egypt - ankh sign.pdf

7/27/2019 Egypt - Ankh sign.pdf

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/egypt-ankh-signpdf 1/25

Ankh-Sign, Belt and Penis Sheath

Author(s): John BainesSource: Studien zur Altägyptischen Kultur, Bd. 3 (1975), pp. 1-24Published by: Helmut Buske Verlag GmbH

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25149982 .

Accessed: 26/07/2013 10:03

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Helmut Buske Verlag GmbH is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Studien zur

Altägyptischen Kultur.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 145.236.15.206 on Fri, 26 Jul 2013 10:03:01 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=hbv

http://www.jstor.org/stable/25149982?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp





http://www.jstor.org/stable/25149982?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=hbv



CANKH-SIGN, BELT AND PENIS SHEATH

by

John B a i n e s

Writing sixty years apart J6quier1 and Fischer2 both concluded that the

origin of the nh-sign was not in an object of practical utility but in

a bow of purely amuletic character. For almost a century there have

also been attempts to identify the sign with some known article, but no

definitive solution to the problem has been found, and the true origin

may well be lost. However, just as in the early centuries A.D. the sign

became adapted to the Christian form of the cross, perhaps helped by

theN^

J? monogram,3 its very simplicity has allowed analogies to be

found between it and objects of everyday use -such as mirrors4

-and

modern scholars from Sayce5 to Westendorf6 have compared it with a co

vering for the genitals, worn primarily by men. In this latter case

the analogies are so various as to preclude a simple identification of

one form of the garment with the sign. This suggests that the posited1 Les talismans

-f-et <Q , in: BIFA0 ll, 1914, 121-43, esp. 134.

2 Some emblematic uses of hieroglyphs with particular reference to an archaic

ritual vessel, in: Metropolitan Museum Journal 5, 1972, 5-15; id., An eleventh

dynasty couple holding the sign of life, in: ZAS 100, 1973, 26; cf. already id.,

The cult and nome of the Goddess Bat, in: JARCE l, 1962, 12.3

Cf. e.g. M. Cramer, Das altagyptische Lebenszeichen im christlichen (koptischen)

Xgypten , Wiesbaden 1955, 10, fig. 7.9; Cramer (o.c, 49-5?) believes that the

'life' notion is the most important factor in the Christian use, but that the

cross (which does not become general as a symbol before the fourth century) also

plays a part. She does not seem to attach any weight to the monogram, whose

relatively late appearance might, however, be related to that of the4f

in

Coptic symbolism. See also Michaelides, Vestiges du culte solaire parmi les

Chretiens

d'Egypte,

in: BSAC 13,1948-9,

1951. 43-55.

**Jequier, in: BIFAO 11, 1914, 129-31; see also Schafer, Die Ausdeutung der Spie

gelplatte als Sonnenscheibe, in: ZAS 68, 1932, 1-7; below p-22.5

In: W.M.F. Petrie, Medum, London 1892, 33.6

Beitrage aus und zu den medizinischen Texten, in: ZXS 92, 1966, 151-4.







2 John B a i n e s SAK 3

identification, although correct, might be not so much the origin of

the sign as a fairly common linking of garment and sign. From this it

would not be possible to deduce with certainty anything about origins

unless there were further arguments, althougha

meaning which was attri

buted socially by the Egyptians might of course be a memory of the

correct origin. However that may be (see also below, passim), my present

purpose is to discuss visual analogies between belt, penis sheath and

cnh-sign,7 which, I believe, strongly support an extended form of Westen

dorf s hypothesis, but only insofar as the analogies seem to have been

explicit to some Egyptians of the historical period. Some of the material

appears not to have been touched either in the extensive literature on

the anh-signBor in recent studies of the penis sheath.9 The existence

of further documentation is the only justification for returning to the

subject, since J6quierfs excellent study of 1914 already contains most

of what can be said on a descriptive level.

In explaining the sign as a covering for the genitals Westendorf assumed

that, on the analogy of the ^sis-knot', the loop at the top was a later

addition,enabling

the wearer to hang the

sign

as an amulet (as on the

example Kofler-Truniger no. A 3110). Therefore the knot at the waist of

the original wearer would be the horizontal band of the sign, and the

hanging part the one or two strips: ~~|. It is, however, possible to

view the sign the other way up. In this manner it can be seen as a

penis sheath, with the loop approximating to the glans visible through

the garment, and the side elements perhaps the ends of a separate strip

7Jequier, in: BIFAO 11, 1914, 133, with n. 2, states that Cameron suggested that

the nh-sign might be an 'appareil protecteur' for the penis. Cameron in fact

saysthat '[the'on/c/z

symbol]is

represented bythe loin cloth ...'

(inM.A.

Murray, The tomb of two brothers, Manchester 1910, 44). This opinion was no

doubt derived from Sayce's (above, n. 5).8

Cf., in addition to the material cited, Schafer, Das sogenannte "Blut der Isis"

und das Zeichen "Leben", in: ZXS 62, 1927, 108-10; id., Djed-Pfeiler, Lebenszei

chen, Osiris, Isis, in: Fs Griffith, 424-31; Volten, Das agyptische -ft -Zei

chen, in: AcOr 25, 1960, 305-31; M. Erler, Das Symbol des Lebens im alten Agyp

ten, Miinchen, ORA Verlag 1966; Staehelin, Tracht, who characterises the problem

of the origin of theariji

as an 'alte Streitfrage'; Barta, Der Konigsring als

Symbol zyklischer Wiederkehr, in: ZXS 98, 1970, 6, n. 14, who endorses Westen

dorf 's view; Derchain, Anchzeichen, in: LdX 1/2, 1973, 268-9.9

P.J. Ucko, Penis sheaths: a comparative survey, in: Proceedings of the Royal

Anthropological Institute ... for 1969, London 1970, 27-67; Wildung, Two re

presentations of gods from the early Old Kindgom, in: Miscellanea Wilbouriana 1,

1972, 154-6.10

H.W. Miiller, Xgyptische Kunstwerke, Kleinfunde und Glas in der Sammlung E. und

M. Kofler-Truniger, Luzern, M&S 5, 1964, 29, with plate; photo also in Fischer,

in: Metropolitan Museum Journal 5, 1972, 14, fig. 20.







1975 cAnkh-sign, belt and penis sheath 3

used to tie the loop. As a sheath for, or rather symbolising, an erect

penis, the 'sign* would then be the right way up, particularly from

the point of view of the wearer (see also below p. 19 ). There is sparse

but cogent evidence for so interpreting some examples of penis sheaths

that resemble each other sufficiently to be called a type. It will be

necessary to treat them fairly fully.

figure 1

The first case is the decoration

wornby the two attendants of the

fantastic animals on the recto of

the Nacrmerpalette (fig. 111).

On

present evidence the date of this

is as early as any example of the

nh-sign, but new material could

change the picture. The object is

evidently added to a kilt, whose

line can be seen at the knees, and

is thus symbolic or ornamental ra

ther than functional.12 By analogy

with the representation of hair

(or a wig) on the figures1 heads,

the main part of the object may be

deduced to be of fur; its form will

be that of a conical tube tied towards the end by a separate element,

presumably not of fur, whose loose ends hang slightly downwards. The

fact that this earliest example is not functional suggests that later

cases will be liable to assume relatively free forms, expecially as the

context of its occurrence is not such as to indicate that it was worn

by normal people.

11Tracing from K. Lange

-M. Hirmer, Xgypten/Egypt^, Munchen l967/London 1968,

pi. 4.12 In view of this example and the poor attestation of sheaths on private indivi

duals it is necessary to view with scepticism the possible cases of a sheath

worn underneath another garment, adduced by Wildung, in: Miscellanea Wilbouriana l,

1972, 154. It would be curious to wear such an explicit garment in a concealed

position. For a parallel cf. E.E. Evans-Pritchard, Nuer religion, Oxford 1956,

I8l, quoted, with extended implications, by T.0. Beidelman, Some Nuer notions

of nakedness, nudity and sexuality, in: Africa 38, 1968, 123. The remark is

not Beidelman1s, as Ucko states, in: PRAI

1969,

52.

Further 'symbolic' examples of sheaths are those worn by Libyan women: Borchardt,

Sa3hu-rec II, pi. 1; 3 examples, bottom L, top L, bottom and middle registers

(figures without beards, middle register damaged). Ucko's citation of a garment

worn by the women of a Chad tribe (ibid., 47-8) is surely irrelevant in this

context.








figure 2a figure 2b

Between this case and the fifth dynasty there is a gap in attestation,

except for a rather doubtful case discussed below. All remaining occur

rences are on fecundity figures ('Nile gods'). The first such are on

figures from the pyramid temple of Sahurec (fig. 2a13). The form is

broadly similar to that on the Nacrmer palette, but the detail is in

sufficient for any deductions as to material composition. As with the

Nacrmer figures, the overlapping of the small strips near the end over

the main conical tube suggests that they are a distinct element. In

both cases the object is far too big to delineate the shape of a real

penis; although penis sheaths of comparable an larger size are known,

they do not tend to mimic closely the form of a penis.1* An example

from the temple of Neferirkarec,15 formally unremarkable, is the only

one with the original colour preserved. The main sheath is red and the

tie with the dangling strips (which do not follow the contour of the

loop) green. This might suggest that the sheath was of animal origin-

leather or fur - and the tie of a vegetable material; but although this

would fit with the Nacrmer palette, the meaning of the colours could be

entirely different.

413

Simplified tracing from Borchardt, Sa3hu-rec II, pi. 29. A further example on

an altar fragment from the pyramid temple (ibid. I, 50, fig. 52) gives no extra

detail. The fragments are misleadingly arranged in the drawing.

1i* Cf. many of the examples in Ucko, PRAI 1969, plates; see also K.G. Heider,

Attributes and categories in the study of material culture: New Guinea Dani

attire, in: Man N.S. 4, 1969, 379-91.15

Borchardt, Nefer-ir-ke3-rec, 29, fig. 29.








figure 3

Examples

on seated figures from the pyramid temples of Sahurec and

Neuserrec (fig. 316) show an interesting variation. In both cases the

strips near the end hang away from the main part of the sheath at

about 70 . Since the sheath is more or less flat in a seated position

gravity is presumably not forcing them to hang down round the circular

end of the garment; thus the strips are neither of a rigid material,

nor intended specifically to follow the contour of the end of the sheath.

The form is closer to the cnh-sign than that on standing figures.

figure 4

The latest example known to meis also the most explicit and

informative; it is on a seated

figure of H pj on BM 1346, a

stela of the reign of Amenem

hat V (fig. 417). This garment,

if placed vertically, resembles

ancnh-sign very closely. As

is natural in a relief of ela

borate execution, it is deco

rated with extra ornamental

detail which makes it seem

padded out-

as, for example Renaissance co-pieces were. The cnh-signs

16Tracing from Borchardt, Ne-user-rec, pi. 16. This plate is almost completely

retouched, so that the reproduction cannot claim great accuracy. Sahurec: Bor

chardt, Sa3hu-rec II, pi. 24

17Tracing from enlargement. Photo: British Museum, A guide to the Egyptian collec

tions, 1909, pi. 28; A general introductory guide to the Egyptian collections in

the British Museum, 1930, 330, fig. 176; Baines, The inundation stela of Sebek

hotpe VIII, in: AcOr 36, 1974, fig. 4 after p. 54. The drawing in BM Stelae IV,

pi. 22 is inaccurate in a number of respects.

The standing figure in Naville, Tb. I, pi. 28, no. A.p., might be thought to

contain a reminiscence of the penis sheath. Examination of the original reveals,

however, that the figure, which is damaged, is a fecundity figure wearing the

normal fecundity figure belt (pBM 9949).








hanging from the adjacent offering-table are not dissimilar - within

the naturally more rigid shape used-

and share the very thick lower

part, divided into two as in many examples of the sign. Whether the

form as apenis sheath is meant to resemble the archaic version with

two separate vertical strips, also found in a Middle Kingdom coffin

frieze which cannot be very distant in time,18 is not clear; the width

could be explained as functional or as a more or less symmetrical ele

ment to the front loop.19 It is also possible that the generously

looped side pieces relate to the loops on S , which were preserved

throughout Egyptian history, rather than those on early cnh-signs; they

could, indeed, be freely invented. It seems most plausible to assumethat an archaic form is behind the sheath.

Since the earlier form of the penis sheath as worn by fecundity figures

does not immediately call to mind the cnh-sign, and that on the thir

teenth dynasty stela is more than a simple elaboration of the earlier

shape, one must assume that another model was used, or that the designer

produced his own shape.20 The elliptical shape of the loops on the side

pieces is much nearer circular than on any example of as a hiero

glyph, although it is more than paralleled in the next example of a

sheath to be discussed. It could perhaps be understood as an 'ideal'

elaboration of the looping found, for example, in the first dynasty

vessel published by Fischer.21 On BM 1346 the garment is not a plau

sible sheath, since the tie in it would appear to come roughly in the

middle of the penis and not near the glans, and the whole object is

18Reproduced in Jequier, in: BIFAO ll, 1914, 123, fig. 9. A later example is in

the decoration of a catafalque from the second intermediate period: J.J. Tylor,The tomb of Sebeknekht, London 1896, pi. 2 Schafer, Principles of Egyptian

art, Oxford 1974, pi. 24.1/40. A case on a Buhen rock drawing (Smith, The rock

inscriptions of Buhen, in: JEA 58, 1972, 49, no. 23 -pi. 25.I, fig. 8.7) and

contemporary occurrences on the stelae Philadelphia E 10983, 10989 and one

further must be of comparable date. The clustering of examples at one site

suggests that the form is a local variant; why it should occur in this particular

place is a matter for speculation.-

See also below, p. 22.19 It cannot be assumed that the lower half of the archaic form is solid with an

opening at the bottom, as such anobject would be shown with a horizontal line

joining the two verticals. Cf. Schafer, Principles, 266, fig. 281/263.20

The form of fig. 1 is a better starting point for BM 1346 than that of fig. 2a,but still it is scarcely close enough to the hieroglyph to have suggested the

modification without separate knowledge of the connection.21 In: MMJ 5, 1972, 5-15.








too large.22 Like most known forms, it was probably divised at a time

when realpenis

sheaths were nolonger

worn inEgypt.

The resemblance

to ancnh-sign,

sounter to nature, is thus probably the creation of an

artist who knew that sign and sheath were associated and that fecundity

figures could wear a sheath, but did not know its real shape; so he

showed something resembling the sign as closely as possible. But if

he thought that sign and sheath were in some way equivalent, it does

not follow that he considered the sheath to be the origin of the sign,

or vice versa. Why the sheath resembles a form of the sign found prin

cipally in the first two dynasties remains an enigma.

jftH

figure 5

After the more or less unequivocal

cases of sheaths, aproblematic

one

may be discussed. This is on a figure

of Djoser from the series of relief

panels in the step pyramid and south

tomb (fig. 523) . The clear penis sheaths

in the relief series (below p.12 ) pro

vide the justification for assuming

that a king could wear the garment.

Here the shape of the tip of the dagger

stuck in the king's belt is extremely

close to that of the penis sheath in

BM 1346 and, interestingly, resembles

the other instances of the type less clearly. The placing of the dagger

22 If the practicalities of wear were ever considered the whole penis was probably

imagined to fit into the tube part of the sheath, and the pompom was a decora

tiveappendage.

The overall shape of the sheath is similar to that of most other variants known;

the narrowing and flaring at the bottom is obviously likely to be in imitation

of the natural form of a penis. It should be noted that the scrotum is mostly

ignored in pictures of penis sheaths. It is, however, found on a few late pre

dynastic reliefs (e.g. Gebel el-cAraq Knife: Asselberghs, Chaos, pi. 41; 'Beirut

palette' [authenticity doubtful], ibid., pi. 104) in forms that are representa

tionally very striking, iiie later absence of this detail suggests that the sheath

was shown more schematically in the dynastic period.23

Tracing from Firth-

Quibell, Step Pyramid II, pi. 17. This and the remaining

tracings from the volume (fig. 7-8) suffer from the poor definition and awkward

lighting of the originals, and much in them is tentative. They are temporary

expedients in default of line drawings of the reliefs themselves.

A parallel to fig. 5, without the looped decoration at the end, is on a relief

of Mentuljotpe III: Wolf, Kunst, 361, fig. 306. Here as on the Djoser figure,

the attributes of mks and mace are an index of the king's divinity, cf. AcOr

36, 1974, 38-54, esp. n. 24.








at precisely the same point on the figure's kilt as a sheath would come

makes it virtually certain that the formal allusion is intentional.

What cannot be decided from the relief alone is whether what is shown

is the dagger itself or its sheath. The latter is more probable, simply

because no real dagger would be of that shape. It is also easier to

explain the variation with the companion relief ,2t* which does not show

this detail, if the dagger is assumed to be basically the same. No two

of these reliefs are identical, but the pairs are basically similar;

so variant sheaths are more likely than dagger and non-dagger. The im

plied symbolic equation: dagger sheath =penis sheaths is of great

interest, and obviously suggests further that dagger

=

penis. It is,

indeed, morelogical

to assume that the latter produced the former,

both because sheaths are secondary to what they sheathe, and because-

so far as I know-

no further evidence for this equivalence of sheaths

in Egypt can be adduced, whereas various a priori arguments may be made

for the equivalence of the objects. Such associations are, of course,

Freudian commonplaces, and the point cannot be gainsaid simply by saying

that Egyptian evidence does not support it. What is relevant here is

the question of how often and in what contexts the connection was ex

plicitly acknowledged.25 As a possible argument along these lines it

may be noted that, except in martial scenes, daggers in the belt are

rare as part of the royal insignia; they are, on the other hand fairly

frequently attested both archaeologically26 and iconographically for

dead kings. Since rebirth to virility is a frequent motif the presence

of the dagger on mummies and in funerary reliefs could be interpreted

suitably as referring to the penis. No such allusion is, however, to be

found in the decoration of dagger sheaths.

The fact that most examples of the sheath form under discussion are on

fecundity figures has some implications worth discussing. It is not

specific to one figure but to the genre, as is clear from the fact that

24Ibid., pi. 40. The sceptre and mace crossing the dagger may obscure the decdil.

25 For a parallel cf. Leach, Magical hair, in: JRAI 88, 1958, 147-64; Hallpike,

Social hair, in: Man N.S. 4, 1969, 256-64; R. Firth, Symbols public and private,

London 1973, 262-98.26

An obvious example is the mummy of Tutcankhamun. The daggers are Carter obj.nos. 256k, 256dd. On the possible significance of iron in this context cf.

Wainwright, Iron in Egypt, in: JEA 18, 1932, 13; id., The coming of iron, in:

Antiquity 10, 1936, 12-13; E. Graefe, Untersuchungen zur Wortfamilie bj3, Koln

1971, 18-18.








it occurs with figures of various names: s*m0w (fig. 2a), t3-mhjw,27

Hcpj (BM 1346). It is therefore simplest to explain it as a rare early

alternand for the belt with strips.28 The reasons for such an alter

nation are unknown, but it should be noted that in all extant cases

the figure with the sheath is the first or only one in its group, so

that the evidence is consistent with the sheath's having a superior

status to the belt with strips. A penis sheath both conceals and exhi

bits the penis:29 the belt's main function is simply concealment. This

is shown by the fact that, in cases where the form as depicted would

in reality not conceal the penis, the penis is by no means always shown.

Paradoxically, in a few cases where the penis is visible it would notin fact be seen (e.g. fig. 63 ) . These examoles confirm that figures

figure 6

27Fig. 3, the name being supplied by the plant held. The words htpwt nbwt and

df3w behind the two figuresare not their names but the benefits they are

implicitly bringing.28 The form of the belt with

strips

was

beingmisunderstood or

misinterpretedon

fecundity figures by the fifth dynasty, cf. Westendorf, Amenophis IV. in Ur

gottgestalt, in: Pantheon 21, 1963, 275-6 (the 'konigliche Nilgottstatuen1cited are not in fecundity figure form). This suggests that the later development occurs at a pictorial level, often without knowledge of the actual garmentor its function. Consideration of the alternation of belt and sheath in this

context should strictly therefore be confined to the Old Kingdom.

An indication of the degree to which garments that are relatively rare in cer

tain contexts may be misunderstood is given by a pair of figures on a Middle

Kingdom relief from Elephantine: Kaiser et al., in: MDAIK 28, 1972, pi. 41 a;these have a belt with two strips in the form of penis sheaths (in addition to

a loin cloth protecting the buttocks). The 'penis sheath1 is in the 'standard1

form, not that found onfecundity figures. The fact that the artist produced

such a palpable absurdity suggests that he was unaware of the function of a

penis sheath.29

Cf. examples cited by Ucko, in: PRAI 1969, passim.30

Tracing fromWresz., Atlas III, 52.







10 John B a i n e- s SAK 3

wearing the garment are not epicene31or eunuchs.32 Cases where the

genitals are paradoxically visible (which do not occur on fecundity

figures, probably in part because the roll of fat below the belt con

flicts with representing the genitals) are no doubt to be classed with

the more general phenomenon of 'false transparency'.33 At all events,

the garment must in some respects be a polite substitute for the penis,

and so meanings attaching to the penis- and a fortiori to the penis

sheath-

may also attach to it. The garment can be worn in addition

to a kilt of another type,3X* which shows that it acquired a value of

its own. The rather 'learned' character of the pieces on which this

occurs does not suggest that this symbolism was widespread. But whatever these meanings may be, the occurrence of the belt on socially in

significant figures and its later near-eclipse show that it was not

held in high esteem as a symbol. Similarly, fecundity figures are the

lowest in status among non-human beings in Egyptian temple relief.

Knowledge and use of the garment as a symbol were probably early or

archaistic.

Restrictions in the symbolic range of the belt with strips should not

be extended to the penis sheath. Different forms of the sheath may have

different symbolic connotations, and deductions about the meaning of

the object as worn by fecundity figures should not automatically be

extended to the form worn, for example, by the statue Cairo CG 38068.35

On grounds of status one would not necessarily expect fecundity figures

to wear the same sheaths as major divinities, and in fact they do not.36

The material relating to the penis sheath is inadequate for any proper

typology.

31 As implied by Westendorf, in: Pantheon 21, 1963, 275.

32 Cf. F. Jonckheere, L'eunuque dans l'figypte pharaonique, in: Revue de l'histoire

des sciences et leurs applications 7, 1954, 145, and the remarks of Kadish, Eu

nuchs in ancient Egypt?, in: Fs Wilson, 58.33

Schafer, Principles, 127 f. 121 f.3 *

E.g. Brooklyn 51.230,: [J. D. Cooney], Five years of collecting Egyptian art

1951-1956, The Brooklyn Museum 1956, 30-31; pi. 55. Examples of this phenomenon

on fecundity figures may always be mistakes, though on as carefully composed

and executed a relief as MMA 25.6 (Hayes, Scepter I, 180, fig. 110) such a

solution is very much a pis-aller.35

Daressy, Statues de divinites, 23; pi. 6.36

For another example of such distinctions cf. Gell, Penis sheathingand

ritualstatus in a west Sepik village, in: Man N.S. 6, 1971, 165-81. Penis sheaths

may carry them like any other form of clothing.








The fecundity figure data are not the only ones relevant to the con

figure 7

sideration of thecnh-sign.

There is also the

possibility, examined by Westendorf, of 'read

ing' it the right way up on a figure. The sta

tuette Brooklyn 58.19237 shows a god wearing

a penis sheath which may be interpreted in this

way (fig. 7). Drawn out as a diagram, with the

belt shown as a pair of lines, it gives five

strands:(||

. This might suggest that the

loop on the sign was the belt itself, shown

the only unambiguous way an Egyptian could,38

and the straight side pieces would be the two

hanging strips of the garment, schematically straight. The prototype

of such a form would be very close to fig. 7. But the alternative possi

bility of taking the top loop as an added element may find some confir

mation in a rare form of the cnh-sign, found on the stela Cairo CG

2003839 and the British Museum stela of Tjetji*0: jk. This form

cannot be explained as a mistranscription from the hieratic,41 and so

is likely to bea

variant of the hieroglyph, however rare. The existenceof these examples removes Jfcquier's objection,**2 already disregarded

by several writers, that the 'stiff side projections of the sign could

not originate in the floppy strips of cloth of the belt. Whatever the

explanation of the stiff projections, the floppy strips occur on the

sign, and may be omitted in the standard form for a variety of reasons.

The form also supports Fischer's suggestion that an early case of m

is simply a variant of #. , and to be read Qnh.*3 The form on the

later stela may well be the product, from a palaeographical point of

37Wildung, in: Miscellanea Wilbouriana 1, 1972, 14-15; photo also in B.V. Bothmer

-

J. L. Keith, Brief guide to the department of ancient art, The Brooklyn Museum

1970, 24. Fig. 7 is traced from the latter.38 The non-circular form would be unexpected, but cf. below, p. 21 .

39 Most recently: H. Brunner, Hieroglyphische Chrestomathie, Wiesbaden 1965,

pi. 8 (with bibliography).** BM 614: PM I2/2, 596, no. 7. Here the sign reads ms. On the possible relevance

of this cf. below n. 44.41

Cf. the forms in M811er, Palaographie II, 51, no. 534.*2 In: BIFAO 11, 1914, 127-8.43 In: MMJ 5, 1972, 15. The validity of Fischer's assumption in his fig. 14 that

SL and flh are the same object with the lateral strips turned different ways

is doubtful. By his own admission it is contradicted by the vessel he publishes,

as by other early examples, and it rests in any case on the hypothesis that

the signs reproduce 'views' of what they represent.








view, of a fusion or confusion of 4t and > m might also have

influenced its shape.44

figure 8 figure 9

The garment on Brooklyn 58.192 is probably the same as that worn by

Djoser in two of the reliefs from the step pyramid complex (fig. 8-9).45

Jn these there seems to have been an attempt to show the way in which

the garment was fastened and attached to the penis. The detail is not

free from inconsistencies,46 so that it is hard to see what precisely

was intended. The sheath is smaller than that on the statuette, and

the scrotum is shown; these differences may be the result of an attempt

to make the form on the statuette more impressive (see also above n. 22).

There is one further hypothetical case of the garment on a king: the&3-statue of Awibrec Hor.47 In good colour photographs this shows clear

traces of two outer strips in approximately the samepositions

as on

****The ms-sign j|| , although strikingly similar in shape to the forms discussed

and to the belt with strips, does not as far as I know alternate with any of

them. It is made of fur (cf. Gardiner, EG 465 no. F.31),

as I suggest that

the 'penis sheath' on the Nacrmer palette probably was.

*5Tracings from Firth -

Quibell, Step Pyramid II, pi. 15 (fig. 8). 42 (fig. 9).See also above, n. 23.

**6 Some of these may ultimately have been eliminated in plaster and paint.t*7 CG 259; cf. comments

by Borchardt,

Statuen und Statuetten

I, 166, esp.

n. 7.

There are two nail holes above the penis, presumably for attaching another gar

ment or part of the same one. For colour photographs cf. W. Westendorf, Das

alte Xgypten, Baden-Baden 1968, 96; [S. Donadoni], Egyptian Museum Cairo, Lon

don etc. 1970, 80.








the Brooklyn statuette. The missing central part of the garment must

be one of two: the normal belt with strips, or the penis sheath with

strips. The belt makes no obvious sense and is not found on kings,

whereas the sheath is known from the examples cited, and would obviously

be appropriate. The Djoser reliefs show a ritual of regeneration in a

mortuary context, and the same associations would be meaningful here.

The divine wig on the statue also places it, along with all other re

presentations of the royal k3, in a context more nearly divine than

is normal for the king.1*8 It is perhaps of relevance that one of the

few other examples of a king in the divine wig is on the well-known

statue ofDjoser

from the north side of thestep pyramid.4*9

The associ

ations of the k3 with sexual fertility should also be considered.50

By analogy with the rare form of the hieroglyph it is possible to see

in the Brooklyn statuette and parallel cases an allusion to the nh

sign as a belt with strips to which a penis sheath has been added.

Early ^nh-sign appear to be made of a single piece of material,51 but

already by the third dynasty forms are found that are evidently meant

to consist of more than one piece.52 So it is perfectly legitimate to

see an

cnh-sign

in acomposite object of the same date.

Whichever of the views just suggested be adopted, the type on the

Brooklyn statuette will pose a further problem: does the sheath itself

or the belt provide the more important analogy with the sign?-

and

which comes first? The thicker vertical stroke is divided in careful

examples, but it is none the less possible that an Egyptian could under

stand it as a sheath with some sort of decoration, rather like the

bottom part of the one in BM 1346, with the rest as its necessary appur

tenances. The alternative assumption, that the analogy is with the belt

with strips, has an implication worth considering: this garment, which

later has an independent formal history, might be a substitute for the

penis sheath, in which the sheath, the central element, was replaced by

one or more extra strips- or it might be the accompanying equipment

without the sheath. The form of the garment must be briefly surveyed.48

Cf., for some, Barguet, Au sujet d'une representation du ka royal, in: ASAE 51,

1951, 205-15. Note also that the royal k3 is frequently shown in sd-festival

contexts.49

E.g. Lange-

Hirmer, Xgypten/Egypt , pi. 16-17. This figure is in modified sd

festival clothing, cf. E. Hornung et al., Studien zum Sedfest, AH 1, 1974, 74.

50 Cf. e.g. Barguet (n. 48 above); Helck, Zu den theophoren Eigennamen des Alten

Reichs, in: Z&S 79, 1954, 28; U. Schweitzer, Das Wesen des Ka ..., XF 19,

1956, 71-3.51

Fischer, in: MMJ 5, 1972, 5-15

52 Firth -Quibell, Step Pyramid II, pi. 16 (personified cnh). 42 (cnh held by

vulture).








It can have from one53 to six (fig. 654) strips hanging down, although

three and four are commonest. Where the number of strips is even they

tend to separate into pairs (e.g. fig. 2b). The form with three strips,

which cannot consist of only one piece of cloth unless the rendering

is very schematic, is found already on the verso of the Nacrmer pa

lette.55 Cases where two stripsare shown could almost always be taken

to be simplifications, as the two mostly align neatly on the thighs of

the wearer.56 The method of tying the central knot is scarcely ever

shown in detail. The garment is almost always worn by relatively low

ranking figures, and its widespread use is confined to the Old Kingdom.57

It is foundvery occasionally

on deities.58Although

it does not seem

rigidly to define the status of its wearers, it is clear that this status

is not high. There is a most striking form, found most clearly at Meir,59

which is relevant for the argument here: a garment that is simply a

strip of cloth looped at the waist with the two ends hanging forward,

leaving the genitals exposed. Since the genitals of fecundity figures

do not appear to be exposed, this disposition supports the assumption

that a two-strip form is schematic. It looks very much as if the Meir

variant lacks a further element to cover the genitals, and that the

complete garment therefore consits of more than one part.

It can, therefore, be seen that, although the original of the belt with

strips might be explicable on the lines of Barta's or Fischer's draw

ings,60 it is more likely that most forms are more complex; otherwise

the outer strips would have to be looped. The widespread presence of

a tongue of material projecting above the belt is incompatible with an

object made of a single strip of material. So it is a reasonable hypo

thesis that the central strip or strips might be a substitute for a

penis sheath. The forms of the sheath itself that show analogies with

the cnh-sl.gn are not worn with strips, and do not conflict with such

53E.g. von Bissing, La chambre des trois saisons du sanctuaire du roi Rathoures

(Ve dynastie) a Abusir, in: ASAE 53, 1956, pi. 3 d after p. 338; Lacau-

Chevrier,

Sesostris Ier, pi. 12. 27; Posener, Premiere domination perse, pi. 4.st* See above, n. 30; also Jequier, Pepi II, 1/2, fig. 1.55 In e.g. Lange

-Hirmer, Xgypten/Egypt , pi. 5.

56E.g. Posener, Premiere domination perse, pi. 5.

57 In the New Kingdom it is worn in conjunction with a back piece probably of leather,

covering the buttocks; e.g. Davies, Rekh-mi-Rec II, pi. 39.58

Naville, Deir el Bahari II, pi. 55 (two examples); Calverley, Abydos III,

pi. 10. 11.59

Blackman, Meir II, pi. 3 =25,2. For other examples cf. Wresz., Atlas I, 405;

III, 39B. 41.60

Z'AS 98, 1970, 6, fig. 5; MMJ 5, 1972, 13, fig. 14.








an association. The suppression of the sheath could be explained on

grounds of status: the evidence for the garment in the dynastic period

is singularly sparse, but it appears not to be worn by native Egyptians,

being reserved for divinities, foreigners, and occasionally the king.61

Of these three categories only the foreigners are likely to have been

seen wearing it. If this is accepted it may go some way towards explain

ing why the belt with strips, which produces the closest analogy with

the nh-sign, is mostly worn by humble people, despite the fact that

the main associations of the sign are with the divine sphere;62 after

the two separated there would be a radical bifurcation in their contexts,

and the garment without its original central part would have had slight

value as asymbol.

There is thus a substantialcongruence

between the

restriction of sheath and nh to the divine and royal sphere.

Some support for the development sketched here can be found in detailed

'A Ik

figure 10

forms of the nh-sign and the belt with strips.

As noted above, the nh-sign with two distinct

elements appears in the third dynasty (and not

the fourth, as stated by Fischer63). In the

early fourth dynasty there are several examples

of a belt with strips which has a loop at the

edge, in all cases the edge furthest from the

body profile (fig. 1064). It is possible to

imagine a second loop on the other side of the

garment. This may be the form that was behind

Sayce's original linking of belt and sign.65 Details of the form and

61Exceptions are the cases in the tomb of Senbi at Meir (Blackman, Meir I, pi. 7)

and the el-Bersha d3mw pointed out by Wildung, in: MW 1, 1972, 154-5 with n. 49).Ucko's statement (in: PRAI 1969, 57) that sheath-wearing was 'widespread' is

wrong; only for the predynastic period does the evidence he cites support it.Senbi's sheath is of interest as it could parallel fig. 1-4 in form; the belt

is tied as in fig. 2a. It should be noted that all the examples on kings are

funerary.62 Cf. Derchain, in: LdX 1/2, 1973, 168-9; RSRG, 418-20; Fischer, in: ZXS loo,

1973, 16-28.63 In: MMJ 5, 1972, 14. It does seem that examples with divided horizontal strips

begin in the fourth dynasty, but this may be a question of the amount of detail

on extant signs.6**

Tracing fromWres., Atlas III, 92C. Other examples: Petrie, Medum, pi. 10-12.

18. 24. 28,2. It is worth noting that a rather different looped garment is found

on the Nacrmer palette: the main captive on the verso (Lange-

Hirmer, Xgypten/

Egypt , pi. 5) wears a belt with three looped strips hanging from it. The rele

vance of this here is doubtful.

The approximate form of fig. 9 is found in the sixth dynasty (Nina Davies-

A. H. Gardiner, Ancient Egyptian paintings I, Chicago 1936, pi. 2). This is

probably a chance survival, perhaps an archaism in the style of the fourth dynasty,

as is found commonly at this time.65

In: Petrie, Medum, 33.








number of strips are variable. This type offers a particularly close

analogy with the nh with looped side pieces, and disappears shortly

after the comparable form of the sign.66 The equation of looped nhand looped belt cannot, however, exhaust the analogies or provide the

key to them, as the three-strip belt is found as early in relief (above,

n. 55) and in three dimensions on a hh-figure on a vase from the step

pyramid.67 The near-contemporary demise of the two is none the less in

favour of the connection, and perhaps of its being explicitly acknow

ledged. Since no good later evidence can be produced it may be that it

was lost soon after this period. It would be necessary here to assume

that garment and sign related by way of the belt, which would be equi

valent to the top loop of the sign; the side loops would be shown hanging

down as in nature and not stiff as in the schematic hieroglyph.68 This

postulated association makes the garment and sign very closely related

indeed to the 'Isis-knot'. The form of the anh-sign with divided hori

zontal strips, concomitant with the indications of lashing at the middle,

probably denotes a departure from origins and knowledge of them, and

stylisation as an object used in ritual and symbolic contexts. Part of

the stylisation would be meant to reinforce the distinction between

9- and ft . The use of the two seems to overlap in many contexts,

and the reason's for the distinction, apart from the obviously less

exclusive character of ( } , are not clear. One difference should be

noted between the associations of*f-

as a sheath and a belt with strips:

as a sheath the loop is integral to the analogy, but as a belt with

strips it may be reduced to the strips with a simple 'handle1, as in

Westendorf's suggestion.69A conceivable allusion to the meaning of

the belt with strips and the sheath may be seen in their occasional

occurrence on Shu.70 Shu is associated with anh and Tefenet with m3 t

(later w3s).7^ Other explanations are, however, possible.

66 It is possible that a single loop only was meant in the relief examples (i.e.

the top loop, the belt being merely * support) but this would imply an im

plausible asymmetry in the garment.67 Firth

-Quibell, Step Pyramid II, pi. 104, 1-2 seems to be over a kilt.

68By dividing the loops on a belt with strips a six-strip belt may be arrived at

(fig. 5; above n. 30). This may be likened to the form of the sign with divided

horizontals, againon the assumption that belt

-top loop.

69 In: ZXS 92, 1966, 152.70

Cenotaph of Seti I, pi. 81; Mariette, Abydos I, pi. 39b. In view of the close

relationship of /z/z-figures and Shu the figure on the vase from the step pyra

mid may also be relevant (above, n. 67). See also pGreenfield, pi. 106.

71Cf. Volten, in: AcOr 25, I960, 317; E. Winter, Untersuchungen zu den agyptischen

Tempelreliefs der griechisch-romischen Zeit, D0AW 98, Wien 1968, 85-8; Wildung,

in: ZDMG 121, 1971, 120-21; Desroches Noblecourt, in: Mon. Piot 59, 1974, b-8, n. 3.








Bonnet72 and Westendorf73, remarking on the way in which gods hold the

nh-sign out to kings, with the loop facing the king, deduced that the

lower part of the sign was considered especially significant. As the

standardised form, from the third dynasty, is very much a unity, any

such value attached to one part would be a hyper-archaism, doubtful in

particular since the identification of sign and garment can be reserved

to make the loop the most prominent part (the 'glans* of the penis

sheath).74 At all events, other reasons could be imagined for holding

the sign at the bottom, whether practical (the nh may be meant ulti

mately to be held by the receiver, in which case it can conveniently

be grasped75), aesthetic, or other. It could, indeed, just as well be

thought that the part pointing towards the recipient was held to be

the most important.

To summarise, possible analogies discussed nh and garments are: 1 with

a particular form of penis sheath; 2 with a penis sheath and accompany

ing strips, two versions of the analogy being possible; 3 with the belt

with strips, probably on the assumption that the top loop is either

the belt or a secondary addition. It may, further, be suggested that

garment 3 could be a version of 2 with the status-indicator removed and

replaced by something more neutral. Among all the examples only BM 1346

is clear enough to constitute anything like proof of the association;

but it supports the idea that the other analogies were meant. As almost

all the data are from the Old Kingdom or earlier it must be doubted

whether knowledge of the connection was widespread after about the fourth

dynasty, and more than a piece of esoteric lore by the middle of the

second millennium B.C.. One must agree with Fischer's implication that

only very earlyforms of the

signcan be cited as evidence of its

origins;76 but originsare not the entire issue, and the later material,

even if wrong, is nearer to them than us and also tells us about the

evolution of the sign's meaning in time. The latest allusions may of

72R&RG, 419.

73 In: Z&S 92, 1966, 152.7i*

Whether the Egyptians viewed the glansor the whole penis as an object of mo

desty is unknown; the existence of circumcising practices, the operation occur

ring at the onset of puberty and adoption of clothing, might favour the glans,but is not conclusive; cf. H. Sigerist, A history of medicine I, New York 1967,

243-4; de Wit, La circoncision chez les anciens egyptiens, in: Z&S 99, 1972,

41-8; Ucko, in: PRAI 1969, 51.75 Cf. the groups of signs held by a king, e.g. Borchardt, Ne-user-rec, pi. 16.76 In: MMJ 5, 1972, 14-15.








course merely be a later reinterpretation which happens to be correct

in one modern writer's view. It should be reiterated that the evidence

examined is insufficent to prove any single origin for the sign.

The fact that we may witness some of its evolution in the early dynastic

period may, however, suggest that we are fairly near the beginning of

its history; if the origin is in a single object, it may be one of those

discussed.

Most of Jequier's objections77 to the idendifications of $ reviewed

in this article have been mentioned above, implicitly or explicitly.

There remain to be considered his remarks on colour. The only coloured

case of the penis sheath worn by fecundity figures is red with a green

tie, while the belt with strips is mostly coloured white, exceptions

often being explicable as symbolic colouring or as a function of colour

patterning. These colours conflict with the generally blue cnh-sign,7B

the colour being attested in both two- and three-dimensional examples.

There is no reconciling this difference, and it should not be assumed

that the rare green indicates a vegetable origin.79 On the view given

above, that standardised fourth dynasty and later forms do not reflect

the origin of the sign,the

onlyreasonable

assumptionis that the

colour is symbolic and not realistic. It is in particular noteworthy

that Q. , with which Jequier80 and Barta81 connect the sign, is

green.82 In the Egyptian system blue is the colour with the greatest

77 In: BIFAO 11, 1914, 126-34.78

Listed Old Kingdom examples include 6 black, 5 blue and one each green and red

(Smith, Sculpture, 368-74); black is probably a substitute for the as yet rare

blue pigment. The paintingson the Boston coffin of Djehutinakhte include 7

black (two with white top loops) and 6 blue cases (E. L. B. Terrace, Egyptian

paintings of the Middle Kingdom, London 1968, pi. 16. 17. 22. 23. 26. 27. 28.

31. 32. 37. 43; the blue signs are mostly larger and more carefully executed).

Calverley, Abydos III-IV contains more than 50 blue nh-signs in distinctive

contexts; other colours occur among representations of furniture etc. (there

is a certain amount of 'superfluous' blue colouring, perhaps because of the

prestige of blue).79Jequier, in: BIFAO 11, 1914, 135.

80Ibid., 142-3.

81 In: Z&S 98, 1970, 6.82

E.g. Calverley, Abydos, passim.








symbolic prestige,83 and it is unlikely that any specific reference

could be found for it here, although many guesses can be made.

It is beyond the scope of the present article to consider in detail

any possible links between the associations of the form of the sign and

the use of the word nh. One or two comments must suffice. Comparative

material suggests that great caution should be taken in assigning sexual

meanings to the use of penis sheaths and the like without evidence that,

they were acknowledged explicitly.8* So the obvious reference of the

garment should mostly be disregarded. It has virtually the same range

of possible symbolic applications as any other garment. In the present

case evidence for a sexual meaning will primarily be from the link bet

ween sign and garment; any extension of this must be based on further

evidence that the penis was associated with the word nh. Here there

is the problem that the likely relation would be with the erect penis;

this is not normally the referent of the penis sheath, which tends to

prevent erection. I have, however, given minimal grounds for equating

the sheath in some cases with the erect penis (above, p. 3 ). Any possible

play on nh and virility would be more or less 'learned' in character,

as there is no evidence for widespread knowledge of it. An example ofa learned allusion would be the alternation and virtual equivalence

between cnh and" nfr at el-Amarna (e.g. nfr-hprw-rQ>

nh-hprw-r ).

This may be paralleled in the occasional alternation ofy and I

83 H. Kees, Farbensymbalik in agyptischen religiosen Texten, in: NAWG 1943, 466-7,

remarks that blue plays no part in colour symbolism in texts (but cf. Harris,

Minerals, 224-5). For pictures the point may seem obvious, and cannot be set

out here. As an example of the primacy of blue one may cite the colouring of

sets of fecundity figures: blue and green are complementary in earlier schemes,

but blue always comes first, while in the Graeco-Roman period it seems to have

superseded all other colours. Ransom Williams's reservations on symbolic

applications of colour (The decoration of the tomb of Per-Neb, MMA New York

1931, 55) should be restricted to secular contexts. The interchange of blue

and black (ibid. 53-8) is more plausibly explained as a by-product of the

original scarcity of blue and possibly of colour terminology than of defective

colour vision, as she suggests. The tests described appear to be tests of termino

logy as much as of vision.

The loop in the nh-sign is white even on coloured backgrounds. As Jequier con

cluded, this probably has a graphic and not symbolic significance; the convention

applies to many signs that enclose blanks, even if the blank is not completely

separate-

as with *? . For examples cf. e.g. G. Thausing-

H. Goedicke, Nofret

ari, Graz 1971, fig. 24. 97. 99. 105. 107.84Indeed, it seems that the reverse is often true and that sheathing is sometimes

asign of confining or sublimation of sexuality

-or may even go with a relative

indifference to it (cf. Heider, in: Man N.S. 4, 1969, 379-91; Ucko, in: PRAI

1969, 49-57; Gell, in: Man N.S. 6, 1971, 165-81). See also above, esp. n. 25.








between a pair of wd3t-eyes at the tops of stelae.85 By way of the

meaning 'penis' for nfrwaeone

might arrive at a sexual association

for nh. Further evidence for this may be seen in a cryptogram of Tut

cankhamun, where the ithyphallic form of Amun apparently reads twt- nh

jmnw and is equivalent to the seated Amon-rec holding an nh-sign.e7

twt describes both figures, as they are standard images, so that the

penis as the odd element should read nh. All this could, at a very

great remove, be confirmed by the designation of the penis as h w- nh

found in Graeco-Roman period texts.88 But tenuous links of this sort

are very little in the way of evidence, when the dominant association

of nh is normally air, as can be seen in the phraset_3w

nj cnh 'breath

(i.e. air) of life' and in countless examples of nh being presented to

the king's nose. Although it would be possible to read hidden meanings

into this,89 to assume that cnh here meant anything more loaded than

'vital force' would be to go beyond the evidence. Early personal names

like nh-k3j,90 or perhaps the form nj- nh-G0D, where the god named is

a creator god (byno means always the case) would fit allusions to a

sexual meaning better, but in the case of a slightly later name like

nh-m-cj-hrw 'life (comes) from/is with Horus' it would be bold to press

the analogy. Better support for a sexual reference may be seen in the

fact that the process of creation is portrayed in Egyptian myths as a

sexual one; but in the texts that spell this out thereis no obvious link

between the process and the word nh.9^ Again, the best evidence that

can be produced is indirect: the relationship between Geb, Nut and Shu

85E.g. CG 20068. 20277. 20079. 20754. A further alternand in this context is the

sun-disk with rays, e.g. CG 22139; this may be of relevance to associations

between^

and the sun-disk. Note also that the interior of Q , the normal

element at this point, may be coloured red, e.g. Durham N 1943, 1953 (not recor

ded in S. Birch, Catalogue... Alnwick Castle, London 188(J; CG 20188. 20383.

20556. 20593, all visible on plates and noted in text; W. K. Simpson, The terrace

of the great god at Abydos, New Haven-

Philadelphia 1974, nos. 26,2. 49,2 (?).

50.1 (= CG 20556). 52,1. 63,1-2. 64,1. 65,4. Again the allusion is probablyto the sun-disk; Simpson's nos. 55,2 and 74,1 seem to show the sun in different

phases, by means of Q andQ .J. Bergman, 'Quelques reflexions sur nfr

-

nfr.t-

nfrw\ XXIXe Congres international des orientalistes, Resumes des

Communications, Sections 1-5, Paris 1973,9-10, has discussed some of these motifs

and some sexual associations of nfr(w). The published abstract gives little of

the content of the study.86

Wb II, 261, 8. 260,7.87

A. Wilkinson, Ancient Egyptian jewellery, London 1971, 130-31, fig. 59-60.88

Wb I, 196, 9.89

Cf. e.g. Westendorf, in: ZAS 92, 1966, 152; 94, 1967, 148-9.90Helck, in: ZXS 79, 1954, 29; see also above, n. 50.

With nfrwone might consider along these lines that names like nfr-nfrw-jtn/r0

meant more than the superficial 'beautiful in respect of beauty is Yati' etc..91

E.g. PT 1652-3.








in the myth in which Geb and Nut are parted might seem in some way to

link sexual potency and air, where Shu (air)92 parts the copulating Geb

and Nut. Itmay, then, be significant that in such contexts Geb is some

times shown in ithyphallic form,93 and that he is also shown wearing a

penis sheath.94 The potency of Geb is, of course, what originates the

rule of human-style gods on earth -Osiris and Isis being the 'children

of Nut'. The detail of any such association, and the role in it of Shu,

are not yet entirely clear (but cf. n. 92).

In conclusion, some formal aspects of nh-sign symbolism, relatively

unrelated to the foregoing discussion, may briefly be surveyed.

An over-rigid interpretation of the sign may lead to the neglect of

some symbolic references. Thus, Schafer's view95 that the elongated

loop of the sign forbids a direct relationship with mirrors or sun

disks, as both of these show a true or flattened circle, is contradicted

by several pieces of evidence. It is most improbable that the sun has

anything to do with the origin of the sign, but it is certainly drawnlater into its range of association.

In the loop of annh-sign that served as a mirror-case the name of

Tutcankhamun is written above a lotus flower,96 This is an allusive

form of the scene where the young sun-god appears on a lotus, so that

the loop is servingas the framework for a solar scene. In the companion

piece the disk on the head of a hh-figure is given the loop shape of an

cnh-sign- or perhaps of a lotus leaf (see below). There can be no doubt

that this loop is equivalent to a sun disk.

92 Cf. RXRG, 685. The equation is Shu air=

life, cf. Zandee, Sargtexte Spruch 80,

in: ZXS 101, 1974, 65; Assmann, Liturgische Lieder, 216; Winter, Untersuchungen

(above, n. 71), 85-6. On air/wind as a creative force, and on its association

with nh cf. Morenz, Agyptische und altorphische Kosmogonie, in: Fs Schubart,

76. 83-93; esp. 88. 92-3.93 Most strikingly in pBM 10008, which shows Geb falling away from Nut; cf. also

Lanzone, Dizionario, pi. 166, 1. 167, fig. on p. 418.9t*

Wildung, in: MW 1, 1972, 155, n. 53; the Turin coffin cited is no. 2236, re

produced in J. Omlin, Der Papyrus 55001 und seine satirisch-erotischen Zeich

nungen und Inschriften, Cat. Mus. Eg. Torino 3, 1973, pi. 29. This is not the

form of the penis sheath that relates to the nh-sign.

95 In: Z&S 68, 1932, 1-796 H. Carter, The tomb of Tut.ankh.Amen III, London etc. 1933, pi. 21B; Carter

obj. nos. 271 c-d.







2 2 John B a i n e s SAK 3

Apart from un-disk-shape disks there are also disk-shape loops. At el

Amarna the sun-disk sign in the script normally has a pendant ^J

there are some cases where the sign is indicated by "J" , so that thedisk serves as the loop.97 This has the additional significance in con

text of producing a monogram reading jtn nh; as a determinative for

(njhh such a meaning is particularly appropriate.

A comparable play on hieroglyphic signs is found in London, UC 408,

a late eighteenth dynasty tomb relief.98 Here two altars with piles of

bread, probably derived formally from the type with a steep conical

pile of loaves,99 are modelled into a rebus reading dj nh (the bottom

of the group is lost). The triangle of ^ encloses the whole, and

the horizontal line of is equivalent to the altar-top. The loop

of t is a flat, circular loaf, from which a further series is layered

vertically. The sense of the whole may be a double pun: the nhw 'pro

visions' on the altar 'give life'.100 Again, the loop of the is

circular.

The relationship of nh-signs, disks and lotuses just mentioned leads

into a much more perilous area of symbolism. The latest example of the

form M- in Egypt, mentioned above n. 18, is on a catafalque where one

would normally expect either -r- or M alternating with*

. From

relatively earlyan alternative in such a scheme is a papyrus swathe.101

As geometric shapes papyrus umbel and lotus flower or leaf areeasily

interchangeable, and the material presented here may serve to make plau

sible a conscious exploitation of the similarity, orconceivably an

unintentional confusion between the two. Simply on the basis of X-dd

in analternating scheme being probably nh-dd one

might posit that

thepapyrus

swathe was a remote variant of nh. The variant with TT

produces a closer resemblance between sign and swathe than normal, and

might suggest an early origin for the device. Further support might

97E.g. CoA II, pi. 49, no. IV D 16.

98Uphill, A New Kingdom relief from Memphis, in: JEA 48, 1962, 162-3.

99E.g. Schafer, Kunst/Principles, 195/189, fig. 188.

100The presence of the object on a private monument is surprising, as dj cnfy,whether active or passive in meaning, is mostly restricted to kings, and godsas givers to kings.

101E.g. Wresz., Atlas I, 405; Hermann, Die Katze im Fenster iiber der Tiir, in: ZAS

73, 1937, 73, fig. 3; pi. 8a. For swathes by themselves cf. A. M. DonadoniRoveri, I sarcofagi egizi dalle origini alia fine dell'antico regno, Roma 1969,

pi. 23, 1-2. 24-5. 27. 30. 39.








be found in cases where ahh-iigure replaces the Qnh element,102 since

ft/z= sw =

nh, as an association of ideas if not as a literal equivalent.

The links between nh and the lotus may suggest an analogy with the

fans held by personified Qnh (and w3s) in a number of contexts.103 The

fans are in the form either of a lotus leaf or of a lotus flower, and

appear to be to some extent a concrete realisation of the protective

formula behind figures of the king: z3 nh nb h3jf dt etc. so that the

lotus would express visually the idea nh. This is shown most graphically

in a carnelian plaque of Amenhotpe III, where the cn7z-figure forms part

of the phrase ddt nh h3js (= Tiye).10** Personified nh and w3s of course

occur in a variety of roles, and the interpretation just given should

not necessarily be generalised among them. It would be tempting to assume

that a similar association of lotus and Qnh already linked the two early

dynastic vessels published by Fischer.105 His rejection of the idea is

based partly on the lack of any symbolic link; but his technical objec

tions will still stand.

From there it is not x large step to suggesting that lotus motifs might

elsewhere sometimes symbolise nh. In this way the floral composition

of many cn/z-patterns like wreaths of flowers106 or decorated spoons107

might gain added significance. Just as ffi is a permissible symbol

where the nh-sign, largely restricted to the divine sphere, is not,

these patterns might have the same more or less explicit reference

where the sign itself could not be employed. Whether the starting-point

for the associations is a formal resemblance or some similarity in

symbolic content is unknown. But it might be relevant to cite the fami

liar secular usage of sniffing a lotus flower, which could be remotely

compared with the offering of to the king's nose. At the same time

the symbolism of birth and youth attaching to the lotus in a mythological

102E.g. Calverley, Abydos I, pi. 29

103E.g. Firth

-Quibell, Step Pyramid II, pi. 15-17. 40-41.

104 MMA 26.7.1339, in e.g. C Aldred, New Kingdom art in ancient Egypt, London2

1961, pi. 100; best illustrated in: JEA 3, 1916, pi. II facing p. 73. For a

possible parallel cf. Thausing-

Goedicke, Nofret-ari, fig. 142.105 In: MMJ 5, 1972, 5-17.106

E.g. Calverley, Abydos II, pi. lO-ll; Fischer, in: Z&S 100, 1973, 25, fig. 6a-b.

In both the latter the floral patterns may be specifically meaningful.

107 Cf. Wallert, Verzierte Loffel, pi. 17. 21-3. 26-7; J. Vandier d'Abbadie,

Catalogue des objets de toilette egyptiens, Musee du Louvre, Paris 1972, nos.

22. 23. 27. 31. 33-4. 36. 39-40. 42. 57 (including examples with a cartouche

as the bowl motif).








context, although not attested in the visual record before the New King

dom,108 might be a further distant motif in the background of a relation

ship between and lotus. At a very late period support may be foundat Meroe, where a decorative motif resembling TT has in one case a

lotus in its loop, and in another 4L ,1 9

It may be possible to bring the attestation of the form TT a little

later in time (apart from the Meroitic allusion just mentioned) if de

corative or amuletic elements on New Kingdom religious figuresare con

sidered;110 these certainly resemble the form strongly, but the connection

is vague. Westendorfs's assumption that paired strips forming part of

royal and divine clothing (largely female) in the New Kingdom are covert

cn/z-signs111concerns a

comparable extra element on garments, but the

allusion is much vaguer still; and it is not clear whether the strips

forming parts of complex kilts etc. or separately tied belts are meant.

An additional problem is that objects of both Erler's and Westendorf's

types tend to be red,112 whereas the nh-sign is blue.

Any search for further decorative or symbolic associations of the sign

need not, therefore, be limited by details of its shape, and may even

rely exclusively on contextual rather than formal criteria. But the

further any such search is pushed, the more hypothetical the links

may be.

108 S. Morenz-

J. Schubert, Der Gott auf der Blume, Ascona 1954, 68-9; cf.

E.-Chr. StrauB, Die Nunschale, MXS 30, Miinchen 1974.109

Dunham, RCK IV, 138, fig. 90, no. 21-3-58. 168, fig. 109 top L (21-3-160)

pi. 5lC.110 Cf. Erler, Symbol des Lebens (above, n. 7), fig. 8-9.111 In: ZXS 92, 1966, 152.112 An analogy with

$would for this reason seem more appropriate. For examples

of strips on female clothing cf. Calverley, Abydos III, pi. I. 6. 33. 40. On

kings extra strips on complex kilts mostly alternate between red and blue,

cf. ibid., pi. 7. 33. 40 (white and red); IV, pi. I. 13. 17. 32. 35.

egypt - ankh sign.pdf

Documents