The Classical Review

http://journals.cambridge.org/CAR

Additional services for The Classical Review:

Email alerts: Click here

Subscriptions: Click here
Commercial reprints: Click here
Terms of use : Click here

ROMAN THEBES. D. Klotz Caesar in the City of

Amun. Egyptian Temple Construction and
Theology in Roman Thebes. (Monographies Reine
Élisabeth 15.) Pp. xviii + 476, ill., map. Turnhout:
Brepols, 2012. Paper, €95. ISBN: 978-2-503-54515-8.

Erin A. Peters

The Classical Review / Volume 65 / Issue 01 / April 2015, pp 218 - 220

DOI: 10.1017/S0009840X14002340, Published online: 21 November 2014

Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0009840X14002340

How to cite this article:

Erin A. Peters (2015). The Classical Review, 65, pp 218-220 doi:10.1017/
S0009840X14002340

Request Permissions : Click here

Downloaded from http://journals.cambridge.org/CAR, IP address: 128.178.131.113 on 23 Mar 2015

218 T H E C L A S S I CA L R E V I E W

retrospectively nor ideologically. The section on philology, somewhat strangely, only con-
siders Ovid (pp. 247–67, some three times the space given to the historical context of 27–
23 B.C.E.). The final chapter in conclusion considers the deified Augustus. One wonders
why the title of the book is Divus Augustus. There is a section on the views on
Augustus in the ancient world, as in the Totengericht of Tacitus in the Annales. There
is no other summation and the views of scholars, mentioned prominently in the foreword,
are ignored.
This book falls short of its own goal. Ever since K.-J. Hölkeskamp complained that
M. Beard failed to give due recognition to the work of T. Itgenshorst on the Roman tri-
umph (the only entry of recent scholarship on the Roman triumph is in fact Itgenshorst
[p. 299]) it has also become acceptable to complain about the German tradition and its
lack of acknowledgement of foreign approaches and scholarship (K.-J. Hölkeskamp,
‘Review of M. Beard, The Roman Triumph, Cambridge (Mass.) 2007’, Gnomon 82
[2010], 130–6; see the debate on the matter in BICS 2011 between M. Crawford and
Hölkeskamp). This book’s bibliography is at times rather outdated and too often ignores
much important work in other languages (curiously, the three bibliographies are composed
differently). And even taking into account that a range of scholarship in German, French,
Italian and English is mentioned in the bibliography, for further reading no doubt, the
debates and information from these volumes of scholarship are often not apparent in the
actual text of this book. The intensive scholarship of the last 20 years on Augustus at
times seems to have eluded the authors.

Aalborg University, Denmark C.H. LANGE

[email protected]

ROMAN THEBES
K L O T Z ( D . ) Caesar in the City of Amun. Egyptian Temple Construction
and Theology in Roman Thebes. (Monographies Reine Élisabeth 15.) Pp.
xviii + 476, ill., map. Turnhout: Brepols, 2012. Paper, E95. ISBN:
978-2-503-54515-8.
doi:10.1017/S0009840X14002340

Scholarship of Roman Egypt has taken a positive turn in the last decade, with a number of
recent studies emphasising survival, success and local and imperial support for Egypt as a
Roman province. K.’s book, which developed from his doctoral dissertation (Yale, 2008),
is an important contribution in this scholarly revision. The book synthesises textual evi-
dence for local theology, temple construction and religious festivals in Roman Thebes,
with the general aim to provide a reconstruction of religious life. K. succeeds admirably,
advancing a positive picture that markedly contrasts with long-held scholarly paradigms
that denigrate religion in Egypt’s Roman period. As K. aptly notes (p. 2), the study of
this period has fallen outside the purview of Egyptologists and Classicists, remaining
instead with those who specialise in Late Antiquity. With the focus on Late Antiquity,
scholars used religion in the Roman period to explain the end of millennia of pharaonic
religion and the ‘triumph’ of Christianity. K.’s contrasting approach keeps more with
recent developments in the study of Roman Egypt that consider connections between
the imperial present and pharaonic past rather than its Christian future, allowing him to
contend that religious life in Roman Thebes continued to develop vibrantly with flourish-
ing cults through official imperial and priestly support. With this revaluation, this book is

The Classical Review 65.1 218–220 © The Classical Association (2015)

 T H E C L A S S I CA L R E V I E W 219
an essential addition to a growing body of scholarship that reframes Roman Egypt as both
a continually successful era of Egyptian history and an integral part of the Roman Empire.1
The book consists of a preface, seven chapters, a map of Theban temples, an impressive
55-page bibliography and a typological index that includes a list of texts translated by K. –
many of which are published here for the first time. In this first comprehensive publication
of texts associated with Roman-period Theban monuments, K. expertly brings together
evidence to build a picture of thriving religious life in Roman Thebes.
The first three chapters are introductory in nature and comprise a cohesive overview to
ideas held about Thebes in modern scholarship, and in ancient sources from both the wider
Graeco-Roman world and within Egypt itself. Chapter 1, ‘Introduction’, provides a themat-
ic overview of previous scholarship on religion in Roman Egypt. Whereas scholars gener-
ally see the annexation of Egypt in 30 B.C. under Octavian as the beginning of the decline
of Egyptian religion (and culture in general), K. understands this paradigm as a ‘grossly
exaggerated myth’ (p. 4). K. calls attention to the unreliability of Roman literary sources,
which imagine a negative Egypt under Augustus (e.g. Suet. Aug. 2.18 and Dio Cass.
51.16.3–17.5). Rather, K. observes the ‘narrative of the decline and fall of Egyptian tem-
ples in the Roman period finds little support in archaeological or textual evidence’ (p. 2).
In order to elucidate further the problematic use of classical sources as reliable accounts,
Chapter 2, ‘Roman Visitors to Thebes’, brings together Roman authors who specifically
mention Thebes. K. places most weight on those who probably visited Thebes, including
Strabo (27–26 B.C.), Pausanias (c. A.D. 140–170) and Ammianus Marcellinus (after A.D.
360). Contrary to most modern interpretations of these sources, K. categorises these
Roman-period accounts of Thebes as ‘quite positive or simply neutral’ (p. 30). Chapter
3, ‘The Reputation of Thebes’, turns to both Greek and Latin sources dealing with the
Egyptian priesthood and Egyptian geographical inscriptions in Roman-period temples,
the latter of which refer to Thebes as ‘mistress of cities’, and ‘heaven upon earth’.
K. takes these epitaphs as proof that Thebes continued to be seen as the traditional religious
capital of Egypt throughout the Roman period.
The next three chapters create a sourcebook for religion in Roman Thebes and serve as
the core of the study. Chapter 4, ‘The Theban Pantheon’, provides the first catalogue of
Theban deities in the Ptolemaic and Roman periods. This catalogue documents 54 individ-
ual or groups of deities through detailed line-by-line translation of and commentary on
temple texts, graffiti, ostraca, papyri and inscriptions on statues. K. reconstructs the
Theban pantheon in the Roman period while connecting it to its pharaonic precedents,
thereby demonstrating its continued vitality. Chapter 5, ‘Temple Activity in the Roman
Period’, uses all known architectural and epigraphic evidence for Roman-period temple
activity in Thebes from Augustus to Constantine to gauge the scope of official support
for the Theban pantheon. K.’s meticulous compilation of temple building activity shows
the extent to which individual Roman emperors supported the Theban area with many

1
E.g. G. Hölbl, Altägypten im Römischen Reich 1–3 (2000–2005); G. Dundas,
Historia 51 (2002), 433–48; L. Capponi, Augustan Egypt: the Creation of a Roman
Province (2005); A. Bowman in Regime Change in the Ancient Near East and Egypt
(2007), pp. 165–81; F. Herklotz, Prinzeps und Pharao: Der Kult des Augustus in
Ägypten (2007); K. Lembke, M. Minas-Nerpel and S. Pfeiffer (edd.), Tradition and
Transformation: Egypt under Roman Rule (2010); S. Pfeiffer, Der römische Kaiser und
das Land am Nil (2010); M.J. Versluys in Isis on the Nile: Egyptian Gods in
Hellenistic and Roman Egypt (2010), pp. 7–36; A. Monson, From the Ptolemies to the
Romans: Political and Economic Change in Egypt (2012); C. Riggs (ed.), The Oxford
Handbook of Roman Egypt (2012); and A. Boozer, AJA 117 (2013), 275–92.
220 T H E C L A S S I CA L R E V I E W

building projects. A tremendous value of this chapter is K.’s assessment of each emperor’s
building programme in Thebes in relation to his temple building programmes in the wider
empire, which prove to be comparable. This conclusion counters the scholarly theory that
Roman Egypt was unique and unrelated to the rest of the empire. Chapter 6, ‘Theban
Festivals’, analyses the texts that contain the most complete references to the festivals at
Thebes; these include temple inscriptions at Medinet Habu and Deir Shelwit and papyri
P. Louvre N. 3176 (S) and P. Leiden II 32. From these sources, K. compiles a list of
daily and decade festivals along with five annual festivals that were performed in
Roman-period Thebes and discusses these festivals as evidence of the continued religious
use of the structures catalogued in the previous chapter.
Chapter 7, ‘Epilogue’, suggests connections between the rich intellectual milieu of the
Theban priesthood and philosophers in the wider empire. K. proposes a dialogue between
Theban priests and international philosophers of the Second Sophistic because of allusions
to Kneph / Kmeph in the works of third-century A.D. Abammon and Porphyry. Although
speculative, this epilogue admirably calls attention to the connectedness of Egyptian reli-
gion and philosophy to the rest of the Roman Empire.
K.’s book is useful for a broader discussion of Egypt in the Roman period, even though
the scope is limited to the ‘religious nome’ of Thebes from the reign of Augustus (30 B.C.–
A.D. 14) to Constantine (A.D. 306–337). Although K. uses temple texts and inscribed
objects as primary evidence, more thorough discussion of the material would be welcome,
as architecture, relief, sculpture and religious donations only appear in relation to how they
support texts, with the exception of corn mummies fashioned for Osiris during the month
of Khoiak (p. 392). It is problematic that K. does not include images, line drawings or
plans for any of the material under discussion. It would be equally helpful to include
images of the original texts, as the majority are only given in transliteration, with a few
in typeset hieroglyphic and demotic.
K. has produced an excellent sourcebook for the deities in the local pantheon of Roman
Thebes, the temples constructed to house them and the festivals to honour them. This
sourcebook conveniently makes available textual evidence for religion in Roman
Thebes; it is well-written, includes copious footnotes and contains few copy-editing errors.

University of Iowa ERIN A. PETERS

[email protected]

VIOLENCE IN EGYPT
B R Y E N ( A . Z . ) Violence in Roman Egypt. A Study in Legal
Interpretation. Pp. x + 363, ills. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania
Press, 2013. Cased, £49, US$75. ISBN: 978-0-8122-4508-0.
doi:10.1017/S0009840X14002157

This monograph seeks to explore ancient stories of violence in order to understand how
and why ordinary people in Egypt contacted Roman magistrates and used law courts to
redefine their relationships with each other. This aim is an extension of B.’s Chicago dis-
sertation (2009) which focused on the expression and construction of pain and personal
violation narrated in the petitions of Egypt’s papyrological record. Marshalling petitions,
protocols of court proceedings and the occasional papyrus letter from approximately 30
B.C. to the reign of Justinian, B. reproduces and translates these in extenso with close read-
ings. He shows how the interlaced legal traditions of the day offered means for

The Classical Review 65.1 220–222 © The Classical Association (2015)