerged, the former
being more yellowish brown and the latter more reddish brown. Black bands are visible at regular
intervals, a common feature of papyri when rolled up. From left to right twelve cracks run vertically
over the papyrus and show that the roll was at a later time in the past smashed. Afterwards, it was badly
damaged by insects which have left their mark in two series of holes running horizontally over the
lower part of the papyrus. The distance between them becomes smaller towards the right indicating that
the papyrus was rolled up from right to left. From the size of the above series of holes, it can be deduced
that the insects ate through a little bit further than the middle of the role here. These holes appear in
pairs, the holes on the right hand side becoming smaller towards the right and the holes on the left hand
side becoming larger towards the right. The holes on the left hand side even indicate how far the insects
have eaten through for they disappear towards the left. Because the extreme left part of the papyrus
remained untouched by insects, this part must have projected from the papyrus roll.44
The layout of the papyrus can be compared with that of P.Cair.Masp. I 67002. This document
consists of three columns, each separated by a blank space. The address runs the whole length of the
first two columns. Therefore, Maspero thought that P.Cair.Masp. I 67004 was also divided into two or
three columns and that, therefore, a substantial amount of text was missing.45 This is certainly not the
37 v? 12. Cf. P.Cair.Masp.

P.Cair.Masp. 167021 Ill 67283.? 5, P.Lond. V 1674.22, 1677 v? 36.
38 Also
P.Cair.Masp. 167004.11, 16, 17.
39 IV 11.82-3.
PAphrod.Lit. 10.3, 23,
40 Cf.
Fournet, Hell?nisme, 511: 'mais en 566, ils ne sont plus, dans la conscience collective, qu'une image qui revient
dans les requ?tes pour d?noncer l'ins?curit? et l'injustice'.
41
Supported at other places in the petition, e.g. Gi)v0pr|[oK]?i>c?vto?? toio\>t[oi?] (1. 16).
421 studied the papyrus in the Egyptian Museum from September until December of 2002 and would like to thankMr.
Sayed Hassan, curator of the papyrological section, for removing the glass plates for me. The photos were made by A.
B?low-Jacobsen for the International Photographic Archive and kindly put atmy disposal by Peter vanMinnen.
43 the fragments cannot are approximate;
However, because be lined up exactly, measurements Maspero gives 31 x 102
cm.
44 Cf. was
P.Hamb. Ill 230, pi. XXIV which also damaged by insects, but written transversa charta.
4^ ne poss?dons
Maspero, Papyrus grecs 1,16: 'Nous que la premi?re colonne.'
case, for in the transmitted text the closing formula at the end of the petition is preserved. Moreover, the
characteristic titles of the dux in the plural are written in full underneath the text. In the case of P.Cair.
Masp. I 67002 these titles are written at the end of the third column.46 For these reasons, our petition
must have of only one column. Towards
consisted the right, the papyrus breaks off entirely. Because the
address above the text can be restored with certainty on the basis of other such petitions, about 75 letters
or 70 cm are missing there, which fixes the minimal length of the original papyrus at 168 cm. From an
almost certain supplement in 1. 3, proposed by Maspero,47 the missing part of the main body of the text
could be about 28 letters. However, several variables make exact measuring of the remaining space
impossible: the letters are of different sizes, and to the lower part the letters and the spaces between the
letters become smaller. Nevertheless, one can make some measurements: the length of the 75 missing
letters of the title is about 70 cm and 1. 3 (the reconstructed part) measures about 23 cm, so the
additional space is at least 47 cm, or 55 letters. This space may have been intended for the signatures of
the petitioners.48
The hand of Dioscorus in P.Cair.Masp. I 67004 is comparable to that of the second and third
columns of P.Cair.Masp. 167002. The letters of the heading are bigger than the rest and an imitation of
chancellery writing. In the first lines the letters are still fairly upright and divided, neat and of bigger
size, but on descending the papyrus, the letters become smaller, more connected with each other and
'pench?e en avant', as Maspero called it.49 The text has two remarkable features: it consists of long
horizontal lines and it is written along the fibres. Most of the documents of this period were written
transversa charta, but the petitions and some poems of the archive of Dioscorus form an exception to
this rule. As is recently supposed, both features may be explained by the 'literarisation' of Late Antique
petitions.50
Text5i
P. Cair.Masp. 16700452 Antinoopolis 567 AD

Cf. Plates I and II
la+ xMTf// + XM7//
1 -f O?ocoi [Tpia]?i Mapiav Mi%ar|?,i ra?pir|A[i]cp 0eo8 p K voxavxiv (Mocpxo
pico) '?ooXiav 'ABavaoi , xc?>?v?oôxaxcp oxpaxr|?uxxTi, arc? ?7i?xoo[v Kai i)7i(6p)(po
eox(ax ) TcaxpiKicp rcpaupeicxoo 'Iodgx?voo, ?odki Kai aoyooaxa?i xfj? ?ri?aioov % pa?
x??///f
2 vacat 51 cm + A?r|oi? Kai ?ceo?a 7ta(poc) x v ??eeivoxax v ?ooAeoxcov "Oji?cov x v So?taov
? 28 ]
xfj? ?)|Li[
46 Cf.
Maspero, Papyrus grecs 1, pi. XI-XII.
47 The is P.Cair.Masp. 167002.? 4.
parallel
48 It is the text. In this case, a third %jLtyhas
possible that the apotropaic symbols %jj,ywere placed symmetrically above
to be added in the lacuna, for the distance until the first %\iy is 60 cm and the distance from the end of the second %\iyuntil
the end of the papyrus is at least 77 cm (70 + 7 cm for the distance between the second xjxy and the start of the lacuna). If a
third %|xywas written, the distance until the second %\iymust be equal to the distance from this sign until the end of the
papyrus, viz. 88 cm. The total length of the papyrus would then be 2 x 88 + 3 (length of the second %u.y)=179 cm. This
means that the remaining space after the title is 88 - 77 = 11 cm. The total length of the blank space would then be 47 + 11 =
58 cm.
49
Maspero, Papyrus grecs 1, 16.
50Fournet, Hell?nisme, 243-5

and 'P?tition'.
51Minor deviations from Maspero's text are not noted.
52 In the this papyrus is also known under special registration number (SR) 2348 and Journal
Egyptian Museum
d'Entr?e number (JE) 40748.
3 "Eyv axai to?? ?v[oik]o?>gi 7ta[aa]v xr\va0A,[i]av fi|ic5v?ri?aicov % pav ? 7tp[o]?0(e?)v

Kai a xfjpa X(piax?)v fm v ?K xov xt\v iinex?pav xa?mrc
??,aa|io? piav a?io?oOai
n?kxv xfj? oia?e?o[r)nevr|c {)|i v Kal 7cav?\)(pr||i,o\)|X?vr|?]
4 7iapo\)aia?. 'E?,7ti?[a Kal aco]xr|pi ??? e%ovxe? ?K xat>xr|? etc' a?,rj0eia? xu%e?v ?r|0r|? x v
ai)|Li???r|KOxcov f|(i?v TtiKp v ?8iKr|jmxx v Kal ?va7cai)?,av ?VO?^?%ti %op??>aai vnep
?t)X[r|v(?)?26]
5 nepeoiv ?(piXo7cp[ay|Li]ovr|0r||LL?v o?k ? exv%ev Kal xo Ka0' f||ia? rcpayna ?êuie?v o?k
T|i)pa|I?V, Kal
\IT\OVXO? JlDXpO-OlxevOD |IT|X?GCOGOVXO?,?? (XTli)|iia? xo?? UTTEpOXCOXaXODC
?v?oôu? [? 24 7C?,T1V
(?)]
6 xo?> 7cavoiKxiaxo\) 0(eo)[?>. To] ?? Ka0' f||Lia? rcpayna ?v xouxoi? e%o|xev. + Ai?(xokco|I?V xr\v
imepqyufj v\i&v Kal ev?oôv ?earcoxeiav ? jn piav Kal ccKaxaaxaaiav ?|it>0r|xov

? 24 ]
?v?arja?v xi? ?xaîa cpepo|i[?Vo?
7 KaxayojLievo? 7ipo [?aJaiAicoc Kal |nr|??|Luav ekkXîv x v vo|u, v KaprcoujLievo? |Lif|X8
?v0pam v (pei?oêvo? Kax? cpo?ov 0?o(?>). Ouk uSkvt|G?v y?p ? xoio?xo? jx?xaio? Kal
o?ia0r|po? Kal [? 28 ]
8 7iovr|p?v a7i8py?[aaa0ai] ea\)x ?iov xe Kal ?pyaoxripiov Kal xo |i?|m)r|nivov [ ] %piaxi
aviK?v ?08xriaai ae?ac Kal ?pfjaKo?, Kal ?aijioai Kal ô?voi? ?cp?ep aai arjKou?,
?vxi7io?8(xiov ?a-oxov 8[?iicvt>? ? 22 ]
9 ?v x avxbv x? ?ep? xo???ap?apoic ?faoiBa?judci a[v]aKaiv?
cncav?a?a 7coir|aa[|Li8vo]?
aaa0ai, |X80' o Ka?rcep eKe?voi x?v ?i?iov ?myiv GKEiv 0eov imeaxp?cpovxo x v
?ôu?ev ae ? ??8 [?, v ? 25]

10 jxocpayv (?)? xoio?>[xo? ]ei(yu [ n?]evo? eQeXÊV
cruvo|ioi v ?xaK[x] v Kal [?]7ipaix?i)
aav Ti[|Li]a? rcavxe?xo? Kal ?o[i]icr|xoi)? x?? TijLiex?pa? ??erc?p0r|O?V oiK?a?, ?,er|?,axr|Ga? x?
7iavxo?a r^cov 7cp?yjLiax[a ? 27]
11 x?icva TcX?ov
?ap?[?p v], auxo?? [K]aK ? ?ia[7i]pa^?|Li8[v]o?a\)vo|i?vo[ia]v xo?? [eip]r|
|Li8(voi?)?ap?apo[i]c Kal ??[e]iav 7rp?xx [v] ?v ?naa K?%pr|[|i]?vo[?]KaKo??a\)xov[o]
|ii[a]? xporc Ka0' o ['I]epoo?oan x?? 8anxx?,ei[?? 27]
12 ei? x? e?S ?xx? xoio?[xo? rc?j?ov xot>x|ai)]?êipy?aaxo [ ]7ir|Kai[ ] ?ap?apoic, yev?|Li[8v]oc
Kal [?]cp'o?? ??rixeia[\>x] v x?[x]eKoXXouBo? [?] ?,[a]n7tpo(xaxo?) ?7Eicp?v8i[av]7cpo[?
e]ai)x?[v] ?i? xti[v xo]v 7c[a]p'a?xo?) Kxia0?[vx]o? N7c[apav]o|Li?av
Kal' [?jmxiniav
N7ta|n'ni?p[av(?) ]oi) [? 28 ]
13 GO)vri0poia8v noXkovq [xoiot)?]xoi)? 7iap[8]7ro|i8voi)? [a\)x] ?7co[ir|]aev jnex? x^v
[7i?]p0riaiv [x] v o?KT||Lia[x]v f||Li [v] Kalxii[v] ?Kei[v] v ?ia[p]7cayr|v [K]ax?[ax]pe\|/ev
x? 7i?e?[ax]a |i[ex'] avx&v Kal[ ]a ?[v]?7cpT]a8V o[ ]va[ ? 28 ]
14 fijx?vKal vr)7ci v x8K[v ]v koXk[ ] vov ?ve?[??]ev ?[ ]i ? jjxxpayo??[K]e?vo? [Kal(?)]
jLiiô?ap?apo[cK]al jja?[??]?r|v, a7covx [v] r||Liv Kal Tiapovx fv] ?vxa?)[0]a ?7ilx[fja88
x]r|? 7co?e ? 'Av[xi]v?[od] ?r||ioaia? %p[eia? ev]e[K8v? 25 ]
15 auxovon v eaux? oiK8i a?|Lievo? |ne[x? x]rjc 87ro|ii?vr|? a\)x x [v] ?xaKx v
a7cf|x[r|a8v],
aDvo?o[\) Kal] ??arcav cav ei? ea['ox]o'u??(p?? ? Kal x? ?[|n]7E??iK?a[i>x] v %[ ]pia
?nr\k[
a7c[expt)]yr|aEV ]r\ [? 28 ]
16 (xeivavxa, 7ipo? ?\)|ui[r|v xov] 8i\[iooiov ?,oyo\) Kal xe?eifav fi(x] v ?vaxp07ir|v, e^ [r\ K]al
7cpoa7copiaa? ?ap?[apoic] E0veai 8 pa K[al] ? xiajLiaxa, at)v0pr|[aK]8^ v xo?? xoioi)
? 29 ]
x[oi?] ? ?e?r|Aoc Kal 7ca[p]08vo[7c?7cr|?
17 ?e?po vnb cvXkr\c[x&v], xov auxou Kal ??ikt^v?[yy?]vr|vKaxajioixeaiaac [ ] ??e ? Kal
Tcpoae[7ilxot)xo]i? x? ?ep? a?Kva x[kev?a]aq %p\)aa ei? K?a[via] a?pac ?ap?apoofv
?y?]%eip v Kal a\)xo[? |Li]8xa7ioir|aa|Li[8VO? ? 24 ]
144 J. H. F. Dijkstra
18 ei oi?v x? ?oxi. Al? 7rapa[Ka?,]o?>jiev x?yv imepcpofj o[ji ]v ??)K?,?iav x? 7cav??iv[a xouxoo]
xo?> ?xo7i xaxoo K[ai KaKJ ? e%ovxo? xfj? [xi|ifj]? xoo a\>xo?> ?vo[jLiaxo?], axiva %apxr|?
[oo % p]e? oiSx8ytaoc[cai?] eKcppaaai [? 28 ]
19 ?vaoxa?rjvai Kai n[avx]ek5)q ?vaipeG^vai. n^[?ov] Kanvov ex>Kaxayv[o?xo (?)
o?]evvuo0ai ox[e xo juvriôa-ovov xo?xoo K[ax? (?) pi]?r|? 7ramox[e ?^ 0]fivai, orc ?
e[op |i]8v 8\)KO?, [? ?i]covai o?oi [? 28 ]

20 x? ??ia x ?r||Lioai [Kai] ?î)7ET|psxfiaai xfi xoo[x v] eio?opa Kax? x[o 80o]? Kai eop jiev
f|a[o]x[ ?] ?iaxp?\|/ai, 7ipoa[KDvo?]|ui8VOi ??iaA,??7c[x ?] x ?yao K[opi 8]tc07txti0e
i)7i(8p) [a x]r|pia? Kai 8[ia|iovf|? ? 21 ]
21 07C8p(po?axa(xoi) Kai 8[\>K?,]88oxa(xoi) axpaxri^(?xai), imaxoi, rcaxp?Kioi, ?ooke?,
[aoyoo]oxa?,ioi, K?pioi. -f a +[+]+
1. (MapTupicp): om. ed.princ. 2. Tta(p?): na pap. Ia%? pap. 4. bnep ?\)%[r\v (?): im?p e\)?[ ed.princ. 5. o?k: odk' pap.,
/. ox)% IKoc0': Ka0' pap. Io?k: odk' pap., /. ox>% InX^v (?)]: ] ed.princ. 6. Ai8aGKC0|j,?v: /. Ai?aGKojiev 7. Kap
7io\)|i?vo? Hagedorn per litteras: ed.princ. I

Ouk : odk' pap. 8. a7i?py?[GaG0ai: ed.princ. I
Kapxou|X?vo? a7i?pya[??G6ai
?[eiKvii)? Hagedorn per litteras: ?[?iKv\>|xevo? (?) ed.princ. 9. fixoi: t^xi ed.princ. Ia[v]aKaiv?GaG0ai Hagedorn per
litteras: oiocKoav?GaG0ai ed.princ. 10. xoio?[xo? ]eig\)c?[ |i?]evo?: xoiot>[xo? ] ?ig [ ]ev[o]? ed.princ. Igdvouxhcov
?x?K[x]o)v Fournet per litteras: Gi)[v]ojioic?>uma Ka[K?]?>ved.princ. IercpaixEDGav /. ?7ipai??i)Gav 11. ?ap?[ap(?v],
auxoic:?ap?[ap ] xa?? ed.princ. I [eip]nui(voi?): [eip]rme> pap. I a?[?]iav: oc[ ]av ed.princ. IK?XpT|[u]?vo[?]
Wilcken, Archiv 5 (1913) 444: K?%pr|[|i]?Vo[i?]ed.princ. IKa6' o ['I]?pco?oa|i Fournet per litteras: KaO' ['I]?p[co]?oa|i
ed.princ. 12. rc?J?ov xot)x[o\)] ?ÊipyotGaxo [ ]7ir|Kai[ ]: ]eov xod[ ] ?^?ipy?Gax[o ] r| Ka[x? (?)] ed.princ. I?,[a]u
7ipo(xaxo?): ?[a]u7tp0pap. I?7tup?v?i[av] Fournet per litteras: ?[u](pav?i [ ] ed.princ. 13. [xoio\>?]xo\)? 7tap[?]7cou?vo\)?
[a\)x]co Fournet per litteras: ]xo\)? na\i[ ]xoji?vo\)? [ ]co ed.princ. I [K]ax?[Gx]p?\|/?v Fournet per litteras:
[K]ax?[xp]?\|/?Ved.princ. ji[?x']: jjl[ev?]ed.princ. I?[v]?7ipr|G?Vo[
I ]va[ : [ ]?7cpr|G?vo [?kt|u(?)]a [xa ed.princ. 14.
koXk[ ] vov ?v??[??]?v d[ ]i: kolX [ ] vov ?i[ ]ev \)[\i?]v ed.princ. I?[k]??vo? Fournet per litteras: b [?k]??vo?
ed.princ. 15 Kal] eOarc?vcoGav: Kax]?oarcavcoGav ed.princ. I??arcavcoGav:/. ??a7tavr|Gav Ix? ?[u]n??,iK? a[\)x]?>v
xMp?a ?7t[?xpt>]ynG?v?m\K[ ]r\ Fournet per litteras: x? o[vv]xeXiK? a[m]?v %[?>vo]iaav[ ] xr???v ?7tr|?,[ic?xr|
(?)] rj ed.princ. 16. jxdvavxa: [ ]?ivovxa ed.princ. I 7ca[p]0?Vo[7t?7rr|?:7ca[p]0?vo[(p9opo? ed.princ. 17. bnb ovk
X,t|g[x?v]: i)7C0G'?^[a?] ed.princ. I[ ] ??E?? Fournet per litteras: [a\)0]a??(o? ed.princ. l7ipoG?[7ii xouxo]i?
Fournet per litteras: 7ipOG?[ ] ed.princ. Ig?kvoc /. G?yva Ix[^?uaG]a? xP^^?c ?i? K?,a[via] a?pac ?ap?apco[v
?Y?]X?ip?v: x[ ]ot?XP'00^ e?? Kka[ ] a?pac ?ap?apa)[v ]%?ipcoved.princ. 18. ?io 7capa[Ka^]o\)|Ji?v: ?i ?[vop
I
k]o?>[|i]?v ed.princ. ic[ai KaK] ? exovxo? xfi? [xi|if|]? xo? a\)xoa) ?vo[|xaxo?]: k[ ]co??xovxo? xfj? [ ]o xo?)a?xo?
?vo[|Liaxo(;] ed.princ. Iy?,(0G[Gai?]: y^coG[GT|]ed.princ. 19. nAJ?ov] KaTcvov ev Kaxayv[o?xo (?) G?]?vvuG0ai:
nX[ ] a?ivoi) ?\)Kaxayco[ ]?W\)G6ai ed.princ. 20. [Kal]: [ ] ed.princ. I??;i)TCr|p?xfjoai
Hagedorn per litteras:
ed.princ. I i)7i(?p): d71 pap. 21. i)7i?p(p\)?Gxa(xoi): i)7T?p(pD?GX?)Xa3 pap. I ?[\)K?,]??Gxa(xoi): ?[\)K^]??GX>ra)
?ô)7i?p?xf?Gai
pap. I Gxpaxr|X,(?xai): GxpaxrjV pap.
Commentary
xa> ... xo
1. (MapxDp?cp): cf. P.Cair.Masp. I 67002.1, 67003.1-2,
67005.1, 67007.1, 67008.1, 67017.1. ?v?o?oxaxco ?//: the
series of titles in the dative case consist of
three honorary titles (GXpaxr|A,axr|?, Latin tribunus, arco i)7c?xcov, consularis
title (8o\)% Kal dux et augustalis).
and 7iaxp?Kioc, patricius) followed by the official a\)yo\)GxaXio?, rcaxpiK?q)
'Io^gxivod: se. ovxo? since Justin was Maspero saw the phrase, on the analogy of
7cpai(p?Kxoa) 'patrician prefect'. *
P.Munch. I 2.6, as a copying error by Dioscorus and read 'prefect of the troops of Justinian' ? However, the case of
7tpai(p?Kxo\) 'Iougx?voi) is different from the series of titles to which it belongs and 'Justin' is not written in the plural.
Moreover, at the end of the papyrus (1. 21) in which the titles of the dux are summed up once again a prefect is not
mentioned, that it is not a title of Athanasius. It is more likely to take 'prefect Justin' with 'patrician' and to
indicating
hypothesise that Justin is the Emperor Justin II himself who had just ascended the throne (in 565) and had been prefect
since 552.54 jf mjs is correct, it confirms the dating of P.Oxy. XVI 1920, in which a patrician Athanasius
interpretation
53 J. 'Les papyrus BIFAO 10 (1912) 131-57 at 143-4, n. 4 and L'organisation militaire de

Maspero, Beaug?', l'Egypte
(Paris, 1912) 80. Cf. Bell, 'Egyptian Village', 33, n. 65; PLRE Illa s.v. 'Athanasius 3'.
byzantine
54 Cor.lust. 1.133-40. Cf. M. 'Altes und Neues aus der byzantinisch-?gyptischen vornehm
Geizer, Verwaltungsmisere,
lich im Zeitalter Justinians', Archiv 5 (1913) 346-77 at 360, n. 5; G. Rouillard, L'administration civile de l'Egypte byzantine
(Paris, 19282) 37, n. 11; E. Stein, Histoire du Bas Empire, 2 vols. (Paris, 1949-59) 2.739-46.
from the Thebaid is mentioned, to 563.55 to ?//: 'for the second year', i.e. 567. Athanasius had been succeeded before
15 March 568, cf. P.Cair.Masp. II 67166.6-9, but probably already between May and July of 567.5"
2. : a reference to the dux, e.g. xr\q h\i[(bv
T?i? v\l[ 7tocv??;?%coc ?eîiocoi) ?ÔDG?a?], cf. P.Cair.Masp. 167002.? 1.
3. 7tp[o]?: 'with'.57 itaxajio?: 'redemption'. The perfect eyvcoGiai demonstrates that the redemption is already a fact,
hence the meaning 'favour of God (acquired by prayer)',5? whereas in other instances in the archive, P.Cair.Masp. I
67003.21 and II 67151.123, cf. 127, the 'redemption' is only to be desired and not fulfilled yet. nakxv: i.e. for the
second year. With this complicated sentence, Dioscorus thus wants to say: 'Everyone in the Thebaid knows that we are
in God's favour, for again we enjoy your presence'.
8K xat)?r|?: se. ... AtiOtk: a
4. rcocpo'UG?ac. a?nOda? play of words? bn?p ?\>x[r|v (?): Maspero read bnep e\)X[, but the last
letter before the lacuna is probably a %. I therefore propose to read wt?p 'more than we could have prayed
ev%[r\v,
for'.59
5. 8(piX,O7tp[aY|i]ovr|0r|ji?v: 'we were the victims of greed'. Cf. at P.Aphrod.Lit. IV 10.3: 'il d?signe toute personne qui,
par ses intrigues, cherche ? s'approprier des biens o?k 'out of proportions'.
ill?galement', (b? ?ru%?v: Preisigke
translates the phrase (b? ?Ti)%?v to kccO' f||i?? Tcpayuxx as 'wie unsere Sache lag', but forgets the connective Kai in
between. "0
5-6. et jifj... nXr\v (?)] to?> tiocvoikt?gtoi) 0(eo)[o): a reference to God is made here in order to slightly nuance the statement
that nobody can save the petitioners but the dux, hence the reading 7tA,rrv (?)] in the lacuna. The accusatives after ei \n\
have to be dependent upon a verb in the lacuna, e.g. 'if we did not have you.
6. to\) 7tavoiKTioTo?> 0(?o)[?: Maspero makes the following comment on this phrase: 'mis?ricordieux au lieu de
mis?rable',"1 but as Bell already observed rcavoiKTiGTo? derives from(irav)oiKTiGTri? in stead of

(rcocv)o?KTicTo?."2
AiOocgkcojiev: an adhortative is not to be expected here, so read Cf. P.Cair.Masp. I 67002.? 9 (?i??xgko
8i?aGKO|i?v.
|i8v), I 67003.15 (?t?aGKcojiev), I 67009 v? 17 (oiOaGKoojiEv), III 67283.2 (?i?o?gkou^v, restored). ?cKocTaGTaG?av:
'instability, anarchy'."-^
7. Kocprcot>|A?vo?: 'derive (profits from)'. Maspero read KapToujiEVoc as a mistake for KpocToujxevo?, but this mistake is
uncommon, whereas Kocprcoujievoc supposes no correction at all. Besides, one would expect an instrumental dative with
KpocToujievoc.
8. ?7t?pya[GaG6ai]: Maspero inserted a present tense, but this seems less appropriate in view of the chain of aorist
infinitives of which it forms a part. u?jjA)r||jivov: to Lampe, this word should be translated as 'having been
according
initiated, instructed (in divine In early Christian sources, the word |x\)GTT|piov/mystenwm means
mysteries)'."4
'mystery', in the sense of religious doctrine, in which one has been initiated, instructed."5 It seems that this sense is
also conveyed here, and that the expression should therefore be translated with has been taught'.
GE?occ: 'worship which
[ ] : according to Maspero, a word was effaced here; on the papyrus a small stroke of ink can still be seen. OpfJGKo? =
0pT|GK??a. ?oemov ?[?ikv\)?: the combination Maspero proposes (eoruT?v (?)) is not attested in Greek.
8[?iKvu|i?vo?
Ta i?p?c: 'the sanctuaries',
9. plural of to ??p?v. The plural could also mean 'sacred mysteries, sacraments',"" but in view
of the context which is about dedicating shrines with demons and wooden statues (1. 8) it is unlikely that thismeaning
prevails here. See further discussion below, to?? ?ap?apoic t?toi Ba?udgi: same phrase in Olympiodorus, F. 35.2
Blockley. Maspero read f|Tt, 'iotacisme pour f|Toi', but this explanation is not necessary as the papyrus reads
clearly
T?toi."' a[v]aKaiv?GOiG0ai: Maspero read?[t]cxKaiv?GaG0ai but the first letter could also be an a. Moreover a v fills
the lacuna better and the verb dcvaKaivi?co is widely attested, whereas is a hapaxP? Palmer
?iccKocivi?oum wrongly
55 Cf. at 1920 (dating: 550-60); PLRE Illa s.v. 'Athanasius 3' (548 or 563); Fournet,Hell?nisme,
P.Oxy. XVI 331
(563).
56 330-6. Maspero, 137-43 already dated the text between 567 and 570 (?), but
Fournet, Hell?nisme, 'PapyrusBeaug?',
M. Geizer, Studien zur byzantinischen Verwaltung ?gyptens (Leipzig, 1909) 24-5 and 'Altes und Neues', 371 dated it 552-3,
Wilcken, 'Papyrus Urkunden XV, 443 ca. 552 and, most recently, Weber, 'Blemmyer', 26 between 548 and 553.
57 Patristic s.v. rcpo?
Lampe, Greek Lexicon, 1.
58 s.v.
Lampe, Patristic Greek Lexicon, itaxGfio? 1.
59 Cf.
e.g. Hid. 6.8.2; Gr.Nyss.Beat. 1 (PG 44, col. 1277,1. 37); Cat.Rom. 8.26 (Cramer 4, p. 144,1. 19); lo.D.Parall.
1.31 (PG 95, col. 1240,11. 1-2), 2.4 (PG 95, col. 1277,1. 6).
60 s.v. xuyx?vco.
Preisigke, W?rterbuch
61
Maspero, Papyrus grecs 1, 16. Cf. at P.Cair.Masp. I 67030 r? 10.
62At P.Lond.V 1676.56.
f? Cf.
Fournet, 'Notes critiques', 7-8.
64 s.v. Cf. Sophocles,
Lampe, Patristic Greek Lexicon, Greek Lexicon, s.v.
65
E.g. J. den Boeft, J.N. Bremmer, 'Notiunculae martyrologicae', VChr 35 (1981) 43-56 at 46-7. Cf. Patristic
Lampe,
Greek Lexicon, s.v. |4A)Gxr|piov D 3 e.
66 s.v.
Lampe, Patristic Greek Lexicon, i?po? 3.
67For
fixoi see P.J. Sijpesteijn, 'TheMeanings of fixoi in the Papyri', ZPE 90 (1992) 241-50.
68 Cf. s.v.
LSJ in which is referred to P.Cair.Masp. 167004 with the translation 'surrender, hand over'.
to ?[i]aKoiv?GaG0ai."9 o eke?voi ... xcov

conjectured Maspero's reading jxe0' Ka?7i?p eôdOevcogecoc ??8co[ta?v:
a main verb is rare, it seems connected
although Ka?7cep with to\)7U?Gxp?(povxo. Preisigke translates i)7i?Gxp?(povxo with
'abfallen (vom Glauben)' and Liddell & Scott with 'refuse', but indeed the word occurs in 2 Pet. 2.21 with the same
meaning of 'turning away from' (expressed with ek by Peter and possibly the genitive xcov in
?ôuO?vcog?cuc ??8co[tauv
our text). 7 * The were, then, away from the idols x?v dci?tov 0??v 'to know the eternal
Blemmyes turning ??iiyivcoGKEiv
God'.
10. gdvouo?cov: in stead of the final v, Dioscorus first wrote a ?, possibly with ?jio?coc in mind. gdvouo?cov ?x?K[x]cov: the
genitive probably depends on the participle which cannot, for the present, be reconstructed, couocpa
..]?iGi)co[.|i?]?Vo?,
ycov (?)may likewise depend upon this participle, although it cannot be excluded that it is dependent upon a word in the
preceding lacuna. In both cases, couocpaycov refers to the Blemmyes, not to Cannibal who is called in 1. 14.
cbuocpayo?
On the other hand, cojiocpaycov may also be a substantive participle just as auxovouxov in 1. 15 and would then refer to
Cannibal all the same.
11. auxo??: Dioscorus wrote this word first, but because he meant the Blemmyes in particular, not barbarians in the just
mentioned metaphoric sense, he added xo?? [?ip]r|ui(voi?) ?ap?apo[i]c. a?[?]iav 7tpaxx(?[v]: cf. P.Cair.Masp. I
67002.iii 4, 67097.35, II 67151.26, 67162.25; P.Lond. V 1716.5; P.Michael. 4?.52 (although here in combination with
the verb ?i?coui). x?? 8ajia?,?i[?...: there presumably follows a form of the verb teoi?g) in the lacuna.7^
12. rc?j?ov xo\>x[oi)]: sc. 'iEpco?oau. y?vau{?v]o?: does not seem to belong to the preceding word as this word
?ap?apoic
is not articulated. This goes against the precise remark about the agreement of Collouthos with actual barbarians in the
following phrase. Hence, yevaujevjoc probably means 'after he had settled' and with Kai [?](p'o?? 'afterhe had settled
on the same conditions on which ...\'^ (?): Dioscorus wroteuiapav and later added the
yna\i'\imp[av originally
Tiau- inter thus the hybrid where should have been written 7^ If
prefix linea, forming 'na\i'uiap[av, 7tajLijiiap[ov
Dioscorus corrected this spelling, cannot be decided.
13. ... sentences. cf. P.Cair.Masp. I
Gi)vr|0poiG8V...?7co[?Ti]G?v [K]ax?[Gx]p?\|/?v: asyndetical rcap[?]7io|Li?vo'D? [a\)x](p:
67002.iii 2. ji?x? ... Kai: 'beside ... also'.
?K??[v]cov: se. xcov oiktiuxxxcov fjuiov. [K]ax?[ox]p?\|/?v: Maspero read [k](xt
?[x]p?\|/?v but this word is rarely attested and does not fit the context, a?xcov: se. ?[v]?7cpr|G?v: cf. P.Cair.
?ap?apcov.
Masp. I 67002.? 24; P.Flor. III 295.9, 296.27.
14. ?v??[??]?v: traces of the ? and i seem to be visible underneath the lacuna. d[..]i: (i)[u?]v) is
Maspero's reading
impossible, because the letter behind the lacuna cannot be a v. uil;o?ap?apo[c K]ai ui?[??,]A,r|v: originally forming the
-
well-known antithesis "E?Anv ?ap?apoc, both words had become negative terms in Late Antiquity and therefore
enhance each other in derogatory meaning.7^ The combination of uiô?ap?apoc with uiêAAnv is, as far as I know,
unattested in Greek.7"
15. are the taxes of the ordinary tax payers which were without doubt mentioned in the lacuna
o?K?ic?Ga|X?vo?: object
immediately before 1. 15. The tax payers are picked up in 1. 15 with a[\)x]c?v. Kai] eoarcavcoGav: read
Maspero
Kax]?Sa7iavcoGav, because he saw an apostrophe before the ?, but nothing can be seen now of an apostrophe and Kai is
syntactically more probable.

16. jidvavxa: Bell read gdv] I[x]??vovxa, beginning at the end of the lacuna of 1. 15, but the breaking off of words between
lines is unusual in these A,cox?G(iaxa: as this word is only attested twice in Greek tragedy in the combination
papyri.77
?cox?G|Liaxa 'E?A,a?o? 'flowers of Greece' fighting barbarians in both cases,7** its usage here may be significant, for in
our text Cannibal offers ?cox?GjLiaxa to the barbarians, xo?? xoiot>x[oi?]: sc. Maspero
?ap?apoic. 7ta[p]8?vo[7U7rr|?:
temptingly read another negative adjective, 7c[ap]??vo[(p9opoc, just as the tricolon 6 xoio?xo? uxxxaio? Kai oîG0r|p?c
Kai [ in 1. 7.7" However, this word is unattested, whereas 7cap??V07c?7ir|? is Homeric."^
17. xo\) a?xoft: these words only make sense if they are taken with i?ncnv and added for rhetorical effect: 'his
?[yy?]ynv
very own daughter'. [...].. oc?eco?: Maspero read [a\)9]a??co?, but this reading is unlikely, because the word auOa??co?
is unattested in Greek and two more letters are missing in the lacuna, x? i?pa G?Kva: 'the imperial standards'. Maspero
69
Palmer, Gram. 143, n. 14.
70 W?rterbuch and LSJ, s.v.
Preisigke,
7* See
Dijkstra, 'World Full of the Word'. Cf. Maspero, who put a comma before tcov
?ôd??V(og??)? ???co[a,(ov.
72Cf.LXXReg.III12.28.
73 s.v. y?yvojiai 3.
Preisigke, W?rterbuch,
741 thank Dieter Hagedorn for this suggestion.
75 See further
Dijkstra, 'WorldFull of theWord'.
76 The terms were not of mixed
used, though together, by later Byzantine authors for Christianised nomads marriages,
H. Ahrweiler, 'Byzantine Concepts of the Foreigner: The Case of the Nomads', in H. Ahrweiler, A.E. Laiou (eds.), Studies
on the Internal Diaspora of theByzantine Empire (Washington, 1998) 1-15 at 13.
77H.I. Bell in =
Maspero, Papyrus grecs 1, 201 ('addenda et corrigenda') BLI (1922) 100.
78A. F 99.17
Radt; E.Hel. 1593.
79 Cf. I 67003.23.
P.Cair.Masp.
80 Horn.//. 11.385.
and Preisigke translate these words as 'saintes images' and However, it is more likely that the Latin
'Heiligenbilder'.81
as and in a military context means
word signum refers to military standards, is suggested by Van Minnen,82 tepo?
'imperial'.83 Moreover, in the Greek and Coptic papyri, all dating from the third century AD or later, the word G?yva
seems to refer to the military were the in, and denoted
standards the military headquarters or even a
complex kept
- -
Since the standards of gold or silver
had been formed especially the legionary eagles they had always
prison.84
been kept in such a secure place. Originally because the standards were regarded as holy and therefore sacrosanct, the
of the soldiers were usually deposited in the same Supposedly, any thief would have been deterred
savings place.85
from violating the sanctity of such a treasury.8? So it looks as if our man might have been implicitly accused of
not the standards themselves, but the money (%p\)Ga) deposited within the building where the
stealing, perhaps
standards were kept.87 Hence the restitution Kai 7ipoG?[7citouto]i? toc ??pa g?kvoc x[^?\)aG]a? %pi)Ga e?? K?a[via]
were kept by
a?pac ?ap?ap(u[v ?Y?]%?ipcov'and on top of that having treated scornfully the place where the standards
taking in hand (its) gold for bracelets of a barbarous slave girl'. As the % in ]%?ipcov is almost certain, a present
participle ?Y?]%?ipa)v seems probable here. Taking this participle with %pvca would explain its otherwise strange
position between gikvoc and Kâ[via].
18. Dioscorus with Cannibal's actual name, which is not transmitted in the text (e.g.
K[al KaK]??...?vo[|iaTo?]: plays
in the same way as P.Aphrod.Lit. IV 14.11 where tiuxxg) and ?vouxx are combined. yX,(?g[gcuc] :Maspero
Eusebios)
only inserted [gtj] here but this is grammatically improbable and there ismore space in the lacuna.
19. nXJ?ov] KocTtvot)?\) KaTccyylo?TO(?) a?]ew?o0ai: Cannibal is the destructing fire, which the dux has to extinguish,
even without smoke. This metaphor already occurs in the Septuagint and returns in patristic sources.88 Because
leaving
a connective with the preceding of verbs is it seems that a new sentence starts here. nX[?ov]
particle string missing,
Kanvov: cf. P.Cair.Masp. I 67002.? 24 and 67004.11, in which kX?ov ?ap?apcov means 'worse than barbarians (do)'
and 67004.12, inwhich kX]eov to?-tIod] means 'worse than he (did)'. In the same way, nX[?ov] koctcvo? is an apposi
tion of o?]evv?a0ai: 'worse than smoke (is quenched)', ev KaTayv[ouo (?): the only parallel for the combination of
these words is Aesch.?wm. otcc?? ?v ev KaTayva)G0fi
573, ??kti 'that the case may be decided on its just merits' (tr.
H.W. Smyth). 'to be quenched', passive use, although the subject is missing.
G?]evv\)G0ai:
20. wrongly read ??;\)7t?p?T??Gai and corrected it, whereas the papyrus has the correct spelling. The
?^DTcripETfJGai: Maspero
lacuna of this line probably consists of a reference to the children of the dux, e.g. tcov i)|Li?T?p(ov taxuTcpo(T?Tu)v)
tekvcov, cf. P.Lond. V 1677 v? 40.

21. i)7i?p(p\)?GTa(T0i)... K?pioi: vocatives.89
Translation
1
To Flavius Triadius Marianus Michaelius Gabrielius Theodorus Constantinus <Martyrius> Iulianus
Athanasius, the most glorious commander, consular and most extraordinary patrician since Justin was
prefect, dux and augustalis of the Thebaid for the second year.
81 s.v.
Maspero, Papyrus grecs 1,18; Preisigke, W?rterbuch,
82 P. van 'Une nouvelle liste des du nome ZPE 101 83-6 at 85, n. 13.
Minnen, toponymes Hermopolite', (1994)
83 Cf. the expression F. Mitthof, Annona militaris. Die im sp?tantiken 2
f| iep?c ?vvcova, Heeresversorgung ?gypten,
vols. (Florence, 2001) 1.63, 73-6.
84 See at P.Lond. VI 1914.18.
kp? G?yva: Stud.Pal. XX 217.4; CPR VIII 71.10; SB 14787.3. G?yva: P.Oxy. LI 3616.5;
P.Lond. II 413.12, 16 (= P.Abinn. VI 12, 16); CPR XIV 39.5; P.Haun. III 52.36; P.Lond. V 1889.13. arm: F. Rossi, Un
nuovo c?dice copto del Museo Egizio di Torino (Rome, 1893) 88; W.E. Crum, Short Texts from
Coptic Ostraca and Papyri
(London, 1921) 389; P.Lond. V 1709.88; H.E. Winlock, W.E. Crum, H.G. Evelyn-White (eds.), The Monastery of Epi
phanius at Thebes, 2 vols. (New York, 1926) 2.201. Cf. H. F?rster, W?rterbuch der griechischen W?rter in den koptischen
dokumentarischen Texten (Berlin, 2002) 726-7.
85 For ad signa see R.O. Fink, Roman Military Records on Papyrus
depositio (London, 1971) 243-9.
86 For the attached to see W. in RAC VII 689-711 at
symbolism military standards, e.g. Seston, 'Feldzeichen', (1969)
702-5 and 705-7; P. Herz, 'Honos aquilae', ZPE 17 (1975) 181-97; M. Speidel, Roman Army Studies, 2 vols.
(Amsterdam/Stuttgart, 1984-92) 1.3-43 at 17-27 ('Eagle Bearer and Trumpeter. The Eagle Stand and Trumpets of the
Legions', 19761) and 301-9 at 301-5 ('"Europeans". Syrian Elite Troops at Dura Europos and Hatra', 19841); J. Riipke, Domi
militiae. Die religi?se Konstruktion des Krieges in Rom (Stuttgart, 1990) 184-8; D. Woods, 'Julian, Arbogastes, and the
Signa of the Ioviani and Herculiani', JRMES 6 (1995) 61-8; C. Robert Philips III, 'Standards,Cult of, inOCD\ 1437-8.
87 Personal communication by David Woods.
88 LXX Ps. Patristic sources: in Ps. 40-44.4
67(8)3, 36(7).20. e.g. Didym.C?mm. (Gronewald 5, codex p. 250,11. 27-8),
oi ex?poi o?v xo?? Ki)pio\)...Kax? x?v Karcv?v auo: x i)\j/co?Tivai a?xov?.
G?evvDvxai
8^ These vocatives are called 'acclamation 350 and also return in the
plurals' by Fournet, Hell?nisme, poems:
P.Aphrod.Lit. IV 14.19-20, 17.20 and 24.20.
2
Petition and supplication from the most pitiable councillors of Omboi, the slaves of your
[authority].
3
Our favour with (our) God and Saviour Christ is known to the inhabitants of the whole of our
unfortunate Thebaid from the fact that our wretchedness is again deemed worthy of your celebrated
4
presence [which is praised all-around]. Whereas on the basis of that (presence) we entertain the
salutary hope of really forgetting the bitter injustices which have befallen us and of celebrating
5
rest more we could have ... we were the victims of greed out of
perpetual [than prayed for?] parts,
proportions and had no chance to declare our case, as there was nobody who could deliver or save us, if
6
[we did not have] you, most eminent and glorious [lord, with the exception?] of God who pities all.
Our case is as follows.
We inform your extraordinary and glorious lordship that someone has fallen ill with unspeakable
... 7 if
madness and rebellion, being carried away by disorder brought before the Emperor, and having
derived no terror for the laws nor sparing people out of fear of God. For that foolish, ...
slippery and
... 8
person did not shrink from making his own life and workplace evil and setting the taught Christian
worship and religion aside and consecrating shrines with demons and wooden statues, (thereby)
an adversary
himself ... 9and he laid the sanctuaries for the barbarians, that
showing traps by renewing
is, Blemmyes, after which, although they were turning away from the despicable idols to know the
eternal God, ... 10 a Cannibal (?), that man bewitched them ... of outlaws
looking like him, and
being
they plundered us completely and he destroyed our houses so that they became uninhabitable after
robbed our various ... [our] nchildren worse than barbarians (do), making an
having (all) possessions
agreement with them, the said barbarians, in an evil way and while he practised fearlessness in all
wicked deeds the law in his own hands as Jerobeam [set up] the heifers ...
respects using by taking just
12 ...
with regard to the idols that person performed for barbarians even worse than (Jerobeam) did, after
he had settled on the same conditions as those on which the illustrious Collouthos in the past tried to
seek their appearance to himself by way of the all-abominable lawlessness and crime of that which was
13
built by him ... (Collouthos) assembled many such (?) escorting him; besides the destruction of our
houses he also caused their robbery; he overturned the bulk with the help of (the barbarians) and burnt
down ... 14us and of our innocent children ... he lifted (them) up (?).. .that Cannibal, half barbarian and
half heathen, whilewe were absent and present here in this city, Antinoopolis, on account of official
15...
(tax) business taking the law in his own hand he collected [the taxes in kind (of the ordinary
taxpayers)], appropriating (the taxes) for himself with the band of outlaws which accompanied him, and
they also fearlessly spent (the taxes) on themselves and he harvested the vineyards of (the ordinary
16 to and our total
taxpayers)... things that have remained, (causing) damage the public treasury
destruction. Moreover, after he had even sent the choicest gifts to barbarous tribes, while the wretched
... ll
man and violator of girls worshipped together with these people here by fellow-brigands, having
fearlessly violated his very own daughter and on top of that having treated scornfully the place where
the imperial standards were kept by taking in hand (its) gold for bracelets of a barbarous slave girl and
... i8 if it is
having himself appropriated possible.
We therefore entreat your extraordinary honour to ... the all-dreadful deeds of that perfectly crazy
man who is also behaving of his name, (deeds) which
in a way not worthy a papyrus cannot contain and
... 19to
which we cannot describe with
(our) tongues, repulse and altogether do away with him. May the
worse than smoke (is quenched), so that the memory of
right decision be made (for him) to be quenched
that man is driven out root and branch once and for all, in order that we find means to live peacefully ...
20 this and
our part (of the taxes) to the fisc and to assist according to custom in the collection of (part)
in order that we find means to pass our time in peace, while we continually pay homage to the good
21
Lord God who sees all on behalf of the salvation and preservation [of your children], most
extraordinary and honourable commander, consul, patrician, dux, augustalis, lord.

Historical Implications
In our petition, it is often hard to distinguish between topoi and actual events, because the text has a
clear, persuasive goal. But stripping the petition of topoi and obvious exaggerations, a few events
remain which are too specific too discard:
Cannibal renewed for a group of Blemmyes

'the sanctuaries'
Cannibal plundered the countryside with them
A certain Collouthos in the past also mustered a gang of barbarians, plundered the countryside with
them and built something for them
Cannibal illegally collected and appropriated taxes, spent them for his own use with the Blemmyes
and harvested vineyards
An incident occurred with the imperial standards, in which Cannibal possibly stole from the military
treasury
Although the line between topoi and credible details cannot be too artificially drawn, for example the
accusation against Cannibal that he raped his own daughter (1. 17) may be more than mere gossip, the
above mentioned details seem to be based on at least a core of truth. But even these elements may be
exaggerated or written from a malicious
point of view. On first sight, the accusations of appropriating
taxes, plundering and stealing described in our petition are not of a different nature from those
recounted in other petitions, for example in P.Cair.Masp. I 67002. But what makes our text different
from the other petitions, as we have seen on p. 141, are precisely the details that Cannibal conspired
with a group of 'real' barbarians, Blemmyes, and renovated their pagan sanctuaries. These remarkable
details and their historical implications can only be understood if they are placed against the historical
background of what we know of the Blemmyes at this time.

In 1. 8, Cannibal is said 'to have set aside the taught Christian worship and religion' and to have
'consecrated shrines
for demons and wooden statues'. In the next line, this statement
is explained
further: 'And he
laid traps by renewing the sanctuaries for the barbarians, that is Blemmyes, after
which, although they were turning away from the despicable idols to know the eternal God, ... '. In a
reminiscence of the New Testament, which has exactly this theme,90 Cannibal is depicted as a false
prophet who leads recently converted people from the right path. Although this, then, may be a
rhetorical element, the Blemmyes were just converting to Christianity (the Greek uses the imperfect
imeaxp?cpovxo), when Cannibal bewitched them to turn back to paganism and plunder the countryside
with him.91 He accomplished this by renovating their, obviously pagan, sanctuaries. Remarkably,
Dioscorus uses three generic plurals for the words 8oci|Liooi, ôavoi? and ct|ko\>? (1. 8), but the
articulated x? iep? in 1. 9. Whereas the first three words seem to be rhetorical plurals aimed to reach the
desired effect, x? iep? seems to denote a more precise location: 'the sanctuaries'. Like the incident with
the building made by Collouthos in 1. 12, these sanctuaries were apparently known among the audience
of the petition. Of course, the question arises which sanctuaries Dioscorus refers to here. The Blemmyes
had settled in several places in Lower Nubia from the end of the fourth century onwards and could well
have been interested in its sanctuaries.92 But the answer cannot have been the perhaps obvious
suggestion of the Temple of Mandulis at Talmis (modern Kalabsha),93 nor other Nubian temples, as the
90 2 Pet. 2. See further *

Dijkstra, World Full of theWord'.
91
Kirwan, Studies, Ch. XXV at 89 translates this sentence as follows: 'And this, in spite of the fact that, in so doing,
the Blemmyes would be persuaded to cease acknowledging the Everlasting God'. to Kirwan, then, the Blemmyes
According
had already been converted to Christianity. For the same see Demicheli, 194; Weber,
interpretation Rapporti, 'Blemmyer',
26.
92 T.
Eide, T. H?gg, R.H. Pierce, L. T?r?k (eds.), Fontes Historiae Nubiorum, 4 vols. (Bergen, 1994-2000) 3 (= FHN
III) 305, 308-9, 317, 319. In what follows, I refer to the numbers of the FHN and take over its translations, unless otherwise
indicated.
93FfflVIII
310-11, 313.
Emperor Diocletian had already abandoned this part of the Roman Empire in 298.94 That is why Philae
is a better option, because its temples, above all the temple of Isis, were
important sanctuaries in the
southern Roman area and Blemmyan presence is well attested here.
From of old, the island of Philae, which lies on the cultural and political border of Egypt and Nubia,
has had a special relationship with the peoples from the south.95 Many third-century Greek and demotic
texts on the temple walls of Philae show that the Kingdom of Meroe, an important client state south of
the Roman Empire, regularly sent official delegates to the island to sacrifice to its gods.96 When the
Kingdom of Meroe declined and Rome withdrew its southern border to Philae in 298, two peoples filled
the vacuum left by these two powers in Lower Nubia in the fourth century: the indigenous Noubades (a
branch of the Nubian people) and the Blemmyes from the Eastern Desert. The interpretation of the
sources regarding these peoples in the fourth and fifth century is commonly based on the assumption
that Noubadian kings were fighting Blemmyan kings over the domination of the land south of Philae.97
This is in fact the picture of contemporary Roman sources. In practice, the Blemmyes and the Noubades
must have formed a complicated system of tribal relationships.98 This hypothesis sheds new light on the
sources concerning these peoples. Especially in the fifth century, tribes of both peoples raided Egypt
and, in consequence, the Romans sent several expeditions to end the disaster.99 The most famous
illustration of this situation is the request by bishop Appion of Syene to protect his churches against
raids from the Blemmyes and Noubades.100
The Roman Empire even paid
peoples both annually to prevent them from raiding again and
allowed them to enter the Isis temple of Philae.101 For example, about the year 452 or 453 the historian
Priscus writes:
eivai ?xo?? kocx?c x?v izakaxbv vojliov ockcoA/uxov xr\v ei? x? iep?v xfj? "Ioi?o?
??
oux?aoiv, xo?> 7ioxa|i?oD aK(x<poD? A?y?7ix?cov ?%?vxa>v xr\v 87ciji??8iav, ?v ?mep x?
aya^|na xfj? Qeov ?vxi0?|ievov ?ioc7top0|i?t>?xai. 'Ev pr|xco yocp o? ?ap?apoi %p?vq) ??
xtjv o?Ke?av ?iocKoni?ovxe? x? ^?avov 7t?A,iv avx& %pr|axr|piaoa|i?voi ?? xt^v vfjaov
?rcoacb?o-uoiv.
and that, in accordance with the ancient custom,10^ their crossing to the temple of Isis be unhindered,
Egyptians having charge of the river boat in which the statue of the goddess (Isis) is placed and ferried
across the river. For at a stated time the barbarians bring the wooden statue to their own country and, after
having consulted it, return it safely to the island.10^
This is a significant remark, for wooden statues, although used in a generic plural, are also mentioned in
our text (1. 8). Maybe, then, the incident referred to in our text has some connection with the 'ancient
custom' among the Blemmyes to worship a wooden statue of Isis.
94FHN III 32S.

95 See most I.C. Rutherford, Island of the Extremity. and Power in the Pilgrimage
recently, Space, Language
Traditions of Philae', inD. Frankfurter (ed.), Pilgrimage and Holy Space inLate Antique Egypt (Leiden, 1998) 229-56.
96 For see F.L. in the Dodecaschoenus, 2 vols.
the demotic inscriptions, Griffith, Catalogue of the Demotic Graffiti
(Oxford, 1935-7 = I.Ph.Dem.). For the Greek ones, A. and E. Bernand, Les inscriptions grecques et latines de Philae, 2 vols.
(Paris, 1969 = I.Ph. Gr.).

97
E.g. L. T?r?k, 'A Contribution to Post-Meroitic Chronology: The Blemmyes in Lower Nubia', RSO 58 (1984) 201
43, Late Antique Nubia (Budapest, 1988) 226-9 and 'Notes on theKingdom of the Blemmyes', in Studia in honorem L. F?ti
(Budapest, 1989) 397-412.
98As I
argued at the 10th International Congress forNubian Studies, Rome 2002.
99FHNWl 314,
318, 328-9.
100 fhjsj jjj 314, xhe was as appears from an imperial on the papyrus.
request granted rescript preserved
101FHN III
318, 328; Joh.Eph.#? III 4.6.1.
102 Fftjy translates with but 'custom' seems more here.
vojiov 'law', appropriate
103FHN III 318.
However, by the sixth century the role of Blemmyan tribes in the Nile valley of Lower Nubia had
died out. In the course of the fifth century, indigenous Noubadian tribes gradually attained the upper
hand,104 and they had been united into a kingdom which became Christianised in the course of the sixth
century.105 Nevertheless, while it is possible that Blemmyan tribes continued to live in the Nile valley,
there is proof that they settled in Upper Egypt in the sixth century. An archive of 13 documents from
Gebelein, 40 km south of Thebes, testifies to a Blemmyan community living on the island Temsir/
Ta?are (probably Gebelein itself) in Upper Egypt at the end of the sixth century.106 Although Byzantine
administrative terms are mentioned in the texts, their tribal structure seems to have remained intact
which suggests that they had been given a special status. Presumably, the Blemmyes came to an agree
ment with the Byzantine Emperor to settle on the Egyptian island and pay taxes in return.107 The Blem
myes mentioned in our text may have had the same status: an autonomous, settled (or semi-nomadic)
community of Blemmyes in Upper Egypt with tax responsibilities towards the Byzantine Emperor.
But what about the connection with the Isis cult of Philae in the sixth century? Procopius has a
famous account of the closing of the sanctuaries on Philae in 535-7:
Tama ?? x? ?v Oi?m? iep? oi)xoi 8r\ oi ?ap?apoi Kai ?? ?|i? ei%ov,?Xk? ?aGiA,ei)c
a?x? 'IoDGXiviavo? Ka0e?,e?v eyvco. NapGfj? yo?>v, IIepoap|i?vio? y?vo?, oi) rcp?oGev
axe r|\)xo|io?,r|KOxo? ?? Tco|iaio\)? ?|ivf|o0r|v, x v ?Keivri oxpaxicox v apxcov x? xe iep?
Kaoe?ê, ?aoiAicoc oi ?7tayY??âvxoc, Kai xo?? ji?v iepe?? ?v cp-oXaiqi ?a%e, x? ??
?y?^|iaxa ?? B-u??vxiov ?rce|i\|/ev.
These barbarians retained the sanctuaries on Philae right down to my day, but the Emperor Justinian
decided to pull them down. Narses, a Persarmenian by birth, whom I mentioned before as
Accordingly
having deserted to the Romans, and who was in command of the troops there, pulled down the sanctuaries
on the Emperor's held the priests under and sent the images to Byzantium. 10?
orders, guard,
In this passage, Procopius to the sanctuaries on Philae with the same plural as in our text
twice refers
(x? iep?). Apparently, Procopius x? ?v Oi?m? uses

iep? as a general plural for the island of Philae,
including all its sanctuaries. The same plural is also used in the Coptic story of Macedonius and the holy
falcon of Philae,109 which is part of the sixth-century Life of Aaron (folia 13a-b). It tells us how in the
past the first bishop of Philae, Macedonius, entered 'the temples' (N6PTTHY6) of Philae in order to
slaughter the living falcon worshipped there by the pagans.110 From the context, it appears that the term
'temples' actually means its most important temple, that of Isis. Moreover, when leaving the place of
slaughter, Macedonius leaves TTPTT6 'the temple', which must have been the temple of Isis. Both
contemporary sources, Procopius' Persian Wars and Pseudo-Paphnutius' Life of Aaron, then, suggest
that x? iep? could be used as a general term for the sanctuaries of Philae, and at the same time as a kind
of totum pro parte for the temple of Isis.111 It would therefore be short-sighted to reject the identifi
cation of the sanctuaries in our text with the temple of Isis, just because our text is later.
104F?TVIII
317, 319-22.
105 III 4.6-9,49-53.
Joh.Eph.H5
106 fHNiH 331-43. H. Harauer dates the text on palaeographical grounds to the last quarter of the sixth century at H.
Satzinger, 'Anmerkungen zu einigen Blemmyer-Texten', in E. Pl?ckinger, M. Kandier et al. (eds.), Lebendige

Altertumswissenschaft (= Festschrift Vetters; Vienna, 1985) 327-32 at 330-2.
107 Cf.
T?r?k, 'Contribution', 236-41 and 'Notes', 406-8
108F/#VIII328.
10^ J.H.F. '"Une Foule Immense de Moines". The Life of Aaron and the Early
Dijkstra, Coptic Bishops of Philae', in
Proceedings of the 23rd International Congress of Papyrologists, Vienna 2001, forthcoming.

110J.H.F.
Dijkstra, 'Horus on His Throne. The Holy Falcon of Philae inHis Demonic Cage', GM 189 (2002) 7-10.
111Note the
singular to iep?v xfj? "Ioi?o? used by the fifth-century historian Priscus, although he is referring
specifically to the ferrying of the statue of Isis from the temple of Isis across theNile.
152 J. H. F. Dijkstra
If Procopius in this respect, other aspects of his version of the event are not beyond
is trustworthy
criticism. Firstly, an exaggeration
it is obviously that the temple of Isis was 'pulled down' (Kocoe??e),
for today it is one of the best-preserved temples in Egypt. Secondly, inscriptions in both Greek and
demotic on the walls of the temple itself speak against Procopius' description of the event, namely that
Justinian used force to bring a still active cult of Isis to an end.112 The inscriptions do give an
impression of an active, though declining cult of Isis until the middle of the fifth century, consisting of
festivals and daily rituals which were kept alive by a small family of local priests.113 The last
hieroglyphic (24 August 394)114 and demotic texts (2December 452)115 to be written in all Egypt can
be found on the walls of the temple of Isis. However, until the so-called 'closing' of the temple in 535-7
we no longer hear anything of these priests and their whereabouts. This implies that the cult had died
out or continued on a very small scale in the last 80 years of its existence.!16 If Philae had declined in
such a way, there was 'pull down' the temple. It seems therefore
no reason to that the account by
Procopius of Justinian's order to close the temple of Isis at Philae was an exaggeration reflecting
rather than a real military intervention. This interpretation makes it more likely
imperial propaganda,
that Blemmyan tribes could still continue an 'ancient custom' like worshipping a wooden statue of Isis.
The other details in the text do not contradict this suggestion either. The councillors of Omboi were
responsible for tax collection in the first Upper Egyptian nome (called 'Oju?ixric), the administrative
unit, which also included Philae.117 Slightly later, in the reign of Heraclius, a similar disturbance of
officials responsible for tax collection in the region of Akhmim (Panopolis) occurred.118 Cannibal may
even have been a local official, as the parallel with the pagarch Menas in P. Cair.Masp. I 67002 sug
enough, Cannibal is compared to a certain Collouthos in 11. 12-4 who was also a
gests.119 Interestingly
high official (k[a\\mpb(xaxoq), 1. 12).120 On the other hand, the incident concerning the imperial
standards referred to in 1. 17, in which Cannibal is accused of stealing from the military treasury, rather
suggests that Cannibal was a military official. Along the southern Egyptian border, many troops were
garrisoned, also at Philae, and itmay well be that Cannibal came to his agreement with the Blemmyes
there and raided the countryside 50 km north of Philae, the fertile land around Omboi.121 This would
explain his
powerful position of renewing the sanctuaries for the Blemmyes (1. 9), raiding the
countryside with them (11. 10-3), appropriating taxes of ordinary people and their vineyards' produce (1.
15) and sending the conspirators gifts (1. 16).
112IPh.Gr.
186, 188-193, 196-9; I.Ph.Dem. 96, 159, 194, 211, 236, 240, 258-9, 332, 343, 351, 355, 364-6, 369-72,
375,436,450.
H3 The latest evidence for continuing cult practice on Philae is a Greek from 456/7 Cf. U.
inscription (I.Ph.Gr. 199).
Wilcken, 'Heidnisches und christliches aus ?gypten', Archiv 1 (1901) 396-436; A. Burkhardt, 'Zu sp?ten heidnischen
Priestern in Philae', in P. Nagel (ed.), Graeco-Coptica: Griechen und Kopten im byzantinischen ?gypten (Halle and
Wittenberg, 1984) 77-83.

1141.PhDem. 436 (=FHN III 306).
n5I.Ph.Dem. 365.
^
Although the fifth-century philosopher Marinus claims that Isis was still worshipped at Philae in 485 (Maiin.Procl.
19).
117 Ill 385-6.
Calderini, Diz.Geogr.
118 Joh.Nik. 'And about this time also there arose a rebel named Azarias in the province of Akhmim, who
97.30:
mustered a large force of Ethiopie slaves and brigands and seized the imperial taxes without the knowledge of the officers of
the province' (tr. R.H. Charles).
119 this does not necessarily make Cannibal a local official from Omboi, as Updegraff, 150
However, Study Blemmyes,
assumes without further explanation.
120 444 suggested to identify Collouthos with a pagarch of the same name,
wilcken, 'Papyrus Urkunden XV,
mentioned in P.Cair.Masp. 167005.19 and to whom two poems are dedicated, P.Aphrod.Lit. IV 14 and 28.
121 For the sixth-century border J.G. Keenan, 'Evidence for the Byzantine in the Syene
troops see, conveniently, Army
BASP 27 (1990) 139-50. There was also a military unit (vexillatio) garrisoned in Omboi, cf. J. Gascou, 'Deux
Papyri',
inscriptions Byzantines de Haute-?gypte', T&MByz 12 (1994) 323-42 at 326, but this unit seems hardly compatible with the
incident of the imperial standards.
Of course,one must consider whether Cannibal could have reinstalled other Ancient Egyptian
sanctuaries for Blemmyes living nearer Omboi or even if 'that which was built by Collouthos' (xo]v
7i[oc]p' oruTo?> KTia0?[vT]o?, 1. 12) could have been the sanctuaries which were renewed by Cannibal.
However, no Ancient Egyptian sanctuary is known in the 'Oju?ixric which could have been active in the
second half of the sixth century, nor is there proof of Blemmyes living near Omboi.122 To be sure, it
would have been unlikely for Cannibal to first renew pagan sanctuaries in Omboi and afterwards raid
the very same area. He would have kept a distance. Regarding Collouthos and Cannibal, they are
compared as to the agreement they made with barbarians, not on the creation of the same building, a
coincidence which would have been mentioned in the text. In fact, it is not even clear what it was that
Collouthos built and it could as well have been some other building. Moreover, the difference in number
between both words makes a connection highly unlikely. If my interpretation, then, of identifying 'the
sanctuaries' in our text with the temple of Isis at Philae is correct and Blemmyes were indeed still
worshipping Isis in 567, this has important historical implications.

In most
handbooks and standard works about Ancient Egypt, the end of Ancient Egyptian religion is
fixed in the years 535-7.123 In an article of 1961, R?mondon has interpreted the incident described in
our text as the third in a series of wars of the Blemmyes against the Byzantine Empire.124 This inter
pretation was built upon in 1967 by Nautin in an article about the conversion of the temple of Isis into
the Church of St. Stephen.125 According to Nautin, Justinian reacted on the Blemmyes by closing the
barbarians' dearest temple, that of Isis of Philae. This would explain why Justinian sent his general to
Philae, set its priests under guard and had the images sent to Byzantium. Nautin connected the events of
535-7 with a series of five
inscriptions found within the temple of Isis which commemorate the dedica
tion of the church of St. Stephen the protomartyr by bishop Theodore of Philae.126 Inscriptions like ?
oTorupo? ?v?KT|0?v ?el vira 'The cross has conquered; it always conquers' would then emphasise this
deliberate anti-pagan policy. The soldiers of Justinian were on the spot and they could have helped
building the church which definitively brought an end to paganism in Egypt.127 What is more, the dedi
cation of the church of St. Stephen has been claimed to be the first step in the official Christianisation of
Nobatia, the Christian kingdom immediately south of Egypt, which started in the 540s.128
Our text is a clear antidote
against these interpretations. First of all, it goes too far to make an
outright 'religious war' out of the incident described in the text. At about the same time our petition was
written, another petition from the Dioscorus archive includes a remark of the inhabitants of Antaiopolis
looking back at their past:
x]fi)v a?u/cr|p(cuv) B?t?|Lit)C?v ?ap?apcov em x v 7ia?,ai f|(x v yov?cov 7iap?i?,r|(pOTC?v

(ant. corr. 7iapaâ?[ovxcov]) [ttiv r||Li?T?pav teo?,i]v Kal 7cVp9r|o?vTcov ?eiv ?.
when the abominable barbarians, Blemmyes, at the time of our parents in those days had taken our city
and plundered it horribly.12^
122 por a collection sources see

of the S. Timm, Das christlich-koptische ?gypten in arabischer Zeit, 6 vols.
(Wiesbaden, 1984-92) 3.1468-70 s.v. 'K?m Umb?'.

123 J. Baines, rev.
E.g. J. M?lek, Cultural Atlas of Ancient Egypt (Oxford, 2000 ed. of 1980) 74; E. Winter, 'Philae',
Lex?g. IV (1982) 1022-7.
124 R. un papyrus
R?mondon, 'Soldats de Byzance d'apr?s trouv? ? Edfou', RechPap 1 (1961) 41-93. Cf. R?mondon's
earlier article 'L'Egypte et la supr?me r?sistance au christianisme (Ve-VIIe si?cles)', BIFAO 51 (1952) 63-78 and J. Gascou,
'Militaires ?trangers en Egypte byzantine', BIFAO 75 (1975) 203-6.
125p
Nautin? 'La conversion du temple de Philae en ?glise chr?tienne', CArch 17 (1967) 1-43.
126IPh.Gr. 200-4
(= FHNlll 324).
127Nautin, 'Conversion', 6-8.
128
Nautin, 'Conversion', 8; T. Baumeister, 'Das Stephanuspatrozinium der Kirche im ehemaligen Isis-Tempel von
Phil?',?? 81 (1986) 187-94.

l29P.Cair.Masp. 167009 v? 17-9.
The Antaiopolitans are looking one generation back, at the time of their fathers and mothers.130 If a
generation consists of about 30 years, they refer to ca. 537, the time the temple of Isis was closed.
However, there is no immediate link with Philae and this may have been just one of the raids of
Blemmyes into Egypt. One can simply not make full scale wars out of incidental raids. Secondly, the
inscriptions in the church of St. Stephen are dated in the long episcopate of Theodore of Philae which
spans the time of about 525 until at least 577.131 The church could have been built at any time in his
episcopate. Moreover, although thought that the first church was built in the naos of the temple
Nautin
of Isis and a second one much later in the hypostyle hall, Grossmann has demonstrated that these two
phases were in fact one and that the church of St. Stephen was situated in the hypostyle hall from the
beginning.132 It was therefore still possible, also in the case that the church had already been built, to
enter the naos of the temple from a side entrance and this circumstance does not exclude the possibility
of continuation of pagan worship of some sort. Additionally, it seems unlikely that the relatively modest
church of St. Stephen could have been the product of a deliberate anti-pagan policy, or even the start of
the Christianisation of Nubia.
Although the inscription of the conquering cross may have evoked
associations of superiority among the Christian visitors of the church, in essence it had the meaning of
the divine presence of Christ symbolised in the cross, which expelled all demons from the building.133
It is therefore more
probable to disconnect the closing of the temple of Isis in 535-7 and the building
of the church of St. Stephen. If at all, the building of the church would have been a reaction to a local
incident, an incident such as described in our text. Exactly the detail that a sanctuary was renewed for
the Blemmyes, points in the direction of Philae. After the closing of the temple in 535-7, which was, as
I suggest, more propaganda than reality, and certainly not implying a religious upheaval of some sort,
Blemmyan tribes may well havekept alive their 'ancient custom' (Priscus) of worshipping a wooden
statue of Isis. However, at the moment they were in the process of converting to Christianity, Cannibal
led them back to their old custom. This incident may have called for a reaction by the local church
authorities. The building of the church of St. Stephen may therefore have been bishop Theodore's
answer.
In this article, tried to show the interest of P.Cair.Masp.

I have I 67004. It has become clear that this
petition, though still not fully understood, is of the utmost importance for the local religious history of
the sixth century. If I am right, the traditional end of Ancient Egyptian religion can still be attributed to
Philae, but not too easily fixed in the years 535-7. P.Cair.Masp. I 67004 may indicate that all was not
over yet then and that, in 567 AD, Blemmyes were still worshipping Isis, whatever the form in so doing
may have been. At Philae the cult of Isis had already declined in the fifth century, but its remembrance
remained attractive to Blemmyes well into the sixth. This fascinating text deserves pride of place in
every history of religion in Late Antique Egypt.134
Groningen Jitse H.F. Dijkstra
130
Tove?? means 'parents', not 'forefathers'. See the expressions ?nb yov?oDV Kai rcpoyovcov, P.Cair.Masp. I 67006.3,
67019 v? 4-5, 67020.17 and 8K rcocT?pcov Kai Tipoyovcov, P.Cair.Masp. Ill 67295.14. Cf. R?mondon, 'Soldats', 69; Fournet,
Hell?nisme, 511.
131J. 'Th?odore de Philae', RHR 59 (1909) 299-317.
Maspero,
132 P. 'Die Kirche des Bischofs Theodoros im Isistempel von Philae. Versuch einer RSO
Grossmann, Rekonstruktion',
58 (1984) 107-17.
133 van Moorsei, 'Une th?ophanie RAC 42 A.J. van der 'Een mogelijke
E.g. P.P.V. nubienne', (1966) 297-316; Jagt,
bron voor de kruis-devotie van de Nubi?rs', in A. Hilhorst (ed.), De in de eerste eeuwen van het
heiligenverering
Christendom (Nijmegen, 1988) 53-62; A. Grillmeier, Jesus der Christus imGlauben der Kirche, 2 vols. (Freiburg, 1979-90)
2.iv 292-5; P.P.V. van Moorsei, Called to Egypt. Collected Studies on Painting in Christian Egypt (Leiden, 2000) 63-80
('Die Nubier und das glorreiche Kreuz', 19721).
134 Cf. FHN III and D. in Roman Assimilation and Resistance in which
Frankfurter, Religion Egypt. (Princeton, 1998)
it has not been included.
TAFEL I
?f f'?
v?*;
/ :'A,
^^^*.rr*v.; mm:r.
M
P.Cair.Masp. I 67004; J. H. F. Dijkstra, pp. 137-154

TAFEL II
2??1IM'B&***:*
3r*??~V?
?*- -*?*.^-j*^,..
?O
7
ex
^S?5lW?^:^5^^-S?;-3
r
I
a:

A Cult of Isis at Philae After Justinian

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Cult of Isis at Philae After Justinian

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Cult of Isis at Philae after Justinian? Reconsidering "P. Cair. Masp.

A Cult of Isis at Philae After Justinian?

Owing to their unfinished and fragmentary few of the petitions

(x? i?p? g?kvoc, 1. 17), about which more is said below.

lgLXXReg. Ill 12.26-32.

l9LXXReg. Ill 13.33-4.

23 A. 'Zwischen Formeln und k?nstlerischer Neutestamentliche Elemente in den

comparison is also made petition in the Dioscorus

37 v? 12. Cf. P.Cair.Masp.

P. Cair.Masp. 16700452 Antinoopolis 567 AD

50Fournet, Hell?nisme, 243-5

3 "Eyv axai to?? ?v[oik]o?>gi 7ta[aa]v xr\va0A,[i]av fi|ic5v?ri?aicov % pav ? 7tp[o]?0(e?)v

imepqyufj v\i&v Kal ev?o^ov ?earcoxeiav ? jn piav Kal ccKaxaaxaaiav ?|it>0r|xov

?^ou?ev ae ? ??8 [?, v ? 25]

e[op |i]8v 8\)KO?, [? ?i]covai o?oi [? 28 ]

7io\)|i?vo? Hagedorn per litteras: ed.princ. I

53 J. 'Les papyrus BIFAO 10 (1912) 131-57 at 143-4, n. 4 and L'organisation militaire de

mis?rable',"1 but as Bell already observed rcavoiKTiGTo? derives from(irav)oiKTiGTri? in stead of

to ?[i]aKoiv?GaG0ai."9 o eke?voi ... xcov

syntactically more probable.

tekvcov, cf. P.Lond. V 1677 v? 40.

extraordinary and honourable commander, consul, patrician, dux, augustalis, lord.

Cannibal renewed for a group of Blemmyes

background of what we know of the Blemmyes at this time.

90 2 Pet. 2. See further *

oux?aoiv, xo?> 7ioxa|i?oD aK(x<poD? A?y?7ix?cov ?%?vxa>v xr\v 87ciji??8iav, ?v ?mep x?

having consulted it, return it safely to the island.10^

94FHN III 32S.

(Paris, 1969 = I.Ph. Gr.).

Kaoe?^e, ?aoiAicoc oi ?7tayY??^avxoc, Kai xo?? ji?v iepe?? ?v cp-oXaiqi ?a%e, x? ??

?y?^|iaxa ?? B-u??vxiov ?rce|i\|/ev.

(x? iep?). Apparently, Procopius x? ?v Oi?m? uses

Satzinger, 'Anmerkungen zu einigen Blemmyer-Texten', in E. Pl?ckinger, M. Kandier et al. (eds.), Lebendige

Proceedings of the 23rd International Congress of Papyrologists, Vienna 2001, forthcoming.

Wittenberg, 1984) 77-83.

worshipping Isis in 567, this has important historical implications.

looking back at their past:

x]fi)v a?u/cr|p(cuv) B?t?|Lit)C?v ?ap?apcov em x v 7ia?,ai f|(x v yov?cov 7iap?i?,r|(pOTC?v

and plundered it horribly.12^

122 por a collection sources see

(Wiesbaden, 1984-92) 3.1468-70 s.v. 'K?m Umb?'.

Phil?',?? 81 (1986) 187-94.

In this article, tried to show the interest of P.Cair.Masp.

Groningen Jitse H.F. Dijkstra

P.Cair.Masp. I 67004; J. H. F. Dijkstra, pp. 137-154

You might also like