“Bad Shepherds” of the Eastern Delta

Lloyd D. Graham

Text Abstract: During the 2nd and 1st millennia BCE, the Nile’s Eastern Delta was supposedly the locale of truculent “shepherds” who were inimical to Egypt. These problematic herdsmen seem largely to have been refractions of foreign powers generated by independent etymological confusions, behind which lie the and the Assyrians; however, the caricature may contain a grain of truth. The shepherd-rebels from the Delta, who have intriguing overlaps with the (proto)Israelites of , ultimately found their way into Greek novels.

Graphic abstract:

1. Introduction

Egyptian narrative literature of the Late Period tends to take liberties with historical events in the manner of a popular novel or even a folk-tale,1 and the same trait can be seen in Greek-language histories – or, more accurately, pseudohistories – of Egypt written in the Greco-Roman period.2 For example, such accounts claim that, during the Second and Third Intermediate Periods, the Eastern Delta was the locale of mysterious groups of shepherds who had either assumed the rulership of Egypt or had at least attempted to do so.3 These troublesome herdsmen seem to have been the result of two separate etymological confusions. Behind these “bad shepherds” of the north-east – unworthy kings and would-be usurpers – lie the Hyksos and, most probably, a divinised representation of the Assyrian army.

As we shall ultimately see, it is possible that something more than coincidence and linguistic accident underpins the repeated characterisation of foreign interlopers from the north-east as shepherds from the Eastern Delta.

2. Shepherd Kings: The Hyksos and the Exodus

The Hyksos rulers of the Second Intermediate Period, who established their capital at Avaris in the Eastern Delta, were reported by the Jewish historian Josephus (1st century

1

CE) to be “Shepherd Kings.”4 This identification occurs within his Greek-language polemic Against Apion. Josephus claims that the passage in question is a verbatim extract from the second book of ’s Aegyptiaca ;5 this lost work represents the only known native narrative of the history of to be written in Greek. Hyksos is a Greek rendering of the Egyptian phrase HqA(.w) xAs.wt, Ruler(s) of Foreign Lands.” As we shall see, Manetho’s – or Josephus’s6 – misinterpretation probably arose from an over-literal translation of the equivalent term HqA(.w) SAs.w, “Ruler(s) of the Bedouin,” as “Lord(s) of the Shepherds.”7 Josephus’s account, which we will next examine in detail, was influential; for example, it was repeated in the 4th century CE by Eusebius, the bishop of Caesarea, an important Christian polemicist and historian.8

Josephus ascribes to Manetho’s second book of Aegyptiaca the following information about the Hyksos:9 “There came, after a surprising manner, men of ignoble birth out of the eastern parts, and had boldness enough to make an expedition into our country, and with ease subdued it by force, yet without our hazarding a battle with them. So when they had gotten those that governed us under their power, they afterwards burned down our cities, and demolished the temples of the gods, and used all the inhabitants in a most barbarous manner; nay, some they killed, and led their children and their wives into slavery. At length they made one of themselves king, whose name was Salatis [...] He chiefly aimed to secure the eastern parts, as foreseeing that the Assyrians, who had then the greatest power, would be desirous of that kingdom, and invade them; and as he found in the Saite Nomos [Sethroite], a city very proper for this purpose, and which lay upon the Bubastic Channel, but with regard to a certain theological notion was called Avaris, this he rebuilt, and made very strong by the walls he built about it [...]” In reality, Hyksos rule was the result of migration and/or infiltration rather than invasion.10 It represented a domination of Lower Egypt by Canaanite peoples who had settled in the Eastern Delta; these probably seceded from central Egyptian control near the end of the 13th Dynasty.11

It is curious that Manetho/Josephus should mention the possibility of Assyrian invasion in connection with this first wave of “shepherds,” for – as we shall see in Section 4 – a subsequent wave of “shepherds” is likely to be none other than the army that Salites (Dynasty 15, 1648-1590 BCE) allegedly feared – even if it was almost a millennium late in arriving.12 After naming the next five kings of the Hyksos dynasty, Josephus continues to quote Manetho as follows:13 “And these six were the first rulers among them, who were all along making war with the , and were very desirous gradually to destroy them to the very roots. This whole nation was styled Hycsos, that is, Shepherd-kings: for the first syllable, Hyc, according to the sacred dialect, denotes a king, as is Sos a shepherd; but this according to the ordinary dialect; and of these is compounded Hycsos: but some say that these people were Arabians.” Hyc – or, more properly HqA – is the Middle Egyptian word for “ruler,” so this part of the etymology is largely correct. Moreover, Sos is probably the Coptic Shos, “herdsman,”14 in which case a group of pastoral nomads – “shepherds” – is indeed indicated. Shos is in turn is derived from the Middle Egyptian term Shasu (SAs.w), which denotes Bedouin tribesmen.15 Nomadic groups designated as Shasu roamed the desert regions of both

2

Canaan and Nubia;16 in this case, the northeastern origin of the Hyksos and the location of their capital in the Eastern Delta makes it clear that they came from the . The Shasu of Edom, south of the Dead Sea, may have worshipped the god Yahweh (who became the sole god of Israel; Exodus 15:1-26, Deuteronomy 32:8-9) from as early as the 15th century BCE,17 a point which may have a bearing on the later entanglement of Hyksos and Israelite traditions (discussed below).

Josephus then interrupts Manetho’s narrative to provide an alternative etymology for the name Hyksos:18 Now in another copy it is said that this word does not denote kings, but, on the contrary, denotes captive shepherds, and this on account of the particle Hyc. In Egyptian hyk, in fact, and hak when aspirated, expressly denote “captives”;19 and this seems to me the more probable opinion, and more agreeable to ancient history. Underpinning this etymology is the Middle Egyptian word HAq, “plunder” or “captive.”20 It is only later that Josephus explains why he favours this understanding over the correct one (HqA, “ruler”); his logic is revealed in the final excerpt below. But first, Josephus resumes Manetho’s narrative thus:21 “These people, whom we have before named kings, and called shepherds also, and their descendants [...] kept possession of Egypt five hundred and eleven years.”22

After that, resurgent Theban kings drove the “shepherds” from the Egyptian hinterland into their capital, Avaris, and laid siege to them. The ultimately unsuccessful siege was abandoned in favour of a negotiated withdrawal of the foreigners to the Levant. Josephus concludes Manetho’s narrative as follows:23 “They [= the Egyptians] came to a composition with them [= the Hyksos], that they should leave Egypt, and go, without any harm to be done to them, wherever they would; and that, after this composition was made, they went away with their whole families and effects, not fewer in number than two hundred and forty thousand, and took their journey from Egypt, through the wilderness, for Syria; but that as they were in fear of the Assyrians, who had then the dominion over Asia, they built a city in that country which is now called Judea, and that large enough to contain this great number of men, and called it .” Now Manetho, in another book of his, says “That this nation, thus called shepherds, were also called captives, in their sacred books.” And this account of his is the truth; for feeding of sheep was the employment of our forefathers in the most ancient ages; and as they led such a wandering life in feeding sheep, they were called shepherds. Nor was it without reason that they were called captives by the Egyptians, since one of our ancestors, , told the king of Egypt that he was a captive, and afterward sent for his brothers into Egypt by the king’s permission. This account identifies the biblical Exodus of the (proto)Israelites with the expulsion of the Hyksos from Egypt. In reality, the latter is likely to have predated the former,24 and the biblical account may to some extent incorporate folk-memories of the Hyksos’ banishment.25 One point of overlap lies in the biblical assertions that the Israelites built the city of Raamses/Rameses (Exodus 1:11) and commenced the Exodus from there (Numbers 33:3-5); a geographic link with the Hyksos becomes apparent in Jacobus van Dijk’s

3

statement that “Rameses II [...] expanded the city of Avaris and made it his great Delta residence called Piramesse (‘house of Rameses’), the Raamses of biblical tradition.”26 Although in part ascribed to Manetho, the identification of the Hyksos’ expulsion with the Exodus is most likely a later Jewish interpolation27 – one well suited Josephus’s agenda.28

That the Egyptians considered at least some HqA.w xAs.wt – the Egyptian phrase that underpins the Greek word Hyksos – to be the chieftains of herdsmen is suggested by a scene in the Middle Kingdom tomb of Khnumhotep II at Beni Hasan. There, clad in Joseph-grade coats of many colours (Genesis 37:3)29 and conducted by a HqA xAs.t named ib-SA (Abisha, an Israelite name found in 1 Chronicles 2:16),30 a group of thirty-seven Asiatics (aAm.w, Aamu)31 arrive before the nomarch, accompanied by many animals (Fig. 1).32 The non-pack animals are wild ungulates (specifically, ibex and gazelle), so they are perhaps symbolic of the delegation’s desert homeland rather than representative of their flocks; nevertheless, the nomads tend to them in the manner of herd animals.33 The gazelle may be an emblem of “Gazelle-land,” which Hans Goedicke identifies as “denoting part of the Wadi Tumilat and the north-eastern Delta fringe as the area of nomads,”34 but the inscription says the nomads originate from a locale called Sw(.t), which is thought to be in northern Sinai.35

We have already noted the interchangeability of the words xAs.wt and SAs.w (Shasu), with the latter probably accounting for the first word of “Shepherd Kings.” William Murnane observes that, at the start of Egypt’s 19th Dynasty, “Problems with Shasu marauders had been perennial in southern ” and that in this case “The terrain that the Shasu had rendered impassable would be the hilly country bordering the main highway between Egypt and Asia, lying south of this road [...] and following the coastal plain northeast into Palestine.”36 As rebels of the Levantine hill-country, the Shasu were behaving in a manner consistent with that expected of the (proto)Israelite population in /Palestine, and such attributes – together with the previously-noted association of some Shasu with Yahweh – provide good reasons for believing that the Israelites may have been sedentarised Shasu.37

No doubt the identification of the (proto)Israelites as Hyksos “shepherds” by ancient Jewish redactors (3rd century BCE – 1st century CE) was aided by Genesis 46:31-32, the passage in which Joseph said to his family: “I will go up and tell Pharaoh, and will say to him, ‘My brothers and my father’s household, who were in the land of Canaan, have come to me. The men are shepherds, for they have been keepers of livestock; and they have brought their flocks, and their herds, and all that they have.’”38

In the last block quotation from Josephus, we may note that, once again, this author (anachronistically) mentions the threat posed by the Assyrians – a foreign power that will form the focus of Section 4 in this paper.

3. Lepers and shepherds: Amarna and Israel

Later in Against Apion, Josephus again cites Manetho to narrate a postscript in which the “shepherds” (Section 2) return to Egypt 518 years after their expulsion.39 By this stage, Avaris had become a refuge for 80,000 lepers and other “unclean people” from Egypt.40

4

5

Fig. 1. Wall-scene from the tomb of Khnumhotep II (Tomb 3) at Beni Hasan. The delegation, which occupies part of a single register on the left-hand wall, has here been split into two overlapping panels to better fill the page; the shared portion of each image is indicated by a blue line above each panel marked “overlap.” The first (i.e., right-most) figure in the upper panel is the Scribe of the Royal Document, Neferhotep; he extends in his right hand a document (small rectangle, truncated at right of photograph) while he introduces the group to Khnumhotep (at far right, not shown).41 The text on the document reads:42 “Year 6 under the Majesty of the Horus ‘Leader of the Two Lands,’ the king of Upper and Lower Egypt Kha-kheper-re [= Senwosret II, Dynasty 12]: List of the Aamu [= Asiatics], whom the son of the mayor Khnumhotep brings about the black eye-paint: Aamu of Shu, their number 37.” Between the shoulder of the second Egyptian (“the Overseer of Hunters, Khety”) and the head of the first Asiatic appears the caption HqA xAs.t, “Ruler of Foreign Lands” and – between their pairs of legs, in front of the ruler’s ibex – his name, ib-SA (Abisha). The second long inscription, which is written in large hieroglyphs above the Aamu of the figure’s upper panel, is readable from the photograph as iyi.t Hr ini.t msdm.t ini.n=f aAm 37: “An arrival regarding the bringing of black eye-paint, he [=Abisha] having brought 37 Aamu.”43 Overall, the wall scene is very dirty; the unusually clear and bright appearance of the Asiatic behind Abisha is the result of an experimental cleaning regime conducted in the past but not extended beyond this trial figure. Author’s photographs, Feb 2020.

This population decided to revolt against the Egyptian king and, to bolster their strength, the rebels invited the shepherds to return to their former stronghold of Avaris. As a result, an army of 20,000 shepherds returned to this city from the Levant.44 Josephus reports Manetho as saying:45 Meanwhile, the army that had come back to Egypt ... and joined with the “unclean” Egyptians treated the people so impiously that their previous occupation as “Shepherds” seemed like a golden age to those who saw their current sacrileges. They not only burned cities and villages, plundered the sanctuaries, and befouled the images of the gods, but they also kept the kitchens going to cook the sacred animals that the people revered. They forced priests and prophets to slay and butcher the animals, and they threw the men out naked. It is said that the man who gave them their constitution and laws was a priest of the people of Heliopolis [...] The stated chronology – 518 years after the expulsion of the Hyksos – places the return of the shepherds at the beginning of the 21st Dynasty, i.e. at the start of the Third Intermediate Period. This was indeed the start of a time of instability and fragmentation within Egypt, during which non-Egyptians – specifically, Libyans and Nubians/Kushites – came to power in the 23rd to 25th Dynasties.46 However, the Egyptian kings named in the narrative belong to the New Kingdom. The pharaoh against whom the “unclean people” rebel is called Amenophis, which situates the crisis in the 18th Dynasty,47 while “his son Sethos, who was also named Ramesses” is clearly a conflation of the first three kings of the 19th Dynasty.48

The historical crisis in the 18th Dynasty, which rocked Egyptian society to its foundations, was of course the religious upheaval implemented by Amenhotep IV – better known as – in which the traditional pantheon of Egyptian gods was suppressed in favour of sole worship of the Aten, a deity whose manifestation was the sun-disk. The religious perversions of the “unclean Egyptians” and the identification of their leader as a priest of Heliopolis – the “city of the sun” – provide a good fit for the Atenist revolution and its sun- struck protagonist, Akhenaten.49 Moreover, the thirteen-year “reign of the lepers”

6

approximates the twelve-year duration of the rule of this king from his purpose-built capital, Akhetaten.50 Manetho’s king Amenophis is clearly an amalgam who embodies the pre-Amarna era of Amenhotep I-III, against whose inherited traditions the heretic pharaoh rebelled. None of Akhenaten’s revolution involved foreign intervention, but it is obvious that his forced relocation of Egypt’s capital from Thebes to Akhetaten – a completely new city, built at forced pace in the desolate plain of Amarna – has become confounded with memories of that other remote and unwelcome capital, the Hyksos stronghold of Avaris. It is for this reason that the “shepherds” were brought back to Egypt by Manetho and/or Josephus. It would seem that whenever Egypt is in peril, subversive shepherds are sure to be involved.51

Ultimately, Manetho’s king Amenophis and his son Ramesses return with their armies from their thirteen-year exile in Ethiopia (by which is meant Nubia and other territory south of Egypt),52 whereupon they successfully purge Egypt of the “unclean ones” and their shepherd reinforcements, pursuing any survivors “as far as the borders of Syria.”53 Subsequent to the restoration of traditional religion in Egypt, the historical Ramesses II did of course campaign into Nubia and the Levant;54 his expansionism established a “golden era” of Egyptian power and prosperity akin to the country’s former glory under Amenhotep III.

Egypt’s religious convulsion in the 18th Dynasty had impacts far beyond its time and place. Akhenaten’s exclusive worship of the Aten has prompted some modern scholars to identify him as the first monotheist,55 an honour traditionally enjoyed by .56 Jan Assmann’s groundbreaking book, Moses the Egyptian, connects the two figures, tracing the origins of Moses’s monotheism back to Akhenaten.57 However, as we shall soon see, Assmann is far from the first person to make such an identification. It is well known that Akhenaten is the new name that Amenhotep IV chose for himself when he disavowed Amun, the king of the traditional gods honoured in his original theophoric name; his new theophoric name reflected his new-found devotion to the Aten. Josephus – claiming the authority of Manetho – tells us that the heretical priest from Heliopolis, in whom we have recognised the figure of Akhenaten, did precisely the same thing: “When he changed his allegiance, he changed his name.” What is startling is the new name that we are told he chose for himself. Originally called Osarseph, in honour of the traditional god Osiris, “he changed his name and was called Moses.”58

Ian Rutherford has pointed out that some geographical details of the Exodus under the biblical Moses, which (as we noted in Section 2) may recapitulate the expulsion of the Hyksos, show intriguing overlaps with surviving narratives of the “lepers and shepherds.”59 For example, Josephus reports another tradition about the “unclean ones,” this time on the authority of Chaeremon, in which – after their expulsion by Amenophis – they linked up with another group of exiles at Pelusium.60 Baal Zephon, opposite which the escaping (proto)Israelites were specifically instructed to camp (Exodus 14:1 & 9), was a major sanctuary at Pelusium61 – moreover, one devoted to a Canaanite storm-god worshipped locally as Seth of Avaris, and thus linked with the Hyksos.62 Mention of Pelusium, as well as the fact that this second group of exiles had been denied permission by Amenophis to cross Egypt’s border, suggests that they could have elements in common with the

7

(proto)Israelites of the Exodus.63 In addition, the Sea of Reeds (Heb. yam suf; Exodus 13.18), which provides such a memorable part of the (proto)Israelites’ journey toward Sinai (Exodus14-15), is most likely located within the marshlands of the Eastern Delta,64 the territory of the troublesome shepherds. Indeed, the Hebrew word suf (“reeds”) is thought to be a loanword from Egyptian; yam suf is probably cognate with the Egyptian toponym pA Twf, “the Papyrus Thicket,”65 which we will meet again in Section 4. The Onomasticon of Amenope lists pA-Twf a toponym at the eastern edge of the Delta.66

4. Marauding shepherds: The Aamu and the Assyrians

The next time that troublesome shepherds from the north-east make an appearance Egyptian (pseudo)history occurs in the Inaros-Petubastis cycle of stories, which are thought to date to early Ptolemaic times.67 In the words of Franziska Naether,68 who draws upon the groundwork of Joachim Quack:69 We turn to another region, the Eastern Delta, which was home to a group constantly opposing the crown, especially in the Third Intermediate Period (c. 1069-664 BCE). Though dwelling in Egypt, the inimical shepherds living there are one of the groups challenging the Pharaoh in the narrative cycle of the Inaros-Petubastis-Stories. They are called “herdsmen” (aAm.w) and appear especially in the stories The Fight for the Prebend of Amun and The Fight for the Armor of Inaros. [...] One can assume that the territory of the rebellious shepherds in the Eastern Delta was not far away from the Sinai and their presumed wandering communities must have led to this designation – even though [in the stories] they perform Egyptian rites and worship Amun.70 Petubastis has been identified with the historical Petubastis II, a Delta king of the 23rd Dynasty based in Bubastis or Tanis.71 Date estimates for his reign vary widely: some assign Petubastis’s rule to ca. 765-730, making him a contemporary of Takelot III and his successors in Upper Egypt at the end of the 22nd Dynasty.72 Others identify Petubastis as the king of Tanis ca. 680-665 BCE,73 and thus coincident with the two late-25th Dynasty rulers of Upper Egypt, the Kushite kings Shebitqo and Taharqo.74 The latter assignation also places Petubastis as a king in the Delta at the time of the Assyrian invasions of Egypt. Even if the historical king who informs the Petubastis of the Inaros-Petubastis story cycle predates the arrival of the Assyrians, other key characters in the narrative – including Inaros – “are indeed historical characters of the 7th century.”75

The storyline of The Fight for the Prebend of Amun is complex. It opens (1) with king Petubastis, who has travelled to Thebes with his army, claiming the prebend of Amun – a benefice or salary paid to the High Priest of Amun – for his son, Anchhor. But, as Thomas Schneider explains, this decision is contested:76 (2) The next day, a contender for the benefice of Amun appears on the stage: a young Horus priest from Buto [...] claims that it is he who is actually entitled to the benefice of Amun. [...] He is accompanied by 13 shepherds [...] To the dismay of Petubastis, Amun confirms the righteousness of the young priest’s claim. [... T]he Horus priest intends to take the barge [= sacred barque] of Amun as a security. Anchhor (Chayris), supported by the general Teos, and the Horus priest become enraged and prepare to fight. (3) Petubastis’ son Anchhor (Chayris) and his army from four nomes is opposed to the Horus priest and the thirteen shepherds. In the first two duels, the Horus priest defeats Anchhor

8

(Chayris),77 and one of the shepherds [defeats] Anchhor’s general Wertepiamonnut. They are bound in fetters and imprisoned below deck on the barge of Amun. The priest and his supporters celebrate their victory [on board with a festival]. [...] (4) [...] Minnebmaat, prince of Elephantine and overseer of Upper Egypt, arrives to support Petubastis. He is able to reach, in four consecutive duels with four of the shepherds, draws. Then Petechonsis and Pemau arrive from the north and engage in more duels with the remaining shepherds. Although the text becomes very fragmentary towards the end of the story, it may be inferred that each of them fought another four times (1 + 4 + 4 + 4 [=13, one duel for each shepherd]). (5) The end of the story and solution to the conflict is not preserved. In accordance with the oracles conveyed throughout the text, it seems likely that a solution respecting the interests of all sides was reached.78 The combative herdsmen supporting the priest from Buto are described as coming from the swamps and marshland,79 which clearly indicates an origin in the Delta, and most probably its eastern part, for “the Delta, and particularly the Eastern Delta, was a marshy land in antiquity.”80 For example, the shepherd-warriors’ homeland is so understood by Naether in the first block quotation in this section.

If the nature of the ending suggested by Schneider – i.e., part (5) in the block quotation – is indeed correct, then the resolution of the Petubastis tale mirrors that of the negotiated solution to the “Hyksos problem,” as reported by Manetho/Josephus; in both cases, the troublesome “shepherds” were repulsed under a negotiated settlement rather than vanquished in open combat. In reality, of course, the Hyksos were defeated militarily by the Theban kings Sequenenre, Kamose and Ahmose I (17-18th Dynasties) and the Asiatics were either expelled from Egypt or – if they had useful skills – resettled within it.81 It is worth noting that Joachim Quack believes that the tradition of Osarseph and his shepherd army from the Levant, as recorded in Greek-language texts about Egypt (Section 3), helped to shape the Egyptian story of the Horus priest from Buto and his shepherd-warriors from the Delta.82

The interpretation of aAm.w given by Naether in the first quotation of this section is correct; in Demotic – the language of the stories – this word means “herdsmen” or “shepherds.”83 However, the classical meaning of aAm.w in Middle Egyptian – which we already encountered in Section 2 – is “Asiatics,”84 a sense which persisted into Demotic times.85 The intercompatibility of the terms aAm(.w) and HqA(.w) xAs(.w)t – the latter being the Egyptian phrase underpinning the word Hyksos – has already been illustrated by Fig. 1.86 The homeland of the shepherds in The Fight for the Prebend of Amun is called pr Dwf, beneath which probably lies the Egyptian toponym pA-Twf – a locale at the eastern edge of the Delta named “the Papyrus Thicket” that we met at the end of Section 3.87 Its location at the north-eastern boundary of Egypt would certainly accord with these aAm.w n(.w) pr Dwf being Asiatics.

If the warriors in The Fight for the Prebend of Amun were indeed Asiatics rather than shepherds,88 then there are good reasons to identify them with the Assyrians, who – first under Esarhaddon, and then under Ashurbanipal – invaded Egypt via the Eastern Delta between 674 and 667 BCE.89 As we have seen, Petubastis may well have been a king at Tanis in the Eastern Delta at the time of the Assyrian invasions. Several tales from the

9

Inaros-Petubastis cycle centre upon Esarhaddon or other Assyrian figures,90 and The Fight for the Armour of Inaros – one of the stories cited in the Naether quotation as involving the shepherds91 – links Petubastis directly to Esarhaddon’s unsuccessful campaign of 674 BCE in the following terms:92 Pemu said: Woe and misery! By Re-Harakhte, the Chief of the Gods, the Great God [------pharaoh] Petubastis on the ... (?) when the chief of Ashur Esarhaddon son of S[ennacherib ------] to take Egypt from pharaoh Petubastis, I jumped in [--- / ---], I made very much bloodbath and destruction. I caused him to return to the east [---] Overall, Jacqueline Jay concludes that “The chaotic period immediately following the Assyrian domination provides a rough background for a number of tales [...] including Prebend and Armour.”93

Thomas Schneider analyses the attributes of the Asiatic shepherd-warriors – thirteen armoured Aamu sporting horned helmets, shields and sickle-shaped swords – and concludes that they represent a divinised form of the Assyrian army.94 This idea is corroborated by the fact that the Egyptians speak of them exactly as one would speak of a foreign army that threatened to invade the kingdom.95 More specifically, Schneider suggests that the details of these warriors – their number, dress and weapons – may well derive from genuine Egyptian encounters with battle-standards featuring the Assyrian war- god Nergal flanked by his twelve divine warriors.96 Based on possible paronomasia, Schneider also identifies the unnamed priest as Horchebi, grandson of the Kushite king Shabaqo and son of the High Priest of Amun, whose office he successfully inherited (along with its prebend) around the time of the Assyrian conquest of Thebes.97 The conquest, which in the tale is encoded by the inconclusive conflict between the Kushite overseer of Upper Egypt (aided by pro-Kushite princes from the north) and the invading shepherd- warriors, did essentially end in a negotiated resolution, as per point (5) above – one that quickly proved beneficial to Egypt.98

5. The rebel shepherds (boukoloi) of Greek novels

The idea that the Aamu warrior-shepherds discussed in the last section might have served as an inspiration for the warlike βουκόλοι (boukoloi, “herdsmen”) of the Nile Delta that appear in Greek novels of the 2nd-3rd centuries CE dates back at least to Gaston Maspero in the late 1800s.99 Ian Rutherford observes that “On the level of semantics, there is no doubt that the Egyptian word ‘aAm’ [...] would have been taken as the precise equivalent to the Greek βουκόλος.”100 The boukoloi feature prominently in fictional stories by three writers: Aithiopica, by Heliodorus of Emesa, Cleitophon and Lucippe, by Achilles Tatius, and Ephesiaca, by Xenophon of Ephesus.

In Aithiopica, the leader of the boukoloi – Thyamis – is the son of a Memphite priest called Kalasiris;101 Thyamis’s younger brother, Petosiris, has dispossessed him of the priesthood, such that the two end up fighting a duel at Memphis.102 The situation is resolved by the

10

unexpected arrival of Kalasiris.103 The storyline of this sub-plot seems to echo that of The Fight for the Prebend of Amun: in both cases, the herdsmen are led by the son of a priest who has unfairly been dispossessed of his father’s office; the herdsmen take the side of the plaintiff against the established authority of the king or governor; the opposing sides engage in duels over the dispute; and the conflict is ultimately resolved in a non-violent manner.104 Of the boukoloi, we are told that they eat raw fish (to the Greek mind, a hallmark of barbarity) and that:105 The Herdsmen cultivate an alarming appearance, particularly as regards their hair, which they pull forwards to meet their eyebrows, and toss violently as it falls over their shoulders, for they are well aware that long hair makes lovers seem more alluring, but robbers more alarming.

In Cleitophon and Lucippe, the protagonists sail from Pelusium toward Alexandria, but at one point their boat is menaced from the shore by a group of boukoloi:106 All at once, the shore was full of wild frightening men, all large and black (not deep black like Indians, but black as, say, a half-Ethiopian might be), bareheaded, heavyset but quick on the feet. They all shouted in a foreign language ... The homeland of these brigands is described thus:107 In the region inhabited by the robbers, the Nile when it retires [after the annual inundation] leaves many ponds, shallow and muddy, on which the robbers sail, in light boats containing one person: any other kind would run aground at once. When water fails, these are taken on the sailor’s back and carried to a deeper channel. Among the swamps, the uninhabited islands are covered with papyrus growing close, behind which, as behind a rampart, the pirates hold their councils and plan their ambushes. In the inhabited islands are rude huts, like a city walled in by the marsh. The robbers had retired to the island of Nicochis, for this place, though connected with the land by a causeway, was otherwise wholly surrounded by the lagoons. Both of the novels’ protagonists end up being captured by the boukoloi, and at one point Lucippe is in danger of being sacrificed, for: “‘We have a tradition’, says the leader of the robbers, ‘that sacrifices, especially human sacrifices, must be performed by newly initiated bandits.’”108 The ritual typically includes cannibalism, for we are told of a previous instance where they were obliged to “offer up a maiden, taste her liver, put her body in a coffin, and retire so that the enemy might take the site of the sacrifice.”109

In Ephesiaca, herdsmen capture the hero – Habrocomes – when he makes landfall in the Eastern Delta. These bandits, who are not called boukoloi but ποιμένες (poimenes, “shepherds”) convey Habrocomes to Pelusium, where he is sold into slavery.110

Taken as a whole, we can see telltale indications of continuity between these stories and earlier accounts of shepherd-warriors from the Delta (Sections 2-4). The association with piracy, which in the novels arises naturally from the waterlogged maze presented by the boukoloi’s homeland and sees them capture both Cleitophon and Lucippe,111 is a signature activity even in far less conducive environments; for example, in The Fight for the Prebend of Amun, the warrior-shepherds seize the sacred barque of Amun and imprison their

11

captives below its deck.112 However, we should also recognise that, to some extent, the Greek stories about bandit boukoloi reflect the actual situation in the Delta in Ptolemaic times, ca. 200 BCE. As Günther Hölbl relates:113 A papyrus dating to the end of the third century [BCE ...] describes how Egyptian bandits attacked a military post and a temple precinct; the attackers came from an area outside the village community. This is obviously an example of the well-known phenomenon of anachoresis in which individuals would seek refuge in the deserts and the Delta marshes as a result of the intensive exploitation of the Egyptian peasantry. Such indigents gathered together and plundered wherever there was something to be had; it was of no concern to them whether the owners were Greeks, Egyptians or even Egyptian priests. From the we also know that, at the end of [Ptolemy IV] Philopator’s reign [= 204 BCE], civil war raged in the Delta. In light of the fact that the “enemies” even attacked sanctuaries, this war should be viewed as a rebellion of the lower classes inspired by social injustice. This uprising in Lower Egypt dating to the last years of Philopator’s reign represented a growing movement which would be completely quashed only in 185 [BCE]. Despite the accuracy of this quotation, native resistance to Greek rule in Ptolemaic Egypt was concentrated not in the Delta but in Upper Egypt, especially around Thebes. For example, Horwennefer and Anhkwennefer led a rebellion in which parts of Upper Egypt seceded from Ptolemaic control between 206-186 BCE.114 Egyptian nationalists vilified their Greek overlords as successors to the Hyksos (of some 1500 years earlier!) by referring to them as “Sethians” or “Typhonians.”115 This slur occurs repeatedly in the anti-Greek Potter’s Oracle (Demotic, 2nd century BCE), which bewails: “For in the time of the Typhonians they [= Egyptians] will say: ‘Wretched Egypt, you are wronged by terrible iniquities wrought against you.’”116 Although nationalist polemics equated the Greeks with the Hyksos, they do not seem to have portrayed them as royal or reprobate shepherds.

Some of the Greek novels’ supposedly fictional accounts of harassment by boukoloi even contain details that can be verified as authentic. For example, the island of Nikokhis and its lawless denizens from Cleitophon and Lucippe has a counterpart in contemporaneous historical records – an administrative papyrus of the late 2nd century CE from Thmouis in the Eastern Delta (just south of Mendes, and somewhat west of Avaris) complains of attacks from the “unholy inhabitants of Nikokis,” and records that “most of the inhabitants of the village of Kerkenouphis had been killed by the ‘impious men of Neikokis’, who came to the village and burnt it.”117 At a later date, the record-keeper adds that “some fishermen had been killed by the ‘impious men of Nikokhis’.”118 In another cross-over of fact with fiction, the historian Cassius Dio tells of a group of boukoloi who caused a civil disturbance in 171 CE under a priest called Isidorus:119 The so-called Boukoloi were disturbed in Egypt and made the rest of Egypt revolt under the priest Isidorus. First, they deceived the Roman centurion, wearing female clothing as if they were the wives of the Boukoloi, and about to give them gold on behalf of their husbands. When he approached them, they killed him, and his companion they sacrificed and swore an oath over his entrails, and ate them. Isidorus was the best of his generation in bravery. Then in pitched battle defeating the Romans in Egypt, they would have taken Alexandria itself, had not Cassius sent from Syria conducted a campaign in such a way as to destroy their common purpose and separate them from each other.

12

In this historical account we see a group of herdsmen being led by a priest and engaging in armed conflict with the authorities, as in The Fight for the Prebend of Amun and in Aithiopica; the group has communal rituals, as in The Fight for the Prebend of Amun (when, for example, the shepherd-warrior Aamu hold a festival on the captured barque of Amun to celebrate their victory),120 and these rituals may extend to human sacrifice with cannibalism,121 as in Cleitophon and Lucippe. In such cases, it is difficult to determine whether art is imitating life or life is imitating art. Rutherford quite reasonably suggests that, as Egyptian nationalists operating in a time of unrest, “the Boukoloi whom Avidius Cassius subdued 172 CE are likely to have called themselves aAm.w and to have set themselves in the tradition of the heroes of the Inaros-Petubastis cycle.”122

The location of the boukoloi homeland is a subject of debate. In Achilles Tatius’s Cleitophon and Lucippe it is (as we saw above) near Nikokhis in the Eastern Delta. The Ephesiaca also locates its bandit-shepherds in the Eastern Delta. (In both accounts, we might note that Pelusium provides a point of intersection with the Hyksos/Israelite trajectories of Section 3.)123 Herodotus refers to a “Bucolic” branch of the Nile,124 and this has traditionally been identified with the modern Damietta branch in the Eastern Delta.125 More speculatively, the class of Egyptian warriors that Herodotus calls έρμοτύβιες (hermotubies) might take their name from a Hellenised contraction of aAm.w n(.w) pr Dwf,126 the term that designated the warrior-shepherds in The Fight for the Prebend of Amun (Section 4);127 numbering 160,000 in the 26th Dynasty, the hermotubies were reportedly drawn from six nomes of the central and western Delta.128 Other accounts, too, favour the west. In Heliodorus’s Aithiopica, a lake and its fringing marshland – collectively designated Boukolia – “is the home of the entire bandit community of Egypt, some of them building huts on what little land there is above water, others living on boats that serve them as both transport and dwelling.”129 As the novel’s plot seems to place this locale near Chemmis, it has been identified with an actual region of the Western Delta – near Alexandria and Lake Mareotis – which is named Boukolia. Eratosthenes tells of a time, prior to the founding of Alexandria, when its “harbour at Pharos [...] was not of free access, but watched and guarded by herdsmen, who were robbers, and [who] attacked those who attempted to sail into it.”130 Although these herdsmen were probably not outlaws opposed to central authority so much as natives who sought to repel foreign invaders,131 their memory may, over time, have become assimilated into that of the boukoloi. There is also indirect support for a Western Delta location in the texts discussed in Section 4, insofar as the young Horus priest in The Fight for the Prebend of Amun comes from Buto. Overall, we may conclude with Ian Rutherford that the boukoloi were probably not confined to just one half of the Delta, but could be encountered in any of its marshlands.

If we accept that the Egyptian boukoloi and their antecedents always enjoyed a pan-Delta distribution, as opposed to their range being expanded only in the Hellenistic imagination, then the “savage shepherd” trope is opened up to other influences coming to Egypt from the west. It is to one such candidate that we now turn.

6. Other influences: The Herdsman’s Tale

The boukoloi are probably not solely the heirs of the Hyksos, Aamu, Assyrians, and so on. To some extent, these wild, frightening, black, hairy male marsh-dwellers – who are eaters

13 of raw flesh and lovers of human sacrifice – may also be gender-inverted transformations of the hairy goddess from The Herdsman’s Tale (Dynasty 12), whose abnormal appearance strikes terror into the eponymous herdsman in his marshland setting.132 As the preserved text breaks off, she is approaching the herdsman as a naked woman whose hair is disordered,133 a nexus reminiscent of the crazy coiffure of Heliodorus’s boukoloi, whose long hair made them more alarming opponents but more alluring lovers.

Thomas Schneider interprets the ambiguous goddess as a Sakhmet-like deity of the Libyan desert who also frequents marshland thickets and who, in this case, is making an appearance in the Western Delta.134 A folk-memory of her may live on in a widespread Libyco-Berber myth that tells of “a kind of ogress, a man- and animal eating demon. She is a big cat or lioness, but [… w]hen represented as an old and malicious woman, she still retains her animal characteristics – her body is covered with a fur, she has a mane, her face is black, she has long teeth or tusks, and hands with claws. […] She is of startling wildness, eats human flesh and the animals of farmers and herdsmen.”135 If outlaw-shepherd boukoloi are in part a transformation of this unruly force, the result is not only inverted in gender (although we might remember Cassius Dio’s cannibal boukoloi, who disguised themselves as women and then ate their ambushed victim’s entrails) but also in function, for in his new Greek setting the Tale’s herdsman has morphed from prey into predator.

7. Unique or paradigmatic? The of

It is interesting to note that Mesopotamia had an approximate counterpart to Egypt’s troublesome marshlanders: the tribal occupants of the swamps in the south of , where the Tigris and flowed into the Persian Gulf. Accordingly, the Assyrians (Section 4) of the expanding empire in Mesopotamia, who had a formidable army but no navy, had been obliged to engage Phoenician ships and sailors “to subdue Chaldaean rebels in the marshes near the Persian Gulf.”136 Nevertheless, the Chaldaeans intermittently came to rule Babylonia. Chaldaean kings were often fiercely anti-Assyrian,137as in the case of Marduk- apla-iddina II (721-710 BCE)138 – the biblical Merodach-Baladan (2 Kings 20:12; Isaiah 39:1) – who was driven back into the marshes by the Assyrian king, Sennacherib.139 Chaldaean revenge was was eventually exacted. In 626 BCE, Nabopolassar proclaimed himself the founder of a new Chaldaean dynasty; “by 616, Nabopolassar had consolidated his powers over Babylonia to such an extent that he was able to invade Assyria,” whose capital – Nineveh – he sacked in 612.140 Babylonia went on to replace Assyria as the regional superpower.141

As the Assyrian homeland occupied the northern part of Mesopotamia, whereas Babylonia comprised the southern part, opposition to Assyrian rule from the marshlands of the far south would probably be better viewed as nationalist resistance to an occupying power rather than rebellion against central authority. This would align the Chaldaean marsh- dwellers more closely with Eratosthenes’ pre-Alexandrian cowherds (Section 7) than with the other warrior-shepherd manifestations considered in this paper, since both groups could be viewed as nationalist natives who sought to repel foreign invaders. Either way, the “intransigent marshlander” trope has persisted in Mesopotamia until modern times. Over the millennia, the swamps of Sumer evolved into the marshlands of southern Iraq and became the homeland of the Arab al-ahwār (“Arabs of the marshland”), often referred to pejoratively as maʿdān (“plain-dwellers”) or shroog (“those from the East”) (Fig. 2).142

14

(a)

(b)

Fig. 2. Marsh Arabs in the wetlands of southern Iraq. (a) A traditional village of reed houses, ca. 1978. Photo by Nik Wheeler/Corbis via Getty Images, reproduced here under licence (order 2066937298). (b) Marsh Arabs poling a traditional mashoof in 2003. Photo by Hassan Janali; U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Digital Visual Library, via Wikimedia Commons, public domain.143

15

They are herdsmen insofar as water-buffalo provide their main source of subsistence.144 These marshes were long considered a source of – and refuge for – opponents of ,145 whose Ba’athist regime exacted retribution for a failed uprising in 1991 by diverting the waters of the Tigris and Euphrates away from the wetlands, drying them out and displacing most of their occupants.146 The Marsh Arabs’ traditional habitation (Fig. 2a) and transport (Fig. 2b) resemble those attributed by Achilles Tatius to the boukoloi of the Eastern Nile Delta and by Heliodorus to Boukolia (Section 5). In the two panels of Fig. 2 we can almost see the boukoloi returned to life, “some of them building huts on what little land there is above water, others living on boats that serve them as both transport and dwelling.”147

8. Conclusion

In the , a primary duty of the righteous king was to “be the shepherd of his people.”148 In Egypt, the first hieroglyph of the word HqA (“rule,” “ruler”) is a shepherd’s crook149 and the Egyptian king carried a crook and flail as insignia of his rulership;150 yet, despite this, invocations of the shepherd as a metaphor for Egyptian kingship are uncommon in textual references.151 However, it is not entirely absent; for example, in the Teaching for King Merikare – which seems to be set in the First Intermediate Period – the king is urged to “Shepherd the people, the cattle of God, For it is for their sake that He created heaven and earth.”152 Indeed, Jan Assmann claims that from this period until the New Kingdom “the role of social reformer and ‘good shepherd’ was a part of the official image of the king.”153

The “good shepherd,” or legitimate king, stands in stark contrast to the “bad shepherds” examined in the current paper, which feature in (pseudo)historical accounts from the Late and Greco-Roman Periods. Behind some of these unworthy kings (Section 2) and conquerors (Section 4) we may discern the historical reality of the Hyksos and the Assyrians; as foreign migrants or invaders from Asia, respectively, neither were regarded as legitimate overlords of Egypt. For completely different etymological reasons, both found themselves refracted in later literature as “shepherds.” In Greek, the Hyksos (HqA.w xAs.wt, “Rulers of Foreign Lands”) morphed into enigmatic “Shepherd Kings,” perhaps via an overzealous translation of the cognate term HqA.w SAs.w, “Bedouin chieftains.” For their part, the Assyrians were identified in literary tales as aAm.w (Aamu), a classical Egyptian word for “Asiatics” that – in the Demotic used to record the stories – had changed in meaning to denote “herdsmen.”

The Hyksos – referred to by Hatshepsut as “the abomination of the gods”154 – represented the first non-native overlords of Egypt, while the arrival of the Assyrians constituted the first organised attempt by a distant superpower to invade Egypt. In literature relating to both of these national traumas, the foreign agents end up recast as shepherds from the Eastern Delta. Interestingly, the first group of troublesome shepherds were resurrected for an ancillary role in the retelling of a third trauma (Section 3), namely the religious revolution of the Amarna period. This time, the historical event was purely internal to Egypt, but its impact was just as shocking as any foreign takeover – perhaps even more so. It was seemingly unthinkable that shepherds from the Eastern Delta were not somehow involved.

16

Is it possible that there is something more than coincidence and linguistic accident to the repeated characterisation of foreign infiltrators or invaders from the north-east as troublesome shepherds from the Eastern Delta, and the fanciful recruitment of the same group to explain Egypt’s internal aberrations? Perhaps this typecasting of villains as shepherds reflects millennia of friction and conflict between the Egyptian farmers of the Nile valley the nomadic Bedouin of the surrounding deserts, augmented by a bitter memory of Egypt’s subjection to the pastoralist Hyksos who migrated from the Levant into the Eastern Delta. Witness how Akhenaten’s henchmen – who were neither foreigners or nomads – ended up vilified as Hyksos “shepherds;” it would be even easier to recast the Assyrian army, who really did arrive in the Eastern Delta from the Levant, in a similar light. And, as already noted in Section 4, some later stories of shepherd armies from the north-east may have been influenced by the structure of earlier ones. The Greeks of Ptolemaic Egypt, too, were likened by Egyptian nationalists to the Hyksos, although seemingly not to shepherds. However, the memory of problem pastoralists from the north did not disappear, and the motif may even have become augmented by mythological elements of Lybico-Berber origin. Ultimately, the time-honoured trope of outlaw shepherds in the Delta migrated from Egyptian (pseudo)historical narratives into Greek novels, where they appear in the marshlands as pirate-bands of boukoloi (“herdsmen”) or poimenes (“shepherds”) – groups which, like their antecedents, seem to have straddled the boundary between fiction and fact. These groups had Mesopotamian counterparts in the swamp- dwellers of southern Babylonia – a population whose successors have perpetuated the marshlanders’ reputation for rebellion into modern times.

In ancient Egypt, then, we see a recurring distrust and vilification of pastoralists from the marshlands in the north-east of the country. In light of this, we should applaud the biblical Joseph’s insight – and indeed prescience – when he welcomed his newly-arrived family to Egypt with the warning that “All shepherds are abhorrent to the Egyptians.”155 Equally uncanny was his belief that the proper place for foreign shepherds attracted by Egypt’s bounty was the land of Goshen156 – a locale in the Eastern Delta.157

© Lloyd D. Graham, 2020, excluding third-party quotations and Fig. 2. v02_15.11.20 Cite as: Lloyd D. Graham (2020) “‘Bad Shepherds’ of the Eastern Delta,” online at https://www.academia.edu/44151544/_Bad_Shepherds_of_the_Eastern_Delta.

Endnotes All URLs were accessed 22 Sep 2020, unless otherwise noted.

1 Quack (2006), 499. 2 Verbrugghe & Wickersham (1996), 107. 3 Josephus, Against Apion, 1.75-92, in Whiston (1999), 942; Quack (2005), 55-57; Naether (2019), 33-34. 4 Josephus, Against Apion, 1.75-92, in Whiston (1999), 942. 5 Josephus, Against Apion, 1.74, in Whiston (1999), 942. 6 Verbrugghe & Wickersham [(1996), 99 fn. 18] caution that it is not certain that Manetho used the word Hyksos or gave any interpretation of the term. 7 Bietak (1980); Rutherford 114, fn. 33; Morentz & Popko (2010), 103-104.

17

8 Verbrugghe & Wickersham (1996), 156-157. 9 Josephus, Against Apion, 1.75-78, in Whiston (1999), 942. 10 Schneider (2010), 157-159. 11 Bourriau (2003), 177-179. 12 The first Assyrian invasion attempt, under Esarhaddon, occurred in 674 BCE; Taylor (2003), 353. 13 Josephus, Against Apion, 1.81-82, in Whiston (1999), 942. 14 Erman & Grapow (1971) vol. 4, 412.10. 15 Faulkner (1962), 261. 16 Bryan (2003), 227. 17 Bietak (2015), 19-21 18 Josephus, Against Apion, 1.83, in Whiston (1999), 942. 19 The first part of this sentence is taken from the Loeb translation of Manetho’s Aegyptiaca [Waddell (1940)], which is also the sense given by Verbrugghe & Wickersham (1996), 157-158. In contrast, the version in Whiston [(1999), 942] reads “shepherds” instead of “captives,” and thus makes no sense. 20 Faulkner (1962), 163; Bietak (1980). 21 Josephus, Against Apion, 1.84, in Whiston (1999), 942. 22 Actually, just ca. 100 years of Hyksos rule; Bietak (2015), 32; however, the 400-Year Stela from the temple of Seth in Avaris commemorates four centuries of Canaanite cult influence at Avaris; Bietak (2015), 31-32. 23 Josephus, Against Apion, 1.88-92, in Whiston (1999), 942. 24 Schulz (2010). For example, Bietak (2015) convincingly places the Exodus in the late Ramesside period (20th Dynasty). 25 Sparks (2007), 593; Levy et al. (2015), xii; Redford (2015). 26 Van Dijk (2003), 292. Piramesse (at modern Qantir) was deliberately founded adjacent to Avaris, the former Hyksos capital, and – over time – came to engulf it. 27 Droge (1996), 135-136, & 122 esp. fn.14; Bietak (2015), 32. 28 Verbrugghe & Wickersham (1996), 118. 29 This is the traditional translation, consistent with the Septuagint; however, the Hebrew of this Genesis phrase is uncertain, and may just indicate a long robe with sleeves (NRSV). 30 Goedicke (1984). In the Chronicles genealogy, Abishai is a descendant of Judah, one of the sons of Jacob/Israel; the capital of the land of Judah in later times was Jerusalem. 31 Faulkner (1962), 38. 32 Rutherford (2000), 113. 33 Rutherford (2000), 113, who credits Prof. Rittner (presumably Robert K. Ritner) with identifying them as pastoralists with their herd animals. 34 Goedicke (1984), 209. 35 Rutherford (2000), 113 fn. 29; Goedicke (1984), 210. 36 Murnane (1990), 41. 37 Levy et al. (2015), xiii; Faust (2015); Sparks (2007), 592-595 & 605. 38 Biblical quotations are taken from the New Revised Standard Edition. 39 Josephus, Against Apion, 1.230, in Whiston (1999), 951. 40 Josephus, Against Apion, 1.233-237, in Whiston (1999), 951. 41 Goedicke (1984), 209. 42 Here I essentially follow the translation of Goedicke (1984), 205, after consulting the transcription of Newberry (1893), Pl. 38 (digitised by the Heidelberg Historic Literature project, online at https://digi.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/diglit/newberry1893bd1/0144). 43 In this reading, the end of the sentence is understood as a present perfect subordinate (circumstantial) clause. The tempting alternative reading, ... msdm.t ini n=f aAm 37, in which ini is understood as a prospective relative form to yield “... black eye-paint, which the 37 Aamu will bring to him [= Khnumhotep]” is precluded because msdm.t is feminine and, as an antecedent, would require ini.t. The same grammatical issue precludes the understanding of ini as a perfective relative form; accordingly, Goedicke [(1984), 206- 207] understands the final clause to be an independent statement and (like the present paper) takes the suffix pronoun to refer to Abisha. 44 Josephus, Against Apion, 1.243, in Whiston (1999), 951. 45 Verbrugghe & Wickersham (1996), 162. 46 Taylor (2003). 47 Amenhotep I-IV were kings of the 18th Dynasty. 18

48 In order: Ramesses I, Seti I and Ramesses II. 49 Assmann (2002), 227. For Akhenaten’s moon-struck Mesopotamian counterpart, Nabonidus, and the afterlife of this Babylonian “heretic king” in Near Eastern legend, see Lewy (1949). 50 Assmann (2002), 227. Construction of Akhetaten was begun in Akhenaten’s year 5 [Van Dijk (2003), 269] and Akhenaten died in his year 17 [Van Dijk (2003), 272], which yields an interval of 12 years. 51 Straddling existing tropes and anticipating ones yet to come in the present paper, Jan Assmann [(2002), 228] writes that: “The Amarna trauma was the motive for recasting memories of the Hyksos Period in the form of a story of religious conflict. […] But the Amarna trauma did not only retrospectively transform the memory of the Hyksos, it also marked Egyptian views and experience of things foreign, and Asiatic in particular, in the age to come. Thus the legend of the thirteen-year rule of the lepers can be seen as collapsing reminiscences of Amarna with memories of the Hyksos, especially of Assyrian conquest, Persian and Greek rule, and ultimately the encounter with the .” 52 Verbrugghe & Wickersham (1996), 100 fn. 19. 53 Verbrugghe & Wickersham (1996), 163. 54 Van Dijk (2003), 289-290. 55 Hoffmeier (2015). 56 Freud (1955). 57 Assmann (1997). 58 Verbrugghe & Wickersham (1996), 163. 59 Rutherford (2000), 114-115. 60 Rutherford (2000), 114. 61 So Rutherford (2000), 115. Note, however, that Manfred Bietak considers all claimed identifications of this toponym to be controversial; Bietak (2015), 29 fn. 52. 62 Rutherford (2000), 115; Bietak (2015), 31. 63 Rutherford (2000), 114. 64 Bietak (2015), 27. 65 Bietak (2015), 27. 66 Bietak (2015), 27 fn. 46. 67 It is “The next time” in terms of the stories’ settings within Egyptian chronology. The Inaros-Petubastis tales are thought to date to early Ptolemaic times; Rutherford (2000), 109, incl. fn. 13. The oldest records of the two Inaros-Petubastis tales that concern us certainly date to Ptolemaic times [Jay (2016), 128; Schneider (2015), p.5 of online typescript PDF], so the tales’ composition predates Josephus and possibly even Manetho. For estimated dates of both the settings and the extant manuscripts of the two Inaros-Petubastis tales, see Jay (2016), 128. It is quite possible that the extant copies of these Demotic tales of rebel shepherds from the Delta also draw upon the historical reality of that region ca. 200 BCE, when peasants driven to desperate measures by Ptolemaic over-taxation formed bandit gangs that launched indiscriminate attacks on any source of wealth; see ahead to the quotation from Günther Hölbl in Section 5. 68 Naether (2019), 34 69 Quack (2005), 55-57. 70 As, for example, when they say: “'Receive our oath that we make before Amun, the great god, present here today: no one cause the prophet of Horus of Pi, in Buto, to hear a word that displeases him, without us watering the ground with his blood ...;” Rutherford (2000), 110, translating from P. Spiegelberg, col. 4. 71 Schulz (2010). 72 Schulz (2010). Depauw [(1997), 88] says that “the historical background of the characters, mostly warriors, is the Third Intermediate Period [...] The narratives themselves, however, do not refer to actual historical facts and are timeless.” 73 Schneider (2015), p.6 of online typescript PDF. 74 Schulz (2010). Consistent with this, Jay [(2016), 136] says that “the tale’s portrayal of conflict between the minor kings and nobles of the Delta certainly fits the scenario at the end of the Third Intermediate Period.” 75 Schneider (2015), p.6 & 8 of online typescript PDF; Quack (2006). 76 Schneider (2015), p.5-6 of online typescript PDF. 77 “The young priest arose against Ankh-Hor, the royal son, as a lion against a wild ass, as a nurse against her nursling (?); he seized the inside of his armour, he threw him on the ground, he bound him firmly, he pushed him on the road before him. The thirteen herdsmen rushed after him, and not a person in the world attacked them, so great was the fear that they imposed.” Rutherford (2000), 110, translating from P. Spiegelberg, col. 5. 78 In line with this, Rutherford [(2000), 110] suggests that “Ankh-Hor probably secured the Benefice, and the young priest of Buto departed with his band of thirteen herdsmen.” 19

79 Quack (2005), 55. The association of herdsmen with marshland and swamps is iconic. For example, in the early 12th-Dynasty Herdsman’s Tale (discussed in Section 6), the preserved portion begins: “Look, I had descended to (= I was down in) the marsh/swamp, which is close by this low-lying land/pasture” (v. 1-2) and the text later contains the declaration “There will be no driving me away from this marsh” (v. 19); Schneider (2007), 311. 80 Lorton (1977), 315. Buto is of course in the Western Delta; on the broadening of the shepherds’ homeland to include the entire Delta, see ahead to Section 5. 81 Bourriau (2003), 197-204; Bietak (2010), 170-171. 82 Quack (2005), 57. Quack [(2005), 87] also sees parallels between the shepherd assistants of the Horus priest and the marshland shepherds who assisted the young Horus in the Delta in mythological times, a connection reiterated by Rutherford (2000), 111, incl. fn. 21. Schneider [(2015), p.9 of online typescript PDF] reviews the textual layers identified by Quack and other scholars. 83 Schneider (2015), p.7-8 of online typescript PDF; Rutherford (2000), 114. 84 Faulkner (1962), 38. 85 Schneider (2015), p.7-8 of online typescript PDF. Rutherford [(2000), 114] points out that the two senses could have a common root, if Asiatics were mainly perceived as working as herdsmen. 86 Rutherford (2000), 115. 87 Rutherford (2000), 111. 88 As earlier identified by, for example, Depauw (1997), 88. 89 Taylor (2003), 353. 90 E.g. Esarhaddon’s Letter to Inaros; The Duel between Inaros and an Assyrian Sorceress; A Visit to Esarhaddon’s Sleeping Quarters; Schneider (2015), p.4 of online typescript PDF. 91 Contra William J. Tait, who reportedly considers the shepherd warriors limited to The Fight for the Prebend of Amun; Rutherford (2000), 109 fn. 14. Nevertheless, the two fight stories – one for the prebend of Amun and and the other for the armour of Inaros – share protagonists (e.g. Petubastis and Pemu), so their settings must be contemporaneous. 92 Ryholt (2004), 495. 93 Jay (2016), 135. 94 Schneider (2015), p.9 of online typescript PDF. Horned headwear is a signifier of divinity in the Ancient Near East. 95 Schneider (2015), p.10 of online typescript PDF 96 Schneider (2015), p.11 of online typescript PDF 97 Schneider (2015), p.11-12 of online typescript PDF 98 Schneider (2015), p.13-14 of online typescript PDF; Taylor (2003), 353. 99 Rutherford (2000), 110 & 119. 100 Rutherford (2000), 110. Both terms are here given in the singular. 101 Kalasiris is the Greek version of gl-Sri, a Late Egyptian/Demotic term denoting a distnguished warrior, a type which in Ptolemaic Egypt was particularly attached to temples. Herodotus identifies two types of Egyptian warrior, the kalasiries and the hermotubies [Fischer-Bovet (2013), 210; Rutherford (2000), 115]; the latter term will be encountered later in Section 5. The term gl-Sri is found in the Inaros-Petubastis cycle of stories; e.g. in The Fight for the Prebend of Amun (Section 4, second block quote, point 4) Minnebmaat, the prince of Elephantine and overseer of Upper Egypt, is a kalasiris; so too is Montebaal in The Fight for the Armour of Inaros. For discussion, see Rutherford (2000), 117-118. 102 Rutherford (2000), 106. 103 The arrival of the kalasiris in Demotic literature often leads to a resolution of the conflict [Rutherford (2000), 117-118], a trend preserved in the Greek Aithiopica. 104 Rutherford (2000), 106-107 & 112. 105 Aithiopica 2.20.5. Rutherford (2000), 107, quoting from the translation of Morgan (1989). An older translation is publicly available online at http://www.elfinspell.com/HeliodorusTitle.html. 106 Cleitophon and Lucippe 3.9. Rutherford (2000), 106, quoting from the translation of Winkler (1989). 107 Cleitophon and Lucippe 4.12. Translation from Wolff (1912), 68. 108 Cleitophon and Lucippe 3.22. Rutherford 107, quoting from the translation of J.R. Morgan in Reardon, B.P. (1989) The Collected Ancient Greek Novels (Berkeley). 109 Cleitophon and Lucippe 3.19. Translation from Wolff (1912), 62. 110 Ephesiaca 3.12. Rutherford (2000), 108. 111 Rutherford (2000), 111. 112 See Section 4, second block quote, point (3). Rutherford (2000), 111. 20

113 Hölbl (2001), 154. 114 Hölbl (2001), 153-159. 115 Pfeiffer (2019). For the Hyksos as worshippers of Seth/Typhon, see Section 3. 116 Smith (2020). 117 Rutherford (2000), 107. 118 Rutherford (2000), 107. 119 Cassius Dio 72.4. Translation from Rutherford (2000), 109. 120 See Section 4, second block quote, point (3). Rutherford (2000), 111. 121 The barbarous trait of eating uncooked flesh (in Aithiopica, raw fish) taken to its ultimate extreme. 122 Rutherford (2000), 116. 123 Rutherford (2000), 115 fn. 39. In addition, the domination of Egypt by the detested Persians had begun when Cambyses II defeated Psamtek III at Pelusium in 525 BCE, and was reprised when Artaxerxes III defeated Nectanebo II at the same site in 343 BCE. In the Egyptian imagination of Ptolemaic times, Pelusium must have been well enmeshed with the activities of unwelcome foreign powers. 124 Herodotus, Hist. 2.17; De Sélincourt (1972), 135. 125 E.g. Negm et al. (2015), Fig. 1. See the discussion in Rutherford (2000), 112 fn. 24. 126 Herodotus, Hist. 2.165-166. Translations: De Sélincourt (1972), 195 (hermotybians); Godley (1920), online via the Perseus Project at http://data.perseus.org/citations/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0016.tlg001.perseus- eng1:2.165.1 (Hermotubies); Rutherford (2000), 116 (Hermotubies) & 117 (Hermotubis). 127 The term underpinning the name of Herodotus’s other class of Egyptian warrior, the kalasiris, also features in The Fight for the Prebend of Amun; see note 101. 128 Fischer-Bovet (2013), 210-211. 129 Heliodorus 1.5. Translation from Rutherford (2000), 112. 130 Strabo 17.1.19. Translation from Hamilton & Falconer (1903), online via the Perseus Project at http://data.perseus.org/citations/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0099.tlg001.perseus-eng2:17.1.19; Rutherford (2000), 109. 131 Rutherford (2000), 109. In the same vein, earlier Greek material (ca. 6th century BCE) tells of “Bousiris, a mythical Egyptian king and eponym of a town in the Delta region [... who] himself is also on occasion depicted as black-skinned” and who is known for “his transgressive act of sacrificing any foreigner who made landfall in Egypt;” Skinner (2012), 103-104. 132 Schneider (2007); Escolano-Poveda (2017). 133 Schneider (2007), 316. 134 Schneider (2007), 316. 135 Schneider (2007), 317-318. Schneider’s proposal remains viable even now that additional fragments from the Herdsman’s Tale have been recovered; Escolano-Poveda (2017), 37-40. 136 Van de Mieroop (2016), 247. 137 Van de Mieroop (2016), 271. 138 Van de Mieroop (2016), 359. 139 Van de Mieroop (2016), 273. 140 Van de Mieroop (2016), 285. 141 Van de Mieroop (2016), 286. 142 Williams (2020), 706; Partow (2001), 15-17. 143 Wikimedia Commons, online at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Marsh_Arabs_in_a_mashoof.jpg. 144 Partow (2001), 16-17, incl. Fig. 8. 145 Wheeler (2020). 146 Partow (2001), 23-35. 147 Heliodorus 1.5. Translation from Rutherford (2000), 112; quoted at greater length earlier in Section 5. 148 Winter (2008), 83. 149 Sign S38; Gardiner (1957), 508. 150 Wilkinson (1999), 160-161. 151 Graham (2019), 37 (endnote 103). 152 Tobin (2003), 164. 153 Assmann (2002), 155-156 & 234. 154 Bourriau (2003), 203. 155 Genesis 46:34. For a discussion of actual motivations for this distaste, see Pinker (2009), 161-166. 156 Genesis 46:34. 21

157 Virtual Jewish Library (2008). Bietak [(2015), 22 & 30] places it in the Eastern Delta at Wadi Tumilat.

Bibliography All URLs were accessed 22 Sep, 2020, unless otherwise noted.

Assmann, Jan (1997) Moses the Egyptian: The Memory of Egypt in Western Monotheism, Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA & London. Assmann, Jan (2002) The Mind of Egypt: History and Meaning in the time of the Pharaohs, trans. Andrew Jenkins, Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA & London. Bietak, Manfred (1980) “Hyksos,” In: Lexikon der Agyptologie, eds. W. Helck and E. Otto, vol. 3, 94-103. Bietak, Manfred (2010) “From Where Came the Hyksos and Where Did They Go,” In: The Second Intermediate Period (Thirteenth - Seventeenth Dynasties): Current Research, Future Prospects, [Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 192], ed. Marcel Marée, Peeters, Leuven, 139-181. Bietak, Manfred (2015) “On the Historicity of the Exodus: What Egyptology Today Can Contribute to Assessing the Biblical Account of the Sojourn in Egypt,” In: Israel’s Exodus in Transdisciplinary Perspective: Text, Archaeology, Culture, and Geoscience, eds. Thomas E. Levy, Thomas Schneider & William H.C. Propp, Springer International, Switzerland, 17-37. Bourriau, Janine (2003) “The Second Intermediate Period (c. 1650-1550 BC),” In: The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt, ed. Ian Shaw, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 172- 206. Bryan, Betsy (2003) “The 18th Dynasty Before the Amarna Period (c. 1550-1352 BC),” In: The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt, ed. Ian Shaw, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 207-264. Depauw, Mark (1997) A Companion to Demotic Studies, [Papyrologica Bruxellensia 28], Fondation Égyptologique Reine Elisabeth, Brussels. De Sélincourt, Aubrey (1972) Herodotus: The Histories, rev. A.R. Burn, Penguin, London Droge, Arthur J. (1996) “Josephus Between Greeks and Barbarians,” In: Josephus’ Contra Apionem: Studies in its Character and Context, with a Latin Concordance to the Portion Missing in Greek, [Arbeiten zur Geschichte des antiken Judentums und des Urchristentums 34], eds. Louis H. Feldman & John R. Levison, Brill, Leiden, 115-142. Erman, Adolf & Hermann Grapow (1971) Wörterbuch der aegyptischen Sprache, Akademie-Verlag, Berlin. Escolano-Poveda, Marina (2017) “New Fragments of Papyrus Berlin 3024: The Missing Beginning of the Debate between a Man and his Ba and the Continuation of the Tale of the Herdsman (P. Mallorca I and II),” Zeitschrift für ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde 144 (1), 16-54. Faulkner, Raymond O. (1962) A Concise Dictionary of Middle Egyptian, Griffith Institute, Oxford.

22

Faust, Avraham (2015) “The Emergence of Iron Age Israel: On Origins and Habitus,” In: Israel’s Exodus in Transdisciplinary Perspective: Text, Archaeology, Culture, and Geoscience, eds. Thomas E. Levy, Thomas Schneider & William H.C. Propp, Springer International, Switzerland, 467-482. Fischer-Bovet, Christelle (2013) “Egyptian Warriors: The Machimoi of Herodotus and the Ptolemaic Army,” Classical Quarterly 63 (1), 209-236. Freud, Sigmund (1955) Moses and Monotheism, Vintage, New York. Gardiner, Alan (1957) Egyptian Grammar: Being an Introduction to the Study of Hieroglyphs, Griffith Institute, Oxford. Godley, A.D. (1920) Herodotus, with an English Translation, Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA. Goedicke, Hans (1984) “Abi-Sha(i)’s Representation in Beni Hasan,” Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 21 (1984), 203-210. Graham, Lloyd D. (2019) “Mythogeography and Hydromythology in the Initial Sections of Sumerian and Egyptian king-lists,” v.03 (18.07.20), online at https://www.academia.edu/40832066/Mythogeography_and_hydromythology_in_the_in itial_sections_of_Sumerian_and_Egyptian_king-lists. Hamilton, H.C. & W. Falconer (1903) The Geography of Strabo, George Bell & Sons, London. Hoffmeier, James K. (2015) Akhenaten and the Origins of Monotheism, Oxford University Press, Oxford & New York. Hölbl, Günther (2001) A History of the Ptolemaic Empire, trans. Tina Saavedra, Routledge, London & New York. Jay, Jacqueline E. (2016) Orality and Literacy in the Demotic Tales, [Culture and History of the Ancient Near East 81], Brill, Leiden. Levy, Thomas E., Thomas Schneider & William H.C. Propp (2015) “Preface,” In: Israel’s Exodus in Transdisciplinary Perspective: Text, Archaeology, Culture, and Geoscience, eds. Levy, Thomas E., Thomas Schneider & William H.C. Propp, Springer International, Switzerland, v-xv. Lewy, Hildegard (1949) “The Babylonian Background of the Kay Kâûs Legend,” Archiv Orientální 17 (2), 28-109. Lorton, David (1977) “Book Review – The Sea Peoples and Egypt, by Alessandra Nibbi,” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 36 (4), 315-318. Morentz, Ludwig D. & Lutz Popko (2010) “The Second Intermediate Period and the New Kingdom,” In: A Companion to Ancient Egypt, vol. 1, ed. Alan B. Lloyd, Wiley Blackwell, Chichester, 101-119. Morgan, J.R. (1989) “Heliodorus: An Ethiopian Story,” In: The Collected Ancient Greek Novels, ed. B.P. Reardon, University of California Press, Berkeley, Los Angeles & London, 349-588. Murnane, William J. (1990) The Road to Kadesh: A Historical Interpretation of the Battle Reliefs of King Seti I at Karnak, [Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 42], Oriental Institute, Chicago. 23

Naether, Franziska (2019) “Magical Practices in Egyptian Literary Texts: In Quest of Cultural Plurality,” In: Cultural Plurality in Ancient Magical Texts and Practices: Graeco-Egyptian Handbooks and Related Traditions, [Orientalische Religionen in der Antike 32], eds. Ljuba Merlina Bortolani, William D. Furley, Svenja Nagel & Joachim F. Quack, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, 27-41. Negm, Abdelazim, Ali Masria, Moheb Iskander & Oliver C. Saavedra (2015) “Towards a Sustainable Stability of Coastal Zone at Rosetta Promontory/Mouth, Egypt,” Oceanography 3 (1), 1-10. Newberry, Percy E. (1893) Beni Hasan, pt. 1, Keegan Paul, Trench & Trübner, London, Partow, Hassan (2001) The Mesopotamian Marshlands: Demise of an Ecosystem, Early Warning and Assessment Technical Report, UNEP/DEWA/TR.01-3 Rev. 1, Geneva; online at https://web.archive.org/web/20171215044941/http:/www.grid.unep.ch/activities/sustain able/tigris/mesopotamia.pdf. Pfeiffer, Stefan (2019) “A Divided Society? Egyptian Revolts against Ptolemaic Domination,” oral presentation, 19 Mar 2019, Department of Ancient History Research Seminar, Macquarie University, Sydney; abstract online at https://ancient-history- blog.mq.edu.au/Seminar-S1-2019-3-CassorPfeiffer-Pfeiffer. Pinker, Aaron (2009) “‘Abomination to Egyptians’ in Genesis 43:32, 46:34, and Exodus 8:22,” Old Testament Essays 22 (1), 151-174. Quack, Joachim F. (2005) Einführung in die altägyptische Literaturgeschichte, vol. 3: Die demotische und gräko-ägyptische Literatur, [Einführungen und Quellentexte zur Ägyptologie 3], LIT-Verlag, Berlin. Quack, Joachim F. (2006) “Inaros, Held von Athribis,” In: Altertum und Mittelmeerraum : die antike Welt: Diesseits und Jenseits der Levante – Festschrift für Peter W. Haider zum 60. Geburtstag, ed. Robert Rollinger, Steiner, Stuttgart, 499-505. Redford, Donald B. (2015) “The Great Going Forth: The Expulsion of West Semitic Speakers from Egypt,” In: Israel’s Exodus in Transdisciplinary Perspective: Text, Archaeology, Culture, and Geoscience, eds. Thomas E. Levy, Thomas Schneider & William H.C. Propp, Springer International, Switzerland, 437-445. Rutherford, Ian (2000) “The Genealogy of the Boukoloi: How Greek Literature Appropriated an Egyptian Narrative-Motif,” Journal of Hellenic Studies 120, 106-121. Ryholt, Kim (2004) “The Assyrian Invasion of Egypt in Egyptian Literary Tradition: A Survey of the Narrative Source Material,” In: Assyria and Beyond: Studies Presented to Mogens Trolle Larsen, ed. J.G. Dercksen, Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten, Leiden, 483-510. Schneider, Thomas (2007) “Contextualising the Tale of the Herdsman,” In: Egyptian Stories – A British Egyptological Tribute to Alan B. Lloyd on the Occasion of His Retirement, eds. Thomas Schneider & Kasia Szpakowska, [Alter Orient und Altes Testament 347], Ugarit-Verlag, Münster, 309-318. Schneider, Thomas (2010) “Foreigners in Egypt: Archaeological Evidence and Cultural Context,” In: Egyptian Archaeology, ed. Willeke Wendrich, Wiley Blackwell, Chichester, 143-163.

24

Schneider, Thomas (2015) “Fuzzy (Hi)stories: On Cat Killing in France and Egypt, the Mystery of a Priest and Thirteen Assyrians, and the Boundaries of the Past in Demotic Literature,” In: Fuzzy Boundaries: Festschrift für Antonio Loprieno, vol. 1, eds. Hans Amstutz, Andreas Dorn, Miriam Ronsdorf, Matthias Müller & Sami Uljas, Widmaier, Hamburg, 2015, 431-446; author’s typescript PDF (21 pp.) online at https://www.academia.edu/16365382/Fuzzy_Hi_stories_On_Cat_Killing_in_France_and _Egypt_the_Mystery_of_a_Priest_and_Thirteen_Assyrians_and_the_Boundaries_of_the _Past_in_Demotic_Literature. Schulz, Regine (2010) “Rulers of Egypt [according to Jürgen von Beckerath],” In Egypt: The World of the Pharaohs, eds. Regine Schulz & Matthias Seidel, H.F. Ullmann, Potsdam, 528. Skinner, Joseph E. (2012) The Invention of Greek Ethnography: From Homer to Herodotus, Oxford University Press, Oxford & New York. Smith, Andrew (2020) Attalus – Ancient Egyptian Texts: 1.7: The Potter’s Oracle, online at http://attalus.org/egypt/potters_oracle.html. Sparks, K. L. (2007) “Religion, Identity and the Origins of Ancient Israel,” Religion Compass 1 (6), 587-614. Taylor, John (2003) “The Third Intermediate Period (1069-664 BC),” In: The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt, ed. Ian Shaw, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 324-363. Tobin, Vincent A. (2003) “The Teaching for King Merikare,” In: The Literature of Ancient Egypt, ed. William K. Simpson, Yale University Press, New Haven & London, 152-165 Van de Mieroop, Marc (2016) A History of the Ancient Near East, ca. 3000–323 BC, Wiley Blackwell, Chichester. Van Dijk, Jacobus (2003) “The Amarna Period and the Later New Kingdom (c. 1352-1069 BC),” In: The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt, ed. Ian Shaw, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 265-307. Verbrugghe, Gerald P. & Wickersham, John M. (1996) Berossos and Manetho, Introduced and Translated – Native Traditions in Mesopotamia and Egypt, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor. Virtual Jewish Library (2008) “Goshen,” Gale Group, online at https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/goshen. Waddell, W.G. (1940) Manetho – History of Egypt and Other Works [Loeb Classical Library 350], Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA, 84-85. Wheeler, Nik (2020) Visa Pour l’Image, [Exhibition], Perpignan, online at https://www.visapourlimage.com/en/festival/exhibitions/irak-les-arabes-des-marais. Whiston, William (1999) The New Complete Works of Josephus, Kregel, Grand Rapids. Wilkinson, Toby A.H. (1999) Early Dynastic Egypt, Routledge, London & New York. Williams, Victoria R. (2020) Indigenous Peoples: An Encyclopedia of Culture, History, and Threats to Survival, vol. 3, ABC Clio, Santa Barbara, Winkler, John J. (1989) “Achilles Tatius: Leucippe and Clitophon,” In: The Collected Ancient Greek Novels, ed. B.P. Reardon, University of California Press, Berkeley, Los Angeles & London, 170-284. 25

Winter, Irene J. (2008) “Touched by the Gods – Visual Evidence for the Divine Status of Rulers in the Ancient Near East,” In: Religion and Power – Divine Kingship in the Ancient World and Beyond, ed. Nicole Brisch, Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, Chicago & Illinois, 75-102 Wolff, Samuel L. (1912) The Greek Romances in Elizabethan Prose Fiction, Columbia University Press, New York.

26