The first two volumes of Petra Papyri
Rodney Ast
JAAKO FROSEN, ANTTI ARIAVA and MARJO LEHTINEN (edd), with contibutions by 2.7.
Fiema, C. A. Kuehn, T. Parola, T- Rankinen, M. Vesterinen and M, Vierros, THE PETRA
PAPYRI (American Center of Oriental Research, Amman 2002) Pp. xix + 142, figs, ps. 26
ANTTI ARJAVA, MATIAS BUCHHOLZ and TRAIANOS GAGOS, with contributions by R. C.
Coldwell, Ro W" Daniel, L: Kyenen, Mi. Lehtinen, M. Mikkola, M. Mustonen, - Purols,
E, Salmenkivi, M. Vesterinen and M. Vierros, and plates prepared by T. Szymanski and
V, Vahtikari, THE PETRA PAPYRI Ill (American Center of Oriental Research, Amman 2007)
Pp. ali + 217, pls. 87. ISBN 978.9957-8543-2-4
Excavations conducted in 1993 by the American Center of Oriental Research (ACOR) at
Petra site of the ancient capital of the Nabataean Arabs, uncovered a stash of Greek papyri in
‘room next toa Byzantine chureh.! Some 140 rolls were recovered, the largest extant corpus of
texts discovered in Jordan thus far. Dated to the yeats A.D. 837 to 893, the documents are con-
‘emed mainly with taxation and property matiers. Amongst other things, they demonstrate
that there was continued habitation atthe site heyond what was previously believed to be its
final destruction by earthquake in the mid-6th c. They also constitute welcome documentary
evidence from a place other than Egypi, the source ofthe vast majority of papyri
Founded by the Nabataeans in the late 2nd/eatly Ist c, WC. and annexed as part of the
province of Arabia by the Romans in A.D. 106, Petra achieved the status of colon inthe early
4rd ¢, propelled no doubt by its strategic position at the crosstoads of the East-West trade
route During its lateantique and Byzantine phases the city was the center ofthe province of
Paiaestina Saiutaris, also known as Palaesting ‘Tertia. Despite its apparent importance
however, Petra does not figure prominently in the historical record ofthe late period: there are
relatively few inscriptions and it attracted litle attention in other sources. This dearth of
information had shaped modem accounts, which attributed its demise to a combination of
‘aural catastrophes (earthquakes in 4.D. 363 and 551) and economic changes (the loss of reve-
nue from a shift northward in the oriental trade route). The papyri correct this view by
‘demonstrating thal, even in the second half ofthe 6th, its inhabitants were carrying on with
their lives. While we would not necessarily expect documents of the types found in P.Petre |
and Ill to menticn natural disasters the exceedingly mundane content of the papysi suggests
that the mundane was the norm and that the city had not been ruined in a violent act of nature,
nor was itn any discernible state of eis,
Just as the city was apparently spared destruction, so were these rolls, the recovery of
which constitutes one of the mes! fascinating pars ofthe story. Burned but not fully incinerated
in a fire that consumed the church in the early 7th c, the papyri survived the centuries in a
catbonized state, Their rediscovery coincided in a mest fortuitous way with advancements in
imaging techniques that have contributed significantly to their decipherment. Both the multi-
spectral imaging (MSI) technology employed by scholaes from Brigham Young University and
the non-MSI techniques used by a team from the University of Helsinki produced good results)
sis visible in the plates atthe back of the two volumes and in digital photographs available
at the Advanced Papyrological Information System (APIS). But before they could even be
photographed, the charcoaled mounds of papyrus had to be unrolled and reconstructed,
Dolnstaking task that i documented in iepressive dctall in the intalustuny sections uf vol
1 Foran
ly overview, see. Keenen, “The carbonized archive from Petra,” JRA 9 (196) 17788
CLT. Gages, "New insriptionsl evidence and Petras re inthe province of Arabi,” [RA 2 (2008)
381-9.
5 Fora recent description ofthe merits of MSI technology for photography of ancentpapys, eS. Bay,
G-Beasman, R. Macfarlane and T. Wayment, “Mulitspettial imaging Vs. monospecteal iniated
Imaging" ZPE 173 2010) 211-17,
4 Theiimages canbe accessed via either www papyrinfo or the Heidelberger Gesamtversichnis (HCV),
htp/ www reser un heidelberg deo 2 hn
‘The first two volumes of Petra Papyri 739
‘The exteaordinary effort invested in conservation and photography, and the expertise that
vas pained from the process, should not be underestimated: it represents one of the great
Successes of the project and will prove more generally valuable tothe field of papyrology.
vector do sot gus fare tcl the Pts papyl a aml archive alhough mary of
Ce et Bee with one peau, Theodores son of Obodiane, ands oil and
sear a le ety sound» te which have no ons
pees hey cote that slice, eign, ded the tn he va
men he rand hen ng amily ee (povided avo 1)
a actor ace Very Lk] in tt anaes, 2 1). Neves, he low
a oe cnc cae he was bom sound SI2SIC ad seen
ing dt aout Tess yon er St, when be gave op te le
cae ee a eral aehdecen, serving ihe arch (he No:
aor aaah he piph we nnd He Inawn to have hie propery
olan Sen nent 1 ehh th Py srr adaathon 207 he aed Stops, ho
a an eset an eat inns parte Fatopils so of Dass
Hat cousin he dag coin calle ia’ erat eas
ve sgunents wines a number fThsdor' pet mainly member of clase
eae saan brbecey and te rokiroeva avis Dips, vie
(Een sf earn avis Pain Havin VMs) lo
ae ator malate pe Panes and Epon). Tey
cr a a ln ing ewe orton tt
ae a eee 0) and so Tor the ont fare dct
19) sing nese 1 cnn) arto of ix apart Ale? Prop
Sa ta sat wonderin paying mp nl ex han
yi ior teeta swe otc
ay nee ier he i vent oi ceorance is of re
ee ge asuon to len aight int te afi the fecal ele he
a sn aed evel pada ne regen nd ocsaly eet
tee rr ee eened in 104 can De Wael 09 of ath Ha
‘ma not yer Ss
rnuch larger ody of material
‘Non-Egyptian papye inevitably invite comparison with the much larger be cia
survingt am Eye Drona considered the Petia ese eich sine rele ac im
HaynlThere aren ew tex types introduce, no sig of significant admiistrative diferences
5 Yo ind ea ih gen nn css ofits One
MRESESS etree voli oeaied em mcudngeech gre Ge)
5 MEE Phare of ofc leary ergy mendes eo A. Wor, “Othe ure
td lergy and onlay” 2PE 51 205) 15 2 i
1 HERAT. Tartpostlte asecond son named Gorgas. ls mame i dropped, however, rom
ely tee vol If doe lakot conte evideree ee nixon 17)70 R Ast
the Egyptian
the Nessana papyzi also record Macedonian month names suggests
Eastern convention, Yel even among documents from the Near East differen-
ces can be observed: Roman month names are less common in texts from Nessana than at Petra,
for example
‘Nessana papyri contain the same form
documents from Egypt, nor have I encountered any explanat
precise meaning ofthe word in this context.
ve challenges to any
se sizes the figures denot
slated into known equivalencies. On the other hand, this also elucidates the
way in which local conventions survived within the broader context of Late Roman society.
1d toponyms) is another area in which
ising since indigenous Ni
fre @ couple of exampl
Roman names. This too isnot sur
social register dominated by landholders and members o
Unusual terms are also worth noting. One striking example is the word dus, which appears
‘frequently in these texts as a synonym for uepts, a term used in late documents from Egypt to
‘The first two volumes of Petra Papyri m1
phrase xpnosnevog xepi in 25.
tested in Egypt: it appears, however in two Srd-c. papyr that were composed
iscovered at Oxyshynchus (P.Ory. 3593..18 and 3594.9). These anomalies
sity of expression that one would expect from different parts of an expansive ey
vehi ¢ Petra for refining our
fe in the Roman provinces, where long;held traditions colored such everyday practices
Especially challenging are the ines that follow these where, according tothe ep. Epiphanios sates
10 Bee éxivacey viv obsov
15
“These lines are uanlated in the eiton thus:
“Whenke (cl Hieis) emptied his house, gave him tworoomsto move into, and he dd ot give methose
yl opt 961 and Pond IV 161021.
(ahs) 39637; ]-L.Fournet, A792 R Ast
beams". The second problematic reading isthe vet following iva in ines 12-13. Thee pr. has goleioe
loimhicn) but find this very dificult to se. The last two letters of Ine 12 are pretty clealy pe and before
‘hem is probably x, which gives p..Tho fr letter of ine 13 ater taken ap than a (the in
oi line 14 and in dalntavod in 16-17). Thus Ink that what was writen was xpehder (.xpesion),
from xpeevun. Taken a whole, the writer seems tostae that he gave Heros two beams so that he might
thang something on them (or hang them on something? — itis unclear what eg ind a line 13 eles fo) ar
tempted to identify the Boxdpua with the two eypresses (Bie unapéta) mentioned in ine 7 but clarity in
this part of the document is hindered by the statement 8 2ivacry (ee BL XI, 187) rv olxov aos inline
10, The editor explains the verb as form of kev, "| empty yt this seems unlikely for two seasons
‘xévace for éxiveney isnot natural phonetic interchange, andthe plse “he emptied his house" seems ke
an odd way to describe someone moving out. D. Hagedorn has suggested the posbiity that éxéuaoev was
writen instend of ée(pléseacv® That the papyrus has x insend of vis very posible, andthe omission of
the letter p would net be surprising. According to this interpretation the relevant lines would read; When
Ine hung (r suspended’ his house, {gave him two beams eo that he could hang iton them Yet here too
sense isnot eniely cles. I he describing the act of building a howe from the ground up or pezhaps jt
‘ulin los? If the term does pertain to bulding, how are we to andeetand the lit of stolen items provide
carlerin the document? A key, cypress logs and a able woud ft the context of building well enmugh, but itis