Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-75dct Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-08T22:20:00.532Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

ALEXANDRIA AD AEGYPTVM: THE (DIS)CONNECTION BETWEEN ALEXANDRIA AND EGYPT

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 October 2022

Ruben De Graaf*
Affiliation:
Radboud University, Nijmegen

Abstract

The ancient city of Alexandria was often referred to as Alexandria ad Aegyptum in Roman documentary, epigraphic and literary sources; this phrase was translated in Greek as ἡ Ἀλεξάνδρεια ἡ πρὸς Αἰγύπτῳ. The grammatical phrasing implies that Alexandria was seen as being ‘near’ or ‘next to’ Egypt, not ‘in’ Egypt. This observation has given rise to the scholarly view that Alexandria was not part of Egypt. In this article the function of the designation ad Aegyptum and of similar designations within literary, papyrological and epigraphic sources ranging from 300 b.c.e. to 640 c.e. will be closely examined. This article argues that the expression can be seen as reflecting both the distinction and the close connection between Alexandria and Egypt on the basis of geographical, political and socio-cultural factors.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

This article results from my research in the project A Powerful City: Alexandria in Greek and Roman Egypt, supervised by Janneke de Jong. I would like to express my gratitude for her comments and suggestions. Furthermore, I would like to thank the referees for their comments and suggestions.

References

1 For an overview of the changes in the administration of Egypt, see Capponi, L., Augustan Egypt: The Creation of a Roman Province (London, 2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 In a trilingual inscription (IPhilae 128) from 29 b.c.e., the first Roman prefect Cornelius Gallus was referred to in Latin as pr(a)efect[us Alex]andreae et Aegypti. The Greek version refers to Gallus as πρῶτος ὑπὸ Καίσ[αρος ἐπὶ] τῆς Αἰγύπτου κατασταθείς. Interestingly, only Egypt is mentioned, without separately mentioning Alexandria.

3 Bell, H.I., ‘Alexandria ad Aegyptum’, JRS 36 (1946), 130–2Google Scholar responding to Schulz, F., ‘Roman registers of births and birth certificates: part II’, JRS 33 (1943), 5564Google Scholar, at 58. Fraser, P.M., ‘Alexandria ad Aegyptum again’, JRS 39 (1949), 56Google Scholar added some further evidence to Bell's account.

4 Stein, A., Untersuchungen zur Geschichte und Verwaltung Ägyptens unter römischer Herrschaft (Stuttgart, 1915), 8590Google Scholar is one of the first who discussed the use of the name Alexandria ad Aegyptum in the documents. He observed that Alexandria and Egypt are often separately mentioned in the titles of Roman functionaries. Arangio-Ruiz, V., ‘L'enigma costituzionale dell'antica Alessandria’, Labeo 5 (1959), 7985Google Scholar discusses the juridical status of Alexandria as a matter of public law, but views it solely as a city near Egypt, failing to account for the evidence that it was also seen as a city in Egypt and therefore missing out on important nuances. Cohen, G.M., The Hellenistic Settlements in Syria, the Red Sea Basin, and North Africa (Berkeley, 2006), 353–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar and 409–23 already studied the designation Alexandria ad Aegyptum and the (dis)connection between Alexandria and Egypt, but focussed mainly on an Egyptian perspective during Ptolemaic times.

5 Fraser, P.M., Ptolemaic Alexandria (Oxford, 1972), 2 vols., 1.107–8Google Scholar.

6 Haas, C., Alexandria in Late Antiquity: Topography and Social Conflict (London, 1997), 7Google Scholar. Haas prefers a geographical explanation of the designation Alexandria ad Aegyptum.

7 Trismegistos Places: www.trismegistos.org/geo/index.php.

8 Thesaurus Linguae Graecae: http://stephanus.tlg.uci.edu/. I used the lemmata “Ἀλεξάνδρεια”, “πρός” and “Αἴγυπτος” in a vicinity of five words.

9 Library of Latin Texts – Online: http://www.brepols.net/Pages/BrowseBySeries.aspx?TreeSeries=LLT-O. Search-string: ‘(%5 Alexandr* Aeg*)’.

10 PHI Greek inscriptions: https://inscriptions.packhum.org/. The search-string ‘πρὸς Αἰγ’ was used. Epigraphische Datenbank Clauss – Slaby: http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/epi.php. Search-string: ‘ad Aeg’.

11 Papyrological Navigator: http://papyri.info/search. Search-string for Greek papyri: “Ἀλεξανδρ* NEAR Αἰγ* NEAR πρός” within five words; search-string for Latin papyri: ‘Alex* NEAR Aeg*’, also within five words.

12 See Calderini, A., Dizionario dei nomi geografici e topografici dell'Egitto greco-romano (Milan, 1986), 4.210–11Google Scholar. For Πτολεμαῒς τῆς Θηβαΐδος see, for example, BGU III 994, 8 (113 b.c.e.); BGU III 996, 7 (c.112 b.c.e.); BGU VI 1249, 6 (136 b.c.e.); P.Grenf. I 27, 4 (109 b.c.e.).

13 One hundred and nine attestations of this reference were found in Greek documents (and one in Latin: ChLA V 301, 19 [147 c.e.]), ranging from the first century b.c.e. to the second century c.e. All attestations were used to designate the place where the document was drawn up as part of the dating formula.

14 See IG XII,1 653, 3–4 (Augustan).

15 Note that Αἴγυπτον is in the accusative case and not in the dative case and thus not used in a locational sense but probably in a relational sense as ‘the Alexandria that is related to Egypt’.

16 Although the designation πρὸς Αἰγύπτῳ is used in the instances mentioned, it is not consequently used in quotations of Hipparchus by Strabo. Alexandria is named eight times in those quotations. In six of the attestations the geographical marker is not used: in Strabo 1.4.1, 2.5.36, 2.5.38 (two times) and 2.5.39 (two times).

17 Oliver, J.H., ‘The ruling power: a study of the Roman empire in the second century after Christ through the Roman oration of Aelius Aristides’, TAPhS 43 (1953), 8711003Google Scholar, at 878–9.

18 K. Nawotka, The Alexander Romance by Ps.-Callisthenes: A Historical Commentary (Leiden, 2017), 3–4.

19 Αἴγυπτον in the accusative, not in the dative. We have already seen this in Hypsicl. Anaph. 63.

20 FHG 3.719.

21 See Zonar. Hypom. in Sophr. Hier. 8; Eust. Comm. in Dionys. Per. 918 (juxtaposed with Σελευκεία τῆς ἐπὶ τῷ Τίγρει); Xanth. Hist. Eccl. 8.5.

22 A.L. Udovitch, ‘Medieval Alexandria: some evidence from the Cairo Genizah documents’, in K. Hamma (ed.), Alexandria and Alexandrianism (Malibu, 1996), 273−83, at 282−3.

23 For more on L. Bovius Celer and the office of procurator ludi familiae gladiatoriae Caesaris, see Kayser, F., ‘La gladiature en Egypte’, REA 102 (2000), 459−78Google Scholar, at 468−9 and H.G. Pflaum, Les carrières procuratoriennes équestres sous le Haut-Empire Romain (Paris, 1960), no. 55.

24 The division between Alexandria and Egypt is more often seen in combination with the title of iuridicus. See Stein (n. 4), 87.

25 This was an official who had certain responsibilities surrounding the Alexandrian harbour that included the issuance of permissions granting departure of ships. See Puk, A., ‘The procuratorship of the Alexandrian Pharos’, ZPE 175 (2010), 227–30Google Scholar.

26 Fernández, R. Gonzáez, ‘Domo Alexandria cat(a) Aegipto(n). Otra peculiaridad de la ciudad que estaba en Egipto’, Myrtia 28 (2013), 343–54Google Scholar.

27 The same expression is used in Aristid. Or. 26.95 ἡ δὲ σεμνὴ καὶ μεγάλη κατ᾿ Αἴγυπτον Ἀλεξάνδρου πόλις, as discussed earlier.

28 Campbell, B., The Roman Army, 31 bc–ad 337: A Sourcebook (London, 1994), no. 329CrossRefGoogle Scholar (bilingual). Note that in line 24 the prefect is not referred to by means of his full title praefectus Alexandreae et Aegypti. The brevity of this reference may be ascribed to the veterans already having indicated their patria as Alexandria ad Aegypto.

29 For declarations of birth and birth certificates, see B. Palme, ‘The range of documentary texts: types and categories’, in R.S. Bagnall (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Papyrology (Oxford, 2009), 358–94, at 379–80; C. Sánchez-Moreno Ellart, ‘Notes on some new issues concerning the birth certificates of Roman citizens’, JJP 34 (2004), 107–19; Schulz, F., ‘Roman registers of births and birth certificates’, JRS 32 (1942), 7891Google Scholar; Schulz (n. 3).

30 Meyer, E.A., Legitimacy and Law in the Roman World: Tabulae in Roman Belief and Practice (Cambridge, 2004), 44CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

31 Meyer (n. 30), 170–83.

32 Schulz (n. 3), 58–9 gives an extensive discussion of the form and recurring clauses of birth certificates, including dating and location formulas.

33 CPL 148, 22; P.Mich. III 166, 2.4; BGU VII 1692, 4; BGU VII 1693, 4; P.Mich. III 168, 6; P.Mich. III 169, 3.4. Other possible abbreviations were CPL 156 line 12: Alexandre(ae) ad Aegyptum; P.Oxy. VI 894 line 3: A]lexandr(iae) ad Ạ[egypt]um; P.Oxy. XXXI 2565 line 5: [Alex][nd](iae) ad Aeg(yptum).

34 See J.G. Wolf, ‘Die Ναυλωτική des Menelaos – Seederlehen oder Seefrachtvertrag?’, in id., Aus dem neuen pompejanischen Urkundenfund: gesammelte Aufsätze (Berlin, 2010), 156–85, at 159–61 for dating and location formulas in different Roman contract forms. The actum-formula is also found in other parts of the Roman empire; cf. the documents of the archive of the Sulpicii (TPSulp.), the Bloomberg Tablets (WT 32, 67) from Britain and P.Mich. III 161 from Caesarea in Mauretania (or Palaestina?).

35 Wolf (n. 34), 160.

36 The military office of praefectus alae is probably meant here, not the praefectus Alexandriae et Aegypti.

37 The uicesima hereditatum was a 5% tax on inheritances higher than 100,000 sestertii by non-relatives that was instituted by Augustus. See OCD 4, s.v. vectigal. What the exact function of the statio uicesimae hereditatum was in relation to this tax remains unknown.

38 ChLA X 416 (late first century b.c.e.), P.Mich. VII 432 (late first century c.e.), P.Mich. VII 433 (110 c.e.), ChLA XLII 1207 (153 c.e.), P.Horak 13 (177/8 c.e.), P.Oxy. VI 899 (200 c.e.), W.Chr. 115 (222–234 c.e.) and CPR XXIV 2 (late fourth or early fifth century c.e.).

39 The full formula is ἐν τῇ λαμπρο(τάτῃ) καὶ φιλοχρίστῳ πόλει τῶν Ἀλεξ̣ανδρέ(ων) τῇ πρὸς Αἰγ(ύπτῳ) or ἐν τῇ λαμπρο(τάτῃ) καὶ φιλοχρ(ίστ)ῳ̣ Ἀλεξ(ανδρείᾳ) τῇ πρὸς Αἰγ(ύπτῳ).

40 This explanation is also upheld by Haas (n. 6), 33 and Cohen (n. 4), 422−3. Bernand, A., ‘Une capitale “en marge”’, in id., Alexandrie des Ptolémées (Paris, 1995), 31−45Google Scholar, at 31−2 states that Alexandria was a ‘capitale “en marge”’, signifying its geographical location as a border city.

41 Hdt. 2.18.2. See Cohen (n. 4), 422 and Lloyd, A.B., Herodotus Book II: Commentary 1–98 (Leiden, 1976), 87–9Google Scholar. Lloyd especially stresses the ‘strong infusion of Libyan elements’ in the western Delta.

42 Translation from Bevan, E.R., The House of Ptolemy: A History of Egypt Under the Ptolemaic Dynasty (Chicago, 1968), 2832Google Scholar.

43 Huß, W., Münchener Beiträge zur Papyrusforschung Heft 104: Die Verwaltung des ptolemaiischen Reichs (Munich, 2013), 24Google Scholar.

44 See Griffiths, J.G., ‘Hecataeus and Herodotus on “a Gift of the River”’, JNES 25 (1966), 5761Google Scholar. Strabo 1.2.29 and 15.1.16 expand upon this tradition.

45 Strabo 17.1.4–5. See also 17.1.21 ἡ δὲ μεταξὺ τοῦ Νείλου καὶ τοῦ Ἀραβίου κόλπου Ἀραβία μέν ἐστι (‘The land between the Nile and the Arabian Gulf is Arabia’).

46 Strabo 17.1.5.

47 Strabo 17.1.24 Πηλούσιον ἐν τῇ Ἀραβίᾳ.

48 Venit, M.S., ‘Alexandria’, in Riggs, C., The Oxford Handbook of Roman Egypt (Oxford, 2012), 103–21Google Scholar, at 104.

49 P.W. Pestman (ed.), Greek and Demotic Texts from the Zenon Archive (P.L. Bat. 20) (Leiden, 1980), 169–71.

50 This is especially interesting because the geographical position of Pelusium was also disputed. This city was sometimes situated in Arabia, as we have seen in Strabo 17.1.24.

51 Arangio-Ruiz (n. 4). É. Will et al., Le monde grec et l'Orient (Paris, 1975), 2.467–8 n. 2 and Cohen (n. 4), 413–14 try to explain this special status by comparing it to the extra-territorial statuses of respectively the modern capitals of Paris and Washington, D.C.

52 L. Koenen, ‘Die Apologie des Töpfers an König Amenophis oder das Töpferorakel’, in A. Blasius and B.U. Schipper (edd.), Apokalyptik und Ägypten: Eine kritische Analyse der relevanten Texte aus dem griechisch-römischen Ägypten (Leuven, 2002), 139–87 and W. Huß, Der makedonische König und die ägyptischen Priester: Studien zur Geschichte des ptolemaiischen Ägypten (Stuttgart, 1994), 166.

53 Huß (n. 52), 171 n. 661.

54 Huß (n. 52), 172–3 and Koenen (n. 52), 159.

55 SEG III 378, B.8–10 καὶ πρὸς τὸν βασιλέα τὸν ἐν τ̣[ῇ ν]ήσῳ Κύπρωι βασιλεύοντα καὶ πρὸς τὸν βασιλ[έα τὸν ἐν Ἀλε]ξανδρείαι καὶ Αἰγύπ[τωι βασιλεύοντα καὶ πρὸς τὸν βασιλέα τὸν ἐν Κυρήνῃ βασιλεύοντα καὶ πρ[ὸ]ς̣ τοὺς βασιλεῖς τοὺς ἐν Συρίαι βασιλεύον[τας …

56 Caes. BCiu. 3.104 Alexandriam Aegyptumque.

57 Cass. Dio 50.24.5 πῶς δ’ οὐκ ἂν ἡμεῖς μεγάλως ἀσχημονήσαιμεν, εἰ πάντων ἀρετῇ πανταχοῦ περιόντες ἔπειτα τὰς τούτων ὕβρεις πρᾴως φέροιμεν, οἵτινες, ὦ Ἡράκλεις, Ἀλεξανδρεῖς τε καὶ Αἰγύπτιοι ὄντες …

58 See Fraser (n. 3).