Le Papyrus Magique Illustre de Brooklyn [Brooklyn Museum 47.218.156] by Serge SauneronReview by: David LortonJournal of the American Research Center in Egypt, Vol. 9 (1971-1972), pp. 144-146Published by: American Research Center in EgyptStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40001070 .

Accessed: 15/06/2014 09:32

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 ofcontent 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 support@jstor.org.

.

American Research Center in Egypt is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toJournal of the American Research Center in Egypt.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 62.122.79.90 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 09:32:08 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

144 jarce 9 (1971-1972)

denotes the "reward" for services rendered, htp-dj- nswt appears to refer to an unwarranted act of grace. The words themselves are most probably the opening words of the formulation used in the royal chancellery for the documents stating the royal act. While the later formula is most probably connected with a reli- gious ceremony, its earlier form is most probably an administrative act by which the king's grace found its expression.

While the ambition of the author can only be com- mended, the way the difficult problem is pursued and the results of the investigation are less convincing. This concerns the unfortunate preconception that the formula is connected with an offering, without giving due consideration to possible alternatives. The narrow- ness of the base hampers the quality of the investiga- tion and the plausability of the results attained. What seems a one-track approach becomes soon apparent and fosters an increasing resistance to the course of argumentation. There are also baffling details in the presentation of the material, which fosters uneasiness in the reader. Barta considers Rc-htp at Meidum the oldest occurrence, predating that in Mtn. A Dynasty IV date for Tnti (LD II 34c), Nfr (Selim Hassan, Exc. Giza III, 208), Whm-k; (Hildesheim), Tnti (LD II 31), Ki-n-nswt (Junker, Giza II, 135 n\), Tzti (Selim Hassan, ibid. 151), Ny^nh-R* (idem, IV 155), Nfr-ssm-Hwfw (BM 1282), 3Iwfi (Hemamieh), Ssm-nfr (LD II 27), S&t-htp (LD II 25), as well as Budge, Lady Meux 97 is untenable. Equally improbable are the Fifth Dynasty dates of Mni (MDIK 8, 1938, 177!; see Junker, Giza IX 148L) Wd;w (de Morgan, Dahchour 189/5, I5)> Pr-snt (Fisher, Minor Cemetery 144: the quoted text is also wrong!). It is also curious that the Dramatic Ramesseum Papyrus is quoted as Fifth Dynasty evi- dence. Why Siut IV is once quoted according to Griffith (p. 36) and then according to Brunner (p. 37) is bewildering. Why MFA 25.629 (Dunham, Stelae pl. VII) is dated to Dynasty XI is as puzzling as the assigning of this date to CT V 165.

The desire by the author to find one uniform ex- planation for all occurrences of the formula opened the pitfall which was aggravated by his preconceived idea that the formula has to reflect an offering-ritual. To have gathered and structured the vast material will be the lasting merit of the book, while the theories put forth might stimulate renewed concern for this important and interesting problem.

The price of the book is exorbitant. Academic pocket-books are not so well filled, that they could easily cope with such prices. By assembling the hiero- glyphic type on off-set plates the costs of publication could have been drastically reduced, for which all Egyptologists would have been grateful.

Hans Goedicke The Johns Hopkins University

LE PAPYRUS MAGIQUE ILLUSTRE DE BROOK- LYN [BROOKLYN MUSEUM 47.218.156], by Serge Sauneron. Pp. ix + 29, pls. V, figs. Frontis- piece + 3. The University Press (Oxford), Brook- lyn, 1970 (= Wilbour Monographs 3). $5.00.

P. Brooklyn Museum 47.218.156, originally pur- chased by Charles Edward Wilbour, contains in its six preserved pages the fragmentary latter portion of one magical text and a second in virtually complete state, each followed by a half -page vignette. It is an impor- tant addition to the corpus of magical texts and will undoubtedly be of interest to historians of religion, science, and art, as well as to Egyptologists.

In his Introduction, Sauneron discusses the prove- nance and acquisition of the papyrus, which he views as Heliopolis and Cairo respectively, based on the appearance of Atum in the vignettes and on certain clues in Wilbour's records (cf. p. ix, with note 8). Chapter I describes the external appearance of the papyrus, with a complete scheme in Figure 1 between pages 2 and 3, and discusses its date: Sauneron would place it between Dyn. XXVI and the first decades of the Ptolemaic period, with some writings and one or two words otherwise known only from Ptolemaic texts favoring a low date (pp. 3f.)-x Chapter II contains a discussion of the "enemy" (actually, a list of enemies) dealt with in the two texts and of the god described therein and portrayed in the vignettes; photographs of the vignettes are on Figures 2 and 3, between pages 12 and 13, while part of the second vignette is shown in color on the Frontispiece. These discussions are followed by a translation and commentary, and by five plates of photographs of the hieratic text and of hieroglyphic transcription.2

It is hoped that the following minor suggestions with respect to the transcription and translation may prove to be of some value :

The determinative of w$ (1,1), for lack of a tick on the left side, is more likely to be ^ than ~% ; cf . Moller, Hieratische Paldographie III, no. 197, as op- posed to no. 81. Cf. also the writing of ^ in bin

1 The Ptolemaic-style spelling of grh "night" in 2,6 and 4,6 can be added to the list of indications for a low date; cf. Wb. V 183.

2 The only criticisms which can be raised regarding the format are the lack of an index, and that, in view of the importance of color in Egyptian iconography, the vignettes should have been reproduced in color photographs, rather than black and white. A color re- production of the entire second vignette would have cost no more than the partial reproduction in the Frontispiece, and if that had been done, the cost of the two black-and-white photographs could have been applied to a color reproduction of the remaining vignette.

This content downloaded from 62.122.79.90 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 09:32:08 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BOOK REVIEWS 145

(5,3 ; 5,8) and inn (5,6); in these cases, the initial vertical stroke is written separately, as is the case in wS, rather than as part of a continuous line with the following horizontal.

The abbreviated form of the determinative jfj) is consistently written in this papyrus as \, with dot above; thus in Jay (1,1; 5,3), hrw (1,2; 2,7), Ms (4,7; 5,6), snd (4,7), rn (5,6, near beginning), and iiw (5,6). The dot is sometimes elongated, however, and the re- sulting \ is indistinguishable from «^ , as Sauneron so transcribes it in IU (1,1) and rn (2,7; 4,3; 4,6, twice; 5,6, towards end; 5,7); other occurrences of these terms, listed above, make clear what the sign should be, and neither word ought to have J^ as determina- tive (cf. Wb. IV 551 and II 425). Similarly, in 2,8, 4*j^j§) wntn.k* "you shall consume" is a more likely

reading than *TJ&^H'my./s3, with a meaningless deter-

minative. It appears, in fact, that the ambiguous se- cond form of the sign is due to scribal confusion. Since the first form is not otherwise attested in hieratic (cf . Moller, op. cit., no. 35 B), but is typical of abnormal hieratic (cf. Hughes, Saite Demotic Land Leases [Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 28] 41), it is probably to be concluded that the text was originally formu- lated in the late Ethiopian or early Saite period, when such a form could have entered the text. The scribal confusion regarding the determinative, however, is further proof of the late date of this copy, as argued by Sauneron (cf. above).

In 2,1 and 5,1 the determinative of ddf(t) and

hf(sw) is in each case -y^_, not ^ ; cf. Moller, op. cit., no. 247, as opposed to no. 245, and the form of JL in 2,3. Cf. also Wb. V 633 and III 72 f. for the determi- natives of these words.

The following remarks may be made with regard to the translation:

The Conjunctive at the beginning of 1,1 might be rendered "... the sky is to be without god, there being no sun-disk (to) rise or set;" the usage seems to be that discussed for Demotic by Nims, JEA 24 (1938) 77, and for Late Egyptian by M. Lichtheim, in Studies in Egyptology and Linguistics in Honour of H. J. Po- lotsky 4-8 (cf. also Volten, ibid. 65 ff.).

The end of page 1 is lost, and 2,1 begins with an epithet of the deity addressed which is somewhat ob- scure: ir(w) U m 4 Uw m n&yw.f m nfw pr(w) m rz.f. The only near parallel I know of is P. Berlin 3049, 5, 8-9 (Hieratische Papyrus aus den Koniglichen Museen zu Berlin II, PL 14) : My srk.sn m Uw n dd.k iw pt mhw.s m nfw tp-n.k "the nostrils, they breathe the breath of your giving (when) the sky comes with its north- wind consisting of the breeze from your mouth." The parallelism between pt m mhw.s and U . . .m nlyw.f here suggests that ./ refers to //, rather than to 4 Uw, as Sauneron takes it (p. 20, note e). The render-

ing should thus be, "who created the earth with the four winds as its nsyw consisting of the breeze which goes forth from his mouth." The term (j (] ̂ ntyw remains enigmatic, however; it presumably indi- cates a beneficial aspect of the winds.

In 2,3, iw hf(iw) [. . .yh'ty and iw cwy.k [hr] ink. . . ought to be Circumstantial; cf. Erman, Neudgyptische Grammatik2 § 495. The Circumstantial also occurs, though not rendered as such by Sauneron, in 2,5 (iw.f hw iw.f mk), 2,6 (iw.f wcb), 4,6 (iw.f rs, iw.f m si, iw.f hw mk, iw.f rh), and 5,2 (iw Hh hr tp.f through iw hh n <bw wih hr tp.f).

The lacuna at the beginning of 2,4 is considerably longer than indicated in the translation on p. 18, it presumably contains a qualification of hf(iw). To- wards the end of the line, the determinative ̂ of the new word hdnw suggests a connection with hdndn "rage" (Wb. Ill 214, 10) rather than with hdnn "to be unwilling." (Wb. Ill 214, 9).

The unusual mention of U hi "the (female) pig" as an enemy in 4,1 (cf. p. 8 for discussion) can most easily be explained as a pun on hwfhyt "fate, death;" cf. te Velde, Seth, God of Confusion (Probleme der Agyp- tologie 6) 21 f.

The passage which begins near the end of 4,8 is "... since if you allow them to lift their arms [against Pharaoh] l.p.h., it is the man of a million [cubits], who is (provided) with 7 faces on one [neck], . . ., against whom [they] shall [lift] their [arms]." For circum- stantial iw (marked "sic" by Sauneron, PL IV a) be- fore a conditional sentence beginning with ir iw, cf . Erman, op. cit. § 523. yI.ir iw[.sn (r) fii] seems to be an attempt to write a second tense of the future (cf . now Nims, JEA 54 [1968] 161-164); an emphasis of the adverbial adjunct here would suit the context, and the presence of a second tense is assured by the parallel in 5,4.* *[Nty] hr 7 hrw appears to be an error for nty m 7 hrw; cf. the parallel in 2,1. The scribe probably began to write hrw "faces" after nty and did not entirely correct his error.

5,4 contains two Praesens II constructions, as pointed out by Sauneron, p. 28, note 11. A rendering by means of cleft sentences would make the meaning clear: "If it is against him (i.e., Pharaoh) that they raise their arms, then it is against the man of a mil- lion cubits . . . that they raise their arms." It seems pertinent to raise the question of whether these spells really assert a "magical identification" of the person to be protected (pr-*;) with the protective deity (as

3 For the form of t, cf. Moller, op. cit., no. 575. For the writing imyt, cf. Wente, Late Ramesside Letters (Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 33) 25, note k.

4 Cf. Williams, JNES 7 (1948) 227 for a dubious Demotic example, i.ir.i iw.i r di n.k . . ..

This content downloaded from 62.122.79.90 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 09:32:08 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

146 JARCE 9 (1971-1972)

asserted by Sauneron, p. 16), or whether they simply seek to enlist the deity's active help: one is reminded of clauses such as "to my friend thou art friend and to my enemy thou art enemy"5 of the Hittite treaties, and of the English expression "any friend of his is a friend of mine."

Attention to the grammar and vocabulary can yield a clearer sense for the passage which begins in the middle of 5,5. It starts with a relative clause with nty, followed by a circumstantial clause continuing the description, "who stands upon the 30 peaks of the land of Kush, his eyes being red(?)," and then by a participle plus more circumstantial clauses and a peri- phrastic participle: "who hates copulation, (though) he is an animal in his limbs, his name being unknown, (he being) one the name of whose mother is unknown." The whole series is a mixture of classical and late forms. Presumably, the "copulation" mentioned here refers to the atrocious acts mentioned in 4,8 and 5,4 ("to copulate with him, to ejaculate in his ear"). For tp (n) iiwt "small cattle, animal" (and not "head of an animal," as in Sauneron's rendering "il est pourvu d'une tete df animal sur ses membres (?)"), cf. Nims, JEA 22 (1936) 51-54-

A relatively straightforward interpretation of the difficult passage in the middle of 5,7 can be tentatively suggested: "You shall not forget the statement which you made, 'There is no fault in me (i.e., "you"), and you are praised!'" To achieve such an understanding, it is necessary to take di.k iiwti as Praesens I with the pronominal form which appears in Demotic (cf . Spiegel- berg, Demotische Grammatik § 135); the writing suits exactly and the direct speech might be taken as sup- port for the Demotic form.

Finally, an observation may be made regarding the vignettes. It is striking that the two texts, while de- scribing in detail the many-headed Bes figures which are pictured, make no mention of Atum, who is also depicted in each vignette. In both cases, he is shown as a serpent6 with human arms and legs, extending to- wards the Bes-figure a sun-disk in which there is drawn a figure corresponding to the hieroglyph J3), i.e., "child." Each time, he is labelled "Atum, lord of Heliopolis, lord of the Two Lands of Heliopolis." Since the vignettes thus show two deities, while the texts address and describe only one, it seems necessary to conclude that the two are actually identical, with Bes being an active manifestation of Atum whose aid the magician can enlist in this world. If this is so, then the [J, -signs which surround the Bes figure in each vignette can be taken as an indication of the boundary

5 McCarthy, Treaty and Covenant (Analecta Bib- lica 21) 182.

6 Book of the Dead, chapter 175, lines 16-17, might contain a reference to Atum as a serpent; cf. Morenz, Agyptische Religion 26.

of the mundane realm, separating Bes from the trans- cendent Atum.7 Support for this conclusion can be drawn from the fact that the second spell speaks of Bes as the bsw "manifestation"8 of Amun-Re'.9 The discrepancy between the mentions of Amun-Re* in the text and the depiction of Atum in the vignettes prob- ably represented no difficulty to the ancient users of the papyrus, since it was common in the Late Period to explain the name Amun by means of a pun as "the hidden one;10 thus, "the hidden one of Rec" could be regarded as a reference to Atum, and this concept corresponds to the depiction of Atum as extending towards the physical world the child, or rising, sun. With regard to the last point, it should be pointed out that Atum appears in each case to the Bes figure's left, while in Egyptian cosmography the "left" is the direction of the rising sun.

The comments made above on a few technical points cannot detract from an appreciation of Saune- ron' s exemplary edition. It is to be hoped that the publications of the remaining papyri in the important group of which it apparently is a part (cf. pp. viif.) will follow as rapidly as possible.

David Lorton The Johns Hopkins University

TWO HIERATIC FUNERARY PAPYRI OF NES- MIN. Part One : Introduction, Transcriptions and Plates, by Fayza Mohamed Hussein Haikal. Pp. 90 + XV. Fondation figyptologique Reine filisa- beth, Bruxelles, 1970 (= Bibliotheca Aegyptiaca XIV). 480 FB.

Pap. BM 10208 and 10209 are two funerary papyri written for Nesmin, son of Peteamennebnesettowe and

7 For "fire" as a metaphor for this world, cf. Goedicke, The Report about the Dispute of a Man with his Ba 95. I owe the suggestion regarding the "fire"- signs in these vignettes to Professor Goedicke.

8 On this concept, cf . now 2abkar, A Study of the Ba Concept in Ancient Egyptian Texts (Studies in An- cient Oriental Civilization 34) 11-15; Goedicke, op. cit. 25.

9 While the appearance of Atum in the vignettes argues for a northern origin of the papyrus (cf. above), the references to the god of Thebes suggest that the text was originally composed in the south. This is sub- stantiated by the abnormal hieratic form of the deter- minative j§] , which the northern scribe confused with

J^ (cf. above). 10 Cf . now Williams, in Studies in Honor of John

A . Wilson (Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 35) 95 f., with references to earlier literature.

This content downloaded from 62.122.79.90 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 09:32:08 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions