“I see wonderful things!” Socio-cognitive experience of Cypriot graffiti in ancient Egypt

I The ‘first encounters’ of the Cypriots with the Egyptian monuments

Over the last several years scholarship has become interested in the socio-cognitive experience of reading and writing monumental inscriptions as well as casual graffiti in the ancient Mediterranean and Greek world.^[6] Writing practices, systems, and traditions have been defined as entangled in a complex mesh of disciplines which focused on: 1) agency – closely connected with the materiality of the writing; 2) structural meanings – the information that texts provide; 3) the context, usually determined by socio-cultural elements and by the environment where the writers act.^[7]

Recent historical and archaeological studies, also based on Cypriot landscapes, aimed to bring together a detailed analysis of geography and environment and the so called ‘sociological imagination’.^[8] This definition, coined by Mills, describes individuals’ awareness of their personal experiences and daily activities as elements of a wider society, through the visual impact of the surrounding environment.^[9] Papantoniou convincingly adopted this mixed approach to analyse the development of the Cypriot landscapes in the Archaic and Classical periods. He has demonstrated that the proliferation of extra-urban sanctuaries was related to the authority of the kings of Cyprus – the island was subdivided into several city-kingdoms and each of them was ruled by a sovereign who also was the main priest in the city. The Cypriot kings controlled the peripheral territories and legitimated their power through the visual impact that these sanctuaries had on visitors and worshippers.^[10] Cypriot landscapes and environment contributed to the ‘sociological imagination’ of the inhabitants, through the view of the sanctuaries, and became ‘arenas’ for social agency, as Papantoniou has argued.^[11]

As shown by this case study, the visual impact of the landscape plays a role in the individuals’ cognitive processes.^[12] The landscape may be a familiar environment, in which the individuals are used to live and spending their days, or a total new environment, and the novelty may trigger different reactions. As in the case of the Cypriot sanctuaries, the Egyptian monuments – pyramids, temples, tombs – were also built to have an impact on the viewers and to stress the power and the authority of the sovereigns and the elite which commissioned them. The first encounters of Cypriots with the Egyptian monuments may have triggered reactions such as amazement and disorientation.^[13] The amazement of being in front of a unique building of imposing dimensions – even Herodotus describes the fascination of the Pyramids (2.99–182) – may have spurred the viewers to leave a trace of themselves, to imprint the memory of their passage to everlasting memory. Certainly, the explorers of all centuries have left their marks on the Egyptian monuments for similar reasons – e. g., the curious figure of Domenico Ermenegildo Frediani (1783–1823), an Italian explorer and prolific writer, who also tagged the surface of Meroitic monuments with the nickname of ‘Amiro’ on, or Giovanni Belzoni (1778–1823), who sealed his discovery of the Khefren’s pyramid with signature and date on the internal wall.^[14]

Disorientation and distance from home, however, may undermine the identity of an individual and the sense of belonging. The sense of belonging can manifest itself in groups that share religious, environmental, cultural or political values. When individuals become members of a group, they feel protected as parts of a community within a given place. A lack of feeling of belonging generates a sense of loneliness, isolation, and societal alienation.^[15] According to these sociological remarks, Cypriots may have written graffiti on the monuments of Egypt not only to leave an imperishable trace of their passage but also to respond to a sense of alienation and disorientation, given that, by tagging the surrounding environment with their names, the writers made their identity and sense of belonging more concrete.

II Cypriot syllabary for breaking the outsiders’ barrier: the socio-cognitive experience of writing graffiti

To better understand the cognitive aspects of writing graffiti on the Egyptian monuments, it is worthwhile to examine the reasons why individuals write graffiti in contemporary societies; they have been extensively studied and provide sociological data that may be applied to communities from different historical periods.^[16] As Gusfield argued, at the basis of writing graffiti there is the dichotomy between societal ‘insiders’ and ‘outsiders’.^[17] The writers identify themselves as societal ‘outsiders’ but ‘graffiti subcultural insiders’. By tagging a new place with their names and city of origin, the writers state that they belong to that place, becoming new ‘insiders’. Such a practice contributes to develop writers’ ‘sense of place’, i. e., the sense of self in relation with the place that is occupied. The development of a ‘sense of place’ boosters the growth of a ‘sense of community’, solidarity, and cohesion among individuals.^[18] On sociological terms, the sense of community occurs on two dimensions: the relational one, i. e., the relationship among individuals who are member of the same group, and the territorial one, i. e., the relationship between the individuals and the place that they consider ‘home’.^[19] In contemporary society, as shown by Myra, et al., gang and crew members (e. g., sailors) who often feel social outcasts, write their names, zipcodes, and create clusters of graffiti to stress their ‘sense of place’ and ‘sense of community’.^[20] Similarly, Cypriots who found themselves caught in Egypt were ‘outsiders’ in a new environment and landscapes, even more in front of the majesty of the Egyptian pyramids or of the temples. Conceivably, to face the feeling of alienation, to express their sense of belonging – and its relational and territorial dimensions – and to become new ‘insiders’, Cypriots wrote graffiti on the Egyptian monuments. The graffiti in Egypt, therefore, are the results of the Cypriots’ ‘physical and cognitive occupation of the space’. By writing their name and place of origin, Cypriots make their membership of a socio-cultural group tangible and visible.^[21]

In this regard, the most striking elements of distinction for Cypriots are the scripts and languages they employed, which allow them to identify as members of a community. In Archaic and Classical Cyprus, the governments of the city-kingdoms adopted specific writing systems and languages as symbols of royal power and authority; they vary according to the city-state that used them.^[22] For example, the Cypriot-syllabic writing system from Paphos, employed to write the Cypriot Greek dialect, is written from left to right; its signs show a peculiar archaizing shape which is distinctive of this city-kingdom.^[23] However, to write the Cypriot Greek dialect, the other city-states adopted a ‘standard’ syllabary, written from right to left. Kition and Lapethos employed Phoenician alphabet and language in their administration, whereas the government of Amathus adopted the standard Cypriot syllabary to write the indigenous Eteocypriot language.^[24] The inhabitants of the city-kingdoms tended to keep the distinctive script and language of their own place of origin and the Cypriot graffiti from Egypt also reflect this variety. Therefore, the writing system that Cypriots employed is a sort of zip code, a distinctive element which clarifies the origins and provenance of the writers, and shows the territorial dimension of their sense of community.

Fig. 1

Contemporary Cypriot-syllabic graffito showing a-na-tu:-po-li, ‘Anthoupoli’ (2021).

The use of the Cypriot syllabary as distinctive label of origin is not a prerogative of ancient Cyprus. The Cypriot syllabary has remained a fundamental marker of the island’s identity for centuries, with a notable revival in recent years, even among common people. Some of the most significant contemporary examples also come from graffiti writers. Recently, a writer tagged a wall with the name of a Cypriot village close to Nicosia, Anthoupoli – probably where the graffito was written in both Cypriot-syllabic Greek – a revival version – a-na-tu:-po-li, and alphabetic Greek, ΑNΘΟΥΠΟΛΗ.^[25] By adopting the Cypriot syllabary, and not exclusively the standard alphabet, the writer stressed his Cypriot origins. But unlike the Cypriots of the fourth century, who regularly employed the syllabic system in their everyday writing, the choice of the current writer was probably driven by stronger socio-political implications, to claim Cypriotness in a border area close to the buffer zone, which divides the Republic of Cyprus and the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, a de facto state.^[26] Remarkably, the syllabary has continued to make ancient and contemporary Cypriots’ membership of a collective group – that of the inhabitants of Cyprus – concrete and real, and still performs as a distinctive mark of the community’s territorial dimension. Similarly, a 2022 mural from Paralimni (Cyprus, Famagusta district) by the artist Sascha Stylianou bears Cypriot syllabic signs. These signs primarily serve a decorative function, and do not convey a specific linguistic meaning, whose visual significance is instrumental in expressing Cypriot identity and affiliation with the island, as the artist explained. Once more, the Cypriot syllabary assumes the role of a symbol for Cypriot identity, imparting a message through its visual impact that transcends the linguistic communication, akin to the manifestation observed with Cypriot graffiti engraved on monuments in Egypt.^[27]

Fig. 2

Contemporary mural with Cypriot-syllabic signs in Paralimni (2022), @Art Murals Signs Cyprus.

III Cypriot casual tourists’ and mercenaries’ graffiti (sixth-fourth centuries)

According to the provenance of the writers, their onomastics, and inscriptions’ scripts, it is possible to count at least 147 Cypriot graffiti on the Egyptian monuments: 135 – at least – written in Cypriot syllabary, 11 in alphabetic Greek, and 1 in Phoenician.^[28] These inscriptions may be subdivided into graffiti engraved by occasional tourists and by mercenaries.^[29]

Tourists’ graffiti usually show the name of the writers and their patronymic. An example of a tourists’ graffito is a Cypriot inscription dated to the fifth/fourth centuries engraved on the pyramid of Kheops in Giza.^[30] Its text reads: (1) ka-ra-ta-to-ro-se | o-sa-ta-si-no (2) te-mi-to-i | mo-ra-to-ro | Κράτα(ν)δρος ὁ Στασίνω | Θεμιτώι Μορά(ν)δρω, to be translated as ‘Kratandros, of Stasinos. Themitó, of Morandros.’ The presence of the female name Themitó suggests that Kratandros and Themitó were a couple, probably visitors and not mercenaries, although wives of Cypriot mercenaries may have joined them, as happened with Greek mercenaries.^[31] Kratandros and Themitó stood in front of the pyramid of Kheops, experienced amazement and disorientation, and decided to write a graffito on the monument, as many travelers who have explored Egypt did, leaving traces of their passage.^[32] In this case, the patronymic and the employment of the standard Cypriot syllabary, a label of their provenance, convey their sense of belonging, of community, and its relational and territorial dimensions.

Fig. 3

Graffito by Kratandros and Themitó; Egetmeyer (2010) vol. II, Egypt n°4 = ICS n°371 (drawing by the author).

In Egypt, however, mercenaries’ graffiti are the most common Cypriot inscriptions.^[33] They contain more information than the tourists’ graffiti since the writers express their sense of belonging to two subgroups, that of the Cypriots in Egypt – as tourists also do – and that of the cohort of Cypriot mercenaries to which they belonged. In this regard, writers tend to create clusters of graffiti, unlike tourists’ graffiti which may also be isolated, whereas lone mercenaries’ inscriptions are rare.^[34]

One of them may be dated to the Archaic period and comes from Bouhen, engraved on a column of the temple of Thutmosis III. It was probably written by one of the mercenaries who joined the campaign of Psammetichus II to Nubia.^[35] The graffito was found close to other Carian graffiti, with which it was initially confused.^[36] It shows five Cypriot-syllabic signs written in the peculiar Paphian syllabary – therefore, from left to right – and bears the text te-we-re-se, likely a non-Greek anthroponym.^[37]

Fig. 4

Paphian graffito from Bouhen Egetmeyer (2010), vol. II Egypt n°141; ICS n°455 = Halczuk (2019) n°N1, 613 (drawing by the author).

Most of the graffiti written by Cypriot mercenaries in Egypt, however, are dated to the fourth century and come from two locations: Abydos, center of the cult of Osiris, where they are engraved on the pillars and one on the internal stairs of the temple of Seti I – also called Mnemonion – and Karnak, where they are engraved on the walls of Acoris’ Chapel.^[38] The higher concentration of Cypriot mercenaries in Egypt in the fourth century is due to the fight between Evagoras I (413–374), King of Salamis, and the Great King, Artaxerxes II. From 391, Evagoras wanted to gain independence from the Achaemenid Empire, or at least extend his rule beyond Salamis, implementing a pro-Athenian policy advantageous to his expansionistic aims.^[39] According to Diodorus, he aimed to take over the whole island; therefore, the city-kingdoms of Amathus, Kition and Soloi, feeling threatened, asked help from Artaxerxes. While acknowledging that the geopolitical landscape was considerably more intricate, these events did contribute to the beginning of the ‘Cypriot war’ which ended with a treaty of peace in 376 (Diod. Sic. 14.98.1–2). In those years, Evagoras allied with Acoris, pharaoh of Egypt, who, in turn, aimed to consolidate his independence from the Persian Empire (Xen. Hell. 4.8.24; Diod. Sic. 15.2–3). Acoris supported Evagoras’ geo-political operations until 380, shortly before his death, and, according to Diodorus, employed mercenary troops against the Persians, mostly from Greece, also led by the Athenian stratēgos, ‘general’, Chabrias.^[40] Conceivably, the Cypriot mercenaries who wrote graffiti on Αcoris’ Chapel served for him in those years. Since most of the Cypriot graffiti from Abydos were engraved by Salaminians, and dated to the same period, plausibly even these writers were Cypriot mercenaries sent to Egypt to support Acoris’ rebellion.^[41] Other Cypriot writers come from Ledra – eight of them among those who inscribed Acoris’ Chapel – and five from Paphos, as suggested by the content of the inscriptions; all these cities were somehow linked to Evagoras.^[42] Ledra, located in the internal part of the island where now the modern Nicosia stands, was a former city-kingdom which lost its independence in the Archaic Period, probably due to its landlocked position and lack of a harbour for trade. It then became part of the territory of another city-state, very likely Salamis.^[43] Paphos allied with Salamis in the ‘Cypriot war’, as suggested by the inscription of Milkyaton’s trophy, a Kition monument which celebrates the naval victory of king Milkyaton and of the Kitians over their enemies, likely the Salaminians, and over the Paphians, their allies.^[44]

Along with Salamis, Ledra and Paphos, a few graffiti were written by the inhabitants of Soloi, by inhabitants of Kition – for example ‘BD’ŠMN BN ŠLM HKTY, ‘Abdeshmun son of Shalem the Kitian’, who inscribed his graffito in Phoenician on the Osireion in Abydos – and conceivably by those of Amathus, the inhabitants of which wrote in Eteocypriot.^[45] Either these writers where mercenaries who voluntarily joined the troops dispatched by Evagoras, without a formal authorization from the royal governments of their cities – governments that, according to Diodorus, opposed Evagoras’ expansionist ambitions and his allies – or, alternatively, some of the Cypriot graffiti in Abydos were written by occasional visitors.^[46]

Fig. 5

Graffito engraved on the temple of Seti I (Abydos); Egetmeyer (2010), vol. II, Egypt n°11 = ICS n°376: (1) e-u-ru-te-mi | pa-si-ni (2) •-la-u-o-•-we-sa-se, Ἐρύθεμι(ς) Πασι-..., ‘Eruthemis son of Pasi-...(?),’ @Creative Commons ISAW.

A small amount of Cypriot graffiti in Egypt are written in alphabetic Greek, five of them on the Chapel of Acoris in Karnak, and two in Abydos (fourth century).^[47] These graffiti testify to the Cypriots’ ability to use different writing systems and show the existence of mixed Cypriot families, a common phenomenon on the island.^[48] One of them reads: Βαλσαμων Φιλοδήμου Λέδριος, ‘Balsamon son of Philodemos from Ledra’. The name Βαλσαμων corresponds to the Phoenician B‘LŠM‘, ‘Ba‘al has listened’, and it has been transliterated from Phoenician into Greek (Karnak n°1). This is not an oddity since in Archaic and Classical Cyprus, Phoenician names are frequently transliterated into Greek and vice versa.^[49] The name of Balsamon’s father, Philodemos, is, however, a common Greek anthroponym, and this implies that their family had a complex identity.

Another graffito from Karnak is digraphic, written in Cypriot-syllabic and alphabetic Greek; it confirms the ability of the Cypriots to juggle different scripts and languages. It reads:

(1) Φιλοκρέων (2) Τιμᾶος (3) Σαλαμίνιος,

Philokreon son of Timas from Salamis,

(1) pi-lo-ke-re-o-[•]-ti-ma-[•]-se

(2) se-la-mi-ni-o-se

(1) Philokreon son of Timas.

(2) Salaminian.^[50]

Fig. 6

Egetmeyer (2010), vol. II, Egypt n°57 = Karnak n°2 (drawing by the author).

These inscriptions also testify to the level of literacy among Cypriots.^[51] Although it is difficult to define to which social class these mercenaries belonged, plausibly they were not members of the elites or related to the kings, otherwise titles would have followed their names; e. g., wanax or adon, in Phoenician, ‘lord’ – in Cyprus, king’s relatives had the titles of wanaktes and wanassai.^[52] The ability to write through different writing systems may therefore be ascribed even to individuals of middle-to-low classes.

In the fourth century, Cypriots were undergoing a process of Hellenization, which led to an increasingly frequent use of the Greek alphabet. Nevertheless, the syllabary was regularly employed in everyday writing until the third century.^[53] Such Hellenization applied to the whole island, and particularly to the city-kingdoms which adopted Athenian customs for political reasons, such as Salamis, particularly during Evagoras’ government which, as anticipated above, promoted a pro-Athenian policy.^[54] By using the Greek alphabet, the Cypriots also adopted a widespread writing system that allowed them to communicate with a larger audience of passers-by who would have read the graffiti, and likely with other fellow mercenaries, perhaps to relate to them. Although the structure of Cypriot mercenaries’ cohorts is not clear, plausibly they have been paired with other foreigner soldiers, mostly Greeks according to Diodorus’ testimony, as happened to the mercenaries who took part in the campaign of Psammetichus II; they were generally called alloglossoi, ‘foreigner speakers’, and not properly distinguished.^[55] As Kaplan has suggested, although mercenaries groups in Egypt tended to be divided according to their ethnicity, cultural contacts with home communities and with fellow mercenaries of the same cohort occurred with equal frequency and multilingualism was the main form of cross-cultural contacts among them.^[56]

Mercenaries’ graffiti also bear a rich range of toponyms that show the territorial dimension of Cypriots’ sense of community. Mercenaries, however, did not exclusively write the name of the city of origin. In one instance, a graffito also mentions Cyprus, (1) ku-ti-lo-se-le-ti-ri-jo-se-ta-se-ku-po-ro-ne, (1) Κυδίλος Λέδριyος τᾶς Κύπρων, ‘Kudilos the Ledrian of Cyprus.’^[57] This is a hapax in the Cypriot corpus, a unique and remarkable document which attests what Cypriot-Greek speakers called the island.^[58]

Fig. 7

Cluster of Cypriot graffiti engraved on the Chapel of Acoris (Karnak). The first graffito reads: ta-mo-ti-ja-se-o-ta-mo-wo-se, Δαμοθίyας ὁ ΔαμωFός, ‘Damothias son of Damos’; Egetmeyer (2010), vol. II, Egypt n°75 = Karnak n°17; the other graffiti show the demotic ‘from Solipotamia’; Egetmeyer (2010), vol. II, Egypt n°77 = Karnak n°18 = ICS n°430; Egetmeyer (2010), vol. II, Egypt n°78 = Karnak n°19 = ICS n°431 (drawing by the author).

Other graffiti bear the names of villages from which the mercenaries come; these small centres would be otherwise unknown, for example Solipotamia and Kariopotamia, close to Soloi, and the village of Limnis, located in the northwest of Cyprus, which were part of the peripheral districts of the city-kingdoms.^[59] Some examples read: (1) pa-si-ti-ja-se | o-te-mi-si (2) ti-ja-u | (s?)o-li-o-po-ta-me-se |,^[60] (1) Πασιθίyας ὁ Θεμις (2)τίyαυ Σολιποτάμης,^[61] ‘Pasithias son of Themistias from Solipotamia’, and 1) ta-mo-ti-ja-se-o-ta-mo-ke-le-o-se-so-li-o-po-ta-me-se,^[62] (1) Δαμοθίyας ὁ Δαμοκλῆος Σολιποτάμης, ‘Damothias son of Damokles from Solipotamia’.

Mercenaries’ sense of community and its relational dimension is also demonstrated by nicknames engraved along with their anthroponyms. The nicknames make the writers identifiable within the subgroup of their cohort and are the results of the camaraderie that developed among the soldiers.^[63] A couple of graffiti from Abydos, which bear nicknames, read:

(1) zo-we-se-o-ti-mo-wa-na-ko-to | (?) sa-ka-i-wo-se

(2) zo-we-se-o-no(?)-ta-ma-u-sa-[?^[64]

(1) Ζώϝης ὁ Τιμοϝάνακτω, σκαιϝός

(2) Ζώϝης ὁ ...

(1) Ζοwes son of Timowanx, the left-handed

(2) Ζοwes...

Fig. 8

Egetmeyer (2010), vol. II, Egypt n°40 = ICS n°405, (drawing by the author).

(1) ti-mo-ke-le-we-se | o-te-mi-si-ta-ko-ro | to-ma-la-ke-le-wi-to |^[65]

(1) Τιμoκλέϝης ὁ Θεμισταγόρω τῶ μάλα κλεϝιτῶ^[66]

Timokles son of Themistagoros, of the very famous

Fig. 9

Egetmeyer (2010), vol II, Egypt n°37 = ICS n°402, (drawing by the author).

Similarly, a Cypriot graffito from Karnark reads: (1) a-ri-si-ta-ko-ra-se (2) ni-ko-ta-mo-o-li-zo-ne, (1) Ἀρισταγόρας (2)Νικοδάμω ὀλίζων, ‘Aristagoras, son of Nicodamos, the youngest’.^[67] Finally, in other instances, the repetition of the same name or of the same group of names in a cluster of graffiti may be interpreted as the result of a collective pastime among the soldiers. An illustrative example is the aforementioned graffito by Zowes, in which his name appears at least twice. Similarly, in Abydos on a wall and on the near door, another cluster of graffiti bears the name Zo-o-pa-o-se up to four time: (1) zo-o-pa-o-se-o-•-ke-le-se (2) zo-o-pa-o-se (3) zo-o-pa-o-se, (1) Ζωοφάος ...κλής (2) Ζωοφάος (3) Ζωοφάος, ‘Zophaos the...; Zophaos; Zophaos; (1) zo-o-•-o-se, (1) Ζωο[φά]ος, ‘Zo[pha]os (?)’.^[68]

IV Religious tourism and theōria

In the examples provided above, by writing graffiti and tagging the surrounding environment with their languages, writing systems, places of origin, patronymics, and nicknames, Cypriot casual tourists and mercenaries physically and cognitively occupied the place in which they acted and became new societal ‘insiders’, according to the data of Myra, et al.’s sociological analysis.^[69] These graffiti, in particular those engraved by mercenaries, however, may also act as a cultural bridge between Cypriot soldiers and new Egyptian customs and practices that they encountered. The choice to engrave them in meeting places frequented also by local devotees – religious tourists or pilgrims – and fellow mercenaries is not accidental. Certainly, the temple of Seti I and the chapel of Acoris in Karnak were well-frequented places of worship. Plausibly, to become societal insiders, in addition to participate as occasional tourists, Cypriot mercenaries also engaged as religious tourists actively taking part in local ritual practices observed among other devotees.^[70]

Some of their graffiti may have been written for religious purposes as at least two of them suggest. A graffito engraved in Abydos bears the Greek formula ‘X saw’, X ethēsato (ἐθήσατο) from theaomai (θεάομαι), ‘I viewed’. It mentions Philanos who ‘saw and viewed’: pi-la-no | o-wo-ro-to-ro-•-o-o-[...]-sa-•-•-e-wi-te | ka-se | e-ta-we-sa-to-•-•-e, Φίλανο(ς) ὁ... ἔϝιδε κας ἐθαϝήσατο, Philanos, son of..., saw and viewed’.^[71] The formula ‘who saw and viewed’ is commonly employed to describe the ‘sacred contemplation’ or theōria, strictly connected with religious tourism.^[72] Comparably, another graffito may bear a similar formula. Its text is: (1) o-po-ke-le-we-se (2) pa-se-ta-we-sa-to-ro (3) e-pa-i-pe (4) •-•-•-se. According to Egetmeyer’s interpretation, it should be read as (1) Ὀ(μ)φοκλέϝης (2) πᾶς ἐθαϝήσατο (3–4) ... (?), ‘Omphokles the son admired’, and not as (1) Ὀ(μ)φοκλέϝης (2) πᾶς Θαϝήσα(ν)δρω (3–4) ... (?), ‘Omphokles son of Thesandros’ as previously interpreted by Masson. The reading of the vowel e in pa-se, either a graphic silent vowel common in the syllabary or an aorist’s augment, remains controversial, as well as the following lines of the graffito.^[73]

In Abydos, graffiti with similar formulas have been engraved by Ionians not far away from the Cypriot graffito of Philanos, and, although such a practice was particularly widespread among the Greeks, local Phoenician graffiti also bear the verb ‘to view’, HZY.^[74] Likely, these writers were visitors who passed by, stopped in the sanctuary, and decided to write a graffito according to a common religious use, perhaps also driven by the ‘and-me’ instinct.^[75] Rutherford stated that the theōria, such a contemplation of sanctuaries, of their artifacts, and of their inscriptions, taught religious devotees and tourists local traditions.^[76] Visitors’ theōria and the knowledge of local practices may have contributed to foreign writers’ integration with the new landscapes and to break down the barrier of ‘outsiders’.^[77] Mercenaries who stationed at the entrance of the temples to rest or to spend the night may have decided to write these graffiti also to adapt to common customs, and to get involved with local culture and communities to become new ‘insiders’.

All in all, the socio-cognitive analysis of these graffiti can suggest why casual tourists and mercenaries from Cyprus carved their names and provenance on Egyptian monuments in the sixth to fourth centuries. Cypriots found themselves in a completely unknown environment and landscape. Amazed by the majesty of Egyptian pyramids and temples, they left their writings as everlasting memorials. But Cypriots also engraved their names and provenance on these monuments to confront the sense of disorientation caused by the visual impact of the new landscape, to break the barrier of social ‘outsiders’, and become new ‘insiders’ in a previously unknown environment. By tagging the surface of the monuments, the writers physically occupied the space in which they acted and made concrete their origins and belonging to one or more communities, such as that of the Cypriots in Egypt or of the military cohort to which the mercenaries belonged, as demonstrated by the use of nicknames – e. g., ‘the very famous one’, ‘the left-handed’ – with which the soldiers distinguished themselves within their subgroups. Similarly, by carving their names on the Mnemonion of Abydos, Cypriot mercenaries and ‘tourists’ adopted a common practice which allowed them to better integrate with local customs and fellow visitors, mercenaries, and religious tourists and devotees. These graffiti also demonstrated the high level of literacy among the Cypriots, their multilingualism, and their ability to write in different scripts. Finally, these inscriptions provide information about the existence of Cypriot families with more complex ethnic identities, such as that of Balsamon who was also part Phoenician, and villages located in the peripheral territories of the city-kingdoms, e. g., Soliopotamia or Kariopotamia, that would be otherwise unknown.

The integration of modern socio-cognitive theories into the analysis of ancient graffiti, coupled with conventional philological and palaeographic approaches, has facilitated a nuanced comprehension of Cypriot society and the internal dynamics of mercenary cohorts, offering new venues for further research. This interdisciplinary approach highlights the significance of writing systems and scripts, such as the Cypriot syllabary, as distinctive identitarian elements both in antiquity and in present-day society.