Words of Thieves

This paper studies how the scribes handled the testimonies given during the trials related to the Great Tomb Robbery case at the end of the 20th Dynasty in Egypt. Some stylistic uniformisation inevitably took place, for instance in the narrative sections that were subjected to some general canvass. This is also illustrated by the way the scribes completed and modified the evidence given during the trial to match administrative format (this can best be seen in the function titles and in the lists of the stolen items), and by the way they re-phrased words spoken by the accused/witnesses. In some cases, verbatim quotations could be kept, as shown by occasional intrusions of slang. Variation also occurred even in very general formulae, in the spelling of very common words, or in phraseology. The paper finally presents some case studies directly relevant for the discussion of variation: 1) one case reported by two witnesses in the same papyrus, 2) one case reported by one witness in two different papyri, 3) parallel wording in two unrelated cases reported by two witnesses in the same papyrus, and 4) parallel wording in two unrelated cases reported by two witnesses in two different papyri.