The Last Priests of Philae
Who were these priests? In this chapter, we will examine who the last priests of Philae
were, what functions they had, and how they dramatically disappeared from the scene.
As these priests dedicated most of the Late Antique inscriptions, they provide us with
a lively picture of the ritual practices and festivals they performed. However, the
inscriptions commemorating them end abruptly in 456/457, and we will try to find an
explanation for this sudden end to the inscriptional evidence.
https://www.rug.nl/research/portal/files/2921159/c4.pdf

Priests and Workmen

Almost a century ago, Walter Otto (1878-1941) published a comprehensive book on
priests and temples in Graeco-Roman Egypt.297 Unfortunately, his standard work has
never been followed up regarding the subject of priests.298 Although detailed studies on
specialised topics abound, a systematic, coherent and up-to-date account of this aspect
of Egyptian religion in the Graeco-Roman period is still a desideratum.299 To take the
case of Philae, although the material discussed thus far demonstrates that the
combination of Greek and demotic inscriptions can add considerably to our
understanding of priesthood, many texts from Philae, spanning the whole GraecoRoman period, still remain to be studied. It is therefore necessary to pay some
attention to priesthood in the Graeco-Roman period before we concentrate on the
priests of fourth and fifth-century Philae.
Otto divides Egyptian priests of the Graeco-Roman period into two groups
according to Greek terminology by comparing famous bilingual or trilingual
documents like the Ptolemaic Rosetta stone and the decree of Canopus. He subdivides
the higher priest class (flere›w) into five subclasses (fula¤). The ‘high priests’
(érxiere›w) come first, then the ‘prophets’ (prof∞tai), followed by the stolistai
(stolista¤), and finally the pterophorai (pterofÒrai; singular pterofÒraw) and
hierogrammateis (flerogrammate›w), who are more or less equal in status.
Unfortunately, Otto’s approach is one-sided and analyses from a Greek perspective.
Consequently, he does not take into account the many different nuances in Egyptian
terminology which exclude a one-to-one equivalence of Greek and Egyptian titles.
Moreover, one priest could have several titles, both administrative and religious, and
these titles varied from time to time and place to place.
The complexity of the Egyptian priesthood can be illustrated by listing the
several functions of the different kinds of priests. High priests and prophets were in
charge of the rituals of the temple. The stolistai were concerned with the garments of
the deity, but also with various other aspects of the temple cult, such as prayers,
hymns, inspection of sacrificial animals and offerings. The hierogrammateus had to
find and inspect holy animals, take part in synods of priests and temple
administration, compose priestly decrees and, finally, to test potential priests on cultic
purity and writing skills. His titles are in hieroglyphs rx-xt, ‘savant’, or Ty(?) pr-anx,
‘member of the House of Life’, and in demotic sX pr-anx, ‘scribe of the House of Life’.
Although the exact difference with a hierogrammateus is still open to debate, it is
generally accepted that a pterophoras designates a priest whose main concern was
writing. His title is in hieroglyphic sšw mDA.t-nTr, and in demotic sX mD-nTr, ‘scribe of the divine book’.300 In general, we can say that the higher priests were divided into Hm-nTr (‘prophets’) and wab (‘priests’). According to Greek terminology, the ‘high priests’, ‘prophets’ and stolistai belonged to the ‘prophets’ (Hm-nTr), but the pterophorai and hierogrammate is to the ‘priests’ (wab). The Greek term ‘prophet’ (profÆthw) could therefore denote both a specific function and a general designation of the highest priestly offices (Egyptian Hm-nTr). Moreover, in addition to being a designation of the priestly offices lower than the ‘prophets’ (Egyptian wab), the Greek term ‘priest’ (flereÊw) was also a general term for higher priests (both Hm-nTr and wab). In addition to the priests who were paid by the temple, other people also worked in the temple, earning a living from private consultation, who were not strictly regarded as ‘priests’ (flere›w) by the Egyptians themselves. However, as we generally refer to Egyptian temple personnel as ‘priests’, we will call them ‘lower priests’ to discriminate them from the ‘higher priests’.301 The most important of these ‘priestly’ people were the pastophoroi (Greek pastofÒroi, Egyptian wn) whose precise functions remain as yet obscure.302 What we do know is that they were responsible for guarding the temple area, and that they interpreted dreams.303 Besides these lower priests, there were a number of workmen (§rgãtai) involved in the temple cult.3