The Satrap Stele of Ptolemy: a Reassessment

chapter 6 The Satrap Stele of Ptolemy: A Reassessment

Boyo G. Ockinga

The so-called “Satrap Stele” (CGC 22263) is the most significant native Egyptian source on Ptolemy from the period before he assumed the kingship.1 The text has eighteen lines: the first and the beginning of the second give the titulary of Alexander IV, this is followed by a list of Ptolemy’s epithets, and from the end of line 3 to the end of line 6 we have an account of Ptolemy’s military exploits. Most of the text, lines 7 to 18, focuses on Ptolemy’s benefactions for the gods and temples of Buto. As D. Schäfer argues, the activities of Ptolemy recorded on the Satrap Stele are those traditionally expected of an ancient Egyptian king, namely taking care of the needs of the gods and protecting Egypt from foreign foes.2 If Ptolemy is shown as acting like a king, do the epithets and the phraseology that refer to him also describe him in royal terms? This paper will examine in detail the language used in the text to refer to Ptolemy, so providing the basis for an evaluation of the ancient author(s) understanding of his position at the time.3

1 For a recent English translation see Ritner, “The Satrap Stele”. A good photograph of the stele can be found in Grimm, Alexandria, Abb. 33, p. 36. The most recent comprehensive study of the stele is by Schäfer, Makedonische Pharaonen und hieroglyphische Stelen, who also provides a facsimile copy of the hieroglyphic text with transliteration and translation, as well as a very extensive bibliography (pp. XIII–XLVI). In the same year that her work appeared, Morenz offered a detailed discussion of what he refers to as the “Hymn to Ptolemy” at the beginning of the text, dealing in particular with the allusions to the classical literary compositions The Story of Sinuhe and the Prophecy of Neferty found in the various epithets applied to Ptolemy: Morenz, “Alte Hüte auf neuen Köpfen”. The studies of both Schäfer and Morenz only became available to me after this paper was delivered (September, 2011) and many of the observations made by Morenz, in particular on the allusions to the classical literary texts The Tale of Sin- uhe and the Prophecy of Neferty, coincide with mine. For a discussion of the identity of the Persian Ḫšryšꜣ and a detailed analysis of lines 8–11 of the stele (Urk II, 16.15–18.6) see Ladynin, “Adversary Ḫšryš(ꜣ): His Name and Deeds according to the Satrap Stela”, which also includes an extensive bibliography on the stele. For a reappraisal of Ptolemy, see now the new study by Ian Worthington, Ptolemy I King and Pharaoh of Egypt who discusses the stele on pgs. 122–125. 2 Schäfer, Makedonische Pharaonen und hieroglyphische Stelen, 193. 3 Schäfer certainly recognizes that the language used to refer to Ptolemy also calls to mind royal phraseology and that the literary form of the section of the text that deals with Ptolemy’s

Section 1 considers the implications of the designation “great chief”; Section 2 examines in detail the 13 epithets used to describe Ptolemy against the back- ground of their earlier usage; Section 3 discusses the royal phraseology that appears in the main text.4 In Section 4 the institutional memory underlying the authors’ use of older literary traditions is examined. Finally, Section 5 considers what the epithets and phraseology can tell us of the Egyptian priests’ perception of Ptolemy, drawing into the discussion the controversial question of whether, in lines 8–12, he is referred to as ḥm=f “His Majesty” and concluding by considering the significance of the empty cartouches.

1 The Introduction to the Text

Ptolemy had exercised real power in Egypt since becoming satrap in 323BCE, yet the stele recognizes Alexander IV, a ca. 10-year-old boy, as the legitimate king. The royal cartouches in the lunette of the stele may, curiously, be empty, but the text proper is dated to the seventh year (311BCE) of Alexander’s reign and begins, like every traditional royal inscription, with his official five-fold titulary. We also note that the text presents Alexander as fulfilling all the require- ments of a legitimate Egyptian king: he is one “to whom the office of his father was given”,the reference being to his earthly father, Alexander III; he is also Stp- n-I̓mn.w, “the chosen one of [the state god] Amun”.While the beginning of line two clearly states “He [Alexander] is the king [nsw] in the Two Lands [Egypt] and the foreign lands” (thus also recognizing him as the legitimate king of the rest of Alexander’s empire), it notes that “His Majesty is amongst the Asiatics,5 while there is a great chief in Egypt—Ptolemy [is] his name”, i.e. the king does not reside in Egypt, while Ptolemy does. The term “great chief” used to designate Ptolemy is of interest. His position was an unusual one: the closest ancient Egyptian equivalent would have been the Viceroy of Nubia (“King’s son of Kush”), but the authors of the text chose a term that in New Kingdom Egypt was used for foreign rulers, for example the Hittite king;6 in the mid-eighth century BCE, in the account of the conquest

benefactions for the gods of Buto is that of the Königsnovelle or “royal novelette” (194); in her chapter II 6.1.3, she also discusses some of the details of the phraseology used; however, considerably more parallels can be identified. 4 These were not discussed by Schäfer, Makedonische Pharaonen und hieroglyphische Stelen. 5 The term Stt here denotes the former Persian Empire, here including Macedon; see Ladynin, “Adversary Ḫšryš(ꜣ): His Name and Deeds according to the Satrap Stela”, 109 n. 55. 6 WB I, 329.20; KRI II, 226.8 and passim (Hittite treaty); II, 234.14 and passim (Hittite Marriage