The engagement with Egypt and the Egyptian gods that transpired in the Hebrew Bible continued into the texts produced by rabbinic Judaism. Rabbinic texts of late antiquity and the early medieval period frequently presented images of Egypt and its religion. One of the critical objectives of these portrayals of Egypt was to set boundaries of Jewish identity by presenting rabbinic Judaism in opposition to Egyptian culture. The Egyptian cultural icons in rabbinic texts also demonstrate that the rabbis were aware of cultures other than their own.Footnote 1 The presence of Egyptian elements in midrash had previously been noted to a very limited extent by scholars of the Wissenschaft des Judentums (the science of Judaism), and it has not escaped the attention of more recent scholarship.
The Wissenschaft scholars were motivated to expand the research of Jewish topics and find “oriental” and “Near Eastern” influences in rabbinic literature.Footnote 2 The lexicographer Samuel Krauss, for example, identified the names of a very small number of Egyptian gods in rabbinic literature.Footnote 3 Recent scholars, like Gideon BohakFootnote 4 and I,Footnote 5 have researched Egyptian religious concepts in rabbinic texts. Bohak has described rabbinic notions of idolatry and paganism and he established that the rabbis had knowledge of Egypt based upon their own experience or that of others. He gathered and presented the evidence for rabbinic knowledge of Egyptian festivals, objects, and magical practices. In my previous work I have advanced an Egyptological perspective and applied semiotics and iconography in contextualizing Egyptian icons in rabbinic texts. This article will demonstrate further a significant awareness of Egyptian gods in rabbinic texts; the analysis will focus upon the identity of these gods, the contexts of their manifestations, as well as their function and assumed power. The question must be raised: Why did the rabbis mention Egyptian gods and integrate them into their discourse? One response to this question is that the rabbis continued to oppose the culture and religion of Egypt, since Egypt was for the rabbis the ultimate symbol of the “Other.” The purpose of invoking Egyptian icons was to establish rabbinic concepts in contrast to competing ideologies, such as those of the Egyptians specifically, but also of new religious groups, like Christians and Gnostics, who laid claim to the Hebrew God. The rabbis frequently utilized Egyptian icons as a metaphor for Rome and these new religious groups. In this article I will be focusing on Egyptian religious views, rather than those instances in which Egypt was only a cipher for some other group. Rabbinic texts utilized portrayals of Egyptian gods to demarcate rabbinic Judaism from other cultures.
Some Egyptian elements in midrash are fairly accurate depictions of Hellenistic-Roman customs,Footnote 6 while other references to Egypt are consistent with images and customs found in earlier periods of Egyptian history. Among the numerous Egyptian elements eliciting religious responses found in different midrashim are the Nile inundation,Footnote 7 the Nile god,Footnote 8 mummy portraits and funeral customs,Footnote 9 the Egyptian language,Footnote 10 Egyptian festivals,Footnote 11 as well as Queen Cleopatra.Footnote 12 Egyptian elements were immediately recognizable as Egyptian, including the gods Anubis,Footnote 13 Osiris,Footnote 14 Isis and Serapis, Footnote 15 Ra‘Footnote 16 and Horus.Footnote 17 Greco-Roman Egypt and the spread of Hellenism were the main cultural conduits for Egyptian and the “Egyptianizing” concepts in rabbinic texts. The Egyptian gods appear in disparate passages in rabbinic literature; often an earlier passage is cited and reworked in a later text. This article will not attempt to write a comprehensive history of the development of conceptions of Egyptian gods in the rabbinic corpus. However, I have noticed a greater involvement with Egypt as a theological construct in the later, medieval and homiletical midrashic texts.
The Power Struggle between the Egyptian God Ra‘ and the Hebrew God
Animosity between the Hebrew God and the Egyptian gods are found already in some of ancient Israel's earliest writings. The Bible states: “And against all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgments” (Exod 12:12). The Hebrews in the Nile Delta region of Egypt during the time of the Exodus would have been familiar with the Egyptian god Ra‘, since there were temples dedicated to Ra‘ in this region. A priest of Ra‘ is referred to in the Hebrew Bible in regard to the marriage of Joseph to the daughter of the priest Potiphera (Gen 41:45, 46:20; Gen 41:50: “Before the years of famine came, Joseph had two sons, whom Asenath, daughter of Potiphera, priest of On, bore to him”). These passages from Genesis resonated with the rabbis and were a source for their own understanding of Egyptian religion. Potiphera was a priest of Ra‘ at On (
wnw, Heliopolis). The name Potiphera (Egyptian: p3 dj p3 r> [he who was given by Ra‘]) identifies him as a High Priest of Ra‘.Footnote 18 The name Potiphera (or its variation: Potiphar) is Egyptian; however, as set forth below, the rabbis deduced their own reading of the name, which was not based upon the Egyptian language. The name was merely recognized as foreign in rabbinic texts (e.g., Gen. Rab. 86:3; Tanh., Buber ed., Vayeshev 14; b. Sotah 13b).Footnote 19
Gen. Rab. 86:3, Theodor/Albeck, p. 1054:
Potiphar, [an officer of Pharaoh's, the captain of the guard, an Egyptian bought him] (Gen. 39:1) is Poti-phera. He was called Potiphar because he fattened bull calves [
] for the purposes of idolatry; “Poti-phera,” because he used to uncover [
] himself in idolatry, but when the bull calf [Joseph] came there, [Potiphar] was enlightened [ϕωτεινόϛ]. A eunuch of Pharaoh (ibid.)—[This means] he was castrated, teaching that [Potiphar] purchased [Joseph] for the purpose of intercourse, whereupon the Holy One, blessed be He, emasculated [Potiphar].
The names of Potiphar are deconstructed and read as Hebrew roots, rendering terms that are related to idolatry. The rabbis recognized that the names “Potiphar” and “Potiphera” were related names of an Egyptian priest without providing any specific reference to the Egyptian god he served. The above text mentions bull calves that could be construed to reflect an Egyptian god in pure animal form, such as ApisFootnote 20 (e.g., Apis of Memphis or the Menevis bull of Heliopolis).Footnote 21 The Apis bull was worshiped commencing in the Early Period in Egyptian history in Memphis;Footnote 22 the animal chosen as the divine bull possessed special features. Osiris-Apis was incarnated into the Apis bull and the visible rituals of the bull worship related to this embodiment of Osiris-Apis; the bull mainly symbolized the life cycle, from birth to death and resurrection, from Apis to Osiris-Apis. The rabbis utilized the Joseph story and the deconstruction of “Potiphar” and “Potiphera” in order to engage in speculative etymology that shaped their understanding of the nature of Egyptian religious practices.
The usage of Egyptian theophoric names in rabbinic texts is a fairly rare occurrence; the exception to this statement is the usage of the Egyptian names of biblical characters such as Pin
asFootnote 23 and Zaphnat Pa‘neah.Footnote 24 This latter name is the name that Pharaoh gave to Joseph (Gen 41:45), and Joseph's Egyptian name may be translated as follows: “Ptah maintains the life of …” The Egyptian etymology of some of the Hebrew names in rabbinic documents demonstrates the pervasiveness and the awareness of Egypt in Jewish memory. It should be emphasized that only a few Egyptian gods are specifically mentioned in rabbinic texts; this may be due to the fear of mentioning a foreign god by name, which could possibly invoke its magical potency. By contrast, the Greek Magical Papyri, written by Jews in Egypt, are filled with references to Egyptian gods and their Greco-Roman or Coptic derivatives.
The Egyptian god Ra‘ was the powerful sun-god, who was mainly depicted in human form and worshiped as the one who created and sustained the world.Footnote 25 By day Ra‘ traveled in his barque through the sky and by night he passed through the underworld; he was reborn and he aged. Ra‘ is referred to in the Bible at Exod 10:10. Additionally, several biblical expressions refer to Ra‘: “the eye of the whole land.”Footnote 26 The Hebrew root [
] 
in the Bible often signifies Ra‘ specifically instead of “evil,” which is the more common meaning associated with this root. Thus, the terms “evil eye” or “evil” in some instances refers to the Egyptian sun-god.Footnote 27 In midrash this connection between evil and Ra‘ is recognized in a medieval compendium:
Yal. 1, 15 Joshua (Yal. 1, 372 Ki tissa):
Pharaoh said to Israel: Look, evil [Ra‘ 
] is before you (Exod 10:10). And he said: I see in my astrological constellations that one star rises against you; his name is Ra‘, he signifies blood and carnage. When Israel sinned through the calf in the desert the Holy One, Blessed be He, wanted to kill them.
The parallel passage, Yal. 1, 392 Ki tissa, has a variation as its text continues: “the Egyptians said: One rises against you, his name is Ra‘.” Rashi also refers to a midrash in his commentary on Exod 10:10. This verse reads, “And he said to them, Let the Lord be with you, if I will let you go, and your little ones. Look, evil (
) is before you.” Rashi comments: “I have heard that in midrash aggadah there is a certain star, the name of it is 
[Ra‘]. Pharaoh said to [the Hebrews], Through my astrology I see that star rising towards you in the desert …” This comment by Rashi, as well as the above citations from the Yalqut, suggest that rabbinic interpretation claimed that the god Ra‘ persecuted the Israelites during the Exodus. The following midrash has an additional reference to the god Ra‘ in his role of persecuting the Israelites.
Exod. Rab. 20:6:
Another interpretation: And it came to pass, when Pharaoh let the people go (Exod 13:17). It is written: Our soul escaped as a bird out of the snare of the fowlers (Ps 124: 7). Israel may be compared to a dove, which was detected by 
Ra‘ while sitting in her nest. This was the case with Israel in Egypt, where the snake [na 
ash] Pharaoh used craftiness against them and he said: Come, let us deal wisely with them (Exod 1:10); and he is compared to a snake, as it says: Prophesy against Pharaoh […] the great snake (Ezek 29:3).
In the above passage the phrase 
Ra‘ means “an evil snake” or more correctly, “the snake of Ra‘.” The text combines the persecution by the god Ra‘ and the persecution by Pharaoh, who in conjunction acted as co-persecutors of the Israelites. To clarify this sentence it should be understood that Pharaoh himself was perceived by Egyptians as the son of Ra‘. This is also indicative of the perceived combat between the Hebrew God and the major Egyptian god Ra‘. Another midrashic text, Mek. Beshallah 2,Footnote 28 refers to the pursuit of the Israelites by a snake and a hawk: “If she [Israel] enters, there is the serpent. If she stays out, there is the hawk. In such a plight were the Israelites at that moment, the sea forming a bar and the enemy pursuing.” The snake and the hawk could relate to Egyptian gods protecting Pharaoh; the hawk may represent Horus, the Egyptian god who guarded the Egyptian king and the snake may represent the uraeus snakeFootnote 29 on his headdress. Frequently in midrash a snake may represent Egypt or the Egyptian king. In a biblical passage that speaks about Egypt's destruction, Jeremiah compares Egypt to a “hissing” snake: “Her [Egypt's] sound is like that of a snake on the move” (Jer 46:22). The Egyptian hissing snake, which, again, is related to the uraeus snake, a symbol of Pharaoh,Footnote 30 is also found in the following midrashic text:
Exod. Rab. 3:12:
R. Ele—azar said that [Moses—] rod was converted into a snake corresponding to (keneged) Pharaoh, who was called a snake, as it says: “Behold, I am against you, Pharaoh King of Egypt, the great-snake.” (Ezek 29:3)
This midrashic text elaborates upon the term “snake.” In the extended text of this midrash a snake god is mentioned by a Roman lady (ma 
nâ), which is a rhetorical device to create a dialogue. However, the crucial question is why the rod of Moses was transformed into a snake. The midrashic term keneged creates an antithetical comparison between Pharaoh's snake (the uraeus) and Moses' snake, implicitly also between Pharaoh's rod (a scepter) and Moses' rod.Footnote 31 The competition between Moses and the Egyptian magicians was conducted by the respective representatives of the Hebrew God and the Egyptian god.
The image of the Egyptian snake is elaborated upon in the following midrash:
Tanh. Va-era— 4Footnote 32
When Pharaoh shall speak unto you, saying […]” (Exod 7:9). Let our rabbi instruct us [yelammedenu rabbenu]: May someone who is bitten by a snake during the tefillah stop praying? Our Rabbis taught [m. Ber. 5:1]: Even if the king salutes, one may not return his greeting, and even if a snake is twisted around one's heel one may not interrupt the tefillah.
Why did the sages compare a snake that is twisted around someone's heel with the kingdom of Egypt? R. Joshua b. Pazzi said, as it is written: Her sound is like that of a snake on the move; for they shall march with force, and come against her with axes, like wood cutters” (Jer 46:22). Just as the snake hisses and kills, so the kingdom of Egypt hisses and kills.
The citation of a mishnaic statement in the yelammedenu passage in the above text (“let our rabbi instruct us”) presents two cases involving the interruption of prayer. As a continuation of the above passage from midrash Tan 
uma these two scenarios (snake bite and royal salutation) are connected to the Scriptural passage or >Inyan (Exod 7:9) of the homiletic discourse by means of the question: “Why did the sages compare a snake that is twisted around someone's heel with the kingdom of Egypt?” The answer to this question posits: “Just as the snake hisses and kills, so the kingdom of Egypt hisses and kills.” The above midrashic unit, like some other midrashim, is bi-directional; the interpretation flows in one direction and then turns around in the opposite direction. From the Scriptural verse (Exod 7:9) which mentions Pharaoh the passage proceeds to a Mishnah citation that mentions a snake. In the subsequent portion of this text the interpretation returns to Egypt. In short, the text moves away from Egypt and then returns to Egypt. The Mishnah occupies the pivotal position in this reversal of direction. The Mishnah interprets Scripture; Pharaoh is understood to be both a king and a snake. The word “Egypt” in the concluding sentence in the above passage illuminates the Mishnah. Even the attack of the snake, representing Egypt, does not interrupt one's compliance with God's commandments, including the tefillah. Any memory or allusion of the Egyptian god Ra‘ had to be immediately erased and supplanted by the Hebrew God.
Egyptian “Animal Worship”
The rabbis knew of idolatrous worship of Egyptian gods, which could have the appearance of animals.Footnote 33 The following animals are mentioned in rabbinic texts in discussions of Egypt: snake,Footnote 34 ram (lamb),Footnote 35 hawk (falcon),Footnote 36 jackal (dog),Footnote 37 crocodile,Footnote 38 frog,Footnote 39 and bull.Footnote 40 These animals were manifestations of Egyptian gods. Egyptian gods existed in multiple forms; the multitude of visible images and the definite animal species relating to a god “make[s] the god more accessible.”Footnote 41 The view that Egyptians worshiped animals was a common misconception in antiquity, shared by the RomansFootnote 42 and the rabbis. Divine animals and statues representing gods were rejected by Judaism in rabbinic texts.Footnote 43 The existence of animal worship in general, without specific mention of Egypt, is addressed in the following text:
b. Zev. 114a:
But as for an animal set apart [for idolatrous practices] and an animal worshiped [as an idol, is it correct that] no one can forbid that which does not belong to him?
This talmudic passage raises the “jurisdictional” issue as to whether the rabbis had the authority to forbid animal worship if the animals were owned by idolaters. In short, it could be argued that animal worship could be permitted to the idolaters. The rabbis perceived such animal worship as the cult of the “Others,” >ábôdâh zara.
Whether the golden calf (Exod 32:4)Footnote 44 was an Egyptian god is disputed.Footnote 45 However, some midrashic and related texts interpret the calf as an Egyptian god. For example, a late midrash states that “the Egyptians are carrying their gods and they are singing and reciting hymns before it… . Make a god like the Egyptian god for us” (Pirqe R. El. 46).Footnote 46 This is based upon a long chain of interpretations that claim that the golden calf was a statue of the Egyptian god Apis.Footnote 47 Although it has seemed reasonable to some scholars to assume that a group that had just left Egypt would create an Egyptian god, the polemic may, instead, have originally been directed against a Canaanite god with whom the editors of the Bible were likely to have been more familiar.Footnote 48 It is clear, however, that the rabbis understood the calf to be an Egyptian deity and Egyptological comparisons support the premise that their interpretations were informed by some knowledge of Egyptian religious customs.
The Egyptian worship of lambs is mentioned in midrashic text, as well as in the Talmud (Tanh., Buber edition, Bo 3; b. Shabb. 89a): “the Egyptians were bowing down to lambs.” In fact, the Israelites were requested to slay the Egyptian lamb god:
Exod. Rab. 16:2Footnote 49
You find that when the Israelites were in Egypt, they worshiped idols and were reluctant to abandon them, for it says: “They did not cast away the detestable things their eyes fasted upon [nor did they forsake the idols of Egypt]” (Ezek 20:8). God said to Moses: As long as Israel worships Egyptian gods, they will not be redeemed; go and tell them to abandon their evil ways and to reject idolatry. This is the meaning of, “draw out and take you lambs” (Exod 12:21). [This means:] Draw away your hands from idolatry and take for yourselves lambs, thereby slaying the gods of Egypt and preparing the Passover; only through this will the Lord pass over you. This is the meaning of, “Through returning and resting will you be saved.” (Isa 30:15)
The above reference to lambs may refer to the Egyptian gods Amun or Khnum.Footnote 50 Both of these gods were frequently depicted with ram's horns. These Egyptian gods were also known in Greco-Roman times, for example, KhnumFootnote 51 was occasionally identified as AmunFootnote 52 and the combination of Zeus and Amun was designated as Zeus-Ammon.Footnote 53 Several centuries earlier there had been conflicts in the fifth century B.C.E. between the Egyptian priests of Khnum in Yev (Elephantine; Egyptian: Abu) who worshiped rams (lambs) and their neighbors, the Jewish priests of the local temple of Yah(o), who sacrificed lambs;Footnote 54 this tension transpired on the same island in the Nile.Footnote 55 Khnum, the ram-headed creator god, was worshiped together with Satis, goddess of the first Nile cataract, and their daughter, Anukis, and represent the principle triad of Egyptian deities at Elephantine (Khnemu, Satet, Anqet).
Names of Egyptian Gods: Neith, Nephthys, and Haroeris
There is evidence that the names of some Egyptian gods were assimilated into Hebrew personal names, which is an indication of the close relationship that Jews in Egypt had with their surrounding culture. In her research of personal names from Egypt that appear in Jewish texts from antiquity, Tal IlanFootnote 56 lists the name of a proselyte, 
, transcribed as “Neptis.” This name may be based upon the Egyptian goddess Nephthys (nebt-het), which is also mentioned by PlutarchFootnote 57 in his conflation of the Osiris myth. Similarly, the name “Neptis”Footnote 58
in b. Yevam. 98a could also relate to the goddess Nephthys, who was married to her brother, Osiris, since problematic marriage practices are involved in the passage set forth below. This appears to be a singular usage in rabbinic literature of the name Nephthys.
b. Yevam. 98a:
Come and hear what R. Jose said: A case involving the proselyte Nephthys, who married the wife of his maternal brother, and when the case was submitted to the Sages their verdict was that the law of matrimony does not apply to a proselyte.
Several names of Egyptian gods are attested to in rabbinic literature, for example, the phrase in b. ‘Avod. Zar. 11b “there are those who say: nitbare 
,” may contain a combination of Neith and Phre according to Samuel Krauss.Footnote 59
b. ‘Avod. Zar. 11b:
R. 
anan b. 
isda in the name of Rav, others say: R. 
anan b. Rava in the name of Rav said: There are five appointed temples of idol-worship: The Temple of Bel in Babel, The Temple of Nebo in Kursi, Tar‘ata in Mapug, Zerifa in Ashkelon, Nishra in Arabia. When R. Dimi came [he said], they added to these the market-place in ‘En-Bekhi [and] the Nidbakhah of Acco; there are those who say: the Nitbara of Acco. Rav Dimi of Nahardea recited these in the reversed order: The market-place of Acco, the Nidbakhah of ‘En-Bekhi.
As mentioned above, Krauss contends that: nitbare may contain a combination of Neith and Phre. However, Krauss does not explore the multiple possible derivations of the word Phre. In my judgment, if the second element of the term nitbare is in fact Phre, it may be derived from the Egyptian p3 r‘, which also occurs in Gen 41:45 as part of the name of the priest Potiphera. As mentioned above, Potiphera was a priest of Ra‘ at On. Additionally, one of the names of the Egyptian kings, containing the element Phre, related the king to the sun-god. On the other hand, Phre may be related to pr-‘3, the term for “pharaoh.” Alternatively, in the Greek Magical Papyri a spell for invisibility contains the element Phre in a series of names that mention other Egyptian gods in a Hellenized form: “I am Anubis, I am Osir-Phre, I am OSOT SORONOUIER, I am Osiris whom Seth destroyed.”Footnote 60 It should be emphasized that the evidence is inconclusive in regard to the meaning of the assumed element Phre in the talmudic term nitbare (b. ‘Avod. Zar. 11b).
Based upon comparative Egyptian descriptions of the goddess Neith, it appears likely that the talmudic term nitbare may contain the theophoric name of Neith and one of her attributes: “Neith created.” In Egypt, and in particular in temples from the Greco-Roman period (e.g., Esna), Neith was viewed as a creator goddess. Furthermore, Neith was frequently identified with Isis.Footnote 61 If nitbare means “Neith created,” then the Bavli text above should be understood to claim that a statue of this particular manifestation of the Egyptian goddess Neith had been erected in Acco. The same passage in b. ‘Avod. Zar. 11b contains the variant reading “nidbakhah,” which could refer to the Syrian god Zeus Madbachos. This explanation of this variant reading is not to be preferred. While this variant reading may have been emended to refer to a Syrian manifestation of Zeus or a different incarnation of Neith, the preferred reading more directly confirms the contention that the Bavli refers to a cult statue of an otherwise known manifestation of Neith. There is a more likely explanation for the variant term, “nidbakhah,” which retains an element similar to the name of the Egyptian goddess Neith (nit) and despite grammatical difficulties could be translated: “Neith wept.”Footnote 62 The weeping Neith could relate to the mourning and weeping Nephthys in some versions of the Osiris myth.Footnote 63 The reading of “nidbakhah” is attested to in a manuscript (MS The Jewish Theological Seminary, Rab. 15, 
or 
). However, two other manuscripts of the Talmud have a Hebrew transcription of the name of the goddess “Neith” that is closer to the Egyptian name: MS Munich, cod. Hebr, 95, fol. 375v: 
and MS Paris, Bibliothéque Nationale, Suppl. Heb. 1337, fol. 136a, which has “Nitbakhah” twice: 
, “and Nitbakhah in Acco, and there are those who say Nitbakhah.” My interpretation is based upon the above spelling in MS Munich, which supports my contention that the term in question contains “Neith.” In my opinion, Krauss was mistaken in his contention that Phre was a component of the talmudic term nitbare; however, he was correct that “Neith” was probably a significant component of this term.
The name of the Egyptian goddess Neith (njt)Footnote 64 was thought to be part of the Hebrew name 
(“Asenath,” Gen 41:45, 50; 46:20); however, according to some Egyptologists, deriving this name from an artificial Egyptian term nsnt meaning “belonging to Neith”Footnote 65 is no longer tenable. Rather, a reconstruction of the Egyptian elements in Asenath's name could possibly render the meaning “she belonged to her father.”Footnote 66 In my view, the name of Asenath does not contain the theophoric element of Neith.
The statues representing Egyptian gods were visible manifestations of Egypt and its religions not only in Egypt, but also in the land of Israel and the Diaspora. The Egyptian god AruerisFootnote 67 (Άαρούηριϛ); the elder Horus, Haroeris) is presented as a powerful idol in rabbinic literature. We find the admonition: “Close his eyes when you walk by his statue” or “Stomp out his eyes” in several Yerushalmi passages (y. ‘Avod. Zar. 3:11, 43b; y. Sheqal. 2:5,47a; y. Mo—ed Qat. 3:7).Footnote 68 There are variant spellings of the name of the Egyptian god, Arueris, in the Yerushalmi passages, including “Aduri” and “Arura.”
To summarize this section I suggest the following: personal names in rabbinic literature sometimes reflect Egyptian gods; direct references to the Egyptian gods themselves are also found in rabbinic literature; there are possible manifestations of “Neith,” as well as a reference to a statue of this goddess; deriving “Asenath” from “Neith” is no longer tenable; the statue of the Egyptian god Haroeris is also referred to in rabbinic texts. Additional Egyptian gods that are extensively cited in rabbinic literature include Isis and Serapis in Greco-Roman garb,Footnote 69 the Romanized Nile god (Nilos), and the view that Pharaoh was a god. Footnote 70
The Cult of Isis and Serapis
The cult of Isis and Serapis and sacrifices to Ammon, Osiris, and Nephthys were prevalent even in remote corners of the Roman Empire.Footnote 71 Egypt under the Ptolemies and, in particular, under Roman rule had returned to many former religious manifestations of Egyptian culture. The multifaceted phenomena of Egypt were, often in a superficial manner, integrated into other texts, including the rabbinic corpus. In Rome Egypt was understood to be the original source of wisdom, yet they found numerous aspects of Egyptian cult practices rather disturbing and abhorrent.Footnote 72 It was difficult for Romans to inculcate such traditions as that of the divine bull, Serapis. Nevertheless, in Roman religions Serapis was a divine entity, usually in human form.
The cult of Neotera-Isis was practiced in Roman Palestine, making it likely that the rabbis had some exposure to this Egyptian export. The titles of Cleopatra VII (Philopator, reigned 51–30 B.C.E.) on coins include theaneōtera, which may refer to Cleopatra as Isis-AphroditeFootnote 73 or Hathor (the Hellenized Aphrodite-Hathor).Footnote 74 For example, this title is engraved on a tetradrachma from Ashkelon from around 37 B.C.E., toward the end of her rule. In contrast to the coins from her earlier reign, which followed Greek conventions, this type of coin is Roman in style; the image is markedly different from the softer images of Hellenistic queens and the coin's less elegant depiction reflects the Roman influence. The meaning of Cleopatra's title, ΘEA NEΩTERA, is somewhat ambiguous; it could mean “the newer goddess,”Footnote 75 a role that Cleopatra assigned to herself (Isis-Aphrodite). Cleopatra VII drew upon the cults of the Egyptian gods—Isis, Osiris, and Apis—in order to firmly establish her rule and to Egyptianize her image. The Isis cult and its derivatives were also found in the land of Israel,Footnote 76 in places such as Raphia, Gaza, and Ashkelon. Additionally, in the Land of Israel there had been earlier combinations of features of Isis with the local goddesses, such as Astarte.
Another combination of Isis with Agape in an oath formula appears in the Bavli as 
, “By the Roman [a]gape!”Footnote 77 Amulets with Isis and representations of Isis lactans (i.e., Isis as a breast-feeding mother) were common in late antiquity and there are numerous depictions and cameos from the Roman era depicting Isis and Serapis together.Footnote 78 The reference to depictions of IsisFootnote 79 and Serapis in the Tosefta was in all likelihood added to the other prohibited representations in this rabbinic text in second century Palestine.Footnote 80 According to Marmorstein,Footnote 81 R. Judah's statement in the passage set forth in the Talmud and in its earlier version in the Tosefta (t. ‘Avod. Zar. 5:1, Zuckermandel, 468), refers to Isis worship in his time. If one finds a seal ring with an image of a breast-feeding woman or the image of Serapis, the finder is required to dispose of the ring in the Dead Sea, i.e., dumping the object into the Dead Sea. This early reference in rabbinic literature reads:
t. ‘Avod. Zar. 5:1:
Someone who found a ring with a representation of the sun, a representation of the moon or a representation of a derāqôn [serpent] should take it to the Dead Sea. [MS Vienna: R. Judah said] And also if [there is] an image [
] of a breastfeeding woman or of Serapis [on a ring that someone has found, he should take it to the Dead Sea].
The breast-feeding woman in this Toseftan text may refer to Isis or another mother-goddess.Footnote 83 An image of a breast-feeding woman on a seal ring is not permitted; this prohibition implies that such representations were in existence. Additionally, the term demut, which is found in this passage, is often related to divine appearances in rabbinic literature.Footnote 84 In all probability an image of the goddess Isis as a breast-feeding goddess is the subject of this prohibition.
The above passage from the Tosefta is cited as a baraita in the Bavli (b. ‘Avod. Zar. 43a)Footnote 85 within the talmudic discussion of foreign, idolatrous worship and the rejection of Hellenism.Footnote 86 The context of the talmudic passage apparently mandates reading the image of the breast-feeding woman as a foreign goddess. The talmudic passage states:
b. ‘Avod. Zar. 43a:
For it has been taught: R. Judah adds the image [
] of a breastfeeding woman and of SerapisFootnote 87 [or: Sar Apis, 
]. A breastfeeding woman—because of Eve who breastfed the whole world; Serapis—because of Joseph who ruled/was a sar [
] and appeased [
] the whole world. [Serapis refers to Joseph when he is represented as] holding a measure [
] and is measuring [grain], and [the breastfeeding woman refers to Eve] when she is holding a child and breastfeeding him.
This talmudic passage mentions Serapis and the grain measure (modius) he is holding. In the manner of midrashic nô
ārqôn, the name of Serapis is divided into two words that serve as the basis for the ensuing interpretation. Serapis is identified with Joseph in the talmudic passage based upon the premise that both provided grain during periods of famine. Identifying Serapis with Joseph is a common theme in Jewish and early Christian literature.Footnote 88 As mentioned above, Isis and Serapis often appeared in tandem. It is therefore probable that the breast-feeding mother in the text is Isis, since the breast-feeding woman and Serapis are mentioned in tandem in this passage.
If one attempts to locate the icon of Serapis in rabbinic texts, one should consider that Serapis is a Romanized deity that is based upon an Egyptian god. The Greeks perceived Serapis as Pluton or Helios, as well as other gods. The prevailing viewFootnote 89 in respect to Serapis has been that this god is a Ptolemaic invention, which combined the Egyptian gods Osiris (w 
jr) and Apis (
p).Footnote 90 Ptolemy I (367–283 B.C.E.) is said to have construed Serapis as the major god of the state that was populated by Greeks and Egyptians. However, this previously held thesis in regard to the formation of the Greco-Roman god Serapis needs to be challenged. The possible revision of this thesis draws upon Egyptology; a more comprehensive understanding of Serapis may contribute to the interpretation of this god in rabbinic passages. Additionally, the Egyptian composite elements of Serapis need to be reexamined in order to identify the iconography of Serapis or SarapisFootnote 91 (Sar Apis) in rabbinic texts.
Arguably, Serapis should no longer be viewed as purely resulting from a combination of Egyptian and Hellenistic features and as an invention of the Ptolemaic rulers of Egypt.Footnote 92 The ancient Egyptian ApisFootnote 93 (
pwj) and Osiris-Apis (w 
jr 
p) had a cult center in Memphis millennia before the first Greeks entered Egypt in the seventh century B.C.E. After death the Apis bull was mummified; it was believed that the bull renewed its existence. In regard to the burial and mummification of the bull in a Serapeum in Greco-Roman Egypt, one may note that from the period of the New Kingdom in Egypt the Apis bulls were buried in the Serapeum in Sakkarah. Based upon Egyptian evidence, this form of Osiris is identical with Serapis.Footnote 94 The Egyptian Memphis continued to be a cult center and a god named “Oserapis” (Άοσοράπιϛ) was venerated by Greeks in the fourth century B.C.E.Footnote 95
The introduction of the Serapis cult in Alexandria and the building of a Serap-eionFootnote 96 in that area may have occurred in the third century B.C.E. or, alternatively, this cult may have been derived from an earlier Serapis cult that utilized the site of a previous cult.Footnote 97 One purpose of this cult may have been to integrate and unite the multi-cultural inhabitants of Alexandria under one god by following the precedent of other cities that had one main god.Footnote 98 The Serapis cult in Alexandria may be reflected in the Septuagint. In Jer 26:15 (=MT Jer 46:15) the LXX inserts “Apis” into its translation:: “Why does Apis flee from you? Your choice ox does not continue …” In Ptolemaic Egypt we encounter the dual nature of gods, as gods of the Greeks and gods of the Egyptians: Serapis was and remained the form attributed to Osiris in Memphis.Footnote 99 In Hellenistic Egypt, Serapis was venerated in Memphis and in Alexandria; he was viewed as the god of salvation after death, as the one who listened to prayers and as the god who healed people following the custom of staying overnight in his sanctuary.Footnote 100 Although Serapis was mainly revered as healing the sick, a multitude of other representations of Serapis developed, including motifs borrowed from statues of Greek gods. The portrayal of Serapis with five curls of hair on his forehead was prevalent in the land of Israel and probably derived from the second century C.E. imperial Rome, however, earlier references to Serapis from the third century B.C.E. were also present in Samaria. Footnote 101
An important feature of the Hellenistic Serapis was his frequent depiction with a kalathos—a bushel measure for grain—on his head, which meant by the talmudic reference to be “a measure,” in the excerpt above. A modius—a beaker to measure grain—was being held by Serapis in that description.Footnote 102 The distinction between gods holding their attributes in their hands or carrying them upon their heads is rather insignificant. The modius, like the horns of the ancient Egyptian main god Amun and the locks of the Greek god Zeus, often served to identify Serapis.Footnote 103 In comparison, Isis occasionally has been depicted iconographically with grain on her head or carrying a cornucopia.Footnote 104 During the Roman period Isis frequently had a sun disc on her head, flanked by stalks of grain. We may note that Egyptian deities mainly wore their identifiable symbols on their heads. Based upon the above examination of the evolution of Isis and Serapis, I suggest that the rabbinic passage t. ‘Avod. Zar. 5:1 (cited in b. ‘Avod. Zar. 43a), which juxtaposes a breast-feeding woman (probably Isis) and Serapis, manifests an iconographic nexus: The god Serapis takes a form of Osiris; Isis is depicted in relationship to Osiris.
The Nile God and Moses as the Child of the Nile
The Roman predilection of assigning gods to rivers also applied to the Nile. The term “Nilos”Footnote 105 (Νεῖλοϛ) refers to the river-god Nilos, as well as to the river Nile itself in Greco-Roman Egypt. In rabbinic literature the term Nilos occurs frequently and usually refers to the Nile river.Footnote 106Nilos is used to identify the location of Joseph's coffin that Moses had to retrieve during the time of the Exodus.Footnote 107Nilos also appears in midrash in reference to the Nile as a source of waterFootnote 108 and in regard to a Nile festival,Footnote 109 which celebrated Egyptian divinities. The rabbis described 
, the Nile festival, to include such activities as idolatrous sacrificial offerings to the Nile god in observance of the Nile inundation and spectacles, as well as circus performances. Rabbinic texts from the third to the sixth century utilized the term Nilos more frequently than the other terms for the Nile (e.g. y 
or, nāhār). In late midrashic texts from the medieval period the authors of these texts revert to the biblical term yé<or in order to archaize their texts.
A perceived Egyptian etymology of the name of MosesFootnote 110 (μωυσήϛ) is found in Philo, Mos. 1.17: “for the Egyptians call water mou;” Josephus, Ant. 2.228, states: “for the Egyptians call water môu and those who are saved esês.”Footnote 111 These two terms are transcriptions of the Coptic words for “water” and “saved.”Footnote 112 With regard to an Egyptian etymology of the name of Moses we may add that “Moses” may be based upon msw, “child of …,”Footnote 113 which possibly could be completed as “child of the god Ra‘” as in the Egyptian name Ramose. Thus, the name Moses could have been an abbreviation of a theophoric name, omitting the name of an Egyptian god.Footnote 114 Another derivation is to read Moses as “to conceive, to bear.”Footnote 115 However, Abraham H. Yahuda, based upon the spelling in the Hebrew Bible, derives the name of Moses from Egyptian “water” or “seed” and “pond, lake, expanse of water”; thus, Moses would mean “Child of the Nile” (mw-še).Footnote 116 In this author's view, “Child of the Nile” is the most likely derivation of the Hebrew name Moses as it appears in the Bible. In midrashic literature it is emphasized that Moses is an Egyptian name, given to him by the daughter of Pharaoh. The etymology explaining the name of Moses in midrash is the same as in the Bible, which is “drawn out of the water.”Footnote 117 However, the midrash poses the question as to whether this name would be the correct grammatical Hebrew form for someone drawn out of the water.
The Dog-Headed God Anubis
Anubis is the god responsible for embalming and is the lord of the necropolis,Footnote 118 who is often depicted in the form of a dog or a jackal watching over the tombs. Traces of the Egyptian god Anubis are found in midrashic texts that refer to the dogs guarding the Egyptian tomb of Joseph in a necropolis.Footnote 119 In midrashic texts these watchdogs of the tombs were juxtaposed to the “barking” dogs in the Scriptural reference from the Exodus narrative. These two features of barking and watching are consistent with references in Roman and Egyptian texts that refer to Anubis.Footnote 120 There are opposing powers that Moses has to combat when attempting to locate Joseph's coffin at the time of the exodus from Egypt.
Exod. Rab. 20:19:
… and the Egyptians had constructed dogs made of gold which, by means of magic, barked for forty days whenever a man approached the sarcophagus, however, Moses made them shut up, as it is said: “But not a dog shall growl at any of the Israelites [not at people, not at animals, so that you shall know that the Lord makes a distinction between Egypt and Israel].” (Exod 11:7)
Within the different cycles of the Joseph legend in midrash, Footnote 121 we find “magical dogs” or “artificial dogs” (Pesiq. Rab Kah. 11:5) that are rendered powerless by Moses. These dogs are fashioned from gold, which was frequently utilized in funeral rites and funeral furnishings in Egypt because of the eternal value of the material. The dogs are identified as watching over the tombs in some versions of the midrashic texts. The dog motif may refer to practices associated with the jackal-headed god Anubis (inpw),Footnote 122 who was a figure prominent in the rites of embalming.Footnote 123 This custom continued into Greco-Roman and Coptic Egypt.Footnote 124 On a shroud painting from Coptic Egypt (ca. 180 C.E.) we find Anubis attending to the deceased, a man in Roman garb representing the mummified Osiris.Footnote 125 Anubis was also known to Roman writers and he is found on Jewish amulets from the first through third centuries C.E.;Footnote 126 significantly, some of these amulets had mixed inscriptions, for example, in the name of the Hebrew God in hieroglyphs. Furthermore, Anubis is often depicted with a key (ankh) and in the Greek magical papyri Anubis carries the key to the tombs of the dead;Footnote 127 this may be a precursor for the key of resurrection of the dead in the midrash of the three keys.Footnote 128 In this midrash God keeps this unique key to the tombs.Footnote 129 Although the name of the Egyptian god Anubis is not directly mentioned in midrashic literature, one may ask the question as to how the rabbis could have depicted barking dogs watching over tombs in Egypt, if they were totally oblivious to the role of the Egyptian deity Anubis? Furthermore, the rabbis were very reluctant to actually name foreign gods, since such an act of naming could bestow power upon such gods.
The Snake Apopis
The Egyptian Apopis, the huge snake-god that threatens the barque of the sun-god every morning,Footnote 130 is also mentioned in rabbinic texts. Y. Ned. 11:1, twice contains an oath formula: 
“By Apopis!”Footnote 131 This is a non-binding oath and a Jew should avoid swearing in the name of idolatrous gods. Krauss emphasizes that the term Apopis is not equivalent to the term pipi (Tetragrammaton), which appears often in the Greek magical papyri.Footnote 132 I agree with Krauss that the term Apopis, as it appears in the Yerushalmi, is definitely not a reference to the God of Israel and the ineffable name. Apopis was a hostile power that had to be adjured in order to balance good and evil. In Egyptian magic there were multiple descriptions and rituals to overcome the attacks of Apopis and to paralyze his powers. These apotropaic rites reverberate in the talmudic oath formula, 
“By Apopis!” Rabbinic texts merely record the name of this Egyptian divine snake as part of an oath in the vernacular of Roman Palestine.
The Condemnation and Destruction of Egyptian Gods
The biblical lemma, “On all the gods of Egypt will I execute judgments” (Exod 12:12), has been interpreted to mean that God battled and destroyed Egyptian gods in inner biblical, as well as in rabbinic interpretation. The destruction of the Egyptian gods together with the Egyptian kings is also mentioned in Jeremiah: “Behold, I will bring punishment to Amon of No, and Pharaoh, and Egypt, with their gods, and their kings; even Pharaoh and all them that trust in him” (Jer 46:25). This passage from Jeremiah was interpreted by the rabbis as an attack on the Egyptian gods. Rabbinic interpretation used the Bible as a resource for addressing Egyptian religion. The divine battle against the gods of Egypt is also a topic in midrashic texts (e.g., Gen. Rab. 96:5; Num. Rab. 16:25; Song Rab. 2:29).
Num. Rab. 16:25:
Moses said to Him: “The inhabitants of the land … have heard that You, Lord, are in the midst of the people … now if You will kill this people as one man” (Num 14: 14–15). He meant: Do not do this that the nations of the world will not say: The gods of Canaan are more difficult to overcome than the gods of Egypt; the gods of Egypt are false, but those of Canaan are strong.
Rabbinic interpretations of passages that deal with the destruction of Egyptian gods are based upon attitudes found in the Hebrew Bible. Israelite worship of Egyptian gods is condemned in Josh 24:14, a dialogue between the Israelites and Joshua, in which serving the Lord, as opposed to worshiping other gods, is emphasized: “Put away the gods that your ancestors served beyond the River and in Egypt…” This passage indicates that the Israelites had actually worshipped Egyptian gods. This idolatrous worship of Egyptian gods is also condemned in Ezek 20:7–8: “Do not defile yourselves with the idols of Egypt … not one of them cast away the detestable things their eyes fasted upon, nor did they forsake the idols of Egypt.”Footnote 133 A midrashic text continues this theme of the condemnation of the worship of Egyptian gods. The “Hebrews” are rebuked for worshipping Egyptian gods in Egypt.
Pesiq. Rab Kah. 5:7:
Our Master Moses, How can we be redeemed, seeing that the land of Egypt is filled with the filth of idolatry? [Moses] said: Since God wishes to redeem you, He will overlook your idolatrous worship.
Following biblical paradigms rabbinic literature viewed Egyptian gods in the context of having been worshiped by the Hebrews in Egypt and consequently, these idols had to be rejected. In this rejection of Egyptian gods it becomes evident that the rabbis had some knowledge of different Egyptian divinities. These rabbinic texts demonstrate that Egypt was not a mere abstraction of which the rabbis had no real knowledge.
Conclusion
Jewish perceptions of Egyptian gods in midrashic texts were transmitted through biblical interpretation; alternatively, they were often derived from the surrounding Greco-Roman culture—the culture that dominated the era during which rabbinic texts were created. Egyptian gods in midrash facilitated the establishment of theological positions in which the God of the Israelites displaced the Egyptian gods. It can be surmised that perhaps the rabbis deliberately invoked Egyptian gods in order to reaffirm the supremacy of the God of Israel and, by extension the rabbinic perspective of Judaism. Egyptian gods are referred to in the following midrashic contexts: 1) in opposition to the Israelite God in narrative and homiletic passages, 2) as gods worshiped by idolaters, 3) as elements of theophoric names, 4) as statues of foreign cults, 5) on objects, such as a ring, 6) in oaths.
The rabbis composed some remarkably accurate passages concerning Egypt and its gods. However, describing the Egyptian gods was not the primary focus of the midrashic corpus; the major concern in midrash was the idea of “opposing” the land, culture, and religions of Egypt. It is critical that one recognizes the disempowered relationship to “Egypt” of the writers of midrash and the role Egypt plays rhetorically and polemically in their texts. Ultimately, Egypt was a symbol of the “Other” whenever it was the focus of the hermeneutics of midrash.
The first inversion of Egyptian concepts arguably transpired in the Hebrew Bible when Egyptian practices were deemed to be abominations. The cultural practices of the “Others,” as well as their deities, were summarily rejected. The second inversion of the “Otherness” of Egyptian culture was willfully created by the rabbis in midrashic texts.Footnote 134 In Egypt, the gods were viewed as supremely positive symbols indicative of power, life, and eternity, while in the midrashic texts the Egyptian gods were transformed into negative symbols, indicative of idolatry, persecution, and death. It is clear that the rabbis possessed a basic knowledge of Egypt, but they manipulated this information to serve their own polemical purposes in their texts. In their portrayals of Egyptian gods the rabbis included topics and themes that were motivated by ideological and religious norms wholly different from those of the Egyptian religionists. The purpose of manipulating these Egyptian ideas and customs was to establish rabbinic concepts in contrast to Egypt, Rome, new religious groups, as well as against others who laid claim to the Hebrew God. Egypt had become more of a theological position rather than a real place. This theological position served as a trope for rhetorical effect in the rabbinic struggle against religious and cultural threats posed by life in Roman Palestine and in the Diaspora. In many respects these environments were viewed as another Egypt.
Rome, the ruling power in the Land of Israel in late antiquity, was fascinated with Egypt; Rome also adopted Egyptian gods, such as Isis and Serapis that offered new religious perspectives and who were both viewed as representatives of an ancient and exotic culture. The rabbinic discussions textualize these Egyptian icons in the polemical or dialectical engagement of the rabbis with foreign cults and beliefs.
A further aspect of rabbinic references to the Egyptian gods is that they serve as not only links to the past, but as a catalyst for current obligations, the continuous performance of the divine commandments. Midrash serves as a sacred way for textual engagement and, in the case of homiletic texts about Egyptian gods, midrash offers a narrative for the Jews that reveals the relevant, true meaning of God. The rabbinic texts utilized portrayals of Egyptian gods in order to make statements of their own values and ideologies. Rabbinic texts referred to Egyptian cultural icons, which served to demarcate rabbinic Judaism from Egyptian and other foreign cultures.
Throughout late antiquity the rabbis continued to affect and alter received traditions. What we call rabbinic Judaism was in an enormous state of flux and self-examination, while Judaic culture was a work in progress. In the midst of this dynamic tension, the rabbis and their associates still contributed to their community's identity. Like the biblical writers, who struggled with the concept of the “Exodus from Egypt” and defined Judaism in opposition to Egyptian customs, the rabbis expressed their perspective of this struggle in their own evolving terms. Reengaging with Egypt and its gods in order to shape and define Judaism was a way of conducting one's life within the philosophical framework of one's community, aspiring to an ethical ideal of differentiating oneself from the majority culture that was viewed as the “Other.”
in y. ‘Avod. Zar. 3:11, 43b (Krotoshin); 
in y. Ber. 2:5, 4b (ed. Peter Schäfer et al., Synopse zum Talmud Yerushalmi.I/1-2 [TSAJ 31; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1991]), y. Ber. 2:11, 
, ed. Amsterdam (1710) 
; 
in y. Sheqal. 2:5, 47a (ed. Venice, 1523: 
), Synopse II/5–12 (2001, TSAJ 83), y. Sheqal. 2:6, Oxford 
and in the Bavli, Munich, 2:6 
, 
; 
in y. Mo—ed Qat. 3:7, 83c.
.
].
ārîqôn method there does not seem to be any meaning attached to this difference.
jr 
p (Osiris-Apis). Alternatively, the name of Serapis may have been derived from sr 
p (Apis prophesying). Mussies, “The Interpretatio Judaica,” 210, offers a reasonable explanation of “Osarseph” based upon the Egyptian name w 
jr sp3 (Osiris-Sepa).
.
, meaning “to conceive, bear.” See also John Gwyn Griffiths, “The Egyptian Derivation of the Name Moses,” JNES 12 (1953) 225–31. Donald B. Redford, “Moses,” The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, 2:438–39, relates the name Moses to the same Egyptian root msi (to bear), but also considers the Canaanite serpent god, Muŝ.
