Jews and Others
more detail on his name: ‘‘He [Amelius] dedicated it to me under the name of
Basileus [King]. Basileus was in fact my name, for in my native language [pa-
trios dialektos] I was called Malkos...andifonetranslates Malkos into Greek
it is interpreted as Basileus’’ (Loeb trans.).^14 Rather curiously, nothing in this
passage serves to explain how or why ‘‘Porphyrios’’ came to be the name
under which his works circulated. An explanation of this is provided only by
Eunapius, writing a century or so after Porphyry’s death: ‘‘Porphyrios’ native
city was Tyre, the foremost city of the ancient Phoenicians....In[this] city
ofSuroiPorphyrios was at first called Malchos (the meaning of this is ‘‘King’’).
But Longinus named him ‘‘Porphyrios’’ (purple), using this appellation to
indicate the royal significance of such clothing.’’^15
What emerges from these passages is at least the clear indication that Por-
phyry began life with a Semitic name, often found in Greek transliteration.
(As he was a Roman citizen, because of being a citizen of a colony, this should
have been hiscognomen, and he ought to have had a Romannomenand, in
theory, also apraenomen). The history of Romanised names in the Greek East
is extremely complex, but it is most likely that ‘‘Porphyrios/us’’ became at-
tached to his name as anagnomenor nickname; hence he will have been,
formally, ‘‘(praenomen), (nomen) Malchus Porphyrius,’’ with the latter element
coming to be the one which he usedquaauthor, and by which he was re-
ferred to.^16 Given that it was Septimius Severus who gave Tyre the status of
a colony, it is quite probable that, if Porphyry turned up in an inscription, it
would be as ‘‘L. Septimius Malchus.’’
Though Porphyry’s own testimony, when taken literally, reveals no more
than that he knew that ‘‘Malchos’’ (derived from MLK) meant ‘‘king,’’ it does
of course also show that he was aware of apatrios dialektos. There, however,
our evidence stops. We do not know whether this ‘‘language’’ was still spo-
ken in Tyre, and if so whether in educated circles or only in lower-class ones.
Neither for the third century nor for the preceding period have we any con-
crete proof that Phoenician was used on perishable materials, for writing
contracts, marriage agreements, or letters. Though no negative generalisa-
tions can be proved, it should be stressed that such evidenceisnow available,
. Porphyry,V. Plot.,.
. Eunapius,Lives of the Sophists,–.
. These questions of evolving nomenclature are not trivial, for they affect issues of
ethnic and cultural self-identification, and also (on our part) serious problems of deter-
mining by what name individuals were identified. See, for example, A. Cameron, ‘‘The
Date and Identity of Macrobius,’’JRS (): . For an excellent survey, see B. Salway,
‘‘What’s in a Name? A Survey of Roman Onomastic Practice from c. ..to..,’’
JRS (): .