From: "Ann & Jon Smyth" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: Re: Ships of the Desert? (was: AEL W3d-wr & the Red Sea?) Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 10:40:53 -0400 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ogden Goelet" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2006 4:10 PM Subject: Re: Ships of the Desert? (was: AEL W3d-wr & the Red Sea?) > Dear Jon, > > I looked at these petroglyphs which appear much like similar > depictions of boats found on (excavated) pre-dynastic pottery--these > are 'Dyn. 0' at the latest, but I'd place them earlier than that on > comparative and sylistic grounds. Dear Ogden. I think it is unfortunate that interpretations of the Eastern Desert petroglyphs have been hijacked by the Followers of Horus. I am hoping to see something broader with respect to interpretations from the survey by Dr. Toby Wilkinson, though I caught a snippet of information this weekend that suggested Dr Wilkinson had teamed up with David Rohl for future Eastern Desert surveys. Speaking of David Rohl, he published a work some years ago which introduced the world to these petroglyphs once again. Perhaps I can provide some links for those interested to see precisely what we are discussing here. Petrie's 'Dynastic Race' and the more recent 'Followers of Horus' both see ancient predynastic work in these desert pertroglyphs, partly based on perceived parallels between Naqada II artwork and 'some' of the Eastern Desert drawings. Here's an example of Naqada II artwork, said to be a ship? http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h246/drifter_03/nakadaII.jpg You might notice that in the above painting, mountains, trees, wildlife & water (rivers, lakes,or seas?) are clearly represented. Yet, if the central detail is a boat then it is clearly on land. Whatever it is, (if a boat?) it is not associated with water. I don't think anyone can argue the detail is 'clearly' a ship. Here is a selection of the more well known Desert Petroglyphs, hand drawn reproductions: http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h246/drifter_03/10ships.jpg http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h246/drifter_03/8ships.jpg Dr Wilkinson actually commented: "Some of it is quite breathtaking," Dr Wilkinson said. "It is very difficult to date precisely, but looking at the stylistic parallels, a lot of this art has got to be from around 4,000BC. That is pretty old - and some of it is even older." http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4110040,00.html "alot of this art"? Though I would not try to read anything into the words of Dr Wilkinson, it does appear he thinks this art represents a wider period that just pre-dynastic Egypt. Here's a "classic" Egyptian ship: http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h246/drifter_03/classicship.jpg The above ship is easily seen in XVIIIth - XXth dynasty painting & reliefs in many Egyptian tombs and monuments. As the above links of groups of ships, not only do I fails to see anything "typically" Naqada II, but I certainly do see ships represented from all periods of Egyptian history. Why is it that conventional wisdom requires us to interpret these petroglyphs as coming from a time which we know very little of the period and nothing at all about their adventures, if any, in the Eastern Desert? And yet, for the best part of 3000 years, periods of Egyptian history when we know a great deal, and in a time when we certainly do know that they did ventures into these same wadi's in the Eastern Desert, we are required to believe they drew nothing ?? That, is mind-boggling!! >However, I do not see the 'tow- > ropes,' nor do I see anything that looks like a team of people towing > the boats. Let me share some more petroglyphs with you: This ship is being pulled by five walking figures.. http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h246/drifter_03/tow5.jpg The figures are drawn by hand below.. http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h246/drifter_03/tow5dwg.jpg Here's a vessel that appears to be being towed by a Hippo? http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h246/drifter_03/hippotow.jpg And another, perhaps of religious significance? http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h246/drifter_03/tow5bark2.jpg Hand-drawn copy.. http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h246/drifter_03/tow5bark.jpg And a later Egyptian tomb painting, very similar.. http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h246/drifter_03/towbark.jpg You say you think it was easier to take these ships apart?, also that the Abydos ships were smaller? I don't think "easy" formed part of the Egyptian vocabulary, on the one hand Egyptians were able to move massive stone blocks weighing several tons across large distances, and on the other hand they were able to move smaller (80ft? long) Abydos ships from the Nile for grave burials. Yet you wish to maintain they could not, or did not, move anything like a cargo vessel. Some thing lighter than a stone block but heavier than the Abydos ships? The Eastern Desert Petroglyphs, which must exist if not in the hundreds but possibly by the thousand, must surely represent by both the numbers and the styles, a far longer period of Egyptian history than the couple of hundred years of the Naqada II period. I think these petroglyphs represent several thousand years of Egyptian history, and, that it was not the Egyptians who inscribed these petroglyphs but the Desert peoples (remember Henu's army who cleared the way ahead of desert troglodytes?). These wadi's may not have been desert at all, even in the empire periods. Regards, Jon Smyth All pictures of petroglyphs linked above are courtesy of Legend, David Rohl, 1998. ============================================================================== From: Ogden Goelet To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 22:01:25 -0400 Subject: Re: Ships of the Desert? (was: AEL W3d-wr & the Red Sea?) Dear Jon, You have gathered many depictions of boats in rock graffiti, but give no indication of the site where they are located. This is important, please. The fact that pottery scenes show boats and landscape and land animals together is hardly surprising, but these boats are moving under oar and not sailing through the desert (no sufficient water). One could just as easily interpret these as nilotic scenes with gebels in the background. You act as if you believe that these graffiti are unknown to Egyptologists generally, but if you go through even popular studies of the pre-dynastic and early dynastic period, you'll see many such illustrations. If we see a scene of, let us say, a battle on an Egyptian temple wall, this doesn't mean that the battle took place in the immediate vicinity of the temple. The scenes of Mecca on the walls of modern Egyptian village houses indicate that homeowner travelled to the holy site, not that Mecca is in the immediate vicinity; some parts of these wall paintings show things in Egypt, others pertain to Saudi Arabia. The connection between a depiction of a place and the location where it scene appears can be quite tenuous. The scenes painted on cave walls in Europe do not indicate that the bisons were roaming through the cave, but rther that the cave dwellers encountered such animals elsewhere in their environment, sometimes a goodly distance away. People often leave depictions of where they have been, not necessarily of where they were when they drew the scene. There is no known means of dating a rock inscription except through style -- no carbon 14 or any such -- at least as far as I know. One finds pre-dynsatic rock drawings in the immediate vicinity of graffiti from a wide range of periods--i.e. proximity to other material is often of little help except when the style appears the same. Therefore, the only means of dating such things is by means of stylistic comparison, as shaky as that may seem. These graffiti have been dated the basis of decoration on excavated pottery that looks quite similar. The graffiti in the wadis look quite different from datable depictions of boats from even the archaic period (Dyns. '0' to 2). In the pharaonic period, the people who executed graffiti while on quarrying and other expeditions produced works that looked roughly similar to scenes in contemporary monuments found in the Nile valley, which stands to reason, because such things were produced by specialists-scribes who were also artists. If you want to date the graffiti you reference into the Middle Kingdom or the 18th Dynasty, be my guest, but I think that you are really, really off and I don't think that many of the people who work with the Early Dynastic or Pre- Dynastic periods would agree with you. I certainly wouldn't, even though this is not my area of expertise. You might ask Prof. Wilkinson his opinion of where he would date these. The fact that boats were towed, especially on festival occasions, is well known. It was a key point of the Opet Festival, for instance. In non-ceremonial occasions in historical times we know of such towing, sometimes to get through exposed rock outcroppings during periods of low Niles. Kings have left inscriptions commemorating digging by-pass channels through such difficulties. In nearly all such cases, however, the boat was towed on water (a canal, for example) by people moving alongside on land. Boats could be towed along the sandbanks, but this was normally for only a few hundred yards. The Egyptians did not shy away from difficulty, to be sure, but they also didn't make it a practice to go out of their way to make things difficult for themselves. The very a very practical people when it came to work. Sincerely, Ogden ============================================================================== From: "KMOTC" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: AEL ALLEN GLYPHSTUDY COLLATION 14.6 Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 01:22:48 -0500 14.6 mAA.f wj Hr jrt wpwt.k (3ae-inf. jrt) He sees me doing your assignment. mAA.f wj = "he sees me" Hr jrt = "doing", infinitive wpwt.k = "your assignment", object of the infinitive Allen gives us the first part of this sentence as "he sees me". (This is a verbal sentence where the suffix pronoun '.f' is the subject and the dependent 'wj' is the object.) The remainder is the prepositional phrase 'Hr jrt wpwt.k'. In this 'jrt' is an infinitive, "doing", from the 3as-inf. verb 'jrj'. The noun phrase 'wpwt.k', "your assignment", is the second element of a direct genitive andcould be either the subject or object of the infinitive (=A714.7). However,only the latter is likely. The infinitive after 'Hr' usually indicates concomitant action. It can betranslated by the ".ing" form of the verb without any introductory word (=A714.11.1). *************************************************************** 14.6 (mAA.f wj hr jrt wpwt.k) (mAA.f) from Allen = he sees me (hr) preposition = (jrt) verb 3ae-inf. BASE + -t. verbal - infinitive = do, doing (wpwt) noun = assignment (.k) suffix pronoun = @MS = you, your He sees me doing your assignment. QUESTION: This one confused me, what happened to the (hr)? ============================================================================== From: "KMOTC" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: AEL ALLEN GLYPHSTUDY COLLATION 14.4 Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 01:17:05 -0500 14.4 transliteration: nj kA.(j) spr r Xnw pn translation: I did not plan to arrive at this capital city This is a sentence with a verbal predicate. The verb and subject are given by kA.j (the verb is in the perfective form, ch. 20); negation is provided by the particle 'nj'. Since none of this has been covered yet, Allen informs us that 'nj kA.j' translates as "I did not plan". The object of this verb is the noun phrase 'spr r Xnw pn'. 'spr' is the infinitive of the 3-lit verb 'spr' meaning "arrive" (the infinitive of a 3-lit verb is just the base of the verb). So we have here an example of an infinitive being used in the object of a transitive verb (sec. 14.12). In addition, 'spr' is being modified by the prepositional phrase 'r Xnw pn', which translates as "at this capital". 14.4 nj kA.(j) spr r Xnw pn = "I did not plan to arrive at this capital city." nj = negative "not" kA(Gardiner V31 - G1) kA.(j) I plan nj kA.(j) I did not plan spr = to arrive 3-lit. r = preposition "to, towards, at" Xnw pn = this capital city ============================================================================== From: "KMOTC" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: AEL ALLEN GLYPHSTUDY COLLATION 14.3 Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 01:14:38 -0500 14.3 Read right to left Allen's hint: nfa.n.j wj "I took myself off" Transcription: nfa.n.j wj m nftft r H(j)H(j) n.j st dg(j) Dissection: nfa = (3-lit.) "remove/take away" nfa.n.j = "I took myself off/I removed myself/I left" m = preposition, signifies concomitant action with nfa.n.j. (14.11.2) nftft = (5-lit.) "leap" nfa.n.j m nftft = "I left, leaping..." r = preposition, can be translated "in order to" (14.11.3) HjHj = (4-lit.) "seek" n.j = dative (14.6) "for me/myself" r HjHj n.j = "in order to seek for myself" st = "place" dgj = (3ae-inf.) "hide" st dgj = "a place of hiding" (direct genitive) Translation: "I left, leaping, in order to find for myself a place of hiding." NOTE: Allen's answer gives HjHj, nftft, and dg as verbal nouns (14.3.1, 14.11.2). 14.13 nat pw jr.n.n m xD r Xnw n jtj This is a Sdm pw jr.n.f form naj = 3ae-inf verb = sail, travel by boat Base stem = na Infinitive = base stem + t nat = Infinitive = to sail, sailing pw jr.n.n = what we did nat pw jr.n.n = what we did was to sail m xD = downstream, north nat pw jr.n.n m xD = what we did was to sail downstream r = preposition = to Xnw = noun = interior, city, capital n = preposition = of jtj = noun = sovereign, king r Xnw n jtj = to the capital of the king nat pw jr.n.n m xD r Xnw n jtj = what we did was to sail downstream to the capital of the king ************************************************************************ 14.3 nfa.n.j wj m nftft r H(j)H(j) n.j st dg Translation: I removed myself, leaping, in order to seek for me (myself) a place of hiding. Infinitive forms: nftft: 5-lit. Allen tells us this is a verbal noun, and that verbal nouns appear more often than infinitives with the "m + infinitive" construction. Otherwise, the form looks the same as the infinitive. The "m +" construction is used to indication action taking place at the same time as the previous verb "nfa.n.j" - I removed my self. H(j)H(j): 4-lit. Allen tells us this is a verbal noun. Because it is a strong verb, there's nothing else to indicate it is not an infinitive. It is used in a construction with the preposition "r" and has the meaning "in order to seek." dg: 3rd weak verb We can tell this is a verbal noun and not an infinitive because 3rd weak verbs have a "t" ending in the infinitive. This verbal noun appears in a direct genitive construction with the noun "st," - place. 14.3 Transliteration: nfa.n.j wj m nftft r H(j)H(j) n.j st dg(j) Translation: I took myself off, leaping, in order to seek for myself a place of hiding. nfa = remove/take away - 3-lit. n.j dative 'n' followed by the suffix pronoun 'j' = I m = preposition (A prepositional phrase with the preposition m and the infinitive, is used to describe concomitant action: I took myself off (whilst in the act of) nftft = leap - verb 5-lit r = to - preposition (A combination of preposition 'r' and infinitive can be used to describe purpose: in order to) HjHj = seek - 4-lit n. dative followed by suffix pronoun 'j' = for myself st = place - noun dg = hide - 3ae-inf. Allen states the 4-lit HjHj 5-lit nftft and 3ae-inf dg are verbal nouns. 14.3 nfa.n=i wi m nftft r H(i)H(i) n=i st dg I took myself off in a leap in order to seek for myself a place of hiding nftft 5 lit. - to leap H(i)H(i) 4 lit. - to seek dgi 3ae inf - to hide r + inf here may be translated as 'in order to do something' ============================================================================== From: "KMOTC" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: AEL ALLEN GLYPHSTUDY COLLATION 14.8 Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 01:28:50 -0500 14.8 (Xmt.n.f hwt.j) (Xmt.n) = think, thought QUESTION: does the (n) make it the dative? (.f) suffix pronoun, 3MS = he (hwtf) verb 4-lit. plunder infinitive (.j) suffix pronoun 1S, I, me, my He thought to plunder me. Volunteer Response to Previous Question-Prior to Collation: I think the "n" in Xmt.n.f is not the dative, but part of a verb form that we haven't covered yet, called the perfect. See chapter 18. It's usually used to indicate past tense, so Allen gives us the translation "I thought" (past). A1\-f\:a\-w\:t-H\-n:f\-A2\-Z3A-x:D52\ xmt.n.f "he thought" [Sin. R. 163] Step 0 - Reverse signs orientation x:D52-Z3A-A2-n:f-H-w:t-f:a-A1 Step A - Allen's Dictionary and Lessons x:D52-Z3A-A2-n:f = xmt.n.f "he thought" (given by Allen) H-w:t-f:a or H-w-t:f:a = Hwtf (verb 4-lit.) "plunder" regular form of infinitive for 4-lit is base A1 = .i (personal pronoun suffix) "I, me, my" Step B - Transliterate xmt.n.f Hwtf.i Step C - Translate He thought to plunder me ********************************************************************************* 14.8 xmt.n.f Hwtf.j = "He thought to plunder me." xmt.n.f = "he thought" (Gardner says "He expected") n = dative (?) Hwtf = to plunder - 4-lit j = me - suffix preposition ============================================================================== From: "KMOTC" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: AEL ALLEN GLYPHSTUDY COLLATION 14.10 Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 01:34:13 -0500 14.10 jw mj xt aA wHm st (3-lit. wHm) It is like something big to repeat it. jw introductory particle mj = "like", preposition xt = "something" aA = "big" wHm = "to repeat", infinitive st = "it", 3n dependent pronoun The first part of this sentence was Ex. 10.23. There this adverbial sentence with no subject is translated "It is like something big". The rest of the sentence, 'wHm st', is not the the subject of the adverbial sentence. If it were, it should come before the adverbial predicate. It is,perhaps, a noun phrase in apposition. This phrase consists of the infinitive `wHm', with the dependent pronoun `st' as its object. Even though the subject of the infinitive is not expressed, when the object refers to things the dependent pronoun is used (=A714.5.2). The translation of this phrase is "repeating it" or "to repeat it". 14.10 transliteration: jw mj xt aA wHm st translation: "It is like something big to repeat it", or "It is like something big when repeating it" This is a nonverbal sentence with an adverbial predicate. The subject of this sentence is not expressed as it does not refer to anything in particular. Since the subject is not expressed, it must begin with a particle; here, the sentence begins with 'jw'. The predicate of the sentence is the prepositional phrase 'mj xt aA'. According to section 4.4, 'xt' ("thing; something, anything"), which is normally feminine, tends to be masculine when it does not refer to anything in particular (i.e., takes the meaning "something, anything"). This is the case here where 'xt' is being modified by the adjective 'aA' ("big") which is in the masculine form. Up to this point we've considered 'jw mj xt aA'. Using "it" as the subject, his translates to "it is like something big". The last part of the sentence is the noun phrase 'wHm st'. 'wHm' is the infinitive of the 3-lit verb 'wHm' meaning "repeat". This is followed by the dependent pronoun 'st,' which serves as the object of the infinitive (this agrees with the rule given in sec. 14.5.2 that 'st' can be used as the object of an infinitive without an expressed subject when it refers to things rather than people). So, 'wHm st' can be translated as "to repeat it" or "repeating it". What role does the phrase 'wHm st' play in this sentence? It describes the circumstance under which "it is like something big". In other words, the phrase's role is adverbial (an adverbial noun phrase, a topic that Allen very briefly considered in the third sentence of the second paragraph of sec. 18.4) --although he seems to imply that this role is limited to nouns of time, I suspect that nouns of time just provide the most common examples. ============================================================================== From: "KMOTC" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: AEL ALLEN GLYPHSTUDY COLLATION 14.9 Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 01:29:56 -0500 14.9 sxA.n.k hrw n qrs Translation: You have remembered the day of burial, or ( burying) Infinitive forms: Qrs - this is a 3-lit. verb, so its infinitive doesn't show any special form. It's used as the second noun of an indirect genitive in the phrase "hrw n qrs" - day of burial. 14.9 ORIENTATION: Horizontal, right to left, normal TRANSLITERATION: S29-M12-G1-A2-N35:V31-O4:D21-Z7-N5:Z1-N35:N29-D21:O34-A53-A24 S29-M12-G1-A2-N35:V31 s-xA-{phonetic complement}-{det - man cogitating}-n:k O4:D21-Z7-N5:Z1 h:r-w-{ideogram - "day"}:{ideogram - N5 is to be read as an ideogram} N35 n :N29-D21:O34-A53-A24 :q-r:s-{det - mummy}-{det - man making effort} VOCABULARY: From Allen: sxA.n.k "You have remembered" hrw "day", noun n - genitival adjective qrs "bury", verb - 3 lit GRAMMAR: SxA.n.k - verb and subject Hrw n qrs - noun phrase, object of sxA Qrs - infinitive, the nominal object of the genitival adjective n A53 cannot be a suffix pronoun, Allen shows it always acting as an ideogram or a determinative; also it would probably have to follow A24 instead of preceding it. TRANSLATION: Literal: "You have remembered the day of the burying" Sense: "You have remembered the day of burial." 14.9 Transliteration: sxA.n.k hrw n qrs Translation: You have remembered the day of burial. sxA = bring to mind/recall - verb caus. 3ae-inf n - dative followed by 'k' = you - suffix pronoun (14.6) hrw = day - noun n = of - preposition qrs = bury - verb 3-lit. 14.9 sxA.n=k hrw n qrs You have remembered the day of burial qrs 3 lit - to bury (here, a verbal noun) ============================================================================== From: "KMOTC" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: AEL ALLEN GLYPHSTUDY 14.5 Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 01:20:48 -0500 14.15 m.k wj jj.kw r HmSt jm.s m.k = Look! wj jj.kw = I have come = given by Allen r + infinitive - describes purpose = in order to HmSj = 4ae-inf verb = sit down, reside base stem = Hms Infinitive = base stem + t HmSt = Infinitive = to sit, sitting r HmSt = in order to sit jm.s = preposition + suffix pronoun = in it m.k wj.jj.kw r HmSt jm.s = Look! I have come (in order) to sit in it ******************************************************************** Exercise 14.5 (read right to left) rdt.j wAt r rdy.j m xd rdt.j - "I give" 3ae-inf 'rdj' infinitive + suffix pronoun which is its subject wAt - "path" noun r - "to" preposition rdy.j - "my two feet" The key says rdy is an alternate writing of the dual 'rdwj' which we might guess from the double determinative m xd - downstream" verbal noun. The verb is 3ae-inf. 'xdj' so the infinitive would be 'xdt'. Allen's dictionary gives 'm xd' explicitly under the entry for 'xdj'. See also Exercise 13.40 and section 14.11.2. So we have "I give a path to my two feet (going) downstream/north". QUESTION: I don't really understand why 'rdt.j' is an infinitive here and not a normal verb. 14.5 rdjt.j wAt n rdy.j m xd Translation: I gave a path to my two feet northward. Infinitive forms: rdjt.j: This is the infinitive form of the anomalous verb rdj - its infinitive has a "t" ending. It is followed by the first-person singular suffix pronoun that serves as subject. xd: This is a verbal noun. It's a 3rd weak verb - xdj. If it were an infinitive, its form would be xdt. So this is the verbal noun. 14.5 ORIENTATION: Horizontal, right to left, normal TRANSLITERATION: D21:D36:X1-A1-V4-G1-X1*N31:N35-D21:D46-M17-M17-D56-D56-A1-G17-Aa1:D46-P1 D21:D36:X1-A1 r:dj(var of D37):t-.j A1-V4-G1-X1 wA-A{phonetic complement}-t N31 n D21:D46-M17-M17-D56-D56-A1 r:d-y -{doubled determinative indicating dual}-j G17 m Aa1:D46-P1 x:d-{det. indicating travel) rdjt.j wAt n rdy [or rd(w)j? see note at bottom].j m xd VOCABULARY: rdj - "give, cause, put" - verb anom. j - 1st sing. Suffix pronoun rd - "foot" - noun n - "in, to", preposition m xd - "going downstream, north" - prepositional phrase GRAMMAR: rdjt.j - rdjt is an infinitive form of rdj (base stem + t 14.3). j is the expressed subject (14.4.2). wAt - direct object of the infinitive. n rdy.j rd(w)j.j - prepositional phrase, per Allen, rdy is a variant form of the dual of rd "foot", j is a suffix pronoun as a direct genitive. m xd - xd is a verbal noun. xdj is a 3ai verb - its infinitive form would be xdt. TRANSLATION: Literal: "I give the road to my two feet northbound." Sense: "I put my two feet on the road, heading north." NOTE: Allen shows rdy as a variant dual form of rd(w)j. The spelling is rdy. I would expect a spelling like D21:D46-G43 (or Z7)-Z4-D56-D56 rdwj, the usual dual form. QUESTION: Could the weak w have dropped out, been assimilated to M17, or could M17 be an error for G43 with the reed-feathers then serving as an additional dual marker? Are there other attestations of rdy as a dual? Exercise 14.5 ------------- transliteration: rdjt.j wAt n rdy.j m xd translation: I gave a path to my feet northwards Allen informs us that this sentence, in which the verb is an infinitive, is taken from a narration. As such, it is most naturally translated by a past tense form. This sentence provides a good example of the word ordering discussed in section 14.6. At the beginning is 'rdjt', which is the infinitive of the anomalous verb 'rdj' meaning "give". This is followed by an A1 seated man as the suffix pronoun 'j', which serves as the subject of the infinitive. The object of the infinitive is given by 'wAt', meaning "path". Last, the sentence concludes with two prepositional phrases. The first is the dative (with a noun) 'n rdy.j', "on my (two) feet", and the other is 'm xd', "going downstream, northwards" (see sec. 14.11.2). Thus, the type of this sentence is VsOA where the dative follows the subject and object since it involves a noun and not a pronoun. Also note that the dative 'n rdy.j' comes before the other adjunct 'm xd'. 'rdy' is a dual form of the noun 'rd' ("leg") and is written with the double reed leaf ('y'). The fact that this is a dual is apparent from the doubling of the D56 leg determinative. ============================================================================== From: "KMOTC" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: AEL ALLEN GLYPHSTUDY COLLATION 14.7 Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 01:27:26 -0500 14.7 Read right to left No hints Transcription: jwt pw jr.n.f n.j Dissection: This type of construction is specifically addressed in 14.14.3 ("the sDm pw jr.n.f" construction). jwt = infinitive form of anom. verb jwj "to come/toreturn" jr.n.f = from jr(j) "to do/doing" (3ae-inf. verb) with.f = 3rd person masculine singular suffix pronoun. jwt pw jr.n.f = "What he did was to come/return..." n = preposition (8.2.6) "to" or "for" something/someone j = 1st person singular suffix pronoun n.j = "to me" or "for me" Translations: "What he did was to come for me." "What he did was to come to me." "What he did was to return for me." "What he did was to return to me." Exercise 14.7 transliteration: jwt pw ir(i).n.f n.j translation: It was coming to me what he did. jwj - verb -"come" infinitive - anomalous verb - jwt (base + t) pw - this (demonstrative pronoun - subject) A pw nominal sentence (??) ir.n.f - he did (n marks the past tense, f suffix personal pronoun "he") "What he did was to come to me" Exercise 14.7 (read right to left) jwt pw jr.n.f n.j jwt = "coming" infinitive (base+t) of the anom. verb 'jwj' pw = demonstrative pronoun jr.n.f = "he did" 3ae-inf. 'jrj' (base + perfect 'n' + 3rd person dep. pronoun as subject) I had to look at the key to sort this one out. I guess we're supposed to remember an earlier gloss? jr.n.j is given several times in the Chapter 12 exercises as "I spent" or "I did". n.j = "to/for me" QUESTION: I couldn't figure out the grammar on this one. The answer key has "What he did was to come to me," which suggests an 'A pw' sentence of existence, but I don't see how the verb phrase fits into that. Workingbackward, 'jr.n.f' is obviously the verb, and 'jwt' is (from the translation) its object. "Coming" is what "he did". 'n.j' is a dative. So perhaps "This coming (is what) he did to me" or "This coming to me is what he did." is a more literal translation. 14.7 Transliteration: jwt pw jr.n.f n.j Translation: What he did was to come to me. jwt = to come - Anom (base+t) pw = he - demonstrative pronoun jr.n.f. - an A pw B nominal sentence in which A is an infinitive or infinitive phrase and B is the verb form plus noun or suffix pronoun as subject: jr.n.f = what he did (14.14.3). The construction jwt pw jr.n.f = What he did was to come n.j dative (14.6) = to me. ============================================================================== From: "KMOTC" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: AEL ALLEN GLYPHSTUDY COLLATION 14.2 Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 19:35:15 -0500 14.2 (tm jT hAtj n z ma.f m jmnt) Allen tells us it is the title of a funerary spell (tm) - defective verb form 2-lit. = not do (jT) verb - 3ae-inf. negatival complement = not taking (hAtj) noun = heart QUESTION: (n) I'm not sure what this is (z) noun = man QUESTION: (ma) ?? (.f) suffix pronoun 3MS he, him his (m) preposition = in (jmnt) noun = West Not taking the heart of a man from him in the West. 14.2 N25-t:1-R14\-m\-a\:f\-m\-A50\-n:z-F34\-F4\:y\*t-iTi\:D40\-m\-t:tm\ title of a funerary spell [CT V, 16f.] Step 0 - Reverse signs orientation t:tm-m-iTi:D40-F4:t*y-F34-n:z-A50-m-a:f-m-R14-t:1-N25 Step A - Allen's Dictionary and Lessons t:tm-m = tm veb 2-lit "not do" 14.16 Negative infinitive pag 169 "In Egyptian the infinitive is made negative by using the infinitive of the 2-lit. verb tm "finish, fail, not be, not do" followed by a special verb form known as the negative complement" 14.17 The form of negative complement "The negative complement of all verbs except those with geminated roots is formed with the base stem plus an ending -w" for iTi:D40 = iTi or iti (verb 3ae-inf) = take possession of the negative complement is it or itw (originally iT and iTw) F4:t*y-F34 = HAti (noun) "heart" n = n (genitival adjective) "of" z-A50 = z(i) (noun) "man" m = m (preposition) "from" a = a (noun) hand f = .f (personal pronoun suffix) 3MS "he, him, his ,it, its" m = m (preposition) "in" R14-t:1-N25 = imnt (noun) "West" Step B - Transliterate tm iT HAti n z(i) m a.f m imnt Step C - Translate not taking the heart of a man from his hand in the West KEY: Not taking the heart of a man from him in the West 14.2 tm jT HAtj n z(j) m a.f m jmnt Noun and phrase build-up HAtj - heart z(j) - man HAtj n z(j) - the heart of a man a - hand, arm a.f - his hand, his arm m a.f - from his hand (=from him) jmnt - West m jmnt - in the West Verb analysis jtj (or jTj; refer to the section about sound changes in 2.8.3) - take possession of This is the root form / dictionary form of the verb. There are three radicals, the last one weak. This puts it in the 'third-weak' verb class. To form the base stem, you drop the final 'j', and get 'jt' or jT'. However, the base form is preceded by the infinitive 'tm'. This makes it a NEGATIVAL COMPLEMENT construction (section 14.16). One of the ways to negate an infinitive (to take -> NOT to take) is to utilize the combination of the infinitive 'tm' and what Allen calls the NEGATIVAL COMPLEMENT. This it the base stem, with a 'w' tacked on at the end. So, jt / jT = the base of the verb TO TAKE And tm jt/jT = NOT TO TAKE (Don't forget...there's an invisible 'w' at the end of 'jt'; Allen says it sometimes shows up, and sometimes it doesn't. But the presence of 'tm' is a dead give-away that we've got a negatival complement here.) So, the translation is: Not to take the heart from a man in the West. HMWK 14.2 tm jT HAtj n z(j) m a.f m jmnt "not taking the heart of a man from him in the West" tm = to not do (negative infinitive) 2-lit verb tm jT = take possession of = take (negative compliment) 3ae-inf. verb tm with jT means "not taking" = negative infinitive with negative compliment HAtj n z(j) = heart of a man m a.f = from him m a = from m jmnt = in the West ============================================================================== From: "msv" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: AEL Amduat texts Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 21:17:46 +0100 Dear All, Does anyone know of an English translation of the Amduat ? It seems the Pyramid texts, Coffin texts and Book of the Dead are readily available, but not collective works on the other Religious texts. A French or german translation would be okay at a push. thanks mark vygus ============================================================================== From: "KMOTC" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: AEL ALLEN GLYPHSTUDY COLLATION 14.1 Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 19:32:59 -0500 14.1 Allen hint: jj.n.j "I returned" Transcription: jj.n.j Hr Sms(j).f Spelled: M18-M17-D54:N35-A1 D2:Z1 N37-S29-T18-D54:I9 Dissection: jj = "come/return" (anom. verb) jj.n.j = "I returned/I came" (Allen's hint) Hr = preposition (see 14.11.1) An infinitive following Hr implies concomitant action (i.e., going on at the same time as jj.n.j, in this case.) Sms(j) = "follow" (4ae-inf. verb) Sms(j).f = "following him" .f is the 3rd masc. singular suffix pronoun. (14.5.1) Hr Sms(j).f = lit. "while following him" Literal Translation: "I returned/came while following him." Allen Translation: "I returned following him." Exercise 14.1 transliteration: jj.n.j Hr Sms.f translation: "I returned following him" jj.n.j = "I returned" (jj - verb - "return", n - marks the past tense, j - suffix personal pronoun 1S- "I") Hr - preposition (infinitive as the object of a preposition 14.11.1 - After Hr (upon) - when Hr is followed by the infinitive (Sms(j)) - it usually has the meaning "when, while", - best translate with "....ing" - - - it expresses an action that goes on the same time as the previous one (I returned) - Sms(j) - follow, accompany infinitive - 4ae-inf (geminating verb - doesn't add t on its base) "I return (when, while) following him" Exercise 14.1 (read left to right) jj.n.j Hr Sms.f jj.n.j - "I returned" (glossed verb) Hr - "upon" (preposition) Sms - "follow" the glyph order is a bit odd here... infinitive (same as base) of the 4ae-inf. verb Smsj .j - "him" object of the infinitive 3rd person masculine singular dependent pronoun So the literal translation is "I returned upon (to follow) him". Rendered naturally in English this becomes, "I returned following him." 14.1 ii.n=i Hr Sms=f I have returned following him Hr + inf. here denotes concomitant action Smsi 4ae-inf (non-geminating) - to follow the t in the infinitive is missing suffix pronoun =f is an object of the infinitive ============================================================================== From: "Bob Myers" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: Re: AEL Amduat texts Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 04:51:48 -0500 Jacob Rabinowitz is doing one on line with text and translation: http://www.invisiblebooks.com/Amduat.htm ============================================================================== From: "A.P.de Visser" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: Re: AEL Amduat texts Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 16:38:07 +0200 Dear Mark I can only give you two translations, which you might know already: Budge: The Egyptian Heaven and Hell (Dover),in which the Amduat is one of the several parts. Th.G Allen,The Book of the Dead or Going forth by Day(Chicago 1974 page 162-175). I hope it helps. Regards Bram ============================================================================== From: Ogden Goelet To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.org.uk Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 11:38:34 -0400 Subject: AEL An apology and a request Dear Listers, I mistakenly sent out part of a lengthy exchange I have been having with Jon Smith to the entire list. I had meant for this to go out to him directly, i.e. 'off-list.' I apologize for the lengthy communication. At the same time, I would like to take this opportunity to make a request for some information. A while back there was a thread on online modern language dictionaries that zipped by me unawares. I would like to know if anyone has a good one for French, especially one that might cover economic, commercial, and legal terminology. I don't know if the following online dictionary was mentioned during that thread, but I have found the following resource for German quite wonderful: http://dict.leo.org/ Thanking you all in advance, Ogden Goelet ============================================================================== From: "msv" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: AEL Re: Amduat Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 17:28:59 +0100 Thanks to all who have answered regarding the Amduat texts. mark vygus ============================================================================== From: "Ann & Jon Smyth" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: AEL Henu had to "clear the way ahead"? Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 20:24:07 -0400 Dear Ogden & members. Getting back to language issues, I had thought to ask about a particular phrase contained in the Henu Inscription. The copy I was working from is that provided by Lepsius.. http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h246/drifter_03/HenuAREI427a.jpg In translations, the portion of text I am interested in is typically rendered: "The army cleared the way ahead", this phrase lies at the end of line 10, the word in question: http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h246/drifter_03/clear.jpg I looked for this word in Faulkner but could only find "srwj" = "remove" (p. 235), likwise this same word appears in Allen (p. 467), but the third glyph "forearm with X8" seems to be D37, though it may be a poorly drawn D43 "forearm with flail", which is a glyph more associated with force or protection. I wondered how conventional this phrase was and if it appears in campaign inscriptions like those of Thutmosis III, Rameses II or Shoshenk. It struck me as unusual to have the army clear the way ahead, the number of armed men is unusually high considering this is supposed to be a journey through the wilderness. How many 'troglodytes' was Hanu assuming to encounter in these out of the way places? An assembly of 3000 armed men which is capable of countering any interuptions by beduin or local hostiles hardly needs to clear the way ahead. However, such a precaution may be neccessary if the main assembly was transporting something which could easily be damaged if attacked by hostiles. Henu then might send the military to remove any possibility of hostile action on the route to the Red Sea. Pieces of timber, if transported across the desert, would not be so vulnerable as a complete ship or perhaps 'ships'. http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h246/drifter_03/tow5.jpg In this case a fully assembled ship would certainly be a vulnerable target for any aggressive action along the route. Regards, Jon Smyth ============================================================================== From: "Bob Myers" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Cc: Subject: Re: AEL An apology and a request Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 14:11:11 -0500 Dear Prof. Goelet; Some time ago, I asked the list if anyone else had had thoughts about the visual content of hieroglyphic writing, and its possible significance to the Egyptians (or, sorry, perhaps I more babbled about it); and the past few days had been thinking that perhaps this question was more one of the domain of Art History. Then, yesterday, I came across your comments at the back of Wasserman's ultimate edition of the Ani Papyrus, where you pointed out that the creators of the manuscript emphasized the artistic content often at the expense of the text, itself. Do you know of any similar treatement for the vignettes and writing style of the Coffin Texts? I understand that no paleography has yet been done, and am wondering if this is because it calls upon the discipline of the art historian more than the philologist(?). My dream team for a take on this would be Mr. and Mrs. Wente, but I think they have retired(?). Best wishes, Bob ============================================================================== Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 12:00:32 +0200 From: ROSMORDUC Serge To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL Amduat texts >> Dear All, >> >> Does anyone know of an English translation of the Amduat ? >> It seems the Pyramid texts, Coffin texts and Book of the Dead are readily >> available, but not collective works on the other Religious texts. >> A French or german translation would be okay at a push. >> >> >> >> thanks >> >> >> mark vygus >> >> Hello, The "standard" translation is that of E. Hornung, "Die Unterweltsbucher der Agypter". regards, S. Rosmorduc ============================================================================== From: Ogden Goelet To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 09:20:45 -0400 Subject: Re: AEL Henu had to "clear the way ahead"? Dear Jon and others, I would not rely on the Lepsius transcription of the text. Genrally speaking Lepsius is used today only in cases where the inscription is either lost or damaged in such a way that the Lepsius version is all that is left. The Montet-Couyat versions are generally much more accurate and were done by more experienced epigraphers. Furthermore, in the case of the more important inscriptions, these are supplemented by photographs of the text and scenes. The presence of 'army' troops on quarrying expeditions is often misleading. The word mSa more properly (and broadly) means simply 'expedition, expeditionary force,' a term that comprises both military and civil usages. In ancient times, all over the ANE, soldiers were used for what one might call 'civil / public works,' a notion that is still somewhat present in the US Army Corps of Engineers. Sometimes Egyptian 'soldiers' were not really military men, and, in any case, there always seems to have have been a more strictly administrative track in the officer corps. I am away on a working vacation and do not have the hieroglyphic text of these inscriptions available at the moment, so I cannot say what vocabulary was used, but it seems to me that 'clearing / preparing the way,' could be rather broad in sense (digging wells, carrying or dragging sledges, etc.) and, once again, could comprise both military and civil uses. Best, Ogden ============================================================================== Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 19:09:12 +0100 (BST) From: ANGELA MANN Subject: AEL Questions on hmwk 14.6, 14.5 and 14.2 To: Ancient Egyptian Language List There were some queries on some of the homework exercises. They have probably been resolved by the other answers, but in case they haven't, my thoughts are as follows: 14.6 mAA.f wj Hr jrt wpwt.k = he sees me doing your assignment Question: This one confused me, what happened to the (Hr)? See 14.11.1 - Hr + infinitive are translated together, usually to describe concomitant action - you could translate Hr as 'while', eg 'he sees me while doing your assigment' (although I wasn't sure who was doing the assignment 'he' or 'me'!!). 14.5 rdt.j wAt r rdy.j m xd = I give a path to my two feet (going) downstream/north Question: I don't really understand why 'rdt.j' is an infinitive here and not a normal verb? Allen's transliteration/ translation is: rdjt.j wAt n rdy.j m xd = I gave a path to my feet northwards (past tense because it is narrative) The way I look at verbs is that there is no such thing as a 'normal' verb; you have the root (which is what is in the dictionary) and then you get different endings to indicate different forms of the verb. Here the root = rdj; the base stem = dj or rdj; and the infinitive = the 'base stem + t' = djt or rdjt. Therefore rdjt = infinitive. There was another question from someone else regarding the 'spelling' of 'rdy' - but I don't know the answer - hopefully an 'expert' on the AEL list will know. 14.2 tm jT hAtj n z(j) ma.f m jmnt = Not taking the heart of a man from him in the West. Question 1: (n) I'm not sure what this is? n = the indirect genitive (S4.13.2) and indicates possession - usually translated as 'of' Question 2: 'ma' ?? You have probably realised the transliteration is wrong, it should read 'm a.f' m a (sometimes written as m-a) is a compound preposition and translates literally as 'in the hand of'. Allen does not list compound prepositions (see S8.3) as he believes their meanings are obvious (?!) but says one should look in the dictionary under the noun part, in this case 'a' - where the definition of 'm a' is given as 'with, from'. So I translated 'm a.f' as 'from him'. Hope the above helps - if it is not quite right perhaps someone else could comment! Best wishes Angela ============================================================================== From: "Nick Mills" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: RE: AEL Questions on hmwk 14.6, 14.5 and 14.2 Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 15:00:49 +0100 14.5 is an example of the "narrative" infinitive (§14.14.2). Allen sets the context for this sentence by annotating it as from a narrative text. As Allen says, we don't always know why Egyptian uses an infinitive instead of a normal finite verb form in stories. The writing of the dual with 'y' (M17-M17) is mentioned in Gardiner §75. It occurs when the dual has a 1s suffix pronoun. Gardiner gives two examples. The first is from the same text as this exercise. The second is 'awy.j', "my two arms", written a:Z1-w&y-M17-M17-A1. Nick Mills ============================================================================== From: "john welch" To: Subject: AEL The King's Road Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2006 09:12:32 +1000 I hope to receive answers before being removed for my absurdity. Did Indo-European Hittite words reach the pharaoh / bora'a /? Celtic brigands reached the Delta and Irish "boaire" cattle-lords were entitled to a bigger house. Gr., Minoan and Old Breton "bou" means cattle. Hittite "arri" is "aire" "arya" noble. And Hittites and Eg. were on speaking terms sometimes, and tried inter-marriage... Is "bora'a" borrowed? (There are other examples which may confuse this issue). John Welch. ==============================================================================