20186764

8/11/2019 20186764

1/4

Ptolemaic Chronology in the Phoenician Inscriptions from Cyprus

Author(s): Javier TeixidorSource: Zeitschrift fr Papyrologie und Epigraphik, Bd. 71 (1988), pp. 188-190Published by: Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn (Germany)Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20186764.

Accessed: 04/09/2014 04:31

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.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 formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn (Germany)is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access

toZeitschrift fr Papyrologie und Epigraphik.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 196.204.160.79 on Thu, 4 Sep 2014 04:31:20 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=habelthttp://www.jstor.org/stable/20186764?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/20186764?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=habelt

8/11/2019 20186764

2/4

1

88

PTOLEMAIC HRONOLOGY

N

THE PHOENICIAN NSCRIPTIONSFROMCYPRUS

Studies

on

Ptolemy Philadelphus' chronology

fail to take

into

account

the Phoenician

inscriptions

from

Cyprus

which

are

dated

to

the

reign

of

that

monarch.

I

present here the data that may

be

gleaned

from those

inscriptions.

An

inscription found

at

Lapethos

on

the

nord coast

of the island

and

now

in the Musee du

Louvre

)

records

the

erection

in the temple of Melqart

of

the statue of Yatonbaal

who

was, like

his father,

a

magistrate

of a

terri

tory outside of the city walls (RB 'RS). Writing in the first person the

local official

says that

he set

up

the

statue

as

his memorial

in the 11th

year

of the lord of

kings Ptolemy

son of

the

lord of

kings

Ptolemy,

which is

the 33rd

year

of the

people

of

Lapethos.

This

was also the

year in

which

Yatonbaal's

brother, Abdashtart,

was

the

priest

of the lord of

kings.

The threefold

indication

of

the date in

this inscription

is to some

degree

unavailing,

however,

because

the

dates of the era

of

Lapethos and

of

the

eponymous

priest

of the

local

cult of

Ptolemy Soter

are

unknown

to

us:

we

are

left with

a

chronology

to be

computed only

starting

with

Philadelphus'

regnal years. The

Cypriot inscription certainly abides

by

the

practice

of

dating

the

first regnal

year

of

Philadelphus

in

285/284

when he

was

associated

with

his

father

in

the government of

Egypt2);

the date

of the

inscription,

therefore,

is 274 and

were

there

any

doubts about

it

the second

part

of the

inscription dissipates

them. There Yatonbaal rehearses

two

former

acts

of

piety.

The

first

one took

place

when he

placed

in

the

sanctuary

the bronze

effigy

of his

father;

this occurred

in

the

4th

year

of the lord of

kings

Ptolemy

son

of the lord of

kings Ptolemy.

The second

pious

act

occurred in

the 5th

year

of

the lord

of

kings Ptolemy

son

of the lord

of

kings Ptolemy ;

then,

Yatonbaal tells

us,

he

instituted

sacrifices

in honor

of

Melqart

on

behalf

of

my

life and

on

behalf

of

my progeny,

and

for

the

legitimate

scion

(SMH SDQ)

and for his

wife.

The

mention

of

the

legitimate

scion

seems to

me

to be

decisive

to

establish

the

chronology,

for the

sentence

cannot

but

be

applied

to

a

particular

year

in

Philadelphus' reign.

It

is

known that

he

was

chosen

by

1. H. Donner and W.

R6llig,

Kanaanaische und

aramaische Inschriften,

vols I (Wiesbaden 21966),

II

(21968)

and III (1964)

= KAI

no

43; J.C.L.

Gibson,

Textbook of Syrian Semitic Inscriptions.

Vol. 3: Phoenician Inscriptions

(Oxford 1982),

n?

36;

R.S.

Bagnall,

The

Administration

of

the

Ptolemaic

Possessions outside

Egypt

(Leiden

1976), pp. 71-72.

2. See W. Clarysse and G. Van der Veken, The Eponymous Priests of

Ptolemaic Egypt (P.L.Bat. 24). Chronological

Lists

of the Priests of

Alexandria

and

Ptolemais with

a

Study of the Demotic Transcriptions

of their

Names

(Leiden 1983),

p.

5

(n. 19).

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

8/11/2019 20186764

3/4

Ptolemaic Chronology

in

the

Phoenician

Inscriptions

from

Cyprus

189

Soter as

his successor in

place

of his eldest brother Ptolemy Keraunus. The

conduct of the latter conveys the impression that the claim of his brother

Philadelphus to the Egyptian

throne could not

have

gone indisputed

after

their father's death in 282. Consequently, the straightforward

and

unique

reference

to the

legitimate king

in the fifth

year

of his

reign

makes sense

only

if

the year

of

the second offering

of Yatonbaal

coincided with the

begin

ning

of 281: Soter

was

dead,

Lysimachus

was

going

to

die

at

Korupedion,

and

Keraunus, disinherited,

would

appoint

himself king

of

Macedonia

after

killing

Seleucus.

As for

Ptolemy's

wife

in

281,

Yatonbaal

preferred

not

to mention

her

name when he wrote the

inscription

in 274:

by

then Arsinoe II had

taken

Arsinoe

I's

place probably since 2793).

A

second Cypriot

inscription4),

this

one from Idalion,

also reckons the

regnal year

of Ptolemy

Philadelphus

from the

first year

of

his coregency.

The

text

commemorates the

setting

up

by

a local

lady

of

votive

statues

as a vow

to

Reseph

on

behalf of

her

grandchildren.

The

offering

took

place

on the

31rst year

of

the

lord of

kings

Ptolemy

son

of

Ptolemy

...,

which is

the

57th

year

of

the

people

of

Kition,

Amat-Osir

(...) being

the

Kanephoros

of

Arsinoe Philadelphus.

The Kition

era

is

known to

have started

in

311 B.C.,

namely

the

year

Ptolemy

Soter

put

to death

Pumyaton

the

king

of

Kition. This

inscription

therefore must date

from 254, a

reckoning

that matches

the

regnal

years

of

Philadelphus

if

counted from 285.

The

chronological

correlation present

in the two

inscriptions

permit us

to

conclude

that the

Lapethos

era started in

307/306

when

Demetrius

Poliorcetes captured

Cyprus to rule over

the

island

for some twelve

years5)

When Ptolemy Soter conquered Cyprus

he

did

not treat Kition

and

Lapethos in

the same

manner,

for Kition was

allowed to start

a

new era after

the

suppres

sions

of

its monarchy

whereas the

same event

did

not

give

Lapethos

the

op

portunity

of

gaining

a

new

statute. Diodorus says

that Soter

arrested

Praxippus,

the king of Lapethos, whom

he suspected

of

being ill-disposed

toward himself

(19.79),

but

this can

hardly explain

the absence of

a

new

era in the city. The explanation for Soter's behaviour escapes us and one can

only guess

that the

determining

factor

was the different

social

component of

3. E. Will. Histoire politique du monde

hell6nistique

I

(Nancy 21979),

pp. 104-105; cf. H. Hauben, Arsinoe

II

et la

politique ext6rieure

de l'tgypte,

Studia hellenistica 27 (Lovanii 1983),

pp.

99-127. Following

Gibson

(note 1),

p. 140 '1TW in

line

11 should de translated

his

wife and not his

wifes

as A.M. Honeyman in Journ. Egypt. Arch. 26 (1940), p.

64

(the editors

of KAI

stand

undecided).

The

translation

here proposed is

grammatically

sound.

Gibson however is mistaken when he states that the wife is Arsinoe

II.

4. KAI n? 40; G.

Hill,

A History of Cyprus

I

(Cambridge

1949),

p.

184.

5. Hill, p. 171.


8/11/2019 20186764

4/4

190

J.

Teixidor

6)

the

two cities

The inscription

of

Lapethos

provides

another

interesting piece

of

in

formation

concerning

the

dynastic

cult.

By

274

only

the cult of

Soter was

known

in

the

island,

the cult devoted to

Arsinoe

Philadelphus

had

yet

to be

founded

in Cyprus

and

most

probably

in

Egypt

as

well. The

mention for

the

first time

in a contract

dated

in

the 14th

year

of

Philadelphus of the

priest

of Alexander and

of

the

Theoi

Adelphoi, namely

in

272/271

has led

7)

Fraser

to

conclude

that Arsinoe's cult

must

have been

founded that

year

As a result the

Lapethos

inscription

and the

contract

supply two dates

between

which the

appearance

of the

dynastic

cult can be

confidently placed.

A third inscription from Cyprus should be mentioned here. The text, in

Greek and

Phoenician,

was written on

a

rock

outside

of

Larnax

tis

Lapithou

near

ancient Lapethos.

It is

usually

dated to the

end

of

the

fourth century

B.C. but

a

date at the

beginning

of

the third

century

seems more

coherent

with

the event there recorded. The

inscription

commemorates the

erection

by

Praxidemos Sesmaos

(in Phoenician

Baalshillem

son of

Sesmai)

to

'Aenva

EcxTeCpa

N1T1

/

axcL

BQ

OLX6WO

HIoTX6jLQou

which in Phoenician reads:

L'NT M'Z

HYM

/

WL'DMLKM

PTLMYS, To

Anat

the shelter of

life and to the lord of

kings

Ptolemy 8

.

The

wording

of the Greek

text

is

awkward and

it

has been

suggested

that the

xcx'

of

line

2

belongs

to

the

preceding word,

i.e. to

the

Victory

of

king

Ptolemy.

In

any

event the text refers

to

a

victory gained

by

Soter,

in

my

view to that of

295,

when

the

Egyptian

monarch

eliminated any

effective

control

by

Demetrius over

Cyprus

and not to

Soter's

ephemeral victory

over

the

kings

of the

island

in

312/311.

We

know

that

Lapethos

did

not at

that

time receive

a

new statute

and therefore

the

euphoric

tone of the

inscription

hardly

fits

that

circumstance.

Paris

Javier

Teixidor

6. Kition

was

Phoenician since

the

beginning

of

the

First Millennium B.C.,

see M.

Yon,

Studia Phoenicia

V,

ed. E.

Lipifnski (Leuven 1987),

pp.

369-373

and

Lapethos

was a

Laconian

foundation,

Strabon

14.6.3;

Hill,

p.

99

note

6.

According

to the

fifth

century B.C.

source used by

(Pseudo-)Skylax

Lapethos

was Phoenician

(phoinikon, 86;

MUller

103):

I

follow

A.

Peretti,

Il

periplo

di Scilace. Studio sul primo portolano del Mediterraneo (Pisa 1979).

7. P.M. Fraser, Ptolemaic

Alexandria I, p. 216; II, p. 366 n. 219 but

see

Hauben

(n. 3),

p.

113

note

57.

8.

KAI

no

42; Dittenberger

OGIS

I

17;

G.A.

Cooke,

A

Text-Book

of

North-Semitic Inscriptions (Oxford 1903), p. 81; for the name Sesmas see

0. Masson,

Les

inscriptions chypriotes syllabiques (Paris 1961),

p.

182.


20186764

Documents