summarise this: The divine name Ἑρμάνουβιϲ is known from a handful of epigraphic and literary sources, mostly of the Roman period.[2] Plutarch cites the name as a designation of Anubis in his underworldly aspect (De Is. et Os. 375e), while Porphyry refers to Hermanubis as ϲύνθετοϲ, "composite," and μιξέλλην, "half-Greek" (De imaginibus fr. 8, p. 18.1–2 Bidez). The name has been restored in a second-century BC dedicatory inscription from Delos (ID 2156.2 [Ἑρ]μανού[βιδι νικ]ηφόρωι), which would be its earliest attestation, but otherwise it appears in three inscriptions of the Roman period, two from Egypt and one from Thessalonike (see below). It is clear that the name is a result of the assimilation of the Egyptian god Anubis to the Greek god Hermes, which is well attested in a number of literary, epigraphic, and artistic sources.[3] Although Hermes was traditionally equated with the Egyptian Thoth, his function as psychopompos encouraged his association with Anubis given the latter's comparable funerary role in Egyptian religion as embalmer and guardian of the dead and as leader of the deceased to the tribunal of Osiris. This assimilation resulted in widespread Graeco-Roman representations of the canine-headed Anubis with attributes of the Greek Hermes, such as the distinctive staff known as the kerykeion or winged sandals.[4] As far as I know, none of these representations whose provenance is known was found in Egypt, though this may be due to mere chance.[5] But in Roman Alexandria there emerges a new iconographical type, well represented in coins and sculpture, in which a fully anthropomorphic young god is flanked by a dog and holds the same attributes as the said Anubis, in addition to wearing the calathos headdress.[6] It is this type that art historians have traditionally labeled "Hermanubis." In making this identification, they have been encouraged by Porphyry's statement about the god's "composite" and "half-Hellenic" character. However, it is important to stress that the reference to the fully anthropomorphic type as "Hermanubis" is only a hypothetical convention, and that not a single of the numerous representations of this type bears a legend or inscription identifying it as such.[7] I will return to this question at the end of the paper in light of the onomastic evidence.