< Back to previous page
Project
Because I am Greek: Polyonymy and the Expression of Ethnicity in Ptolemaic Egypt
The use of double names in Graeco-Roman society has fascinated many researchers and is mentioned in numerous studies. Despite the abundance of references, however, no comprehensive and up-to-date investigation of the phenomenon exists. Whereas earlier works had a merely classifying approach, more recent studies are usually confined to case-studies combined with some sociological remarks. To fill in this gap, my colleague Yanne Broux and I have each written a dissertation on polyonymy and the use ofdouble names, as a part of the project Creating Identities in Graeco-Roman Egypt (M. Depauw, W. Clarysse, K. Vandorpe, 2008-2012), with respective focus on the Ptolemaic and the Roman period. The approach of thesestudies is interdisciplinary, incorporating both Greek and Egyptian (hieroglyphic, demotic and Coptic), papyrological and epigraphic documents.Statistical research is combined with modern theoretical research aboutidentity. The chronological division into Ptolemaic and Roman period may seem a rather arbitrary decision, since traditions in naming patterns were not abruptly overthrown with the conquest of Egypt by Augustus. Theend of Ptolemaic regime is, however, not merely a chronological dividing line: with the arrival of the Romans, the social structure in Egypt changed. Since naming patterns are closely related to society, the regime change can serve as a useful finishing and starting point. The intentionis, moreover, that taken together, these two studies offer a complete chronological overview on the subject. The aims of my study are twofold. In the first part, a full investigation of polyonymy in Ptolemaic Egypt will be conducted. In the second part, a specific subset of polyonymous persons, those combining a Greek and an Egyptian name, will be used to investigate the expression of ethnicity in Ptolemaic society. Although social interactions in Ptolemaic society can be approached from many angles, both concepts of polyonymy and ethnicity provide us with a useful framework for outlining these relations.
393 polyonymous individualshave been identified for the Ptolemaic period. Their references are listed in the prosopography in Part III. In Part I of this study, the prosopographical data are used to discuss the historical, onomastic and social aspects of polyonymy and double names. In chapter three, the history of polyonymy in Egypt, from the Old Kingdom up to the Ptolemaic period, is sketched on the basis of previous studies. The subject of double namesoutside Egypt is also briefly touched upon, in order to answer the question on the origin of polyonymy and double names. Chapter four, the longest chapter, starts with a chronological and geographical investigation of double names, but also investigates the types of document in which both names were used together. In the next part, the formulation of doublenames is examined: the Egyptian and Greek formulae that were used to connect the two names are discussed, as well as the (problematical) use ofjuxtaposition. The position of the double name in the genealogical string is presented separately for the Egyptian and Greek documentation. Thethird part of the chapter treats the onomastic aspects of polyonymy. After chronologically and geographically examining the combinations of names from different linguistic origin (e.g. Egyptian-Egyptian or Greek-Egyptian), attention goes to the different types of names used (e.g. theophoric or basilophoric) and the relationship between both names (e.g. semantic (meaning), phonetic (sound) or linguistic (abbreviations)). The last part of chapter two discusses the identity of polyonymous persons, outlining different facets such as gender, age and social position. Special attention goes to the seemingly higher popularity of double namesamong women; the moment of allocation of a second name; and the social position of polyonymous persons, mainly on the basis of titles and ethnics. Finally, chapter five revolves around the motivations for polyonymy and the reasons for using the two names together as a double name. Family membership, religious devotion, political allegiance and ethnic identity can all be expressed by using different names. It is this last motive, the articulation of membership of an ethnic community, that will be examined in the second part of this study.
The seventh chapter of this study focuses on Greeks and Egyptians before the Ptolemaic period. First the expression of identity by these two ethnic groups is discussed separately, after which the history of their encounters is sketched. At the beginning of chapter eight, previous studies on the relation between Greeks and Egyptians in Ptolemaic Egypt are summarised. The constant factor in these discussions is the degree of fusion and separation between the two main ethnic players in society. By means of the above outlined flexible definition of ethnicity, however, these seemingly contradictory themes of fusion and separateness, of creating and crossing borders, can be reconciled. The last part of chapter two deals with the possibility of ethnicity to create borders; some texts give us an idea of thetensions that may have lingered between Greeks and Egyptians; the same ethnic division is found in the Ptolemaic tax system, where being Greek (or Hellene) was a privileged status. Ethnics were also used for official identification. While most of these markers originally indicated origin, some of them evolved into pseudo-ethnics and could be acquired through serving the Ptolemaic king. As such, a privileged Greek status wasnot reserved for those of Greek origin or descent. Many of these new-Greeks assumed not only a Greek ethnic but also a Greek name. The choicebetween their Greek or Egyptian name seems to have depended on the perceived ethnicity of the context they operated in. This contextual switching of identities according to the ethnic space is the topic of the ninthchapter. On the basis of some case studies of bilingually polyonymous persons, the importance of ethnicity in diverse domains of Ptolemaic society is discussed, including court, administration, army and religion. The topic of bilingual polyonymy amongst women is also examined here. The division of Ptolemaic society in these particular spheres is somewhat artificial, with many individuals combining functions in several of these domains. Each of them nevertheless highlights some specific aspects, contributing to the larger picture of polyonymy and the expression of ethnicity that emerges.
393 polyonymous individualshave been identified for the Ptolemaic period. Their references are listed in the prosopography in Part III. In Part I of this study, the prosopographical data are used to discuss the historical, onomastic and social aspects of polyonymy and double names. In chapter three, the history of polyonymy in Egypt, from the Old Kingdom up to the Ptolemaic period, is sketched on the basis of previous studies. The subject of double namesoutside Egypt is also briefly touched upon, in order to answer the question on the origin of polyonymy and double names. Chapter four, the longest chapter, starts with a chronological and geographical investigation of double names, but also investigates the types of document in which both names were used together. In the next part, the formulation of doublenames is examined: the Egyptian and Greek formulae that were used to connect the two names are discussed, as well as the (problematical) use ofjuxtaposition. The position of the double name in the genealogical string is presented separately for the Egyptian and Greek documentation. Thethird part of the chapter treats the onomastic aspects of polyonymy. After chronologically and geographically examining the combinations of names from different linguistic origin (e.g. Egyptian-Egyptian or Greek-Egyptian), attention goes to the different types of names used (e.g. theophoric or basilophoric) and the relationship between both names (e.g. semantic (meaning), phonetic (sound) or linguistic (abbreviations)). The last part of chapter two discusses the identity of polyonymous persons, outlining different facets such as gender, age and social position. Special attention goes to the seemingly higher popularity of double namesamong women; the moment of allocation of a second name; and the social position of polyonymous persons, mainly on the basis of titles and ethnics. Finally, chapter five revolves around the motivations for polyonymy and the reasons for using the two names together as a double name. Family membership, religious devotion, political allegiance and ethnic identity can all be expressed by using different names. It is this last motive, the articulation of membership of an ethnic community, that will be examined in the second part of this study.
The seventh chapter of this study focuses on Greeks and Egyptians before the Ptolemaic period. First the expression of identity by these two ethnic groups is discussed separately, after which the history of their encounters is sketched. At the beginning of chapter eight, previous studies on the relation between Greeks and Egyptians in Ptolemaic Egypt are summarised. The constant factor in these discussions is the degree of fusion and separation between the two main ethnic players in society. By means of the above outlined flexible definition of ethnicity, however, these seemingly contradictory themes of fusion and separateness, of creating and crossing borders, can be reconciled. The last part of chapter two deals with the possibility of ethnicity to create borders; some texts give us an idea of thetensions that may have lingered between Greeks and Egyptians; the same ethnic division is found in the Ptolemaic tax system, where being Greek (or Hellene) was a privileged status. Ethnics were also used for official identification. While most of these markers originally indicated origin, some of them evolved into pseudo-ethnics and could be acquired through serving the Ptolemaic king. As such, a privileged Greek status wasnot reserved for those of Greek origin or descent. Many of these new-Greeks assumed not only a Greek ethnic but also a Greek name. The choicebetween their Greek or Egyptian name seems to have depended on the perceived ethnicity of the context they operated in. This contextual switching of identities according to the ethnic space is the topic of the ninthchapter. On the basis of some case studies of bilingually polyonymous persons, the importance of ethnicity in diverse domains of Ptolemaic society is discussed, including court, administration, army and religion. The topic of bilingual polyonymy amongst women is also examined here. The division of Ptolemaic society in these particular spheres is somewhat artificial, with many individuals combining functions in several of these domains. Each of them nevertheless highlights some specific aspects, contributing to the larger picture of polyonymy and the expression of ethnicity that emerges.
Date:1 Oct 2008 → 13 Sep 2012
Keywords:Graeco-Roman Egypt
Disciplines:History
Project type:PhD project