CULTS OF THE GOD AMUN AT MEMPHIS: IDENTIFICATION, PROSOPOGRAPHY AND TOPONYMY Mariam Victoria Kamish submitted for the degree of PhD in archaeology University College London 1990 CULTS OF AMUN AT MEMPHIS for Fessar and Zena* *io alphabetical order AL-HORBAN \ \ \ \ 330Sooc- AL-MIDiYAH AL-QUSURAH \ \ TUMAN DAFBABY KHAUQ AR-RAML h BEWAL-BELADON N Birkah NAWA MlT RAHtNAH 330tooo- BAHR AL-QANTARAH ARBAIN FAKHRY S Birkah h \ ALJ QALAAH N3303ooo Memphis HELUL Hod and tom names and boundaries •dent of ruin field boundary M m PTAH ENCLOSURE VWALL 300m SABAKHAH EES grid I b - as published in Jeffreys, Survey o f MmpA/s. 2 Abstract Some fifteen cults of AmOn/Amon-R 6r are attested for Memphis, from the firs t attestations in the reign of Amenhotep II. They are AmOn/Amon-R£r of Prw-nfr/o; ob nswt t& j; of 'Inbw-Mo; pntj bvt Mrw, o\ *pit-nfr/c;<A Uwdntjt ;of N§i;<A 7pt; t/p w tn trn p w t raw n Wsr-m/rt-Rr-stp-n-Rr m pr 7mn,ol Rsbd;ot rbw,ot PJ-v-ro ;ti Pr-bnwM DnlR; and at Msdo, as this place may have been in the memphite region. Most of these cults appear to have been founded during the reign of Ramesses II, in line with a policy of malting manifest the principal deities in all their aspects and therefore in each of the major cities. Most of the temple foundations examined here were of middling size and were located in the area of central Memphis. AmOn/Amon-Rftr of P rw -a fr/*, however, was the chief deity at P rw -n fr/ 9, some distance from the central city, and several others of the cults were also sited elsewhere in the memphite region. The iconography and epithets associated with AmOn/Amon-Rt'' of Memphis are standard, with no local peculiarities. Am0n/Amon-R0r is notably well-attested at Memphis. The period examined terminates with the conquest of Alexander. A few Ptolemaic attestations, however, are included. The material surveyed includes private monuments and votive material, royal monuments, temple inscriptions, administrative papyri, scarabs and amulets. The principal aim of the study has been to make a contribution to knowledge of Memphis in the context of rescue archaeology at the site. 4 acknowledgements During work ofi the thesis In Egypt in 19S3 and in the course of an A.R.C.E. fellowship in 1986- 87 l t a great many people were very kind to me in my work. I should like to thank Dr. Mohammed Saleh, director of the Cairo Museum, Dr. A li al-Khouli, Mr. Nassif Hassan, Mr. Fouad Yacoub and Madame Fauzia Bishara of the Egyptian Antiquities Organisation administration. Professor Hassanein Rahtra of the University of Cairo, Dr. Holeil Ghaly of the Saqq&rah and M it Rahinah inspectorates, Dr. Abdel Fatah Sobahy of the Glzah inspectorate, Mr. Nadir Ramadan, Mr. Ferghali Qandfl and Mr. Mohammed Rashid of the M lt Rahinah inspectorate and Madame Amlra Khattab of the American Research Center in Egypt and her staff. Dr. Lanny Bell, former director of Chicago House, Luxor, gave me access to the Chicago House Library and to archive material. Many staff and former staff of the Cairo Museum, in particular Mr. Mohammed Hagros; staff of the Cairo Museum Library; and the French Institute Library gave me their assistance. I am grateful to Mr. Okasha Edaly and his family, to Rais Hilmi Mohammed Yusuf and his family, to Mr Salah al-Dln Mohammed Hasiballa and his family, to Rais Said Salim, and to Mr Michael Jones for their kindness and their discussions on the historical topography of the Memphis region. 1 should also like to mention the countless people, whom I met only in passing in the course of the toponym survey, who gave of their time and hospitality, as the survey group passed through their area. I must particularly thank Madame Mai Trad of the Cairo Museum, my partner and teacher in the toponym survey, who gave so generously of her time, her deep knowledge and expertise, and her s k ill in solving administrative difficulties. My thanks also go to Rais Qatb Mohammed Mojiammed Saif whose vast knowledge and resource were responsible for so much of our results. I am grateful to the American Research Center in Egypt for sponsoring the fellowship, to the Egyptian M inistry of Education for providing the opportunity for me to study in Egypt and to the Egyptian Antiquities Organisation for making the work possible. Dr. David O'Connor of the Department of Egyptology, the University of Pennsylvania, at the request of Professor H.S. Smith, made it possible for me to work on unpublished material from Memphis in the storerooms and archives of the University of Pennsylvania Musem. It is by his permission that the Philadelphia material is quoted here. Ms. Mary Elizabeth Ruwell of the University of Pennsylvania Museum Archives made the archive material available and the late Mr. Charles Detwiler of the antiquities stores of the museum gave me a great deal of his help. Professor Edward Wente and the late Dr. Klaus Baer of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago discussed ancient egyptlan religion with me and with Professor George Hughes encouraged me as an undergraduate. Staff of the Oriental Institute Museum Archives and the antiquities stores also gave me their help. Dr. Jaromir Malek of the TopographicalBibi^hy, the G riffith Institute, Oxford, gave me access to the G riffith Institute Library and the benefit of valuable discussions. Dr. Jeffrey Spencer of the British Museum gave me access to object cards in the British Museum. Dr. Patricia Spencer, chief archivist, the Egypt Exploration Society, gave me help on numerous occasions and encouraged me in the original choice of subject. Ms. Barbara Adams, curator and Ms. Rosalind Hall, assistant curator of the Petrie Museum were a great help on very many occasions. Dr. Alison Roberts, Honourary Fellow of the Petrie Museum, discussed Mut and Hathor and the psychology of religion with me, and gave me references to material published and unpublished. I would like to give my thanks to staff of the Department of Egyptology, University College London: to Ms. Elizabeth Blyth for all her kindness and her help both academic and practical; to Dr. David Dixon, who gave me valuable bibliographical references and advice; to Professor Geoffrey Martin, who was responsible for the theme of the thesis, as references to Amun at Memphis had long interested him, and who gave me the benefit of much advice in the early stages of the work, including help with references, format and prosopographical methodology; and to Dr. David Jeffreys, by whose kindness plates from The survey o f Memphis appear here, who took the time to 1 made possible with a grant from the U.S.I.A. 5 teach me a great deal during the field work in 1983, and who has often given me advice and encouragement in the memphite work. I am very grateful to my colleagues at University College London: to Mr. Saif al-Islam Mohammed Assim abd al-Kader who spent enormous amounts of time teaching colloquial Arabic to a most unpromising student and who arranged accoa/mdation for me through his family for the fellowship year in Egypt; to Mr. Robert Morkot who has always kept a weather eye for any references which might be of use, particularly in nubian and nubian related material, a kindness which has brought me several invaluable finds which would entirely have escaped my notice and whose thoughts on the evolution of conceptions of kingship have been very illuminating; to Dr. Mark Collier, as he is now, whose devotion to Intellectual rigour has been an inspiration and a challenge and who has always been w illin g to give his time to other people s work, most recently in chasing up references when I was unable to get to a library. To all my colleagues at University College London, I give my thanks; in Wepwawtt and in the UQL egypto/ogy seminars we did work which brought a ll of us forward and perhaps laid the basis, as we hoped, of future contributions by those of us who remain in the field towards coherency of thought in the discipline. None of that would ever have been begun if it had not been for the influence of Professor Harry Smith of the Department of Egyptology, University College London, who has a great g ift as a gardiner of human beings. He has always given, in the kindest possible way, his thoughtful attention and the fru its of his observation and experience to every individual with whom he has come into contact. Many of the group of students whom 1 knew have gone on to various other work, but they each bear the mark of Professor Smith s encouragement in iconoclasm, so that it is those who have grown to disagree with him in various matters who most particularly owe him a tremendous debt for his nourishing of their minds and characters. I certainly owe him a great deal. 6 preface i. def ence of the methodology of the research. There is today in egyptology some contention between proponents of the model-forming and the descriptive approaches. Perhaps it is not the case that every one of us takes part in the debate, but it is fa ir to say that its reverberations are fe lt everywhere in the field. Each of the methods is claimed for science and rigour. The model-maker finds the descriptive egyptologist a curator of data rather than an original thinker (and derides this), while the descriptive egyptologist finds the model maker too hotly imaginative, a dilettante f ather fields and insufficiently versed in the technical details of his or her own.