Ella Karev, Ph.D. (2022), University of Chicago, is a Senior Lecturer in Egyptology at Tel Aviv University. She is a social and economic historian of Egypt whose research focuses on enslavement as well as Greek, Aramaic, Coptic, and Demotic papyrology.

• Preface and AcknowledgementsList of TablesAbbreviations1 Introduction1.1 Introduction1.2 Scope1.3 A brief note on terminology1.4 The corpus of texts1.5 Previous scholarship1.6 Eikones in Demotic and Latin1.7 Eikones outside of Egypt1.8 Outline1.9 Abbreviations and conventions2 Identity verification, biometrics, and documentality2.1 Biometrics, identity, and eikones2.2 Biometrics and anthropometry2.3 Documentality2.4 The role of social trust2.5 Conclusions and implications3 Descriptive eikones3.1 The Ptolemaic period: detailed physical description3.2 Characteristics in the Ptolemaic eikōn3.3 Absent characteristics and perception of physical traits3.4 Comparison with artistic evidence3.5 Demotic eikones3.6 Conclusions4 Oulai4.1 The Roman period: identification by oulē4.2 The format of the oulē-eikōn4.3 Why not a scar?4.4 Location of oulai on the body4.5 Moles4.6 “Unmarked” and “well-Marked”4.7 Descriptive eikones in the Roman period4.8 Conclusions: oulē as “identifier”5 Impairments and disabilities5.1 Impairment as identification5.2 Types, frequency, and distribution of impairments5.3 Distribution by Occupation and Gender5.4 Impairments absent from the eikones5.5 Impairment as an oulē5.6 Comparison with artistic depictions and physical remains5.7 Implications of impairments in the eikones6 Ethnonyms, ethnicity, and race6.1 The inclusion of ethnonyms in the eikones6.2 Ethnonyms, geonyms, and “legal ethnic designations”6.3 Ethnonyms of unenslaved persons6.4 Ethnonyms of enslaved persons6.5 Skin colour, race, and ethnicity6.6 Conclusions7 Enslaved persons7.1 Enslaved persons in the corpus of eikones7.2 Terminology7.3 Characteristics of the eikones of enslaved persons7.4 Enslaved eikones and social alienation7.5 Typology of enslaved eikones7.6 Distribution of texts by type7.7 Conclusions8 Conclusions8.1 Findings8.2 Ptolemaic descriptive eikones in contrast with Roman oulē-eikones8.3 The eikones as a biometric system of documentary identification8.4 Descriptions of enslaved persons8.5 Observations on impairments8.6 Race and ethnicity8.7 Conclusions and future researchAppendixBibliographyIndex

Ella Karev, Ph.D. (2022), University of Chicago, is a Senior Lecturer in Egyptology at Tel Aviv University. She is a social and economic historian of Egypt whose research focuses on enslavement as well as Greek, Aramaic, Coptic, and Demotic papyrology.

• Preface and AcknowledgementsList of TablesAbbreviations1 Introduction1.1 Introduction1.2 Scope1.3 A brief note on terminology1.4 The corpus of texts1.5 Previous scholarship1.6 Eikones in Demotic and Latin1.7 Eikones outside of Egypt1.8 Outline1.9 Abbreviations and conventions2 Identity verification, biometrics, and documentality2.1 Biometrics, identity, and eikones2.2 Biometrics and anthropometry2.3 Documentality2.4 The role of social trust2.5 Conclusions and implications3 Descriptive eikones3.1 The Ptolemaic period: detailed physical description3.2 Characteristics in the Ptolemaic eikōn3.3 Absent characteristics and perception of physical traits3.4 Comparison with artistic evidence3.5 Demotic eikones3.6 Conclusions4 Oulai4.1 The Roman period: identification by oulē4.2 The format of the oulē-eikōn4.3 Why not a scar?4.4 Location of oulai on the body4.5 Moles4.6 “Unmarked” and “well-Marked”4.7 Descriptive eikones in the Roman period4.8 Conclusions: oulē as “identifier”5 Impairments and disabilities5.1 Impairment as identification5.2 Types, frequency, and distribution of impairments5.3 Distribution by Occupation and Gender5.4 Impairments absent from the eikones5.5 Impairment as an oulē5.6 Comparison with artistic depictions and physical remains5.7 Implications of impairments in the eikones6 Ethnonyms, ethnicity, and race6.1 The inclusion of ethnonyms in the eikones6.2 Ethnonyms, geonyms, and “legal ethnic designations”6.3 Ethnonyms of unenslaved persons6.4 Ethnonyms of enslaved persons6.5 Skin colour, race, and ethnicity6.6 Conclusions7 Enslaved persons7.1 Enslaved persons in the corpus of eikones7.2 Terminology7.3 Characteristics of the eikones of enslaved persons7.4 Enslaved eikones and social alienation7.5 Typology of enslaved eikones7.6 Distribution of texts by type7.7 Conclusions8 Conclusions8.1 Findings8.2 Ptolemaic descriptive eikones in contrast with Roman oulē-eikones8.3 The eikones as a biometric system of documentary identification8.4 Descriptions of enslaved persons8.5 Observations on impairments8.6 Race and ethnicity8.7 Conclusions and future researchAppendixBibliographyIndex

Ella Karev, Ph.D. (2022), University of Chicago, is a Senior Lecturer in Egyptology at Tel Aviv University. She is a social and economic historian of Egypt whose research focuses on enslavement as well as Greek, Aramaic, Coptic, and Demotic papyrology.

• Preface and AcknowledgementsList of TablesAbbreviations1 Introduction1.1 Introduction1.2 Scope1.3 A brief note on terminology1.4 The corpus of texts1.5 Previous scholarship1.6 Eikones in Demotic and Latin1.7 Eikones outside of Egypt1.8 Outline1.9 Abbreviations and conventions2 Identity verification, biometrics, and documentality2.1 Biometrics, identity, and eikones2.2 Biometrics and anthropometry2.3 Documentality2.4 The role of social trust2.5 Conclusions and implications3 Descriptive eikones3.1 The Ptolemaic period: detailed physical description3.2 Characteristics in the Ptolemaic eikōn3.3 Absent characteristics and perception of physical traits3.4 Comparison with artistic evidence3.5 Demotic eikones3.6 Conclusions4 Oulai4.1 The Roman period: identification by oulē4.2 The format of the oulē-eikōn4.3 Why not a scar?4.4 Location of oulai on the body4.5 Moles4.6 “Unmarked” and “well-Marked”4.7 Descriptive eikones in the Roman period4.8 Conclusions: oulē as “identifier”5 Impairments and disabilities5.1 Impairment as identification5.2 Types, frequency, and distribution of impairments5.3 Distribution by Occupation and Gender5.4 Impairments absent from the eikones5.5 Impairment as an oulē5.6 Comparison with artistic depictions and physical remains5.7 Implications of impairments in the eikones6 Ethnonyms, ethnicity, and race6.1 The inclusion of ethnonyms in the eikones6.2 Ethnonyms, geonyms, and “legal ethnic designations”6.3 Ethnonyms of unenslaved persons6.4 Ethnonyms of enslaved persons6.5 Skin colour, race, and ethnicity6.6 Conclusions7 Enslaved persons7.1 Enslaved persons in the corpus of eikones7.2 Terminology7.3 Characteristics of the eikones of enslaved persons7.4 Enslaved eikones and social alienation7.5 Typology of enslaved eikones7.6 Distribution of texts by type7.7 Conclusions8 Conclusions8.1 Findings8.2 Ptolemaic descriptive eikones in contrast with Roman oulē-eikones8.3 The eikones as a biometric system of documentary identification8.4 Descriptions of enslaved persons8.5 Observations on impairments8.6 Race and ethnicity8.7 Conclusions and future researchAppendixBibliographyIndex