Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2006 13:22:26 -0800 (PST) From: george geoffrey conwill Subject: Re: AEL IF YOU ARE SENDING SCARAB LINE 3.1 SEND NOW to karen directly--I WILL DO COLLATIONS TONIGHT To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Dear Karen, I'd like to make a correction to my first line of the AIII lion hunt scarab: I should have translated it as: rxt mAjw jnj n Hmt.f m st.t(w).f account of lions gotten by his Majesty by means of his own shooting Here's line 2 as well: SAa Hat-sp nfryt r Hat-sp mDw beginning from the bottom (ie first or zero) regnal year to regnal year ten Pax et bonum, Geoff ============================================================================== From: "KMOTC" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: AEL SCARAB COLLATION 3.1 Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 01:25:13 -0600 Hey Gang, It is, as they say, better late than never --when it comes to the collation, that is. ( : However, starting Sunday January 7, 2007, the Scarab Translation lines must be in by 10pm central USA time, because I will be posting the collations shortly after that time. If I delay the collation for some reason, and send on Monday, and you are late, you luck out, if not, we might miss your contribution. So please try your best to submit the lines on time ( : As your moderator I reserve the sole right to be late on a regular basis *teasing but sadly often true* And as you well know, I rely on you all to make me look good. And since you have not failed in your volunteer duties in this respect so far, I expect you will continue to keep up the good work! I will still cut us some slack for 3.2 and 3.3, and if you get them to me by this Sunday for 3.2 and 3.3 some time before the Sunday after that, everything should work out. Just do your best and send as soon as possible. 3.2 is quite short and could reasonably be done by this Sunday. I would like to get us back on schedule for 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3, which if you recall are all due on January 7th. We were going to move much slower for the Holidays, but then we ended up moving slower even than I had anticipated. I will take full credit for this lapse, if you will do the work to get us back on schedule ( : Neat how that works. Please discuss anything you wish to about the translation lines on AEL--that's why we do this. best, Karen collation below *************** Scarab 3.1 rxt mAjw jn.n Hm.f stt.f Ds.f rxt = number mAjw = ideogram = lions jnj = verb 3ae-inf = fetch, get jn.n = perfect form of verb = fetched/got rxt mAjw jn.n = the number of lions fetched/got Hm.f = His Maesty stj = verb 3ae-inf = shoot stt = base + t = infinitive = to shoot, shooting stt.f = his shooting Ds == self, own Ds.f = his own Hm.f stt.f Ds.f = His Majesty's (his) own (his) shooting rxt mAjw jn.n Hm.f stt.f Ds.f = the number of lions (that were) taken (by) his Majesty's own shooting or The number of lions shot by his majesty ************************************************************** 3.1 rxt mAjw jnj n Hmt.f m st.t(w).f account of lions gotten by his Majesty by means of his own shooting 3.1 transliteration: rxt mA(w) jn.n Hm.f m stt.f Ds.f translation: The number of lions which his Incarnation got through his own shooting This line starts off with the noun phrase 'rxt mA(w)'. This is a direct genitive between 'rxt' ("number") and 'mA(w)' ("lions"); thus 'rxt mA(w)' means "number of lions". 'mA(w)' is written ideographically with the E22 lion sign, which is followed by the Z22 plural strokes. Also note that the root of the noun is 'mA' (lioness is 'mAt'), so the plural is 'mAw'. 'rxt mA(w)' is modified by the indirect relative clause 'jn.n Hm.f m stt.f Ds.f'. QUESTION: This clause starts with 'jn.n', which might well be the relative perfect (ch. 24) rather than the perfect. then again, it might not; it's not quite clear to me which it is. On the one hand, the relative perfect should agree in gender with the noun it modifies. The primary noun in the direct genitive is 'rxt' which *looks* feminine; if it is feminine, then one would expect the perfect relative to be 'jnt.n' (according to my cursory reading of sec. 24.2.3). Perhaps the 't' was omitted by the scribe, but Allen doesn't discuss that possibility, so it's probably very rare. On the other hand, the coreferent, which would be the direct object in this clause, is not expressed. Allen states in sec. 24.5.1 that in relative clauses with a relative form where the antecedent is identified with the direct object of the relative form, the coreferent is not normally expressed. However, in the unmarked, indirect relative clause with a verb in the perfect that is given in example 3 of sec. 18.12, the coreferent *is* expressed and is the direct object of the verb in the perfect. Of course, the existence of this one example doesn't prove that the relative clause must always express the coreferent where it would be the direct object of a verb in the perfect, but it does lend support to the idea that 'jn.n' in this example is the relative perfect. More damningly, the perfect is not used in unmarked relative clauses after an antecedent that is defined (sec. 18.12), as is likely the case here. Anyway, the subject of this clause is 'Hm.f' ("His Incarnation"). This is followed by the prepositional phrase, 'm stt.f Ds.f'. Here 'stt' is the infinitive of the 3ae-inf. verb 'stj' ("shoot"). The 3MS suffix pronoun 'f' is the subject of the infinitival phrase. 'Ds.f' ("himself") here modifies the suffix pronoun 'f' attached to 'stt'; Allen states (sec. 18.14) that when 'Ds' plus a suffix pronoun modifies another suffix pronoun, it often has to be translated by "own". The meaning of 'm' here is that of "through" or "by" (check out the second example in the last bullet of section 8.2.3). Thus, 'm stt.f Ds.f' means "through his own shooting". ************************************************************** 3.1 rxt mAj(w) jn.n Hm=f stt=f Ds=f rxt = amount, number mAj(w) = lions (plural) jnj (verb 3ae-inf) = to fetch, get, use HERE: jn.n - perfect Hm=f = his majesty stj (verb 3ae-inf) = to shoot HERE: stt - infinitive, expresses concomitant action Ds=f = himself The number of lions His Majesty got [while] shooting on his own or The number of lions His Majesty killed 3.1 Transliteration: rxt mAjw jn.n Hm.f m stt.f Ds.f Dissection: 1) rxt = "the number, the amount" 2) mAjw = "lions" 3) rxt mAjw = a direct genitive "the number of lions" 4) jn.n = perfect form of jnj (verb 3ae-inf.) "fetch, get, use" (see 18.2 in Allen) 5) Hm.f = "His Majesty", i.e., the king 6) m stt.f = m + infinitive form of stj (verb 3ae-inf) "shoot". This shows concomitant action (Allen 14.11.2) 7) Ds.f = Ds "self, own", .f =3rd person masc. suffix pronoun. i.e., "himself" Translation: Literal: "The number of lions His Majesty brought, shooting (by) himself." Paraphrase: "The number of lions His Majesty shot by himself." 3.1 rHt mAiw inn Hm=f m stt=f Ds=f rHt - amount many mAi (w) lions - plural - direct object inn brings - verb Hm.f his Majesty m stt.f which he collected / the collecting of it. verb of motion Ds.f himself - reflexive pronoun His majesty brings many lions which he collected himself 3.1 rxt mAw jn=B7n Hm=B7f m stt=B7f Ds=B7f The number of lions that his Incarnation brought away by his own shooting This line starts with a noun phrase 'rxt mAw' "the number of lions". \ Theremainder of the line is a relative clause modifying this phrase. The verb 'jn=B7n' which looks like the perfect may in fact be what Allen calls the perfect relative form, which he discusses in Chapter 24 - see in particular §24.5.1. The subject of the verb is 'Hm=B7f'. In the following prepositional phrase. 'stt' is the infinitive of 'stj'. For 'Ds=B7f' see §8.14. 3.1 rxt mAiw in(i). n. Hm. f st(i)t. f Ds. F The number of the lions which his majesty has slain, shooting them himself Reading: Line. 1 The twin ideas of [ini] 'overcome/vanquish' together with 'shooting' suggest that the king slew the lion. ******************************************************************** 3.1 rXt mAw jnj.n stt.f Ds.f rXt noun = number, amount mAw plural noun = lions jnj.n verb, 3ae-inf. = bring, fetch hm.f noun plus 3MS suffix pronoun = His Majesty stt.f verb plus 3MS suffix pronoun = he shot Ds.f preposition plus 3MS suffix pronoun = by him - by himself His Majesty brought back a number of lions shot by him. ***********************************************************************8 3.1 rxt mAi.w in.n Hm.f m st(i)t.f Ds.f The number of lions his majesty brought of which he himself shot rxt - amount, number. mAi.w- masculine plural lions. in.n Hm.f - his majesty brought - the perfect, (sDm.n.f) The verb ini (to bring)is a 3AE INF. The third weak consonant not written. m - "of" - preposition, (not sure.) st(i)t.f -" he shot" - The active sDmt.f form Ds.f - "self" + "him". Reflexive pronoun used adverbially. I'm not sure of the last part of the sentence, the "m" is stumping me. This is my first attempt at a transliteration as you can probably tell. (Hmwk voluneer's self-correction before collation rxt mA(i).w in.n Hm.f m st(i)t.f Ds.f The number of lions his majesty has brought shooting (them) himself In my last post I thought st(i)t.f was the active sDmt.f form - he shot Now I believe it to be the infinitive 3AE-INF, base + t - stt.f - his shooting Infinitive after preposition m = "in" :- m stt - in (the act of) shooting or The number of lions his majesty has brought, of his own shooting If the prep. is m "of" ************************************************************** 3.1 rxt mA[i].w in .n Hm .f m st[i]t .f Ds.f The number of lions His Majesty brought to shoot himself. As the English doesn't sound 'quite' right how about a looser translation of The number of lions His Majesty brought [ in order that he can ] shoot [ them ] himself ?? 3.1 rxt mA[i].w in(i).n=Hm.f m st[i]t=f Ds=f How about a translation of: count of lions that His Majesty brought of its own shot (literal). (count or list better than " number "???? Adapted: Count of hunted lions of His Majesty of its own shot or List of the lions those hunted its majesty with its own shot *********************************************************** 3.1 MdC: r:x*t:Y1-E22:3-W25-n:n-Hm-1:f-m-F29:t*t-f-D:z:f Transliteration: rxt mAw in.n Hm.f m stt.f Ds.f rxt = Amount, Number mA(i)w = Lions in(i) = to fetch, to bring - .n - perfect form Hm.f = His Incarnation m stt.f = pseudoverbial construction - in shooting him/them Ds.f = Himself Translation: The number of lions His Incarnation has brought while shooting them himself 3.1 rxt mAw jn.n Hm.f m stt.f Ds.f rxt: noun, fem, 'number', 'quantity' mAw: noun, masc plural, 'lions' (we know it's plural by the 3 pluralizing strokes underneath it.) rxt mAw: indirect genitive construction, 'number of lions'. jnj: 3-ae weak verb, 'to bring', 'to fetch' I'm going to assume that this is the perfect form of the verb with a nominal subject. See Allen chapter 18. Same structure as the example he gives in 18.2: sDm.n nTr - the god heard. Hm.f: 'king', 'majesty'. See Allen's comments on this in the essay of chapter 3. So the clause 'jn.n Hm.f', in isolation, can be translated as 'His Majesty fetched/got/brought/bagged'. I'm going to assume that 'jn.n Hm.f' is an (unmarked) indirect relative clause modifying 'mAw'. (What kind of lions? The lions THAT HIS MAJESTY GOT.) See Allen 18.12 for a short discussion; this construction would seem to fit since 'mAw' would qualify as an undefined antecedent. The rest of this line is pretty straight-forward: stt: noun, fem, 'shooting', 'hunting'. m stt.f: in his shooting, 'in/from his hunting' Ds.f: see Allen 8.14, last paragraph. 'by himself' Wrap-up. This line (it's not a complete sentence) can be translated as 'The number of lions that His Majesty, by himself, got in his shooting' and then the following lines will tell us the actual number. 3.1 rxt mAi.w in.n Hm.f m st(i)t.f Ds.f The number of lions (which)his majesty brought by his shooting himself rxt = number mAi.w = lions (plural) [which] in.n Hm.f = in(i) weak verb to bring, perfect tense (as in sDm.n f), hence his majesty brought m = by st(i)t.f = infinitive of st(i) shooting, hence his shooting Ds.f = himself ie. his own shooting 3.1 rxt mAj ini n Hm.f stt.f Ds.f The number of lions His Majesty shot himself rxt number, amount mAj ideagram for lion (with plural strokes - lions) ini 3ea-inf. bring, get, fetch n prepositional nisbe 4.13.2 of Hm.f His Majesty stt shoot is the correct word here but found stt in dictionary to be boil Ds.f himself 3.1 Transliteration: rxt mAj(w) jn.n Hm.f m stt.f Ds.f Translation: The number of lions got by his majesty, he shot by himself. rxt = number mAj(w) = lions - plural, ideogram jn.n got - jnj = verb 3ae-inf = fetch/get- jn.n perfect form of verb = = got Hm.f = his majesty m = by stt.f = he shot - stj = verb 3se-inf = shoot - stt, base + t = infinitive + .f he shot Ds.f = himself Ds = self + .f him = himself ============================================================================== Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2006 10:46:41 -0800 (PST) From: Peter Barta Subject: Re: AEL W3d-wr & the Red Sea? To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Dear Listmembers, On the map of the Ancient Egyptian natural resources published in J.Baines-J.Malek, Atlas of Ancient Egypt (Equinox, Oxford 1984) p. 21, there are many mines in the Eastern Desert along the coast of the Red Sea. There is an island 45 miles off the Egyptian coast at Aswan, called now Zabargad (in the Ancient Age: Topazios) where the ancient 'topaz' (that is peridot according to the modern minerology) was mined from the early second millenium B.C. (Cf. Pliny, Nat.Hist. Book XXXVIII, Ch. XXXII. § 108. In spite of Iuba information, the island was mined more than 15 centuries before the Ptolemidan Age.) So, both the mine and the island can be easily located without too much trouble IMO. Best regrds, Peter Barta Budapest, Hungary > >The emphasis then shifts to an account related to a > scribe by a sailor, > >presumably from some other voyage which became > wrecked on an island in > >"w3d-wr". This voyage is purported to be bound for > "the mines of Pharaoh" > >without identifying which mines are intended. There > is no departure point, > >no route nor even an identifiable destination but > at some point a "contrary > >wind" (or storm?) blew up and the vessel perished > with all hands except the > >sailor who was washed up on the island. ==============================================================================