A Second Nabataean Inscription from Tell esh-Shuqafiya, Egypt Author(s): Richard N. Jones, Philip C. Hammond, David J.

Johnson, Zbigniew T. Fiema Source: Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, No. 269 (Feb., 1988), pp. 47-57 Published by: The American Schools of Oriental Research Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1356949 Accessed: 09/12/2010 06:05
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=asor. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

The American Schools of Oriental Research is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research.

http://www.jstor.org

Second Tell

Nabataean

Inscription esh-Shuqafiya, Egypt

from

RICHARD N. JONES Middle East Center University of Utah Salt Lake City, UT 84112 DAVID J. JOHNSON Dept. of Anthropology Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602

PHILIP C. HAMMOND Dept. of Anthropology University of Utah Salt Lake City, UT 84112 ZBIGNIEW T. FIEMA Dept. of Anthropology University of Utah Salt Lake City, UT 84112

A second early Nabataean inscription from Tell esh-Shuqafiya, Egypt, is part of the established collection of the Mathaf Hariyyat Raznah, Zagazig. Other information concerning the provenance of the inscription is vague or lacking. The inscription was written in Nisan, 36 B.C., and dated to the reigns of Cleopatra VII, Malichus I King of the Nabataeans, and a certain 'tlh, apparently a local priest. This unique triple dating also fixes the date of the ascendancy of Malichus I at 63/62 B.C. The inscription records a dedication to Dushares, the chief Nabataean god, and locates his shrine at Daphne, modern Tell ed-Defenna, in the northeast Delta. The palaeography of the inscription is significant. This is the second oldest extant Nabataean inscriptionfrom Egypt.

ell esh-Shuqafiya is well known as the source of an important early Nabataean inscription that Clermont-Ganneau published early in this century (Clermont-Ganneau 1919). It was subsequently restudied by Littmann (1954: 227-30), and Strugnell (1959) who provided the definitive reading. The tell, about 3 km from the present village of Tell el-Kebir in the eastern delta of Egypt, gets its name "Tell of Sherds" (Arabic shaqafa, "potsherd") from the carpet of Hellenistic-Roman period pottery fragments that covers it. The site received scant attention until Philip C. Hammond of the University of Utah surveyed it in 1979. Hammond returned in 1981 and 1982 with the American Expedition to Tell esh-Shuqafiya to direct excavations.' The inscription discussed in this study was spotted by R. N. Jones during a staff field trip to Zagazig in October 1982. The inscription is part of the established collection of the Mathaf Hariyyat Raznah in Zagazig.2 Little specific information is known about it, except that a small notice indicates that T 47

it comes from Tell esh-Shuqafiya. It is otherwise unidentified, unnumbered, and uncatalogued. In November 1982, the director of the museum presented the authors with a black and white photograph of the inscription, from which we did our initial work. The quality of the photograph did not allow the elucidation of difficult portions of the text, so Jones returned to Zagazig in October 1986 and made new photographs of the inscription; he also recorded notes and observations from a careful examination of the inscription (figs. 1, 2). DESCRIPTION OF THE INSCRIPTION The inscription is engraved on a white limestone block, approximately 21.5 cm high and approximately 23.5 cm wide.3 The depth of the block varies greatly; the reverse side is very irregular, approximately 10.0 cm at its thickest, but in places less than half that. Chips of various sizes are present on all borders, and wear is present

48

JONES, HAMMOND, JOHNSON, AND FIEMA

BASOR 269

Fig. 1. The second Nabataean inscription from Tell eshShuqafiya, now at the Mathaf HariyyatRaznah, Zagazig, Egypt.

Fig. 2. Line drawing of the second Nabataean inscription from Tell esh-Shuqafiya.

especially on the front lower right portion. The face contains light to moderately deep scratches and gouges, and some dark smudges from an unknown substance. This inscription is much better preserved than other early Nabataean texts, which are often significantly damaged with considerable loss of text. The text here is largely preserved and in only four instances are letters damaged. Two letters are entirely lost but easily restored, and two are only partially damaged. All of the ancient Nabataean characters and some of the accidental marks on the face of the stone block are filled with a hard brown material, apparently retained from the sandy soil of Tell eshShuqafiya, which contains a large clay component. Recent undecipherable red and black jottings made with an ink marking pen appear below line 3 and on the last line. THE TEXT The text reads as follows (sigla are: [ ] = restoration or reconstruction; ( )= translation amplification): Line 1: Line 2: Line 3: Line 4: Line 5: d' rb't' dy 'bd whb'lh[y] br 'bd'lg' br 'wPlhy Idwr' 'Ih' dy bdpn' msryt snt 14 Imlk qlptrw dy Snt 26 t

Line 6: [l]mnkw mlk nbtw dy hy snt Line 7: 2 I'tlh byrh nysn Translation "This is the (quadrangular) shrine which Wahb'alahi son of 'Abd'alga' son of 'Aws'alahi made to (the honor of) Dushares the god who is in Daphne (as it is known) in the Egyptian (language). (Dated) year 14 of queen Cleopatra, which is year 26 of Malichus, king of the Nabataeans, which are year 2 of 'tlh. (Dedicated) in the month of Nisan." Notes to the Text The oldest known Nabataean inscription is the Khalasa dedication from ancient Elusa, a Nabataean settlement in the Negev on the road from Petra to Gaza; it has been dated to about 170 B.C. (Cross 1961: 161). However, that text is written in undifferentiated, pre-Nabataean Aramaic script belonging to the third century cursive tradition rather than the tradition from which Nabataean lapidary branched (Albright 1937: 165; Cross 1955: 160; 1961: 161). The same is largely true of the next oldest text, the Aslah inscription from Petra near Bab es-Slq, dated to about 95 B.C., where semiformal features are just beginning to appear (Cross 1961: 161). The oldest true Nabataean

1988

A SECOND NABATAEAN INSCRIPTION

49

inscription appears to be the first inscription from Tell esh-Shuqafiya (hereafter Shuqafiya 1), dated to about 77 B.C. (Albright 1937: 166; Cross 1961). While it still contains many formal features, the first Tell esh-Shuqafiya inscription does contain some cursive elements. The Rabb'el inscription from Petra (C.I.S. 349; Table 45),4 dated to about 66 B.C., is Nabataean but still relatively archaic (Albright 1937: 167). That is followed by our text, Shuqafiya 2, the second oldest Nabataean inscription from Egypt. Written just a generation later than Shuqafiya 1 and Rabb'el, it contains a broad mixture of formal Aramaic characters mixed with intrusions of well-developed Nabataean cursive letters. Particularly striking is the variation in the morphology of certain letters from line to line. The he, waw, qop, and pe are especially notable; in some instances the examples resemble some of their formal predecessors of 100 years earlier, and then, in other instances, they resemble their cursive counterparts of 200 years later. The text exhibits clearly the extremely rapid evolution of the Nabataean cursive script in the late first century B.C. (fig. 3). Albright was no doubt correct when he attributed this rapid development of the script to its use in business transactions at a time when most of the business in Syria was recorded in Greek. That explains why development of a cursive script was slower in the Hawran, a fact also reflected in the Palmyrene script generally (Albright 1937: 168). Line 1. D' fem. demonst. pron., occasionally written dh in later texts from Syria (Littmann 1914: #34). There is some uncertainty about the exact meaning of the word rbt', here fem. emph. sing. A discussion of the derivation and possible meanings of this word, and of the masculine form 'rb'n', can be found in Littmann (1914: 4-5; see also Jean and Hoftijzer 1965: 274). The translation "(quadrangular) shrine" has been adopted here with due caution. Other translations of the word have been proposed, including "inscribed votive block" and "cultic niche"; more recently it has been suggested that it may be related to the Jewish Aramaic reviac, a dining or banquet hall associated with the Bet Midrash (Meitlis 1984; Urman 1984). The phrase, d' rbct', appears again later in C.I.S. 160 from Sidon and in two examples near Bosra (Littmann 1914: 4, 58). Dy is the relative pronoun of common gender and number; zy is found much less frequently in later Nabataean Aramaic but three times in the earlier Rabb'el

inscription and twice in the Khalasa inscription. Both forms appear together in R.E.S., vol. 3: 1432, an inscription from the Bab es-Siq at Petra. The name Wahb'alahi is found in many Nabataean inscriptions, most of them in various parts of Sinai, but some also at Petra and the Hejaz (see C.I.S., vol. 2: 235c and many references). Note that waw in this name is not looped at the top but appears as a slightly curved stroke. The block is only slightly worn above this letter and no portions of the letter appear to be damaged or missing. A loop at the top of this waw, if it really existed, would still be detectable. The letters -'lh(y) of this name are easily read, despite the lacuna caused by the deep chip in the block, when compared to the same sequence that appears in lines 2 and 3. The flag of the he is not ligatured to the following bet but may appear to be connected because of a small scratch in the block at that point. The final letter is undoubtedly yod as in the vast majority of extant examples of this name and the reading whb'lhy seems certain. Line 2. Immediately following the first word br on this line are some uninscribed, undecipherable jottings in red ink marker, apparently recent. There is no indication of engraving near or beneath those marks and we do not know their meaning or purpose. The name 'Abd'alga' is fairly frequent in Nabataean, found at Petra (R.E.S., vol. 3: 1434) and Sinai (C.I.S. 1205), with variant spellings 'bd'lgy' and 'bd'lgw found in the Hegra, Bosra, and Puteoli in Italy. This is the earliest occurrence of this name in Nabataean. Certain problems regarding this name and its forms have been discussed by Sourdel (1952: 52; n. 9). Here, as is characteristic elsewhere in this text, letters are crowded together so that often the most distal left-hand portions come extremely close or even touch the following letters. In this name the lamad is not connected to the gimel as it may appear. The name 'Aws'alahi is common in Nabataean, especially in Sinai (Cantineau 1932, 2: 58b), but examples are also known from Petra and el-Jawf. The spelling is clear except for the questionable final letter. An inspection of that letter gave the impression that all portions of it are deliberately inscribed and not scratched artifacts. It may simply be a poorly written yod. It could be suggested that the ancient writer here, intending to write a yod, accidentally began to write an alep, as if to write -'alaha' for instance (compare line 3), but then consciously proceeded to make (or force) a yod

.
-C

, 41

t(

I, /

r3 2 ~~Qi

o*s

`F Iol Cs(>Q

4e ls',p, Cjjlbl-

)>)

.)_1

_.

n ),,,1'?,7?

1c 1 bY111 )
I

n ,n ih

nA

u n

]//I'

J/

1t
te
"J

'"
d?I

0 a. 3^t 1 ?IJSIU J

JC )

1d? ??

ED,jjY^^[

^
J)Ii

P S t

tn

Fig. 3. Table of scripts. The scripts of Tell esh-Shuqafiya Inscription 1 and the Rabb3el Inscription are drawn from Cross (1961; fig. 6). The scripts from the Petra Temple Inscription are drawn from photographs and plaster casts in the possession of R. N. Jones (cp. Hammond, et al., 1986). The letters from any one inscription are drawn and hung as they appear in the texts, but proportions of letters from one text to another are not comparable. Letters enclosed in brackets are uncertain. Several slash marks indicate damaged portions of letters. All letters from Shuqafiya Inscription 1 appear in the chart, but only representative examples appear for the other inscriptions.

1988

A SECOND NABATAEAN INSCRIPTION

51

out of it (compare the forms in dy hy in line 6). It is also possible to see this letter as an alep without the closed bottom, much like the alep of Shuqafiya 1. In this regard note especially the bend in the right leg (see Cross 1961: fig. 7; fig. 3 here). Most examples of the name known from other inscriptions are spelled 'ws'lhy rather than 'ws'lh'. We have tentatively read the letter as a yod. Line 3. The word dpn' is clearly a geographical place name in Egypt as indicated in the next line. The reading of dpn' as Daphne, the modern Tell ed-Defenna, is discussed below. The sense of the phrase is, "Dushares the god whose shrine is in Daphne." Line 4. The phrase bdpn' msryt is of considerable interest. Msryt is known in only two other instances in Aramaic, both from the Elephantine papyri where it means "in the Egyptian language" (Kutscher 1954: 237; Ginsberg 1954: 160-61).5 The small stroke to the left of the stem of the sade is probably accidental. The numerals are read 10 + 4 to equal a total of 14. Toward the end of this line, the ancient scribe ran out of space, and the final taw of the word mlkt "queen" is found at the end of the next line far left. This sort of scribal accident and its repair is encountered commonly in epigraphy and papyrology (e.g., Littmann 1953: 14, #35; Cowley 1923: 116). Line 5. Qlptrw, Cleopatra, is read here with reasonable certainty. At first glance, the spelling qlptt or qlpth, might appear likely. Close study of this last letter, however, revealed that the tip of the res touches the waw and only gives the appearance of a taw or some similar letter. This is another instance of the scribe's tendency to group letters together in such a fashion. A slight break between the res and the waw is detectable. Other features of the script support this reading: The left leg is shorter than the right leg, in contrast to those of all but one other taw in this text; in most cases, the left leg is longer. The leg possesses no foot; every taw in this text does. The spelling of the name Cleopatra in Nabataean is of interest, as there are no other known examples. It is well known that Greek case endings are handled irregularly or are sometimes omitted in earlier Aramaic dialects, and it seems in this text that the waw was probably added by metanalysis, making it comparable to the other proper names in this inscription, mnkw and nbtw. In addition, one might expect the name to be spelled with a tet rather than a taw, and a waw to represent the

o-class vowel in the name Cleopatra. The number 26 is written with two 10s stacked vertically followed by two 3s. Line 6. A large, deep chip in the block at this point partly obliterates the mem of the first word, mnkw. Originally, the particle lamed was also prefixed to this word but that is now lost due to a chip; only a very small remnant is visible. It seems that the chip included a fracture along the upper left-hand portion of the block, exactly along the impression of the lamed. At the end of the word mnkw, a shallow chip is found near the final waw. Similarly in the word nbtw, the vertical extension of the waw is not real but is the result of a large shallow chip taken from the block at this point. In both cases, the waw does not curve completely around and close upon its stem, but is written rather as a hook. In recent years, some scholars have preferred to read mnkw and not mlkw for the royal name "Malichus." We have followed that usage in our reading of the present inscription, although with some reservation (for references see Cross 1973: 8, n. 19; Khairy and Milik 1981). The matter needs further study. Dy here with the fem. demonstrative hy provides added force to the equation of the first two dates with the third one on the next line, and is therefore translated here with some freedom. Line 7. The bottom right vertical and right horizontal edges of this inscription are worn but none of the text is missing. There are some markings here also in black and red ink marker but, again, their purpose is unclear. This portion of the block shows no trace of any ancient characters associated with or in the vicinity of these markings. The beginning of this last line starts late, leaving a space (where the ink or paint markings are located), very likely because the ancient writer felt there was insufficient vertical space to begin inscribing the last line. Even so, the first four or so characters are still cramped and their bases lie very close to the bottom border of the block; but the writing becomes less cramped thereafter. There are only two vertical strokes at the beginning of this line, indicating the number 2. These may not be connected at the bottom by a horizontal tie as are other numbers in this inscription. What can be seen at their bases may be a small chip filled with soil but this is uncertain. The next vertical stroke, although short, is the particle lamed prefixed to the name that follows. While not obvious in the photograph, traces of the bottom of a very typical

52

JONES, HAMMOND, JOHNSON, AND FIEMA

BASOR 269

alep in the name 'tlh were visible to the eye. The lamed does not touch the he at the bottom. The name 'tlh is discussed below. DISCUSSION The place name dpn' in this inscription is apparently the ancient city Daphnai/Daphne/ Daphno in the eastern Delta, generally identified with the modern Tell ed-Defenna (Petrie 1888: 47-52; Sethe 1901: 2135), which lies about 24 km southwest of Pelusium/Farmea/Tell el-Farama and about 8 km west of el-Qantara (Timm 1985: 552; Lexikon 1: 990; Calderini 1975: 93). The text specifies "Daphne (as it is known) in the Egyptian language" and it seems safe to assume that it refers to a location named Daphne inside Egypt, which one must distinguish from the important cultic center of the same name in Syria. We have not eliminated the possibility that msryt may have a wider range of meaning in this context and may function as a geographic marker making bdpn' msryt understandable as "in Daphne of Egypt" or "in Daphne of the Egyptians." Petrie briefly excavated the tell in 1886-1887; he uncovered remains of the Ramesside, Persian, and Hellenistic periods, including the well-known inscription of Psammetichos, but nothing dated to the Byzantine period (Petrie 1888). The famous stele of the god Baal Zaphon in the Cairo Museum is from Tell ed-Defenna. The site's long history dates to Pharaonic Egypt. King Psammetichos I (seventh century B.C.) located a Greek garrison there. There were also Jewish inhabitants from time to time, and the prophet Jeremiah once lived at the site as a refugee from Babylonian invasions of Palestine (Jer 43:7-9, there known as Tahpanhes). The site is mentioned by Herodotus (11:30:107) who notes Daphnai along with Pelusion as outposts against the Assyrians and Arabs. Ptolemy later mentions the site briefly (Ball 1942: 129). It is found in the Antonine Itinerary at the end of the third century A.D. as Daphno (Ball 1942: 141); and Stephanus of Byzantium mentions Daphne, a city near Pelusium which takes its name from laurels (daphnae) which grew there (Ball 1942: 171). The Christian pilgrim Egeria (late fourth century), according to one manuscript, mentions a place Taphnis in the land of Goshen ("Gessen," i.e., the eastern Delta) on the route from the city Arabia to Pelusium, which has been identified by some as Daphne.

Other manuscripts read Tathnis/Tatnis, which is understood to be Tanis (Gingras 1970: 63-64, 186-88). A Bishop Eulogius from Tafnas at the time of Athanasius is known from Coptic sources, and Copto-Arabic sources mention St. Isidor from Dafnds (Timm 1985: 553). A certain Daphne of Egypt appears in late apocrypha as the place of the Devil's exile.6 It seems logical that Nabataean shrines existed in Egypt, given the large quantity of inscriptional evidence for the Nabataean presence. It is clear from the important work by Strugnell, who provided the definitive reconstruction and reading of the missing portions of Shuqafiya 1 that there were shrines to the god al-Kutba' at Tell esh-Shuqafiya, Qasrawet, and at the unidentified 'wytw (= Qasrawet?) (Strugnell 1959). Al-Kutba', whose name is derived from the Arabic root ktb "to write," was apparently a scribal god and probably had some affinities with the Egyptian scribal deity Thoth. A few other Nabataean and Lithyanite inscriptions also mention al-Kutba'. The appearance of the cult of Dushares in Egypt was probably facilitated by several factors. It is commonly accepted that there was a syncretistic identification of Dushares with Dionysos (Sourdel 1952: 63-64; Ryckmans in E.I.2, vol. 2: 246). Osiris, in the later periods, became associated with many gods and especially with Dionysos (Griffiths 1985). Thus a syncretistic comparison of Dushares of the Nabataeans and Osiris of the Egyptians can be proposed also on the basis of the primacy of those gods in their respective nations. In addition, the laurel or bay tree, daphnae, was sacred to Osiris, Dionysos, and Apollo (Diodorus I: 17). The specific association of the site Daphne with the presence of laurel trees later mentioned by Stephanus of Byzantium has already been noted. Certainly we cannot speak of a total identification of Osiris with Dushares, but we may suggest that there was a certain degree of assimilation of some Osirian (Dionysian, Apolline) attributes by Dushares, understandable and expected in the case of Nabataean colonists in Egypt. Other factors, though more difficult to establish, may have been significant as well, such as the role of Dushares as patron of caravaneers (Ovadiah 1981: 103). The original character of Dushares, his attributes, and nature, as found in his homeland Nabataea and Petra, would be somewhat more conservative than in highly syncretistic Hellenized areas like Egypt,

1988

A SECOND NABATAEAN INSCRIPTION

53

Fig. 4. The Egyptian Delta and some of the connecting routes.

where the fusion and absorption of attributes of other deities by Dushares would be easier. In Nabataea proper, especially in the Hawran, such syncretistic absorption would tend to occur later in the Roman period. If our identification of dpn' as the ancient Daphne can be accepted, then the Nabataean shrine appears to have been located in the eastern Delta at the present Tell ed-Defenna. One may ask why such a location as Daphne was chosen as the site of the Nabataean shrine to Dushares. In northern Sinai, two main routes connected Egypt with Palestine and Syria. The shortest track, the "Via Maris," ran along the coast and was used as early as the Pharaonic period. It went from Gaza to Rhinocorura to Pelusium, and apparently passed by Daphne and then along the Bubastite branch of the Nile to pass somewhere in the vicinity of the modern Tell esh-Shuqafiya, and terminated at Memphis.7 The other route leading toward the north of Sinai started at Memphis-Babylon, descended Wadi Tumilat and went east toward modern Ismailia

and Jebel Maghara. The other important site with Nabataean ruins, Qasrawet (near Qatiyeh), is situated along this branch (fig. 4). The reported site of discovery, Tell eshShuqafiya, is also important. It appears that the site had a long history and involvement with trade because of its location on the Pelusium-DaphnaeMemphis road as well as the Babylon-HeropolisSerapeum-Clysma road along Wadi Tumilat (Ball 1942: 141-42). Petrie identified the site with the Egyptian Thou or Tohu of the Antonine Itinerary (Ball 1942: 171). It has also been identified with Phagrioripolis, which supplanted Pithom, capital of the eighth Nome in the 15th Dynasty (ClermontGanneau 1919: 1-2). The site was known until at least the fifth century from the Notitia Dignitatum.8 The discovery of the first Nabataean inscription at Tell esh-Shuqafiya is therefore not surprising in view of Nabataean caravan activity, though Meredith thought it "baffling" (Littmann 1954: 241-42). Now with the discovery of the second Nabataean inscription from Tell eshShuqafiya, the early presence of the Nabataeans

54

JONES, HAMMOND, JOHNSON, AND FIEMA

BASOR 269

at Tell esh-Shuqafiya is confirmed. The brief excavations at this site in 1981 and 1982 support an impression of commercial activity and trade as well.9 It is reasonable to see a network of Nabataean settlements linked throughout the eastern Delta, with shrines located at Daphne, Qasrawet, probably at Tell esh-Shuqafiya, and perhaps elsewhere.'? Some scholars have thought that Nabataean commercial activity in Egypt occurred largely after the annexation of the Nabataean kingdom by the Romans in 106 A.D.(Meredith, in Littmann 1954: 243). However, with the discovery of Shuqafiya 2 and the information it contains, the Nabataean presence in Egypt appears strongly established by the Late Ptolemaic-Early Roman periods, continuing at least to 266 A.D., the date of the latest Nabataean inscription from Egypt (see Littmann 1953: 16, #43a). This is the first Nabataean text in which three dating systems are used. The inscription is first dated to year 14 of Cleopatra, unquestionably the famous Cleopatra VII Philopator. It is also dated to year 26 of mnkw mlk nbtw, Malichus King of the Nabataeans, who can be none other than Malichus I. Those two dates, when synchronized, give an absolute date for this inscription. The reign of Cleopatra is dated from February 22, 51 B.C. to her suicide on August 30, 30 B.C. (Skeat 1937; Bickerman 1968: 153; Pestman 1967: 82; Lexikon, vol. 3: 451-54)." Year 14 of Cleopatra, calculated from 51 B.C., would be 37/36 B.C.;and thus the inscription was written in the month of Nisan of that year. The beginning of the reign of Malichus I was not accurately known to scholars in the past but several proposals have been made: 62-30 B.C. (Hammond 1973: 19); 60-30 B.C. (Meshorer 1975: 20; Negev 1977: 542); 56-30 B.C. (Starcky 1966: 909); 47-30 B.C. (Dussaud 1904: 189-238; Cantineau 1930: 8; EII, vol. 3: 801). From this inscription, it is now possible to firmly fix the ascendancy of Malichus I. The inscription indicates that year 14 of Cleopatra equals year 26 of Malichus. We know now that year 14 of Cleopatra is 37/36 B.C. From this reference point we can fix the ascendancy of Malichus I at 63/62 B.C. This dating of the inscription to the reigns of both the Egyptian and Nabataean rulers is not surprising; it simply reflects the circumstances of a community of Nabataean nationals living under Egyptian suzerainty. Malichus I was actively in-

volved in international politics during the unsettled years in the second half of the first century B.C. Throughout his reign of more than 30 years, he tended to align himself with whoever was in a position of strength in the east. That policy, at least in the beginning, apparently brought him closer to Cleopatra VII of Egypt, since both actively supported Julius Caesar and, later, Mark Antony. Thus, Malichus sent troops to the aid of Caesar and Cleopatra in the Alexandrine War of 47 B.C.'2 After the assassination of Caesar and during the political turmoil that followed, Malichus became somewhat noncommittal for a time; he later became an ally of Antony and thus again within the same "political camp" with Cleopatra. However, Cleopatra's desire for territorial gains must have upset her relationship with Malichus. Cleopatra demanded from Antony control over Judaea and Arabia (Josephus, Ant. Jud. 15:92; Bell. Jud. 1: 360) and in the fourth decade of the first century B.C., Antony gave her part of Arabia (Josephus, Ant. Jud. 15:96; Plutarch, Antony 36: 2), which most probably included the Gulf of Aqaba and its extension to the Red Sea (Bowersock 1983: 41). Furthermore, Cleopatra convinced Antony to force Herod, King of Judaea, to wage war against Malichus. As a result, Cleopatra and Malichus must have been on rather bad terms toward the ends of their respective reigns, although they remained supporters of Antony in his struggle against Octavian. With the defeat and death of their patron Antony, which brought an inevitable end to the rule of the Ptolemies in Egypt, the Nabataeans did not waste the opportunity to gain the favor of the new ruler of the world, Octavian, by burning Cleopatra's ships at the shore of the Red Sea (Plutarch, Antony 69:3; Dio Cassius 51:7:1). However, it seems (and Shuqafiya 2 supports this) that, despite occasional political frictions, the Nabataeans enjoyed a peaceful life and trade exchange in Egypt during the first century B.C. Apparently, through their settlements in Egypt and by showing political allegiance to the Ptolemies, the Nabataeans began to be treated as valuable and respected commercial contractors and transporters. In contrast, the absence in Shuqafiya 1 of the mention of any Nabataean king just a generation earlier seems to indicate that the Nabataeans lacked any substantial political strength in the east at the beginning of the first century B.C.

1988

A SECOND NABATAEAN INSCRIPTION

55

(Strugnell 1959). Ptolemaic hostility toward the Nabataeans earlier in the third century B.C. is also well known (Rostovtzeff 1932). The third date in the inscription, "year 2 of 'tlh, is less clear. It appears to be a local and coincident calendar. It seems best to regard it as the date of the term of office of a local priest named 'tlh, making it analogous to the dating formula in Shuqafiya 1, snt 1 lmr'n syw 'pkl' "year 1 of our lord Seyo the priest," even though in Shuqafiya 2

the various words for "priest," 'pkl or kmr, are absent. In conclusion, it is clear that the second Nabataean inscription from Tell esh-Shukafiya provides important new information concerning the sociopolitical and cultic milieu of the Nabataeans in Egypt, and sheds important light on the evolution of the Nabataean Aramaic script during the last half century before the Common Era.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors extend thanks to His Excellency Dr. Ahmed Khadry, Chairman of the Egyptian Antiquities Organization, and to Dr. Ibrahim an-Nawawy, Director of Museums, for their permission to publish this inscription. Appreciation is also extended to the Director of the Mathaf Hariyyat Raznah, Zagazig, A.R.E., Center in Egypt, Cairo; and Dr. Mieczyslaw Rodziewicz, Consultant to the Egyptian Antiquities Organization and director of excavations at Mareotis, for their assistance and advice. This paper would have been impossible without the assistance of Norman B. Jones, Department of Environmental Engineering, Utah State University, Logan, Utah; and Stephen B. Whipple, of Whipple and Associates, Salt Lake City, Utah. Their generous support is gratefully appreciated.

MadameLullya CAbd for al-MasTh, helpful assistance

and advice in the study and photography of the inscription in October 1986. We also thank Dr. Robert B. Betts, and Madame AmTra,of the American Research

NOTES
1The results of the excavations of the American Expedition to Tell esh-Shuqafiya remain largely unpublished. Hammond has circulated a privately-produced results summary of the 1981 season (Hammond 1981). 5The word msryt is found again in a fragmentary Arabian text from the oasis of Tayma', bh msryt, which Winnett translates "lay with an Egyptian woman" (Winnett and Reed 1970: 106). 6In a Greek "Dialogue Between Christ and the Devil," the final residence of the devil after severe chastisements by angels, will be Daphne, a city in a district of Egypt called Gouze (Casey and Thompson 1955: 63). We are unable to identify the location called Gouze and thus to determine if that Daphne is the same as Tell ed-Defenna. Tobit 8:1-3 carries a similar motif.
7Compare Judith 1: 9-10: " . .. Kades, and the river

Richard N. Jones, who served as epigrapher and palaeopathologistfor the expedition, is preparingreports on the osteologicalspecimensfrom the site. The paper, "Analysisof a Yellow-StainedHuman Femur from Tell esh-Shuqafiya,Egypt: Evidenceof Ancient has Trauma," been submittedto the AmericanJournal
of Physical Anthropology. This will be followed by at least one additional paleopathological report. 2The museum is also commonly known as the Mathaf Ahmad 'Arabi, variously pronounced locally as Arabi, Orabi, and Oraibi.

3This block was apparentlyintended to be square. Other inscribedlimestone blocks of the same dimensions are knownfrom Egypt.Segre(1941),for example, in publisheda limestoneblockinscribed Greekfrom the
second century A.D.;it measured 21 x 21 x 6.5 cm.

4Cross(1961: 197)notes that the reproduction the of Rabb'el inscriptionin Cantineau(1932, 2: 2) is inaccurateand untrustworthy criticalwork. for

of Egypt, and Taphnes, and Ramses, and all of the land of Goshen, until you come beyond Tanis and Memphis...." Daphnae is mentioned in several other minor sources. See for instance the geographical papyrus published by Noordegraaf (1938). 8The passage from the Notitia Dignitatum Or. XXVIII: 41 mentions the Cohors prima Augusta Pannoniorum stationed in Tohu under the authority of Comes limitis Aegypti. 9Unpublished data from excavations of the American Expedition to Tell esh-Shuqafiya indicates occupation

56

JONES, HAMMOND,

JOHNSON,

AND FIEMA

BASOR 269

between the late fourth century B.C. and the fourth century A.D. (Hammond 1981: 6). No artifacts taken from Tell esh-Shuqafiya can be firmly linked with the Nabataean presence there. Both inscriptions, Shuqafiya 1 and 2, are associated so far with this site only by informants. 'lThe existence of a temple somewhere at Tell eshShuqafiya seems particularly likely in view of the improved reading of Shuqafiya 1 by Strugnell (1959: 32-33). The large size of the inscription suggests that it was a foundation or altar stone. Clermont-Ganneau (1919: 1) reports that the inscription is "said to come from a wall or building on the summit" of the tell. However, the location has not yet been identified. This block is said to be in the Egyptian Museum, No. 45053, but anecdotal reports suggest that it has not been seen by scholars for many years.

1Because of the peculiarities of the Egyptian methods of reckoning chronologies of reigns, Cleopatra's first year ran from February 22, 51 B.C. to September 4, 51 B.C. (Skeat 1962; 1937). Significantly, the inscription is dated by Cleopatra alone, and this fact may lend support to Cross's dating of Shuqafiya 1 to ca. 77 B.C. (Cross 1961). If Shuqafiya 1 were rather to be dated to 47 or 44 B.C. as proposed by Clermont-Ganneau (1919: 21) or Littmann (1954: 227), only 11 or 7 years earlier than Shuqafiya 2, we might expect the mention of Cleopatra VII. Since no coregent is mentioned with Cleopatra in Shuqafiya 2, it seems likely that the Ptolemy mentioned in Shuqafiya 1 is to be dated earlier than Ptolemy XIII, Ptolemy XIV, or Ptolemy XV. 12Josephus, Ant. Jud. 14: 128, mentions only "forces from Arabia" but the Bell. Alex. 1: 1 says "equites ab rege Nabataeorum Malcho" (see Bowersock 1983: 38).

BIBLIOGRAPHY Albright, W. F. A Biblical Fragment from the Maccabaean 1937 Age: The Nash Papyrus. Journal of Biblical Literature 56: 145-76. Alt. A. 1943 Taphaein und Taphnas. Zeitschrift des Deutschen Paldstina- Vereins66/1: 64-68. Ball, J. 1942 Egypt in the Classical Geographers. Cairo: Government Press, Bulaq. Bickerman, E. J. 1968 Chronology of the Ancient World. Ithaca, NY: Cornell. Bowersock, G. W. 1983 Roman Arabia. Cambridge, MA: Harvard. Calderini, A. 1975 Dizionario dei Nomi Geografici e Topografici dell'Egitto Greco-Romano, vol. 2. Goliardica: Cisalpino. Cantineau, J. 1930-32 Le Nabateen, 2 vols. Paris: Leroux. Casey, R. P., and Thompson, R. W. A Dialogue between Christ and the Devil. 1955 Journal of Theological Studies, N.S. 6: 49-65. C.I.S. 1902-07 Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum. Pars Secunda, Inscriptiones Aramaicas Continens. T. 1-2. Paris: Parisiis/E Reipublicae Typographeo. Clermont-Ganneau, C. 1919 Les Nabateens en Egypte. Revue de L'histoire des religions 79/3: 1-28. Cowley, A. 1923 Aramaic Papyri of the Fifth Century B.C. Oxford: Clarendon. Cross, F. M. 1955 The Oldest Manuscripts from Qumran. Journal of Biblical Literature 74: 147-72. The Development of the Jewish Scripts. 1961 Pp. 132-202 in The Bible and the Ancient Near East. Essays in Honor of William Foxwell Albright, ed. G. Ernest Wright. Garden City, NY: Doubleday. 1973 Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic. Essays in the History of the Religion of Israel. Cambridge, MA: Harvard. Dussaud, R. 1904 Numismatique des rois de Nabatene. Journal asiatique 3: 183-238. EI1 1913-34 Encyclopaedia of Islam (Old Edition) 4 vols. Leiden: Brill. EI2 1960- Encyclopaedia of Islam (New Edition). Leiden: Brill. Gingras, G. E. 1970 Egeria: Diary of a Pilgrimage. Ancient Christian Writers, no. 38. New York: Newman. Ginzberg, H. L. The Brooklyn Museum Aramaic Papyri. 1954 Journal of the American Oriental Society 74: 153-62. Griffiths, J. G. The Origins of Osiris and His Cult. Leiden: 1980 Brill. Hammond, P. C. The Nabataeans. Their History, Culture, and 1973 Archaeology. Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology, vol. 37. Gothenburg: Astroms. Tell el-Shuqafiya, Egypt. Interim Excavation 1981

1988

A SECOND NABATAEAN INSCRIPTION

57

Report. Tell el-Shuqafiya, Egypt. Salt Lake City, UT: privately published. Hammond, P. C.; Johnson, D. J.; and Jones, R. N. A Religio-Legal Inscription from the 1986 Atargatis/Al-'Uzza Temple at Petra. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 263: 77-80. Jean, F. J., and Hoftijzer, J. 1965 Dictionnaire des inscriptions semitiques de l'ouest. Leiden: Brill. Khairy, N., and Milik, J. A New Dedicatory Inscription from Wadi 1981 Musa. Palestine Exploration Quarterly 113: 19-26. Kutscher, E. Y. 1954 New Aramaic Texts. Journal of the American Oriental Society 74: 233-48. Lexikon 1975- Lexikon der Agyptologie, vol. 1. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz. Littmann, E. 1914 Nabataean Inscriptions from the Southern Hauran. Publications of the Princeton University Archaeological Expeditions to Syria in 1904-1905 and 1909. Division 4, Section A. Leiden: Brill. 1953 Nabataean Inscriptions from Egypt. Bulletin of the Schools of Oriental and African Studies 15: 1-28. 1954 Nabataean Inscriptions from Egypt II. Bulletin of the Schools of Oriental and African Studies 16: 212-46. Meitlis, I. 1984 The Significance of the Revua in Katzrin. Tarbiz 53: 465-66 (Hebrew). Meshorer, Y. 1975 Nabataean Coins. Qedem. Monographs of the Institute of Archaeology of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem no. 3. Jerusalem: Hebrew University. Naville, E. 1903 The Store-City of Pithom and the Route of the Exodus. London: Trubner. Negev, A. 1977 The Nabataeans and the Provincia Arabia. Aufstieg und Niedergang der Romischen Welt. 2/8. New York: de Gruyter. Noordegraaf, C. A. 1938 A Geographical Papyrus. Mnemosyne 6: 273-312. Ovadiah, A. 1981 Was the Cult of the God Dushara-Dushares Practised in Hippos-Susita? Palestine Exploration Quarterly 113: 101-4. Pestman, P. W. 1967 Chronologie egyptienne d'apres les texts

demotiques. Papyrologica Lugduno-Batava, vol. 15. Leiden: Brill. Petrie, W. M. F. 1888 Tanis. Part II. Nebesheh and Defenneh (Tahpanhes). London: Trubner. R.E.S. 1905-18 Repertoire d'epigraphie semitique. T. 1-3. Paris: Librairie C. Klincksieck. Rostovtzeff, M. 1932 Foreign Commerce of Ptolemaic Egypt. Journal of Economic and Business History 4: 728-69. Seeck, O., ed. 1962 Notitia Dignitatum. Berlin 1826. Reprinted, Frankfort am Main: Minerva G.m.b.H. Segre, M. 1941 Epigraphica. Bulletin Societe Royal d'Archeologie d'Alexandrie N.S. 11: 27-29. Sethe, K. 1901 Daphnai. Paulys Real-Encyclopddie der Classischen Altertumswissenschaft. Stuttgart: Metzler. Skeat, T. C. 1937 The Reigns of the Ptolemies with Tables for Converting Egyptian Dates to the Julian System. Mizraim 6:7-40. 1963 Notes on Ptolemaic Chronology, 3, "The First Year Which is also Third," A Date in the Reign of Cleopatra VII. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 42: 100-105. Starcky, J. 1957 Une inscription nabateenne provenant du Dj6f. Revue Biblique 64: 196-217. 1966 Petra et la Nabatene. Dictionnaire de la Bible. Supplement, eds., H. Cazelles and A. Feuillet. 7: 886-1017. Paris: Letouzey et Ane. Strack, M. L. 1979 Die Dynastie der Ptolemder. Berlin, 1897. Reprinted Aalen: Scientia. Strugnell, J. 1959 The Nabataean Goddess al-Kutba' and her Sanctuaries. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 159: 29-36. Tarn, W. 1929 Ptolemy II and Arabia. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 15: 9-25. Timm, S. 1985 Das Christlich-Koptische Agypten in Arabischen Zeit, Teil 2 (d-f). Wiesbaden: Reichert. Urman, D. 1984 Jewish Inscriptions of the Mishna and Talmud Period from Kazrin in the Golan. Tarbiz 53: 531-43 (Hebrew). Winnett, F. V., and Reed, W. L. 1970 Ancient Records from North Arabia. Toronto: University of Toronto.