Talk:Elephantine papyri

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Why is there nothing about Elphantine worship being non-monotheistic? Or about the temple at Elephantine being destroyed, and the letters that were written soliciting support for permission to rebuild it? AnonMoos 02:29, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

This article is calling for the touch of your hand. --Wetman 14:52, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
I read some material about this at least five years ago, but I have no idea where I read it, and what I read might not have been very up to date, either. AnonMoos 02:27, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Two of the links at the bottom of the page both refer to the same website - I've removed one. ronch 10:26, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

From a link here at Wiki:

"The 'Elephantine papyri are caches of legal documents and letters written in Aramaic, which document a community of Jewish soldiers, with perhaps an admixture of Samaritans, stationed here during the Persian occupation of Egypt. They maintained their own temple (also see BYT YHWH), evincing "polytheistic beliefs", which functioned alongside that of Chnum" (my emphasis added)

Why does it seem that 99.9% of the articles pertaining to Jews and Judaism are historically skewed in favor of the Jewish purported historic record. This article claims the temple was destroyed as a result of "antisemitism" when in fact that was not the case at all. Quite simply the Jews were not singled out for the reasons associated with the term until much later. Manson48 (talk) 18:44, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

It wasn't all that much later in historical terms; fairly elaborate forms of antisemitism existed in the Ptolemaic period, such as the works replied to in Josephus' Contra Apionem (Osarseph etc.) ... AnonMoos (talk) 13:10, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
The reference backing up the "antisemitic" claim seems like a reasonable one, and we have no others. DJ Clayworth (talk) 02:20, 26 January 2010 (UTC)


some papyrus pictures with descriptions. someone should add this images to the artice. i do not know how to do this! (talk) 01:53, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

"anti-Semitic rampage"[edit]

This is mentioned above in a comment from a few years back. Firstly, the link in the reference leads to a dead link. Secondly, "...had recently been badly damaged by an anti-Semitic rampage on the part of a segment of the Elephantine community" is a bit of an exaggeration. The letter dates to the 5th century BCE. For comparison sake (taken from Wikipedia's own article on Antisemitism): "The first clear examples of anti-Jewish sentiment can be traced back to Alexandria in the 3rd century BCE"

The Elephantine Jewish community may not have been entirely monotheistic so it isn't clear that they would be singled out on account of their Jewishness which is what an "anti-Semitic rampage" would imply. That "part of a segment of the Elephantine community" was specifically a group of priests devoted to Khnum. The letters mentions construction activities by the Khnum priests alluding to tension which also involved the temple being looted at one point along with beams being taken to construct the Khnum temple (on a different occasion prior to it being destroyed). It's also mentioned that the Persians initially destroyed all the other temples except for the the Jewish temple. Rival religions destroying idols and temples (and using the material to construct other temples) is common in the ancient world and in Egypt. Calling it an "anti-Semitic rampage" implies being singled out because the attackers didn't like Jews placing the incident in the same category as pogroms. It's a little too early in history for antisemitism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:11, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

I agree with the above comment. To call it an "anti-Semitic rampage" is at best anachronistic. The motives for the damage should be described in the terms supported by the original sources. SamuelTheGhost (talk) 12:10, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Identity of Bagoas, Persian governor of Judah[edit]

Verify the date of the letter to Bagoas. This article says it was dated to 407 BC, but the Bagoas that it links to is stated to have died in 336 BC and was not old, but was ordered to drink poison by the Shah of Persia. The letter to Bagoas either should be dated later, or another Bagoas needs to be linked to the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:B:480:14:25A1:491E:4A91:C0B6 (talk) 17:34, 22 May 2013 (UTC)