Mehu's False Door

An AEL-L exercise.
For picture of the door and numbering of text, see Mehu.

Contents:
(I) Intro: schedule; who was Mehu; false door terminology.
(II) Line 2+3: titles on inner door-post and lintel.
(III) Line 5B: titles on outer door-post.
(IV) Line 5A+6: offering formula on middle door-post and architrave.
(V) Line 4: offering table scene on stela.
Links to the AEL and EEF mailing lists at bottom of page.

Intro


----------
From: 	Aayko Eyma[SMTP:ayma@tip.nl]
Sent: 	6+8+10 September 1999 20:49 [bundled]
To: 	'Ancient Egyptian Language List'
Subject: 	AEL Mehu's Door - time schedule

Hi all,

This weekend I was working at the text of the false door
in the OK tomb of Mehu - for no other reason than that there 
is such a VERY beautifull photo of it in
"Aegypten, Die Welt der Pharaonen", 1997, ed. Regine Schultz 
and Matthias Seidel.
Every glyph can clearly be seen, which is quite unusual for book 
pictures! (actually, this book has loads of the sharpest photos 
you will ever see).

Do many of you have this book and do you perhaps like to 
partake in translating? 
As it is a short text, with formulaic text (offerings, titles), 
I suppose it would be good for the AEL (long texts seem to 
run aground; perhaps we should try rounded weekly projects?)

I've put up the door picture at http://www.oocities.org/TimesSquare/Alley/4482/Mehu.html

I've divided the door in sections - if someone can give the correct
English terminology for false door parts, please do. 
I did not follow the above book, which calls the two outer posts
"inner and outer door-post" - leaving me wonder what they call
the sections next to the door opening?


SCHEDULE

1) week Sept 11-17: titles
- text 2+3 to be prepaired (by all, I hope) in the weekend (I'll post it
Sunday evening to start debate)
- text 5B in second half of the week (I'll post Wednesday evening*)
- related issues to debate:
Who was Mehu? What do the titles mean? Conclusions for 
the administration of the OK?

2) week Sept 18-24 (or Sept 25 - Oct 2* ): offerings
- text 5A+6 to be done in weekend (I'll post Sunday evening),
- text 4 in second half of the week (I'll post Wednesday evening*)
- related issues to debate:
The structure of offering formula.

* Time permitting, if there's much debate we just shift the 
schedule a week.

I'll gather the thread, streamline it [i.e. more chatty stuff is left out], 
and put it under a link on the Door page. 

Aayko Eyma




----------
From: 	Abey[SMTP:abey@mindspring.com]
Sent: 	09 September 1999 18:19
To: 	AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk
Subject: 	AEL Mehu-False Door project.


Aayko and those who know:
	I was trying to look up some information on Mehu, and I was unable to find
anything at this point.  -Were there other names that he was known by?  If
it spoils the project, I understand that we will have to wait until next week.
	Amir Bey


----------
From: 	Michael Tilgner[SMTP:mtilgner@knuut.de]
Sent: 	09 September 1999 22:46
To: 	AEL
Subject: 	AEL Information about Mehu (was: Mehu-False Door project)

Dear Amir,

Mehu was vizier under Pepi I; other titles are on the inscription. It is
possible that he served under Teti, too.

Jean-Philippe Lauer, Saqqara. The Royal Cemetery of Memphis, London, 1976
has a section about the mastaba of Mehu, some b/w and color plates - to be
found in the German edition: text pp. 153-155, color photographs XVIII-XX,
b/w photographs no. 132-134

Latest publication: Hartwig Altenmüller, Die Wanddarstellungen im Grab des
Mehu in Saqqara [The wall decorations in the tomb of Mehu in Saqqara],
Mainz, 1998 (AV, 42)

Best wishes,
Michael Tilgner
mtilgner@knuut.de


-------

From: 	Michael Tilgner[SMTP:mtilgner@knuut.de]
Sent: 	15 September 1999 23:02
To: 	AEL
Subject: 	AEL False door - terminology

Aayko wrote:

> I've divided the door in sections - if someone can give the correct
> English terminology for false door parts, please do.


We have hundreds or maybe even thousands of false doors in ancient Egypt.
Therefore it is astonishing to note that beside some articles there is only
one (!) monograph about their structure, function, and development:

Silvia Wiebach, "Die aegyptische Scheintuer. Morphologische Studien zur
Entwicklung und Bedeutung der Hauptkultstelle in den Privat-Graebern des
Alten Reiches" [The Egyptian false door. Morphological studies on the
development and meaning of the main place of cult in the private tombs of
the OK], Hamburg, 1981 (Hamburger aegyptologische Studien, 1)

Also important are:
-- LAe V, 563-574, s.v. "Scheintuer" [false door]
-- Nigel Strudwick, "The Administration of Egypt in the Old Kingdom",
London, 1985, especially chapter 2 "The False Door as a Criterion for
Dating", pp. 9-52

Nigel Strudwick (pp. 10-11) used the following terms for the parts of the
false door:

(1) cornice - "the cavetto cornice to be found above the architraves of
doors, although a second is occasionally found within the outer one" - also
present in Mehu's false door, but not shown in the scan
(2) torus - "the roll around the outer edges of the door intended to
represent original fibrous binding" - parts can be seen on the scan.
(3) panel - with the deceased in front of the offering table (Aayko: "A
stela in a niche above the lintel, showing the tomb owner eating from the
offerings")
(4) apertures - to the left and right of the panel - space without text or
scenes on Mehu's false door
(5) jambs - "The terms 'one-jamb door', 'two-jamb door' and 'three-jamb
door' describe a false door with respectively one, two or three pairs of
jambs." - Mehu's false door is a 'three-jamb door', each jamb consisting of
two columns (Aayko: "inner doorpost" and "outer doorpost") - The German
terminology distinguished between inner and outer doorposts (or jambs), as
Aayko did.
(6) architrave - (Aayko: "architrave")
(7) lintel - (Aayko: "lintel, above the inner door-posts")
(8) central niche - here without any text, scene or sculpture

Strudwick did not provide a term for the "immitation beam" (Aayko) below the
lintel. [German: "Rundbalken" (round beam?)]

The ancient Egyptian words are:
rA-pr "false door", HWB, p. 458
rw.t "false door", HWB, p. 460

Best wishes,
Michael Tilgner
mtilgner@knuut.de



----------
From: 	Aayko Eyma[SMTP:ayma@tip.nl]
Sent: 	17 September 1999 19:47
To: 	'Ancient Egyptian Language List'
Subject: 	RE: AEL False door - terminology
Dear Michael,

Thank you for the literature references and the overview.

To nitpick a bit about  terminology:

>(3) panel - with the deceased in front of the offering table (Aayko: "A
>stela in a niche above the lintel, showing the tomb owner eating from the
>offerings")

***The reason I named this a stela, in  a niche, was that I have a
sideways photo of the false door of Nefersechemptah (dyn.6),
and there you see that the stela is standing detached in a niche,
that is, the apertures are in the dept, if you know what I mean
(much more than with Mehu).
So I took (take) this to be the 'original' form, comparable to the
niche with stela above tomb openings. And the doors that have 
stela and apertures at the same level (same dept compaired to 
each other and compaired to the rest of the door) I thus took (take) 
to be abstractions. Whether this hunch is fully valid I do not know,
but I think it does more justice to the character of the offering table 
scene than calling it a "panel" (suggesting it was 'just' a part of the
door). For as I've read it, originally this offering table scene was not
a part of false doors:

- originally, tombs had either a stela or a false door (dyn 2), 
depending on social status (only kings and high officials had a door)
- when the door became used by lower classes, door and stela were both 
placed in the tomb (dyn 3-4)
-and finally (dyn 5-6) the two became merged into doors like the 
one of Mehu (dyn. 6)
- later (MK/NK), the false door decreased in size and  disappeared and
the stela remained (or the statue of the tomb owner) at the traditional 
false door spot in the tomb. (Occassionally, false doors do (re)appear
in NK, but not on the 'old' spot).  

>(4) apertures - to the left and right of the panel - space without text or
>scenes on Mehu's false door
(5) jambs - "The terms 'one-jamb door', 'two-jamb door' and 'three-jamb
door' describe a false door with respectively one, two or three pairs of
jambs." - Mehu's false door is a 'three-jamb door', each jamb consisting of
two columns (Aayko: "inner doorpost" and "outer doorpost") - The German
terminology distinguished between inner and outer doorposts (or jambs), as
Aayko did.

***No, I did not call the text columns doorposts. I called the
jambs doorposts, each consisting of two columns of text. 
So the doorposts under the lintel I called "inner doorposts"
(each post having two columns of text), and the doorposts
under the architrave I called "outer doorposts"; and as there
were two of the latter, I dubbed these _one_ outer doorpost
consisting of _two_ panels, each pannel having two columns 
of text. In other words: I took this double set as a 'reduplication'
of the originally sole outer doorpost. Arbitrary, I agree.
It would perhaps have been better to not speak of panels but
of "middle" and "outer doorposts",  so to get a three-jamb door.
But my criterium was: everything under the lintel is "inner", 
everything not under the lintel but under the architrave is "outer". 

That criterium might be tricky, as in some cases the lintel
stretches over the whole width of the door, so one having
two sets of  "inner" doorposts under the lintel (what in
my above terms would become: one inner doorpost consisting 
of two panels, i.e. a reduplicated doorpost). But no "outer" doorpost!

What do you mean, "messy"? :o

(Michale: note that Altenmueler in the text with Mehu's door, in 
'Egypt-Land of the Pharaos', falsely calls the middle 
jamb, with offering texts,  "inner doorpost"...in my Dutch version
of the book at least. So the "German terminology" was not the 
same as mine - and IMVHO wrong.)
 

>(8) central niche - here without any text, scene or sculpture

** I think "central niche" is not a very 'telling' word -  "door-opening"
is. Sometimes it even has imitation doors in it, or as you say
a statue on the threshold: the tomb-owner stepping through the
door to visit the land  of the living. For this seems to have
been the original meaning of the door (which as concept
ultimately goes back on the niches of the mastabas): 
- originally the door was directed to the Nile Valley. So 
depending on which side of the Nile the tomb was built, 
west or east, the door was placed against the western or 
eastern wall of the tomb to face to the Nile. 
- only later in the OK, when the notion of the West (realm
of the dead) became prominent, the door always was
put against the western wall (to face east), even at the
eastern side of the Nile. Now the deceased could only
step out of the door when coming from the West, not 
just from anywhere in the Beyond, so to say.

kind regards,
Aayko Eyma




Line 2+3

----------
From: 	Aayko Eyma[SMTP:ayma@tip.nl]
Sent: 	12 September 1999 17:14
To: 	'AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk'
Subject: 	AEL Mehu's Door - lines (2)+(3)


Hi all, 

Behold my go at text 2 and 3. 

For the occassion, I did even swap my sane _'_, _3_ and _j_ for
the MdC codes _a_, _A_, _i_  (bah!). ;)
First comes the transliteration (every glyph accounted for, for
those who are only practicing reading glyphs and are not yet
into translating), then the formal transcription, then the translation.

Note that the ending .y is hardly ever written in this text (and
not only in this text).


(2) Text on the inner doorposts, two rows: titles

(a)
bi.t-t-*xtm.w-s-mr-wa-t-{stroke}-m-r-Sma-m-r-s-D-sDm-t-nb-t
<=>
xtm.w-bi.t.y  smr-wa.t.y  im.y-rA  Sma  im.y-rA  sDm.y.t  nb.t  
<=>
Seal-bearer of the King of Lower Egypt, Sole Friend, Overseer of
Upper Egypt, Overseer of all judges/authorities.

(b)
s-mr-wa-t-{stroke}-r-nfr-HA-t-m-r-i-iz-z-{2x house}-sw-t-Xkr 
<=>
smr-wa.t.y  ir.y-nfr-HA.t  im.y-rA  iz.w.y  Xkr.w  nsw.t  
<=>
Sole Friend, Keeper of the Diadem, Overseer of the Two 
Bureaus of the Royal Insignia.

Comments:
- the reading of S19 is not certain to Egyptologists, as apparantly
this title is never spelled out. It is either *sDAw.t.y or *xtmw, 
as "seal" is sDAw.t or xtm, "to seal" is xtm.  
Why btw did they reconstruct *xtm.w (AFAIK: "sealer") and not
*xtm.y ("he of the seal"), analogue to sDAw.t.y?
- The Sma glyph in (2b) can be clearly seen in the original photo (if 
you look well, ditto on the scan).
- sDm.y ("he to which one listens", so authority, judge) is my 
venture, as just  sDm ("servant") seemed less likely to be
worthy of being overseen by our top-dog. 
The _.t_ I take to be the collective ending .t, which is also used below. 
- iz can  mean "workshop" (Werkstatte, Atelier), but I presumed
our guy would not oversee the actual production of the insignia
(workshops), but (also) the whole administrative process surrounding 
them, hence my "bureau" (Kammer, Arbeitsbereich) - "office" or
"department" would fit too I suppose.


(3) Text on lintel above the inner doorposts: titles

(a)
H-Xr-b-Hr-tp-i(A)m-a-s-mr-wa-t-{stroke}  <=>
Xr.y-Hb.t  Hr.y-tp  imA-a  smr-wa.ty  <=>
Chief Lector, Pleasing Employe and Sole Friend,

b) s-m-xrp-*smA-t-nb-t-xrp-m-nTr {3x} <=>
sm  xrp  *smA.t  nb.t  xrp  im.y(.w)-nTr.w  <=>
Sem-priest, Leader of all smA-priests, Leader of 
him/them in whom the gods are (or: him/them
who is/are belonging to the gods).


Comments:
- imA-a is literally  "well-disposed/pleasing of arm"; HWB p. 70
translates it as "Angenehmer Arm", "Geschaetzter Mitarbeiter",
and the latter I have tried to render above.
- I read AA25 here, although the glyph on the door is a bit sturdy. 
Hence: "bekleidungspriest", priest who clothed the god (Faulkner p.227). 
With the collective .t again. 
- the last title was a puzzle: _xrp m nTr.w_ or _xrp im.y nTr.w_ made not
much sense to me. What a relief to find that the HWB does not know
either: p.615 xrp imy.w nTr.w = "*Leiter von dem, worin die Goetter sind 
[Bedeutung noch nicht gesichert]". It cannot denote the priesthood/temples
in general, I feel?; why else first mention the smA priests seperately? Are 
imy.w-nTr.w perhaps prophets or oracles? Normal priests were not thought
as being possessed by the gods, I would presume, or were they? As 
oracles and prophets tend to do politically sensitive utterances, it would 
perhaps be logically if our political friend would keep an eye on them ;).
 
Aayko Eyma



----------
From: 	Lauraine v Zyl Smit[SMTP:lauraine@adept.co.za]
Sent: 	13 September 1999 07:04
To: 	Ancient Egyptian Language List
Subject: 	Re: AEL Mehu's Door - lines (2)+(3)

Hi,
text 2 b

"Overseer of the Two Bureaus of the Royal Insignia"

Please see Gardiner pg 555 left column, 8th word, 'Tomb chamber", but for
our purpose "chambers"?

Cheers
Lauraine van Zyl Smit




----------
From: 	Jenny Carrington[SMTP:jennycarrington@hotmail.com]
Sent: 	13 September 1999 14:04
To: 	AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk
Subject: 	AEL Mehu's Door - lines (2)+(3)

Greetings All,

Here is my attempt at translating this text.

>(2) Text on the inner doorposts, two rows: titles

sDA.w bit.y smr wa.t.y imy-r rsw imy-r sDm.t nb.t
   Seal Bearer of the King of Lower Egypt
   Sole Companion
   Overseer of the South
   Overseer of all who hear  (ie. all the judges)

I had 'rsw' instead of 'Sma' . I missed the fine details of the sign. But 
either way refers to the same land - the South / Upper Egypt.

sDm.t - I thought was the Passive Imperfective Relative - 'who hears', - 
would that be possible?
[Gardiner paragraph 381 - "when the relative form is used as a noun, it may 
be qualified by the adjective 'nb' ".  His two examples have nb.t]

smr wa.t.y r nfr-HAt imy-r is.wy nsw.t
   Sole Companion to the Diadem
   Overseer of the two royal council chambers.

Wasn't too sure about this part. Since Sole Companion was already mentioned 
in the previous row,  I thought this time it might be connected to the 
following phrase - r nfr-HAt,  (everywhere else imy-r has the 'm' drawn, so 
I read it simply as 'r').
Diadem = crown = king.  (Sole Companion to the King)

imy-r is.wy Xkr.w nsw.t  - here at first I had not understood the last sign. 
(Xkr.w) Thanks Aayko, I found it after I read your version.
Xkr - to be adorned.
Faulkner has Xkrw nsw - Royal Insignia; but Gardiner has Xkryt nsw - King's 
ornament, title of a royal concubine. So what of the possibility of :
"Overseer of the two chambers of the royal concubine."
And if the king's ornament refers to concubine, is it possible the diadem 
refers to the Queen? Would it then be "Sole Companion to the Queen"?

But I guess crown and insignia fit better with the rest of the text.


>(3) Text on lintel above the inner doorposts: titles

Xry-Hb.t Hry-tp imA a smr wa.t.y
   Chief lector priest, Gracious arm (helper), Sole companion

sm xrp smA.t nb.t xrp m nTr.w
   Sem Priest
   Director of every Robing Priest.
   Director from the gods.


m Htp,
Jenny

jennycarrington@hotmail.com
http://www.oocities.org/SoHo/Nook/7916/ArtWorks.html
=====================================================




----------
From: 	Michael Tilgner[SMTP:mtilgner@knuut.de]
Sent: 	13 September 1999 22:13
To: 	AEL
Subject: 	AEL Mehu's Door - lines (2)+(3)

Dear Listmembers,

My translation is nearly identical to the ones of Aayko and Jenny, but I
have few different readings (difference to Aayko's translation indicated by
_..._):

(2a)
xtm.w (or: sDAw.ti) bi.ti smr wa.ti im.i-rA _Smaw_ imi-rA _sDm.t_ nb.t
"Seal-bearer of the King of Lower Egypt, Sole Friend, Overseer of Upper
Egypt, Overseer of all hearings"

The reading of M25 is Smaw "Upper Egypt" (Gardiner, Sign-list)
imi-rA Smaw "Overseer of Upper Egypt", HWB, p. 63

sDm.t "hearing, interrogation", HWB, p. 794
imi-rA sDm.t nb.t "Overseer of every hearing", HWB, p. 794

(2b)
smr-wa.ti iri nfr-HA.t imi-rA is.wi _Xkr[t]_ nsw.t
"Sole Friend, Keeper of the Diadem, Overseer of the Two Departments of the
Ornament of the King"

Xkr.t "'ornament/jewellery' (designation of women who were in the royal
harim)", HWB, p. 645
imi-rA is.wi n Xkr.t nsw.t "Overseer of the Two Departments of the Ornament
of the King", HWB, p. 51
Note: graphic transposition with honorific intent of Xkr.t nsw.t!

(2c)
mHw
"Mehu"


(3a)
Xri-Hb[.t] Hri-tp imA-a smr wa.ti
"Lector, Pleasing Employee, Sole Friend"

(3b)
sm xrp _SnDw.t_ nb.t xrp im.i.w nTr.w
"Sem-priest, Controller of every kilt, Controller of *that, in which the
gods are (?)"

SnDw.t "kilt", HWB, p. 832 - the sign in question is S26; not easy to find
out!
xrp SnDw.t nb.t "controller of every kilt (or: of all those bearing a
kilt)", HWB, p. 832

(3c)
mHw
"Mehu"

Best wishes,
Michael Tilgner
mtilgner@knuut.de






----------
From: 	Jenny Carrington[SMTP:jennycarrington@hotmail.com]
Sent: 	14 September 1999 02:00
To: 	AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk
Subject: 	AEL Mehu's Door - line 2


Another thought:

"Sole companion, Keeper of the Diadem,
Overseer of the two chambers of the royal insignia."

Sole companion / unique friend - indicates the trust the king had in whoever 
held this position.
He was also trusted with the safekeeping of the crown and insignia.
The two chambers could refer to the two rooms in which all the kings 
paraphernalia was kept.

Adolf Erman in "Life in ancient Egypt" describes this title  (Xkr.w nsw.t)  
as 'the "chief  metal worker and chief artist for the care of the royal 
jewels" - which at the same time formed part of the charge of the treasury; 
the superintendence of the clothes of the king was also vested in the same 
department.' p. 62

m Htp,
Jenny Carrington


----------
From: 	Geoffrey Norman Watson[SMTP:gwat@svrc.uq.edu.au]
Sent: 	14 September 1999 13:31
To: 	Ancient Egyptian Language List
Subject: 	Re: AEL Mehu's Door - lines (2)+(3)

On Sun, 12 Sep 1999, Aayko Eyma wrote:

> 
> b) s-m-xrp-*smA-t-nb-t-xrp-m-nTr {3x} <=>
> sm  xrp  *smA.t  nb.t  xrp  im.y(.w)-nTr.w  <=>
> Sem-priest, Leader of all smA-priests, Leader of 
> him/them in whom the gods are (or: him/them
> who is/are belonging to the gods).
> 
> 
> Comments:
> - I read AA25 here, although the glyph on the door is a bit sturdy. 
> Hence: "bekleidungspriest", priest who clothed the god (Faulkner p.227). 
> With the collective .t again. 
>  
> Aayko Eyma


Did you consider the possibility that the sign you read as AA25 might be
S26?

Geoffrey Watson
gwat@svrc.uq.edu.au





----------
From: 	Aayko Eyma[SMTP:ayma@tip.nl]
Sent: 	16 September 1999 20:32
To: 	'AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk'
Subject: 	AEL Mehu's Door 


Hi all,

Thanks for all the contributions: 
* Geoffrey and Michael: the S26 was of course on the mark. 
* Michael: note that Hannig has Sma for M26, and so does Brunner.
Brunner gives Sma for Upper Egypt, and so does Hannig in his
sign-list; but in the text of the HWB Hannig has Smaw for Upper 
Egypt. The glyph on the door is M26, not M25.  
* Lauraine: yes agreed, cf. Faulkner: iz = (1) tomb  (2) council chamber(?)  
(3) workshop , and Hannig: iz = (1) tomb,  mastaba, rock-tomb   
(2) administrative chamber, office, archive  (3) workshop, place of work 
* Jenny: I would agree that after the diadem, the royal insignia
would make more sense than the concubines.  Also because the
other HWB p.51  _imy-rA  iz_  titles deal with 'mundane' things
like workshops and food. 

Aayko Eyma





----------
From: 	Michael Tilgner[SMTP:mtilgner@knuut.de]
Sent: 	18 September 1999 14:00
To: 	AEL
Subject: 	Re: AEL Mehu's Door - lines (2)+(3)

Dear Aayko,

> * Michael: note that Hannig has Sma for M26, and so does Brunner.
> Brunner gives Sma for Upper Egypt, and so does Hannig in his
> sign-list; but in the text of the HWB Hannig has Smaw for Upper
> Egypt. The glyph on the door is M26, not M25.

You are right:

(1) The sign in question is M26, not M25!
(2) The reading of M26 is Sma. "Upper Egypt" was called Smaw as fuller
writings show. M26 is also used as an abbreviation for these writings, HWB,
p. 820, and thus must be read Smaw in the title.

(3) Correction to my translation of (3a):

Xri-Hb[.t] Hri-tp imA-a smr wa.ti
"_Chief_ Lector, Pleasing Employee, Sole Friend"

The _chief_ was somehow lost when I copied-pasted this phrase.

Best wishes,
Michael Tilgner
mtilgner@knuut.de




----------
From: 	Michael Tilgner[SMTP:mtilgner@knuut.de]
Sent: 	19 September 1999 11:26
To: 	AEL
Subject: 	AEL Reading of Mehu's title "Seal-bearer"


Aayko Eyma wrote about the reading of the title *xtm.w (*sDAw.ty) bi.ty
"seal-bearer of the King of Lower Egypt":

> - the reading of S19 is not certain to Egyptologists, as apparantly
> this title is never spelled out. It is either *sDAw.t.y or *xtmw,
> as "seal" is sDAw.t or xtm, "to seal" is xtm.

These uncertainties are discussed by Henry George Fischer, Inscriptions from
the Coptite Nome, 1964 (Analecta Orientalia, 40), Appendix B: On the reading
of S19 and S20 in titles, pp. 126-129

S19 "cylinder-seal attached to bead-necklace"
S20 "cylinder-seal attached to bead-necklace (as seen from the front)"

The reading sDA.wty for both signs: "A serious point against it is the fact
that no Old Kingdom writings of sDA(w).t or sDA(w)t(y) have yet been found
which exhibit either of these signs as determinative ... In all four of the
examples known to me, the determinative is instead S106 [(extended library)
rotated by 90 deg.], representing the seal without necklace ...

If xtm is the only root that is incontestably connected with S19 in the Old
Kingdom, the same is true of S20. From the very beginning of the Fourth
Dynasty onward these two signs are frequently interchanged, and the choice
of one rather than the other often seem to be dictated by considerations of
space and composition; thus S19 is generally preferred in combination with
the narrow sign R8 [nTr], and S20 is usually combined with the wider sign L2
[bi.t] ...

In brief, while the evidence for sDAw.ty is rather fragmentary, this and xtm
evidently appear in Old Kingdom titles of a rather similar nature... it must
be conceded that, on the basis of the Old Kingdom evidence reviewed thus
far, the root xtm is more probably involved in most of the ideographic
writings under consideration.

The problem must also be considered in the light of the endings which appear
in these writings... the -tyw ending appears in S20-G4 [the tyw bird] ...
and is frequent in the Middle Kingdom, when the variant S20-w-G4-A1-Z3
[S20-w-tyw] also occurs ... This Middle Kingdom writing is difficult to
explain in terms of the root xtm"

> Why btw did they reconstruct *xtm.w (AFAIK: "sealer") and not
> *xtm.y ("he of the seal"), analogue to sDAw.t.y?

If one tends to read S20 as sDAw.t, then the last examples imply the nisbe
reading sDAw.ty "the one who is sealing". On the other hand we have a
writing S20-w (HWB, p. 626) which - assuming the reading xtm - must be read
xtm.w. To make things worse, we also have a word xtm.y, HWB, l.c., which is
interpreted as "seal-maker" rather than "sealer".

Why -w in xtm.w? This is the OE variant of nisbe-forming (Edel,
Altaegyptische Grammatik [OE grammar], paragraph 343). The nisbe (=
adjective with -y) is explained in Gardiner, paragraph 79; note his Obs. "An
alternative ending -w survives [in ME] in some nouns ..." - Nisbe-adjectives
are often used as nouns (paragraph 81). The variation between i and w was a
common phenomenon in OE; in many cases it is difficult to decide which was
the original phoneme (Edel, paragraph 142).

Best wishes,
Michael Tilgner
mtilgner@knuut.de



----------
From: 	Michael Tilgner[SMTP:mtilgner@knuut.de]
Sent: 	19 September 1999 13:55
To: 	AEL
Subject: 	AEL Reading of Mehu's title "Overseer of all hearings"


Jenny Carrington wrote in her translation of section 2:

> ... imy-r sDm.t nb.t

>    Overseer of all who hear  (ie. all the judges)

> sDm.t - I thought was the Passive Imperfective Relative - 'who hears', -
> would that be possible?

Dear Jenny,

The translation of the word sDm.t in this title was discussed by Henry
George Fischer, Marginalia II: 1. sDm.t and wa in titles, GM 128, pp. 69-71
(1992).

Beginning with a title Hry-sStA n mAA.t wa which he translated as "Master of
the Secrets of that which (only) One sees", he applied the same pattern to
the title Hry-sStA n sDm.t nb.t and translated "Master of the secrets of
that which one alone judges".

Then he dealt with the sDm.t titles: imy-rA sDm.t nb.t "Overseer of all that
is judged" - "which seems to be more literally correct" (Fischer) - instead
of "Overseer of all (judicial) hearings".

Fischer: "Thus there appears to be no firm evidence for sDm.t 'hearing',
apart from a possible example of sDm.t-mdw."

Therefore sDm.t may be an imperfective relative form, feminine for neuter
use. However, Gardiner doubted that there existed a passive of the relative
forms (paragraph 388).

Best wishes,
Michael Tilgner
mtilgner@knuut.de






----------
From: 	Aayko Eyma[SMTP:ayma@tip.nl]
Sent: 	19 September 1999 17:55
To: 	'Ancient Egyptian Language List'
Subject: 	RE: AEL Reading of Mehu's title "Seal-bearer"


Dear Michael,

Thanks for all your interesting remarks of today!

The reason I took  *xtm.w  to mean "sealer" was that I thought
it was the substantivation(? the English term I do not know) ending .w 
(like in Sms.w, Hs(i).w, etc); so I was wondering why that one was
used instead of the nisbe form - overlooking the alternative nisbe
form in .w.  
The reason I translated *sDAw.t.y as "he of the seal" instead
of your  sDAw.ty  "the one who is sealing" is that I did not see
a verb SDAw for sealing in the HWB, only the noun sDAw.t. 
I suppose your option would be supported by the G4 writing
in the MK? 

kind regards,

Aayko Eyma


--------
From: 	Michael Tilgner[SMTP:mtilgner@knuut.de]
Sent: 	29 September 1999 22:18
To: 	AEL
Subject: 	RE: AEL Reading of Mehu's title "Seal-bearer"

Aayko Eyma wrote:

> The reason I translated *sDAw.t.y as "he of the seal" instead
> of your  sDAw.ty  "the one who is sealing" is that I did not see
> a verb SDAw for sealing in the HWB, only the noun sDAw.t.

You are right: *sDAw.t.y is derived from sDAw.t "seal, sealing", HWB, p. 792
and therefore its nisbe-form should better be translated as "he of the
seal".

Perhaps it is possible that this word can be derived from s.wDA "to let
someone/something be safe, to do someone/something good" (and similar), HWB,
p. 682 indicating the safe-keeping function of the sealing. This is a
causative of wDA "to be safe, unhurt, intact", HWB, p. 231. Causatives of
verbs which had w as their first consonant often dropped it: s.wDA -> s.DA
(Edel, Altaegyptische Grammatik [OE grammar], paragraph 442)

Best wishes,
Michael Tilgner
mtilgner@knuut.de







Line 5B





----------
From: 	Aayko Eyma[SMTP:ayma@tip.nl]
Sent: 	16 September 1999 20:32
To: 	'AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk'
Subject: 	AEL Mehu's Door - line (5B)


Hi all,
 
The next line has also one glyph I could not place.

(5B) text on the outer panel of the outer door-post, two columns: titles

(a)
r-p-a-HA.t-a-s-mr-wa.t-t-Xr-H-b-Hr-r-s-S-t-tA-A-n-pr-{stroke}-d-w3-dw3-
{house}-t-m-r-?-pr-{stroke}-sw-t-tp-Xr-m-r-Hw.t-wr-6-t-{house}
<=>
ir.y-pa.t  HA.t.y-a  smr-wa.t.y  Xr.y-Hb.t  Hr.y-sStA  n  pr-dwA.t 
im.y-rA  pr [-?-]  Xr.y-tp-nsw.t  im.y-rA  Hw.t wr.t 6   
<=>
Hereditary Nobelman, Local Prince, Sole Friend, Lector, Master
of the Secret of the (Royal) Morning-room/Robing-room, Overseer
of the Palace, Chamberlain of the King, Overseer of the Six Great
Mansions (Law Courts).

(b)
tA.y.t-sAb-TA(.t.y)-m-r-sw-t-sS-a-{scroll}-m-r-Snw.t {2x}-m-r-
pr{2x}-HD-i-mA-imAx-x-w-x-r-nTr-{god}-aA
<=>
sAb-tA.y.t.y-TA.t.y  im.y-rA  sS(.w)-a-nsw.t  im.y-rA  Snw.t.y
im.y-rA  pr.wy-HD  imAx.w  xr  nTr-aA
<=>
Vizier, Overseer of the Royal Record-scribes, Overseer of the
Two Granaries,  Overseer of the Two Treasuries, Revered One
with the Great God.


Comments:
- the only real problem is that glyph in (a), that looks like a ...
birth control thingie...and qualifies the building, apparantly with
honorific transposition,  pr-[?], so something denoting the king
(or a god)?? 
I simply could not find this glyph!  Any idea? 
So I just took it to mean plain "House" , that is "Palace".
- the rest are all standard titles, even if their true content
may be vague (at least to me). The Revered One is no political
title of Mehu, but denotes his blessed state after death.
- like in line 2b ("the Two  Bureaus of the Royal Insignia"), we 
have here two institutes that also are described as being dual: 
"the Two Granaries"; "the Two Treasuries". Was this a reflection
of the Two Lands - even though in practice there might have
been only one building per institute? Or where there really two 
seperate departments/buildings, one for UE and one for LE?
- one little question-mark was why sS is not plural; Faulkner 
and Hannig say sS-a is a person/job, a 'record-scribe', but then 
I would expect a plural or collective here (sS.w-a or sS.t-a). Why 
is that missing? HWB p63. gives Y3 as rendering ss.w in this title.
Or is it rather an infinitive here ("of the royal record writing")? 

kind regards,

Aayko Eyma


----------
From: 	Stephen Fryer[SMTP:sfryer@prcn.org]
Sent: 	17 September 1999 04:34
To: 	Ancient Egyptian Language List
Subject: 	Re: AEL Mehu's Door - line (5B)


Aayko Eyma wrote:

>
> - the only real problem is that glyph in (a), that looks like a ...
> birth control thingie...and qualifies the building, apparantly with
> honorific transposition,  pr-[?], so something denoting the king
> (or a god)??
> I simply could not find this glyph!  Any idea?

Aa14 = OK form of Aa13


--
Stephen Fryer
Lund Computer Services

**************************************************
The more answers I find, the more questions I have
**************************************************





----------
From: 	Geoffrey Norman Watson[SMTP:gwat@svrc.uq.edu.au]
Sent: 	17 September 1999 21:15
To: 	Ancient Egyptian Language List
Subject: 	Re: AEL Mehu's Door - line (5B)

On Thu, 16 Sep 1999, Stephen Fryer wrote:
> 
> Aayko Eyma wrote:
> 
> >
> > - the only real problem is that glyph in (a), that looks like a ...
> > birth control thingie...and qualifies the building, apparantly with
> > honorific transposition,  pr-[?], so something denoting the king
> > (or a god)??
> > I simply could not find this glyph!  Any idea?
> 
> Aa14 = OK form of Aa13
> 
> 
> --
> Stephen Fryer
> Lund Computer Services
> 

This would seem to be right, but (slightly off topic) could someone help
me by supplying the writing for the OK title 'librarian'?  I too was stuck
over this glyph, and while looking for it the only comparison I came across was
a poor illustration of a false door of one 'Qarta' from the reign of Pepi I.
(This is in an old (1930) guide book to the Br Mus - my access to books on
Egyptology is pretty limited.)  This door has the same title as in 5Ba.
Unfortunately there was no description, only a caption which says: Qarta, priest,
chancellor and librarian.  Since this was the only title with a pr glyph I
at first thought that the im.y-rA pr ... was 'librarian' but decided that this
was probably not the case - however I now can't work out which of the titles
*is* that for librarian!

Thanks

Geoffrey Watson
Software Verification Research Centre
University of Queensland
Australia




----------
From: 	Jenny Carrington[SMTP:jennycarrington@hotmail.com]
Sent: 	17 September 1999 13:55
To: 	AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk
Subject: 	AEL Mehu's Door - line (5B)


Hi Aayko and All,

I see the problem glyph in (a)  as 'gs' (Aa 14). See Gardiner p.598 for 
'imy-r gs-pr'  =  Overseer of Administration.

(a) - Column 1
ir.y-pa(.t)    Hereditary Noble
Ha.t.y-a       Local Prince / Mayor
smr wa.t.y     Sole Friend
Xry Hb.t       Lector Priest
Hry sStA n pr-dwA.  He who is over the secrets of the Robing Room.
imy-r gs-pr	Overseer of Administration
Xry tp nsw	He who is at the Head of the King
imy-r Hw.t-wr 6	 Overseer of the Six Great Mansions (Law Courts)

Adolf Erman, "Life in Ancient Egypt" (Dover) p.87;  'All the judges belonged 
  to one of the six great houses, that is to one of the great law-courts.. 
. .. and the chief of these great men, the superintendant of the south, was 
a member of all the six. At the head of this court of justice stood the 
Chief Judge, who was at the head of the whole jurisdiction of the country. 
The chief judge was always of very high birth; if not one of the sons of the 
king, he would be one of the "high priests of the great gods,"or a 
"hereditory prince," or at least a "real prince."   .. .. the chief judge 
held the highest appointment that could be bestowed under the Old Empire. He 
was the [tA.t.y], the chief of the whole administration - the governor, .. 
. the "leader of the great men of the north and the south," the "second 
after the king in the court of the palace." '

(b) - Column 2
Gardiner:   tAy.t.y = 'he of the curtain'  p.494,   (epithet of the vizier)  
p.599.       sAb = 'dignitary, worthy'
Faulkner:   tAy.t.y = 'The Shrouded One' (title of vizier). p.293.
Faulkner has sAb tAy.t.y with the meaning of 'Chief Justice(?)' p.209.

sAb tAy.t.y    Chief Justice
TA.t.y	       Vizier
imy-r sS-a nsw    Overseer of the King's Record Scribes
imy-r Snw.t.y     Overseer of the (Two) Granaries
imy-r pr.w.y-HD   Overseer of the (Two) Treasuries
imAx.w xr nTr aA   Revered one with the Great God

At first I had 'Revered by the Great God' but that would be imAx xr nTr aA, 
would it not?


m Htp,
Jenny




----------
From: 	Marc Line[SMTP:marc@bosagate.demon.co.uk]
Sent: 	17 September 1999 08:50
To: 	AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk
Subject: 	Re: AEL Mehu's Door - line (5B)

In article <01BF0082.D2CA8760@vp237-191.worldonline.nl>, Aayko Eyma
 writes

snip

>Comments:
>- the only real problem is that glyph in (a), that looks like a ...
>birth control thingie...and qualifies the building, apparantly with
>honorific transposition,  pr-[?], so something denoting the king
>(or a god)?? 
>I simply could not find this glyph!  Any idea? 

Snip

Hi Aayko

I have to admit that your description of the glyph has more going for it
that the suggestion that it represents two ribs of an oryx.  Perhaps it
ought to be known as an Egyptian Letter? :)

I think it's Aa14, which is an Old Kingdom form of Aa13.  Its use here
appears to be as "gs" in "gs-pr", which I take to mean something along
the lines of "region under the control of the royal household".

cf. Faulkner, p291
    Hannig, p906
    WB 5, p198

Best regards

Marc Line



----------
From: 	Aayko Eyma[SMTP:ayma@tip.nl]
Sent: 	17 September 1999 19:46
To: 	'Ancient Egyptian Language List'
Subject: 	RE: AEL Mehu's Door - line (5B)



>> - the only real problem is that glyph in (a), that looks like a ...
>> birth control thingie...and qualifies the building, apparantly with
>> honorific transposition,  pr-[?], so something denoting the king
>> (or a god)??
>> I simply could not find this glyph!  Any idea?

>Aa14 = OK form of Aa13

Thanks for the suggestion, Stephen. I had considered it but 
rejected this option as:
1) the 'opening' is at the wrong end [the point of AA14
is pointing in the start-reading direction, so points into the direction
to which animals etc look (at least in the HWB), so in the
opposite way this enigmatic sign does.]
2) AA14 is IMO in the architrave, line 3, and looks different
from this enigmatic one in the outer doorpost.

Yes, likely it is some OK variant of some glyph  - but it's not in the
Extended List either, I believe.

kind regards,
Aayko Eyma




----------
From: 	Aayko Eyma[SMTP:ayma@tip.nl]
Sent: 	18 September 1999 17:49
To: 	'Ancient Egyptian Language List'
Subject: 	RE: AEL Mehu's Door - line (5B)



>Aa14 = OK form of Aa13

Sleeping a night over it, I think your option is the only
possible one, Stephen, even though the glyph is written wrongly:
for the same group of titles is present in the architrave,
with AA14 written correctly:

im.y-rA  gs-pr  Xr.y-tp-nsw.t 

Faulkner:
gs-pr = administrative district (?), temple (?)
[for the latter, see Shipwrecked Sailer line 141, which had 
_sntr n gsw-prw_  "incense of temples" (Dr. Allen; AEL, Dec 24, 98)]

Hannig:
gs-pr = Verarbeitungsbetrieb, Manufaktur, Handwerksbetrieb; 
             Verwaltung

So the most likely is IMO: 

im.y-rA gs-pr =
"Overseer of the Production Centers of the Administration"

or the like. So the whole of production centers connected to
(under the control of)  the Palace  (more attractive to me
than your "region", Marc, as it can also take into account 
'processing' the incense of the Sailor [ergo: we loose the "temple"]) 

As not only Stephen but also Marc, Geoffrey and Jenny
voted for AA14, I suppose I can only bow - but not before
asking a whiping for the scribe who spoiled this splendid door
of Mehu by this error [once writing the glyph with wrong shape and
in the wrong directon is forgivable, but writing it in two different
ways on the same medium is not..."Consistency is a virtue, sir!" ;) ] 

>Qarta, priest, chancellor and librarian.  
>I now can't work out which of the titles
>*is* that for librarian!

Geoffrey: 
HWB p280 has:  im.y-x.t pr-mDA.t  "*controller of the library"
(mDA.t having V12 as det. )
Perhaps that was the title on your door?

While looking for V12 - I think our enigmatic glyph looks 
a bit like V62 (still wrong direction, but same 'wobbly' and non-pointy
shape). The HWB does not give a value - it's no variation of V12, is it?

kind regards,
Aayko Eyma




----------
From: 	Michael Tilgner[SMTP:mtilgner@knuut.de]
Sent: 	18 September 1999 21:32
To: 	AEL
Subject: 	RE: AEL Mehu's Door - line (5B)

Aayko Eyma wrote:

> >Aa14 = OK form of Aa13
>
> Sleeping a night over it, I think your option is the only
> possible one, Stephen, even though the glyph is written wrongly:

> asking a whiping for the scribe who spoiled this splendid door
> of Mehu by this error [once writing the glyph with wrong shape and
> in the wrong directon is forgivable, but writing it in two different
> ways on the same medium is not..."Consistency is a virtue, sir!" ;) ]

There is a special study of this problem; unfortunately I do not have it at
hand, namely

H. G. Fischer, The Orientation of Hieroglyphs, Part 1: Reversals, New York,
1977

According to Wiebach's study on false doors the direction of writing changed
according to (Fischer's) principles of confrontation, symmetry, and
concordance. The symmetrical principle can easily be observed on the columns
of Mehu's false door.

Not only complete rows or columns could be reversed, but also parts of them,
even parts of words, namely single hieroglyphs (Wiebach, p. 230 citing
Fischer, Reversals, pp. 63-77, 134-137).

If one looks at both columns with this inscription (second from left and
second from right) one notices that this sign is reversed in both (!)
cases - consistently. Therefore it is not a scribal error, but written
intentionally, whatever this might have been!

Best wishes,
Michael Tilgner
mtilgner@knuut.de





----------
From: 	Michael Tilgner[SMTP:mtilgner@knuut.de]
Sent: 	19 September 1999 13:52
To: 	AEL
Subject: 	AEL Reading of Mehu's title "Revered One"


Jenny Carrington wrote in her translation of section 5B:

> imAx.w xr nTr aA   Revered one with the Great God
>
> At first I had 'Revered by the Great God' but that would be imAx xr nTr
aA,
> would it not?

I think that imAx.w is the OE variant of a nisbe-adjective (Edel,
Altaegyptische Grammatik [OE grammar], paragraph 343), used as a noun.

Best wishes,
Michael Tilgner
mtilgner@knuut.de



----------
From: 	Michael Tilgner[SMTP:mtilgner@knuut.de]
Sent: 	19 September 1999 13:52
To: 	AEL
Subject: 	AEL Reading of Mehu's title "Overseer of the Royal Record-Scribes"

Aayko Eyma wrote in his translation of section 5B concerning the title
imy-rA sS.w a nsw.t "Overseer of the Royal Record-Scribes":

> - one little question-mark was why sS is not plural; Faulkner
> and Hannig say sS-a is a person/job, a 'record-scribe', but then
> I would expect a plural or collective here (sS.w-a or sS.t-a). Why
> is that missing? HWB p63. gives Y3 as rendering ss.w in this title.
> Or is it rather an infinitive here ("of the royal record writing")?

As you mentioned an overseer should be directing a collective; therefore a
plural must be expected. Why is it not written?

The plural in OE was not shown graphically in many cases, especially in
titles (Edel, Altaegyptische Grammatik [OE grammar], paragraph 271). Lack of
space may be one reason. One should read the title grammatically: imy-rA
sS(.w) a nsw.t adding the plural -w in parentheses to indicate that it was
not written originally.

Please note the honorific transposition of nsw.t in this title (Gardiner,
paragraph 57).

Best wishes,
Michael Tilgner
mtilgner@knuut.de



----------
From: 	Aayko Eyma[SMTP:ayma@tip.nl]
Sent: 	19 September 1999 17:55
To: 	'Ancient Egyptian Language List'
Subject: 	RE: AEL Reading of Mehu's title 	


Dear Michael,


>If one looks at both columns with this inscription (second from left and
>second from right) one notices that this sign is reversed in both (!)
>cases - consistently. Therefore it is not a scribal error, but written
>intentionally, whatever this might have been!

You're right the scribe is consistent on the doorposts, and on the 
right one the shape of the Aa14 sigh is at least okay (pointy)
- somehow I  was only looking at the left doorpost all this time,
don't ask me why! - 
but my point of consistency was over doorposts vs architrave.  
Speculation: were sharp pointy glyphs not supposed to point to the
door-opening where the tomb-owner would appear??

kind regards,

Aayko Eyma




Line 5A+6
From: 	Aayko Eyma[SMTP:ayma@tip.nl]
Sent: 	19 September 1999 19:24
To: 	'AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk'
Subject: 	AEL Mehu's Door - line (5A) en (6)

Hi all,

The next lines; the only problems lie in the last (3rd) line
of the architrave.


(5A) Text on the middle doorpost, two columns: offering formula

a) sw-t-n-Htp-t-p-Di-inpw-Htp-t-p-Di-xn.t-t-nTr-zH-tp-Dw-f-im-w-t-
{city}-nb-tA-Dsr-q-r-qs-s-{coffin}-t-f-m-Hr-Xr  <=>
Htp-Di-nsw.t  Htp-Di-inpw  xn.t.y  zH-nTr  tp.y  Dw=f  im.y  w.t
nb  tA-Dsr  qrs.tw=f  m  Xr.t-nTr  <=>
An offering which the King gives, an offering which Anubis gives, 
He [i.e. Anubis] who is at the head of the God's Hall [Place of
Embalming], He who is on his mountain, He who is in the place 
of mummy-wrapping, Lord of the Necropolis: may one bury him 
[i.e Mehu] in the Necropolis!

b) sw-t-n-Htp-t-p-Di-ir-ws-{god}-Htp-t-p-Di-x-p-{walk}-f-Hr-r-
wA-t-{3 x road}-nfr-r-t-zmA-mA-f-tA-r-imn.t-t-nfr-f-r-t-i-a-f-{stairs}-
n-nTr-aA  <=>
Htp-Di-nsw.t  Htp-Di-wsir  xpi=f  Hr  wA.w.t  nfr.w.t  
zmA=f  tA  r  jmn.t(.t)  nfr.t  ja(r)=f  n  nTr  aA  <=>
An offering which the King gives, an offering which Osiris gives:
may he [i.e. Mehu] walk on the Beautifull Roads, may he be buried 
in the Beautifull West, and may he ascend to the Great God!


(6) Text on the architrave, three rows: offering formula

a) sw-t-Htp-Di-inpw-Htp-Di-xn.t-t-nTr-zH-im-w-t-{city}-tp-Dw-f-
nb-tA-Dsr-q-r-qs-s-{coffin}-t-f-m-nTr-Xr-Hr  
<=>
Htp-Di-nsw.t  Htp-Di-inpw  xn.t.y  zH-nTr  im.y  w.t  tp.y  Dw=f  
nb  tA-Dsr  qrs.tw=f  m  Xr.t-nTr  
<=>
An offering which the King gives, an offering which Anubis gives, 
He [i.e. Anubis] who is at the head of the God's Hall [Place of
Embalming],  He who is in the place  of mummy-wrapping, He who 
is on his mountain, Lord of the Necropolis: may one bury him 
[i.e Mehu] in the Necropolis!

Comment: nearly the same as (5A.a), just with some slight
writing variations (nsw.t, Htp, Xr.t-nTr) and one change in 
order (tp.y Dw=f).  


b) sw-t-Htp-Di-ir-ws-{god}-Di-xn.t-t-Dd-d-w-{city}-
x-p-{walk}-f-Hr-r-wA-t-{3 x road}-nfr-r-t-n-t-imn.t-t-iAw-nfr
<=>
Htp-Di-nsw.t [Htp-]Di wsir  xn.t.y Ddw  xpi=f  Hr  wA.w.t 
nfr.w.t  n.t  imn.t(.t)  iAwi  nfr  
<=>
An offering which the King gives and [an offering] which Osiris
gives, He [i.e. Osiris] who is the foremost of Busiris: 
may he [i.e. Mehu] walk on the Beautifull Roads of the West,
attaining a good [old] age.

Comment: mostly different from (5A.b).
- Note no Hotep written for Osiris; error or valid way of writing?
- The door has the common swap of A21 for the more proper A19. 
- Is it _iAwi nfr_ "(in) good old age" (noun), or _iAwi nfr_ 
"attaining a good [i.e old] age" (verb; i.e. infinitive as predicate)?
I thought the latter, but HWB p.23 seems to suggest that _iAwi
nfr wrt_ can mean "in sehr hohem Alter", so as if no preposition
is needed.


c) sw-t-Htp-Di-pr-xrw-{bread}-{bread loaf}-{beer}-n-f-m-Hb-
-nb(?)-hrw(?)-Hb(?)-m-Aw-t-{3x scroll}-D-t-
{land/expanse}-m-r-gs-pr-sw-t-tp-Xr-m-mH-w 
<=>
Htp-Di-nsw.t [r] pri-xrw n=f  m Hb nb hrw [n] Hb m Aw.t  D.t 
im.y-rA gs-pr  Xr.y-tp-nsw.t mHw
<=>
An offering which the King gives: to bring funerary offerings to
him on every festival (and) feast day in the lenght of eternity, 
(to) the Overseer of the Production Centers of the Administration,
the Chamberlain of the King: Mehu.

Comments:
- Is it  pri-xrw (verb; infinitive, hence my [r]) or pr(.t)-xrw (noun)?
I thought the first was more likely.
- The second group of glyphs of the feast section was not totally
readible, all those 'baskets' (Hb or nb) and 'circles'. 
First I thought the circle was D12 (rather than x or zp), cf. HWB 520,
making just "to him on every festival in the lenght of eternity".
But later I thought that perhaps N5 could be an option. Although 
the 'diamond' is not visible, I thought that the second lowest basket
sign was the same in size as the first lowest sign (which clearly
has the 'diamond'); they seem to be smaller than the  nb baskets
in the rest of the inscription. 
- the gs-pr is very clear here. Why do just these titles appear here, 
I wonder, and not other more important ones (like Vizier). 

Aayko Eyma


----------
From: 	Aayko Eyma[SMTP:ayma@tip.nl]
Sent: 	19 September 1999 19:25
To: 	'AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk'
Subject: 	AEL Mehu's Door - Offering formula


Dear all,

The standard interpretation of htp-di-nswt is, I believe, that 
offerings given by the king to the gods, 'spill over" to his dead 
servants, as it were.
Borghouts says in his grammar about the offering formula: 
"the ancient, official fiction is this: a god receives (_n_ is 
often missing) offerings from the king; after the god is satisfied 
the offerings are passed on to normal people (like tomb owners). 
However, often the formula is phrased thus, that it can be 
interpreted that king and god are *parallel*  givers." (my translation)

[So _Htp-Di-nsw.t wsir_ as "an offering which the 
King gives *to* Osiris" OR  "an offering which the 
King gives *and* Osiris". 
Cf Lichtheim who has the latter; Q: why no honorific 
transposition of Osiris if this parallel 'and'  really was 
the meaning?; because of the qualifying titles to follow?).
 
Apparantly our variant _Htp-Di-nsw.t Htp-Di-wsir_ then
must be understood in the latter sense: "an offering which
the King and Osiris give". 

king-->god---->tomb owner
king & god --->tomb owner ]

Borghouts further says that the _di_ is a perfective
relative form (Hs(i)(.t)=f ); and about that form he says that 
the implied time _may_ also be future - "but according to 
others, such a form that refers to the future is a special
prospective relative form."

[AFAICT,  the  relative form would literally be a passive 
participium plus genitivus; so in this case:
Htp di nswt = offering [qualified as:] {the given (one) of [not: by] 
the king}"  => offering which the king gives ] 

Finally Borghouts says that the above is the standard 
opinion, but "it is not certain that a relative form figures here.
Alternatively, _di_ could be interpreted as an independant 
prospective sDm=f : "may the king give an offering..."

Hannig p.567 says that the standard "an offering which the
King gives" is less good, and he prefers "royal gift of mercy"
or the like; he also gives "prayer of the dead" (Totengebet). 
 
Now the latter comes closer to the  "may give..." I feel,
and seems more suited in those cases when  the phrase is 
followed by requests (for future offerings or for a good burial etc.)
"may the King give this offering, may the god give this
offering: "
So the offerings 'generating' the fulfilment of the request?

If the formula were only followed by requests (it isn't!) I would 
nearly say we could better pick Htp "mercy" than htp "offering":
"A mercy which the King shall grant, a mercy which the god 
shall grant:   " or
"A mercy which the King may grant, a mercy which the god
may grant: "
The god on earth and the gods in heaven having the power 
to protect the  tomb, its cult and  the deceased and to fulfill
his wishes.
That would be so much more logical than that odd "an 
offering which the king gives'.....Alas.... :)

Is that "ancient fiction" (passing on of offerings: king gives to 
god, god gives to tomb owner) really Egyptian or is it 'merely'
Egyptological theory to explain this phrase? 

kind regards,
Aayko Eyma


----------
From: 	Jenny Carrington[SMTP:jennycarrington@hotmail.com]
Sent: 	20 September 1999 13:01
To: 	AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk
Subject: 	AEL Re: Mehu's Door - line (5A) en (6)



>5A) Text on the middle doorpost, two columns: offering formula

Column 1
Htp di nsw Htp di inpw xn.t(.y) sH-nTr tp Dw=f
A boon which the king gives, a boon which Anubis gives, Foremost of the 
Divine Booth, He who is upon his Mountain,

imy w.t nb tA Dsr qrs.t=f m Xr.t-nTr
He who is in the Embalment Chamber, Lord of the Sacred Land, that he may be 
buried in the necropolis.

(The king and the god grant him the favour of a decent burial.)


Column 2
Htp di nsw Htp di wsir xpi=f Hr.y wA.w.t nfr.t smA=f tA r imnt.t nfr.t ia=f 
n nTr aA
A boon which the king gives, a boon which Osiris gives, that he may travel 
upon the beautiful roads,  that he may arrive at the beautiful land to the 
west, and ascend to the great god.



>(6) Text on the architrave, three rows: offering formula

Htp di nsw Htp di inpw xn.t(.y) sH-nTr imy w.t tp Dw=f nb tA Dsr qrs.t=f m 
Xr.t-nTr
A boon which the king gives, a boon which Anubis gives, Foremost of the 
Divine Booth, He who is in his the Embalment Chamber, He who is upon his 
Mountain, Lord of the Sacred Land, that he may be buried in the necropolis.

Htp di nsw Htp di wsir xn.t(.y) Ddw xpi=f Hr.y wA.w.t nfr.t nt imnt.t iAw 
nfr
A boon which the king gives, a boon which Osiris gives, Foremost of Djedu 
(Busiris), that he may travel upon the beautiful roads of the west in good 
old age.

Htp di nsw pr.t-xr.w n=f m Hb nb hrw nb m Aw.t D.t imy-r gs-pr Xr.y tp nsw 
mHw
A boon which the king gives, invocation offerings for him at every festival 
and every day in perpetuity (the length of eternity), the Overseer of 
Administration who is at the Head of the King, Mehu.


Aayko wrote:
>- the gs-pr is very clear here. Why do just these titles appear here,
>I wonder, and not other more important ones (like Vizier).

Maybe this position is the highest in the land next to the king.


m Htp
Jenny Carrington



----------
From: 	Michael Tilgner[SMTP:mtilgner@knuut.de]
Sent: 	21 September 1999 21:00
To: 	AEL
Subject: 	Re: AEL Mehu's Door - line (5A) en (6)


Dear Jenny , dear Aayko,

I am agreeing to your translation in general, but I have some remarks and
comments to the following phrases:

(5A)
a) ...
Aayko:
qrs.tw=f  m  Xr.t-nTr  "may one bury him in the Necropolis!"
Jenny:
qrs.t=f m Xr.t-nTr "that he may be buried in the necropolis."

qrs "to bury" must be in a passive voice here, but where is the w of -tw
"one"? Gardiner, paragraph 39: "To create the _passive_ of the sDm=f form,
an element -tw, sometimes more briefly written -t(w) is inserted immediately
after the verb-stem ..."

b) ...
Aayko:
zmA=f  tA  r  jmn.t(.t)  nfr.t  "may he be buried in the Beautiful West"
Jenny:
smA=f tA r imnt.t nfr.t "that he may arrive at the beautiful land to the
west"

smA tA "to arrive at the land = to be buried" This meaning was
obviously derived from the funeral voyage of the deceased to the west bank
of the Nile.
The adjective nfr.t belongs to imnt.t: "beautiful West".

(6)
b) ...
Aayko:
iAwi  nfr  "attaining a good [old] age"
> - The door has the common swap of A21 for the more proper A19.
> - Is it _iAwi nfr_ "(in) good old age" (noun), or _iAwi nfr_
> "attaining a good [i.e old] age" (verb; i.e. infinitive as predicate)?
> I thought the latter, but HWB p.23 seems to suggest that _iAwi
> nfr wrt_ can mean "in sehr hohem Alter", so as if no preposition
> is needed.
Jenny:
iAw nfr "in good old age"

I would tend to see the sign as A20 "man leaning on forked stick, less
senile than A19"; I can recognize the forked stick in the original
photograph.

My translation: iaw.w nfr "(after) becoming old in a good (perfect) way"

iAwi [4ae inf] "to become old" - iAwi nfr "to live to a good age", HWB, p.
23
iAw.w is pseudoparticiple/old perfective - form 3 m. sing.: Gardiner,
paragraph 309 -  "... _adjective verbs_ ... the old perfective expresses a
_state_ or _condition_ of things" (paragraph 311)
nfr used as an adverb
The MK variants of this wish (request) indeed wrote m-x.t "after" so that we
can assume this meaning here, too.

c) Htp di nsw.t pr.t-xrw n=f m Hb nb ra nb m Aw.wt D.t ...
"An offering, which the King gives, (namely) invocation-offerings for him on
every festival (and) on every day in the lenghts of eternity ..."

pr.t-xrw "invocation-offerings", HWB, p. 286 - My explanation of the sign
group following di is: O3, where X3 "loaf" and W22 "beer-jug" are placed to
the left instead below the combination O1 "house" and P8 "oar". Between the
two latter there is X6 "round loaf bearing mark of the baker's fingers";
this must be an OE variant of O3.

ra nb "(3) daily, every day", HWB, p. 460 - the sign is N5 "sun"
See also HWB, p. 496: hrw nb "(2) daily, every day (seldom instead of ra
nb)"

Aw.t "length (temporal)" - m Aw.t D.t "eternally, in the length of
eternity", HWB, p. 4 - Note that the determinative Y2 "OK form of papyrus
roll" is written three times, hence plural.


Best wishes,
Michael Tilgner
mtilgner@knuut.de






----------
From: 	Geoffrey Norman Watson[SMTP:gwat@svrc.uq.edu.au]
Sent: 	22 September 1999 09:19
To: 	Ancient Egyptian Language List
Subject: 	AEL RE: AEL: Mehu's false door


So far we have had a couple of cases where the glyphs in titles have been
obscure or needed a very good eye to decipher.  Looking again at the 
photograph I noticed that it includes a small part from the two side walls
flanking the false door. Whereas the right-hand wall is in pretty poor shape
the left-hand wall (from what we can see) is very clear.  This wall has
Mehu in painted relief with some of his titles also in relief. The glyphs
seem very clear - eg the sedge plant in flower.  Does anyone know whether
there is a published picture of this part of the tomb? If it repeats Mehu's
titles it may help to clarify or confirm our interpretations.

Just a thought.

Geoffrey Watson
Software Verification Research Centre
University of Queensland
Australia




----------
From: 	Michael Tilgner[SMTP:mtilgner@knuut.de]
Sent: 	25 September 1999 12:39
To: 	AEL
Subject: 	Re: AEL Mehu's Door - line (5A) en (6)


(6)
b) ... iaw.w nfr
"(after) becoming old in a good (perfect) way"

The Egyptian ideal age was 110 years.

Coffin Texts, spell 228:
"... As for any [man] who knows this spell, he will complete 110 years in
[life] ..." (Faulkner, Coffin Texts I, p. 181)

Papyrus Westcar:
"There is a man named Djedi who lives in Djed-Snefru. He is a man of a
hundred and ten years ..." (Lichtheim I, p. 217-218)

Statue in Karnak of Amenophis, son of Hapu:
"I am 80 years old, my favor with the King being great, and I will also
complete 110 years." (from the German translation of Helck, Urk. IV, 1828)

Note that Joseph lived 110 years (Gen. 50, 22).

Best wishes,
Michael Tilgner
mtilgner@knuut.de



----------
From: 	Aayko Eyma[SMTP:ayma@tip.nl]
Sent: 	26 September 1999 15:18
To: 	'Ancient Egyptian Language List'
Subject: 	RE: AEL Mehu's Door - line (4)


Dear Michael,

>(6)
>b) ... iaw.w nfr
>"(after) becoming old in a good (perfect) way"

I take the  (.w) is Stative?
Yes, makes sense, "after/while..." in subsentence refering back;
ending often not written.



Aayko Eyma


----------
From: 	Scalpill2@aol.com[SMTP:Scalpill2@aol.com]
Sent: 	26 September 1999 21:32
To: 	AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk
Subject: 	AEL Old


Can I ask how (grammatically) an adjective can be used as a stative?(iaw.w)
Can aA.kwi---I, having become big------- be written?

If Mehu is the prince and sealbearer during the reign of Pepi11, I understand 
he was killed on a southern expedition, his body returned later by his son, 
Sabni. If so, what is the significance of the reference to old age? All the 
references given(110 years etc) are to life on earth, not to the hereafter. 

Sam Lan.




----------
From: 	Aayko Eyma[SMTP:ayma@tip.nl]
Sent: 	28 September 1999 23:26
To: 	'Ancient Egyptian Language List'
Subject: 	RE: AEL Mehu's Door - line (4)


Dear Sam,

>Can I ask how (grammatically) an adjective can be used as a stative?(iaw.w)
>Can aA.kwi---I, having become big------- be written?
>If Mehu is the prince and sealbearer during the reign of Pepi11, I understand 
>he was killed on a southern expedition, his body returned later by his son, 
>Sabni. If so, what is the significance of the reference to old age? All the 
>references given(110 years etc) are to life on earth, not to the hereafter. 

**I'm not sure if I understand you correctly; I suppose the wish
to die (walk the roads of the hereafer) only "after having become old"  
would only make sense if the door was made BEFORE Mehu's dead. Did 
you mean that? 


Aayko


----------
From: 	Michael Tilgner[SMTP:mtilgner@knuut.de]
Sent: 	28 September 1999 22:12
To: 	AEL
Subject: 	Re: AEL Old

Sam Lan wrote:

> Can I ask how (grammatically) an adjective can be used as a
stative?(iaw.w)
> Can aA.kwi---I, having become big------- be written?

iAwi [4ae inf] "to be old, to become old", HWB, p. 23 is a verb

There is also

aA "to be great, to become great; great", HWB, p. 125

Please, note the following remark by Gardiner, paragraph 135:
"To most Egyptian adjectives there corresponded an adjective-verb, and
indeed it is highly probable that the adjective was simply a participle from
such a verb. Thus _nfr_ is a verb 'be beautiful, good' and the adjective
_nfr_ may well mean properly 'being good'."

For the form of iAwi see paragraph 310: it looses the last (weak)
consonant -i and then =w is added for the 3 m. sing. (paragraph 309).

> what is the significance of the reference to old age? All the
> references given(110 years etc) are to life on earth, not to the
hereafter.

This wish (request) must indeed be for the still living person for whom the
tomb is built.


Best wishes,
Michael Tilgner
mtilgner@knuut.de



Line 4


From: 	Aayko Eyma[SMTP:ayma@tip.nl]
Sent: 	22 September 1999 19:17
To: 	'Ancient Egyptian Language List'
Subject: 	AEL Mehu's Door - line (4)

(4) text on the central stela:  the deceased in front of the offering 
    table plus offering list


(a)
tA.y.t-sAb-TA(.t.y)-m-r-sw-t-sS-a-{scroll}-m-r-
Hw.t-wr-t-{house}-6-i-mA-imAx-x
(b)
sw-t-tp-Xr-m-mH-w
<=>
(a)
sAb-tA.y.t.y-TA.t.y  im.y-rA  sS(.w)-a-nsw.t  im.y-rA  
Hw.t wr.t  6  imAx(.w)  
(b)
Xr.y-tp-nsw.t mHw
<=>
(a)
Vizier, Overseer of the Royal Record-scribes, Overseer of the
the Six Great Mansions [i.e. Law Courts], Revered One,
(b)
Chamberlain of the King: Mehu

(c)
Apd 1000, Apd 1000, iH 1000, t 1000, pA.t 1000,
Hnq.t 1000, Ss 1000,  mnx.t 1000
<=>
(Offering list:) Two thousand (heads of) fowl, thousand (heads of)
cow(s), thousand (pieces of)  bread, thousand (pieces of) offering 
cake(s), thousand (butts of)  beer, thousand (pieces of) alabaster, 
thousand (pieces of) clothing.


Comments: 
- The titles are a selection of those in (5B).
- I see no difference between the two bird heads in (c); why two of them?
- The cow-head F1 is the abbreviation of E1, and thus can be rendered
iH or  kA; and perhaps even iwA ("oxen", which has E1 as det.
and is the fattened animal specifically used for offerings; see Lichtheim 
below). Picking the most general word seemed safest. (HWB has
iH for F1, but Borghouts has kA).
- The English analogue "1000 heads of cattle" seemed fitting,
seeing the Apd and iH glyphs. "Butts of beer"  is less
fitting, different measure/container, but the alliteration is nice ;).

Looking in Lichtheim, I note that offering lists tend to have this form:
"a thousand of bread, beer, cakes, oxen and fowl,
alabaster, clothing, incense/myrrh and unguent/ointment,
and all things good and pure."
with not all elements at every occassion represented and not
necessarily in the above order.

kind regards,

Aayko Eyma


----------
From: 	Jenny Carrington[SMTP:jennycarrington@hotmail.com]
Sent: 	24 September 1999 01:13
To: 	AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk
Subject: 	AEL Re: Mehu's Door - line (4)


sAb tAy.t.y	  Chief Justice
TA.t.y		  Vizier
imy-r sS-a nsw    Overseer of the King's Record Scribes
imy-r Hw.t-wr 6   Overseer of the Six Great Mansions (Law Courts)
imAx.w            Revered one
Xr.y tp nsw mHw   He who is at the Head of the King, Mehu.

In the list of offerings I wondered if we do have two different types of 
birds, 1000 ducks and 1000 geese, as there are also two different types of 
bread.

A suggestion would be:
s.t xA   a thousand ducks
gb xA    a thousand geese
The goose (G38) and the pintail duck (G39) are very similar.

Otherwise I have:
Apd.w xA 2  two thousand fowl

kA.w xA     a thousand cattle
t xA        a thousand bread
pA.t xA     a thousand round loaves
hnq.t xA    a thousand beer
Ss xA       a thousand alabaster
mnx.t xA    a thousand clothing


m Htp
Jenny Carrington




----------
From: 	Michael Tilgner[SMTP:mtilgner@knuut.de]
Sent: 	25 September 1999 12:02
To: 	AEL
Subject: 	Re: AEL Mehu's Door - line (4)


Dear Jenny, dear Aayko,

my translation of Mehu's offering list:

Apd.w xa Apd.w xa ka.w xa t xa psn xa Hnq.t xa Ss xa mnx.t xa
"thousand of fowl, thousand of fowl, thousand of oxen, thousand of bread,
thousand of beer-bread, thousand of beer, thousand of alabaster, thousand of
clothing"

Apd "(1) [in general] bird (2) [plur.] fowl", HWB, p. 7 - Gardiner's
sign-list, p. 473: H1 "head of pintail duck G39" "In formula of offering as
abbrev. of Apd.w 'fowl'"
Possibly two different kinds of fowl?

kA "oxen", HWB, p. 873 - Gardiner's sign-list, p. 461: F1 "head of ox"
"replaces E1 'bull' in the formula of offering"

psn "bread (especially "bread ('bread for beer', necessary for brewing; also
for the offering to the deceased)", HWB, p. 293 - the sign in question is X4
"roll of bread"; note its lengthy form, whereas X6 "a round leaf bearing
mark of the baker's fingers" is a circular sign. X4 (reading: sn) is also an
abbreviation for psn.

Ss "(1) alabaster (2) jar of alabaster", HWB, p. 834

mnx.t "clothing", HWB, p. 341 - S27 "horizontal strip of cloth with two
strands of fringe" is an abbreviation for mnx.t

For all these abbreviations - except psn - see also Gardiner, Excursus B
"The Formula of Offering employed in the Funerary Cult", pp. 170-173, here
p. 172

xa "1000" was not meant as a number, but had the meaning of "a large
quantity of".

Best wishes,
Michael Tilgner
mtilgner@knuut.de





----------
From: 	Michael Tilgner[SMTP:mtilgner@knuut.de]
Sent: 	26 September 1999 12:39
To: 	AEL
Subject: 	Re: AEL Mehu's Door - line (4)


F1-M12 F1-M12
Apd.w xa Apd.w xa ...
"thousand of fowl, thousand of fowl, ..."


Aayko wrote:
- I see no difference between the two bird heads in (c); why two of them?

Jenny wrote:
> In the list of offerings I wondered if we do have two different types of
> birds, 1000 ducks and 1000 geese, as there are also two different types of
> bread.
>
> A suggestion would be:
> s.t xA   a thousand ducks
> gb xA    a thousand geese
> The goose (G38) and the pintail duck (G39) are very similar.

I wrote:
> Possibly two different kinds of fowl?


Offering lists - the study of which is science of its own! - are rather (but
not completely) fixed lists of goods for the deceased. They had been slowly
evolving over time.

Mehu's offering list is an abbreviation of the the complete list of the OK,
which consists of more than 90 items. This list is structured in several
sublists: the food list, the salve list, the jar list etc. The food list
itself is divided in: the bread list, the meat list, the fowl list, the
drink list etc.

The standard fowl list:
srw (sr) "*graylag goose (Anser anser rubrirostris)", HWB, p. 728
Trp "white-fronted goose (Anser albifrons)", HWB, p. 959
s.t (sA.t) "*pintail duck (Anas acuta)", HWB, p. 648
sr -> srw
m.nw.t "pigeon, turteldove (Streptopelia turtur Isabellina)", HWB, p. 338

Unfortunately there is a variant reading of the first item
rA "graylag goose (Anser anser)", HWB, p. 455

Remarks to this list:
(1) It seems that sr and rA designate the same kind of species.
(2) The OE reading of the s.t-duck is m.zi.t (see also Wb 2, 136), another
reading is m.zA.t. There was a change of consonants A -> i in OE (Edel,
Altaegyptische Grammatik [OE grammar], paragraphs 133-134). The dropping of
the prefix m- was a common phenomenon (Hermann Grapow, Ueber die
Wortbildungen mit einem Praefix m- im Aegyptischen [On the word formation
with a prefix m- in ancient Egyptian], Berlin, 1914, pp. 10ff)
(3) Though sr and srw are seen as synonyms in HWB, their use in the fowl
list implies that they designate two different species.


Elmar Edel, Hieroglyphische Inschriften des Alten Reiches [Hieroglyphic
inscriptions of the OK], Opladen, 1981 studied the false door of a certain
iS.t(=i)-mAa, pp. 66-71, where we find a sequence of five (!!) F1-M12.
Comparing the whole sequence of the offering list with those of other false
doors he could convincingly demonstrate that each of the F1s represent one
species of the complete fowl list. In fact, the forms of the F1s differ from
each other (longer or shorter neck) indicating that, despite the fact that
they are all of the same sign, they should represent different species.



Guenther Lapp, Die Opferformel des Alten Reiches [The offering formula of
the OK], Mainz, 1986 studied this problem further ("The list of fowl",
paragraphs 213-216) with the following results:

(1) There are two variants of the standard fowl list (see above)
(2) Each item of this list if often abbreviated with the F1 sign. He gave
examples with 5, 4, 3, and 2 F1s!
(3) In some cases there are phonetic complements to the F1s, implying that
the first items are meant in the abbreviated lists. However, one could also
argue that the shorter list is only an abbreviation of the whole list.
(4) If there is only one F1 then the reading of the general term Apd.w
"fowl" is assumed (which must not be the case).

That this interpretation seems to be correct can also be seen on the
offering scene of Seshathotep, where the F1s have their names above them
(Joachim Boessneck, Die Tierwelt des Alten Aegypten, Munich, 1988, pl. 50)



CONCLUSION
There are two possible readings of the F1s in Mehu's offering list:
(1) sr (srw) 1000 Trp 1000
(2) rA 1000 Trp 1000
"a thousand of graylog geese, a thousand of white-fronted geese"

Best wishes,
Michael Tilgner
mtilgner@knuut.de





----------
From: 	Aayko Eyma[SMTP:ayma@tip.nl]
Sent: 	26 September 1999 15:18
To: 	'Ancient Egyptian Language List'
Subject: 	RE: AEL Mehu's Door - line (4)


Dear Michael,



>Apd.w xa Apd.w xa ka.w xa t xa psn xa Hnq.t xa Ss xa mnx.t xa
>xa "1000" was not meant as a number, but had the meaning of "a large
quantity of".

***The latter is why you have plurals? You will have seen
I had singular. "The numeral follows the noun, which, as a general rule, 
exhibits the singular  form" (Gardiner)
Why only the animals in plural and not the breads (you are following
Gardiner there)?

Aayko Eyma




----------
From: 	judith sebesta[SMTP:jsebesta@usd.edu]
Sent: 	27 September 1999 22:36
To: 	Ancient Egyptian Language List
Subject: 	Re: AEL Mehu's Door - line (4)

I had trouble reading the glyphs, not being able to enlarge them
sufficiently on my screen.  Could someone provide me with the sign numbers
for the following one that appears first in line a?:


>(a)
>sAb-tA.y.t.y


This has been a very profitable exercise for me and I appreciate all the
comments people have exchanged.

Judith Sebesta, Chair
Dept. of History
414 East Clark St.
U of South Dakota
Vermillion SD 57069

FAX: 605-677-5568       Phone: 605-677-5218
e-mail: jsebesta@usd.edu






----------
From: 	Michael Tilgner[SMTP:mtilgner@knuut.de]
Sent: 	28 September 1999 22:12
To: 	AEL
Subject: 	RE: AEL Mehu's Door - line (4)

Aayko Eyma wrote:

> >Apd.w xa Apd.w xa ka.w

>
> ***The latter is why you have plurals? You will have seen
> I had singular. "The numeral follows the noun, which, as a general rule,
> exhibits the singular  form" (Gardiner)
> Why only the animals in plural and not the breads (you are following
> Gardiner there)?

and, after some examples, Gardiner continued: "Frequently, however, the noun
shows the plural form ..." (paragraph 261)

"When the number is relatively small, the noun is in the plural and in
apposition to the word denoting the number; with the highest the noun is
rendered in the singular and introduced by _m_ or _n_" (and similar in
paragraph 262, 2).

Therefore the noun in singular is the rule. I followed Gardiner in his
excursus on the offering formula, p. 172 that H1 was an abbreviation for
Apd.w "fowl", perhaps understood as a collectivum?, and F1 for kA.w "oxen"
[BTW, see his footnote (4) that this sign was read iH in late times; and
Lapp, cited in my previous posting, preferred this reading for the OK,
too!], these words have plural strokes, when all signs are written.

One note to the writing: "... the method of writing the numeral after the
word denoting the thing numbered was purely graphic; doubtless it was
borrowed from book-keeping ..." (paragraph 261)


Judith Sebesta wrote:

> Could someone provide me with the sign numbers
> for the following one that appears first in line a?:
>
>
> >(a)
> >sAb-tA.y.t.y

E17 sAb "jackal"

O17 OK variant of O16 tA "Gateway surmounted by protecting serpents"
[In fact the standard sign has 7 uraeus serpents, whereas the sign in Mehu's
inscriptions has 5, on the offering table even only 4]

E17 is used for sAb "sab, *'judge'; *civil servant", HWB, p. 658
O17 is used as an abbreviation for tAy.t.i "taiti (*the dressed one or *the
one of the gate; Osiris, vizier)", HWB, p. 915
TA.t.i "vizier", HWB, p. 944

The whole title sAb tAy.t.i TA.t.i is literally "sab, taiti, (and) vizier"
or simply "grand vizier":
"It has long been realized that the title of tAy.t.i sAb TA.t.i represents
the highest administrative office in Ancient Egypt at almost all periods.
.. The word 'vizier' originally refers to the senior minister in a moslem
country, especially to the 'Grand Vizier', the chief minister of the Sultan
of Turkey; this term expresses the wide scope of the responsibility of the
ancient title as it cannot be associated with any specific functions as can,
for instance, that of overseer of works." (Nigel Strudwick, The
Administration og Egypt in the Old Kingdom, 1985, p. 300)

Please note that there is some inconsistency in which order the three titles
should be read.

Best wishes,
Michael Tilgner
mtilgner@knuut.de





----------
From: 	Aayko Eyma[SMTP:ayma@tip.nl]
Sent: 	28 September 1999 23:26
To: 	'Ancient Egyptian Language List'
Subject: 	RE: AEL Mehu's Door - line (4)

Dear Judith,

>I had trouble reading the glyphs, not being able to enlarge them
sufficiently on my screen.  Could someone provide me with the sign numbers
for the following one that appears first in line a?:
>(a)
>sAb-tA.y.t.y

*** O17-E17-G47

O17 is Old-Egyptian form of O16


>This has been a very profitable exercise for me and I appreciate all the
comments people have exchanged.

***Yes, I enjoyed it too! I think such overseeable short projects,
with thematic non-lingusitic intermezzos (titles, doors, offerings)
work well.


Aayko






----------
From: 	Michael Tilgner[SMTP:mtilgner@knuut.de]
Sent: 	30 September 1999 22:59
To: 	AEL
Subject: 	Re: AEL Mehu's Door - line (4)



Concerning the two bird heads: There are two offering scenes of a certain
Khnumti on the net, one has also two bird heads F1s, the other five (!!)
heads F1s.

http://ncartmuseum.org/collections/ancient/egyptian/

Just two illustrate my arguments on the reading of the F1s as members of the
fowl list.

Anybody who followed the Mehu exercise closely should now be able to
translate most of the offering inscriptions.

Best wishes,
Michael Tilgner
mtilgner@knuut.de




Go to EEF index page (EEF is the moderated email discussion list dedicated
to Egyptology; owners: Aayko Eyma and Geoffrey Graham)

Go to EEF Archives & Links: with Archives (sorted by topic)
and FAQs (Bibliographical Abbreviations and Links for Egyptological magazines et.al., Egyptological Bibliographies,
Transliteration Charts, E-mail addresses of Egyptologists, etc.)

Go to AEL index page (AEL is the moderated email discussion list
dedicated to the Ancient Egyptian language; owner: Mark Wilson)