Suppl. 1335.

Fig. 1

Funerary monument of a woman, Gerosa. Turin, Museo Egizio, Suppl. 1335. Photo by Nicola Dell’Aquila and Federico Taverni/Museo Egizio.

Γερ|όσα

Gerosa must be the name of the deceased, depicted on the stela as a praying female figure. Her name is unattested elsewhere. It is hardly likely that it was conceived of as the feminine of the Greek proper name Γέρων (“Elder”).27

Both the style and the iconography of the monument are clearly indicative of a Fayum provenance. Standing praying figures (orantes), usually female, within an architectural frame (aedicula) are a frequent feature of late antique stelae from the Fayum and continue an ancient iconographic tradition.28 For the figure of the woman, the Moscow stela of Matrona (Pushkin Museum, no. I, 1a 5835) offers a close parallel. It was purchased in Luxor, but is in every respect a pure representative of the Fayum style.29 The Turin stela is exceptional in that it lacks an architectural frame and a proper funerary formulary. As for the absence of a frame, it cannot be fully excluded that the stone was trimmed in modern times to look more “presentable”. The brevity of the inscription, which lacks a prayer and even the date of decease of Gerosa, might point at a relatively early date, perhaps in the fifth or sixth century.

Suppl. 1332.

Fig. 2

Funerary monument of a lector. Turin, Museo Egizio, Suppl. 1332. Photo by Nicola Dell’Aquila and Federico Taverni/Museo Egizio.

[epigraphic field]

2. ψηχὴν: ψυχὴν | τούλου: δούλου || 4. ἐκυμήθη: ἐκοιμήθη | μιν[ὶ] : μηνὶ || 6. Διοκλιδιανοῦ: Διοκλητιανοῦ

2. Χρι̣[ : χρ[ Lefebvre || 3. ]α̣μ̣ . [ : ] . ω [ Lefebvre || 4. μιν[ὶ]: μινε̣ι̣ Lefebvre || 5. ἔτο̣υ[ς]: ετ[ο]υσ̣ Lefebvre || 6. Διοκλιδιανοῦ: Διοκλεδιανου Lefebvre

+ Lord, grant rest to the soul of your servant Chri[ . . . ], lector of (the church of) Saint [ . . .]. He fell asleep in the Lord in the month of Pharmouthi 29, (year) of the indiction 15, + of the year of Diocletian [ . . . ]. Amen. + Alpha + Omega.

2. Not enough of the name of the deceased survives to allow a confident reconstruction. The space seems a bit cramped for a popular name such as Christodoros or Christophoros, although both are well attested in the Fayum (see Diethart, Prosopographia arsinoitica, 1980, pp. 337–38; among the lectors listed by Diethart at p. 371, none bears a name that would fit the traces).

3. The name of the church to which the deceased was affected cannot be reconstructed with any certainty. Pamoun, Pamouthios or Samuel might fit the very faint traces, but none of these saints are known to have had a cult in the Fayum in this period (seventh-eighth centuries). The question of the name is therefore best left open.

5. The raised delta in the abbreviation for “indiction” looks deceptively like a theta due to damage to the surface of the stone.

According to Gustave Lefebvre, in his editio princeps, the stela had been acquired by Schiaparelli in the Fayum, together with our no. 11 (re-edited below). This is not confirmed by the museum documentation and clearly belied by the nature and appearance of our no. 11. It is far more likely that both stelae were purchased in Cairo or Giza.30 Nevertheless, the material, formulary, style and iconography of the present monument are all unmistakable indications of a Fayum provenance. Close parallels for the iconographic type, which shows a cross in an aedicula as its central motif,31 are offered by the stelae of Thecla (Cairo, Coptic Museum 8598)32 and the pastry baker Damian from Sinnuris (present location unknown).33 As was already observed by Lefebvre, however, the closest parallel is offered by the stela of the meizoteros Apa Ol, now in Cairo (Coptic Museum 8599).34 This stela reportedly originates from Damanhur in the Delta, yet represents a pure Fayum style. It is dated to the equivalent of AD 693 and thus provides a fairly reliable date for the Turin monument, where the Diocletian year in l. 6 is broken away.

The funerary formulary is characterized by the opening phrase Κύριε, ἀνάπαυσον, “O Lord, grant rest” (etc.), and the use of the middle voice of the verb κοιμάω for designating the death event (“to fall asleep, pass away”). Both elements are a common feature of similar epitaphs from the Fayum.35

The deceased commemorated by the inscription was a lector serving a church, the name of which is lost, perhaps in the city of Arsinoe itself.36 His lavishly decorated tombstone suggests that he was a man of some means.37

Provv. 4817.

Fig. 3

Cross-shaped funerary monument of a man, Phoibamon. Turin, Museo Egizio, Provv. 4817. Photo by Nicola Dell’Aquila and Federico Taverni/Museo Egizio.

☩ ⲡⲛⲟⲩϯ ⲡⲁⲛⲧⲱ-

5. ⲙⲛ: ⲛ inverted || 10. ⲙⲙⲁϥ || 13. ⲓⲛⲇ(ⲓⲕⲧⲓⲟⲛⲟⲥ): ⲓⲛⲇ/ stone.

+ God almighty, grant mercy and rest to the soul of the blessed Phoibamon. He went to rest on the 17^th of Mechir, (year) 14 of the indiction. Amen.

1. The cross is a croix fourchée. Note the full writing of ⲡⲛⲟⲩϯ, instead of the abbreviation ⲫ̅ϯ̅, which is commonly used in Fayumic epigraphy.

8. ⲛⲡⲙⲁ(ⲕⲁ)ⲣⲓⲟⲥ: the abbreviation (or simple error?) ⲙⲁ(ⲕⲁ)ⲣⲓⲟⲥ / ⲙⲁ(ⲕⲁ)ⲣⲓⲁ occurs more often in Nubian epitaphs, but is rarely found elsewhere (see Richter, in Hodak et al. [eds.], Coptica, 2013, no. 85, ll. 2–3, with commentary; cf. also the abbreviation ⲙⲁ(ⲕⲁ)ⲣ(ⲓⲟⲥ) in SB Kopt. I, 531, l. 4, from Aswan).

10. ⲛⲙ<ⲁϥ>: it is unclear whether the mason erroneously omitted –ⲁϥ or purposely meant the same group in ⲁϥⲉⲙⲧⲁⲛ (l. 9, immediately above) to do double service in order to save space.

12. The Fayumic form of the month name, ⲙⲉϣⲓⲗ, is fairly rare, but occurs also in the epitaph of Ama Maria, presumably from the Fayum (SB Kopt. IV, 1966, l. 4; Jarry, BIFAO 67 [1969], p. 233, no. 1, pl. LXVIII; Boud’hors and Calament, in Immerzeel and Van der Vliet [eds.], Coptic Studies, 2004, p. 465, no. 17).

The language of the inscription, Fayumic Coptic with its characteristic lambdacisms, leaves no doubt about the provenance of this nice monument. It belongs to a well-documented group of funerary stelae in an (often approximate) cross-form from the Fayum and the adjacent area of the Nile Valley.38 A more intricate parallel is offered by the Fayumic stela of a woman Martha, acquired by the British Museum in 1931.39 Much closer, for the shape of the cross, is the stela of Eulogia and Ane, also in the British Museum, of which the provenance is unknown, however.40 Such freestanding crosses, of which our no. 8 offers another example, must have crowned the superstructure of a tomb. Particularly popular in the Fayum, they occur also elsewhere in Egypt and Nubia, as well as far beyond.41

The text is very similar to that of the cross-shaped epitaph of Martha in the British Museum, mentioned above. It likewise bears an opening invocation of “God almighty” (παντοκράτωρ) and a prayer formula of the “have mercy”-type (in Fayumic ⲁⲗⲓ ⲟⲩⲛⲉⲓ ⲙⲛ or ⲙⲉ), both of which are common in particular in the Fayum and throughout Middle Egypt.42 Note, however, that in the present case, the prayer formula is expanded into ⲁⲗⲓ ⲟⲩⲛⲉⲓ ⲙⲛ ⲟⲩⲁⲛⲁⲡⲁⲩⲥⲓⲥ ⲙⲛ, “grant9 mercy and rest”, which is not habitual and produces a slightly scrambled text (more usual would be: ⲁⲗⲓ ⲟⲩⲛⲉⲓ ⲙⲛ and / or ϯ ⲟⲩⲁⲛⲁⲡⲁⲩⲥⲓⲥ ⲛ-). The proper name Phoibamon (Phoibammon) was extremely popular in the late antique Fayum.43

Cat. 7133. Obsolete signatures mentioned in previous publications are B.A. 6337 (Seyffarth) and 137 (Revillout, SB Kopt.).

Fig. 4

Funerary stela of a mason, Epimache. Turin, Museo Egizio, Cat. 7133. Photo by Nicola Dell’Aquila and Federico Taverni/Museo Egizio.

☩ ⲡⲛⲟⲩⲧⲉ ⲛⲛϫ`ⲓ̈´ⲥⲟⲟⲩ ⲛⲛⲁ-

5. ⲙⲏⲛⲧⲁϥⲧⲉ: ⲙⲛⲧⲁϥⲧⲉ || 7. < . . . >ⲕⲉⲧⲉⲕⲁⲧⲉⲥ ⲛⲧⲉⲕⲧⲓ̈ⲁⲛⲟⲥ: < . . . >καιδεκάτης ἰνδικτίονος (see comm.) || 8. ϣ`ⲗ´ⲏⲣ: ϣⲗⲏⲗ || 9. ⲧⲉ: ⲛⲧⲉ || 10. ⲉⲓ̈ⲣ: ⲉⲣ or ⲣ̄ || 9-10. ⲛⲧⲁⲣⲉⲡⲟ|ⲣⲟⲥ: ταλαίπωρος

1. ⲛⲛϫ`ⲓ̈´ⲥⲟⲟⲩ: ⲛⲛϫⲥⲟⲟⲩⲛ Seyffarth, ⲛⲛϫⲥⲟⲟⲩ Stern || 1-2. ⲛⲛⲁ|ⲡⲟⲥⲧⲟⲗⲟⲥ: ⲛⲛⲁ|ⲕⲟⲥⲧⲟⲗⲟⲥ Leclercq || 3. ⲧⲉⲯⲏⲭⲏ: ⲧⲉⲯⲩⲭⲏ Seyffarth, Revillout, SB Kopt., ⲧⲉⲫⲩⲭⲏ Leclercq | ⲙⲡ<ⲙ>ⲁⲕⲁⲣⲓ̈ⲟⲥ: ⲙⲙⲁⲕⲁⲣⲓ̈ⲟⲥ Seyffarth, ⲙⲡⲙⲁⲕⲁⲣⲓⲟⲥ Revillout, Leclercq, SB Kopt. || 5. ⲙⲏⲛⲧⲁϥⲧⲉ: ⲙⲛⲧⲁϥⲧⲉ Revillout, SB Kopt., ⲙⲛⲧⲁϥⲡⲉ Leclercq || 6. ⲛⲧⲓ̈ⲣⲟⲙⲡⲉ: ⲛ ⲧⲣⲟⲙⲡⲉ Stern || 7. ⲛⲧⲉⲕⲧⲓ̈ⲁⲛⲟⲥ: ⲛⲧⲉⲕⲧⲓ̈ⲟⲛⲟⲥ Seyffarth || 8. ϣ`ⲗ´ⲏⲣ: ϣⲏⲏⲣ Seyffarth, ϣⲏⲣ Stern, Revillout, Leclercq, SB Kopt. || 9. ⲉⲧⲥⲟⲟⲩ<ⲛ>: ⲉⲅⲥⲟⲟⲩ Seyffarth, ⲉⲧⲥⲟⲟⲩⲛ Revillout, Leclercq, SB Kopt. || 10. ⲉⲓ̈ⲣ: ⲉⲓⲣ̄ Stern | ⲧⲁⲯⲏⲭⲏ: ⲧⲁⲯⲩⲭⲏ Seyffarth, Revillout, Leclercq, SB Kopt. || 10-11. ⲛⲧⲁⲣⲉⲡⲟ|ⲣⲟⲥ: ⲛⲧⲁϩⲉⲡⲟ|ⲣⲟⲥ Seyffarth || 11. ⲉϥ<ⲉ>ϣⲱⲡⲉ: ⲉϥϣⲱⲡⲉ ⲡⲉ Seyffarth, ⲉϥⲉϣⲱⲡⲏ Revillout, Leclercq, SB Kopt. || 12. om. Seyffarth, Revillout, Leclercq, SB Kopt.

+ God of the Lords, the Holy Apostles, may you have mercy upon the soul of the blessed Epimache, the mason10, who went to rest on the fourteenth of the month Paone of this very year, a < … >teenth indiction. Please, pray for me, everyone who knew me, that God may have mercy upon my miserable soul. Amen, so be it. Jesus Christ! +

1. The cross is a croix fourchée. Stern translated the invocation correctly, but all other translators from Revillout onwards interpreted the phrase ⲛⲛϫ`ⲓ̈´ⲥⲟⲟⲩ ⲛⲛⲁⲡⲟⲥⲧⲟⲗⲟⲥ as “of our Lords, the Apostles”, which would demand an unnecessary emendation ⲛ<ⲛⲉ>ⲛϫ`ⲓ̈´ⲥⲟⲟⲩ, however.

2-3. Prayers for God’s mercy (ⲛⲁ) are common throughout Middle Egypt, including the Fayum; see Tudor, Christian Funerary Stelae, 2011, pp. 178–81; Dijkstra and Van der Vliet, CdE 87 (2012), p. 193, in the reprint, p. 188, and above no. 3.

3. The same erroneous spelling ⲙⲡⲁⲕⲁⲣⲓⲟⲥ is found in the stela of a man George, from Antinoopolis (SB Kopt. II, 1069; Munier, Aegyptus 29 [1949], p. 129, no. 1, l. 4).

4. ⲉⲕⲱⲧ: “builder, architect” (οἰκοδόμος), rather than the much rarer homonymous word for “potter”.

6-7. This emphatic way of introducing the indiction year, with a double demonstrative pronoun, prefixed and appositive, “this very year”, and a Greek numeral, is characteristic of Middle Egypt; see Dijkstra and Van der Vliet, CdE 87 (2012), p. 193 (in the reprint: p. 189), with n. 5.

7. In the numeral, the scribe or mason omitted the unit. Stern prints it as ⲧⲁⲓⲕⲉⲧⲉⲕⲁⲧⲉⲥ, translating “twelfth”, but this can hardly be a spelling of δωδέκατος (for Coptic spellings of which, see Förster, Wörterbuch, 2002, p. 212). In fact, the element ⲧⲁⲓ̈ is the appositive demonstrative pronoun following ⲧⲓ̈ⲣⲟⲙⲡⲉ (see above ad ll. 6-7). Revillout translates “dixième”, leaving the element ⲕⲉ- = και- unaccounted for, as do later editors. Given the form of the numeral, a thirteenth, fourteenth or fifteenth indiction year may have been intended. A fifteenth (ⲡⲉⲛⲧⲉⲕⲉⲧⲉⲕⲁⲧⲉⲥ) year seems the most likely option; the scribe probably confused the syllables ⲧⲁⲓ̈ and ⲧⲉ and skipped the syllable ⲡⲉⲛ- (saut du même au même). The spelling ⲛⲧⲉⲕⲧⲓⲁⲛⲟⲥ is again found in the stela of George from Antinoopolis (SB Kopt. II, 1069; Munier, Aegyptus 29 [1949], p. 129, no. 1, ll. 8–9). 16

8. ϣⲗⲏⲣ for ϣⲗⲏⲗ is a rare writing, even though the ⲗ / ⲣ swap is quite common (similarly in ll. 10–11: ⲧⲁⲣⲉⲡⲟⲣⲟⲥ for ταλαίπωρος); see Kahle, Bala’izah, 1954, pp. 98–99; Crum, in Winlock and Crum, Monastery of Epiphanius I, 1926, p. 243, associates it in particular with the region of Ashmunayn (Hermopolis).

9. Although Crum, Coptic Dictionary, 1939, p. 369b, cites (Fayumic) examples of ⲥⲟⲟⲩⲛ without the final ⲛ (cf. also Kahle, Bala’izah, 1954, p. 111; Kasser, Compléments, 1964, p. 58), here ⲉⲧⲥⲟⲟⲩ represents most likely a simple omission of the scribe or mason, under the influence of the following cluster ⲙⲙ.

9-10. The use of the form ⲧⲉ for ⲛⲧⲉ of the conjunctive, in the phrase ⲧⲉ ⲡⲛⲟⲩⲧⲉ ⲉⲓ̈ⲣ ⲟⲩⲛⲁ confirms, broadly speaking, a Middle Egyptian provenance; cf. Kahle, Bala’izah, 1954, pp. 160–62.

Its textual format, but also its material (marble) and various details of script and orthography link the stela of the mason Epimache (Epimachos) firmly to Middle Egypt, in particular the area of Antinoopolis and Hermopolis. The text follows a tripartite format, comprising an introductory prayer for God’s mercy (ll. 1-4), a death lemma including an indiction year in Greek (ll. 4-7), and a final section (ll. 8-11) where the deceased addresses the living, asking for their prayer (appel aux vivants).44 The opening invocation, “God of the Lords, the Holy Apostles”, shows that the Apostles must have been locally important as patrons.45 Its form recalls the nomenclature of the oratory “of the Lords, the Apostles”, ⲉⲛⲛϫⲓⲥⲟⲟⲩ ⲉⲛⲁⲡⲟⲥⲧⲟⲗ[ⲟ]ⲥ, at Hermopolis, as found in a seventh-century receipt issued by its legal representatives.46

The appel aux vivants of ll. 8-11 has a close parallel in the Coptic Totenklage-stela (funerary lament) of a young girl Eulogia, dated to AD 759, presumably from Antinoopolis, but now in Leiden: ϣⲗ̅ⲗ ⲉϫⲱⲓ ⲛⲉⲧⲥⲟⲟⲩ(ⲛ) ⲙⲙⲟⲓ ⲧⲉ ⲡⲛⲟⲩⲧⲉ ⲁⲛⲁⲡⲉⲩⲉ ⲛⲧⲁⲯⲩⲭⲏ, “Pray for me, you who knew me, that God may grant rest to my soul”.47 Another Totenklage-stela, for a girl Mary, shows a pessimistic inversion of the same idea: ⲁ ⲛⲉⲧⲥⲟⲟⲩⲛ ⲙⲙⲟⲓ ⲧⲏⲣⲟⲩ ⲉⲣ ⲡⲁⲱⲃ︤ϣ, “All who knew me have forgotten me”.48 The Leiden epitaph of Eulogia is also paleographically close to the present stela, which suggests a date in or around the eighth century.

Cat. 7132.

Fig. 5

Collective epitaph for a group of four monks. Turin, Museo Egizio, Cat. 7132. Photo by Nicola Dell’Aquila and Federico Taverni/Museo Egizio.

ⲁⲡⲁ ⲃⲓⲕⲧⲱ[ⲣ . . . . . . . ]

Apa Victor [ . . . ] went to rest on the x^th of Thoout, in peace. Our brother, the papas [N. N.], the son of Apa Elijah, went to rest on the x^th of Choiak, in peace. Amen. Our brother Phoibammon, from Pamoune Psobt, went to rest on the 2^nd of Paremhotp, in peace. Amen. Our brother John, (son of) Betir, from Pamoune Psobt, went to rest the 7^th of Paone. Amen.

The epitaph records the dates of decease of four monks, three of whom are formally called “brother”, to wit Apa Victor (ll.1-3), a priest (πάπας) whose name is lost (ll. 4-7), Phoibammon (ll. 8-12) and John (ll. 12-15). Presumably in order to distinguish them from namesakes within their community, all are identified by patronymics and / or places of origin (lost in the case of Victor, in l. 1). The surviving names of the persons mentioned are commonplace. Only the name Betir (l. 13) is rare, but undoubtedly the same as the known name Betil.49

Two of the monks, Phoibammon and John, hail from the same village, Pamoune Psobt (ll. 9-10, 13-14). Egyptian place names composed with the word sbt / ⲥⲟⲃⲧ, “wall, enclosure”, which survives in modern toponyms as the element Safṭ, are ubiquitous.50 The present one, Pamoune Psobt, is the Greek Ψῶβθον Ἀμούνεως, a hamlet (ἐποίκιον) in the toparchy of Leukopyrgites Kato, in the Hermopolite nome, known from a small number of Greek administrative documents of second to fourth century date.51 Its Coptic name was not previously attested. Both versions of the name may be translated as “(The Settlement) of Amoune at the Wall”.52 The precise location and modern name of the village are unknown.

The paleography and the entire format of the monument are characteristic of late antique monastic sites in Middle Egypt. Various quite similar epitaphs12 likewise contain Hermopolite toponyms. Among these is a small group of Coptic stelae that has been traced to Zawyat al-Mayatin, south of Minya.53 As the Turin stela twice mentions an obscure village or hamlet in the Hermopolite nome, it stands to reason that it originates from a monastery in the same general region, between the modern cities of Minya and Mallawi.

Suppl. 2201.

Fig. 6

Fragment of an epitaph. Turin, Museo Egizio, Suppl. 2201. Photo by Nicola Dell’Aquila and Federico Taverni/Museo Egizio.

[ - - - ⲙ]ⲁⲕⲁⲣⲓ̣[ⲟⲥ - - - ]

2. perhaps ⲁⲣⲧⲟ]ⲕⲟⲡⲟⲥ or ⲁⲣⲅⲩⲣⲟ]ⲕⲟⲡⲟⲥ

[ - - - ] blessed [ - - - ] . . . [ - - - ] on this very day [ - - - ] of this very year [ - - - ]

Part of the name-date lemma of the funerary inscription of an apparently male person. Line 2 mentioned the profession of the deceased, whose name must have followed the epithet ⲙⲁⲕⲁⲣⲓⲟⲥ (in l. 1). He was perhaps a baker (ἀρτοκόπος) or a silversmith (ἀργυροκόπος), less likely a bishop (ἐπίσκοπος), since funerary stelae of bishops, differently than in Nubia, are extremely rare in Egypt. Lines 3 and 4 contained the month date and the indiction year of his death, recorded in a way that was very common in Middle Egypt (cf. above no. 4, ad ll. 6-7). The style of the script and the material are typical of the Hermopolite-Antinoopolite region.13

Suppl. 2202.

Fig. 7

Fragment of an epitaph (?). Turin, Museo Egizio, Suppl. 2202. Photo by Nicola Dell’Aquila and Federico Taverni/Museo Egizio.

[ - - - ] . ⲡⲉ ⲭⲟ[ⲓⲁⲕ - - -]

[ - - - ] is Choiak [ - - - ] since Diocletian [ - - - ]

The fragment preserves part of the two final lines of an inscription, most likely of a funerary nature, comprising the dating lemma with the day and year of decease. As in the previous item, the style of writing is typical of the Hermopolite-Antinoopolite region.

Provv. 4871. The piece bears the Arabic number 1025 in black ink.

Fig. 8

Cross-shaped funerary monument of a man, Noute. Turin, Museo Egizio, Provv. 4871. Photo by Nicola Dell’Aquila and Federico Taverni/Museo Egizio.

☩ ϩⲙ̣̄ ⲡ[ⲣⲁ-]

13. ⲙ̄ⲡⲉⲙⲡⲧⲏⲥ: πέμπτης (ἰνδικτίονος) || 14. ⲓⲟⲩⲣⲏⲛⲏ: l. ⲟⲩⲓⲣⲏⲛⲏ || 17-18. ϥⲟ̣|ⲑ<ⲉ>: βοηθέω.14

+ In the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. The blessed Noute went to rest on the third of Tybi of the fifth (indiction) year, in God’s peace. Amen. Jesus-Christ, help me charitably! +

1. The pi is still visible on one of the smaller fragments.

5. The epsilon looks like a sigma.

12. The name Noute is rarely attested (see Hasitzka, Namen, 2007, s.v.), but there is definitely no space for ⲡⲁⲡⲛⲟⲩⲧⲉ, ϣⲉⲛⲟⲩⲧⲉ or a similar more popular name.

13. In the notation of the indiction year, the scribe uses a Greek numeral (in the genitive). This may be indicative of a Middle Egyptian provenance (see above no. 4, ad ll. 6-7).

17-18. The stone’s ϥⲟ̣|ⲑ, to be read as ϥⲟⲑ<ⲉ> (by haplography, for βοηθέω), seems rare. Förster, Wörterbuch, 2002, p. 139, notes only one example of the spelling ϥⲟⲑⲉ, from Saqqara. The structure of the sentence, with a following ⲉⲣⲟⲓ̈, precludes an interpretation as the cryptogram ϥ̄ⲑ̅, for Amen.

In spite of its present fragile condition, this piece – like our no. 3 – must have been a freestanding monument that once crowned the superstructure of a tomb. It is inscribed with a full-fledged though brief epitaph. It opens with a widespread opening formula invoking the Holy Trinity (ll. 1-7), followed by a statement of death containing the name of the deceased and the date of his demise (ll. 7-16). The text concludes with a brief prayer for the deceased, who himself speaks through the epitaph in the first person, addressing not the reader, as is more usual (compare the appel aux vivants in no. 4), but Christ directly (ll. 16-20). Its appeal to divine succor (βοήθεια) is widespread in all kinds of inscriptions, including epitaphs, and has a strong apotropaic value.54

Sepulchral crosses were particularly popular in the Fayum (see our no. 3, above), but the present piece is typologically and textually quite different from the Fayum crosses. The material, a rather bright limestone, the form of the indiction date in l. 13, and the first-person prayer of ll. 16-20 would seem to indicate a provenance in Middle Egypt, but it is difficult to be more assertive or precise.15

Cat. 7130. Obsolete signatures mentioned in previous publications are B.A. 6631 (Seyffarth) and 1126 (Revillout 1885).

Fig. 9

Epitaph of a woman [ . ]aqo. Turin, Museo Egizio, Cat. 7130. Photo by Nicola Dell’Aquila and Federico Taverni/Museo Egizio.

[☩ Ἡ Ἁγία] Τριάς. ^vac.

8. ⲟ ⲡϭ(ⲟⲓ)ⲥ: ⲟ ⲡⲟ̅ⲥ̅ stone || 13-14. ⲁⲡⲟ | ⲇⲓⲟⲕⲗⲏ(ⲧⲓⲁⲛⲟⲩ): ἀπὸ Διοκλητιανοῦ || 15. ⲥⲁⲣⲁⲅⲉⲛⲟⲥ: ἀπὸ Σαρακηνῶν

2. ⲉϩ]ⲣⲁⲓ: . . ]ⲑⲁⲓ Seyffarth || 3. [ⲛϭⲓ ⲡⲉⲥ]ⲕ̣ⲩⲛⲱⲙⲁ: . . . ⲛⲥⲱⲙⲁ Seyffarth, . . . ⲩⲛⲱⲙⲁ Revillout 1874, (ⲛⲉⲥⲕ)ⲩⲛⲱⲙⲁ Revillout 1885, (ⲛⲛⲉⲥⲕ)ⲩⲛⲱⲙⲁ Revillout 1912, [ⲡⲉⲥⲕ]ⲩⲛⲱⲙⲁ SB Kopt. | ⲛⲧⲙⲁ-: ⲙⲧⲙⲁ- Seyffarth || 5. [ⲙⲡⲙ]ⲁⲕⲁⲣⲓⲟⲥ: (ⲙⲡ)ⲙⲁⲕⲁⲣⲓⲟⲥ Revillout 1874, 1885, 1912, SB Kopt. | ⲥⲉⲩⲏⲣⲟⲥ: ⲥⲉⲩⲉⲣⲟⲥ Seyffarth || 6. ⲇⲉ: ϫⲉ Seyffarth, - Revillout 1912 || 8. ⲟ ⲡϭ(ⲟⲓ)ⲥ: . . . Revillout 1874, 1885, SB Kopt., . . . (ϣⲗⲏⲗ) Revillout 1912 || 9. [ⲛ]ⲧⲉ: ⲧⲉ Revillout 1874, 1885, SB Kopt. | ⲡϫⲟⲉⲓⲥ: ⲡϫⲟⲉⲕ Seyffarth, ⲡϫⲟⲉⲓⲉ Revillout 1912 | ⲁⲁⲥ: . . . Revillout16 1874, 1885, SB Kopt., (ⲁⲁⲥ ⲛ) Revillout 1912 || 10. [ⲛ]ⲙⲡϣⲁ: ⲙ̄ⲡϣⲁ Revillout 1874, 1885, SB Kopt., ⲙⲛϣⲁ Revillout 1912 || 10-11. ⲕⲗⲏ|[ⲣⲟ]: (ⲕⲗⲏⲣⲟ) Revillout 1874, 1885, 1912, SB Kopt. || 11. ⲛⲉⲧ-: ⲛ(ⲉⲧ) Revillout 1874, 1885, 1912, SB Kopt. || 13. ⲁⲡⲟ: ⲁⲛⲟ Revillout 1912 || 14. ⲭ̅ⲝ̅ⲃ̅: ⲗⲝⲃ Seyffarth || 15. ⲥⲁⲣⲁⲅⲉⲛⲟⲥ: ⲥⲁⲣⲁⲅⲉⲛⲇ Seyffarth, ⲥⲁⲣⲁⲅⲁⲛⲟⲥ Revillout 1874, 1885, 1912, SB Kopt.

+ O Holy Trinity! Here lie the mortal remains of the blessed [ . ]aqo, the daughter of the blessed Severus. She went to rest on the 17^th of the month Phamenoth. O Lord! – that the Lord may make her worthy to take up inheritance together with all the saints. Amen, so be it! + (Year) since Diocletian, 662; (since) the Saracens, 334.

This and the next item belong to a small group of textually very similar stelae that on the basis of both internal and external criteria can be attributed to Abydos or its close vicinity (Balyana). For a discussion of the entire group and a textual and historical commentary, see the most recent re-edition, where the anacoluthon of ll. 8-9 is also discussed.

Cat. 7131.

Fig. 10

Epitaph of a woman Maleu. Turin, Museo Egizio, Cat. 7131. Photo by Nicola Dell’Aquila and Federico Taverni/Museo Egizio.

[☩ Ἡ Ἁ]γία Τριάς, ἐ-

1-2. ἐ|[λέ]υσων ὑμᾶς: ἐλέησον ἡμᾶς || 4-5. ⲡⲉⲥⲕ(ⲁⲓ)ⲛ{ⲏ}ⲱ|ⲙⲁ: ⲡⲉⲥⳤⲛⲏⲱ|ⲙⲁ stone, σκήνωμα || 7. ⲙⲁⲗ̣ⲏⲩ: perhaps read ⲙⲁϣ̣ⲏⲩ || 9. ⲡⲉⲡⲣⲏⲥⲃⲉⲧⲉⲣⲟⲥ: πρεσβύτερος | [ⲧ]ⲁ̣ϣ: ⲧⲟϣ || 10. ⲧⲉ: δέ | ⲙⲟⲥ: ⲙⲙⲟⲥ || 10-11. ⲛⲁⲗ|ⲕ(ⲁⲓ): ⲛⲁⲗ|ⳤ stone, ⲛⲁⲗⲕⲉ || 11. ⲡϭ(ⲟⲓ)ⲥ: ⲡⲟ̅ⲥ̅ stone || 12. ⲛⲁϫⲥ ⲁⲕⲟⲩⲛϥ: ⲛⲟϫⲥ ⲉⲕⲟⲩⲛϥ || 13. ⲓ̣ⲁ̣ⲕⲟⲃ: ⲓⲁⲕⲱⲃ || 14. ⲙⲡⲟⲩⲛⲁϥ: ⲙⲡⲟⲩⲛⲟϥ || 16. ⲉϥⲉϣⲟⲡⲉ: ⲉϥⲉϣⲱⲡⲉ || 17. ⲥⲁⲣⲁⲕ(ⲁⲓ)ⲛⲟⲥ: ⲥⲁⲣⲁⳤⲛⲟⲥ stone, Σαρακηνῶν.

+ O Holy Trinity, have mercy upon us! Here lie the mortal remains of the blessed Maleu, of sweet memory, the daughter of the blessed Menas, priest of this diocese. She went to rest on the last day of Choiak. May the Lord make her recline in the bosom of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, in the paradise of delight, so that she will take up inheritance with all the saints. Amen, so be it. (Year) since the Saracens, 338; since Diocletian, 666.

This epitaph is a companion piece to the previous item, which presents a very similar text, even though they were probably produced by different scribes and masons. For a discussion of its provenance and context and a detailed commentary, see the editio princeps.

Suppl. 133855 (second text).

Fig. 11

Funerary monument of a woman, Tse. Turin, Museo Egizio, Suppl. 1338 (second text). Photo by Nicola Dell’Aquila and Federico Taverni/Museo Egizio.

+ Εἷ-

+ One God! Tse, (daughter of) Meneshe. +

Stelae with an aedicula decoration and a text consisting of the εἷς θεός acclamation and the name of the deceased only are characteristic of the southern parts of Upper Egypt and common, for instance, at Esna (Latopolis).56 Another example, with the same textual format, is provided by our no. 13, which is presumably from Hermonthis (Armant). Stylistically, however, the present monument is rather different from the stelae typically attributed to Esna or Hermonthis (well illustrated by nos. 13-15 below).18

The name of the (female) owner, Tse, may be a variant of Tsa, “Beauty”.57 Meneshe is assumed here to be her father’s name, yet it seems to be unattested elsewhere. Alternatively, the entire group of ll. 4-6, could be read as a single name of the popular type beginning with the group ⲧⲥⲉ-, etymologically “daughter of”, so ⲧⲥⲏⲙⲏⲛⲉϣⲏ, Tsemeneshe.58

Suppl. 133859 (first text).

Fig. 12

Fragmentary commemorative inscription. Turin, Museo Egizio, Suppl. 1338 (first text). Photo by Nicola Dell’Aquila and Federico Taverni/Museo Egizio.

[ - - - - - - - - ]σκος Π̣ολι-

4. ]υ̣πατ[ . ]ησκη: perhaps Κλε]υπατ[ρ]η σκη- (Łajtar)? or ε]ὔπατ[ρ]ης (for -ις) κη-??

[ - - - ]skos Poli[ - - - ]os erected [ - - - ] this wall [ - - - ] . . . [ - - - ] . . . very well [ - - - ] having transferred [ - - -].

Not enough of the text survives to allow a confident reconstruction. The inevitably somewhat hypothetical interpretation proposed here owes a great deal to the expertise of my colleague Adam Łajtar, University of Warsaw. The inscription may be commemorating the erection or restoration of a building or part of building (cf. ll. 2-3) by a benefactor or benefactors whose names and functions were probably detailed in ll. 1-2. There is nothing in the preserved parts of the inscription to connect it with a Christian milieu.

Suppl. 1337.

Fig. 13

Funerary monument of a man, Ketatios. Turin, Museo Egizio, Suppl. 1337. Photo by Nicola Dell’Aquila and Federico Taverni/Museo Egizio.

Εἷς θεός. Κετά-

One God! Ketatios. +

According to its first editor, Gustave Lefebvre, the stela was acquired by Schiaparelli in the Fayum, together with our no. 2. Lefebvre (followed by Peterson) therefore attributed the stela to the Fayum, although with a question mark. This provenance is not confirmed by the museum documentation and is certainly incorrect.60 Its material (sandstone), decoration and text firmly link this piece to the area of Hermonthis (Armant), south-west of ancient Thebes.61 A much similar stela of the Hermonthis type is our no. 14, below. For the textual format, the εἷς θεός acclamation followed merely by a name, compare our no. 11 above.

The name of the deceased, Ketatios, is uncommon, but the readings are indubitable. At some point, Lefebvre seems to have envisaged the possibility of splitting it up as κε (for κ(ύρι)ε ?) and Τάτιος, since the latter name is quoted in his indices,62 though not adopted in his edition of the text. Peterson suggested that the entire group, including the cross, might have to be read as κὲ (for καὶ ?) ὁ Χριστός.63 Neither of these alternative readings are acceptable. Ketatios looks like a Latin name. Cedatius might be a good candidate, even though it is attested only rarely.64

Suppl. 18116.

Fig. 14

Funerary monument of a woman, Mariamme. Turin, Museo Egizio, Suppl. 18116. Photo by Nicola Dell’Aquila and Federico Taverni/Museo Egizio.

Μαρι̣ά̣μμη. [Ο-]

1-2. ο|ὐτίς: οὐδείς || 3-4. κόσμ|ͅ: κόσμῷ.

Mariamme. Nobody is immortal in this world.

Stylistically and iconographically, this funerary monument belongs to the same class as our no. 13. Although acquired at different moments in time, both can be confidently assigned to the region of Hermonthis. The present text shows a different format, though. Here the name of the deceased is followed by the originally pre-Christian formula “nobody is immortal in this world”. Often preceded by μὴ λυπῇς, “do not grieve”, it addresses the deceased through the agency of the reader. It occurs in Greek and in Coptic forms throughout Upper Egypt and Lower Nubia, but is particularly frequent in the region between Thebes and Edfu.65

The name Mariamme (Mariame), apparently a hellenization of Mariam, occurs in Christian Egypt and Nubia, in both Greek and Coptic contexts.66

Suppl. 18125. The front bears the Arabic number 978 in black ink.

Fig. 15

Funerary monument of a woman, Thermouthis (?). Turin, Museo Egizio, Suppl. 18125. Photo by Nicola Dell’Aquila and Federico Taverni/Museo Egizio.

[ⲑⲉⲣ]ⲙⲟⲩⲑⲓⲥ ϫⲓ ⲛⲥⲓⲗⲡ̣ⲁ̣ⲛ̣[ⲟⲥ]

The text merely identifies the deceased. Neither her name nor that of her father can be deciphered with full certainty. Given the space available at the beginning of the line, the popular name Thermouthis or Termouthis is a reasonable guess.67 In the father’s name, everything beyond Sil- is conjectural; the name Silvanus is usually spelt ⲥⲓⲗⲃⲁⲛⲟⲥ, but a beta cannot be read here. The ⲃ / ⲡ swap occurs infrequently in all regions of Egypt and Nubia.68 The form of the filiation formula, ϫⲓ ⲛ- for ⲧϣⲉ ⲛ-, is found fairly often in southern epitaphs.69

Donadoni describes the stela as “forse da Assiut” (“perhaps from Asyut”),70 which is certainly incorrect. The style and elements of its decoration rank it with a numerous class of funerary monuments, generally considered to come from the region of Esna.71

Provv. 1580.

Fig. 16

Fragmentary epitaph of the Totenklage-type. Turin, Museo Egizio, Provv. 1580. Photo by Nicola Dell’Aquila and Federico Taverni/Museo Egizio.

[⁘ ※ ⲓ(ⲏⲥⲟⲩ)ⲥ ⲭ(ⲣⲓⲥⲧⲟ)ⲥ ⲛⲁ] ⲛⲁϥ ※ ⁘

2. -ⲕⲁⲧ]ⲉ̣ⲗⲩ: καταλύω || 8. perhaps ⲧ]ⲡ̣ⲓ̣ϩ̣ ⲧⲡ[ⲟ]\ⲗ/(ⲓⲥ)

+ + Jesus-Christ, have mercy upon him + + O, indissoluble and irreversible verdict! O, [ - - - ]! Woe to us, human beings, that we [ - - - ] without boat, until we make this [ - - - ] pious . . . [ - - - ] . . . , namely Apou’s-Sorour [ - - - ] alone (?) [ - - - ] . . . , the city [ - - - ]. God of the spirits and Lord of all flesh, may you grant rest to his blessed soul [ - - - ], in the place of repose, in the bosom of our holy fathers, the patriarchs, Abraham and Isaac and Jacob [ - - - ].

1. Tentatively reconstructed after the acclamation at the top of the lost stela of Patarmoute from Qasr Ibrim in Nubia (SB Kopt. IV, 2109, l. 1; cf. Van der Vliet, JEA 92 [2006], pp. 220–21, in the reprint, pp. 319–21); a similar acclamation in Greek, Θ(εὸ)ς ἐλεήμων, “Merciful God!”, is found at the top of the Berlin stela of a woman Elisabeth, presumably from northern Nubia (Koerner, AfP 18 [1966], p. 44, ll. 1-2, cf. pp. 45–46).

2. For this line, compare the very similar opening lines of the Totenklage-stela of a girl Mary (Paris, Bibliothèque nationale, date and provenance unknown; SBKopt I, 465; Cramer, Totenklage, 1941, no. 9), ll. 1-3: ⲱ ⲁⲡⲟⲫⲁⲥⲓⲥ ⲛⲁⲧⲡⲁ|ⲣⲁⲓⲧⲉⲓ ⲙⲙⲟⲥ ⲁⲩⲱ ⲛⲁⲧ|ⲃⲱⲗ ⲉⲃⲟⲗ, “O irrevocable and indissoluble verdict!”; and the Totenklage-stela of a priest George, from Antinoopolis (Ansina no. 414, reproduced in Ahmad Mustafa Abd-al-Aziz, “Collection of Coptic Tombstones”, 2014, p. 273, pl. 14), ll. 3-4: ⲧⲉⲫⲱⲛⲏ ⲛⲁⲧⲕⲧ|ⲟⲥ, “the irreversible pronouncement” (my readings; I thank Ibrahim Saweros, University of Sohag, for this reference). In all of these cases, God’s verdict over Adam is meant (Gen. 3:19), verbally quoted in the stela of George; cf. Van der Vliet, in Łajtar and Van der Vliet (eds.), Nubian Voices, 2011, pp. 202–09 (in the reprint, pp. 404–08).

4. My extremely uncertain readings and interpretation of this line are inspired by the voyage imagery of several of the Totenklage-stelae, in particular Cramer, Totenklage, 1941, nos. 3, 4 and 7 (SBKopt I, 781, 782 and 464); cf. Cramer, Totenklage, 1941, pp. 39 and 50–51. Accordingly, I take the entire passage of ll. 3-4 to mean something like: “Woe to us that we must go abroad without a boat, so as to make this distant crossing”. In [ϣⲁ]ⲧⲉⲛⲓ̈ⲣⲉ, the lacuna is too small for a reading of the standard form [ϣⲁⲛ]ⲧⲉⲛⲓ̈ⲣⲉ and too wide, for instance, for [ⲉⲛ]ⲧⲉⲛⲓ̈ⲣⲉ. If indeed ⲓ̈ⲣⲉ stands for ⲉⲓⲣⲉ and ⲧⲉⲓ̣̈- is the head of a nominal object, an object marker would be missing.

5. Apparently, this line marks the beginning of the naming lemma, which appears to continue at least to l. 8. The first legible word, ]ⲛⲁⲡⲁⲕ̣ⲏⲥ, must be (part of) a substantive or adjective, most likely referring to a person, qualified as “pious” in the same phrase.23 Note that instead of the doubtful kappa, a lambda, chi or alpha could also be read. It is hardly the rare and archaic word ἀβακής, “mild, gentle”, in spite of its suitable meaning.

6. The occurrence of an Arabic name, Abû’l-Surûr, confirms the late date suggested by the paleography. For this name in Coptic sources, see Heuser, Prosopographie, 1938, p. 14; Legendre in Boud’hors et al. (eds.), Coptica Argentoratensia, 2014, p. 429. It could be the name or, more likely, the surname of the owner of the stela or his father.

7. The remains of this line defy interpretation. ⲙⲱⲛⲟⲥ might stand for μόνος or μόνως.

8. The abbreviation of the word πόλις with a monogram (writing the ο inside and the λ on top of the π) is particularly frequent in medieval inscriptions (see Förster, Wörterbuch, 2002, pp. 659–60). What precedes may be a toponym, but cannot be deciphered with any certainty; if a toponym, ⲧ]ⲡ̣ⲓ̣ϩ̣, for modern Atfîh in Middle Egypt, might fit the very faint traces.

9-10. Largely lost in the huge gap between the two fragments.

11. Here starts a prayer of the “God of the spirits”-type, tentatively reconstructed after the epitaph of a priest Stephen, from Esna, of AD 1104 (Sauneron and Coquin, in Livre du centenaire, 1980, pp. 259–60, no. 57, ll. 14-20).

12. Note the use and the position of the superlinear stroke, elsewhere in the text replaced by ⲉ.

15-16. We read ⲙ]ⲉⲛ ⲉⲓ̈ⲁ|[ⲕⲱⲃ, “and Jacob”, since it seems likely that Abraham and Isaac were mentioned earlier. Alternatively, ]ⲉⲛⲉⲓ̈ⲁ could be the ending of a Greek noun.

These two fragments contain the remains of an epitaph, composed for a man, perhaps named or surnamed Abû’l-Surûr (l. 6). Just enough of the text survives to show that it adhered to the format of the Totenklage-stelae, epitaphs inscribed with a funerary lament.72 As the stelae of the Totenklage-genre show a great deal of textual variation, a satisfactory reconstruction of the extremely fragmentary text proves very difficult.

The text begins with the laments that are proper to the genre, about the inevitability of death and the human condition in general (ll. 2-3), while ll. 3-4 may refer to the image of death as a journey. From l. 5 onwards, the deceased appears to be introduced and l. 8 may have mentioned his home city. Lines 9-10 are almost entirely lacking. In l. 11, the invocation “God of the spirits” appears to mark the beginning of the prayer section, which allows for only a very partial reconstruction (our ll. 11-16).

The Coptic redaction of the famous, originally Greek funerary prayer “God of the spirits” (here ll. 11-16) seems to make its appearance in Egyptian funerary epigraphy only at a rather late date, not before the eighth century.73 Also the paleography and the occurrence of an Arabic name in l. 6 favor a date towards the turn of the millennium.

The genre of the Totenklage-epitaphs is generally believed to have had its epicenter in early Islamic Antinoopolis.74 The present piece is not only a rather late representative of the genre, but also certainly stems from much farther south. The material, brittle reddish sandstone, suggests a provenance in southern Upper Egypt, perhaps as far south as Aswan, where a single fragmentary example has been discovered in the ruins of the famous Saint Hadra monastery.75

Index of names in the edited texts

Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, patriarchs	10, 12-13; 16, 15-16 (?)
Abû’l-Surûr, masc. pers.	16, 6 (ⲁⲡⲟⲩⲥⲥⲟⲣ[ⲟⲩⲣ])
Betir, masc. pers.	5, 13
Chri[ ... ], masc. pers.	2, 2
Diocletian, emperor	2, 6; 7, 2; 9, 14; 10, 17-18
Elijah, masc. pers.	5, 5 (ⲁⲡⲁ ϩⲏⲗⲓⲁ̣[ⲥ])
Epimache, masc. pers.	4, 4
Gerosa, fem. pers.	1
Jesus Christ	4, 11; 8, 16-17; (16, 1)
John, masc. pers.	5, 12-13 (ⲓⲱ[ϩ]ⲁⲛⲛⲏⲥ)
Ketatios, masc. pers.	13, 1-2
Maleu (?), fem. pers.	10, 7 (ⲙⲁⲗ̣ⲏⲩ)
Mariamme, fem. pers.	14, 1
Menas, masc. pers.	10, 8 (ⲙⲏⲛⲁ)
Meneshe, masc. pers. (?)	11, 5-6 (ⲙⲏⲛⲉϣⲏ)
Noute, masc. pers.	8, 12
Pamoune Psobt, top.	5, 9-10; 5, 13-14
Poli[ ... ], masc. pers. (?)	12, 1-2
Phoibammon, masc. pers.	3, 8-9 (ⲫⲟⲓⲃⲁⲙⲱⲛ); 5, 8-9
Saracens, people	9, 15; 10, 17
Severus, masc. pers.	9, 5 (ⲥⲉⲩⲏⲣⲟⲥ)
Silvanus, masc. pers.	15 (ⲥⲓⲗⲡ̣ⲁ̣ⲛ̣[ⲟⲥ])
Thermouthis (?), fem. pers.	15
Tse, fem. pers.	11, 4 (ⲧⲥⲏ)
Victor, masc. pers.	5, 1 (ⲁⲡⲁ ⲃⲓⲕⲧⲱ[ⲣ])
[ . ]aqo, fem. pers.	9, 4 ([ . ]ⲁϭⲱ)