After the Egyptian victory at the Battle of Rafia (22 nd June 217 BC) and the favorable finish of the Fourth Syrian War for the country of the Nile (221-217 BC), the local priestly synod accepted a decree in honor of a ruling pharaoh -Ptolemy IV Philopator (15 th November 217 BC). We are talking about the so-called Rafia Decree (Cairo 50048; cf. CG 31088). Its text is best preserved in a demotic version. A demotic text of this document contains two points that are usually considered by the modern researchers as the mistakes of the performers of the inscription. The first point is the naming of Ptolemy IV as the son of Arsinoe, while Berenice II was the real mother of this king. The second point is an unprecedented naming as pharaoh of Antiochus III -of the ruler, of the kingdom of the Seleucids, which was hostile to Egypt; besides, his name was partially framed in the royal cartouche in a few cases. In author's opinion, both points were the result of a planned decision. The reason for the deliberate replacement of Berenice's name with "Arsinoe", another popular name of the Ptolemaic royal family, was the reluctance to remind of the act of maternal murder, actually committed by Ptolemy IV. However, the name of Ptolemy IV's mother is indicated correctly in a fragmentary hieroglyphic version of the decree. I think that it has occurred in consequence of the prohibition of deliberately blatant distortion of the truth in the use of a sacred hieroglyphic writing. The naming of Antiochus III as Pharaoh may have been a reflection of the first signs of dissatisfaction of the local population of Egypt with Ptolemy IV's insufficient attention to the duties of the lord of the Two Lands. In such an extravagant way, the representatives of the Egyptian priesthood hinted at the possibility of the appearance of another pharaoh, who could be the closest relative of Philopator in the female line -Antiochus III.
