We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
In the scholarly literature on the oases, we find a variety of assertions about the cities of the Kharga and Dakhla oases: that one was the capital at a particular period, that one did or did not have civic status at some date. On close examination, most of these statements turn out to be based on slender or no evidence, and in many cases we find that we know much less than has been supposed about the administrative organization of the Great Oasis. In what follows, we look more closely at the available evidence for both Kharga and Dakhla, tracing the history of Hibis – often supposed to be the capital of the whole oasis – and then of the two major towns of the Dakhla Oasis, Mothis (modern-day Mut) and Trimithis. We will try as well to see what we can of their interrelationship and of the overall administrative structure.
More than thirty years of excavations in Kharga Oasis yielded a large amount of Demotic ostraca providing information about the tax systems in place in this remote area of the Egyptian Western Desert. In this chapter I propose an overview of the Demotic fiscal documentation emanating from various settlements of the Great Oasis considered (part 1). These texts provide insights on the multiple tax systems set up by state as well as by local temples in the longue durée of the second part of first millennium BC. The king seems to have levied taxes at the district and the village levels while the temples took an amount from the harvests of their tenants. In this context, the temple of Amun of Hibis of Kharga appears as the religious institution that owned the most land in the whole oasis (part 2). It helps also to know the nature of the taxes - in cereal, in oil for lighting - and attests to the existence of a form of banalité required for the use of a mill (part 3).
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.