Durham E-Theses
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Durham E-Theses Hieroglyphic Semantics in Late Antiquity WILDISH, MARK How to cite: WILDISH, MARK (2012) Hieroglyphic Semantics in Late Antiquity, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/3922/ Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in Durham E-Theses • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full Durham E-Theses policy for further details. Academic Support Oce, Durham University, University Oce, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP e-mail: [email protected] Tel: +44 0191 334 6107 http://etheses.dur.ac.uk Hieroglyphic Semantics in Late Antiquity - 1 - Hieroglyphic Semantics in Late Antiquity Mark Wildish Department of Classics and Ancient History Thesis submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Classics at Durham University, in 2012. Mark Wildish - 1 - Hieroglyphic Semantics in Late Antiquity - 2 - This thesis is the result of my own work. All material from the published or unpublished work of others which is referred to in the thesis is credited to its authors. The thesis is approximately 70,000 words in length. Signed: (Mark Wildish) Date: Mark Wildish - 2 - Hieroglyphic Semantics in Late Antiquity - 3 - Abstract The primary aim of this thesis is the reconstruction of a development in the history of the philosophy of language, namely an understanding of hieroglyphic Egyptian as a language uniquely adapted to the purposes and concerns of late Platonist metaphysics. There are three main reasons for this particular focus. First, the primary interest of philological criticism has emphasized the apparent shortcomings of the classical hieroglyphic tradition in light of the success of the modern decipherment endeavour. Though the Greek authors recognize a number of philologically distinctive features, they are primarily interested in contrasting hieroglyphic and Greek semantics. The latter is capable of discursive elaboration of the sapiential content to which the former is non-discursively adapted. Second, the sole surviving, fully extant essay in the exegesis of Egyptian hieroglyphs, the Hieroglyphica of Horapollo can be situated within the broader philosophical project in which the Neoplatonic commentators were engaged. As such, it draws on elements of the distinct traditions of Greek reception of Egyptian wisdom, 4th/5th century pagan revivalism under Christian persecution, and late Platonist logico-metaphysical methodological principles. Third, the rationale for Neoplatonic use of allegorical interpretation as an exegetical tool is founded on the methodological principle of ‘analytic ascent’ from the phenomena depicted, through the concepts under which they fall, to their intelligible causes. These three stages in the ascent correspond to the three modes of expression of which, according to Greek exegetes, hieroglyphic Egyptian, as composites of material images and intelligible content, is capable. Horapollo’s Hieroglyphica, I argue, maintains a tripartite distinction between linguistic expressions, their meanings, and the objects or name-bearers which they depict and further aligns that distinction with three modes of hieroglyphic expression: representative, semantic, and symbolic. I conclude, therefore, that a procedure of analytic explanatory ascent from empirical observation through discursive reason to metaphysical or cosmological insights is employed in the exegesis of the sapiential content of the hieroglyphs of which it treats. Mark Wildish - 3 - Hieroglyphic Semantics in Late Antiquity - 4 - Table of Contents Title page - 1 - Signed and dated declaration - 2 - Abstract - 3 - Table of contents - 4 - Introduction - 6 - Chapter One: The Hieroglyphic Tradition - 10 - §1. Egyptian Hieroglyphs - 10 - §2. Greek Hieroglyphs - 16 - §3. Genres of Exegesis - 19 - §4. Hieroglyphic Wisdom - 25 - Chapter Two: The Coptic-Pagan Controversy - 29 – §1. Author and Text - 29 - §2. The Coptic Corpora - 41 – §3. The Pagan Response - 54 – Chapter Three: Neoplatonic Hieroglyphics - 58 - §1. Semantics - 58 - §2. Metaphysics - 66 - §3. Interpretation - 75 - Chapter Four: Horapollo’s Hieroglyphica - 86 - §1. Introduction - 86 - §2. The Representative Mode - 88 - §3. The Semantic Mode - 100 - §4. The Symbolic Mode - 107 - §5. Horapollonian Metaphysics - 116 - Conclusion - 125 - Mark Wildish - 4 - Hieroglyphic Semantics in Late Antiquity - 5 - Appendixes - 129 – Appendix 1 - 129 – Appendix 2 - 131 – Appendix 3 - 139 – Appendix 4 - 142 – Bibliography - 143 – (A) Primary Texts - 143 - (i) Manuscripts of the Ἱερογλυφικά - 143 - (ii) Editions of the Ἱερογλυφικά - 145 - (iii) Testimonia - 148 – (B) Secondary Texts - 149 - (i) Greek Texts - 149 - (ii) Latin Texts - 166 - (iii) Coptic Texts - 169 - (iv) Egyptian Texts - 172 - (v) Armenian Texts - 175 – (C) Secondary Literature Cited - 176 – (D) Other Secondary Literature Consulted - 182 – Mark Wildish - 5 - Hieroglyphic Semantics in Late Antiquity - 6 - Introduction The primary aim of this thesis is the reconstruction of a development in the history of the philosophy of language. The development in question is an understanding of hieroglyphic Egyptian as a language uniquely adapted to the purposes and concerns of late Platonist metaphysics. There are earlier conceptions of the particular superiority of hieroglyphic Egyptian for theological and philosophical purposes, both among the Egyptians themselves and in the Greek philosophical tradition. In the Greek philosophical sources the interest in hieroglyphs probably originates with the Stoic writer Chæremon, but it also appears in Platonic sources, including Plutarch. It is, however, with the specifically Neoplatonic development in the understanding of hieroglyphs that I am concerned here. There are two main reasons for this particular focus. The first is the scholastic and curricular inclinations of many of the representatives of Neoplatonism. This allows for far greater integration of their treatment of hieroglyphic Egyptian not only into philosophical linguistics more generally, but also into the broader philosophical project in which they were engaged. The second reason is that the only Greek text on the subject of hieroglyphs to survive complete, the Hieroglyphica of Horapollo, can profitably be read, so I shall argue, in the context of Neoplatonic theorizing about language in general and of hieroglyphics in particular. I describe the development as taking place in the philosophy of language because it identifies language – in this case, a particular language – as a topic of specific interest for the discipline of philosophy. My interest in that development concerns the philosophical status of that development, its methods and conclusions, and is therefore an essay in the history of philosophy of language. Of course, the reconstruction is to a large extent concerned with what are otherwise essentially historical aspects of the literature of late antiquity on the subject of hieroglyphic Egyptian. However, that concern extends only so far as the historical aspect supports a specifically philosophical interest and this is the basis of the secondary aim of the thesis, namely, an assessment of the presuppositions of the development as reconstructed. In this respect the project has more in common with Frede’s characterization of an earlier ‘doxographical tradition’ in the history of philosophy, than the later developmental tradition he distinguishes from it.1 On the other hand, it no more presupposes ‘a basic set of philosophical questions’, than it is written ‘from a particular philosophical position’ to which the history of philosophy has led us. Far less does it endorse the idea that ‘philosophical understanding is 1 Frede, M., ‘The History of Philosophy as a Discipline’ in The Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 85, No. 11, Eighty-Fifth Annual Meeting American Philosophical Association, Eastern Division, (Nov., 1988): pp. 666-672. Frede, M., ‘Introduction: The Study of Ancient Philosophy’ in Essays in Ancient Philosophy (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1987): pp. ix-xxvii. Mark Wildish - 6 - Hieroglyphic Semantics in Late Antiquity - 7 - essentially historical’.2 The project is philosophical, rather, because the historical development was thought by its proponents to do philosophical work, and the judgement I form is a judgement on their reasons for thinking so. In principle, then, the ‘basic set of philosophical questions’ addressed ‘from a particular philosophical position’ are those of the late Platonists themselves. Chapter One begins by examining the philological criticism which has focussed on the tradition’s apparent congruence or otherwise with the success of the decipherment endeavour. The primary interest of the decipherment endeavour was the reconstruction of the language of ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs. As a result of that endeavour a distinction was drawn between sound-signs and sense-signs into which hieroglyphic texts are typically analyzed. The introduction of this distinction is the product of an independent interest in the phonology and semantics of hieroglyphic Egyptian. It does not inform a purely orthographic analysis of sign- groups which are