From: "Charles Jones" To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.org.uk Subject: Re: AEL Sinuhe B 248 Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 20:38:29 +0000 In Coptic, the word appears as "meh-senau" (second); does anyone know what function the 'meh' is used for? is it a prefix of sorts? The standard Coptic lexicon indicates some kind of prefix of ordinals or "fill." Chuck Jones (Gregorio) >From: S_Comee@jpf.go.jp > > >Regarding sp-sn with the meaning of "second," although I know of no >other place where such use is attested, like Mark, I also like the >alternative translation. The idea of using the "repeat" sing after >dawn, with the meaning of "two dawns later," or "on the second dawn" >somehow makes sense to me, and sounds like the way the scribes might >write it. > >m Htp, >Stephen ============================================================================== From: "Susan g" To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.org.uk Subject: Re: AEL Merenptah stele Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 19:56:16 +0100 Michael, Thanks for the references, they were very useful to me. Even though I do not participate much, I appreciate the discussions and translations of the active members. A nice week to you cordialement susan ============================================================================== From: "msv" To: "AEL" Subject: AEL Sinuhe B256 - B260 Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 10:40:46 -0000 Berlin 3022 B256 Dd in Hm =f n waw m nn n smrw Ts sw Then His Majesty said to one of these courtiers 'Raise him up, B257cont imi mdw =f n =i Dd in Hm =f mk tw iwt Hwi .n =k xAswt ir n wart let him speak to me'. Then His Majesty said 'Behold, you have returned (after) you have roamed foreign lands. The flight has B258 hd im =k tni pH .n =k iAwy nn Srr abt xAt =k punished you, (you have) grown old, you have reached old age. It is of no small matter, the [attachment / purification] of your corpse (ir n wart = made an attack) (does abt also mean burial ? as in 'attachment to the earth', or could it be an ancient mis-spelling of abw = purification ?) B259cont nn bs =k in pDwtyw m ir r =k sp-sn grw n mdw =k you will not be interred by foreigners, further, do not act against yourself, do not act against yourself ! You do not speak B260 dm.tw rn =k although your name is pronounced mark vygus ============================================================================== Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2004 08:50:21 +0100 Subject: Re: AEL Set/Seth From: Jos Van Kessel-Lo To: AEgyptian-L Marianne Luban heeft geschreven op 29 februari 2004: > Philological arguments aside, But you cannot just lay them aside as if they do not exist. They are the key to this entire argument. Since stS and stX existed before the SIP, and s(w)tx furthers the pre-existing trend, there is no reason for believing s(w)tx is foreign. Where is the Semitic text were "Sutekh" is mentioned as a Semitic deity, having nothing to do with Egypt or the Egyptians? There are none. The name does occur in cuneiform texts, but only in reference to Egyptians. > why should "Sutekh" if he is the same as the old Egyptian god, Set, who was > identified as a donkey and some other uncertain animal, be depicted as a man > in foreign dress on the image to which I referred? The image which you refer to is from the 400 Year Stele. http://nefertiti.iwebland.com/texts/400_year_stela.htm http://sethy1.free.fr/An400.html The actual text only has the Seth animal written for the name of the god and not stx or st specifically. But this does not really matter as the text does say the god is the Son of Nout, and the Ombite, so he must be Seth and not any other. It is well known that Seth was identified by the Egyptians with Bael. Since the 400 Year stele celebrates the foundation of the Seth cult, and Seth/Sutekh was identified by the Egyptians with Bael, it is not strange to show Bael. I think also that this is the only representation of Set/Sutekh as Bael known, but I may be wrong. If it is, then it cannot be said to be typical iconography. > The old Set did not suddenly become depicted in the latter manner > for all time after the Ramesside era (to wit, the fine group statue of > Ramesses III between Horus and Set). So this particular Sutekh, even though > it is obvious he has now been adopted into the Egyptian pantheon, is not the > same as the old Set or stS. But on the 400 Year stele he is called the son of Nout and also the Ombite, so he must be Seth, not a foreign god. More to this. In the Poem of the Battle of Kadesh, at section 131 one version says that Ramses is "like Seth" (written only with a seated Seth figure), but a second version replaces that with "Bael" (with a Seth animal as a determinative). Further on in the text (section 158, in all versions), Ramses is described as being "Sutekh Great of Power, Bael in person"; the name of Sutekh is specifically written. "Great of Power" is one of the typical epithets of Seth; it is used also for him on the 400 Year stele. The association between Seth/Sutekh and Bael is clear. > Otherwise, he would have been depicted as he always was. This makes sense to > me. As for Hathor, she is shown quite consistently throughout pharaonic > times. Not so. Sometimes she is a cow, some times she is shown as Isis or Bast. And sometimes Isis is shown as Hathor or Mout. Amoun can be shown as Min, and Thoth as Khonsou, all depending on the context of the representation. Just so with Seth/Sutekh being shown as Bael on the 400 Year stele. The bigger problem for your argument is laying out how stS and stX are not related to stx (if you are correct). Jos ============================================================================== Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2004 17:38:38 -0500 To: Ancient Egyptian Language List From: steve whittet Subject: Re: AEL Set/Seth At 12:37 PM 02/26/2004 -0800, you wrote: > >>From: Jos Van Kessel-Lo >> >>on 20 February 2004 at 8.42 PM, Marianne Luban wrote: >> >> >> From: Jonas Souza >> >> >> I believe that Set comes from swty, one of the names of that god. >> Seth may >> >> be from stX, but I actually don't know if there is some significant >> >> difference of usage between the two names. >> >> >> > >> > Set was apparently one of the old gods, the personification of darkness, in >> > opposition to the Egyptian solar gods, including Horus the Elder. This was >> > so before the intermediate period of Hyksos rule when the god, Sutekh, was >> > introduced, even though Sutekh came to be associated with Seth by the >> > Egyptians. Set was apparently one of the old Libyan gods. There are references to him at Naquada http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/set5.jpg on a standard of the Scorpion king The name shows up in the cartouches of the 2nd dynasty in a form which links it to Horus Gardiner E20 , C7 =A760, St Gk sigma eta theta compare Gardiner p 587 hnn, destroy, disturb, det turmoil If we can draw a distinction between the righteous destruction of that which is evil in the eyes of the lord and the temptations to do the evil things in the first place we may see Set and Sutekh in a different light >>I think this is not so likely.The name of Seth in the Pyramid Texts (OK) >>is stS. Teshub (compare El Shaddai,Yahweh, Zeus) seems to have more to do with the righteous power of the law to bring destruction on whatever doesn't measure up to the prevailing standards of the community. The Hittite god Sius also seems to be more like Zeus or Thor in that he holds a hammer and thunder bolts This god represents the exercise of power and authority using coercive sanctions the dispensing of Law and Order, (not necessarily justice), but rightous retribution on that which is banned. This power of the Set god is the seductive sanction which would include the use of the Law to provide things like the sense of justice in revenge which despite being against the spirit of the Law is often tempting. Set seems to have an association with evil, temptation and misleading people in such a way as to cause them to choose the wrong course that is familiar to us in the form of Satan.and the temptations of evil that cause us to break the commandments of the Law. >>This name is also from the Middle Kingdom. Also from the Middle Kingdom >>is stX (WB IV:845). These are all from before the Hyksos. The Hyksos >>worshipped Bael, but the Egyptians associated Bael with Seth (as st, stS, >>stx, or stX), so the Hyksos (who wanted to be accepted as legitimate rulers >>of Egypt) did the same. In other words, Sutekh and Set and Seth are all the >>same. "Seth" is just a Greek form of st or stX. Set, Sutekh, Sth clearly did exist as one or more gods associated the Hyksos but tracing the association between the Egyptian Set and the Syro/Anatolian Hittite/Hurrian Tesub (a storm god sometimes portrayed as standing on a bull) and showing how that differs from the Hyksos Seth is another story. >I don't disagree that there is a "stS" in the pyramid texts, or that /S/ was >interchangeable with /x/ in some Egyptian dialects, but I am far from sure that >this is the same as Sutekh, who was a Hittite god, borrowed from the Hurrians and >may have been adopted by the Syrians. Ancient Set seems similar to Baal in that they are often shown in the same Narmer pose, a pose associated not so much with destruction as the threat of destruction if one does not accept the control of some power or authority. > From > >http://www.sacred-texts.com/egy/eml/eml31.htm > > >"Sutekh is depicted on a cliff near Smyrna as a bearded god with curly >hair and a high, curving nose. He looks a typical mountaineer, clad in a >tunic which is tightened round the waist by the "hunger belt" so familiar >in Scottish hill lore, and wearing boots with turned-up toes, specially >suited for high snow-covered altitudes. > >Sutekh was a sky and atmosphere deity who caused the storms and sent >thunder. He was a god of war, and wore goat's horns to symbolize fertility >and the male principle. As Tark or Tarku he is depicted carrying in one >hand a hammer and in the other three wriggling flashes of lightning, >suggesting the Teutonic Thor. He is also shown grasping a mace and trident >or a double battleaxe. As Ramman 1 with double horns, and bearing his axe >and three thunderbolts, he received adoption in Babylonia after the >Hittite conquest." > >One can see such a representation on page 14 of Kitchen's "Pharaoh >Triumphant". Here Sutekh holds a was scepter, which indicates he was >already an Egyptian deity. The original Egyptian god, Set, was shown as a >donkey and then another odd animal. Sutekh was a man. This was the god of >the Hyksos, and not the Set animal, I believe. The early Ramesside kings >also worshipped Sutekh--but that may have been due to the idea that these >hailed from the eastern Delta. The fact that Set and Sutekh were both >gods of storm and thunder was perhaps the very thing that caused the >merger of their identites--or they both originated from the same source in >a mysterious way. Set is a god of evil invoked to protect against temptations Sutek - Tesub - Sius - Zeus is a Hyksos storm god from northern Syro Anatolia invoked for righteous retribution against enemies and protection against destruction. Seth provides yet a third variation as a war god whose amulet could help a warrior invoke protections against terror, danger and destruction and at the same time overcome an obstacle, or temptation on condition of knowing and doing what is right and proper and setting ones mind to overcome the challenge. >Marianne Luban regards, steve ============================================================================== From: "Marianne Luban" To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.org.uk Subject: Re: AEL Set/Seth Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2004 12:51:11 -0800 >From: Jos Van Kessel-Lo > >Marianne Luban heeft geschreven op 29 februari 2004: > > > Philological arguments aside, > >But you cannot just lay them aside as if they do not exist. They are the >key >to this entire argument. Since stS and stX existed before the SIP, and >s(w)tx furthers the pre-existing trend, there is no reason for believing >s(w)tx is foreign. Where is the Semitic text were "Sutekh" is mentioned as >a >Semitic deity, having nothing to do with Egypt or the Egyptians? There are >none. The name does occur in cuneiform texts, but only in reference to >Egyptians. I have to disagree, I'm afraid. My point had nothing to do with the actual name of Set, however it was variously written. Early, Set was depicted as a beast or an anthromorphic entity with the head of a beast. Then, on the 400 Year Stela, he is shown as a foreigner, but with the indication that he is an Egyptian deity. That this god may be called "Sutekh", elsewhere doesn't matter. The foreigners had their own names for this god of storms and thunder, clearly. If the Egyptians saw fit to call him Sutekh, Montu (or even Baal), that is a matter of identification by assimilation with the older Set, from their point of view. However, that the god is shown as a foreign-appearing man is the telling and salient point, no matter how long ago this foreign god became identified with the Egyptian Set of the variously spelled name. > > why should "Sutekh" if he is the same as the old Egyptian god, Set, who was > > identified as a donkey and some other uncertain animal, be depicted as a man > > in foreign dress on the image to which I referred? > >The image which you refer to is from the 400 Year Stele. > >http://nefertiti.iwebland.com/texts/400_year_stela.htm > >http://sethy1.free.fr/An400.html > >The actual text only has the Seth animal written for the name of the god and >not stx or st specifically. But this does not really matter as the text does >say the god is the Son of Nout, and the Ombite, so he must be Seth and not >any other. It is well known that Seth was identified by the Egyptians with >Bael. Yes. But Baal is not a native god--whether he is called "son of Nut" or not. The stela could have shown Set in the older Egyptian way, but it does not. That is the point it seems to me--that this particular god was introduced 400 years or so ago--and incorporated into the older Set by virtue of similarity to the same in certain aspects. Otherwise, what would be the point of depicting him in this manner? I do not quite understand the reasoning, introduced into the discussion by another poster, that this could have nothing to do with the Hyksos. The Hyksos were clearly foreigners, who arrived in Egypt with their own gods. Certainly, they came some 400 years before the time of the great-grandfather of Ramesses II--and definitely four centuries before the accession of Ramesses II, the erector of the stela. Why not believe what the stela says? The oldest form of Set was worshipped in Egypt much longer than 400 years. When Ramesses II supplicated Sutekh to protect his expedition from the "cold Sirocco", (as it is known in the Levant), he was surely this time not praying to the old Set but to the form of the god who came from that area, from Asia. Surely, one cannot connect the older Set as having any great power over snows and blizzards, which don't occur in Egypt. >Since the 400 Year stele celebrates the foundation of the Seth cult, >and Seth/Sutekh was identified by the Egyptians with Bael, it is not strange >to show Bael. 400 years does not seem to me to celebrate the foundation of the cult of the old Set, but the coming of Baal, otherwise called Set. >I think also that this is the only representation of Set/Sutekh as Bael >known, but I may be wrong. If it is, then it cannot be said to be typical >iconography. Exactly! See my point above on the purpose of the iconography. > > The old Set did not suddenly become depicted in the latter manner > > for all time after the Ramesside era (to wit, the fine group statue of > > Ramesses III between Horus and Set). So this particular Sutekh, even though > > it is obvious he has now been adopted into the Egyptian pantheon, is not the > > same as the old Set or stS. > >But on the 400 Year stele he is called the son of Nout and also the Ombite, >so he must be Seth, not a foreign god. See above. Perhaps Nut and the Ombite had their foreign counterparts. It doesn't matter--because Baal became identified with the older Set. If I am adopted by a family called Smith, my parents were not Smith, but that is what I call my parents--Mr. and Mrs. Smith. I hope you forgive this simple analogy. >More to this. In the Poem of the Battle of Kadesh, at section 131 one >version says that Ramses is "like Seth" (written only with a seated Seth >figure), but a second version replaces that with "Bael" (with a Seth animal >as a determinative). It is hardly significant. Baal and Set were fused into one for the Egyptians now. >Further on in the text (section 158, in all versions), Ramses is described >as being "Sutekh Great of Power, Bael in person"; the name of Sutekh is >specifically written. "Great of Power" is one of the typical epithets of >Seth; it is used also for him on the 400 Year stele. The association >between >Seth/Sutekh and Bael is clear. Yes. But the stela makes it clear that 400 years ago there arrived Baal. Adoption completed. > > Otherwise, he would have been depicted as he always was. This makes sense to > > me. As for Hathor, she is shown quite consistently throughout pharaonic > > times. > >Not so. Sometimes she is a cow, some times she is shown as Isis or Bast. And >sometimes Isis is shown as Hathor or Mout. Amoun can be shown as Min, and >Thoth as Khonsou, all depending on the context of the representation. Just >so with Seth/Sutekh being shown as Bael on the 400 Year stele. But Hathor is never shown as Baalath, a foreign goddess, and called "Hathor", to my knowledge--even though she was identified by the northerners with Baalath. The 400 years stela could have shown Set in the Egyptian style as an Egyptian god--but it did not for a reason obvious to me. >The bigger problem for your argument is laying out how stS and stX are not >related to stx (if you are correct). No problem. I don't argue with the name at all. ============================================================================== Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 13:38:51 -0500 (EST) From: Anastacia Bird Subject: AEL Translation To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.org.uk I am looking for the translation of two words into heiratic, "eternity" and "immortal". I need the images of how they would written out. ( A link to a webpage with this would suffice ) Anastacia anastacia421@yahoo.ca ============================================================================== From: "A.P.de Visser" To: Subject: AEL Sinuhe B257-258 Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 16:38:12 +0100 Here are a few comments on Mark,s translation: B 257: < ir n wart> is translated by < made an attack>. In my edition I find < ir.n.k.wart> and that means quite something else and more logic, namely< you made a flight>. B 258: < ab> or means < unite> (namely with the earth). So Marks first suggestion seems to be the right one. Bram ============================================================================== From: "Katherine Griffis-Greenberg" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: Re: AEL Set/Seth Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 14:51:53 -0000 Marianne Luban wrote: "When Ramesses II supplicated Sutekh to protect his expedition from the "cold Sirocco", (as it is known in the Levant), he was surely this time not praying to the old Set but to the form of the god who came from that area, from Asia. Surely, one cannot connect the older Set as having any great power over snows and blizzards, which don't occur in Egypt." Sutekh/Seth has control over storms of all types - rainstorms, windstorms, etc. The fact that weather disturbances are disruptive is enough to grant the deity as having a hand in their origin or presence. He has particular reign over the type of atmospheric disturbances which spew forth rain from the sky (PT 26a), and Seth is noted in gushing forth water from his arm as a heavy rain (PT 20d), or having "felled the sky to the ground," as noted in pBremner-Rhind (all cited by te Velde, 1977: 85, in referring to Sutekh's traditional attributes as a storm deity). That Sutekh is particularly associated with snow can be seen in the term /srq/ which is the word for 'snow' in Egyptian, and written with the Set-animal god [C7] determinative: Aa18-Z1-Z4:D21-Z1-N29-Z7-C7-G7, as noted by te Velde (1977: 22-23, citing A.H. Gardiner, 1947. _Ancient Egyptian Onomastica_, I: 6). In listing 24 different types of words which associated the Set-animal by determinative, te Velde continued: "About half the words refer to atmospheric disturbances. Discussing some words that are determined with the Seth-animal in his article about Seth as a storm-god, however, Zandee has rightly placed the use of the Seth-animal as a determinative in a wider setting than only that of storm and thunder and its god. He points out that Xnnw [one of the 24 Seth determinative terms - KGG] is the opposite of mAat*." (te Velde 1977: 25) te Velde's citation: Zandee, J. 1963. Seth als Sturmgott. Z=C4S 90: 147. Further, it should be noted that snow indeed _does_ occur in Egypt, particularly in the northern half of the country. The last impressive snowfall in Egypt recorded was about 3-4 years ago, with Cairo receiving about 3-4 inches. However, I recall a similar snowfall of fewer inches in the same city in 1991, while visiting there at the time. Snow may not stay very long on the ground (about 2 days tops), but I was told by natives there it was also not all that unusual, either. Regards -- Katherine Griffis-Greenberg, MA (Lon) Oriental Institute Oriental Studies Doctoral Program [Egyptology] Oxford University Oxford, United Kingdom http://www.griffis-consulting.com ============================================================================== From: "Robert Dery" To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.org.uk Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2004 14:14:18 +0000 Hello, I'm Rob Dery and I've just joined AEL. I come from a background in Celtic linguistics but I've always had an interest in Egyptian in its many phases: such a long recorded history compared with "my" languages! I wonder whether anyone can help me in a search for a corpus of Old Coptic texts i.e. the pagan magic spells etc. Can one find them collected together somewhere? Or are they, as I suspect, scattered in hard to access journals? I'm interested in the language itself, not translations of the texts. Does anyone know how this phase of Egyptian differs from that of the later Coptic of the Gospels? I'd be grateful for any help or guidance you can give me. Rob Dery ============================================================================== Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2004 10:55:05 +0100 Subject: Re: AEL Set/Seth From: Jos Van Kessel-Lo To: AEgyptian-L Marianne Luban heeft geschreven op 2 maart 2004: >> But you cannot just lay them aside as if they do not exist. They are the key >> to this entire argument. Since stS and stX existed before the SIP, and s(w)tx >> furthers the pre-existing trend, there is no reason for believing s(w)tx is >> foreign. > I have to disagree, I'm afraid. My point had nothing to do with the actual > name of Set, however it was variously written. Now I am confused. You originally wrote "This was so before the intermediate period of Hyksos rule when the god, Sutekh, was introduced, even though Sutekh came to be associated with Seth by the Egyptians". When I objected, saying that Sutekh is not a Hyksos god, we began this discussion. Now you seem to be saying that the name is unimportant. If you are claiming that Bael (a Semitic god known to the Hyksos) was associated with Seth/Sutekh (an Egyptian god whose name can be spelled in a variety of ways), then we are in agreement. > Early, Set was depicted as a beast or an anthromorphic entity with the head of > a beast. Then, on the 400 Year Stela, he is shown as a foreigner, but with > the indication that he is an Egyptian deity. He is an Egyptian deity, Seth. He is called on the stele Seth [written as a seated Seth deity], son of Nout, Great of Strength, the Ombite. He cannot be any god except Seth. As I have said, the fact that the iconography shows him in the form of Bael is not surprising since the Egyptians associated Seth with Bael. The Egyptians were very easy with their inscriptions of gods who were associated with each other. That is why Hathor can be shown but the text will say she Isis, or Mout, or Sekhmet, and so on (lots of other examples can be found). That Seth is named in the text of the 400 Year stele but Bael shown is not very surprising. > The stela could have shown Set in the older Egyptian way, but it does not. > That is the point it seems to me--that this particular god was introduced 400 > years or so ago--and incorporated into the older Set by virtue of similarity > to the same in certain aspects. Otherwise, what would be the point of > depicting him in this manner? I have no argument with this. My only arguement was that Sutekh is a different spelling of st/stS/stX and is Egyptian. That he happened to be associated with Bael by the Egyptians is secondary, and that the spelling swtx is not a Semitic or Hittite name at all (as I thought you were claiming). > 400 years does not seem to me to celebrate the foundation of the cult of the > old Set, but the coming of Baal, otherwise called Set. I agree to a point. It is Seth, in the form of Bael, whose cult is being celebrated. >> More to this. In the Poem of the Battle of Kadesh, at section 131 one version >> says that Ramses is "like Seth" (written only with a seated Seth figure), but >> a second version replaces that with "Bael" (with a Seth animal as a >> determinative). >> > It is hardly significant. Baal and Set were fused into one for the Egyptians > now. It is very significant. It shows that in the minds of the Egyptians Seth and Bael were associated with each other, just as they are on the 400 Year stele. > But Hathor is never shown as Baalath, a foreign goddess, and called "Hathor", > to my knowledge--even though she was identified by the northerners with > Baalath. No, the Semites did the opposite. They represented Baelet Gubla (the Lady of Byblos) as Hathor, in the Egyptian style. But the Egyptians associated her with Baelet when they call Hathor nbt kpn (the Lady of Byblos), the exact precise meaning of Baelet Gubla. > The 400 years stela could have shown Set in the Egyptian style as an > Egyptian god--but it did not for a reason obvious to me. Yes, they were associated with each other. The text says one thing, the drawing another. >> The bigger problem for your argument is laying out how stS and stX are not >> related to stx (if you are correct). >> > No problem. I don't argue with the name at all. I thought you had. I must have been mistaken. We seem to be in agreement then that swtx is just a different spelling of the older forms stS and stX, who are Seth. The association with Bael comes in the SIP, but is not original. Friendly greetings, Jos ============================================================================== From: "Marianne Luban" To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.org.uk Subject: Re: AEL Set/Seth Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2004 15:43:06 -0800 >From: Jos Van Kessel-Lo > >Marianne Luban heeft geschreven op 2 maart 2004: > > >> But you cannot just lay them aside as if they do not exist. They are the key > >> to this entire argument. Since stS and stX existed before the SIP, and s(w)tx > >> furthers the pre-existing trend, there is no reason for believing s(w)tx is > >> foreign. > > > I have to disagree, I'm afraid. My point had nothing to do with the actual > > name of Set, however it was variously written. > >Now I am confused. You originally wrote "This was so before the >intermediate >period of Hyksos rule when the god, Sutekh, was introduced, even though >Sutekh came to be associated with Seth by the Egyptians". When I objected, >saying that Sutekh is not a Hyksos god, we began this discussion. Now you >seem to be saying that the name is unimportant. If you are claiming that >Bael (a Semitic god known to the Hyksos) was associated with Seth/Sutekh (an >Egyptian god whose name can be spelled in a variety of ways), then we are in >agreement. > I was confused, myself. I should not have written "Sutekh", as that is not a foreign name. So I think we do agree. ============================================================================== From: "Marianne Luban" To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.org.uk Subject: Re: AEL Set/Seth Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2004 15:38:21 -0800 >From: "Katherine Griffis-Greenberg" > >Marianne Luban wrote: > >"When Ramesses II supplicated Sutekh to protect his expedition from the >"cold Sirocco", (as it is known in the Levant), he was surely this time not >praying to the old Set but to the form of the god who came from that area, >from Asia. >Surely, one cannot connect the older Set as having any great power over >snows and blizzards, which don't occur in Egypt." > >Sutekh/Seth has control over storms of all types - rainstorms, windstorms, >etc. The fact that weather disturbances are disruptive is enough to grant >the deity as having a hand in their origin or presence. He has particular >reign over the type of atmospheric disturbances which spew forth rain from >the sky (PT 26a), and Seth is noted in gushing forth water from his arm as >a heavy rain (PT 20d), or having "felled the sky to the ground," as noted >in pBremner-Rhind (all cited by te Velde, 1977: 85, in referring to >Sutekh's traditional attributes as a storm deity). > >That Sutekh is particularly associated with snow can be seen in the term >/srq/ which is the word for 'snow' in Egyptian, and written with the >Set-animal god [C7] determinative: Aa18-Z1-Z4:D21-Z1-N29-Z7-C7-G7, as >noted by te Velde (1977: 22-23, citing A.H. Gardiner, 1947. _Ancient >Egyptian Onomastica_, I: 6). In listing 24 different types of words which >associated the Set-animal by determinative, te Velde continued: > I must admit I didn't realize that it snowed in Egypt, but the fact remains that "sArqw" (written variously) is not an Egyptian term but a Semitic loanword. See Hoch, "Semitic Words in Egyptian texts of the New Kingdom and TIP", page 264. He says "The word occurs in the onomastica among meterological terms and is otherwise only attested in the following passage concerning the mission to meet Ramses II's Hittite Bride when she arrived in Palestine." However, the animals of Seth, the strange beast and the crocodile, are only given in two writings which Hoch terms "defective". While Hoch gives "sArqw" as "snow", it may be that this is a term for "blizzard", as well. In the text, Ramesses II mentions, in order, Hwyt (rain), qbw (strong winds) and "saraqu". This is what the "cold Sirocco" I mentioned above, is all about in the Levant. It comes on suddenly and has been known to kill people not appropriately dressed for it. A wind comes from the north with freezing rain that becomes a blizzard. A "sirocco", always a wind, is either hot or cold. I note the similarity between "saraqu" and "sirocco", but can comment no further on this. It does rain and thunder in Egypt, but I doubt the older Set was a god associated with the dangerous blizzards of the Levant. ============================================================================== From: "msv" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: Re: AEL Sinuhe B257-258 Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2004 10:36:27 -0000 Bram, Which edition do you have ? My A. Blackman (1972), the AEL site and Foster all have 'ir n wart' mark ============================================================================== From: "Katherine Griffis-Greenberg" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: Re: AEL Set/Seth Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2004 10:26:31 -0000 Marianne Luban wrote: It does rain and thunder in Egypt, but I doubt the older Set was a god as sociated with the dangerous blizzards of the Levant. ***To an extent, we may be in agreement insofar as the reference to the Levant and snow, but the association of Sutekh with any form of water which comes from the sky (rain, hail, snow, etc.) is attested from texts as far back as the Pyramid Texts, as I indicated earlier, as is his association with foreign countries and foreigners. The association of Sutekh with the snows of the Levant would be logical, although it is clear the 19th Dynasty association in the Marriage Stela of Ramses II is more likely an example of syncretic association, just as Sutekh is invoked by the Ramessid kings when Ba'al or other storm gods of other countries are meant as also invoked. This practice is not just a Ramessid invention. Herodotus, in later periods, refer to Egyptian gods with Greek names since it was the Greek divine _attributes_ he perceived in the ancient Egyptian ones, and he too thought the Greek deities were everywhere in every land, ruling every person and matter as they did in Greece. He also was, of course, attempting to make the Egyptian religion more understandable to his Greek listeners/readers. It is very possible one is seeng the same syncretic rationale in calling Semitic storm gods 'Sutekh,' but the point remains that all the Egyptian attributes of Sutkeh _did_ encompass the same meteorological associations, which would have included snow. There is also the added panache that Sutekh was, in the Egyptian mind, the god who held sway over all matters foreign and or disruptive (particularly in those foreign states where Egypt's control was not absolute). Katherine Griffis-Greenberg, MA (Lon) Oriental Institute Oriental Studies Doctoral Program [Egyptology] Oxford University Oxford, United Kingdom http://www.griffis-consulting.com ============================================================================== From: "Sa Ra DjtAnkh IrtRa" To: Subject: AEL Baset Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2004 10:01:51 +0100 Hi! Can somebody tell me how to write the name of goddess Baset? I mean by hieroglyphs (MdC) ofcourse... :-) Thank you very much. Be well! anx-WDa-snb Sa Ra DjtAnkh IrtRa (Gime) MdC: zA&ra-<-D&t&Dt-anx-wDAt-> Dt == N16 ============================================================================== Date: Fri, 05 Mar 2004 01:54:41 +0100 From: "Doc(Ent)" To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL Baset Hi, Something like W2-X1, i.e. bAs-t Take care, -- Zbigniew Szczudlik doc73@NOSPAMpoczta.fm ============================================================================== Date: Fri, 05 Mar 2004 17:01:31 -0500 From: Crystaldragon162@aol.com To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.org.uk (Ancient Egyptian Language List) Subject: Re: AEL Baset Actually, I'm not sure it's possible. Her name is one hieroglyphic symbol of an obelisk of sorts, with the name signifier behind it. Take care, Nicole ============================================================================== From: "A.P.de Visser" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: Re: AEL Sinuhe B257-258 Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 12:23:36 +0100 Sorry for the wrong transliteration.The in should be . I think that Sethes remark about the addition of the is decisive because he was a great authority and it makes the whole construction more logic. Bram ----- Original Message ----- From: "msv" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2004 11:36 AM Subject: Re: AEL Sinuhe B257-258 > > Bram, > > Which edition do you have ? > > My A. Blackman (1972), the AEL site and Foster all have 'ir n > wart' > > > mark > ============================================================================== From: "A.P.de Visser" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: Re: AEL Sinuhe B257-258 Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 12:12:24 +0100 The editions Mark asked for: 1. Luino: La veritable histoire de Sinuhe( Maison de vie) this is a French edition in which B257 is written as . 2.Kurt Sethe: Lesestucke In this edition I found this passage written as < ir.n.wArt >.But here a note was added that it should be considered as < ir.n.k.wArt> ============================================================================== From: "Sasha Verma" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: AEL Grave of Set1 Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2004 09:56:41 +0100 Can anyone send me a translation of corridor C right wall coll 15 to 26 from the tomb of seti 1. Many thanks, sasha Verma ============================================================================== Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 17:58:41 -0800 (GMT-08:00) From: Imnrnnre To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL Baset Crystaldragon162@aol.com wrote: Regarding Bastt, please see Sir Alan Gardiner's Egyptian Grammar for the sign list beginning on p. 442. The glyphs for Bastt (or Bastet) are indicated as W1 (or W2), X1, X1, B1. See p. 563 for transliteration. I have added B1 to the expression as the determinative for "goddess." The odd looking ideogram refered to by Nicole is an unguent jar with a tied lid. The jar itself is transliterated as Bas as shown as well on p. 563. In short we have the unguent (or oil) jar, a bread loaf, another loaf, and a seated woman. For this and other combinations see E.A. Wallis Budge, An Egyptian Hieroglyphic Dictionary, Vol. I, p. 205. Regards Raymond Davis ============================================================================== From: "Jakob Kimbell" To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.org.uk Subject: AEL RE: Old Coptic texts Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 17:06:26 +0800 I hope the lack of an immediate reply to Rob Dery's question about Coptic does not signal that nobody on this list has an interest in such things -- I have a question or two (about controversies surrounding the phonological system) which I was hoping to pose when I get the time..... Anyway, I have consulted my handy edition of the 8th volume of Encyclopedia Coptica (this #8 at least being a sine qua non for Coptic linguistics) and find some pertinent info in the sections on "Bodmer papyri" (esp. p.51), "Old Coptic"(esp. p. 170) and perhaps also the sections "Dialect P" and "Pre-Coptic". Let me know if you have trouble finding the Enc.Copt.; I certainly had to go some ways to bring it back here (Taiwan). --- Jakob p.s. I have a background in Tibetan and Chinese, but have been studying Coptic for a while now. Let's see if we can solve some of the puzzles it offers! >From: "Robert Dery" >Reply-To: Ancient Egyptian Language List >To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.org.uk >Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2004 14:14:18 +0000 > >Hello, I'm Rob Dery and I've just joined AEL. I come from a background in >Celtic linguistics but I've always had an interest in Egyptian in its many >phases: such a long recorded history compared with "my" languages! > >I wonder whether anyone can help me in a search for a corpus of Old Coptic >texts i.e. the pagan magic spells etc. Can one find them collected together >somewhere? Or are they, as I suspect, scattered in hard to access >journals? I'm interested in the language itself, not translations of the >texts. Does anyone know how this phase of Egyptian differs from that of the >later Coptic of the Gospels? I'd be grateful for any help or guidance you >can give me. > >Rob Dery > ============================================================================== Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2004 13:53:16 -0800 (GMT-08:00) From: Imnrnnre To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL Set/Seth Marianne and Jos, It appears to me the two of you agree that the god depicted in the 400 Year Stela is a foreigner. If we take the representation seriously, he would be the Hyksos god Baal. That the Egyptians refer to him as Stx and as Sts in the accompanying glyphs is absolutely in keeping with their long-established practice of syncretism done, as was often the case, for political reasons. Instead of focusing on the names, why not emphasize what was a common and long-lived practice? I say this while acknowled- ging that I am guilty of having recently committed the same error. Raymond Davis ============================================================================== From: "A.P.de Visser" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: Re: AEL Grave of Set1 Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2004 11:47:04 +0100 Sasha I am almost sure that the text in Sethi,s tomb concerns a part of the namely the 4th and 5th hour of the night.You can find text and translation in : by E.Wallis Budge. Kind regards Bram ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sasha Verma" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Sent: Saturday, March 06, 2004 9:56 AM Subject: AEL Grave of Set1 Can anyone send me a translation of corridor C right wall coll 15 to 26 from the tomb of seti 1. Many thanks, sasha Verma ============================================================================== From: "Brian Yare" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: Re: AEL Grave of Set1 Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 11:37:20 -0000 << You can find text and translation in : by E.Wallis Budge. >> Which is available on CD-ROM from us, scanned at 400 d.p.i.. Brian Yare (Yare Egyptology) http://www.yare.org/egypt ==============================================================================