Remerciez-le!

Remerciez @Admin pour avoir partagé cet document gratuitement, de la manière la plus simple, en partageant sur les réseaux sociaux.

Institut d’égyptologie François Daumas UMR 5140 « Archéologie des Sociétés Médi

Institut d’égyptologie François Daumas UMR 5140 « Archéologie des Sociétés Méditerranéennes » Cnrs – Université Paul Valéry (Montpellier III) Two Curious Orthographies for Khepri David Klotz Citer cet article : D. Klotz, « Two Curious Orthographies for Khepri », ENIM 3, 2010, p. 67-75. ENiM – Une revue d’égyptologie sur internet est librement téléchargeable depuis le site internet de l’équipe « Égypte nilotique et méditerranéenne » de l’UMR 5140, « Archéologie des sociétés méditerranéennes » : http://recherche.univ-montp3.fr/egyptologie/enim/ Two Curious Orthographies for Khepri David Klotz Institute for the Study of the Ancient World New York University HE MONUMENTAL, bookshelf-bending Lexikon der ägyptischen Götter und Götterbezeichnungen edited by Christian Leitz, et al. (hereafter LGG) has contributed enormously to the study of Egyptian religion and lexicography. Nonetheless, while perusing temple publications, one occasionally encounters problematic epithets not recorded by the LGG, either because the precise reading was uncertain, a phrase was not considered an epithet, or variants of the same name were not recognized.1 In comparison to the host of creative orthographies for divine names in the Graeco-Roman period,2 it would appear that scribes were less inspired by the important god Khepri, since his name is almost always written with the scarab.3 However, context and parallels suggest that the following epithets are surprisingly odd orthographies of Khepri. In one of the hymns to Amun-Re from Hibis Temple, a seemingly unique orthography of the name Khepri ( ) occurs in the sequence “Amun-Re-Horakhty-Atum-Khepri” (example 1).4 Although the translation is confirmed by at least thirteen parallels,5 the exact reasons for this reading remain mysterious. Over the years, additional variants have come to light, none of which appear to have been discussed previously. (2) Edfou IV, 377, 12-13: In a scene of offering the wesekh-collar,6 the king describes the object as follows: “it is called Khepri ( ) together with his children (k“.tw≠f ⁄prµ m-©b Ú“.w≠f).” One might initially 1 For one example, see recently Chr. THIERS, “Le ciel septentrional ghr.t et le ciel méridional gb.t,” ENiM 2, 2009, p. 53-58. 2 E.g. S. SAUNERON, L’Écriture figurative dans les textes d’Esna, Esna VIII, 1982; M.-Th. DERCHAIN-URTEL, “Die Namen der Götter,” in W. Clarysse, et al. (ed.), Egyptian Religion: the Last Thousand Years I, OLA 84, 1998, p. 569-587. 3 M. MINAS-NERPEL, Der Gott Chepri: Untersuchungen zu Schriftzeugnissen und ikonographischen Quellen vom Alten Reich bis in griechisch-römische Zeit, OLA 154, 2006; LGG V, 713 (s. v. ⁄prµ). 4 N. de G. DAVIES, The Temple of Hibis in el-Khargeh Oasis III. The Decoration, MMAEE 17, 1953, pl. 30, reg. II, col. 3; D. KLOTZ, Adoration of the Ram: Five Hymns to Amun-Re from Hibis Temple, YES 6, 2006, p. 172, n. A. 5 D. KLOTZ, Adoration of the Ram, pl. 26. 6 For a recent discussion of these types of scenes, see F. COPPENS, The Wabet. Tradition and Innovation in Temples of the Ptolemaic and Roman Period, 2007, p. 110-113. T David Klotz ENIM 3, 2010, p. 67-75 68 suggest reading the divine name as “Atum,” deriving ‘Itm from µt (< µ“.t) + m < (m““),7 since many texts identify the nine leaves of the collar with the Ennead.8 Nonetheless, this epithet is not restricted to Atum,9 and another wesekh-collar scene mentions “Re between his children (R© µmytw ms.w≠f),” while elsewhere Montu-Re-Harakhty of Armant is further qualified as “Khepri in the midst of his children (⁄prµ Ìr-µb Ú“.w≠f).”10 As M. Minas- Nerpel has noted, Khepri occasionally replaces Atum in these scenes,11 and one text even invokes Khepri as father of the Ennead instead of Atum.12 Thus in this example, the group could potentially write either Atum or Khepri. (3) Mam. Edfou 55, 8-9: The following passage likens Horus of Edfu to the rising sun: m““≠n sw z“b-‡w.ty pr m “≈.t ‘Itm ⁄prµ m ƒ.t≠f ß.t≠f. May we see him, the one dappled of plumage, who emerges from the Akhet, Atum and Khepri ( ) in the morning and the evening.13 Unlike in the previous example, this group cannot represent Atum, since he is mentioned immediately beforehand. Rather, this passage identifies Horus as the solar deity par excellence, manifesting himself as both Atum and Khepri. Other cosmographic texts employ similar terminology to specify that Re-Harakhty is “Khepri in the morning (m ƒ.t≠f), and 7 While perfectly reasonable, no examples of this orthography for Atum are recorded in K. MYŚLIWIEC, Studien zum Gott Atum, II: Name-Epitheta-Ikonographie, HÄB 8, 1979, LGG VII, p. 411-422 (s.v. Tm), or M.- Th. DERCHAIN-URTEL, Epigraphische Untersuchungen zur griechisch-römischen Zeit in Ägypten, ÄAT 43, 1999, p. 72-79; however the µ“w.t-standard is comparable to the use of the old man (µ“w) to write the first consonant of his name in the Roman Period (K. MYŚLIWIEC, Studien zum Gott Atum, II, p. 58-59). For the wakeful-eye alone writing m““, see O. PERDU, “L’Osiris de Ptahirdis reconstitué,” SAK 27, 1999, p. 288, n. a. 8 For Atum “together with his children,” in other wesekh-collar scenes, cf. E. GRAEFE, “Über die Verarbeitung von Pyramidentexten in den späten Tempeln (Nochmals zu Spruch 600 (§1652a-§1652d: Umhängen des Halskragens),” in U. Verhoeven, E. Graefe (ed.), Religion und Philosophie im alten Ägypten. Festgabe für Philippe Derchain zu seinem 65. Geburtstag am 24. Juli 1991, OLA 39, p. 138-139, no. 29 (Graefe noted the present example as a variant of the phrase “Atum together with his children” [his example Nr. 24], but he did not translate or comment on the unusual group); the closest parallels are Edfou I, 97, 14-15; 243, 7; Mam. Edfou 158, 12-13 (for that particular spelling of Atum, cf. Val. Phon. II, p. 400, 119); Dendara II, 47, 3-4; IV, 245, 10. 9 For similar epithets applied to various divinities, cf. D. KURTH, Dekoration der Säulen, p. 65, n. 17, 153, 154- 155, n. 26); also Edfou VII, 14, 1 (R© Ìry-µb Ú“.w≠f); 23, 5-6 (R© Ìn© Ú“.w≠f); 27, 7-8 (R© pw Ìn© ms.w≠f). 10 Urk. VIII, 9b; cf. S.H. AUFRÈRE, Le propylône d’Amon-Rê-Montou à Karnak-Nord, MIFAO 117, 2000, p. 182, 185, n. g. 11 M. MINAS-NERPEL, Der Gott Chepri, p. 370-374 (discussing the Graeco-Roman wesekh-collar scenes mentioning Khepri, to which the present example can be added). 12 Edfou IV, 265, 10-14. 13 Fr. Daumas offered a significantly different translation, and interpreted the signs following Atum as a quotation: “Atoum: « La fonction je l’exerce (?) de jour et de nuit. »” (Les mammisis des temples égyptiens, 1958, p. 296). E. LOUANT, meanwhile, read: “l’Avenant qui exerce la fonction d’Atoum jour et nuit” (“Les fêtes au Mammisi,” Égypte Afrique & Orient 32, 2003, p. 33). Two Curious Orthographies for Kepri http://recherche.univ-montp3.fr/egyptologie/enim/ 69 Atum in the evening (m-ß.t≠f).”14 One inscription from Edfu even employs similar word order as the present example:15 skt.t m dw“ m©nƒ.t m m‡rw ßr ⁄prµ ‘Itm m ƒ.t≠f ß.t≠f. The skt.t-bark in the morning, the m©nƒ.t-bark in the evening,16 carrying Khepri and Atum in the morning and the evening. However, one occasionally finds an opposition between “Atum in the evening (‘Itm m-ß.t≠f)” and “the sundisk in the morning (µtn m ƒ.t≠f),”17 suggesting the present text could potentially write “Atum and the Aten (µtn)”18 in the evening and the morning. (4) Edfou IV, 57, 5: This text describes Horus of Edfu as a solar deity “who rises as Re, who transforms into Khepri ( ), great god who came into existence by himself” (wbn m R©, ≈pr m ⁄prµ, nÚr ©“ ≈pr ƒs≠f).19 The solar context and the possible phonetic wordplay (≈pr m ⁄prµ (...) ≈pr ƒs≠f) both support reading this example as Khepri. (5-6) Edfou VI, 303, 3-4: In this passage from the book “Schutz des Leibes,” Horus is identified with a host of divinities to ensure his protection. ¢n≈≠f mµ ‘Itm nµ mw.t≠f n µ“d.t-rnp.t ntf ⁄prµ ≈pr ƒs≠f (...) ≈pr≠f mµ ≈pr ⁄prµ. He will live like Atum, he will not perish from the annual pestilence, he is Khepri ( ) who came into being by himself (...), he comes into being like Khepri ( ) comes into being. 14 E.g. Esna III, 219, 5; VI, 475, 13; for these terms designating morning and evening, see recently D. KURTH, “Philologenrätsel,” in G. Moers, et al. (ed.), jn.t ƒr.w. Festschrift für Friedrich Junge II, 2006, p. 405-406, No. 9. 15 Edfou VII, 15, 3-4. 16 Although the (m)skt.t and (m)©nƒ.t were traditionally the “night-bark” and “day-bark” respectively, texts of the Late Period usually reverse the order; cf. M. SMITH, The Mortuary Texts of Papyrus BM 10507, CDPBM 3, 1987, p. 85, note to IV, 11; P. WILSON, A Ptolemaic Lexikon, p. 467. 17 Deir Chelouit III, 154, 3. 18 Hypothetically reading: µt < µ“.t + n < nw, “to see,” frequently written with the wakeful eye alone (cf. Val. Phon. I, p. 149; Dendara XII, p. xxi). 19 LGG V, 692b-c, recorded this passage as the only example for an unusual epithet: ≈pr m rs-µ“w.t, “Der zu dem wird, der das Amt bewacht.” David Klotz ENIM 3, 2010, p. 67-75 70 According to the Lexikon, the first epithet is µr-µ“w.t, “he who carries out the office” (LGG uploads/Litterature/ klotz-enim-3-p67-75.pdf