Death by Fire in Ancient Egypt

Anthony Leahy

Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, Vol. 27, No. 2. (1984), pp. 199-206.

Stable URL:
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0022-4995%281984%2927%3A2%3C199%3ADBFIAE%3E2.0.CO%3B2-Y

Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient is currently published by BRILL.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained
prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in
the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/journals/bap.html.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is an independent not-for-profit organization dedicated to and preserving a digital archive of scholarly journals. For
more information regarding JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

http://www.jstor.org
Tue May 15 04:45:38 2007
 Journal of the Economic and Social Histosy of the Orient, Vol. X X V I I , Part I1

MISCELLANEA

DEATH BY FIRE IN ANCIENT EGYPT

In a recent survey entitled "The Treatment of Criminals in Ancient Egypt

through the New Kingdom"'), David Lorton has argued that "the only form of
death penalty that we know of was impalement" (p. 51). In reaching this conclu-
sion, he considers, inter alia, a number of passages which seem to refer to death by
fire. In his discussion of the fate of the adulterous woman in Pap. Westcar, he
diverges significantly from the traditional view that the woman was burnt2) by
translating rdi St rn as a reference to "branding .. . or, less likely perhaps, torture"
(p. 15). In support of this, Lorton adduces a passage in a stela from Abydos, which
bears the cartouches of Neferhotep 13),as proof of the existence of branding as part
of a punishment for crime in ancient Egypt4). The stela forbids burial, or even
trespass, in a sacred part of the necropolis5), specifying as the penalty for anyone
committing the latter offence br. q w ) wbd. t(w).f, which Lorton translates as "one
shall brand him' ' , adding that "the mention of branding ... clearly implies reduc-
tion to unfree status" (p. 18). His translation and conclusion both invite comment
since, having thus disposed of two apparently explicit references to death by fire as a
capital punishment, Lorton is able to dismiss a Ramesside ostracon of similar im-
port ( 0 . Nash 2) with the words "The text seems to state literally that they will be
thrown into the fire, but such a penalty would fall entirely outside the bounds of the
patterns of criminal punishment established by a study of the entire c o r p ~ s " ~ ) .
In support of his rendering of wbd in the Neferhotep inscription as "brand", Lor-
ton quotes the translation of Breasted, who is said to have "pointed to the attesta-
tion of wbd in the Ramesside period in reference to branding'''). O n examination,
however, this "Ramesside" parallel (not so called by Breasted) turns out to be part
of the Twenty-second Dynasty "Chronicle" of Prince Osorkons). Furthermore,
wdb does not occur in the passage quoted by Breasted which has, in any case,
nothing at all to do with brandingg). It does not, therefore, provide a parallel for a
translation of wbd as "brand"lO), and thus no support for Lorton's translation of
Pap. Westcar can be derived from the Neferhotep stela. In both cases, the tradi-
tional translation of "burn" should be retained. It is not my intention to pursue the
question of branding as a concomitant of imprisonment or loss of freedom. Suffice it
to say that the only branding scenes we possess depict foreign captives being
registered on their arrival in Egypt or at the institution to which they had been allot-
ted, and there is as yet little evidence that it was part of the ordinary criminal pro-
cedure").
The main concern of this note is Lorton's implicit contention that burning as a
capital punishment is not attested in ancient Egypt, or at least not before the end of
the Twentieth Dynasty. Quite apart from the texts already mentioned, there is
evidence from the New Kingdom which merits consideration (see below, n. 39),
and, in excluding the period after the New Kingdom, a body of material which is in
some vital respects richer than that available for the two previous millennia is
neglected. The extent of its relevance to earlier Egyptian society is rarely easy to
assess, but it cannot simply be ignored. In some aspects of law, there was
demonstrably little significant change between the New Kingdom and the
200 MISCELLANEA

Ptolemaic period12), and it might be argued that, in so far as generalisation is per-

misible, the presumption ought to be one of relevance until proven otherwise.
References to death by fire in a variety of contexts have been collected by De
Meulenaere and Hornung'3), and it would serve no purpose to catalogue them
again here, but I would like to draw attention to one particular aspect of the prob-
lem, for which a text from the temple at Philae provides an excellent starting-point.
An address to Osiris reads: di.k Bkw-ib ms_dn nsw r 'b n Mwt _hrsnwt.s sbr. n. k. Snyw
hm.f, "May you place the rebels, the king's anathema, on the brazier of Mut, who
is under her brother, after you have overthrown the enemies of His Majesty"").
H3kw-ib and Sntyw, if not exactly synonymous, are evidently descriptions of the
same peoplei5), and it is clear that death by fire is envisaged as a punishment for
rebels after their defeat. The possibility of remote allusion to actual rebellion here is
intriguing but cannot be clarified without a more detailed knowledge than we cur-
rently possess of the influence exercised by Ptolemaic and Roman rulers on the
composition of temple inscriptionsI6). That the concept is not a purely mythological
one is evident from the much more worldly "Instruction of Ankhsheshonq". In the
preamble, which explains how Ankhsheshonq came to be in prison, it is related how
those associates of the author who schemed against Pharaoh suffered the fate of be-
ing placed upon "the brazier" (p3 Ch)'7).An as yet unpublished demotic story re-
counts an essentially similar episode, although apparently as an integral part of the
tale rather than merely by way of introductionla). The papyrus is unfortunately
fragmentary, but one passage cites a royal order to put someone, probably a Proph-
et of Horus, lord of Letopolis, together with his family and associates, on the brazier
(P3 'h). It is not certain what the crime was or whether the punishment was actually
carried out, but, as in "Ankhsheshonq", the execution episode is incidental, and
likely to reflect the custom of the day. The use of the definite article in the two
stories implies that the punishment was familiar to their audienceIg), and the com-
bined testimony of these diverse texts may be taken as proof that death by burning
was well-known to Egyptians in the latter half of the first millennium B.C., and that
it seems to have been regarded as particularly appropriate to treason.
It is important to note that these two demotic literary texts, despite the late date of
the surviving mss. 20), reflect a wholly Egyptian milieu. All the characters are Egyp-
tian, and, whoever the unnamed Pharaohs of these tales may be, they are not
Ptolemies. The Saqqara papyrus is earlier as a manuscript than the extant copy of
"Ankhsheshonq", but each must derive its inspiration from at least as far back as
the Thirtieth Dynasty, and perhaps much earlier, as does the Pedubast cyclez1).
This does not necessarily help to determine their dates of composition, since one can
envisage them being written in a mood of nostalgia for a lost past, or as a nationalist
rejection of the unpleasant fact of foreign sovereigntyz2);the crucial point for the
present purpose is that the society and customs which they depict are distinctively
Egyptian.
The same association between rebellion and death by fire can be seen in two
earlier instances. The well-known crux in the narrative of prince Osorkon,
whatever its precise significance (see below), undoubtedly refers to the burning of
Theban rebels. The method of execution is not explicit, "each man being burned in
the place of his crime", but the double reference to 'hw, "braziers", by way of
simile in the same passage points to one akin to that of the texts discussed abovez3).
 MISCELLANEA 20 1

The crime in this case was ostensibly or theologically against Amun; in reality, the
price to be paid for unsuccessful rebellion against Osorkon himself, the King's
eldest son and principal representative in Upper Egypt. The fact that he was also
High Priest of Amun doubtless facilitated representation of the resistance as opposi-
tion to the godz4).
A second, slightly later, parallel is provided by Manetho's story of the burning
alive of Bocchoris by Shabako. This is baldly related in both versions of
SyncellusZ5),but it has generally been accepted at face valuez6).Shabako's invasion
of Egypt in c. 712 B.C. was accompanied by the suppression, at least temporarily,
of any widespread claims to kingship on the part of the Twenty-second, Twenty-
third and Twenty-fourth Dynasties, if not of the dynastic lines themselves27). In
these circumstances, the execution of the figurehead of resistance to the Kushites
would be entirely comprehensible, and pragmatically, as a response to Tefnakht's
rejection of the authority of Piye, a political necessity. Tefnakht, Bocchoris'
predecessor at SaisZB), had taken an oath of allegiance to Piye after the latter's cam-
paign in his year 2OZ9), and had subsequently broken it by proclaiming himself
king30). In succeeding Tefnakht, Bocchoris had compounded the offence, since the
vassal treaty which one may assume accompanied the oath was probably binding on
descendants3'), and he was therefore a subject in revolt against his overlord.
Such attempts to overthrow the established political order, embodied in the per-
son of the king, echoed parallel mythological assaults on Maat, and especially the
rebellion of Seth against the legitimate rule of Osiris. The destruction by fire of the
latter's enemies can be traced back to the Coffin Texts and is a recurrent theme in
the theological literature of the New Kingdom and after3z).It is prominent in late
accounts of the proscription of Seth, epitomised in a text recently published by
G ~ y o n ~in~ which
), the gods place the "Ba" of Seth on "the great brazier of the
rebellious" (<b n sbiw). Literal translation of the genitival n does not bring out its
full force, which confirms the strong and permanent connection between the offence
and this form of punishment. Rebellion was thus inevitably a crime with strong
religious connotation^^^), and the appeal to Osiris to punish revolt against the king
in the Philae text is entirely apposite, since it is quite logical that the same an-
nihilator~treatment should be meted out to rebels against the Horus king. The in-
vocation'of Mut in the Philae text represents a slightly different but quitecompati-
ble mythological strain. The fiery Mut is a relatively rare figure of retribution and
plays no part in the Osiris myth, but she is occasionally identified with the destruc-
tive Sekhmet, and as a symbol of kingship is an entirely appropriate protector of the
royal position and avenger of assaults upon it35).It is perhaps in the same spirit that
the "flame (nbi) of Mut" is called down by Osorkon on those who might violate the
decrees he issued on behalf of the king, although Mut, as one of the beneficiaries of
those ordinances, had a special interest in the case3'j). The punishment by fire thus
represents a response to the most heinous of crimes which is perfectly consistent
with the mythological background to Egyptian politics. It is also essential to ensure
that the offender is denied an afterlife by the complete destruction of his body3').
The relevance of this to earlier periods remains to be considered. The practice is
certainlv better attested in the first millennium B.C. than d u r i n" ~the New
Kingdom, but there is no evidence to suggest that it was introduced by the inten-
sified foreign intrusions of the former period38).On the contrary, the frequency of
202 MISCELLANEA

the destruction of the enemy by fire as a theme in earlier religious literature, com-
bined with some Ramesside texts which illustrate the use of fire to punish subject
populations in revolt against Pharaoh, show that it has a long history in EgyptS9). If
the traditional view of Pap. Westcar and the Neferhotep stela is restored, then burn-
ing takes its place as one of the forms of capital punishment at the King's disposal
throughout the pharaonic period40).
Several problems remain. There is the possibility, for instance, that in some cases
rebels were executed first and their bodies then incinerated. rather than that thev
were roasted alive. Only in the case of Bocchoris is it explicitly stated that the vic-
time was alive, but only in the Osorkon episode does the phraseology encourage the
view that he was killed first4'). The crucial passage reads 'hC.n s6r.f nlfst, "Then he
(Osorkon?) sbr them (the rebels) for him (Amun?)"; this occurs after the prisoners
had been led in, already bound, and before the statement that they were burnt. Sbr
here has a knife determinative which renders unlikely the general sense of "over-
throw" appropriate to the Philae text, but it might easily refer to a non-fatal ritual
blow rather than to actual execution, and the fact that it is "each man" rather than
their bodies which are said to be burnt would lend support to this view4=).Inter-
pretation here must be a matter of opinion and this single instance is not, in any
case, an adequate basis for generalisation.
A related question is the actual manner of execution. The word which recurs con-
stantly in quite disparate texts in Cb43),which seems from temple inscriptions to
have had a recognised role in rites concerned to ensure the king's triumph over his
enemies4'). I have translated this as "brazier" with etymology in mind, and
because the link with sacrifice is undoubtedly important, but "furnace" might be
more appropriate. The only detailed description is in the Instructions of
"Ankhsheshonq", for which I quote Glanville's translation: "Pharaoh caused an
altar of earth to be built at the door of the royal palace. He caused Harsiese, son of
Ramose, to be placed in the furnace of copper together with all the
conspirator^"^^). Presumably the earth provided a base for the fire in a way that
was considered too familiar to need elaboration. Even if one accepts the elimination
of "copper", as proposed by Stri~ker'~),the L sign after Cb still implies a
predominantly metal medium. There may be a clue to its precise form in certain il-
lustrations accompanying religious texts. In the Book of Gates, some large furnaces
called &dw are depicted4'). A scene from Edfu shows the king causing four bound
prisoners to be burnt in a 'box'ts), and a vignette illustrating a section headed d 4
c~w in P. Salt 825 shows two men tied back to back in a similar container sur-
mounted by four signs49). These examples may illuminate a spell in the Coffin
Texts, in which, in the words of Faulkner, "the determinative of cb looks like a chest
but is probably intended for a rectangular brazier on feet" In no case is
the working of the mechanism clear but, since destruction of the body was the inten-
tion, the victims must have been exposed directly to the flames.
A third difficulty concerns the exact legal circumstances in which burning was
employed and the nature of the misdemeanours for which it was imposed. Although
it seems to have been a common end for rebels, there is no exclusive or necessary
relationship between the two. Rebellion may be punished by other forms of death
penalty5'), while burning is also attested for adultery (P. Westcar), sacrilege
(Neferhotep stela), murder52), and conspiracy to murder5=).The degree to which it
 MISCELLANEA 203

was envisaged by the legal code, rather than a n ad hoc imposition (sometimes by the
conqueror on the conquered) is also uncertain. I n the Neferhotep stela, it is
specified by royal decree (w_djS4) for a particular crime, whereas, in a passage in P.
Rylands IX, it is suggested almost casually i n a n attempt to settle what amounts to a
blood-feud, without any reference to law (see n . 52). I t may be that the use of w C C~
in this text, rather than the p3 'l~repeatedly encountered above, is significant as a
reflection of irregularity. Unfortunately, the evidence a n d our knowledge of Egyp-
tian law are still too slight to enable us to answer such questions.

LEAHY
ANTHONY
(University of Birmingham)

1) J E S H O 20 (1977) 2-64.
2) See, for instance, De Meulenaere, CdE 28 (1953) 250, n. 6; Hornung, Altci'gyptische
H~llenvorstellungen( A S A W 1968), 22, n. 3; Simpson, Faulkner, Wente, The Literature ofAncient
Egypt, 18; Plutarch,,De Isrde et Osinde (ed. J . Gwyn Griffiths), 317; Eyre, S A K 4 (1976) 107;
Vergote, Joseph en EgvPte, 22-4.
3) Cairo JE 35256, published in Randall-MacIver and Mace, E l Amrah and Abydos, pl.
xxix, with bibliography in PM V, 67. Neferhotep's cartouches were cut over those of an
earlier king, but the exact original date is uncertain. The early Thirteenth Dynasty is at least
as likely as the Twelfth-see Cltre, MDAZK 14 (1956) 29.
4) Art. cit., 18. Again this opposes the general view exemplified by Kees, Ancient Egypt,
243; Otto, Egyptian Art and the Cults ofOslsis andAmon, 44; Stracmans, CdE 25 (1950) 30; Hor-
nung, op. cit., 22, n. 4; De Meulenaere, art. cit., 259, n. 4. As far as I know, only Breasted,
Ancient Records, I, 5 770, has translated "brand" here.
5) As pointed out by Kemp, LA I, 35-6, this area can only be the wadi which divides the
cemetery of Abydos into two parts, and which almost certainly served as the processional
route from the Osiris temple enclosure to the supposed tomb of Osiris at the Umm el-Qa'ab.
6) Art. cit., 44, n. 201. Lorton refers to Allam, Hieratische Ostraka und Papyn' a w der
Ramessidenzeit, 219, n. 16, where the possibility of a figurative meaning is mooted.
7) Art. cit., 18, n. 74, with reference to Breasted, Ancient Records, I, $5 766-72, especially 5
770, note b.
8) Lepsius, Denkmiiler, 111, 257a, col. 36 = R I K , pl. 19, col. 53.
9) Presumably the word Breasted had in mind was nbi (Wb. 11, 244). For the context, see
Caminos, The Chronicle of Prince Osorkon, 71-3, $8 101-5.
10) The essential meaning of wbd is "to destroy by fireJ'. Extension of its semantic range
to include burning by hot metal is not inconceivable, but I know of no instance in which the
specific translation of "brand" is certain or even likely. For its use, see Wb. I, 297, 1-8; Von
Deines and Westendorf, Worterbuch der medizinischen Texk I , 179-81.
11) For references to branding (3bw) and branding scenes see Caminos, Late Egyptian
Miscellanies, 230-1. Dr. Mark Smith has kindly drawn my attention to a figurative use of 3bw,
ibid., 233-4 (10, 2). An unfortunately obscure allusion to "brand marks" in connection with
punishment may be found in 0 . Berlin 12654 = Allam, op. cit., 35-8; here again, 3bw, and
not wbd, is the word used.
12) See Pestman, in Studia et Documents ad iura onkntis antiqui pertznentia 9, 58-9.
13) In C d E 28 (1953) 258-60 and Altci'gyptische Hollenuorstellungen, 21-9, respectively. See also
Eyre, art. cit. 107, n. 32 and 113, n. 85.
14) Btntdite, Le temple a% Philae, 116. Translated by Vemus, Athribis, docs. 201-2.
15) For the terminology used to describe rebels, see Grimal, L a sQ1c triomphale de Pi(cankhly
au M w i e du Caire (MIFAO CV) 110, nn. 304 and 306.
 204 MISCELLANEA

16) For hieroglyphic texts of the Ptolemaic period describing rebels as enemies of the gods,
see Sethe, Z A S 53 (1917) 35-49; Clarysse, CdE 53 (1978) 243-53. The Rosetta decree com-
pares Ptolemy V's extirpation of the Lycopolite rebels to Horus' earlier defeat of his enemies
(Urk. 11, 182, 5). For royal influence on the temples, see Crawford, in Studies on Hellenzihc
Mmphzs (Studia Hellenistica 24) 24-5. The "special relationship" which the Memphite
clergy seem to have enjoyed with the Ptolemies probably did not hold for Upper Egypt,
however, and the priests there may have been more independent. For the Egyptian
priesthood as the creators and purveyors of nationalist propaganda in the Ptolemaic period,
see the perceptive analysis of Lloyd, Historra 31 (1982) 33-55.
17) Glanville, Catalo~ueofthe Demotic Papyn in the Bntish Museum, 11, 13 = col. 4, 415. For
subsequent bibliography and new translations, see Lichtheim, Ancient Epyptian Literature 111,
159-84, and Smith, Serapis 6 (1980) 133-56, the latter of whom reconsiders the placing of the
fragments.
18) Preliminary reports will be found in Smith, A Visit to Anczent Egypt, 19 and XIVth Con-
gress ofPapyrologzsts, University College, London, 29th July, 1974, 257. Professor Smith has
kindly provided me with a transcription of the relevant section in advance of its publication in
Saqqara Dmotrc Papyrz I, and I a m grateful to him, to his co-editor Dr. W. J. Tait, and to the
Egypt Exploration Society, for permission to quote the passage.
19) So Glanville on the "Ankhsheshonq" passage, quoted by Zandee, Death as an E n m y ,
142. P3<his the 'Late Egyptian' version of M E ch in the Book of Repulsing Evil, Urk. VI, 77,
19/20. For the date of the latter text, see Vernus, in L'Egyptologie en 1979, (Colloques Interna-
tionaux CNRS) I, 82, n. 9.
20) The Saqqara papyrus dates to the fourth to third centuries B.C., the "Ankhsheshonq"
manuscript to the late Ptolemaic period; see Smith, Serapzs 6 (1980) 155-6.
21) See Kitchen, The Thtrd Intermediate Pertod zn E ~ p t ,3s 423-30 for the origin of the
Pedubast cycle in the eighth century B.C. Some of these tales do, however, show obvious
Greek influence.
22) The stories are not overtly xenophobic, but they may be regarded as a form of cultural
propaganda in their refusal to acknowledge any ruler other than Pharaoh, and their cultiva-
tion of a recognisably Egyptian sense ofidentity; cf. Lloyd, art. czt., esp. 34-5, 39-40, 55. Such
an interpretation is compatible with composition under either the Persians or the Ptolemies.
Smith, art. a t . , 154-6, summarises the evidence for a fourth century date for the composition
of the story section of "Ankhsheshonq", with a deliberately chosen Twenty-sixth Dynasty
setting, but does not exclude a later date.
23) Caminos, Chronicle, $ 65. For the use of the same terminology to describe animal
sacrifice and human execution, see Grimal, op. cit., 110, n. 306. O n the symbolism of such
sacrifice, see Lloyd, art. czt., 44, n. 35.
24) Cf. Hornung, op. ctt., 27, n. 9. O n the treatment of defeated enemies as rebels, see
Grimal, op. czt., 273, $ 7 [I].
25) Waddell (ed.), Manetho, 167. Herodotus, 11. 152, seems to confuse this episode with
the encounter between Tantamani and Necho I, the exact manner of whose death is
unknown.
26) Hornung, op. ctt., 27, casts doubt on the authenticity of the Manethonian account on
the ground that it is "geschichtlich so wenig verburgt". While this calls for caution, it is
scarcely a cogent objection in itself, since it is true of so much that passes for history in our
knowledge of ancient Egypt. A different tradition, according to which Shabako abolished
capital punishment, is preserved by Diodorus Siculus, I , 65, 2-4. Kitchen's view, op. cit.,
377, n. 763, that, unless Shabako had the remains buried decently, burning Bocchoris would
have alienated the Egyptians, ignores the fragmented state of Egyptian politics at the time,
and fails to take account of the ritual and exemplary nature ,of the punishment.
27) O n the date, see Spalinger,JARCE 10 (1973) 95-101. Priese, B S 9 8 (1970) 19, argues
that the Delta dynasts retained their titularies throughout the Twenty-fifth Dynasty. This re-
 MISCELLANEA 205

mains to be documented although a comparison of the Piye stela and the Rassam cylinder
does show that the divisions of Egypt had changed little between c. 728 B.C. and 671 B.C.,
and that in some cases the same families were still in power-see Kitchen, op. cit., $3 356-8.
28) According to Diodorus Siculus, I. 45, 2, Tefnakht was also his father.
29) Piye stela, lines 142-4 = Urk. 111, 52-3. A recent translation can be found in
Lichtheim, op. cit., 66-84, and a new edition of the text with translation and commentary in
the work by Grimal cited in n. 15 above. Spalinger, RdE 31 (1979) 77-8 and SAK 7 (1979)
291, has recently argued against the idea that Tefnakht took a vassal oath on the ground that
the verb-forms in the relevant passage must be past tense. This derives from his thesis that the
negative signs in the Piye stela are functionally distinct, *corresponding to M E n and
usually preceding sdm. n.f or perfective sdrn.1 to M E nn and usually negating the pro-
spective s_dm.f: The hypothesis is an attractive one but, while there is some degree of cor-
respondence, there are more exceptions than Spalinger allows. His interpretation of the oath,
a series of+s_dm. f forms, as retrospective and exculpatory is not inherently impossible,
since that is after all the ethos of the Negative Confession, but it makes no sense in the con-
text. Such an oath would be of no use to Piye and not worth recording. That it is recorded im-
plies something more substantial, and better sense is obtained if the passage is taken as pros-
pective. It has been observed several times recently that the scribe or school responsible for
the redaction of the Piye stela was not fully conversant with Middle Egyptian-Spalinger
himself in RdE 31 (1979) 79; Logan and Westenholz, JARCE 9 (1971-2) 11-19; most fully,
Grimal, op. cit., 194 f.-and the attempt to impose M E verbal patterns on the inscription
merely proves the point. It is vain to expect that internal consistency will be achieved even
when aspired to, and the notion of an "Cgyptien de tradition" proposed by Vernus, RdE 30
(1978) 139, n. 136, is apposite here. O n the general state of the language in texts of Dynasty
Twenty-five, see the same author's remarks in BIFAO 75 (1975) 63-6.
30) This is the traditional view and has the support of Diodorus Siculus, I. 45, 2. For
references, see Edwards, CAHIII. 1, 574. Priese, art. cit., 19-20, n. 19, again differs, object-
ing quite justifiably that Manetho does not mention a Tefnakht as predecessor of Bocchoris in
the Twenty-fourth Dynasty, and that there is no firm evidence to connect the opponent of
Piye with the King Tefnakht known from two donation stelae. However, his identification
with the Stephinates whom Manetho names as predecessor of Necho I is equally lacking in
proof. I see no means of resolving the problem on present evidence, although the eight years
of Tefnakht seem to fit more easily into the vacuum created by Piye's return to Nubia than
into the reign of Taharqa prior to the first Assyrian invasion.
3 1) Cf. Wiseman, The Vassal- Treaties of Esarhaddon, 50-51, for contemporary practice in the
Near East. Both Necho I and, initially, Psammetichus I were bound to the Assyrians by such
treaties; see Spalinger,JAOS 94 (1974) 322 and JARCE 13 (1976) 135 for these. It should be
noted that, even if Priese's view is correct, Bocchoris' claim to kingship would still be
rebellion; for the Kushite attitude to rebels, see Grirnal, oh. cit., 273, $ 7.
32) See Zandee, op. cit., 133-42; Hornung, op. cit., 27, nn. 11-12; Grifiths, op. cit., 551-3;
Urk. VI, 15, 48 f.; Vernus, Athribis, 242(g). A similar fate is often predicated of the enemies
of Re- e.g., Borghouts, JEA 59 (1973) 136-7; Hoenes, Untersuchungen zur Kult und Wesen der
Gottin Sachrnet, 75.
33) BIFAO 75 (1975) 391 [226] 3-4; similarly 395 [230] 13-14.
34) See nn. 15-16, 23.
35) See T e Velde, JEOL 26 (1979-80) 5-8 for this aspect of Mut. She is here not
malevolent, but on the side of order in a punitive capacity; cf. Urk. VI, 65, where@ '6 n Mwt
is said to surround all evil men. For Mut the avenger, see Vernus, Alhribis, 242 (g).
36) Caminos, Chronicle, $ 101.
37) So in the posthumous burning of Amasis' body by Cambyses, for which see most
recently Hofmann, SAK 9 (1981) 186-7. The same ideology underlies the punishment
206 MISCELLANEA

threatened in the Instruction of Sehetepibre : nn is n sbi hr hm.j "There is no tomb for the
rebel against His Majesty", (Cairo CG 20538, line 19).
38) Death by fire is known in some Near Eastern societies long before the first millen-
nium-see the articles by Renger and Sasson in J E S H O 20 (1977) 97 and 109 respectively.
The possibility of a much earlier Nubian origin for the practice in Egypt is mooted by Strac-
mans, C d E 25 (1950) 30, but without any firm evidence.
39) See, for instance, the burning of a chief and his followers recorded on the Amada stela
of Merenptah (KRI IV, 1, lines 15-16; translated and discussed by Kitchen in Agypten und
Kusch, ed. Endesfelder, 223), or the generalised statement in an Abu Simbel hymn (KRZ 11,
3 19, lines 11-14 = Youssef, A S A E 63 [I9791 190, lines 9-10). In a different context, see the
Redesiyeh stela of Seti I ( K R I I, 69, 10-11). O n the symbolic level, cf. the burning of rebels
by Re, Sekhmet or the king himself in the Kadesh texts ( K R I 11, 87, 1; 88, 1; 120, 11). An
aspect which cannot be pursued here is the frequency of reference to the fire of the royal
uraeus acting against the king's enemies.
40) I n addition to impalement, attested as late as the second century B.C. (Urk. 11, 183,
line 6), decapitation was certainly practised-witness sources as diverse as the headless bodies

nmt ( v)
of the Narmer palette, by implication the celebrated episode in P. Westcar, and the writing of
in the Piye stela, line 86 (see Grimal, o p cit., 110, n. 306). See Capart, ZAS 36
(1898) 125-6 and Hornung, op. cit., 18-20.
41) This is the view of Kitchen, op. cit., $ 292. O n the sense of the passage, see Caminos,
Chronicle, $$ 65-9 and Lloyd, Herodotus Book 11, Commentafy 1-98, 213, who vigorously rejects a
sacrificial interpretation.
42) It is perhaps just such a ritual blow that is depicted in the countless representations of
the king smiting his bound enemies before Amun.
43) w b . I, 223, 13-16.
44) Lacau and Chevrier, Une chabelle dlHatchepsout h Karnak I, 371, (b)
45) Op. cit., 13. O n the door of the palace as venue for the execution ofjustice, see Smith,
ad. cat., 156, n. 19.
46) O M R O 39 (1958) 59, n. 25, followed by Lichtheim, op. cit., 163, n. 13. Smith, art. czt.,
148, n. b l , is non-committal. I am grateful to Dr. Mark Smith for his comments on this
point.
47) Hornung, op. cit., pl. V .
48) Chassinat Edfou, IX, pl. 82.
49) See Derchain, Papynrs Salt 825, 59 and col. XIII.
50) The Anctent Egyptian Coffin Texts 11, 124, n. 28: Spell 479.
51) A penalty other than burning was probably visited on the conspirators against Ramses
111, but the extant documents are, perhaps deliberately, obscure on this point; see Lorton, art.
czt., 3 18.
52) In P. Rylands IX, 13111, it is suggested that some youths guilty of murder should be
thrown into wCCb, "a brazier" (Grifith, Calalopue of Demotic Papyri' in the John Rylands Libraty,
111, 91).
53) Grimal, Quatre stat-s napatienes au Mushe du Caire, 38, 15-17; 39, 4-5.
54) See Vernus, Annuaire E P H E , IVe section, 1977-8, 81-4, for Middle Kingdom royal
decrees.