Amel Bouhafs | Université Paul Valéry - Montpellier (original) (raw)
Uploads
Talks by Amel Bouhafs
Transport et Mobilité dans l'Egypte antique, 2023
« En Méditerranée Orientale, le cuivre vient de Chypre, l’ivoire et l’ébène d’Afrique. » Et s’il... more « En Méditerranée Orientale, le cuivre vient de Chypre, l’ivoire et l’ébène d’Afrique. »
Et s’il en était autrement ? L’origine de certains matériaux semble tellement acquise qu’on ne les met que rarement en question. Pourtant des analyses sur des armes en bronze de Byblos du Bronze Moyen montre que le cuivre employé pour leur fabrication n’est pas chypriote. D’où provient-il s’il ne provient pas de cette île à deux jours de navigation de la cité portuaire levantine ? Pourquoi le chercher aussi loin que l’Iran, le nord de la Turquie ou encore Oman ? Est-ce une question de qualité du minerais ou Chypre ne commerçait-elle qu’avec certains partenaires ? Et si Byblos était davantage tournée vers l’est avec ses routes terrestres que vers l’ouest et l’espace maritime ? Cette question sur le cuivre se pose également pour d’autres matières telle que l’ivoire que l’on dit forcément provenir d’Afrique via l’Égypte. Pourtant des données, notamment archéologiques, montrent des sources d’approvisionnement autres, plus proche voire autochtone.
Et si nous avions jusqu’alors surestimé les relations, en particulier commerciales, entre l’Égypte et la cité de Byblos fondées sur quelques mythes et textes
Meeting the Other - Transfers and Cultural Interactions around the Nile Valley. IFAO & PCMA, 2021
Archaeology reveals that there were many "exchanges/transfers" between Egypt and Byblos/Jbeil. Th... more Archaeology reveals that there were many "exchanges/transfers" between Egypt and Byblos/Jbeil. The excavations at Jbeil brought to light small Egyptian and Egyptianizing objects - such as easily transportable scarabs that can be found everywhere in the Mediterranean - and some large-scale constructions and architectural elements (obelisks, uraeus-friezes, bas-reliefs….). Iconography also bears Egyptian motifs like cobras, sema-taouy scenes etc. Most of these examples date from the Middle Kingdom/SIP to the beginning of the first millennium BC. These Egyptian influences are not only found in Byblos but also in other Near-Eastern regions.
In this communication, we will give a general presentation of these objects, monuments and Egyptian figures which inspired Giblite production (the Egyptianizing objects). We will focus on the adoption and transfer of motifs and symbols using Egyptian and Egyptianizing artefacts found in Byblos/Jbeil in Lebanon. This general inventory will give an idea about the nature and evolution of relations between Egypt and Byblos and will help us to try and answer many questions: does the exchange of objects imply a transfer of ideas, signs, and symbols? Do the object and the sign have the same function in Egypt and in Levant? Do they play the same role? Why were some imported objects modified? Knowing all the Egyptian symbols existing in Byblos, what influenced the choice of a pattern over another on some artefacts?
Finally at the end of this process of assimilation/transfert, is it possible to consider this “Egyptianizing art” as a “purely decorative art”, with a complete loss of the significance of Egyptian symbols?
Multiple Identities Pisa 10 11 12 December 2020, 2020
Cette communication a pour but d'aborder la question de l'identification des divinités des temple... more Cette communication a pour but d'aborder la question de l'identification des divinités des temples de Byblos à travers les sources hiéroglyphiques du IIe millénaire mises au jour dans les deux ensembles cultuels principaux de l'acropole.
1e Sebayt Montpelliéraine- 23 février 2019
Les manifestations du pouvoir, colloque de l'AEPOA Montréal du 26 au 28 avril, 2018
Posters by Amel Bouhafs
Poster submitted to CRE 2021, Rhodes for host CRE 2022 in Montpellier.
Edited Books by Amel Bouhafs
Cahiers Égypte Nilotique et Méditérranéenne / Access Archaeology, 2023
Current Research in Egyptology 2022. Proceedings of the Twenty-Second Annual Symposium, Universit... more Current Research in Egyptology 2022. Proceedings of the Twenty-Second Annual Symposium, Université Paul-Valéry Montpellier 3, 26-30 September 2022.
The present volume collects thirty-two papers on various topics from the history of Egyptology to archaeology and material culture, from the Predynastic to the Roman period, through history and epigraphy, as well as new technologies.
Papers by Amel Bouhafs
This article explores the identification of deities in the temples of Jbeil/Byblos (Lebanon), usi... more This article explores the identification of deities in the temples of Jbeil/Byblos (Lebanon), using 2nd millennium BC hieroglyphic sources discovered in the two main religious complexes: the temple of Baalat Gebal, “the Lady of Byblos,” a poliad deity; and the temple of the Obelisks, a multifunctional temple. Many researchers have attempted to determine the identity of the Lady of Byblos. However, this quest may have been in vain, as Baalat Gebal appears to be a distinct divine entity in her own right. If her identification with Anat, Astarte, or Hathor is accurate, it might have evolved during the lengthy period of the goddess’s attestation. In this article we explore these questions in light of hieroglyphic sources. The Obelisk Temple was previously attributed to Reshef, but this connection was based on an erroneous reading of Herichef’s name on a hieroglyphic relief. Moreover, numerous other Egyptian theonyms are attested in these documents: Nut, Ra-Harakhty, the Great Ennead, and the Small Ennead. Drawing on later Phoenician texts, these theonyms can be interpreted as an “interpretatio aegyptiaca” of Semitic gods by an Egyptianized Semitic population. Hence, they might be referring to Anat, Shamash, and “the assembly of the holy gods of Byblos.”
Conference Presentations by Amel Bouhafs
Transport et Mobilité dans l'Egypte antique, 2023
« En Méditerranée Orientale, le cuivre vient de Chypre, l’ivoire et l’ébène d’Afrique. » Et s’il... more « En Méditerranée Orientale, le cuivre vient de Chypre, l’ivoire et l’ébène d’Afrique. »
Et s’il en était autrement ? L’origine de certains matériaux semble tellement acquise qu’on ne les met que rarement en question. Pourtant des analyses sur des armes en bronze de Byblos du Bronze Moyen montre que le cuivre employé pour leur fabrication n’est pas chypriote. D’où provient-il s’il ne provient pas de cette île à deux jours de navigation de la cité portuaire levantine ? Pourquoi le chercher aussi loin que l’Iran, le nord de la Turquie ou encore Oman ? Est-ce une question de qualité du minerais ou Chypre ne commerçait-elle qu’avec certains partenaires ? Et si Byblos était davantage tournée vers l’est avec ses routes terrestres que vers l’ouest et l’espace maritime ? Cette question sur le cuivre se pose également pour d’autres matières telle que l’ivoire que l’on dit forcément provenir d’Afrique via l’Égypte. Pourtant des données, notamment archéologiques, montrent des sources d’approvisionnement autres, plus proche voire autochtone.
Et si nous avions jusqu’alors surestimé les relations, en particulier commerciales, entre l’Égypte et la cité de Byblos fondées sur quelques mythes et textes
Meeting the Other - Transfers and Cultural Interactions around the Nile Valley. IFAO & PCMA, 2021
Archaeology reveals that there were many "exchanges/transfers" between Egypt and Byblos/Jbeil. Th... more Archaeology reveals that there were many "exchanges/transfers" between Egypt and Byblos/Jbeil. The excavations at Jbeil brought to light small Egyptian and Egyptianizing objects - such as easily transportable scarabs that can be found everywhere in the Mediterranean - and some large-scale constructions and architectural elements (obelisks, uraeus-friezes, bas-reliefs….). Iconography also bears Egyptian motifs like cobras, sema-taouy scenes etc. Most of these examples date from the Middle Kingdom/SIP to the beginning of the first millennium BC. These Egyptian influences are not only found in Byblos but also in other Near-Eastern regions.
In this communication, we will give a general presentation of these objects, monuments and Egyptian figures which inspired Giblite production (the Egyptianizing objects). We will focus on the adoption and transfer of motifs and symbols using Egyptian and Egyptianizing artefacts found in Byblos/Jbeil in Lebanon. This general inventory will give an idea about the nature and evolution of relations between Egypt and Byblos and will help us to try and answer many questions: does the exchange of objects imply a transfer of ideas, signs, and symbols? Do the object and the sign have the same function in Egypt and in Levant? Do they play the same role? Why were some imported objects modified? Knowing all the Egyptian symbols existing in Byblos, what influenced the choice of a pattern over another on some artefacts?
Finally at the end of this process of assimilation/transfert, is it possible to consider this “Egyptianizing art” as a “purely decorative art”, with a complete loss of the significance of Egyptian symbols?
Multiple Identities Pisa 10 11 12 December 2020, 2020
Cette communication a pour but d'aborder la question de l'identification des divinités des temple... more Cette communication a pour but d'aborder la question de l'identification des divinités des temples de Byblos à travers les sources hiéroglyphiques du IIe millénaire mises au jour dans les deux ensembles cultuels principaux de l'acropole.
1e Sebayt Montpelliéraine- 23 février 2019
Les manifestations du pouvoir, colloque de l'AEPOA Montréal du 26 au 28 avril, 2018
Poster submitted to CRE 2021, Rhodes for host CRE 2022 in Montpellier.
Cahiers Égypte Nilotique et Méditérranéenne / Access Archaeology, 2023
Current Research in Egyptology 2022. Proceedings of the Twenty-Second Annual Symposium, Universit... more Current Research in Egyptology 2022. Proceedings of the Twenty-Second Annual Symposium, Université Paul-Valéry Montpellier 3, 26-30 September 2022.
The present volume collects thirty-two papers on various topics from the history of Egyptology to archaeology and material culture, from the Predynastic to the Roman period, through history and epigraphy, as well as new technologies.
This article explores the identification of deities in the temples of Jbeil/Byblos (Lebanon), usi... more This article explores the identification of deities in the temples of Jbeil/Byblos (Lebanon), using 2nd millennium BC hieroglyphic sources discovered in the two main religious complexes: the temple of Baalat Gebal, “the Lady of Byblos,” a poliad deity; and the temple of the Obelisks, a multifunctional temple. Many researchers have attempted to determine the identity of the Lady of Byblos. However, this quest may have been in vain, as Baalat Gebal appears to be a distinct divine entity in her own right. If her identification with Anat, Astarte, or Hathor is accurate, it might have evolved during the lengthy period of the goddess’s attestation. In this article we explore these questions in light of hieroglyphic sources. The Obelisk Temple was previously attributed to Reshef, but this connection was based on an erroneous reading of Herichef’s name on a hieroglyphic relief. Moreover, numerous other Egyptian theonyms are attested in these documents: Nut, Ra-Harakhty, the Great Ennead, and the Small Ennead. Drawing on later Phoenician texts, these theonyms can be interpreted as an “interpretatio aegyptiaca” of Semitic gods by an Egyptianized Semitic population. Hence, they might be referring to Anat, Shamash, and “the assembly of the holy gods of Byblos.”