DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.49270#0301
214
0. Bates
was regarded as a form of, or at least as an associate of, the goddess, is perfectly clear from
a relief in a temple in Khargah Oasis. The relief in question represents a mormyrid of
some sort, below which are inscribed the words: “Hathor, Mistress of Sen [ = Esna]”.53
The phagrus was venerated at Syene and in the region of the First Cataract.54 It
has been doubtfully identified as an eel,55 and connected, with greater reason, with the
fish called maeotes. According to Clemens Alexandrinus the phagrus was revered at Syene,
while the maeotes was worshiped at Elephantine,56 but as Aelian states that the phagrus wor-
shiped at Syene was the same fish that was called “ maeotes ” by the people of Elephantine,57
and as both the places in question are within gunshot of each other, there is little question
but that the two names apply properly to one fish. This conclusion is not weakened when
we find that Plutarch 58 says of the phagrus what Aelian relates of the maeotes — viz.
that it was held sacred because its appearance indicated the impending rise of the Nile.
About the lepidotus, we are even less informed than we are as to the other two fish
which Plutarch notes as those most generally avoided. It may perhaps be one of the
barbels, of which small bronze images are not uncommon (fig. 251); but adequate proofs
are here wholly lacking, and the only hint as to the nature of the lepidotus is that afforded
by its name (= “scaly”).
Aside from the three fish just considered, we are told by Strabo of the worship of a
fourth, not mentioned by Plutarch. The fish in question was the latus (Lates niloticus),
which the Greek geographer tells us was revered, at the city named Latopolis, in its honor,
in conjunction with a goddess whom he identifies with Athena.59 Latopolis is the modern
Esna, the Egyptian Sen (the Coptic Sne). I have already mentioned that in Khargah
the name of “Hathor of Sen” is found in unmistakable association with a mormyrid: it
is therefore puzzling to find that the fish chiefly worshiped at Esna was not a mormyrus
at all, but a Lates. When, on the scattered stones of Esna temple we find carved various
sorts of fish, and one, which is neither a mormyrus nor a lates, enclosed in a royal car-
touche,60 we are moved to question Strabo’s accuracy. The geographer is however fully
63 Wilkinson, op. cit., vol. 3, p. 342, fig. 584.
64 Aelian, op. cit., X, 19; Clemens Alexandrinus, vol. 1, col. 119, Cohortatio ad gentes, p. 11 Sylb., where E^Trat
should be read Swp'ircu.
66 Wilkinson, op. cit., vol. 3, p. 342. Wilkinson (in loc.) remarks that the cult of the phagrus was also established
at Phagroriopolis, a city near the apex of the Delta; Strabo, XVII, i, 26 (p. 804 Cas.). Nothing substantiates this
statement except the name of the town.
66 Clemens Alexandrinus, loc. cit.
57 Aelian, loc. cit.
58 Plutarch, op. cit., § 7.
69 Strabo, ed. C. Muller and F. Dubner, Paris, 1853-1877, XVII, i, 47 (p. 817 Cas.).
60 Wilkinson, op. cit., vol. 3, p. 343, fig. 586.
0. Bates
was regarded as a form of, or at least as an associate of, the goddess, is perfectly clear from
a relief in a temple in Khargah Oasis. The relief in question represents a mormyrid of
some sort, below which are inscribed the words: “Hathor, Mistress of Sen [ = Esna]”.53
The phagrus was venerated at Syene and in the region of the First Cataract.54 It
has been doubtfully identified as an eel,55 and connected, with greater reason, with the
fish called maeotes. According to Clemens Alexandrinus the phagrus was revered at Syene,
while the maeotes was worshiped at Elephantine,56 but as Aelian states that the phagrus wor-
shiped at Syene was the same fish that was called “ maeotes ” by the people of Elephantine,57
and as both the places in question are within gunshot of each other, there is little question
but that the two names apply properly to one fish. This conclusion is not weakened when
we find that Plutarch 58 says of the phagrus what Aelian relates of the maeotes — viz.
that it was held sacred because its appearance indicated the impending rise of the Nile.
About the lepidotus, we are even less informed than we are as to the other two fish
which Plutarch notes as those most generally avoided. It may perhaps be one of the
barbels, of which small bronze images are not uncommon (fig. 251); but adequate proofs
are here wholly lacking, and the only hint as to the nature of the lepidotus is that afforded
by its name (= “scaly”).
Aside from the three fish just considered, we are told by Strabo of the worship of a
fourth, not mentioned by Plutarch. The fish in question was the latus (Lates niloticus),
which the Greek geographer tells us was revered, at the city named Latopolis, in its honor,
in conjunction with a goddess whom he identifies with Athena.59 Latopolis is the modern
Esna, the Egyptian Sen (the Coptic Sne). I have already mentioned that in Khargah
the name of “Hathor of Sen” is found in unmistakable association with a mormyrid: it
is therefore puzzling to find that the fish chiefly worshiped at Esna was not a mormyrus
at all, but a Lates. When, on the scattered stones of Esna temple we find carved various
sorts of fish, and one, which is neither a mormyrus nor a lates, enclosed in a royal car-
touche,60 we are moved to question Strabo’s accuracy. The geographer is however fully
63 Wilkinson, op. cit., vol. 3, p. 342, fig. 584.
64 Aelian, op. cit., X, 19; Clemens Alexandrinus, vol. 1, col. 119, Cohortatio ad gentes, p. 11 Sylb., where E^Trat
should be read Swp'ircu.
66 Wilkinson, op. cit., vol. 3, p. 342. Wilkinson (in loc.) remarks that the cult of the phagrus was also established
at Phagroriopolis, a city near the apex of the Delta; Strabo, XVII, i, 26 (p. 804 Cas.). Nothing substantiates this
statement except the name of the town.
66 Clemens Alexandrinus, loc. cit.
57 Aelian, loc. cit.
58 Plutarch, op. cit., § 7.
69 Strabo, ed. C. Muller and F. Dubner, Paris, 1853-1877, XVII, i, 47 (p. 817 Cas.).
60 Wilkinson, op. cit., vol. 3, p. 343, fig. 586.