The Hermias Trial:The Most Famous Trial from Ptolemaic Egypt

Ptolemaic Egypt (332 BC-30 BC) came into being after Alexander the Great in 332 B.C. had liberated the country from the Persians, and General Ptolemaios ascended the throne after the extinction of the Argeadian dynasty. Afterwards, many Greeks immigrated to Egypt, creating a multicultural society. In it, Greeks and Egyptians lived together and both the Greek and Egyptian languages ​​were used in official and private contexts. A relatively large number of private papyrus archives from this period, brought together by an archive owner, have been preserved – we currently have 319 – which form an important source for our knowledge about daily life from this period. We know from the archive of Osoroeris  some papyri that form the basis of the Hermias trial, the most famous lawsuit from Ptolemaic Egypt.

Archive of Osoroeris

The bilingual archive (Egyptian-Greek) of Osoroeris, son of Horos , is one of them. Horos and his son Osoroeris belonged to a family of Theban Choachites, mortal priests who were responsible for preparing the burial, storing the mummy, decorating the tomb, and performing the rituals of the cult of the dead. The Choachites worked on the western shore of Theban, including the Valley of the Kings, but also where commoners were buried. The Choachites also had a house on the east bank, near the Karnak Temple, where they temporarily housed mummies. P. Survey 48 is a trial record preserved on papyrus and dated December 11, 117 B.C. This papyrus, together with five other papyri from the archive (P. Survey 7, 8, 11, 42 and 44 ) was part of the so-called Hermias trial, a lawsuit that took place in the period 125-117 BC. in Thebes.

Map of Thebes showing the house of the Choachites

The lawsuit concerns the Theban house of the Choachites (A on the map), which is located on the east bank of the Nile and where the dead priests stored their mummies. The house originally belonged to a certain Ptolemaios, during a major revolt in the region in 205 B.C. fled from his house. This revolt was a native rebellion sent from Nubia. Many Greeks, including Ptolemy, were forced to leave Thebes. Ptolemy's house was then taken by the rebels and sold to the highest bidder. Between 153 and 146 B.C. the house was gradually bought up by a group of Choachites. The original house had long since fallen into ruin and the Choachites had just started rebuilding when Hermias came to Thebes. He was the son of the original owner Ptolemaios and a Greek officer who was stationed at Ombos, 165 km south of Thebes. Hermias claimed the house and made many attempts to get it back into his possession. These were all in vain, because after seven attempts, the judge concluded that Hermias could not present any evidence that he was the rightful owner and so the officer lost the trial. This latest decision, along with information about the previous lawsuits, is maintained on the papyrus P. Survey 48 , which is regarded by papyrologists as one of the most important legal papyri.

The different phases of the Hermias process

Six papyri relate to the trial:three Demotic (Ancient Egyptian) copies of sales contracts and three Greek court records. In the process we can distinguish seven phases or attempts by Hermias to get his house back. The question is who exactly is being charged in all these attempts. In most cases these are the owners at the time, the choachites so, usually described as “Horos (the father of Osoroeris) and his followers”, but sometimes Hermias has also sued other people, such as one of the previous owners, who sold part of the house to the Choachites.

Hermias sent a number of different petitions to get the house back. There were different kinds of charges, which, for reasons that were not always obvious, were used interchangeably. A enteuxis (ἔντευξις ) is a petition addressed to the king, in which the officials (e.g. strategos or epstates ) who actually dealt with the matter, as in most cases the king could not do this himself. A petition could also be addressed directly to these officials, namely via a prosangelma (προσάγγελμα) or hypomnema (ὑπόμνημα). A prosangelma was a brief description of an illegal act, usually addressed to the police chief. The hypomnemata were often handed over and explained in person, and had a more solemn and rigid structure. In one case, we learn in detail how Hermias filed his charges. In the Thebais, Greek judges (the khrematistai ) a “vase” (angeion ) especially for petitions, which were submitted in 148/147 B.C. and again in 127 B.C. was made available in the city of Ptolemais (north of Thebes) and in 126/125 BC. at Diospolis Magna (eastern Thebes). Hermias therefore gratefully took advantage of this opportunity and dropped one of his charges in this vase.

In addition to the charges, we also have three Greek procedural documents for the Hermias case (P. Survey 42, 44, 48), covering three of the seven attempts or phases.

Process flow

In the first phase, Hermias complained Lobais on with an enteuxis -petition to the court of the chrematistai , a court of Greek judges, arranged by the king. Lobais was one of the characters who sold the house to the Choachites. Hermias probably thought he would quickly win the case by addressing one of the salesmen directly. There was no appeal against the decision of the chrematistai . When Hermias' charges against Lobais by the chrematistai was destroyed, so he could only sue other people. Hermias then turned against the then owners, the Choachites. On the second and third attempts, Hermias sent a hypomnema- petition to the strategos of the Thebais against the Choachites. The strategos was responsible for the civil, military and administrative aspects of one or more nomes (provinces). But also the strategos could not help Hermias any further, so he turned to other officials again.

Map Egypt with location Thebes

In the fourth phase, Hermias then sent an enteuxis- petition to the epistates Herakleides , who presided over the Peritheban Shire (province). This indictment led to a lawsuit in which P. Survey 42 the procedural document. Unfortunately for Hermias, his charges were dismissed. In the next phase he sent another enteuxis to the epistates Ptolemy of the Peritheban Shire, which led to a lawsuit in which his charges were again dismissed (see Procedural Document P. Survey 44 ). On his penultimate attempt, Hermias again served a hypomnema in, this time at the epistrategos, who in turn passed the case to the strategos . The epistrategos ruled much of Egypt, including the southern region of the Thebais, and was thus one of the country's most important officials. But this attempt also did not lead to the hoped-for result for Hermias. Finally, in the final stage, Hermias again sent a request to the strategos Hermias , who in turn referred the matter to the epistates of the Peritheban Shire Herakleides. This led to a lawsuit on November 11, 117 B.C. the verdict that Hermias' charges were dismissed. This last phase is noted on the papyrus P. Survey 48 . The main reason the case dragged on for so long is mainly because the Choachites with every attempt by Hermias went across the Nile and simply waited for Hermias to go back to his garrison. Until 119 B.C. the choachites did not even show up for any charges.

Decision of the process

The last stage of the process is especially important for our understanding of the functioning of the legal system in Ptolemaic Egypt. The Choachites actually had a lawyer from the beginning, but Hermias had none until the last trial. In the final phase, both lawyers were allowed to make their pleas, which were carefully noted. Since Hermias could not provide evidence that he was the rightful owner, while the Choachites could provide three purchase contracts as evidence, Hermias' lawyer had to be very creative to make his case strong. He first refers to Hermias' first attempt, in which he filed a lawsuit against Lobais, one of the people who sold the house to the Choachites. Lobais had stated that she did not legally own the house when she sold it to the Choachites. Hermias' lawyer also reported that the contracts presented by the Choachites (P. Survey 7, 8, 11 ), were not registered and therefore could not be legally valid. The Choachites' lawyer argued against this that Hermias himself had admitted during that first phase that the sale had taken place and that Hermias should also not have addressed one of the sellers over the current owners.

Tomb stele of a choachite

Another important argument from Hermias' lawyer was that the Choachites used the house to store mummies before they were buried in the necropolis. According to Hermias' lawyer, this was an act of pollution and an act of disgrace to the gods, as the house was close to the dromoi (access roads) of Hera and Demeter . This is indeed the case under Greek law, but not under Egyptian law, and the Choachites, unfortunately for Hermias, fall under Egyptian law. This was because of the royal prostagm (ordinance), issued a year earlier (in 118 B.C.), making the language of the evidence determine the jurisdiction of the court. Hermias' lawyer had also made a mistake by the choachites “taricheutai” in his plea about the storage of the mummies. to name a few, these are the embalmers, who were of a lower rank than the Choachites. All these arguments of Hermias' lawyer therefore made little sense.

The last argument the Choachites' lawyer made was a prostagma (a royal decree) on property. As mentioned, in the first phase, Lobais stated that she did not lawfully possess the house when she sold it to the Choachites. Well, now the lawyer of the choachites indicated that this "possession" was nevertheless legitimized thanks to that prostagma about property, which had come after times of civil war when much real estate became ownerless:in those cases the real estate then came into the hands of the person who later took possession of it. The choachites' lawyer pointed out that his clients shouldn't even have to present the sales contracts, because the house was in their possession anyway, thanks to the prostagma. Consequently, the verdict dismissed Hermias' charges and ended a long series of complaints and lawsuits.

Importance for papyrology

What is the importance of the process now? The Hermias trial has most likely attracted a lot of public attention. On the Egyptian side was a group of priests with whom many who wished to be buried in the Theban necropolis would someday come into contact, and on the Greek side was an important soldier. It is also interesting to note that Hermias could go to a different authority each time with his grievances and use different types of charges interchangeably. The process has given us a better understanding of the workings of the various legal institutions operating in Egypt at the same time. Hermias would most likely have hoped for an easy victory, as he was highly regarded as a Greek soldier, but unfortunately for him the authorities only looked at the legal aspects of the case. Finally, the process was certainly also relevant to similar lawsuits. Hermias will undoubtedly not have been the only one whose house was taken over after the great revolt. Finally, we have to admit that Hermias had enormous perseverance and the choachites were just a little faint waiting for it to be all over.