From: "Mark Wilson" To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk Date: Mon, 5 May 1997 22:18:12 +0000 Subject: AEL (Fwd) Egyptology I received the following question privately. Maybe someone on the list can assist here. Thanks, Mark Wilson weneg@rostau.demon.co.uk ------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- Date: Fri, 02 May 1997 21:03:57 -0700 From: Benbow Cheesman Reply-to: crossbow@execpc.com To: markw@rostau.demon.co.uk Subject: Egyptology If not inappropriate, would appreciate list of major universities providing undergrad. preparation for career in Egyptology. Requester is 16 yr. old honor student learning hieroglyphics on her own. Thanks. ============================================================================== Date: Mon, 05 May 1997 16:52:04 -0500 From: Saida To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL Rahotep Corrections Graham wrote: > > Hi, > > I have been talking with Marianne who has a much clearer copy of the > photograph. Between her better photograph and my Woerterbuch, I have been > able to revise my translation: > > wr-m3.w jwnw w<.t.y > Unique Chief of Seers of Heliopolis > > wr zH mDH.w 3ms > Chief of the Shrine, Manager of the Scepter > > js w<.t.y wrS pj n Hrw > Unique Ancient(one) who guards Pe for Horus > > z3-n.y-sw.t n.y X.t=f r<-Htp.j > Bodily Royal Son, Rahotep > > wr n.y pj{.t} > Chief of Pe (feminine t still makes no sense.) On the opposite side of the river from Pe stood Tep, and to all intents and purposes, Pe and Tep were one city. The whole thing later, of course, became Buto. In my opinion, the feminine {t} is a sort of clever little touch. One can still get "Pe" out of it, if one is partial to Pe, but, looking the other way around, one can get "Tep" as well! > > jm.y-r3 s-k3j.t Tt > Overseer of construction and Vizier (or local leader) > > jm.y-r3 mS< xrp tm3 > Overseer of the Army, Controller of Squadrons > > z3-n.y-sw.t n.y X.t=f r<-Htp.j > Bodily Royal Son, Rahotep > > The real changes are: > > - grouping of wr + S = wrS, and realization that the circle after the {p} > was actually a city sign. > > - realizing that js was not the adjective, but a noun. > > - I still don't have an explantion for th intrusive {t} in pj!!! > > - Marianne reminded me that the sxm scepter should be read xrp in titles > according to Gardiner. > > - I found tm3 in the Woerterbuch as an Old Kingdom word for "squadron" > (Soldatsrotte) with this same determinative. > > Finally I am satisfied except for that one little {t} which bothers me > still. If you can buy my explanation, I would say the translation is a keeper now! ============================================================================== Date: Mon, 5 May 1997 23:41:09 -0400 (EDT) From: Graham To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL (Fwd) Egyptology Hi, I hope the questioner is subscribed to the list. Mark, if she is not, please forward this message to her. > If not inappropriate, would appreciate list of major universities > providing undergrad. preparation for career in Egyptology. Requester is > 16 yr. old honor student learning hieroglyphics on her own. Thanks. I can give you a partial list of North American Institutions offering undergraduate and graduate programs in Egyptology, and I hope others who know of new programs, and are more familiar with Egyptology on other continenets will also add to the list. If I have neglected any programs, please fill in my blanks. East Coast of the United States: Yale University, New Haven, CT Brown University, Providence, RI The University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA New York University, New York, NY Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD The West Coast of the United States: University of California, Berkeley, CA University of California, Los Angeles, CA The Central United States: University of Chicago, Chicago, IL University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI University of Memphis, Memphis, TN (formerly "Memphis State University") Canada: University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada I wish you well in your educational endeavors! Yours, Geoff Graham sokar@minerva.cis.yale.edu ============================================================================== Date: Mon, 05 May 1997 18:31:28 -0500 From: Saida To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL Back to Westacr, ll. 11 ff. James Hoch wrote: (snipped a bit) > > Line 18: what form is gnX (and note the word order) It's too bad I don't know the parts of speech, but I think I understand the phrase, which is very oriental. It's the verb, isn't it, "shining" ("r-f"--upon it) of gold? This *would* seem a good place for a term meaning "to plate or overlay", but I don't see it here and the idea is conveyed in a different fashion. So I suppose the subject of the "gnX" is "ssnDm" -- (which was) "gleaming upon it(self) with gold" or, in better English, "which had gold gleaming upon it". > > More word plays, as poor as they may be: > > line 14 ??? Can't do this one without the glyphs (I keep losing the web site!) but I think the word play comes in between the "provisions" and the "ship. Also, I have "s-spDd" for the transliteration. What's this? > lines 17-18: what was the carrying poles made of and what did Hardedef do > before he was carried off? The poles were made of "ssnDm gnX r-f m nbw". I've already said that I vote for "ssnDm" being sandalwood but it could be yet another "cedar" word--some pleasant-smelling wood without a doubt. This prince traveled sitting in a chair of ebony. "S3r pw iri.n-f m Hr.t.y s-nDm-f m gniw n.y hbni" > > By the way, hbny (line 17) has worked its way even into English via a no-doubt > circuitous route. Ys, tiw. Probably by way of the Latin "ebeninus" or "hebeninus", which the Romans got from the Egyptians, but who knows? > > Best wishes, > James Hoch Thanks! Marianne Luban ============================================================================== Date: Mon, 05 May 1997 19:52:49 -0500 From: Saida To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL Rahotep Corrections Saida wrote: > > Graham wrote: > > > > wr n.y pj{.t} > > Chief of Pe (feminine t still makes no sense.) Marianne: > On the opposite side of the river from Pe stood Tep, and to all intents > and purposes, Pe and Tep were one city. The whole thing later, of > course, became Buto. In my opinion, the feminine {t} is a sort of > clever little touch. One can still get "Pe" out of it, if one is > partial to Pe, but, looking the other way around, one can get "Tep" as > well! Well,...no. I am wrong. "Tep", it would seem, was never spelled with the /t/ or *loaf* but the *hand* and should then be *Dep*. However, while checking on this (which I should have done better in the first place) I see that, quite often, both "Pe" and "Dep" have the *loaf* afterward. In fact, quite a few Egyptian towns have this feature, probably even most of them. It seems to be a determinative, going along with the det. for "city". Marianne Luban ============================================================================== Date: Mon, 5 May 1997 23:29:06 -0400 (EDT) From: Graham To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL Rahotep Corrections Hi, Marianne, I am so pleased that this text is finally making more sense! Thanks for your encouraging words. > > wr n.y pj{.t} > > Chief of Pe (feminine t still makes no sense.) > > On the opposite side of the river from Pe stood Tep, and to all intents > and purposes, Pe and Tep were one city. The whole thing later, of > course, became Buto. In my opinion, the feminine {t} is a sort of > clever little touch. One can still get "Pe" out of it, if one is > partial to Pe, but, looking the other way around, one can get "Tep" as > well! This is interesting, however there is one serious problem with that interpretation. The original name for "Tep" was "dp". The /d/ later conflated with the /t/, but not until Late Late Egyptian. The History of the name "Buto" is an interesting one, and it returns us to a previous post I made about the vocalization of its goddess's name, in which Professor Schenkel rightly corrected my analysis some months ago. The name "Buto" does not actually come from the conflation of the names of the two cities "p(j)" and "dp" in sequence, but rather from Dep's ancient temple to the tutelary goddess of Lower Egypt, Wadjyt. Her name, probably originally *3D.w.t "cobra" eventually came to be written as w3D.y.t by the Middle Kingdom. The {3} may have been becoming a /w/ and the similarity between the new sequence "wD" and "w3D" "become green" may have become irresistable, since she became a bringer of fertility being a personification of the inundation as the Solar Eye which returned every new year. This is just speculation on my part however, and there are those who think her name was always "the Green". yet, the similarity between 3D.w.t "cobra" and w3D.w.t "greening/fertility" might always have seemed like a suitable pun to the ancient Egyptians. By the time of Greek contact she was called {outO}. This happened because the /D/ became /d/ and subsequently /t/, while the final ending -w.t transformed into -y.t and thence into a lengthened vowel. Her temple had been called "pr-wD.w.t" "domain of Wadjyt". The /b/ at the beginning of "Buto" is most likely a corruption of "pr" rather than any remembrance of the ancient city Pe accross the river. Now, as for the strange {t} ending on p(j).t in this inscription, it might well be a feminine nisbah ending -y.t. If so, then maybe we are to understand that some domain within the city is the referent. *pj.y.t could be the "Butite Quarter", and refer to a temple precinct within the city. It is just a suggestion. I cannot really say. Geoff Graham sokar@minerva.cis.yale.edu ============================================================================== Date: Tue, 06 May 1997 09:26:14 -0500 From: Saida To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL Rahotep Corrections Graham wrote: > > The History of the name "Buto" is an interesting one, and it returns us to > a previous post I made about the vocalization of its goddess's name, in > which Professor Schenkel rightly corrected my analysis some months ago. > The name "Buto" does not actually come from the conflation of the names of > the two cities "p(j)" and "dp" in sequence, but rather from Dep's ancient > temple to the tutelary goddess of Lower Egypt, Wadjyt. Her name, probably > originally *3D.w.t "cobra" eventually came to be written as w3D.y.t by the > Middle Kingdom. The {3} may have been becoming a /w/ and the similarity > between the new sequence "wD" and "w3D" "become green" may have become > irresistable, since she became a bringer of fertility being a > personification of the inundation as the Solar Eye which returned every > new year. This is just speculation on my part however, and there are those > who think her name was always "the Green". yet, the similarity between > 3D.w.t "cobra" and w3D.w.t "greening/fertility" might always have seemed > like a suitable pun to the ancient Egyptians. By the time of Greek > contact she was called {outO}. This happened because the /D/ became /d/ > and subsequently /t/, while the final ending -w.t transformed into -y.t > and thence into a lengthened vowel. Her temple had been called > "pr-wD.w.t" "domain of Wadjyt". The /b/ at the beginning of "Buto" is > most likely a corruption of "pr" rather than any remembrance of the > ancient city Pe accross the river. > > Now, as for the strange {t} ending on p(j).t in this inscription, it might > well be a feminine nisbah ending -y.t. If so, then maybe we are to > understand that some domain within the city is the referent. *pj.y.t > could be the "Butite Quarter", and refer to a temple precinct within the > city. It is just a suggestion. I cannot really say. I'm not so sure you were wrong in the first place. Your explanation of Buto makes sense to me. First of all, the goddesses's name was "Wadjyt", as you say, and it looks to me, from examining some Egyptian words beginning with the *chick* and glyphs of a comparable sound value, followed by a semi-vowel, that a "w" sound is retained when these words survive into Coptic. These terms usually begin in Coptic with the letters "O" and "Ue" combined in that order. To me this is obviously a "w" vocalization. I don't know how else it could be pronounced. What compelling reason is there to believe that the "outO" of Greek times had lost the sound of "w" and become some sort of "oo" that conveniently slurred into "Buto"? Moreover, if the goddess, herself, had ever really been known by the name of "Buto", wouldn't there be some attestation of this? I don't see it in my dictionary. Perhaps the name of the goddess and the place where she was held sacred got confused at some point. Not only that, but why should the Greeks have been more interested in the place name "Per-Wadjyt" as opposed to the probably more common "Pe" and "Dep"? Besides, this "Pe" may have been pronounced "Pu". I see it spelled variously "P", "Pyy" and "Pyw", which is interesting. It seems to me that these towns, "Pe" and "Dep", are attested as being written together "Pe-Dep", like the Hungarian cities, Buda and Pest, separated by the Danube, are known as Budapest. It is easy, I think, to see how "Pe-Dep" or "Pu-Dep" become "Buto". "P" and "B" are interchangeable in linguistics. The Greek name "Petros" (Peter) becomes "Butros" in Coptic. Either the Egyptians vocalized a "p" more like a "b" or the Greeks themselves did and the Egyptians copied it! I lean toward the latter explanation. However, for all this to be the case, we have to lose the final "p" from "Dep"--but, then, we have to accept that the final "t" was lost from "Wadjyt" in the other explanation as well. Marianne Luban ============================================================================== Date: Tue, 06 May 1997 14:15:31 +0000 From: "Patrick C. Ryan" To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL Rahotep Corrections Graham wrote: >The name "Buto" does not actually come from the conflation of the names of > the two cities "p(j)" and "dp" in sequence, but rather from Dep's ancient > temple to the tutelary goddess of Lower Egypt, Wadjyt. Her name, probably > originally *3D.w.t "cobra" eventually came to be written as w3D.y.t by the > Middle Kingdom. The {3} may have been becoming a /w/ and the similarity > between the new sequence "wD" and "w3D" "become green" may have become > irresistable, since she became a bringer of fertility being a > personification of the inundation as the Solar Eye which returned every >new year. This is just speculation on my part however, and there are those > who think her name was always "the Green". yet, the similarity between > 3D.w.t "cobra" and w3D.w.t "greening/fertility" might always have seemed > like a suitable pun to the ancient Egyptians. By the time of Greek > contact she was called {outO}. This happened because the /D/ became /d/ > and subsequently /t/, while the final ending -w.t transformed into -y.t > and thence into a lengthened vowel. Her temple had been called > "pr-wD.w.t" "domain of Wadjyt". The /b/ at the beginning of "Buto" is > most likely a corruption of "pr" rather than any remembrance of the > ancient city Pe accross the river. > Dear Geoff, Marianne, and AEListers: 1) there is no credible evidence of which I am aware to suppose *3D.w.t, *cobra. 2) w3D.t, the green one, would be a very appropriate name for the for the variety of cobra which is olive-colored; 3) the cobra, which primarily eats other snakes, may have been a mixed blessing during the inundation season because, although dangerous, it probably helped dispose of the other snakes displaced by the flood; 4) w3D is not the earliest form of this word; as we have seen, Egyptian 3 corresponds primarily to in other related languages; Latin viridis, green, is distantly cognate through IE *wiridhi-; I will not assert but I strongly suspect that Arabic zumurrudiyyun, green (like an emerald) is also cognate (but borrowed from another language), a compound of zu- (*stone) + m- + *wrdy [cf. Arabic warada, blossom; but in Arabic, warada has gravitated to "rose-colored" through "fresh (meat)"; cf. also Egyptian w3D.t, rawness (of meat), *pinkness?]. Accordingly, I would reconstruct w3D.t as w(i)3(i)D(i).t--- 4) The most economical way to account for the -w- in pr-*w(i)3(i)D(i).w.t is to interpret it as a common feminine plural: the "house" of the green ones (feminine). 5) There is no relationship between w and 3, phonologically or historically, in Egyptian, or in any language of which I know. Pat -- PATRICK C. RYAN (501) 227-9947; FAX/DATA (501)312-9947 9115 W. 34th St. * Little Rock, AR 72204-4441 * USA WEBPAGE: ************************************** 'Veit ek, at ek hekk, vindga meidhi, naetr allar niu, geiri undadhr... a theim meidhi er mangi veit hvers hann af rotum renn.' * (Havamal 138) ************************************** ============================================================================== Date: Tue, 06 May 1997 17:55:03 -0700 From: Stephen Fryer To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL sDm=f's and sDm.n=f's Graham wrote: > I have been waiting for anyone to decide that it is time to return to > grammar and translation now, but this just is not happening, and because I > think the sDm=f issue is quite a separate one from the minute phonological > questions of the {3} and {j} threads, I figured that I might as well > respond to your very interesting comments on the reconstruction of the > sDm.n=f. I hope that the list will find this question interesting. I hope that replying on-list will be OK. I would be interested in what some of the lurkers on the list have to say about this topic, which I know some have some expertise in. The whole reason I originally got into this subject was grammatical - I was trying to see how to make a clear distinction for myself between the circumstantial and prospective sDm=f forms and it sort of grew from there. > > A problem I am still having with this, is my finding that sDm.n.f appears to > > be *seDmenef, where everyone else claims it was *seDemnef. If I am right, I > > then have the problem of figuring out why the 3-inf. verbs don't behave as I > > would expect. If I am wrong, then I have to figure out why 2-gem. verbs > > don't behave as expected for that scheme. So, whichever it is, I have a > > difficulty! > > What if there were actually vowels in both places, but that for some > reason one of them predominated in one case and another in the other for > some reasons which are not at first obvious? > > *mere'enef *qebebenef > "it loved" "it was cool" > So, *mere'enef could have tended to collapse into *merenef, while > *qebebenef would have had the two similar consonants gravitate toward one > another into *qebbenef The problem I have with this is that if this was the case here, then it sort of undermines all the rest of my conclusions based on 2nd-gem verb forms. Not totally of course, since what you seem to be arguing is that they came out the way I see them, but derived differently in Old or Archaic Egyptian (or somewhere). > However, if one analyzes the sDm.n=f in the traditional way, then your > suggestion would not be as likely, unless you allow for the presence of > case endings. > > If jw sDm=f originally meant "the case is his hearing" which became "he > hears" (this is the usual interpretation offered, by the way), then if one > analyzes the sDm.n=f in the same way, one gets jw sDm.n=f meaning "the > case is hearing to him" which became "he has heard". The secret lies in > the interpretation of the n as the proposition "to", which is how Egyptian > would express "having". ("to him" meant "he has/had".) So just like the > English and other European idioms, the idea of "he HAS heard" was the way > that Egyptian also expressed its past. > > Now, when we look at the phonology of n=f we find Coptic 'naf". So we > want infinitive plus the antecedent of "naf". You agree that the > infinitive was *seDem (consonant, vowel, consonant, vowel, osnsonant, > with the nature of the vowels not specified). We want "* seDem + nef". > Unless you believe that the infinitive had a final vowel, such as a case > ending, and that the case ending were rather accented, there is no real > room for an interpretation of the sDm.n=f as **seDmenef, assuming that the > traditional interpretation of the grammar is correct. However, it may be > that the tradition is mistaken, and maybe you will discover a reason why. The problems I have with this: First of all, the derivation of the sDm.n=f forms is conjectural, and given a choice between speculation and what I see written in the contemporary records, I'll take the contemporary evidence. Second, you say that it was derived from the infinitive+"n=f", whereas Gardiner et al. derive it from a passive participle (they seem unclear about which one - and there seem to have been passive participles with both seDem and seDm roots). Loprieno makes basically no reference to this, but comes out with *saDimnaf, which he appears to be basing on Osing's work with a papyrus in "Late Middle Egyptian with contemporary phonetic outcomes" written in Greek letters. I think there is a lot of room for research here, for example all the syntactic types of sDm.n=f are indistinguishable in spelling, but I doubt that they were pronounced the same way (which was what got me involved with the sDm=f forms to start with. So for now, I'll tentatively stick with my conclusions, shaky as they are, and hope that somebody can come up with some evidence that either adds to their credibility or demolishes them. -- Stephen Fryer Lund Computer Services ************************************************** The more answers I find, the more questions I have ************************************************** ============================================================================== Date: Tue, 06 May 1997 20:46:33 -0700 From: Stephen Fryer To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL Back to Westacr, ll. 11 ff. I won't spoil the fun too much I hope on the riddles posed by Dr. Hoch, however I did have a few comments sort of around the edges. Saida wrote: > It's too bad I don't know the parts of speech, but I think I > understand the phrase, which is very oriental. It's the verb, isn't it, > "shining" ("r-f"--upon it) of gold? This *would* seem a good place for > a term meaning "to plate or overlay", but I don't see it here and the > idea is conveyed in a different fashion. So I suppose the subject of the > "gnX" is "ssnDm" -- (which was) "gleaming upon it(self) with gold" or, > in better English, "which had gold gleaming upon it". Actually, it has the wrong determinative for "shine", which would be a star. In this case I think it does mean "covered" or perhaps better "worked". I'm thinking of Hetep-Heres' carrying chair from about the period the story is supposed to have occurred, and of a style probably still familiar a thousand years later. Faulkner's dictionary gives only this instance of this use of the word, and translates it as "mounted in gold", though I think he had difficulaty figuring it out too. > > > > > More word plays, as poor as they may be: The Egyptians seem to have just LOVED word plays (word magic?) of any quality (I think they were my kind of people). > > line 14 ??? > > Can't do this one without the glyphs (I keep losing the web site!) but I > think the word play comes in between the "provisions" and the "ship. > Also, I have "s-spDd" for the transliteration. What's this? Actually the transliteration should be "sspd," I think you transliterated the determinative too - it's a triangle, because "spdt" means triangle,and has a similar sound to this word, which means "to make ready" (more literally prehaps "cause to be sharp"). > > lines 17-18: what was the carrying poles made of and what did Hardedef do > > before he was carried off? What Hardedef did was "snDm.n=f" which is usually translated "he sat down," but considering the meaning of the root "nDm" I think we should maybe think more in terms of "got comfortable," or "took his ease," or "relaxed." > The poles were made of "ssnDm gnX r-f m nbw". I've already said that I > vote for "ssnDm" being sandalwood but it could be yet another "cedar" > word--some pleasant-smelling wood without a doubt. This prince traveled > sitting in a chair of ebony. "S3r pw iri.n-f m Hr.t.y s-nDm-f m gniw > n.y hbni" The word "ssnDm" strikes me as a rather peculiar word - it looks rather like a double causative: "to cause to cause to be pleasant." However perhaps it was wood that caused on to relax (s-snDm), though I doubt they meant Cascara wood! > > By the way, hbny (line 17) has worked its way even into English via a no-doubt > > circuitous route. > > Ys, tiw. Probably by way of the Latin "ebeninus" or "hebeninus", which > the Romans got from the Egyptians, but who knows? > Acutally the route was fairly direct Eg. hbny -> Gr. ebenos -> L. (h)ebenus -> Eng. ebony. The Romans sometimes spelled it with an "h" but that doesn't really count since by the 1st cent. CE they didn't pronounce the "h" at the beginning of words. My old complete Webster got it wrong, deriving it from Heb. eben "stone" because ebony is so hard! -- Stephen Fryer Lund Computer Services ************************************************** The more answers I find, the more questions I have ************************************************** ============================================================================== Date: Wed, 07 May 1997 11:53:10 -0500 From: Saida To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL Back to Westacr, ll. 11 ff. Stephen Fryer wrote: > Saida wrote: > > > It's too bad I don't know the parts of speech, but I think I > > understand the phrase, which is very oriental. It's the verb, isn't it, > > "shining" ("r-f"--upon it) of gold? This *would* seem a good place for > > a term meaning "to plate or overlay", but I don't see it here and the > > idea is conveyed in a different fashion. So I suppose the subject of the > > "gnX" is "ssnDm" -- (which was) "gleaming upon it(self) with gold" or, > > in better English, "which had gold gleaming upon it". > > Actually, it has the wrong determinative for "shine", which would be a > star. In this case I think it does mean "covered" or perhaps better > "worked". I'm thinking of Hetep-Heres' carrying chair from about the > period the story is supposed to have occurred, and of a style probably > still familiar a thousand years later. Faulkner's dictionary gives only > this instance of this use of the word, and translates it as "mounted in > gold", though I think he had difficulaty figuring it out too. My dictionary waffles on this one with a "to work (?)" when it comes to "gnX" with the determinative for metal. Another "gnX" with the "star" determinative has "to be subject to, to toil under orders(?)"--again not sure. Then there is "gnX-t" (det. "star") for "star, luminary" where I got my "gleaming". It would be interesting to see the other texts where this word appears and in what context in order to understand this term better. Lest anybody wonder, the Egyptians had a couple of words that are more definitely translated as "plate" or "overlay", so the conveyance of the idea doesn't depend upon the iffy "gnX". Still, something to do with "gleaming" may still be at the root of "gnX" because the word for a copper object is "gen", "genu" are metal pots or vases or, spelled variously, lamp-stands, candlesticks and stands for offerings, perhaps of shiney copper. I say this because "gnX-t" is a star or something luminous. In the Westcar passage, we are not talking about copper but gold, another clue that the "gn" words may not refer to just one metal but anything shining. So maybe there's a chance my instinct was right. (snip some) Marianne: > > > The poles were made of "ssnDm gnX r-f m nbw". I've already said that I > > vote for "ssnDm" being sandalwood but it could be yet another "cedar" > > word--some pleasant-smelling wood without a doubt. This prince traveled > > sitting in a chair of ebony. "S3r pw iri.n-f m Hr.t.y s-nDm-f m gniw > > n.y hbni" Stephen: > > The word "ssnDm" strikes me as a rather peculiar word - it looks rather > like a double causative: "to cause to cause to be pleasant." However > perhaps it was wood that caused on to relax (s-snDm), though I doubt > they meant Cascara wood! Couldn't it be just "smell-pleasant"--nothing more complicated than that? > > > > By the way, hbny (line 17) has worked its way even into English via a no-doubt > > > circuitous route. Marianne > > > > Ys, tiw. Probably by way of the Latin "ebeninus" or "hebeninus", which > > the Romans got from the Egyptians, but who knows? > > > Acutally the route was fairly direct Eg. hbny -> Gr. ebenos -> L. > (h)ebenus -> Eng. ebony. The Romans sometimes spelled it with an "h" > but that doesn't really count since by the 1st cent. CE they didn't > pronounce the "h" at the beginning of words. My old complete Webster > got it wrong, deriving it from Heb. eben "stone" because ebony is so > hard! So much for dictionaries and etymologies! It is only the newer dictionaries that are starting to add Egyptian to the etymologies of certain terms. The Romans were in Egypt--the Romans were in Britain. So for once we may not even need the Greeks for the diffusion. Marianne Luban ============================================================================== Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 05:01:57 -0400 (EDT) To: Ancient Egyptian Language List From: "Timothy T. Dickens" Subject: AEL The Teachings of PTAHHOTEP Cc: jeaton@amc1500.atlm.peachnet.edu, belcherr@amcmail.atlm.peachnet.edu Dear members of AEgyptian-L, Today I have a simple question about a book called _The Teaching of PTHAHHOTEP: The Oldest Book in the World_, Edited by Asa G. Hilliard III, Larry William and Nia Damali (Blackwood Press). Has anyone on this list ever heard of this book? Is it really the 'Oldest Book in the World?" Did such a writing ever exist in antiquity? The editors say in the book's introduction that these teachings were published ca. 2388 BC during the fifth Kemetic dynasty uder the title: Teachings of the Prefect of the City, Dja Ptahhotep under the majesty of the king of the South and North, Assa Djed-Ka-Ra, living eternally forever. Quite honestly, I have not only not heard of such a book, but I am unfamiliar with ancient Egyptian literature. I would appreciate the comments of any one who might be able to offer any insights into this monograph. Tim Dickens Smyrna, GA Hi Geoff! :) ============================================================================== Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 15:01:57 -0400 (EDT) From: To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL The Teachings of PTAHHOTEP The text exists alright, but you'd best read it for yourself, without all this Kemetic stuff. A perfectly adequate translation is to be found in M. Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian Literature, vol. I, pp. 61-80. Another translation: R. O. Faulkner in W. K. Simpson, ed., The Literature of Ancient Egypt, pp. 159-76. There was a vizier (chief minister) in the Fifth Dynasty. The text we have dates to a somewhat later period, however. Is it the oldest book? Likely not. The Pyramid Texts comprise an older book, and the Egyptians refer to still others. There are Sumerian works that were probably earlier as well. Gerald E. Kadish Professor of History and Near Eastern Studies Department of History Binghamton University (SUNY) Binghamton, NY 13902-6000 (607) 777-2488 e-mail: kadishg@binghamton.edu ============================================================================== Date: Wed, 07 May 1997 14:53:39 -0500 From: Saida To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: AEL Rahotep Again Graham wrote: > > wr-m3.w jwnw w<.t.y > Unique Chief of Seers of Heliopolis > > wr zH mDH.w 3ms > Chief of the Shrine, Manager of the Scepter Hi, Geoff! Just when you thought this was laid to rest, I got a bee in my bonnet about the above phrase. I was just looking at the photograph and something struck me about the sign O22, which I call the "McDonald's arch". What I want to know is: Is there any possibility the phrase could go like this: w<.t.y wr > js w<.t.y wrS pj n Hrw > Unique Ancient(one) who guards Pe for Horus > > z3-n.y-sw.t n.y X.t=f r<-Htp.j > Bodily Royal Son, Rahotep > > wr n.y pj{.t} > Chief of Pe (feminine t still makes no sense.) > > jm.y-r3 s-k3j.t Tt > Overseer of construction and Vizier (or local leader) > > jm.y-r3 mS< xrp tm3 > Overseer of the Army, Controller of Squadrons > > z3-n.y-sw.t n.y X.t=f r<-Htp.j > Bodily Royal Son, Rahotep > Geoff Graham Marianne Luban ============================================================================== Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 19:19:07 -0400 (EDT) From: Graham To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL Rahotep Again Hi, Marianne, Thanks for the thoughts. > > wr zH mDH.w 3ms > > Chief of the Shrine, Manager of the Scepter > w<.t.y wr > Geoff, what does "Chief of the Shrine, Manager of the Scepter" really > mean? Are these common titles? Yes, they are pretty well attested titles for this period. They have ritual significance. The Chief of the Shrine would be an officiant at the Sokar Feast. There are lots of mDH.w titles too. We can rest assured that the axe is ment as a word sign and not as any determinative for the above. Also, note that the right hand side seems to have predominantly ritual titles while the left hand side has predominantly civil and military ones. Sorry, but I think this suggestion was not feasible. Yours, Geoff ============================================================================== Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 22:14:14 -0400 (EDT) From: Graham To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL sDm=f's and sDm.n=f's Hi, Stephen, > Second, you say that it was derived from the infinitive+"n=f", whereas > Gardiner et al. derive it from a passive participle (they seem unclear > about which one - and there seem to have been passive participles with > both seDem and seDm roots). Well, I was wrong. I did not mean the real infinitive, but rather just some form containing all the root consonants. Honestly I did not remember at the time which form that ought to be. The most difficult problem with which we are faced is the dissapearance of the sDm.n=f as a real grammatical form in Late Egyptian, which has a few crystalized uses of it, but does not really favor it in the least. Demotic completely abandoned it, and Coptic of course has no surviving examples. Geoffrey Graham sokar@minerva.cis.yale.edu ============================================================================== Date: Thu, 8 May 1997 00:37:23 -0400 From: James_Hoch@mail.campuslife.utoronto.ca (James Hoch) Subject: AEL Westcar ll. 17-18 To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk Hello folks! The meaning of gnX may not be certain, but I am inclined to think of the known examples of carrying poles, where the gold bits are attached to the ends of the poles. The ssnDm wood, whatever it was, would probably have been highly polished to "gleam" along with the gold. Possible meanings of gnX then might be "to fit" or "to cap" (with metal determinative because of the type of fitting). I have not done a study of the word, so this is totally off-the-cuff. My original question was not so much concerning the meaning of the word gnX, but rather with its grammatical form. The word order: ssnDm gnX (NOUN VERBAL-form) is key here. The word-play in lines 17-18 is simply this: Hardedef "having seated himself" (snDm.n.f) was carried in a palanquin with carrying poles made of ssnDm wood. In Egyptian literature, with puns, like in horseshoes, "close counts". By the way, I think that Stephen is no doubt right in the ORIGINAL meaning of snDm along the lines of "putting oneself to ease", but it also took on the meaning of "to sit down" and even "to dwell". Not unlike the slang (at least in my era): "to take a load off," meaning "to sit down." Line 17: Hrty This is an infinitive, the consonant y theoretically being a weak consonant (like verbs ending in i [3rd weak verbs], which normally have infinitives ending in t ), but verbs ending in y seem very often to NOT have a t ending. Line 16: What *NO* takers for my probing on the verb form of mni ? Note the word order: NOUN VERB-form. Best wishes to all, James Hoch -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- CampusLife - University of Toronto http://www.campuslife.utoronto.ca ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- ============================================================================== Date: Wed, 07 May 1997 16:54:48 -0700 From: Stephen Fryer To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL The Teachings of PTAHHOTEP Timothy T. Dickens wrote: > Today I have a simple question about a book called _The Teaching of > PTHAHHOTEP: The Oldest Book in the World_, Edited by Asa G. Hilliard III, > Larry William and Nia Damali (Blackwood Press). > > Quite honestly, I have not only not heard of such a book, but I am > unfamiliar with ancient Egyptian literature. I would appreciate the > comments of any one who might be able to offer any insights into this monograph. Possibly the best way to answer your question and improve your knowledge of Egyptian literature is to suggest you read _Ancient Egyptian Literature: Vol.1 The Old and Middle Kingdoms_ by Miriam Lichtheim. There is a translation of the Instruction of Ptah-hotep with commentary stating on page 61. The publication you refer to in you question, I have not heard of, however I think the claim that this is the oldest book is rather overstated. The ascription to Ptah-hotep is fictitious (and a common technique in the composition of "wisdom literature" in the Ancient World) and the work is probably a century or two later than it claims. There is at least on other "wisdom" book which is probably older - the Teaching of Hardedef which may actually be from around the date claimed by Ptah-hotep (though naturally it claims to be much earlier!) As you seem to have guessed, books using a superlative in the title are usually to be taken magno cum grano salis! -- Stephen Fryer Lund Computer Services ************************************************** The more answers I find, the more questions I have ************************************************** ============================================================================== Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 21:48:05 -0400 (EDT) From: Graham To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: AEL Thorny Preparations Hi, Stephen, Just one clarification: > Actually the transliteration should be "sspd," I think you > transliterated the determinative too - it's a triangle, because "spdt" > means triangle,and has a similar sound to this word, which means "to > make ready" (more literally prehaps "cause to be sharp"). Her transliteration is probably derived from my original transliteration. I was putting the Old Egyptian origin of the word into the the transliteration in my usual reconstructive fashion. The original word was spDd plus a causative s. Later the /D/ seems to have fallen out. The sign is a thorn. It means "sharp" and is well related to the word, since "sharpen" was "preparing" when applied to weaponry. Interestingly the term is frequent with preparing weapons for war. Geoff Graham sokar@minerva.cis.yale.edu ============================================================================== Date: Wed, 07 May 1997 22:13:08 -0500 From: Saida To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: AEL Hatshepsut--West Face (Long) If it's okay, as no one else has come forward, I'd like to have a crack at the obelisk text (the first one) that Al Berens so kindly put up. Hrw wsr.t k3(w) nbty Horus, mighty of "ka"s, Two Ladies w3D.t rnpt Hrw n nbw flourishing (in her) years the Golden Horus I translated it thus, but I really think it is meant to convey something "in the bloom of her years" or "in the prime of her life". nDr.t X<(t)? nb T3wy M To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL Hatshepsut--West Face I have already found in error in my "Hatshepsut" translation. I wrote: nb nst.t T3wy s. To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL Hatshepsut--West Face (Long) Hi, Marianne, Very good attempt. The only problem is that there were a few small errors in the original typesetting, but I think Al has cought them and is about to make the changes and put the texts back up. Meanwhile: > w3D.t rnpt Hrw n nbw > > flourishing (in her) years the Golden Horus This title is now read bjk nbw, meaning "golden falcon". There are a few writings of it that have helped scholars to see that this is the case, but I can't remember exactly which ones to consult on it. Maybe some of the experts will know right off hand. > nDr.t X<(t)? nb T3wy M > crowned divinity lord of the Two Lands Ma'at-Ka-Re I think it should read nTr.y.t x Ir n Mnw m mnw Mnw n t-f Imn-mnw > > (she/he) made for Min (by way of a) monument (to)Min for his/her father > Amun-Min Here the problem is that the sign for Min has accidentally been used in place of the {z} bolt by the examiner of the photograph. This one is about to be corrected. The reading will actually be: jrj.n=s m mnw=s n jt=s jmn. Let's just hold off on the obelisk for a while until the corrections are up, and then we can tackle this all afresh. In the mean time, following James' lead, I suggest we focus our attention on Westcar until the obelisk text is fully ready. You have done a very good job nonetheless. Thank you, and thanks to Al for getting us this text. He is just about to finish it up soon, and then we can all enjoy it together. Geoff Graham sokar@minerva.cislyale.edu ============================================================================== Date: Thu, 08 May 1997 12:07:54 -0500 From: Saida To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL Rahotep Again Saida wrote: > > Graham wrote: > > > > wr-m3.w jwnw w<.t.y > > Unique Chief of Seers of Heliopolis > > > > wr zH mDH.w 3ms > > Chief of the Shrine, Manager of the Scepter I wrote: > w<.t.y wr Maybe " with the determinative of the *axe* (seen as det. in carpentry, > ship-building , etc.) means "expert in construction" or "builder" or "wr > or as we would say in English "the Crown". Geoff said I was wrong and he was right about that. Yet Geoff and I are both wrong! When the poster first asked about the Rahotep text, I told him I couldn't clearly read it but I remember Erman saying that Rahotep was a "Great One of the South" even though his duties seemed to be in Lower Egypt. I shouldn't have forgotten the words of Erman, whom Geoff and I both admire. Here is Adolf Erman: "On the other hand, there were "great men of the south" who had no administrative duties in the south, and who yet, by special favor of the king, were considered members of the collegiate assembly, e.g. Rahotep, the high priest of Heliopolis, a town scarcely belonging to the south; the departments over which he ruled as "district chief" were very peculiar: they were the fisheries and the Nile. The government of these departments were given to him, in order that a personage so important should have a seat in the great counsel..." So Geoff was close to being correct. He had: > > wr zH mDH.w 3ms > > Chief of the Shrine, Manager of the Scepter but he needed to keep with this, I think > w<.t.y Geoff says this word means "unique" and that is true, not in this case, probably. This time it is likely to mean "one of " the "Wr-rs" the "Ten Great Ones of the South". This title is spelled somewhat variously but generally *swallow, south sign, 10 hoop* or *G36,M23, 10 hoop*. You know, the number 10 is written with a glyph that looks like a croquet hoop. However, in the Rahotep text it's written otherwise. What we have is "G36, O22,T7" or *swallow, McDonald's arches, axe* transliterated "wr ? mDw". What word shall we take for the O22? Definitely now we know this glyph represents "council". Should we take Geoff's "zH", which tends to mean "council chamber" (but which may be exactly the right word) or perhaps "chatchat" (which I don't know how to transliterate properly) the word for the Great Royal Council or Royal College? The "axe" then represents "mdw" or the number 10! After that is "3ms" or "the scepter". This just means royal as in the "Royal Council" or "Royal College" , also called the "chatchat nesu". Now if we can only figure out where in the text Adolf Erman saw his "fisheries and the Nile"! But maybe he just got this from somewhere else. Marianne Luban > > js w<.t.y wrS pj n Hrw > > Unique Ancient(one) who guards Pe for Horus > > > > z3-n.y-sw.t n.y X.t=f r<-Htp.j > > Bodily Royal Son, Rahotep > > > > wr n.y pj{.t} > > Chief of Pe (feminine t still makes no sense.) > > > > jm.y-r3 s-k3j.t Tt > > Overseer of construction and Vizier (or local leader) > > > > jm.y-r3 mS< xrp tm3 > > Overseer of the Army, Controller of Squadrons > > > > z3-n.y-sw.t n.y X.t=f r<-Htp.j > > Bodily Royal Son, Rahotep > > > Geoff Graham > > Marianne Luban ============================================================================== Date: Thu, 8 May 1997 19:32:02 +0100 From: Serge Rosmorduc To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL sDm=f's and sDm.n=f's Hi, About the passive "sDmw=f" there is an insteresting hypothesis in Grandet-Mathieu's grammar, which also relates to the recent postings about sDm.n=f. They think that 1) the sDmw"=f" is in fact a use of the old perfective which explain the occasionnal "=w" that would be the 3rd person ending of the old perfective 2) even more, the sDmw being a passive form, the normal expression for the agent would be : sDmw SUBJECT in AGENT. and they think the ".n=f" of the sDm.n=f stems from this. It would relate with the fact that intransitive movement verbs sDm.n=f are always nominal : in their case, the expression of the agent is not relevant. (the accomplished form for ir is ir.n=f but for Sm, it is : iw=f Sm=w ) regards, -- Serge Rosmorduc, (rosmord@iut.univ-paris8.fr) 5, rue Beranger 92240 Malakoff tel 01 48 70 37 13 fax 01 48 70 86 49 http://www.iut.univ-paris8.fr/~rosmord/AEgypt.html ============================================================================== Date: Thu, 8 May 1997 19:40:42 +0100 From: Serge Rosmorduc To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: AEL Westcar ll. 17-18 >>>>> "James" == James Hoch writes: James> Line 17: Hrty This is an infinitive, the consonant y James> theoretically being a weak consonant (like verbs ending in James> i [3rd weak verbs], which normally have infinitives ending James> in t ), but verbs ending in y seem very often to NOT have a James> t ending. Would you relate that with the use of 'y' in certain words in place of a final 't' ? regards, -- Serge Rosmorduc, (rosmord@iut.univ-paris8.fr) 5, rue Beranger 92240 Malakoff tel 01 48 70 37 13 fax 01 48 70 86 49 http://www.iut.univ-paris8.fr/~rosmord/AEgypt.html ============================================================================== Date: Thu, 08 May 1997 13:41:19 -0500 From: Saida To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk Subject: Re: AEL Rahotep Again A person could write a book about this Rahotep text! The more I look at it, the more I see. Somewhere an Egyptian is laughing at us from the next world. We have been mistaken, misled, but not intentionally! It's fun, though, like solving an ancient riddle. I wrote: Geoff: > > wr zH mDH.w 3ms > > Chief of the Shrine, Manager of the Scepter Marianne: >but he needed to keep with this, I think > w<.t.y Hi, Geoff! No--you were right. The ">w>.t.y" can mean nothing but the "only one" and must belong to the title "High Priest of On". >(Rahotep was) "one of " the "Wr-rs" the "Ten >Great Ones of the South". This title is spelled somewhat variously but >generally *swallow, south sign, 10 hoop* or *G36,M23, 10 hoop*. You >know, the number 10 is written with a glyph that looks like a croquet >hoop. >However, in the Rahotep text it's written otherwise. What we have is >"G36, O22,T7" or *swallow, McDonald's arches, axe* transliterated "wr ? >mDw". What word shall we take for the O22? Definitely now we know >this glyph represents "council". Should we take Geoff's "zH", which >tends to mean "council chamber" (but which may be exactly the right >word) or perhaps "chatchat" (which I don't know how to transliterate >properly) the word for the Great Royal Council or Royal College? The >"axe" then represents "mdw" or the number 10! After that is "3ms" or >"the scepter". This just means royal as in the "Royal Council" or >"Royal College" , also called the "chatchat nesu". It's all good until I got to the "3ms", the scepter. It doesn't mean royal anything here! It's a purely phonetic spelling! Geoff was wondering why, in this text, the /s/ came before the "scepter glyph" when it's usually the other way around. I agreed with him that it was just a quirk--but actually it was intentional because these two glyphs togther spell "s3msw" or "smsw", which is "the elder" or "dean" of something. The determinative, the bent old man leaning on a stick is in the following row! Before him, though, (and this can be confusing and misleading) is M40 *tied-up roll of papyrus*, which has the phonetic value of "is". Now this "is" can mean a great many things depending upon the determinative. Many times, it means a large place, a dwelling of some sort or even a tomb. "is" means "old", too, with another det.--but in the text we only have the "is" glyph followed by the *old man". I feel this is all tied up to the previous "smsw" but how? Does it imply that Rahotep is the "elder" or head of some large place like the "smsw h3it" is the elder of a priest's college? Does it means he is the eldest, despite his youthful, handsome appearance, of that council of 10? Or is it connected with the ensuing glyphs in the row headed by the "old man" which says " To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL P. Westcar: Like-to-Be Participants In reference to Mr. Hoch's letter I am fairly computer litterate and can get around, but I find that my problem is a lack of reference books, the only ones that are available in my area are the Budge Dictionaries, I am waiting for a De bucks Dictionary from Amazon right now, 4-6 week waiting period. I can not find a copy of Gardiners: Middle Egyptian Grammer. I am still slowly working through the fist page of the Westcar Text. I didn't do well in English at school and have very little familiararity with Coptic or Hebrew, but I have always wanted to understand Hieroglyphics since I was a child, so I am dilligently pushing on. I find that the discussions of grammer and syntax are way above my head, but I am making progress. I would like to ask if anyone out there has any duplicate copies of some of thier books that they would be willing to share with me. I live in a small town in Alaska and access to reference work is very hard to come by. Thank you for your time. Julie Smith Ketchikan, Alaska ============================================================================== Date: Thu, 8 May 1997 18:05:43 -0400 From: James_Hoch@mail.campuslife.utoronto.ca (James Hoch) Subject: AEL P. Westcar, back to sspd To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk Good to get back to sspd in the phrase aHa.n sspd aHaw Some interesting posts on the meaning of the word, but even MORE interesting is the form of sspd. Stephen may have answered this in large part a while ago, but it deserves more explanation. I intended to write something up--and perhaps actually did post it, but this is important enough to repeat a few times! One normally expects the construction aHa.n sDm.n.f (with a past-time form--o.k., the construction aHa.n sDm.f [with relative present form] is attested, but it is quite rare). There is no "n" on sspd! Another thing is to identify the subject, here it must be aHaw "ships" since it follows the verb (normal place for the subject) and the subject is then followed by a dative phrase. TWO bells should be sounding in your head at this point. 1) ships do not prepare things, but are prepared; 2) the form does not have the "n" of the past time sDm.n.f in a place that you expect to refer to past time (this is an important clue in analysing the form). This form is the passive, past tense equivalent to the circumstantial sDm.n.f. The name of the form is the sDm(w).f passive. The "w" is put in parentheses because it is almost never written. What learners need to remember that A) it is PASSIVE--but does NOT use the passive marker tw B) that it is PAST--but does NOT use the past-time marker n The form is not at all rare, and you will see a number of them in P. Westcar. All the best, James Hoch -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- CampusLife - University of Toronto http://www.campuslife.utoronto.ca ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- ============================================================================== Date: Thu, 8 May 1997 17:38:46 -0400 (EDT) From: Graham To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL Westcar ll. 17-18 Hi, James, and Serge, > Would you relate that with the use of 'y' in certain words in place of a final 't' ? I would suggest that {Hrty} might not be a verb since we already have s-nDm as the verb, but rather an adverb. Had it been the verb, we would want it to be *Hrj.t, but we have {Hrty} (is it *Hr.y.t.y?). I think it could be like Coptic {ehrai} and mean "upward". I might be quite wrong. On the other hand, {Hrty} could conceivably be a corrupted spelling of Hrj.t, could it not? Geoff Graham sokar@minerva.cis.yale.edu ============================================================================== Date: Thu, 8 May 1997 18:13:59 -0400 (EDT) From: Graham To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL Rahotep Again Hi, Marianne, You really like this text a lot, don't you? ;-) Slow down a minute. I think you are reading too much into it though. > Geoff said I was wrong and he was right about that. Yet Geoff and I are > both wrong! When the poster first asked about the Rahotep text, I told > him I couldn't clearly read it but I remember Erman saying that Rahotep > was a "Great One of the South" even though his duties seemed to be in > Lower Egypt. Erman was talking about other inscriptions from the mastaba. This statue was definitely not the only significant find, or list of his titles. I am sure that Erman was reading another list of titles. Egyptians did not always list the same exact set of titles in every one of their inscriptions. > > > wr zH mDH.w 3ms > > > Chief of the Shrine, Manager of the Scepter > > but he needed to keep with this, I think > w<.t.y w<.t.y is an adjective, it HAS to follow what it modifies. The only candidate for that is wr-m3.w jwnw. We can't have w<.t.y beginning an new title. It just does not happen. > Geoff says this word means "unique" and that is true, not in this case, > probably. This time it is likely to mean "one of " the "Wr-rs" the "Ten > Great Ones of the South". This title is spelled somewhat variously but > generally *swallow, south sign, 10 hoop* or *G36,M23, 10 hoop*. You > know, the number 10 is written with a glyph that looks like a croquet > hoop. No, Marianne, at this period that title was always written with a wr sign {swallow}, a Sm< sign {flowering sedge plant} growing out of the mD sign (looks like a croquet hoop). I have never heard of any scribe ever substituting the zH sign {divine booth} for this. It is too much speculation. I don't think we want to go so far, unless you can find an example where the title has been written in its usual way with this as a determinative or something. > the word for the Great Royal Council or Royal College? The "axe" then > represents "mdw" or the number 10! After that is "3ms" or "the > scepter". This just means royal as in the "Royal Council" or "Royal > College" , also called the "chatchat nesu". No, the axe cannot represent /mD/. It has a final /H/ at least, if not the /w/. I have never heard of any instance where 3ms can be anything other than the scepter itself. > Now if we can only figure out where in the text Adolf Erman saw his > "fisheries and the Nile"! But maybe he just got this from somewhere > else. I think that that is a safer assumption. Marianne, I think we have already finished this text in an acceptible way. I know you have a very clever mind, and I really appreciate your working on this so hard, but I am not so sure we can make so many extreme conjectures as you are with what is written here. If you are particularly interested in the mastaba of Ptahotep and Nofret, then, by all means, go and consult the original publications from the tomb. You can find this by checking Porter and Moss, (I think volume III). That wonderful topographical bibliography is bound to lead you toward the right publications, and there you will probably find various inscriptions, one of which will undoubtedly have the source of Erman's assertions. The biggest problem, however, is the very early date of Ptahotep. His inscriptions will all by very difficult reading, and it is advisable to finish with Middle Egyptian, and then work on standard Old Egyptian, and then, and only then, to begin working on very early Old Kingdom texts which are transitional between Archaic Egyptian and Old Egyptian. It has been instructive to look at this small text, only because it helps to demonstrate how much Egyptian changed between the beginning of the 4th Dynasty and the Middle Kingdom. However, it probably is not in the best interests of the list to try and take on anymore texts from such an early date, since they are exceedingly difficult to penetrate, as you have well seen through this one small endeavor. For now, let's persevere on texts from the classical stage of the language so that people can gain the background to be able to make intelligent speculations about earlier material. This message is not meant to discourage you. However, I would like it to caution you about taking on projects that are too advanced without more grounding in Middle Egyptian. As you can see, even people who have studied Egyptian for many years have difficulty reading texts like this one. It simply is not a good place to begin learning. Be well, and enjoy your studies! ;-) Yours, Geoffrey Graham sokar@minerva.cis.yale.edu ============================================================================== Date: Thu, 8 May 1997 20:30:27 -0400 (EDT) From: Graham To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL Rahotep Again Marianne, Please stop. ;-) Let's just let this text rest for now. These are interesting ideas, but they just don't make much sense. > It's all good until I got to the "3ms", the scepter. It doesn't mean > royal anything here! It's a purely phonetic spelling! Geoff was > wondering why, in this text, the /s/ came before the "scepter glyph" > when it's usually the other way around. I agreed with him that it was > just a quirk--but actually it was intentional because these two glyphs > togther spell "s3msw" or "smsw", which is "the elder" or "dean" of > something. No, they would never write smsw this way during this period. Maybe in the Ptolemaic Period, but never in the Old Kingdom. the text is not intended to be cryptographic. It is just an archaic form of writing. Why do you have so much trouble with wr zH mDH.w 3ms? These are perfectly good titles and need not be over analyzed into something else. The determinative, the bent old man leaning on a stick is in > the following row! Before him, though, (and this can be confusing and > misleading) is M40 *tied-up roll of papyrus*, which has the phonetic > value of "is". Now this "is" can mean a great many things depending > upon the determinative. Many times, it means a large place, a dwelling > of some sort or even a tomb. "is" means "old", too, with another > det.--but in the text we only have the "is" glyph followed by the *old > man". I feel this is all tied up to the previous "smsw" but how? No, I don't think so. js has to be a separate word, and the old man is its determinative. OK, let's just close this up for now. I am not trying to thwart you, but I think that you are letting your mind run too wild with the glyphs. Not that running wild with glyphs is not a fun thing to do. Didn't someone write a book called "Women who run with wolves"? Maybe we should write a sequal; "Minds that run with glyphs"! OK, Marianne, this has been very fun, but I think there comes a time when we just have to let go! ;-) Best wishes, yours, Geoff sokar@minerva.cis.yale.edu ============================================================================== Date: Thu, 08 May 1997 19:17:49 -0700 From: Stephen Fryer To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL Westcar ll. 17-18 Graham wrote: > > Hi, James, and Serge, > > > Would you relate that with the use of 'y' in certain words in place of a final 't' ? > > I would suggest that {Hrty} might not be a verb since we already have > s-nDm as the verb, but rather an adverb. Had it been the verb, we would > want it to be *Hrj.t, but we have {Hrty} (is it *Hr.y.t.y?). I think it > could be like Coptic {ehrai} and mean "upward". I might be quite wrong. > On the other hand, {Hrty} could conceivably be a corrupted spelling of > Hrj.t, could it not? Let's see, first of all, Faulkner gives Hrty as a 4-inf. verb meaning "travel by land" (p.176) [By the way, I knew I had seen this in there, but had a problem finding it just now. Does anyone else find Faulkner's "alphabetical order" somewhat confusing?] Of course he gives only two references for this, one of which is this exact passage. Presumably it is ultimately derived from Hr, "upon", since the roads etc would all be higher than the rest of the land, especially the river, which was the main highway. I'm not sure of the exact location of Ded-Snofru, but would presume it was on the high desert next to the pyramid, so Hr would be even more descriptive, and one could possibly even go so far as to attempt translating m Hrty as "upwards" The construction is parallel to an earlier one: SAs pw ir(w).n=f m xntyt "he journeyed southward" m Hrty "he journeyed overland(?)/upward(?)" The word after the m is obviously a nominal of some form, the general suggestion having been an infinitive. Assuming this is an infinitive of a 4th-weak verb, what is somewhat unusual about it? (Which is what James originally asked, and I don't want to spoil the fun >:-> ) -- Stephen Fryer Lund Computer Services ************************************************** The more answers I find, the more questions I have ************************************************** ============================================================================== Date: Fri, 09 May 1997 00:43:40 -0500 From: Saida To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL Rahotep Again Graham wrote: > > Hi, Marianne, > > You really like this text a lot, don't you? ;-) Slow down a minute. I > think you are reading too much into it though. Geoff, I like Erman, too, and I am trying to find what he saw! > Erman was talking about other inscriptions from the mastaba. This statue > was definitely not the only significant find, or list of his titles. I am > sure that Erman was reading another list of titles. Egyptians did not > always list the same exact set of titles in every one of their > inscriptions. You may be right about this. > > > > > wr zH mDH.w 3ms > > > > Chief of the Shrine, Manager of the Scepter > > > > but he needed to keep with this, I think > w<.t.y > > w<.t.y is an adjective, it HAS to follow what it modifies. The only > candidate for that is wr-m3.w jwnw. We can't have w<.t.y beginning an new > title. It just does not happen. I corrected this in another post. You may have missed it ;-) >the "Wr-rs" the "Ten > > Great Ones of the South". This title is spelled somewhat variously but > > generally *swallow, south sign, 10 hoop* or *G36,M23, 10 hoop*. You > > know, the number 10 is written with a glyph that looks like a croquet > > hoop. > > No, Marianne, at this period that title was always written with a wr sign > {swallow}, a Sm< sign {flowering sedge plant} growing out of the mD sign > (looks like a croquet hoop). I have never heard of any scribe ever > substituting the zH sign {divine booth} for this. It is too much > speculation. I don't think we want to go so far, unless you can find an > example where the title has been written in its usual way with this as a > determinative or something. On the other hand, does this sign by itself mean "shrine"? All the "shrine" words I see in my dictionary have a different determinative. Even "zH mnw" or "hall of the shrine" has another det. in addition to our *arches*. It seems to me the *McDonald's arches* always mean "hall" in the one sense and some sort of "counselor or wiseman" in the other sense. Marianne: > > > the word for the Great Royal Council or Royal College? The "axe" then > > represents "mdw" or the number 10! After that is "3ms" or "the > > scepter". This just means royal as in the "Royal Council" or "Royal > > College" , also called the "chatchat nesu". > > No, the axe cannot represent /mD/. It has a final /H/ at least, if not > the /w/. In the number 10, the final /w/ fell away early Gardiner says. Otherwise, I can't argue your well-taken point. > > I have never heard of any instance where 3ms can be anything other than > the scepter itself. Marianne > > > Now if we can only figure out where in the text Adolf Erman saw his > > "fisheries and the Nile"! But maybe he just got this from somewhere > > else. Geoff: > > I think that that is a safer assumption. I don't know...now Row 2 may have something along these lines in it. Since I don't know now whether the *old man leaning on the stick* after "is" belongs with this row or the previous, I'll start with "w From: cejo@midway.uchicago.edu (Charles E. Jones) Subject: AEL Getting Egyptological books Cc: Julie Smith Responding to Julie Smith's message about the (non-)availablility of books: The Suq at the Oriental Institute in Chicago has quite a number of basic Egyptological reference works actually in stock. http://www-oi.uchicago.edu/OI/MUS/SUQ/Suq_Store.html If you have need of books not in stock the staff of the Suq will happily track them down and order them for you. While I cannot guarantee to you that their service will be faster than any other web/mail-order operation (Amazon, etc.), I can assure you that they are a not-for-profit operation - all revenues go to support projects of the Oriental Institute, the Research Archives being the primary beneficiary (and the Suq being the primary source of funds for our acquisitions budget). In addition, members of the Oriental Institute get a ten percent discount. So, if you buy your books there, you'll not only get the books you want, but you'll also support this institution. Those of you unfamiliar with the Research Archives of the Oriental Institute can visit us virtually at: http://www-oi.uchicago.edu/OI/DEPT/RA/Research_Arch.html -Chuck Jones- cejo@midway.uchicago.edu ============================================================================== Date: Fri, 9 May 1997 17:16:32 -0400 (EDT) From: Graham To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: AEL Rahotep Revisited? Oops, I am sorry to bring this text back again, but I simply have to. I have not been fair to Marianne. I did not mean to make her look bad. I am sorry if I gave that impression. My comment about "minds which run with glyphs" was intended to be humorous at both of our expenses, and not to put Marianne down. I went and looked up the titles concerned. The two of us only have two disagreements in reading left, and the text should be read as follows: wr-m3.w jwnw w<.t.y Unique Chief of Seers of Heliopolis wr zH mDH.w 3ms Chief of the Shrine, Manager of the Scepter (Our disagreement is only that Marianne feels that this one line should read: wr mD-Sm To: "AEgyptian-List" Subject: AEL back to Westcar l.10 Date: Sat, 10 May 1997 15:07:20 +0200 These last weeks, there are full of legal holidays in France, then I could start to Westcar's translation. For the line 10, I found the same translation but after a come-back to my translation, I though of another possibily : translation of *Tnw by the interrogative where (he knows where [are] the secret chambers...) - but indirect speech is rare in Egyptian ; - papyrus roll and plural determinatives don't really exist for this sense : yet, in hieratic texts (according what I know) sometimes there is misuse of these determinatives. - more, with regard to the context, the king will be interested to see the chambers if he wants make a copy for his tomb (I think it's tomb not glory because there is no use of bird G25). Is my translation a feasabily or am I entirely wrong ? amicalement, Yves Dupont - Lyon Croix-Rousse - France ydupont@serveur.dtr.fr ==============================================================================