Page 7 commentary

[Home] [Commentary p. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11] [Hieroglyph P7]

Commentary for pWestcar, AEL Page 7, Lines 1 - 26


Go to Line 1 - 2 | 3 - 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19-20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |

LINES 1 - 2 [next] [top]

Dd.in Hm n.y ra nb sAXbw n As.t nb.t-Hw.t
msi-xn.t Hq.t Xnm.w

"Then the Majesty of Re, Lord of Sachebu said to Isis, Nephthys, Meskhenet, Heqet, and Khnum; ..."

[MDS, 15/9/97; AEL Westcar P7, L1-2]

a) Narrative verb form, Dd-in=f, "Then X said,...."
b) Subject is the nominal construct, Hm n.y ra nb sAXbw, "The majesty of Ra, Lord of sAXbw"
c) dative n, 'to, for', indicates indirect object of verb. In this case there are multiple indirect objects,ie. a series of gods, "Ra said *to* X, Y, Z...."
d) Ra speaks to a host of goddesses (first) and one god. All (from my limited knowledge of the mythologies) are relevant gods in birth.

As.t, Isis
nb.t-Hw.t, Nephthys
msxnt = 'Meskhenet' the goddess of birth
Hqt, frog goddess
xnm, Khnum

My translation: "Then the Majesty of Ra, Lord of Sakhebu, said to Isis, Nephthys, Meskhenet, Heket and Khnum, "...."
[G.Graham, 17/9/97; RE>AEL Westcar P7, L1-2]

I might have done it: "Then the Majesty of Re, Lord of Sachebu said to Isis, Nephthys, Meskhenet, Heqet, and Khnum; "Would that you might travel in order to deliver Reddjedet of the three children who are in her womb." Of course this is approximately the same as you have said. The Dd.jn=f puts the statement in relationship to what had come before, so "then" might be appropriate, and then I am just being a little more literal about Hwy-3 and playing with the vocabulary in a couple of other instances.
LINES 3 - 4 [prev] [next] [top]

Hwy-A SAs=Tn s-msi=Tn
rd-Dd.t m pA-Xrd.w xmt

"Would that you might travel in order to deliver Reddjedet of the three children ..."

[MDS, 15/9/97; AEL Westcar P7, L1-2]

a) Hwy-A, The non-encl.part. Hwy, joined to the enclit. part. A. This compound particle expresses a (polite) wish/desire. (See Gr.#119 part8, bottom of p96).
b) SAs, intrans. verb, travel, go. The form of the verb would probably be a prospective (?), "Please will you (plural) go ..." So, why not just use a plain prospective (without an initial particle)? Is it just an intensifier?
c) s-msy, Faulkner gives as 'deliver', obviously a 's-' causative derived from msi, "to give birth, bear". The verb form? Another prospective?? The y ending would fit this.
d) oops, looks like there should be an _nty_ added to Geoffs transcription. The relative pronoun, nty, introduces a relative clause when the antecedent is specific, which in this case is "the three children".

My translation: "Please will you go that you may deliver RdDdt of the 3 children which are in her body"
LINE 5 [prev] [next] [top]

nty(.w) m X.t=s nty(.w) r iri.t iA.t twy mnx.t

"...who are in her womb."
[MDS, 17/9/97; AEL Westc. P7, L5-8.]

"... and who will exercise this potent office..."
Notes:
a) a relative clause introduced by the relative pronoun, nty, "who,which". Refers to a specific antecedent, "the 3 children".
b) this clause is repeats a phrase used previously (AEL P5, L19).
c) r iri.t, is the r of futurity, followed by the infinitive.
LINE 6 [prev] [next] [top]

m tA pn r Dr=f
[MDS, 17/9/97; AEL Westc. P7, L5-8.] "... in this entire land." Note: an idiomatic phrase. Literally, 'in this land, to its end.'
LINE 7 [prev] [next] [top]

qdi=sn rA.w-pr=Tn, s-DfA=sn xAw.w.t=Tn,

"That they might build your temples, that they might supply your altars,..."

[MDS, 17/9/97; AEL Westc. P7, L5-8.]

"They will build your temples, They will endow your altars,
Notes:
a) I take the bare sDm=f verbs as prospective forms.
b) Question: what is the flying duck (G41) sign doing in s-DfAy? A determinative?

[G.Graham, 17/9/97; RE>AEL Westc. P7, L5-8.] I would let this continue as part of the same sentence: "That they might build your temples, that they might suppy your altars, that they might cause your libations to become luxuriant, and that they might increase your divine appeasments."

LINE 8 [prev] [next] [top]

s-wAD=sn wDH.w=Tn, s-aAi=sn Htp.w-nTr=Tn !"

"... that they might cause your libations to become luxuriant, and that they might increase your divine appeasments."

[MDS, 17/9/97; AEL Westc. P7, L5-8.]

"They will richly provide your offering tables, They will increase/enlarge your gods-offerings."
Notes:
a) more strings of (?) sentences, all describing the benefits the children will bring to the gods. So Ra is really BRIBING them to go and help RdDdt!!
b) All the sentences have a similar structure: beginning with a prospective verb form, then the 3rd pl. suffix pronoun, then a noun followed by a suffix pronoun (2nd person pl.)

LINE 9 [prev] [next] [top]

wDA pw iri.n nn (n.y.w) nTr.w , iri.n=sn xpr.w=sn m xni.y.w.t ,

"Then These gods set forth, making their forms as xni.y.w.t"
[M.Wilson; 19/9/97; AEL Westcar P7, Lines 9-10]

Who or what is xni.y.w.t? From the determinatives it looks like a female being given to traveling in some pluralistic capacity.
[G.Graham; 19/9/97; AEL Westcar P7, Lines 9-10]

xnj.y.w.t are female itinerant musicians. They were like bards apparently. Their instruments were usually percussion (hence the sistra and menat collars to come).
LINE 10 [prev] [next] [top]

Xnm.w Hna=sn Xr.y qni .

"with Khnum as their porter (i.e. bearing their load)".
[M.Wilson; 19/9/97;AEL Westcar P7, Lines 9-10] "Khnum with them, in a group(?)" Hmmm, I seem to have run into problems here. Where am I going wrong?
[G.Graham; 19/9/97; AEL Westcar P7, Lines 9-10]

Xr.y means "bearing" and qnj is a "litter/carrying chair/basket".
LINE 11 [prev] [next] [top]

spr pw iri.n=sn r pr ra-wsr ,

Literally, "What they did was arrive at the house of Ra-user." [G.Graham]
Less literally, "Then they arrived at per ra-wsr." [M. Wilson]
LINE 12 [prev] [next] [top]

gmi.n=sn sw aHa(.w) , dAiw s-xdi(.w) .

"They found him standing with his loin-cloth ruffled.**"
[M. Wilson, 22/9/97; AEL Westcar P7, Lines 11-12]

"They found him standing with his loin-cloth ruffled."
In sxdi(.w), is the s the causative prefix, or just part of the root?
[G.Graham, 22/9/97; RE>AEL Westcar P7, Lines 11-12]

** or "disshevled", "inside out", or "upsidedown"
LINE 13 [prev] [next] [top]

wn.in=sn Hr mzA n=f mni.t=sn sSS.w.t .
"Then they extended their menats and sistra to him."
[M.D-S, 23/9/97; AEL West. P7, L13-14]

"Then they were bringing to him their mnit (necklace) and sceptres/sistras."
Notes:
a) Narrative verb form wn.in=sn, with 3rd pers. plur. suffix pron. '=sn' (they).
b) next comes a preposition, Hr, which looks like it introduces an infinitive, mzA; so this would be a progressive tense ('upon bringing/presenting'). What about rendering it as: "Then they were about to present him with...."
c) The two next nouns are a bit of a puzzle. The first is a mni.t necklace, sacred to Hathor. Is it singular or plural? The next noun has no suffix pronoun, and looks like it is read 'sxm' rather than sSS.w.t. It is translated as either sceptre or sistrum; which are rather different things aren't they? The determinative gives no inkling.
[G.Graham, 23/9/97; RE>AEL West. P7, L13-14]

"Then they extended their menats and sistra to him."
mz3 is like Arabic madda "stretch out/extend". It is not the same as "give/present" which would be expressed with rdj.t. The act is not that they offer these impliments as gifts, but that they are advertising that they are singers who could be employed to entertain for a small fee.
Egyptian can put a plural pronoun ending onto a singular noun and it was understood that the objects were plural. Hence, mnj.t=sn can mean, as you have suggested "a menat-collar of theirs" or "their menat-collars".
This text seems to have sxm written, but in many cases the two objects were written with the identical signs, and there was great confusion as to which instrument was which. I opted for sSS.t, but it might indeed be the sxm. This kind of sxm, however, is not the same as the "sekhem-scepter" which served as a kind of fly-swatter and was a symbol of authority. They were actually constructed of green papyrus reeds and consisted of a flat mat of reeds mounted onto a wooden handle with a papyrus umble as the transition from the handle to the flat part.
[M.D-S, 23/9/97; RE>AEL West. P7, L13-14]

The meaning of mzA was a bit of a guess for me as Faulkner lists a number of meanings. "Bring, present" are the first. The third meaning given is "extend (hand)". Geoff, this is where your knowledge of custom is so important. I thought they were giving presents!
Now I'm sure I read somewhere that these travelling female dancers were also important as 'midwives'. Ah, "The psS-kf and the opening of the mouth ceremony" (Ann Macy Roth, JEA, vol 78, p140), where the word for a female dance troupe (xnrt) contains the sign, which Roth claims is probably the psS-kf knife, used to cut the (umbilical) cord. Do others believe this interpretation by Roth? If so, is there a possible reference to this aspect by their disguise as a troupe of entertainers, or are singers and dancers very different? **
[Katherine Griffis-Greenber, 23/9/97; RE>AEL West. P7, L13-14]

[It is likely that the] sistra [was] used/played or presented by the female musicians (not as gifts I would reckon, but as music and magical tools to assist in labor). The menat's meaning is tied to fertility, and thereby to the birthing process. It is usually considered that Hathor oversaw the birth of children and the birthing process. so the gifts would likely be tied to supplication of Hathor in assisting the woman in labor, evidently to provide her "sacred assistance" and distraction to ease her labor pains.

**The discussion on the topic of sistra and Hathor and birth was quite lengthy and had a number of contributors. See postings around the 25-26/9/97 at: www.rostau.org.uk/AEgyptian-L/archives/week33.txt

LINE 14 [prev] [next] [top]

aHa.n Dd.n=f n=sn ; " Hn.w.t=i, mi.Tn , zi.t pw nty.t Hr mns(.t)! qsn msi(.t)=s !"
"Then he said to them; "My mistresses, look, it is the woman who is laboring! Her birthing is difficult!"

[M.D-S, 23/9/97; AEL West. P7, L13-14]

"Then he said to them: " Ladies, see, she is a woman who is suffering the pain of her labour!"
Notes:
a) Narrative verb form (aHa.n Dd.n=f), "Then he said to them..."
b) Hn.w.t=i, is a polite form of address, in this case would be something like, "My ladies".
c) mi.Tn, is the 2nd person plural version of the more common particle, mk (see!).
d) Nominal syntax, with 'pw' (he/she/it/they) interposed just after the first prosodic unit of the sentence (??).
e) Hr mn=s.t, I have a slightly different transliteration to Geoff (I think) where the mn (to suffer) is the infinitive, followed by a pronoun (ie. suffix pron., as direct genitive). "is suffering of herself"
f) What about qsn acting as a noun, and so is the object of the verb mn, "suffering the pain..."
g) msi.t=s "her birthing/labour"
[G.Graham, 23/9/97; RE>AEL West. P7, L13-14]

"Then he said to them; "My mistresses, look, it is the woman who is laboring! Her birthing is difficult!"
Pw sentences do not always have to have the pw agree with any aforementioned person or noun. pw is like saying "it is". Here, I think that he means "there is a woman (here) who is experiencing pain" or some such.
qsn is an adjective. Any adjective can be used in the nfr sw construction. That is to say adjective, noun/pronoun. Its translation is "noun is adjective." This means that qsn msj.t=s would be "her birth-giving is arduous/difficult/hard". I take it as adjective, noun, possessive pronoun.
LINE 15 [prev] [next] [top]

aHa.n Dd.n=sn ; " di=k mA=n sy . mi.k n rx.wyn s-msi(.t) ."
[G.Graham, 6/10/97; RE>AEL Westcar P7, Lines 15]: "Then they said, may you let us see her."" Hey look, we know midwifery!"
[M. Wilson, 1/10/97; AEL Westcar P7, Lines 15-1]

aHa.n Dd.n=sn "di=k mA=n sy mi.k n rx.wyn s-msy"
Then they said "May you cause that we see her. Behold, we know how to cause to give birth."
I've opted for a slightly different transliteration for s-msy than the one on the web page. Apparently, infinitives of many s-causative verbs derived from 3rd weak roots do not have the t ending, and this is one of them. See Hoch's grammar sections 89 and 170.
[M.D-S., 2/10/97; RE>AEL Westcar P7, Lines 15]

My notes:
aHa.n Dd.n=sn, a narrative past tense construction (Hoch #90)
di=k, prospective verb form of the anomalous verb rdi, "may you cause..."
mA=n, prospective verb form of anomalous verb mAA. Used as an object of the preceding verb, and acting as a result clause, "...that we shall see her."
Question. The prospective form of mAA sometimes has an n suffix, mAn, but this example doesn't. Is this because of the following suffix pronoun, n?? (ie. they are rolled together as a single n, or the scribe doesn't need to write two n's because it would be obvious to the reader).
Mark's translation seems fine to me and close to the actual egyptian. A 'next level up' translation (in english) might be something like, "Will you let us see her?" This seems a very polite request. Presumably the type of language would reflect the social status of such musicians. Can someone comment on this?

mi.k, the non-enclitic particle, "See (you)..."
n, 1st pers. plur. dependant pronoun (dep. pron. used after mk).
rx.wyn, stative form of the verb, rx "to learn (how)". The verb ending, wyn, gives this away. So, a past tense form, ie. "to know (how)", (see Hoch, #89).
The stative form follows its subject (n, 'we').
s-msy, an interesting word. Acts as a nominal object to the preceding verb, as in the grammatically similar construct "See, we know it". Mark has translated the last word as "how to cause to give birth". He opts for an infinitive (which is a nominal form). Faulkner gives s-msy as 'deliver' (a child), so one could translate the statement as: "See, we know how to deliver (children)" Question: could s-msy be a true noun "delivery/childbirth" derived from the
verb? ie., "See, we know (about) childbirth/delivery"
[G.Graham, 6/10/97; RE>AEL Westcar P7, Lines 15]

The n that sometimes comes out in m33 is entirely optional, but it only can occur in a prospective. There can also be prospectives without it. The =n suffix might have some influence on whether it is written or not too.
[re MDS question about: s-msy] Yes, it very well could be [a true noun]. I opt for "midwifery" because it is causative. "Delivery" is fine too.
LINE 16 [prev] [next] [top]

aHa.n Dd.n=f n=sn ; " wDA.w !"
[M. Wilson, 1/10/97; AEL Westcar P7, Lines 15-1] So he said to them, "Go forth!".
[M.D-S., 2/10/97; RE>AEL Westcar P7, Lines 15]

My notes:
wDA.w, an imperative (ie. giving a command). This interpretation is mainly based on the syntax and context. It is a verb (wDA, to proceed, etc.). The verb stands alone; there is no subject or object (fairly common in commands, eg. "Eat, Drink, and be Merry, ....). It would be an appropriate response by the man to the question asked. The plural strokes, indicated in the transliteration by the .w suffix, denote the group of musicians being addressed, and is expected in a plural imperative. See Hoch, #145.
[G.Graham, 6/10/97; RE>AEL Westcar P7, Lines 15]: So he said to them, "Go forth!".; Maybe the verb wD3 is not as fixed as English "set forth". I would see it in this case as "come in!" One would have to find more examples of its use to determine whether it can have this meaning too, but I suspect it does. It is also quite homophonous with wD3 meaning "be sound/well/whole". That sounds a bit like a welcome too.


LINE 17 [prev] [next] [top]

aq pw iri.n=sn tp-m rd-Dd.t .
[M.Vygus, 2/10/97; AEL Papyrus Westcar P7, L17-20]: "They entered, in front of Reddjedet"
[G.Graham, 6/10/97; RE>AEL Papyrus Westcar P7, L17-20]: Fine. To be more literal, one might say: "What they did was enter before Reddjedet."

LINE 18 [prev] [next] [top]

aHa.n xtm.n=sn a.t Hr=s Hna=s .
[M.Vygus, 2/10/97; AEL Papyrus Westcar P7, L17-20]: "Then they closed off the room with her and themselves (inside)"

[G.Graham, 6/10/97; RE>AEL Papyrus Westcar P7, L17-20]: Very well done. This is a particularly hard one to render in nice English.; "Then they closed the room on (themselves) and her together." Any way about it, you have to put something in parentheses!
LINES 19 - 20 [prev] [next] [top]

aHa.n rdi.n sy As.t xft Hr=s , nb.t-Hw.t HA=s , Hq.t Hr s-xAx msi.w.t .
[M.Vygus, 2/10/97; AEL Papyrus Westcar P7, L17-20]: "Then Isis placed herself in front of her face, Nephthys behind her, Heqet was hastening the births"
[G.Graham, 6/10/97; RE>AEL Papyrus Westcar P7, L17-20]: That was perfect.
LINE 21 [prev] [next] [top]

aHa.n Dd.n As.t ; " imi=k wsr m X.t=s , m rn=k pwy n.y wsr-r=f !"
[M.Wilson, 13/10/97; AEL Westcar p7, lines 21-6]: Isis said "May you not be powerful in her womb, in this your name of 'The one more Powerful than He'"!
LINE 22 [prev] [next] [top]

war.in Xrd pn tp a.wy=s m Xrd n.y mH wa ,
[M.Wilson, 13/10/97; AEL Westcar p7, lines 21-6] This child rushed forth, head and arms held by her (?)
[G.Graham, 13/10/97, RE>AEL Westcar p7, lines 21-6]

You missed the preposition.
"Then this child rushed out *onto* her two arms as a child of one cubit,"
More detailed analysis:

war.in
Xrd
pn
tp
a.wy=s
m
Xrd
n.y
mH
wa

- verb (suffix conjugation with .jn)
- subject
- demonstrative pronoun, modifying subject
- preposition (on)
- dual noun possessed by "her", object of the - preposition
- preposition, used for equivalence (as)
- noun, the thing equated with the subject
- genitival adjective (of m., sing.)
- noun, the possessor of the noun
- specifyer = a number (one), specifying how many of nounThis last term was coined by Netly Layton of Yale, for use in Coptic, but it applies nicely also to Egyptian.
LINE 23 [prev] [next] [top]

rwD qs.w=f , nxbt a.w.t=f

"... and his bones were sturdy, and his limbs plated ..."
[MDS, 17/10/97, AEL West. P7 line 23 nxbt]: nxbt is a verb? Where did this come from?
[G.Graham, 18/10/97, RE>AEL West. P7 line 23 nxbt]: As far as I know nxbt seems to be a hapax legomenon in this very text. I am only following the suggestions of others in taking it as some verb that means to cover with metal. Faulkner (in _The Literature of Ancient Egypt_, ed. W.K. Simpson) uses: "the covering of whose limbs was of gold". Lichtheim uses: "his limbs overlaid with gold". The Woerterbuch gives a separate entry to nxb.t meaning "titulary" and nxb.t (they point off the {t} though I do not see how one can assume that it is grammatically feminine!) found ONLY in Westcar, meaning "vom goldenen Aeussern des neugeborenen Koenigskindes" (concerning the golden exterior of the newborn royal child). Still, if Erman and Grapow, take this as a feminine, then I do not understand which grammatical construction they would like to see in the sentence, since the nfr sw construction has to be formed on the; masculine form of the adjective, regardless of the gender of what follows, and a sDm=f cannot be feminine unless it is a relative form, and I see no reason to interpret this sentence as containing relatives. So, either the verb is nxb, and it is in the sDm.tw=f form, and then we might translate it as something like "his limbs were designated/called/appeared to be golden", or the verb is a quadtiliteral with a hard /t/ radical at the end, and it has a special meaning which refers to the making of objects to have a golden appearance, such as "his limbs were plated/overlaid/painted/guilded with gold".
LINE 24 [prev] [next] [top]

m nbw , afn.t=f m xzbD mAa .

"...with gold, and his hair-do was of real lapis lazuli!"
LINE 25 [prev] [next] [top]

iai.in=sn sw , Sad(.w) XpA=f , rdi Hr ifd.y m Db.t .

"Then they washed him, cutting his umbilical cord, placing (him) upon a couch/cushion in (the form of) a brick"

[J.Hoch, 15/10/97, AEL Re(2): AEL Westcar p7, lines 21-6]: Serge:; I think this is a grammatically interesting part. In a number of cases sDm.w=f seems to be used as a "continuative" tense in narration.; James: Sad(w) XpA.f: Hang on a second. Let's try the normal grammatical patterns here before considering the less common possibilities...; Also, think of the natural order of events. (O.K., so maybe I have more experience in assisting childbirth than some of you, but there is a logical order here.)
[G.Graham, 15/10/97; RE>AEL Re(2): AEL Westcar p7, lines 21-6]: Isn't this just a participle, the endings just not being written because they would be vocalic? I mean that Sad(.w) and rdj(.w) would be "cutting" and "placing" modifying the subject of the verb, which is third person plural. When we first read this text, my instructor insisted that Sad was a sDm.w=f passive, meaning that his umbilical cord "was cut", however, the participial option seemed more attractive to me, especially since rdj, which seems like it should be the same form, does not have a grammatical subject that could be "placed". You have to admit that the line does seem a bit ambiguous to our sensibilities, though clearly the Egyptians had no such problems with it, otherwise they would not have repeated it three times in this text!
[J.Hoch, 15/10/97, AEL Re(2): AEL Westcar p7, lines 21-6]: Just checked a couple of the standard translations--and they are not quite accurate--although they do get the gist into passable English. You can do better! (At least in explaining the grammar.); If Sad(w) were the participle (which would have to be feminine plural), it would have to be either a modifier of a noun "who cut his umbilical cord" or stand as a noun "the cutters of...". Neither works in this sentence.; Basic syntax (word order) points to the solution: verb=noun. Try the simplest option for a "verb=noun situtation"--as one of my students used to call it. This would be the form that Geoff's instructor said. The meaning, however, would not be: "The umbilical cord was cut"--at least not as an independent statement.; The second modifying clause, rdi(w) Hr ifdy n(y) Dbt, has: VERB (ZERO SUBJECT) ADVERBIAL (location). Here rdi(w) cannot be a participle, which would have to be feminine plural, and would have to somehow tie into the sentence either as an adjectival modifier ("who placed") or as a noun ("the placers").; The two modifying clauses (circumstantial clauses) are based on two very different (but *grammatically* interchangeable) patterns. The former is quite time specific, the latter is not. (Vague time reference is general feature of the latter pattern [used as a circumstantial clause], and not just something that happens to fit this passage.)
LINE 26 [prev] [top]

aHa.n mzA.n sy msi-xn.t r=f .

"Then Meskhenet extended herself toward him (leaned over him), and..."
<< Prev Page | Next Page >>

Up to Line 1 - 2 | 3 - 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19-20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |
[Home] [Commentary p. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11] [Hieroglyph P7]