[Home] [Commentary p. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11] [Hieroglyph P6]

Commentary for pWestcar, AEL Page 6, Lines 1 - 18

This discusses hieroglyphic page 6 (= De Buck's Page 86).
The full transliteration of page 6 is here. The 'clickable' vocabulary is here.
 
Go to Line 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 - 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 |
LINE 1 [next]
wn-in Hm=f ib=f wA.w r Dwi.t Hr=s
 
"Then His majesty's mood became bad over it."

 

[MDS, 21/8/97; AEL West. P6, L 1- 3]
wA.w r, stative form of the verb wA, 'to fall', r, 'into' a condition.
[S. Rosmorduc, 21/8/97; AEL West. P6, L 1- 3] (responding to MDS query to explain the wn-in X stative construction)
The construct X ib=f (or some other part of the body) is well attested I don't think it has some relationship with the stative which follows. The reason for this stative, I think, is that the sadness of the king is the direct result of Djedji's announcement.
[G.Kadish, 22/8/97; RE>AEL West. P6, L 1- 3] (private post to MDS)
Here is a case in which one must pay some serious attention to the verb wn. It is a verb specifying a state of existence (not to put too much of a metaphysical cast on it). A rough translation would be: "Then His Majesty existed, his heart having fallen into sadness on account of it." Note that the stative is clearly intended to be the precondition for the initial verb (wn), since the best way to deal with a stative when it is not used as an historical narrative is to regard it as (a) the end result of an action and (b), as here, a kind of circumstantial clause. The verb wn then specifies the state he is in once the depression has set in. The in after wn is clearly a statement that the wn is consequent to the wA(w). Finally, keep your mind open on the preposition Hr; try "about", "on account of", because of", etc. Actually, that's generally a good idea; we get fixated on a translation easily. The verbs iri and (r)di are good examples of words that cover a spectrum of English terms, especially the latter.
[Dan-El Kahn, 21/8/97; RE>AEL West. P6, L 1- 3]
I guess the scribe wants to emphasize that it is the "emotional" heart-ib that fell into sadness. By the way, where does the verb wA r come from. Does it originally mean 'to fall', or does it have to do with being 'far from' or is it a curse or 'to conspire'?
[G. Graham, 22/8/97; AEL Helping Verbs and Numerals]
Remember that wnn is a verb of its own and does not always have to be a helping verb. Literally the sentence says: "Then His Majesty was (in the condition such that) his heart was fallen to badness over it."
Dwj.t is ambiguous, and can mean evil as well as sadness, and given what happens later, I think evil intent might be relevant. It is also important to note that w3j.t is used in many Egyptian texts where rebels and miscreants "fall" (as if from grace or heaven) into evil and bad behaviors and practices with regard to the state. So the King may be stooping to the level of baseness and envious crime, or it might be something a little less severe than such but there are other ways to say that a person is sorrowful, mournful, or unhappy, and Dwj.t implies something a bit "wrong", I think.
Serge is quite right [ed. regarding the construct X ib=f], and the expression means "his mood is...this or that". jb can mean heart, idea, thought, intellect, mood, emotion, desire, and all kinds of things in Egyptian. H3t.y tends to mean literal physical heart more often, and jb tends to mean the intangible will or desires of a person (sometimes it was even confused with the verb 3bj.t "desire" in the New Kingdom and later), though both can alternate with one another to the point of considerable confusion. Often texts juxatapose one with the other in chiastic parallelism.
 
LINE 2 [prev] [next] [top]
Dd-in Ddi ptr ir=f pA-ib it.y anx.w wDA.w snb.w nb=i
 
"Then said Djedi, "What is the matter (lit. the heart) sovereign, l.p.h., my lord ?"

 

 
LINE 3 [prev] [next] [top]
in iri.tw Hr pA-Xrd.w xmt
 
"Is it because (/on account of) of the 3 children ?"

 

 

[MDS, 21/8/97; AEL West. P6, L 1- 3]
I suppose the passive (iri.tw) is used because you only address the king indirectly.
 
[S. Rosmorduc, 21/8/97; AEL West. P6, L 1- 3]
You might be right about the =tw being used for the king. Remember that in later times, the usage of =tw for the king is very frequent. Now the question is 'what is the form of iri ?' (Lots of other possibilities exist : for example, you might have a nominal sentence : in ( iri.t Hr pA 3 Xrd Dd.n=i (pw ommited)) "Is it the case that it is a thing done because of...")
Also remember that 'in' is used for a yes or no question, and try to cut another way, for example like this :
pty irf pA ib ity aws nb=i ?
in ir=tw Hr pA 3 Xrd Dd.n=i (He could have added "Hr=sn") ?
kA sA=k
kA sA=f
kA wa im=sn
'Dd.n=i' being a relative form, with 'pA 3 Xrd' as antecedent. Note also that 'pA 3 Xrd' is singular. In Egyptian, when a name is preceded by a number, it is singular. Grammaticaly, the name is *the number*, not the following substantive. Compare with english : 'a pair of trousers'.
>[MDS What is the verb kA?]
It is here the auxilliary which occurs in kA sDm=f/sDm.kA=f construction. Have a look at Gardiner parag. 242. (For those who haven't got a grammar, try to translate by 'then').
 
[Dan-El Kahn, 21/8/97; RE>AEL West. P6, L 1- 3]
"Is it happening because of the three children?" in is an interogative particle, iri.tw is passive, though I don't know if it is past , present or impersonal (royal). L. Depuydt has got a good chapter on the kA form in 'Conjunction, contiguity, contingency', New York, 1993.
[G. Graham, 22/8/97; AEL Helping Verbs and Numerals]
... Egyptian numbers were nouns. They behaved very strangely compared to English. They often agreed in gender with the nouns they accompanied, but they usually did not agree in number. Egyptian numbers on the basis of Coptic can be interpreted something like this: (someone with a Coptic Dictionary please check my memory on the Coptic.)
 

 Egyptian (m/f)

 Coptic (m/f)
  Numeral  English Meaning

 wa / wa.t

 oua / ouei

 1
  "monad/unit"

 snw / sn.t

 snau / snte

 2
  "dyad/duo/pair"

 xmt / xmt.t

 <sh>omnt / <sh>omte

 3
  "triad/trio"

 fdw / fdw.t

 ftoou / ftoe

 4
  tesserad/quartet"

 djw / dy.t

 ti / tie

 5
  "pentad/quintet"

 srs / srs.t

 sO / soe

 6
  "hexad/sextet"

 sfx / sfx.t

 sa<sh>f / sa<sh>fe

 7
  "heptad/septet"

 xmn / xmn.t

 <sh>moun / <sh>moune

 8
  "ogdoad/octet"

 psD / psD.t

 psis / psite

 9
"ennead/group of nine"

 mD / mD.t

 mEt / mEte

 10
  "decad/group of ten"
 
LINE 4 [prev] [next] [top]
Dd.n=i kA zA=k kA zA=f kA wa im=s
 
"I said, there will be a son of yours, a son of his, and one of her's."
 

 

[G. Graham, 22/8/97; AEL Helping Verbs and Numerals] (responding to MDS, I can't work what 'kA' is. Not the verb 'think about, plan'?]
Yes. it is, but it is also "do/act/be in the future", analogous to pAi "be in the past".
[S. Rosmorduc]
Etymologically, yes ; but it is here the auxilliary which occurs in kA sDm=f/sDm.kA=f construction. Have a look at Gardiner parag. 242. (For those who haven't got a grammar, try to translate by 'then').
[G. Graham, 22/8/97; AEL Helping Verbs and Numerals]
Serge, is of course right, but kAi.t can and does act as its own verb as well. All helping verbs had their own individual functions as well as their supportive ones. Maybe it would be helpful for us to make a list of helping verbs and examine their original meanings with their tense and aspect modifying properties: I presently remember the following helping verbs, there will of course be others that some of you will be able to add to this list:
 Infinitive  Meaning  Modifying feature
 wnn  be  move action to non-present tense
 iri.t  do  make action perfective
 aHa  stand  relate action in a time sequence
 pAi.t  do/be in past  push action back into a further past
 kAi.t  do/be in future  push action into a further future
 
LINE 5 [prev] [next] [top]
Dd-in Hm=f msi=s ir=f zy nw rd-Dd.t
 
"When will she give birth, (that is namely this afore-mentioned) Redjedet"

 

 
[MDS, 26/8/97; AEL West. P6, L5-6.]
"Then his majesty said, "When shall Redjedjet give birth?"
Notes: The spoken sentence begins with a bare verb form (msi) followed by a suffix pronoun (=s), 'she/her'. A prospective form of the verb would fit. The particle ir=f has been discussed previously, and can either be ignored, or translated as 'indeed'. The critical word zy follows, and is an interrogative, meaning Who/What/Which? This is next to the word nw 'time', so the two words mean, 'What time' = 'When'. OK, the question I have about this sentence is the relationship of the suffix pronoun, =s, and the womans name. Is the name just in apposition at the end of the sentence, "When shall SHE give birth, ie. Redjedjet?"
 
[S.Rosmorduc, 26/8/97; AEL West. P6, L5-6]
I think Redjedjet is just an apposition ; IMHO the construct here belongs more to stylistics than to grammars.
 
[G.Graham, 26/8/97; RE>AEL West. P6, L5-6.]
I agree with Serge. It is just like colloquial speach, but if you fill in the missing "data", you get: "When will she give birth, (that is namely this afore-mentioned) Redjedet"
 
LINE 6 [prev] [next] [top]
Dd-in Ddi msi=s m Abd wa pri.t sw mD-diw
 
"Then Djedi said, "She will give birth in the [first] month of pri.t (winter) , day 15"

 

 
[MDS, 26/8/97; AEL West. P6, L5-6.]
Notes: Prospective verb form (msi) again (?). Does the sun sign to double duty as the det. for pri.t and as the word for day (sw)? The season of pri.t is called winter, and is the time of appearance (pri) of the fields from the inundation [Gr. p203], so the water levels are going down.
 
[S.Rosmorduc, 26/8/97; AEL West. P6, L5-6]
The Z1-stroke under the Abd sign is a one. As an aside, the 'ms' in the answer might be a prospective sDm(w)=f, which can be used to emphasise prospective construct. (the paradigm of prospective sDmw=f is the same as circumstancial sDm=f, except for an final y/w that can appear). Here, of course, I suggest it because one expect an emphatic sentence after a question for specification involing an adverbial complement.
 
[G.Graham, 26/8/97; RE>AEL West. P6, L5-6.]
I agree with Serge. ;-P I do actually wonder whether ra was ever really used for "day" however, since there are plenty of examples where hrw can be written with the disk and stroke as well. I believe there are a very few examples of ra nb spelled out phonetically but this always seemed kind of odd to me. However, if you think of each day as the equivalent of a new sun, in the same way that some people's have looked at every month as a new moon ("many moons ago"), then maybe it is not so much of a problem. So often though Egyptian had many different values written with the same exact signs so it is a bit tricky to know which one is intended. sw or sw.w seems to be what was used for days (i.e. "dates") of the month as opposed to hrw meaning "daylight" and ra meaning "sun" in its sense of the day.
There are yet more problems with the year writings (M4, O50), because rnp.t year seems so have had a similar relationship to a regnal (i.e. "date") year as hrw had to sw! However the problem is especially tricky since we do not know precisely how the word for regnal year was pronounced. It has been suggested as: rnp.t-zp, H3t-zp, rnp.t-Hsb.t, Hsb.t-zp, and simply zp. I tend to think that the last one is probably the most likely since in Coptic one finds simple {sp}. But this unfortunately does not explain what to do with the {t}-loaf that so often occurs in this writing, and this tends to throw one back to square one guessing which feminine word was involved.
 
[S.Rosmorduc, 26/8/97; AEL West. P6, L5-6]
[responding to Geoff's question about what Serge means by the sDm.w=f verb form.]
 
The "prospective sDmw=f", as many Egyptian verb form, is known under a number of names, which vary among authors. The other name I was given for this one is "prospectif ancien". You can find information on it in Pascal Vernus, "Future at issue", YES 4 (ed. YES = Yale Egyptology Studies) pp. 29-53.
 
To summarize :
a) The emphatic prospective sDmw=f is completely different from the passive sDmw=f
b) In the Pyr. Texts, its use are
1) mark of simple future vs. modal (which is prosp. sDm=f)
2) emphatic counterpart of prospective sDm=f (which is interesting, for when you think of it, prospective sDm=f is already a nominal form)
c) The prospective sDm=f tends to replace the nominal sDmw=f as time goes by.
d) paradigm : sDm=f/mAA=f/ir=f/rdj=f/iw=f/in=f/wnn=f. A "w" or a "y" can appear in all forms.
 
USES:
e) after some prepositions m/mi/m-xt/n-ib-n/r/Hr/Dr.
f) sDmw=f is the normal verb form after "ir" in protasis (you usually find ir mAA=f..., and nor ir mA=f)
g) can be used as subject or object of noun clauses (rare as object after rdi)
h) as apodosis or as continuation of an imperative
i) in Wechselsatz (balanced sentences)
j) in future cleft sentence, sDmw=f is the regular verb form used (in A mAA=f)
k) as emphatic counterpart of "iw X r sDm" and "sDm X"
l) the auxiliary wnn would be a sDmw=f form.
Unfortunately, the prospective sDmw=f is often difficult to tell from the plain prospective sDm=f, except for 2ae gem. It is however an interesting option to keep in mind.
[S.Rosmorduc, 29/8/97; AEL West. P6, L5-6]
Well, It's yet another damned terminology problem ; I'm using the terminology of P. Vernus in the quoted book, so the correspondances are :
  Allen terminology about Old Egyptian

 Prospective

   Subjunctive
  Terminology in YES "Future at issue"

 Prospective sDmw=f

 Prospective sDm=f
Of course, the 2nd line is about forms in Middle Egyptian, not in Old Egyptian.
 
I had a look at Gardiner about verbs after "ir", to see what he said. It's rather fascinating to see that despite his theory of perfective/imperfective forms, his observations are basically correct, which leads to a rather complex situation for him : he is obliged to conclude that some kind of verb are used in the imperfective form, and some other verbs in the perfective one.
There seems to be a disagreement between authors on the values of these forms. In Future at Issue, P. Vernus writes : (About Allen's work on sDmw=f), "From his careful studies, it arises that in initial position sDmw=f in Pyr. contrasts with sDm=f both as an "emphatic" form versus a "non emphatic" one, and as a simple future versus a modal Future", whereas A. Loprieno assigns a modal value to both : the (Old) prospective being an optative form (wish), and the subjunctive form being used for commands (jussive).
 
LINE 7 [prev] [next] [top]
 
Dd-in Hm=f i<w>st<i> TAz.w n.y.w rm.wy Hsq.w
 
"Then His Majesty said; "However, the banks of the Remwy-canal are cut off."
 
[ed. note: there was some initial confusion regarding the transliteration of the canal name. The discussion below relates to this.]
[M. Luban, 1/9/97; RE>AEL West P6, L 7 - 10]
[re: rm.wy] It's probably the "Two Fishes Canal". The dets. N23 and N36 present here make it clear that a canal or channel is being spoken of. However, the sign beneath the fishes indicates a nome, which should be Lower Egyptian Nome 2, being that is where sAXbw is. However, this nome doesn't have two fishes as its emblem. In fact, the only nome with a fish, in this case being a single one, is "Char", whose capital is Mendes. I'm not even sure how all this gets transliterated as "km.wy".
 
[Tony Spalinger, private post to MDS12/9/97}
[I can refer you to] Edel's interesting discussion of the two Fisches Canal in Discussions in Egyptology. I think that the issue is 1994-5 but you can check it. You might want to check on Goyon's researches regarding the topography: canals and the like. BIFAO somewhere.
 
[G. Graham, private post to MDS, 16/9/97]
I have a copy of Farouk Gomaa's Nomes book-- _Die Besiedung Aegyptens waerehnd des Mittleren Reiches_ vol. II (Unteraegypten und die angrenzenden Gebiete). He says rm.wy too. It is on page 72. It is attested in only two locations: Westcar and Merikare. It is of uncertain reading. Gardiner thought it should read X3.wy (two oxyrhynchos fish). Rm.wy was proposed by Montet. Even the location of Sachebu is not really known yet. Goyon suggested that it was the canal Zat el-Kom(?) between the Rosetta branch and the Bahr el-Labani.
[ed. this is also the place given in the toponym section of R. Hannig's egyptian-german dictionary]
LINES 8 - 9 [prev] [next] [top]
bAk=i A n=s<t> Ds=i kA mAn=i tA-Hw.t-nTr n.y.t ra nb sAXbw
 
"I will work tracks to it myself, and then I might see the temple of Re, Lord of Sakhebu."

[G. Graham, 1/9/97; RE>AEL West P6, L 7 - 10]
I think A is a noun here (tracks). [The initial word is not 'servant' but the verb 'work']
A note of possible interest: in Sahidic Coptic the verb "go" ends up as {bOk} but there is no known precedent in earlier stages of Egyptian. Maybe this is the expression by which bAk "work" was able to transform into a verb meaning "go" in Sahidic. Bohairic Coptic uses {<sh>e} which derives from Egyptian Sm.t which by Late Egyptian was already beng spelled as Si. Sahidic is the only dialect to have developed this strange verb {bOk}. If Westcar is representing the way people really spoke Egyptian at the time, then maybe bAk A was already an idiom for "go" by the end of the Middle Kingdom. The only problem is that when this is the only example of the expression it does not exactly make a strong case for it.
 
LINE 10 [prev] [next] [top]
Dd-in Ddi kA rdi=i xpr mw.w n.y.w mH fdw Hr TAz.w n.y.w km.wy
 
"Then I will create ('cause to form') water of 4 cubits (depth) upon the sands of the km.wy canal."

 

LINE 11 [prev] [next] [top]
 
wDA pw iri.n Hm=f r aH=f
"What his majesty did was to proceed to his palace" or: "His majesty proceeded to his palace"

 

 
[MDS, 1/9/97; AEL West. P6, L 11- 16]
[The sentence begins with] the INFINITIVE pw iri.n SUBJECT form described in P1,L1. The iri.n is a relative form, "what (the subject) did".
 
LINE 12 [prev] [next] [top]
 
Dd-in Hm=f immi di=tw m Hr n.y Ddi r pr
 
"Then his majest said, "See that Djedi is directed to the house ..."
 
[MDS, 1/9/97; AEL West. P6, L 11- 16]
1) immi (or imi, as in Faulkner) is the imperative of rdi. I have tranlated this fairly loosely. Literally it is more like, "Grant/Cause that ..."
2) di=tw, a passive construction. Faulkner describes the phrase 'rdi m Hr' as "lay a charge on" or "command (someone)" The king is looking after Djedi by organising his room and food.
 
LINE 13 [prev] [next] [top]
 
zA-n.y-sw.t Hrw-dd=f Hmsi=f Hna=f
 
".. of prince Hrw-dd=f, that he may stay with him"
 
LINE 14 [prev] [next] [top]
 
iri aq.w=f m tA xA Hnq.t ds Sn.t iwA wa
 
"Make his provisions be 1000 loaves of bread,100 jars of beer, one ox,..."
 
[MDS, 1/9/97; AEL West. P6, L 11- 16]
I take iri as imperative. We have had some discussion before about whether these vast amounts of food are real or the calculated monthly rations. If they are monthly rations, the loaves must be small.
LINE 15 [prev] [next] [top]
 
iAq.w xrS Sn.t
"... (and) 100 bundles of vegetables."
 

 

[MDS, 1/9/97; AEL West. P6, L 11- 16]
Faulkner gives the meaning as leek, or as vegetables in general. Were leeks that popular?
[G.Graham, 2/9/97; RE>AEL West. P6, L 11- 16]
I believe, but could be wrong, that j3q.t is "leek" and j3q is generic "greens". Yes, leeks were rather popular, as were onions and garlic as well. It might be interesting to make a catalogue of just which vegetables were eaten in Egypt. Many of the ones eaten there now were not yet brought there from far continents.
 
Here are some that I know of for certain: (see Lise Maniche's, 'An Ancient Egyptian Herbal')
 
 Egyptian  Coptic  English
 j3q.w.t  E<kj>e  leaks
 HD.w  mcOl  onions
 xtn  <sh>cEn  garlic
 m3t.t  mit  celery
 m3t.t x3s.t  lat  parsley
 Hr.w-bjk  bilnebOk  garbanzos
 Szp.t  <sh>Ope  zucchini
 bnd.t  bonte  cucumber
 abw  Of  lettuce
 arSn  ar<sh>in  lentils
 Dd.w.t  coeit  olives
 tH.w  betbet  peas
 jkw  oke  sesame
 pwr.w  phel  fava beans
 jwr.y.t  ourO  beans
 
LINE 16 [prev] [next] [top]
 
iri-in=tw mi wD.t nb.t Hm=f
 
[Lit:] "Then it was done according to every command of his majesty."
 
[MDS, 1/9/97; AEL West. P6, L 11- 16]
1) The sDm-in=f narrative verb form again, but passive.
2) wD.t I take as a noun, "command'", presumably derived from the verb, wD, 'to command'. The nb.t would then be an adjective attached to wD.t, and this nominal phrase would be a direct genitive to the following Hm=f, his majesty.
LINE 17 [prev] [next] [top]
wa(.w) m nn (n.y) hrw(.w) xpr(.w)
 
"One of these days came to pass, ..."
 

 

[G.Graham, 10/9/97; AEL Westcar's First Birthing Episode]
1. Often Egyptians fluctuated as to the writing of the n.y after nn because nn was felt to have the n in it already.
2. hrw must be plural
3. xpr is in the stative form.
[S. Rosmorduc, 10/9/97; AEL West P6. L17]
You can also cut like this : wa m nn n hrw xpr.w / wn.in ... (You find elsewere in the text :
xr m-xt mSrw xpr iwt pw ir.n=f
xr m-xt tA HD 2 n hrw xpr SAs pw ir.n pA Hry-pr
xr m-xt mSrw xpr iwt pw ir.n pA nDs
xr m-xt pA hrw 7 xpr wDA pw ir.n nswt-bity
and in tA HD, HD is clearly an old perfective, so the following xpr is probably one. A pity we don't have some feminine form before xpr there). But your interpretation is interesting ; however, if xpr was an
auxiliary here, I would expect it to be a sDm.n=f ; (e.g. pr.n fqA.n=f Xry-Hbd Hry-tp DADA-m-anx m bw nb nfr, where pr.n is a rare auxiliary). However, since wn.in is already a narrative form, I doubt you can find something like that. You would have *xpr.n rdDt Hr Snt=s
 
LINE 18 [prev] [top]
wn.in rd-Dd.t Hr Sni.t=s qsn mss=s
 
"... and then Reddjedet was in her labor, and her birthing was difficult."
 

 

[G.Graham, 10/9/97; AEL Westcar's First Birthing Episode]
1. In this case wnn is the main verb and not a helping verb.
2. Snj.t is the infinitive and hence a noun.
3. mss: One expects the infinitive, but seems to be getting a nominal form of sorts.
[G. Kadish, 10/9/97; RE>AEL West P6. L17]
Take a look at pWestcar X, 3-4, [ed., =de Buck p84, line9; =AEL p7, L14] where you see the phrase qsn ms.s used again with respect to her travail. The writing of the second word is different from the occurrence in IX,22, but it seems clear that qsn is understood to be the verb and ms.s a nominal construct: "Her bearing is painful"
[S. Rosmorduc, 10/9/97; AEL West P6. L17]
You are right, mss=s is a nominal form ; "thus she gave birth" is doubtful because it would require a prospective (if the consequence were stressed) or a sequential form (either wn.in=s ..., or ms.n=s). Well, now we have a nominal form without a circumstantial complement; so, it's not used to stress the complement that isn't there :-) Knowing that the nominal form is just that --- nominal ---, and can be translated "the-fact-that-she-gives-birth", how would you translate the sentence ?
 
<< Prev Page | Next page >>
[Home] [Commentary p. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11] [Hieroglyph P6]
[top]