Death by Fire in Ancient Egypt Author(s): Anthony Leahy Source: Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, Vol. 27, No. 2 (1984), pp. 199-206 Published by: BRILL Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3632103 . Accessed: 14/02/2011 13:40 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=bap. . 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
[email protected].
BRILL is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient.
http://www.jstor.org
Journalof theEconomicandSocialHistoryof theOrient,Vol. XXVII, Part II
MISCELLANEA DEATH BY FIRE IN ANCIENT
EGYPT
In a recent survey entitled "The Treatment of Criminals in Ancient Egypt through the New Kingdom"'), David Lorton has argued that "the only form of death penalty that we know of was impalement" (p. 51). In reaching this conclusion, he considers, interalia, a number of passages which seem to refer to death by fire. In his discussion of the fate of the adulterous woman in Pap. Westcar, he diverges significantly from the traditional view that the woman was burnt2) by translating rdi bt m as a reference to "branding ... or, less likely perhaps, torture" (p. 15). In support of this, Lorton adduces a passage in a stela from Abydos, which bears the cartouches of Neferhotep 13), as proof of the existence of branding as part of a punishment for crime in ancient Egypt4). The stela forbids burial, or even trespass, in a sacred part of the necropolis5), specifying as the penalty for anyone committing the latter offence br.t(w) wbd.t(w).f, which Lorton translates as "one shall brand him", adding that "the mention of branding ... clearly implies reduction to unfree status" (p. 18). His translation and conclusion both invite comment since, having thus disposed of two apparently explicit references to death by fire as a capital punishment, Lorton is able to dismiss a Ramesside ostracon of similar import (0. Nash 2) with the words "The text seems to state literally that they will be thrown into the fire, but such a penalty would fall entirely outside the bounds of the patterns of criminal punishment established by a study of the entire corpus"'6). In support of his rendering of wbd in the Neferhotep inscription as "brand", Lorton quotes the translation of Breasted, who is said to have "pointed to the attestation of wbd in the Ramesside period in reference to branding" 7). On examination, however, this "Ramesside" parallel (not so called by Breasted) turns out to be part of the Twenty-second Dynasty "Chronicle" of Prince Osorkon8). Furthermore, wdb does not occur in the passage quoted by Breasted which has, in any case, nothing at all to do with branding9). It does not, therefore, provide a parallel for a translation of wbd as "brand"O10), and thus no support for Lorton's translation of Pap. Westcar can be derived from the Neferhotep stela. In both cases, the traditional translation of "burn" should be retained. It is not my intention to pursue the question of branding as a concomitant of imprisonment or loss of freedom. Suffice it to say that the only branding scenes we possess depict foreign captives being registered on their arrival in Egypt or at the institution to which they had been allotted, and there is as yet little evidence that it was part of the ordinary criminal procedure11). The main concern of this note is Lorton's implicit contention that burning as a capital punishment is not attested in ancient Egypt, or at least not before the end of the Twentieth Dynasty. Quite apart from the texts already mentioned, there is evidence from the New Kingdom which merits consideration (see below, n. 39), and, in excluding the period after the New Kingdom, a body of material which is in some vital respects richer than that available for the two previous millennia is neglected. The extent of its relevance to earlier Egyptian society is rarely easy to assess, but it cannot simply be ignored. In some aspects of law, there was demonstrably little significant change between the New Kingdom and the
200
MISCELLANEA
Ptolemaic period12), and it might be argued that, in so far as generalisationis permisible, the presumption ought to be one of relevance until proven otherwise. References to death by fire in a variety of contexts have been collected by De Meulenaere and Hornung'3), and it would serve no purpose to catalogue them again here, but I would like to draw attention to one particularaspect of the problem, for which a text from the temple at Philae provides an excellent starting-point. An address to Osiris reads: di. k h33kw-ibmsd n nsw r C' n Mwt hr snwt.s sbr.n. k. intyw
hm.f, "May you place the rebels, the king's anathema, on the brazier of Mut, who is under her brother, after you have overthrown the enemies of His Majesty" 1). Hl3kw-iband intyw, if not exactly synonymous, are evidently descriptions of the same people"5), and it is clear that death by fire is envisaged as a punishment for rebels after their defeat. The possibilityof remote allusion to actual rebellionhere is intriguing but cannot be clarified without a more detailed knowledge than we currently possess of the influence exercised by Ptolemaic and Roman rulers on the composition of temple inscriptions16). That the concept is not a purely mythological one is evident from the much more worldly "Instruction of Ankhsheshonq". In the preamble, which explains how Ankhsheshonqcame to be in prison, it is related how those associates of the author who schemed against Pharaoh sufferedthe fate of being placed upon "the brazier" (p3 C'h)17).An as yet unpublished demotic story recounts an essentially similar episode, although apparentlyas an integral part of the tale rather than merely by way of introduction18).The papyrus is unfortunately fragmentary, but one passage cites a royal order to put someone, probablya Prophet of Horus, lord of Letopolis, togetherwith his family and associates, on the brazier (p3 Oh). It is not certain what the crime was or whether the punishment was actually carried out, but, as in "Ankhsheshonq", the execution episode is incidental, and likely to reflect the custom of the day. The use of the definite article in the two stories implies that the punishment was familiar to their audience19),and the combined testimony of these diverse texts may be taken as proof that death by burning was well-known to Egyptians in the latter half of the first millennium B.C., and that it seems to have been regarded as particularlyappropriateto treason. It is important to note that these two demotic literarytexts, despite the late date of the surviving mss. 20), reflect a wholly Egyptian milieu. All the charactersare Egyptian, and, whoever the unnamed Pharaohs of these tales may be, they are not Ptolemies. The Saqqara papyrus is earlier as a manuscript than the extant copy of "Ankhsheshonq", but each must derive its inspiration from at least as far back as the Thirtieth Dynasty, and perhaps much earlier, as does the Pedubast cycle21). This does not necessarily help to determinetheir dates of composition, since one can envisage them being written in a mood of nostalgia for a lost past, or as a nationalist rejection of the unpleasant fact of foreign sovereignty22);the crucial point for the present purpose is that the society and customs which they depict are distinctively Egyptian. The same association between rebellion and death by fire can be seen in two earlier instances. The well-known crux in the narrative of prince Osorkon, whatever its precise significance (see below), undoubtedly refers to the burning of Theban rebels. The method of execution is not explicit, "each man being burned in the place of his crime", but the double reference to Cbw,"braziers", by way of simile in the same passage points to one akin to that of the texts discussed above"2).
MISCELLANEA
201
The crime in this case was ostensibly or theologically against Amun; in reality, the price to be paid for unsuccessful rebellion against Osorkon himself, the King's eldest son and principal representative in Upper Egypt. The fact that he was also High Priest of Amun doubtless facilitatedrepresentationof the resistanceas opposition to the god24). A second, slightly later, parallel is provided by Manetho's story of the burning alive of Bocchoris by Shabako. This is baldly related in both versions of Syncellus25),but it has generallybeen accepted at face value26). Shabako'sinvasion of Egypt in c. 712 B.C. was accompaniedby the suppression, at least temporarily, of any widespread claims to kingship on the part of the Twenty-second, Twentythird and Twenty-fourth Dynasties, if not of the dynastic lines themselves27).In these circumstances, the execution of the figurehead of resistance to the Kushites would be entirely comprehensible, and pragmatically, as a response to Tefnakht's rejection of the authority of Piye, a political necessity. Tefnakht, Bocchoris' predecessor at Sais28),had taken an oath of allegiance to Piye after the latter's campaign in his year 2029), and had subsequently broken it by proclaiming himself king30). In succeeding Tefnakht, Bocchorishad compounded the offence, since the vassal treaty which one may assume accompaniedthe oath was probablybinding on descendants31), and he was therefore a subject in revolt against his overlord. Such attempts to overthrow the established political order, embodied in the person of the king, echoed parallel mythological assaults on Maat, and especially the rebellion of Seth against the legitimate rule of Osiris. The destructionby fire of the latter's enemies can be traced back to the Coffin Texts and is a recurrenttheme in the theological literature of the New Kingdom and after32).It is prominent in late accounts of the proscription of Seth, epitomised in a text recently published by Goyon33), in which the gods place the "Ba" of Seth on "the great brazier of the rebellious" (Cb9Cn sbiw). Literal translationof the genitival n does not bring out its full force, which confirms the strong and permanentconnection between the offence and this form of punishment. Rebellion was thus inevitably a crime with strong religious connotations34),and the appeal to Osiris to punish revolt against the king in the Philae text is entirely apposite, since it is quite logical that the same annihilatory treatment should be meted out to rebels against the Horus king. The invocation of Mut in the Philae text representsa slightly different but quite compatible mythological strain. The fiery Mut is a relatively rare figure of retribution and plays no part in the Osiris myth, but she is occasionally identified with the destructive Sekhmet, and as a symbol of kingship is an entirely appropriateprotectorof the royal position and avenger of assaultsupon it35). It is perhaps in the same spirit that the "flame (nbi) of Mut" is called down by Osorkon on those who might violate the decrees he issued on behalf of the king, although Mut, as one of the beneficiariesof those ordinances, had a special interest in the case36).The punishment by fire thus represents a response to the most heinous of crimes which is perfectly consistent with the mythological backgroundto Egyptian politics. It is also essential to ensure that the offender is denied an afterlife by the complete destruction of his body37). The relevance of this to earlier periods remains to be considered. The practice is certainly better attested in the first millennium B.C. than during the New Kingdom, but there is no evidence to suggest that it was introduced by the intensified foreign intrusions of the former period38).On the contrary, the frequency of
202
MISCELLANEA
the destruction of the enemy by fire as a theme in earlier religious literature, combined with some Ramesside texts which illustrate the use of fire to punish subject populations in revolt against Pharaoh, show that it has a long history in Egypt"3). If the traditionalview of Pap. Westcar and the Neferhotep stela is restored, then burning takes its place as one of the forms of capital punishment at the King's disposal throughout the pharaonic period"4). Several problems remain. There is the possibility, for instance, that in some cases rebels were executed first and their bodies then incinerated, rather than that they were roasted alive. Only in the case of Bocchoris is it explicitly stated that the victime was alive, but only in the Osorkon episode does the phraseologyencourage the n shr.fn.fst, "Then he view that he was killed first41).The crucial passage reads ChC. (Osorkon?) sbrthem (the rebels) for him (Amun?)"; this occurs after the prisoners had been led in, already bound, and before the statement that they were burnt. Sbr here has a knife determinative which renders unlikely the general sense of "overthrow" appropriateto the Philae text, but it might easily refer to a non-fatal ritual blow rather than to actual execution, and the fact that it is "each man" rather than their bodies which are said to be burnt would lend support to this view42). Interpretation here must be a matter of opinion and this single instance is not, in any case, an adequate basis for generalisation. A related question is the actual manner of execution. The word which recurs constantly in quite disparate texts in Cb4 4), which seems from temple inscriptions to have had a recognised role in rites concerned to ensure the king's triumph over his enemies44). I have translated this as "brazier" with etymology in mind, and because the link with sacrifice is undoubtedly important, but "furnace" might be more appropriate. The only detailed description is in the Instructions of "Ankhsheshonq", for which I quote Glanville's translation: "Pharaoh caused an altar of earth to be built at the door of the royal palace. He caused Harsiese, son of Ramose, to be placed in the furnace of copper together with all the conspirators"'5). Presumably the earth provided a base for the fire in a way that was considered too familiar to need elaboration. Even if one accepts the elimination of "copper", as proposed by Stricker46), the J~sign after 9h still implies a predominantly metal medium. There may be a clue to its precise form in certain illustrations accompanying religious texts. In the Book of Gates, some large furnaces called h3dw are depicted7). A scene from Edfu shows the king causing four bound prisoners to be burnt in a 'box' 48), and a vignette illustratinga section headed t6 4 in P. Salt 825 shows two men tied back to back in a similar container surWChw mounted by four f2 signs49). These examples may illuminate a spell in the Coffin Texts, in which, in the words of Faulkner, "the determinativeof cblooks like a chest In no case is but is probably intended for a rectangularbrazier on feet" (i)50). the working of the mechanism clear but, since destructionof the body was the intention, the victims must have been exposed directly to the flames. A third difficulty concerns the exact legal circumstances in which burning was employed and the nature of the misdemeanoursfor which it was imposed. Although it seems to have been a common end for rebels, there is no exclusive or necessary relationship between the two. Rebellion may be punished by other forms of death penalty51), while burning is also attested for adultery (P. Westcar), sacrilege (Neferhotep stela), murder52),and conspiracyto murder53).The degree to which it
MISCELLANEA
203
was envisaged by the legal code, rather than an ad hoc imposition (sometimes by the conqueror on the conquered) is also uncertain. In the Neferhotep stela, it is specified by royal decree (wd)4) for a particular crime, whereas, in a passage in P. Rylands IX, it is suggested almost casually in an attempt to settle what amounts to a blood-feud, without any reference to law (see n. 52). It may be that the use of wCCh in this text, rather than the p3 chrepeatedly encountered above, is significant as a reflection of irregularity. Unfortunately, the evidence and our knowledge of Egyptian law are still too slight to enable us to answer such questions.
ANTHONY LEAHY (University of Birmingham)
1) JESHO 20 (1977) 2-64. 2) See, for instance, De Meulenaere, CdE 28 (1953) 250, n. 6; Hornung, Altdgyptische ofAncient Hollenvorstellungen (ASAW 1968), 22, n. 3; Simpson, Faulkner, Wente, TheLiterature Isideet Osinde(ed. J. Gwyn Griffiths), 317; Eyre, SAK 4 (1976) 107; Egypt, 18; Plutarch,.De en Egypte,22-4. Vergote, Joseph 3) Cairo JE 35256, published in Randall-MacIver and Mace, El AmrahandAbydos,pl. xxix, with bibliography in PM V, 67. Neferhotep's cartouches were cut over those of an earlier king, but the exact original date is uncertain. The early Thirteenth Dynasty is at least as likely as the Twelfth-see Clare, MDAIK 14 (1956) 29. 4) Art. cit., 18. Again this opposes the general view exemplified by Kees, AncientEgypt, 243; Otto, EgyptianArtandtheCultsof OsirisandAmon,44; Stracmans, CdE25 (1950) 30; Hornung, op. cit., 22, n. 4; De Meulenaere, art. cit., 259, n. 4. As far as I know, only Breasted, AncientRecords,I, ? 770, has translated "brand" here. 5) As pointed out by Kemp, LA I, 35-6, this area can only be the wadi which divides the cemetery of Abydos into two parts, and which almost certainly served as the processional route from the Osiris temple enclosure to the supposed tomb of Osiris at the Umm el-Qaaab. 6) Art. cit., 44, n. 201. Lorton refers to Allam, HieratischeOstrakaund Papyriaus der 219, n. 16, where the possibility of a figurative meaning is mooted. Ramessidenzeit, 7) Art. cit., 18, n. 74, with referenceto Breasted,AncientRecords,I, ?? 766-72, especially ? 770, note b. III, 257a, col. 36 = RIK, pl. 19, col. 53. 8) Lepsius, Denkmnler, 9) Presumably the word Breastedhad in mind was nbi(Wb. II, 244). For the context, see Caminos, The Chronicle of PrinceOsorkon,71-3, ?? 101-5. 10) The essential meaning of wbdis "to destroy by fire". Extension of its semantic range to include burning by hot metal is not inconceivable, but I know of no instance in which the specific translationof "brand" is certain or even likely. For its use, see Wb. I, 297, 1-8; Von Deines and Westendorf, Wdrterbuch TexteI, 179-81. dermedizinischen 11) For references to branding (3bw) and branding scenes see Caminos, Late Egyptian Miscellanies,230-1. Dr. Mark Smith has kindly drawn my attention to a figurativeuse of3bw, ibid., 233-4 (10, 2). An unfortunatelyobscure allusion to "brand marks" in connection with punishment may be found in O. Berlin 12654 = Allam, op. cit., 35-8; here again, 3bw, and not wbd, is the word used. ad iuraorientisantiquipertinentia 9, 58-9. 12) See Pestman, in Studiaet Documenta 21-9, respectively.See also 13) In CdE28 (1953) 258-60 andAltiigyptische Hdllenvorstellungen, Eyre, art. cit. 107, n. 32 and 113, n. 85. 14) Benedite, Le templede Philae, 116. Translated by Vernus, Athribis,docs. 201-2. dePi(cankh)y 15) For the terminologyused to describe rebels, see Grimal, La stkletriomphale au Musie du Caire(MIFAO CV) 110, nn. 304 and 306.
204
MISCELLANEA
16) For hieroglyphic texts of the Ptolemaic period describingrebels as enemies of the gods, see Sethe, ZAS 53 (1917) 35-49; Clarysse, CdE 53 (1978) 243-53. The Rosetta decree compares Ptolemy V's extirpation of the Lycopolite rebels to Horus' earlier defeat of his enemies (Urk. II, 182, 5). For royal influence on the temples, see Crawford, in Studieson Hellenistic Memphis(Studia Hellenistica 24) 24-5. The "special relationship" which the Memphite clergy seem to have enjoyed with the Ptolemies probably did not hold for Upper Egypt, however, and the priests there may have been more independent. For the Egyptian priesthood as the creators and purveyors of nationalist propaganda in the Ptolemaic period, see the perceptive analysis of Lloyd, Historia31 (1982) 33-55. 17) Glanville, Catalogueof the Demotic Papyri in the British Museum, II, 13 = col. 4, 4/5. For
III, subsequent bibliography and new translations, see Lichtheim, AncientEgyptianLiterature 159-84, and Smith, Serapis6 (1980) 133-56, the latter of whom reconsidersthe placing of the fragments. 18) Preliminary reports will be found in Smith, A VisittoAncientEgypt, 19 and XIVthCongressof Papyrologzsts, University College, London, 29th July, 1974, 257. Professor Smith has kindly provided me with a transcriptionof the relevant section in advance of its publicationin SaqqaraDemotzcPapyriI, and I am grateful to him, to his co-editor Dr. W. J. Tait, and to the Egypt Exploration Society, for permission to quote the passage. 19) So Glanville on the "Ankhsheshonq" passage, quoted by Zandee, Deathas an Enemy, 142. P3 Chis the 'Late Egyptian' version of ME Cbin the Book of Repulsing Evil, Urk.VI, 77, en1979, (Colloques Interna19/20. For the date of the latter text, see Vernus, in L'Egyptologie tionaux CNRS) I, 82, n. 9. 20) The Saqqara papyrus dates to the fourth to third centuries B.C., the "Ankhsheshonq" manuscript to the late Ptolemaic period; see Smith, Serapis 6 (1980) 155-6. 21) See Kitchen, The ThirdIntermediatePeriodin Egypt, ?? 423-30 for the origin of the Pedubast cycle in the eighth century B.C. Some of these tales do, however, show obvious Greek influence. 22) The stories are not overtly xenophobic, but they may be regardedas a form of cultural propaganda in their refusal to acknowledge any ruler other than Pharaoh, and their cultivation of a recognisably Egyptian sense of identity; cf. Lloyd, art.cit., esp. 34-5, 39-40, 55. Such an interpretation is compatible with composition under either the Persians or the Ptolemies. Smith, art. cit., 154-6, summarises the evidence for a fourth century date for the composition of the story section of "Ankhsheshonq", with a deliberately chosen Twenty-sixth Dynasty setting, but does not exclude a later date. 23) Caminos, Chronicle,? 65. For the use of the same terminology to describe animal sacrifice and human execution, see Grimal, op. cit., 110, n. 306. On the symbolism of such sacrifice, see Lloyd, art. cit., 44, n. 35. 24) Cf. Hornung, op. cit., 27, n. 9. On the treatment of defeated enemies as rebels, see Grimal, op. cit., 273, ? 7 [1]. 25) Waddell (ed.), Manetho,167. Herodotus, II. 152, seems to confuse this episode with the encounter between Tantamani and Necho I, the exact manner of whose death is unknown. 26) Hornung, op. cit., 27, casts doubt on the authenticity of the Manethonian account on the ground that it is "geschichtlich so wenig verbiirgt". While this calls for caution, it is scarcely a cogent objection in itself, since it is true of so much that passes for history in our knowledge of ancient Egypt. A different tradition, according to which Shabako abolished capital punishment, is preserved by Diodorus Siculus, I, 65, 2-4. Kitchen's view, op. cit., 377, n. 763, that, unless Shabako had the remains buried decently, burning Bocchoriswould have alienated the Egyptians, ignores the fragmented state of Egyptian politics at the time, and fails to take account of the ritual and exemplary nature of the punishment. 27) On the date, see Spalinger,JARCE 10 (1973) 95-101. Priese, ZAS98 (1970) 19, argues that the Delta dynasts retained their titularies throughoutthe Twenty-fifth Dynasty. This re-
MISCELLANEA
205
mains to be documented although a comparison of the Piye stela and the Rassam cylinder does show that the divisions of Egypt had changed little between c. 728 B.C. and 671 B.C., and that in some cases the same families were still in power-see Kitchen, op. cit., ?? 356-8. 28) According to Diodorus Siculus, I. 45, 2, Tefnakht was also his father. 29) Piye stela, lines 142-4 = Urk. III, 52-3. A recent translation can be found in Lichtheim, op. cit., 66-84, and a new edition of the text with translationand commentary in the work by Grimal cited in n. 15 above. Spalinger, RdE 31 (1979) 77-8 and SAK 7 (1979) 291, has recently argued against the idea that Tefnakht took a vassal oath on the ground that the verb-forms in the relevant passage must be past tense. This derives from his thesis that the correspondingto ME n and negative signs in the Piye stela are functionally distinct, usually preceding sdm.n.f or perfective sdm.f, f\ to ME nn and usually negating the prospective sdm.f The hypothesis is an attractive one but, while there is some degree of correspondence, there are more exceptions than Spalinger allows. His interpretationof the oath, a series sdm.f forms, as retrospective and exculpatory is not inherently impossible, of. since that is after all the ethos of the Negative Confession, but it makes no sense in the context. Such an oath would be of no use to Piye and not worth recording.That it is recordedimplies something more substantial, and better sense is obtained if the passage is taken as prospective. It has been observed several times recently that the scribe or school responsible for the redaction of the Piye stela was not fully conversant with Middle Egyptian--Spalinger himself in RdE 31 (1979) 79; Logan and Westenholz, JARCE 9 (1971-2) 11-19; most fully, Grimal, op. cit., 194 f.-and the attempt to impose ME verbal patterns on the inscription merely proves the point. It is vain to expect that internal consistency will be achieved even when aspired to, and the notion of an "dgyptien de tradition" proposedby Vernus, RdE 30 (1978) 139, n. 136, is apposite here. On the general state of the language in texts of Dynasty Twenty-five, see the same author's remarks in BIFAO 75 (1975) 63-6. 30) This is the traditional view and has the support of Diodorus Siculus, I. 45, 2. For references, see Edwards, CAH III. 1, 574. Priese, art. cit., 19-20, n. 19, again differs, objecting quite justifiably that Manetho does not mention a Tefnakht as predecessorof Bocchorisin the Twenty-fourth Dynasty, and that there is no firm evidence to connect the opponent of Piye with the King Tefnakht known from two donation stelae. However, his identification with the Stephinates whom Manetho names as predecessorof Necho I is equally lacking in proof. I see no means of resolving the problem on present evidence, although the eight years of Tefnakht seem to fit more easily into the vacuum created by Piye's return to Nubia than into the reign of Taharqa prior to the first Assyrian invasion. 50-51, for contemporarypracticein the 31) Cf. Wiseman, The Vassal-TreatiesofEsarhaddon, Near East. Both Necho I and, initially, PsammetichusI were bound to the Assyriansby such treaties; see Spalinger,JAOS 94 (1974) 322 andJARCE 13 (1976) 135 for these. It should be noted that, even if Priese's view is correct, Bocchoris' claim to kingship would still be rebellion; for the Kushite attitude to rebels, see Grimal, op. cit., 273, ? 7. 32) See Zandee, op. cit., 133-42; Hornung, op.cit., 27, nn. 11-12; Griffiths,op. cit., 551-3; Urk. VI, 15, 48 f.; Vernus, Athribis,242(g). A similar fate is often predicatedof the enemies of Re- e.g., Borghouts,JEA 59 (1973) 136-7; Hoenes, Untersuchungen zurKult undWesender GdttinSachmet,75. 33) BIFAO 75 (1975) 391 [226] 3-4; similarly 395 [230] 13-14. 34) See nn. 15-16, 23. 35) See Te Velde, JEOL 26 (1979-80) 5-8 for this aspect of Mut. She is here not malevolent, but on the side of order in a punitive capacity;cf. Urk.VI, 65, wherep3 b n Mwt is said to surround all evil men. For Mut the avenger, see Vernus, Athribis,242 (g). 36) Caminos, Chronicle,? 101. 37) So in the posthumous burning of Amasis' body by Cambyses, for which see most recently Hofmann, SAK 9 (1981) 186-7. The same ideology underlies the punishment
206
MISCELLANEA
threatened in the Instruction of Sehetepibre : nn is n sbi hrhm.f, "There is no tomb for the rebel against His Majesty", (Cairo CG 20538, line 19). 38) Death by fire is known in some Near Eastern societies long before the first millennium-see the articles by Renger and Sasson inJESHO 20 (1977) 97 and 109 respectively. The possibility of a much earlier Nubian origin for the practice in Egypt is mooted by Stracmans, CdE 25 (1950) 30, but without any firm evidence. 39) See, for instance, the burning of a chief and his followersrecordedon the Amada stela of Merenptah (KRI IV, 1, lines 15-16; translated and discussed by Kitchen in Agyptenund Kusch,ed. Endesfelder, 223), or the generalised statement in an Abu Simbel hymn (KRI II, 319, lines 11-14 = Youssef, ASAE 63 [1979] 190, lines 9-10). In a differentcontext, see the Redesiyeh stela of Seti I (KRI I, 69, 10-11). On the symbolic level, cf. the burning of rebels by Re, Sekhmet or the king himself in the Kadesh texts (KRI II, 87, 1; 88, 1; 120, 11). An aspect which cannot be pursued here is the frequency of reference to the fire of the royal uraeus acting against the king's enemies. 40) In addition to impalement, attested as late as the second century B.C. (Urk. II, 183, line 6), decapitationwas certainly practised-witness sources as diverse as the headlessbodies of the Narmer palette, by implicationthe celebratedepisode in P. Westcar, and the writing of nmt( ) in the Piye stela, line 86 (see Grimal, op. cit., 110, n. 306). See Capart, ZAS 36 (1898) 125-6 and Hornung, op. cit., 18-20. 41) This is the view of Kitchen, op. cit., ? 292. On the sense of the passage, see Caminos, BookII, Commentary 1-98, 213, who vigorously rejectsa Chronicle,?? 65-9 and Lloyd, Herodotus sacrificial interpretation. 42) It is perhapsjust such a ritual blow that is depicted in the countless representationsof the king smiting his bound enemies before Amun. 43) Wb. I, 223, 13-16. a Karnak1, 371, (b). 44) Lacau and Chevrier, Une chapelled'Hatchepsout as for the execution ofjustice, see Smith, venue the the door of On 13. cit., palace Op. 45) art. cit., 156, n. 19. 46) OMRO39 (1958) 59, n. 25, followed by Lichtheim, op.cit., 163, n. 13. Smith, art.cit., 148, n. bl, is non-committal. I am grateful to Dr. Mark Smith for his comments on this point. 47) Hornung, op. cit., pl. V. 48) Chassinat Edfou,IX, pl. 82. 49) See Derchain, PapyrusSalt 825, 59 and col. XIII. 50) TheAncientEgyptianCoffinTextsII, 124, n. 28: Spell 479. 51) A penalty other than burning was probablyvisited on the conspiratorsagainst Ramses III, but the extant documents are, perhapsdeliberately,obscureon this point; see Lorton, art.
cit., ? 18.
52) In P. Rylands IX, 13/11, it is suggested that some youths guilty of murder should be thrown into wCcb, "a brazier" (Griffith, Catalogue of DemoticPapyriin theJohn RylandsLibrary, III, 91).
au Musie du Caire,38, 15-17; 39, 4-5. 53) Grimal, Quatrestles napatienes See Annuaire IVe section, 1977-8, 81-4, for Middle Kingdom royal EPHE, Vernus, 54) decrees.
