Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 16:02:26 -0700 (PDT) From: martie hensley Subject: AEL westcar Papyrus To: aegyptian-l@rostau.demon.co.uk Would anyone know where I could find a copy of Papyrus westcar cursive translate to hieroglyphs I have the hieratic rendition & I have pages 11, & some of 5, 4,6. I am using the hieroglyphs translate to fill my hieratic carter lists as will as translate the text it self, it seems like I mite have a good start on the translate but the more info I have the better martie hensley bahrtah@yahoo.com ============================================================================== From: Sumbebekos@aol.com Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 15:05:02 EDT Subject: AEL CT 160 Posted To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk Dear List, I have just posted the hieroglyphs, transcription and literary translation CT 160, which describes Set as Ra's defender against the serpent lurking on the sunset mountain. This may be viewed at my website "Isle of Fire." at http://www.geocities.com/yewneserser/index.html I have also put up a page of links to sites of Egyptian interest on the web. Suggested additions are welcome. Jacob Rabinowitz ============================================================================== Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 00:55:27 +0200 To: From: Hans van den Berg Subject: AEL Hieroglyphic in Unicode is nonsense I've become aware of recent proposals to have the basic Gardiner set included in Unicode as a first step towards full inclusion of hieroglyphic. I wish to express here that I believe the idea of ever having, or ever trying to achieve a full standardized set of hieroglyphs is sheer folly. I also believe that the choice for the 'basic Gardiner set' seems more motivated by an apparently desparate need of the few to have something represented rather than a well balanced judgement of the need of Egyptology as a whole. Gardiner himself would have argued against this choice. The set is wonderfully useful, no doubt about it, but we should not forget it only concerns the signs most frequently met with when teaching Middle Egyptian from the most well-known texts. The serious scholar would soon find himself in trouble when leaving the well-paved path. In this respect we should not forget what Gardiner himself wrote in his preface, where he clearly points out the limitations of the set. He speaks of it as being an enumeration of the "commonest hieroglyphs found in Middle Egyptian", and he adds that "it would be easy enough to augment our list very considerably". Apart from denying any intention to provide 'completeness', Gardiner also warns us for arrogance where it comes to dealing with these matters, as he says "the modern carving for scientific precision, so contrary to the habit of the egyptians themselves, has often led in the past to falsification of the graphical facts". And graphical facts is what we're mostly dealing with when it comes to working with hieroglyphic texts, and a careful evaluation of the graphical facts should therefore be the sole basis from which a standardised set, if any, is formed. So not by just picking the one most readily available! Moreover, I believe there was no single Egyptological committee at all convened or consulted for this choice, so who is making the decisions here and what is the damn hurry?!? I have recently observed that within the Unicode chambers some have started to become discontented with the apparent lack of participation from scholars in reviewing Unicode proposals. They believe that especially the scholars would most likely use and benefit from the inclusion of various 'dead languages' in the Unicode standard. It only these scholars were consulted! One reason for the hurry might be found here: in e-mail communication of 10/28/00 the Technical Director of the Unicode Technical Committee observed that "there are powerful, countervailing forces within the [computer] industry and among standardization circles that would prefer that the Unicode Standard stop changing and expanding, since adaptation to such change is expensive and unsettling." This makes certain parties within Unicode committees believe that the time may soon come when no longer any additional historic languages may be accepted because of feelings amongst Unicode Consortium members. This may account for certain parties continuing to pursue the hurried inclusion of these scripts now. I find it a sorry fact to have Gardiner's basic set included with the same hurry 'for the sake of it', rather than on basis of a well balanced judgement of the historic development of the script and its characters. So Unicode being about standards, whatever to think of a comprehensive 'standardized' hieroglyphic set? Even if the basic Gardiner set were to be a first step, it remains very hard to define a common set of hieroglyphs to serve as basis for characterset standardization. As discussed above, it only represents a common set for the Middle Egyptian stage, leaving out important signs from pre- and post-Middle Egyptian stages. Other sets, like the CCER's Hieroglyphica, make it hard to distinguish between graphemes and graphic variants, therefore containing a maximal set too ambiguous for this purpose. Moreover, both Gardiner and Hieroglyphica lack an approximate statistic of the exact use of the signs presented, making it very difficult indeed to choose the most common denominator. Especially Egyptologists, knowing the exact problems of the hieroglyphic script with its ambiguous use of signs and phonemes, would not want to set about defining a most 'common', 'typical', minimal or even maximal set. A lot of questions still remain as to the exact nature of the Egyptian Grammar, in any stage of the language, which is clearly illustrated by the large number of 'new' grammars being produced by the scientific community. New grammars and newly discovered texts time and again influence the lecture of signs. Also, geographical and regional differences between signs are highly debated, and some of the many graphical variants found may finally appear to be graphemes after all. As long as this situation isn't solved it remains difficult, if not impossible, to assign definitive labels to Egyptian graphemes, an essential requirement for standardization. So why not accept the fact that the best standardized way of representing linguistic data of 'dead languages' could well remain to be in the form of transliteration? Gardiner himself argued that "the beginner may safely use our types as his models, but he must realize that copying from the actual monuments gives knowledge of hieroglyphic writing unobtainable in any other way". And about his basic set he says "no fount of type is sufficiently rich or sufficiently adaptable to do justice to the Egyptian originals. Indeed, there is only one wholle satisfactory method of publishing hieroglyphic texts, namely reproduction in facsimile". But even for the purpose of grammatical or lexographical works, should a Unicode standard start by limiting itself to Middle Egyptian with -obviously- such a limited set? I would not encourage anyone to support this proposal, as it lacks a fundamental scientific basis, and therefore serves no scientific purpose but the folly of a few enthousiasts with no clear agenda. Hans van den Berg The Netherlands ============================================================================== Subject: AEL Verb Sms(j) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 14:05:19 +0200 From: To: Hi all. Concerning Allen's exercise # 14.1, I looked for verb Sms in the dictionary part of the book. I'm a little bit puzzled as it's stated that it is a 4ae-inf verb (Smsj). But in HWB, in Faulkner and in the dictionary part of Gardiner I find Sms. I guess the verb class is a little bit unclear, as Hannig doesn't mention it under Sms (it usually cites the verb classes). Anyway I cannot understand why the infinitive is _Sms_. If it is a 4ae-inf verb, an infinitive made up by the verb base means that it is a geminating verb. But I couldn't find signs of gemination (_Smss_?) in Hannig. Any clues by anyone? Grazie, Fabio. ============================================================================== From: "mark" To: "AEL" Subject: AEL re: peasant Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 15:16:15 +0100 Thanks Jeremy for finishing off the Peasant. I'll try and catch up and post another section soon. Well done mark ============================================================================== Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 00:37:28 +1000 To: Ancient Egyptian Language List From: Mike Dyall-Smith Subject: AEL Geoffrey Graham - Westcar Does anyone know the whereabouts of Geoffrey Graham. He was one of the active members at the beginning of the AEL list and also the EEF. I will cross-post at the EEF. His old Yale email address no longer works and his personal web site has disappeared. I've asked several of his academic colleagues. Any assistance greatly appreciated. Also, Geoff was a major contributor to the Westcar papyrus discussion, and I put up his 'reconstructions' of the hieratic (which is badly damaged in many sections). The link was broken (along with many other links at the CCER), but it is now working again. Regards, Mike Dyall-Smith ============================================================================== From: "James P. Allen" To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk Subject: AEL Demonstratives, articles, and the colloquial Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 10:35:48 -0400 Re the exchange on articles: as someone pointed out, the pA/tA/nA series of demonstratives is known from the OK onward. Loprieno published an article (in Italian) in 1980 in which he argued that these were originally (until Late Egyptian) only demonstratives and not articles, and my own research, which is detailed in my forthcoming publication of the Heqanakht papyri, confirms this. As someone also indicated, these are almost certainly dialectical variants of the pn/tn/nn series, and theyre used in exactly the same way in Middle Egyptian texts. What we call standard or classical Middle Egyptian was, of course, originally a spoken language. Like standard written Arabic it first reflected the spoken language but did so less and less as time went on. By the New Kingdom the situation was much as it is in Arabic-speaking countries today, with a spoken language much different than the written one. What we call Late Egyptian is primarily a "modernization" of the written language, making it more reflective of the spoken idiom. In the case of Egyptian we also have to reckon with dialects (Coptic shows us that there were many). Middle Egyptian is probably based on the dialect of Thebes, while Old and Late Egyptian reflect that of the north. In this light it is dangerous to speculate on the social status of one or another dialect. The significance of Mentuwosers statement--jnk mdw r r-a srjw Swy m Dd pAw "I am one who speaks according to the style of officials, free of Dd pAw"--is not clear. I too used to think it meant "free of saying pAs," as reflected in my grammar (section 5.10.3). But if you look at the letters of the vizier Intefiqer, preserved in Papyrus Reisner IV, you will find them full of pA/tA/nA. It doesnt seem likely that a vizier, the paragon of Egyptian officialdom (see the Instructions to the Vizer), would use "lower-class" idioms in his official letters. Intefiqer's letters indicate that pA/tA/nA were not "lower class" language but simply features of his own dialect, which was somewhat different from that of standard literary Middle Egyptian. We find the same demonstratives in the Illahun papyri of the late Middle Kingdom, most of which are letters addressed to higher officials. Even their use in the so-called colloquial of Papyrus Westcar conforms to the regular grammar of the pn/tn/nn demonstratives (except, of course, for their position before the noun). There they occur in the king's speech (6,1; 8,13; 9,1-2; 9,5; 9,8; 9,9; 9,17) as well as in the speech of others and the narrative. I now think that Mentuwosers pAw is a participle of the verb pA "do in the past," and his statement means something like "free of outdated speech"--nothing to do with the pA/tA/nA demonstratives. What is clear, as someone pointed out, is that the Late Egyptian articles came from the demonstratives, as they have in many languages. The fact that they came from the pA/tA/nA series may only reflect the dominance of one particular dialect at the time Late Egyptian was put into writing. They could as easily have come from the pn/tn/nn series, in which case they would have been expressed after the noun (pr pn this house > *"the house" vs. pA pr "this house" > "the house"). Thats sort of analogous to what actually happened to the Latin demonstratives in Romanian, where they became definite articles attached to the end of the noun, as opposed to the other Romance languages, where theyre expressed before the noun. James P. Allen, Curator Department of Egyptian Art The Metropolitan Museum of Art ============================================================================== Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 23:38:44 +0200 (MEST) From: Mark-Jan Nederhof Subject: AEL align peasant To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk version = B1 A few remaining corrections for the eighth speech, with regard to the two submitted readings. One should likely read the stative form of Hr; cf. Gardiner p. 239. <337> Hr.tj r jrt jyt ; <337> beware of doing evil! Clearly jrr sj, not jrr=s, since s(j) is object: <338> [...] hAA=s <339> m-a jrr sj r Xrt-nTr ; <338> [...] It goes down <339> with him who does it to the necropolis. Surely not wr=s and aA=s, since wr and aA are adjective verbs. One could argue about wAH=s, but it seems unlikely in the context. <351> [...] Dr-ntt wr sj ; <351> [...] For it is mighty, <352> aA sj wAH sj ; <352> it is great, it is enduring, Regards, Mark-Jan ============================================================================== From: "Rohan Fenwick" To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk Subject: Re: The Unnamed God (WAS RE: AEL Tut's Curse) Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 02:11:34 +0000 sS.n=f Jean-Claude: >Regarding the origin of the AE definite articles pA (m. sing.), tA(f. >sing.) >and nA (pl.) it has been establised that they originate from ME (and even >OE) >demonstrative adjectives: pA bAk originally means "this servant" and then >evolved >in LE to "the servant" (cf. Gardiner, lesson IX). Thank you. This was my original query... I didn't mean to start a war over the articles. :) As a digression, I should have noticed this correlation. Linguistically, a lot of languages have their articles originating in their demonstrative stems. In my English dictionary, for example, the etymology of "the" reads: "Old English, replacing /se/, /se:o/, /thaet/ (= THAT)" The fact that the Egyptian articles don't resemble Semitic or Greek counterparts (Arabic "al", for example, or the Greek "ho", "tous" etc.) is also a signpost showing that the articles weren't borrowed from contemporary languages. A signpost I missed, it seems. Regards, Rohan Fenwick rfenwick18@hotmail.com ============================================================================== From: "Sandro Banducci" To: Subject: AEL re: Seti 1 Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 12:00:14 -0700 Hi all. Could anyone direct me to some online photos of the Alabaster sarcophagus belonging to Seti 1st.? I believe it is housed in the Soanne museum, London. Thanks in advance, Sandro Banducci mailto:support@atlantisconsulting.com ============================================================================== Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 23:52:50 +0200 (MEST) From: Mark-Jan Nederhof Subject: AEL align peasant To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk Some noteworthy phrases from the beginning of the ninth speech. version = B2 <93> [...] jn jwsw Dar <94> DAt ; <93> [...] and it is the `hand'-balance that detects <94> deficiency I would rather transliterate jrr than jr. This text seems to be quite consistent in the writing of jr/jrr, although in general the writing with eye+mouth is ambiguous. If it had been jr, I would have strongly favoured an imperative over a participle. jrr xsft r xsfw n=f ; and inflicts punishment on him who ought to be punished. Just a wild guess trying to make some sense out of this. I assume sn here has the meaning "copy, imitate". sn.tw tp-Hsb r=k ; One sets the standard after you. Damaged text. Reading is pure speculation: <95> [???] grg xpr Xrt=f ; <95> Falsehood [???] when its need arises, Certainly not ann=s. Also ann sw is unlikely; note that ann is substantival sDm=f, and furthermore, elsewhere in this text, sw is never written as just s. <96> ann sj mAat r aqA=f ; <96> but the truth returns to correct it. jxt pw nt <97> grg mAat ; Truth is an aspect of falsehood, For the following, Jenny's transcription differs from Parkinson's (latter has f rather than D). swAD=f is passive sdm=f (?) swAD=f pw ; which means it is made to thrive n nw.tw=f ; but it is not gathered in. <98> jr Sm grg jw=f tnm=f ; <98> When falsehood sets out, it goes astray. n <99> DA.n=f m mXnt ; It cannot cross in a ferry sSAA (absent from Faulkner's dictionary; see Hannig) seems semantically much more likely than any word sSA, although the writing would be quite unusual: n sSAA.n=f ; and it cannot row. Regards, Mark-Jan ============================================================================== Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 18:18:16 -0700 From: Marianne Luban To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL re: Seti 1 On Thu, 25 Jul 2002 12:00:14 -0700 Sandro Banducci wrote: >>Hi all. Could anyone direct me to some online photos of the Alabaster sarcophagus belonging to Seti 1st.? I believe it is housed in the Soanne museum, London. >> http://www.soane.org That's the official webpage. What they have there I don't know. See also http://www.geocities.com/scribelist/Round.html for some criteria for assigning images in the round to the reign of Seti I. I am going to get a drive going in hopes that people associated with museums and other collections can perhaps find a few more pieces from this reign. Marianne Luban ============================================================================== Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2002 01:03:03 +0200 (MEST) From: Mark-Jan Nederhof Subject: AEL align peasant To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk The remainder of the ninth speech. I only give those phrases where I differ with Jerome's reading. version = B2 <105> [...] m Sp Hr=k r <106> dg n=k ; <105> [...] Don't be blind to <106> someone who looks to you! [...] hA=k <107> m pA wsf ; [...] May you abandon <107> this neglect, smj.tw Ts=k ; and may your verdict be accounced! For a particle rf instead of r=f, it would come suspiciously late in the sentence. <108> [...] m sDm n bw-nb r=f ; <108> [...] and don't listen to anyone (who is) against him! njs s <109> r sp=f n wn-mAa ; Summon a man <109> concerning his just cause! The translation of r below is doubtful, but I don't see viable alternatives. Parkinson's translation by a comparison "more wretched than" suffers from the fact that mAry is a substantival form and not an adjective. <111> [...] xpr wTsw m <112> mAry ; <111> [...] The accuser becomes <112> wretched, mAry r sprw ; wretched to be a petitioner, <113> xpr xftj m smAw ; <113> and the opponent becomes a murderer. Don't forget =j after spr, indicated by A1. Lit. "I will go so that I may plead". <114> [...] jw=j r Smt spr=j <115> Hr=k n ^jnpw ; <114> [...] I will go and plead <115> concerning you with Anubis.' Regards, Mark-Jan ============================================================================== From: "mark" To: "AEL" Subject: AEL align peasant Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 11:28:27 +0100 version = B2 <101> nn iwaw =f tp-tA ir sqdd ; <101> he has no heirs upon earth. He who sets sail <102> Xr =f n sAH n =f tA n mni n ; <102> with it, he doesn't touch land. His boat does not <103> dpwt =f r dmi =s m dns n is =k ; <103> moor at its fitting place. Do not be weighty, you were not light # 'light' of character <104> m ihm n xAx =k m nma m sDm n ; <104> Do not linger, you were not swift. Do not be 'partial', do not listen to <105> ib m Hbs Hr =k r rx n =k m Sp Hr =k r ; <105> the heart. Do not cover your face to the one you know. Do not blind your face against # be inaccessible <106> dg n =k m ni twA tw hA =k ; <106> one who looks at you. Do not drive away an inferior. You descend <107> m pA wsf smit Ts =k ; <107> into the sluggishness, the charge is your maxim. <108> ir n irr n =k m sDm n bw-nb r =f nis s ; <108> act for the one who acts for you. Do not listen to anyone against him, summon a man <109> r sp =f n wn mAa nn sf n wsfw ; <109> to his own Just cause.There is no yesterday for the sluggard <110> nn xnms n sX mAat nn hrw ; <110> there is no friend for one deaf to Justice, no holiday <111> nfr n awn-ib xpr wTsw m ; <111> for the greedy. If the accused becomes <112> mAry mAry r sprw ; <112> wretched more wretched than (when) a petitioner # after Parkinson <113> xpr xfty m smAw mk wi Hr spr ; <113> then the enemy becomes a killer. Behold, I am petitioning <114> n =k n sDm n =k st iw =i r Smt spr ; <114> to you but you do not hear it. I will go, a petitioner, <115> Hr =k n inpw rdi in imy-r-pr-wr ; <115> on account of you to Anubis. Then the High Steward <116> sA mrw rnsy Sm imy-sA 2 r ann =f ; <116> Meru's son Rensy caused 2 attendants to turn him back. <117> wn in sxty pn snD ib(i) =f irrt ; <117> This peasant was afraid, he thought it was being done <118> r xsf n =f Hr mdt tn Ddt n =f Dd in sxty pn ; <118> in order to punish him for the speech he had spoken. This peasant said <119> xsfw n ib(i) m mw DAt r ; <119> the thirsty mans approach at water, a childs mouth <120> n Xrd n sbnt m irtt ; <120> reaching out to a wet-nurse for milk mark ============================================================================== From: Michael-Tilgner@t-online.de (Michael Tilgner) To: "AEL" Subject: Re: AEL re: Seti 1 Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 14:11:24 +0200 Sandro Banducci wrote: > Could anyone direct me to some online photos of the Alabaster > sarcophagus belonging to Seti 1st.? There is a special website about Seti I http://sethy1.free.fr/ The original publication about the alabaster sarcophagus is BA 18641 Sharpe, Samuel: The alabaster sarcophagus of Oimenepthah I., king of Egypt, now in Sir John Soane's Museum, Lincoln's Inn Fields / drawn by Joseph Bonomi, and described by Samuel Sharpe. - London : Longman, Green, Longman, Roberts and Green, 1864. - 45 S. : 19 Taf., 12 Abb. ; 4 Best wishes, Michael Tilgner ==============================================================================