Zelinskyi THE DELIBERATE “MISTAKES” IN A DEMOTIC VERSION OF THE RAFIA DECREE

THE DELIBERATE “MISTAKES” IN A DEMOTIC VERSION OF THE RAFIA DECREE

A. L. Zelinskyi

DSc (History) Acting Leading Researcher Department of History of Asia and Africa State Institution “Institute of World History of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine” 5 Leontovich str., Kyiv, 01054, Ukraine  z-al@ukr.net

After the Egyptian victory at the Battle of Rafia (22^nd June 217 BC) and the favorable finish of the Fourth Syrian War for the country of the Nile (221–217 BC), the local priestly synod accepted a decree in honor of a ruling pharaoh – Ptolemy  IV Philopator (15^th November 217 BC). We are talking about the so-called Rafia Decree (Cairo 50048; cf. CG 31088). Its text is best preserved in a demotic version. A demotic text of this document contains two points that are usually considered by the modern researchers as the mistakes of the performers of the inscription. The first point is the naming of Ptolemy IV as the son of Arsinoe, while Berenice II was the real mother of this king. The second point is an unprecedented naming as pharaoh of Antiochus III – of the ruler, of the kingdom of the Seleucids, which was hostile to Egypt; besides, his name was partially framed in the royal cartouche in a few cases. In author’s opinion, both points were the result of a planned decision. The reason for the deliberate replacement of Berenice’s name with “Arsinoe”, another popular name of the Ptolemaic royal family, was the reluctance to remind of the act of maternal murder, actually committed by Ptolemy IV. However, the name of Ptolemy IV’s mother is indicated correctly in a fragmentary hieroglyphic version of the decree. I think that it has occurred in consequence of the prohibition of deliberately blatant distortion of the truth in the use of a sacred hieroglyphic writing. The naming of Antiochus III as Pharaoh may have been a reflection of the first signs of dissatisfaction of the local population of Egypt with Ptolemy IV’s insufficient attention to the duties of the lord of the Two Lands. In such an extravagant way, the representatives of the Egyptian priesthood hinted at the possibility of the appearance of another pharaoh, who could be the closest relative of Philopator in the female line – Antiochus III.

Keywords: the Rafia Decree, Ptolemy IV, Arsinoe, Berenice II, Antiochus III

Preislamic Near East 2021, (2):69-78

https://doi.org/10.15407/preislamic2021.02.069

Full text (PDF)

REFERENCES

Zelins’kyy A. L. (2020), Vid basylevsiv-faraoniv do faraoniv-basylevsiv: pershi 100 rokiv ptolemeyivs’koyi monarkhiyi, “Tvory”, Vinnytsya and Kyiv. (In Ukrainian).

Ladynin I. A. (2017), Nachalo makedonskogo vremeni v kategoriyakh traditsionnogo mirovozzreniya drevnikh egiptyan kontsa IV – nachala III vv. do n. e.: v 2-kh t. T. 1: Dis… dokt. ist. nauk: 07.00.03, Moskovskiy gosudarstvennyy universitet, Moscow. (In Russian).

Panov M. V. (2019), Dokumenty persidskogo, i greko-rimskogo periodov, M. V. Panov, Novosibirsk. (In Russian).

Panov M. V. (2017), Istoriko-biograficheskiye i mifologicheskiye nadpisi pozdnego vremeni, M. V. Panov, Novosibirsk. (In Russian).

Panov M. V. (2020), Istoricheskiye nadpisi iz Kusha i Kemeta (I tys. do n. e.), M. V. Panov, Novosibirsk. (In Russian).

Panov M. V. (2021), Istochniki po drevneyegipetskoy istorii v perevodakh na russkiy yazyk. Katalog, M. V. Panov, Novosibirsk. (In Russian).

Panov M. V. Legendy, mify i gimny. Doklady. Novosibirsk: M. V. Panov, 2018. (In Russian).

Panov M. V. (2021), Pis’ma, nastavleniya i dokumenty epokhi Ramessidov. 2-e izdaniye, ispravlennoye, M. V. Panov, Novosibirsk. (In Russian).

Stuchevskiy I. A. (1984), Ramses II i Kherikhor. Iz istorii drevnego Egipta epokhi Ramessidov, Nauka, Moscow. (In Russian).

Chegodayev M. A. (2014), “Na kakom yazyke govoril bog?”, M. O. Tarasenko (ed.), Doislams’kyy Blyz’kyy Skhid: istoriya, relihiya, kul’tura. Zbirnyk naukovykh statey, Kyiv, pp. 257–64. (In Russian).

Blasius A. (2007), “Antiochos IV. Epiphanes. Basileus und Pharao Ägyptens? Porphyrios und die polybianische überlieferung“, in St. Pfeiffer (ed.), Ägypten unter fremden Herrschern zwischen persischer Satrapie und römischer Provinz, Verlag Antike, Frankfurt am Main, pp. 75–107.

Gladic D. (2015), Das Dekret von Memphis (196 v. Chr.). Kommentar X Auswertung: Dis… Doct. Phil., der Universität Trier, Trier.

Grabowski T. (2010), Ostatni Triumf Ptolemeuszy. Czwarta Wojna syryjska (221–217 p. n. e.), Historia Jagellonica, Kraków.

Grabowski T. (2014), “Polityka religijna Ptolemeusza IV Filopatora -wybrane aspekty”, Klio (Pl.), Vol. 30/31, pp. 37–49. https://doi.org/10.12775/KLIO.2014.042

Hölbl G. (2001), A History of the Ptolemaic Empire, translated by T. Saavedra, Routledge, London and New York.

Huss W. (2001), Ägypten in hellenistischer Zeit: 332–30 v.Chr., C. H. Beck, München.

Huss W. (2011), Verwaltung des ptolemäischen Reichs, C. H. Beck, München. https://doi.org/10.4000/books.chbeck.1228

Klotz D. (2013), “Who was with Antiochos III at Raphia? Revisiting the Hieroglyphic Versions of the Raphia Decree (CG 31088 and 50048)”, Chronique d’Égypte, T. 87, pp. 45–59. https://doi.org/10.1484/J.CDE.1.103382

Manning J. (2010), The Last Pharaohs. Egypt unter the Ptolemies, 305–30 BC, Princeton University Press, Princeton, Oxford. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400831647

Morenz L. and Popko L. (2010), “The Second Intermediate Period and the New Kingdom”, in A. Lloyd (ed.), A Companion to Ancient Egypt, Vol. I, Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, pp. 101–19. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444320053.ch6

Pfeiffer St. (2017), Die Ptolemäer: im Reich der Kleopatra, W. Kohlhammer GmbH, Stuttgart.

Schwartz J. and Malinine M. (1960), “Pierres d’Égypte”, Revue Archéologique, T. 1, pp. 77–90.

Spiegelberg W. (1925), Beiträge zur Erklärung des neuen dreisprachigen Priesterdekretes zu Ehren des Ptolemaios Philopator, Verlag der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, München.

Thissen H.-J. (1966), Studien zum Raphiadekret, A. Hain, Meisenheim am Glan.

Veïsse A.-E. (2004), Les “revoltes egyptiennes”. Recherches sur les troubles interieurs en Egypte du regne de Ptolemee III a la conquete romaine, Peeters, Leuven, Paris and Dudley (MA).

Vittmann G. (2005), “ ‘Feinde’ in den ptolemäischen Synodaldekreten. Mit einem Anhang: Demotische Termini für ‘Feind’, ‘Rebell’, ‘rebellieren’ ”, in H. Felber (ed.), Feinde und Aufrührer. Konzepte von Gegnerschaft in ägyptischen Texten besonders des Mittleren Reiches, Verlag der Sächsischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig, Stuttgart and Leipzig, pp. 198–219.

Wespi F. (2016), “Das Gesetz der Tempel: Ein Vorbericht zu den Priesternormen des demotischen Papyrus Florenz PSI inv. D 102”, in M. Ullmann (ed.), Ägyptologische Tempeltagung: Ägyptische Tempel zwischen Normierung und Individualität. München, 29.–31. August 2014. Königtum, Staat und Gesellschaft früher Hochkulturen 3, 5: Akten der ägyptologischen Tempeltagungen, Harrassowitz Verlag, Wiesbaden, pp. 179–94. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvc5pfjr.15

Winnicki J.-K. (1989), Operacje wojskowe Ptolemeuszów w Syrii, Wyd-wo Un-tu warszawskiego, Warszawa.