i^ ifet'iasti-i 
 

 * * &f 
 
 afotncU Uniueraitg Eibrarg 
 
 Strata, Nem $orit 
 
 THE GIFT OF 
 
 Co-'vn-e^p-*- 
 
 ^-vv^t^X^XUrri 
 
OLiN LIBRARY-CIRCULATION* 
 DATE DUE 
 
 3 1924 060 471 186 
 
 *W~51WN^, 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 tml.2 
 
 iW 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 CAVLORO 
 
 
 
 PRINTED IN U.S.* . 
 
The original of this book is in 
 the Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924060471186 
 
EGYPTOLOGICAL RESEARCHES 
 
 r r * 
 
 VOL. Ill 
 
 THE 
 
 BILINGUAL DECREES OF PHILAE 
 
 BY. 
 
 W. Max Muller. 
 
 Published by the Carnegie Institution of Washington 
 Washington, 1920 
 
W^^x ^^ 
 
EGYPTOLOGICAL RESEARCHES 
 
 VOL. Ill 
 
 THE 
 
 BILINGUAL DECREES OF PHILAE 
 
 BY 
 
 W. Max Muller. 
 
 Published by the Carnegie Institution of Washington 
 Washington, 1920 
 
Carnegie Institution of Washington 
 Publication 53, Volume III 
 
 Press of Gibson Bros. Inc. 
 Washington, D. C. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 In 1910, through the liberality of the Carnegie Institution of Washington, I was enabled 
 to visit the doomed island of Philae and to glean the epigraphic material left by the Berlin 
 expedition. My first thought was the decipherment of the famous bilingual inscriptions 
 engraved on the walls of the large court between the first and the second pylons. These texts 
 had attracted the attention of the very first Egyptologists and were soon recognized as con- 
 taining the greatest epigraphic treasure of the island, but their state of mutilation had caused 
 them to remain a dead treasure for almost a century. 
 
 Champollion (1828) mentions them in his Notices Descriptives I, p. 178, describing briefly 
 some sculptures of Ptolemy Neos Dionysos (Champollion thought Philometor). He con- 
 tinues: "The inscriptions are illegible because they are drawn over a hieroglyphic and demotic 
 inscription from the reign of Epiphanes." It is thus evident that the admirable man who, 
 with almost superhuman energy, gathered such an immense mass of material from the monu- 
 ments, recognized clearly the bilingual character of those inscriptions, but he had no time for 
 the study of such difficult texts. 
 
 In 1843 R- Lepsius noticed those inscriptions which (he thought) "had not been noticed 
 by the French-Tuscan expedition" and observed their bilingual character. He announced 
 this as a very important discovery (see his Brief e aus Mgypten, 108-109, English ed., 120-12 1). 
 In the first decree he saw nothing but a republication of the Rosettana enlarged by the honors 
 given to Queen Cleopatra. This involved him in a controversy with de Saulcy, who, on the 
 basis of paper impressions taken by Ampere, contested correctly the identity of the decrees of 
 Rosetta and Philae. (On this discussion see Zeitschrift der deutschen Morgenl. Gesellschaft, 1847, 
 264, foil., Revue Arch., IV, 240.) 
 
 Next Brugsch passed Philae. In his Reiseberichte, p. 261, he described the decree of 
 Epiphanes as "sculptured into the wall with characters so minute that I was hardly able to 
 recognize it." In his Sammlung demotischer Urkunden (1850), pi. 3, he published some extracts 
 from the first decree, trying to show the correspondence of the hieroglyphic and demotic 
 fragments; also to him the text seemed to be important only for filling gaps of the Rosetta 
 inscription. The way in which he gave those extracts was very imperfect. 1 It is questionable 
 if he copied the second decree. 
 
 In his Denkmaeler aus JEgypten (IV, pi. 33, the demotic text, VI, 30 to 34), Lepsius, who, in 
 the use of paper squeezes, possessed a great advantage over his predecessors, had a facsimile 
 drawn after the paper impressions of both decrees. These copies, although infinitely better 
 than the attempts of Brugsch, left the text so fragmentary that nobody utilized them. 
 
 Finally, Brugsch (Aeg. Zeitschr., 1878, 44), with great sagacity, observed the connection 
 of the second decree with the great Egyptian rebellion. His preliminary hints about the con- 
 tents suggest that he then planned a more exhaustive treatment of the text, but later abandoned 
 this undertaking. 
 
 1 The most objectionable features are some wild restorations where there was absolutely nothing on the stone. 
 
* INTRODUCTION. 
 
 G. Ebers, in Baedeker's first Guide Book to Upper Egypt (Oberaegypten, 1891) stated, p. 
 322, after Brugseh: "Of scientific importance, but written extremely minutely and almost 
 illegibly, are the decrees, above, on the left colonnade near the first pylon, discovered [sic!] by 
 Lepsius in 1843, written in the twenty -first year of Ptolemy Epiphanes in demotic and hiero- 
 glyphic writing, one at the celebration of the suppression of a rebellion and the punishment of 
 the malefactors, the other in honor of Cleopatra, the wife of Epiphanes. Unfortunately these 
 decrees have been much mutilated by the figures later (under Neos Dionysos) cut over them." 
 
 In the edition of Baedeker of 1897, p. 354, this description of the "scientifically important" 
 texts was limited to the first, which is called "a duplicate of the well-known inscription of 
 Rosetta (only the Greek text lacking)." Later editions withdrew this remark. 
 
 How far those texts remained unknown to science may be concluded from the fact that 
 E- A. W. Budge, in his first volume of The Rosetta Stone, p. 20, in 1904, reproduced a small sec- 
 tion of the so-called second decree from Lepsius's plate with the title "portion of a copy of the 
 decree on the Rosetta stone cut in hieroglyphic upon a wall of a temple at Philae." This illus- 
 trates well the illegibility of that publication. 
 
 The high importance of those texts became clear to me when, in 1883-84, as a student at 
 Leipzig, I took up privately the study of the demotic script of the ancient Egyptians. Con- 
 tinuing these studies at Berlin, in 1884-85, I received from the administration of the Berlin 
 Royal Museum permission to examine the paper squeezes brought home by the Lepsius expe- 
 dition and immediately saw how that almost useless copy in Lepsius's Denkmaeler could be 
 vastly improved by the study of the original. I devoted much time to the decipherment of 
 those squeezes and in later years obtained collations of various details on them by Erman, 
 Schaefer, and Sethe, and returned twice to Berlin for the purpose of collating them personally. 
 Later, I received, through the courtesy of W. Spiegelberg, a set of paper squeezes of my own. 
 My results, however, never were sufficiently certain. The edition presented here is based 
 principally on my work in the summer of 1910, when I was able to make further impressions and 
 to compare with the original stone the results obtained by me up to that time from squeezes. 
 Everybody familiar with epigraphic methods knows that even the best paper impression can 
 not entirely replace the study of the original ; sometimes a sign will look different on every other 
 squeeze. Here, of course, the original is unusually difficult. The small, shallow-engraved 
 signs become distinctly visible only during the short time of the day when they receive strong 
 side-light; running up and down on high ladders during that time, when even the seconds seem 
 precious, is the work of Tantalus for the scholar who would like to brood for hours over a single 
 difficult sign. Nevertheless, this comparison of the original on stone was a very desirable 
 and even indispensable supplement to the previous attempts of decipherment from squeezes. 
 
 What I offer as result is, I hope, almost exhaustive for the hieroglyphic text, more than can 
 be said, e. g., of the existing reproductions of the Rosetta stone. 1 A few remaining uncertain- 
 
 1 The principal paleographic characteristics of the hieroglyphs and the distances are carefully reproduced, but («. g.) the clumsy 
 and irregular division-lines (both of the first and second text) are not exactly imitated, because this would interfere with the legibility 
 of the text. Therefore, I have also inverted the direction of the hieroglyphic text which, in the original, runs from right to left; in 
 measuring the distances, etc., the inverted form on the squeezes had to be followed. The commentary has been limited to the most 
 condensed notes possible, principally because the lack of hieroglyphic types forbids philological investigations. Likewise the tran- 
 scription of Egyptian aims at simplicity, especially in the very complicated question of rendering the demotic orthography. The 
 employment of simple z for the widely different Egyptian sound ts, etc., is to be considered in this light. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 3 
 
 ties have been indicated. The demotic texts, owing to the difficult script which is so poorly 
 suited for monumental use (a kind of stenography always depending much on the context), leave 
 more uncertainty. I have, in their case, tried to draw mechanically only what I could see 
 clearly and without fancy. Of course, every experienced philologist knows how difficult it is 
 to call a decipherment of a palimpsestic manuscript final when it contains a unique text not 
 controlled by parallel manuscripts. Here, on stone, the difficulties are increased. I hope, 
 however, to have saved the best historic treasure of Philae so far that scientists will not have 
 to lament an irreparable loss when the beautiful temples of Philae come to be completely 
 destroyed by submerging. The end of Philae will, I must state it with regret, come much sooner 
 than has been admitted in the press. 
 
 THE FIRST DECREE. 
 
 The "first" 1 bilingual decree of Philae, engraved on the right side of the wall, is a modified 
 copy of the famous decree of Rosetta, or rather of Memphis, in which city the priests of all 
 the Egyptian temples (as far as they were then under control of the struggling Alexandrian 
 government) had assembled in the ninth year of Ptolemy V., Epiphanes, to honor the king as 
 benefactor of the temples and of the whole Egyptian nation. Two years after the suppression 
 of the great revolution, i. e., in the year 21, the priests at another convention in Memphis are 
 stated to have renewed that decree of thanks to the king and the establishment of his divine 
 worship. The principal reason was that the decree of year 9 had not yet been set up in the 
 temples of the Upper Country, owing to the long years of rebellion. The promulgation of 
 those honors to the king seemed the more necessary to the priests because the reforms of the 
 old decree (above all, the remission of taxes lost to the Alexandrian government in the rebellious 
 provinces) had been extended to the time of the suppression of the rebellion, i. e., to the year 
 19 inclusive. 
 
 Of course, these reasons are not stated too plainly in the new decree ; this would have meant 
 a painful confession of past disloyalty. Still, the decree was not entirely reproduced at Philae 
 as it had been written in the year 9. Instead of maintaining the fiction that the Upper Country 
 had been loyal, the text of the priestly resolution of Memphis is here given mutatis mutandis. 2 
 Therefore it bears not the original date of the ninth year, but the date of the convention of the 
 year 21. 
 
 The divine honors are extended to the queen, Cleopatra, as probably had always been 
 done since the date of her marriage. This formal recognition of the queen's cult is, however, 
 not the main point for republication, as Lepsius thought. The great rebellion furnished the 
 principal reason for this republication. All references to that great rebellion, however, were 
 taken out of the old text of Memphis; that whole unfortunate period now was left to oblivion. 
 
 1 1 still use this expression because the erroneous numbering introduced by Lepsius has become familiar. According to its dating 
 the above decree is the second. See the references to the alleged "second" decree in the "first" inscription, line 9/ and 13c to d 
 (demotic 13/). 
 
 2 In the decree of Damanhur, of the year 23, the scribe simply altered the protocol of year 9 to that of year 23, but copied the text 
 of year 9 for the rest quite mechanically. This was mere negligence, not a wilful fiction of conservatism or loyalty. I am not sure 
 whether we can draw the inference from a comparison of the two later editions (Philae and Damanhur) that the adaptations of the 
 decree of Memphis were left to the scholars of each temple, instead of being worked out at the convention where the renewal of that 
 decree was decided. The inclination of the Egyptian mind toward a certain laxity in execution of everything may be considered, at 
 least in the case of the Damanhur copy. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 The modifications in the enumeration of royal reforms and benefits are the most difficult to 
 understand; in the mutilated condition of the text we can not follow them very well nor decide 
 whether the shortening of some paragraphs was due to cancellation of those laws 1 or to the 
 impression of the redactor that those matters were somewhat obsolete after twelve years. 
 The most important matter of the decree, after all, claims to be the worship of the royal couple, 
 and of this the description is given very minutely. For the rest, the redactor's mode of pro- 
 ceeding remains yet to be determined. 
 
 We might infer from the promptness with which the priests at Philse engraved the two 
 decrees, and from the prominent place which they gave to them, that they had a specially bad 
 conscience toward the Alexandrian government. We can not, however, with full certainty, 
 add this inference to some other indications which could be interpreted as though the rebellion 
 had started in the cataract region or had received special aid from this frontier district. (See 
 below, on the titles of the two rebel kings.) 
 
 The question of the original language of all those priestly decrees is now rather plain. The 
 priests, of course, discussed their resolutions and probably sketched them in their native lan- 
 guage. It is certain that the first form in which the resolutions went into writing was in demotic 
 script; the hieroglyphic style was too much confined to the most learned and not practical 
 enough for a protocol of this kind. The official form, however, finally was in Greek. After 
 this form, authorized by communication to the Royal Government, the final Egyptian versions, 
 such as we have them, were translated rather literally. Small additions occur for the sake of 
 loyalty or clearness; they are of greater importance where the Greek redaction had not done 
 full justice to matters of too special Egyptian character, e. g., in the description of the hiero- 
 glyphic symbols decorating the portable shrine of the king, which had merely been summarily 
 touched by the Greek version (Rosetta, lines 43 to 44) . There the Egyptian translations went 
 back to the original (demotic) minutes of the priest. 2 Elsewhere, these minutes scarcely 
 exercise any influence. The demotic version of the official Greek form preceded the hiero- 
 glyphic; the latter often leans more on the demotic than on the Greek text. These principles 
 I consider now as settled, especially for the Rosetta and Philse decree. 3 
 
 Difficult and obscure as are the Egyptian versions, on account of their clumsy writing and 
 style, nevertheless they are extremely helpful for the elucidation of the Greek text. 4 The 
 redactors of this text always strove more for elegance and terseness of style than for clearness, pre- 
 supposing too much that the readers would be sufficiently familiar with the matters mentioned. 
 Of course, the hieroglyphic versions arehampered, on their part, by their striving after archaizing 
 beauty while expressing too modern matters. To follow a model in a language differing in 
 expression so widely from Egyptian as does classical Greek was not much easier for the hiero- 
 grammates than it would be for a lawyer or newspaper reporter of our age to express matters of 
 modern politics or business in Latin. The demotic version ought to be simpler and is, indeed, 
 
 1 As Mahaffy, Empire, 311, believes to trace the reintroduction of the apomoira from wine, in documents from the year 18. 
 
 2 Not copying them, however, word for word. The description is neither quite exhaustive nor clear in the demotic version on stone. 
 
 3 Thus the remarks by Mahaffy {Empire of the Ptolemies, 302) on the succession of the versions, are to be corrected. The plan 
 of all those decrees is, of course, very un-Greek, betraying somewhat the first conception in the old Egyptian style, but their Greek 
 wording is excellent, at least for the contemporaries. The demotic text, on the other hand, struggles too desperately and is often too 
 un-Egyptian to be literally the original version of the final official edition. 
 
 4 $ee the honest confession of Mahaffy, Empire, 302, 
 
INTRODUCTION. 5 
 
 more helpful where the complicated writing, especially poorly suited for monumental use (p. 3), 
 can be read with certainty. 1 Thus the gaps and obscurities of the Greek text of the Rosettana 
 need comparison with the Egyptian versions, while these useful commentaries themselves would 
 be much more obscure without the Greek original. We gain now, by our parallel text from 
 Philae, a better understanding of all three versions of the Rosettana, principally of the hiero- 
 glyphic part. 2 
 
 One general result of comparing our Philae text with the Rosettana is the relatively close 
 adherence to the style of the official hieroglyphic text of year 9. The Egyptian scribes of the 
 New Empire usually showed great lack of accuracy in copying any texts; they varied their 
 models intentionally by freely using synonymous words and synonymous orthography. We 
 still find a great amount of such liberty in those Ptolemaic decrees, more than modern systems 
 of writing would tolerate, but the scholars who could use archaic Egyptian quite fluently had 
 evidently become scarcer; therefore, we observe that such masterpieces of style as the Rosetta 
 text were followed in a fairly accurate way, especially where they contained strange and 
 remarkable archaisms. Lack of hieroglyphic types, as said (p. 2, note 1), prevents my studying 
 the very peculiar style of our decrees from the philological side ; this theme invites the attention 
 of specialists in Egyptian grammar. 3 
 
 Less rich are the results for the demotic text of the old Memphis decree. The demotic 
 hand of the Philae text is much prettier and clearer than that of the faithful engraver of the 
 Rosettana, for instance, but the sandstone of Philae did not receive and preserve the signs as 
 well as the basalt of the Rosetta stone ; this writing, poorly suited for monumental use in general, 
 as said repeatedly, has thus here in many places become indistinct. Like all kinds of stenog- 
 raphy, it needs absolute clearness and a safe context to be readable. I have given the traces in 
 such passages mechanically as I could see them on the stone, and only in my translation, not on 
 the plates, have I dared to restore boldly after the corresponding lines of the Rosettana. 
 
 The two decrees can be called bilingual after their present condition or trilingual according 
 to the original intention of the priests. The omission of the Greek version at Philae is not with 
 certainty significant (as though, in the cataract region, the Greek-speaking element had been 
 scarce enough to form an excuse for the omission of the Greek part) . This tendency to save 
 some part of labor by quiet omission appears too often in ancient Egypt. A good example is 
 the stela of Damanhur, where the priests apparently thought they had shown their good will 
 sufficiently by some wretched extracts from the hieroglyphic text, disregarding completely the 
 two other versions. 
 
 1 The engraver of the demotic Rosettana slavishly copied his extremely hastily written model on papyrus as though he had papyrus 
 for his material; he did not attempt to change it anywhere to clear monumental forms. We often doubt whether he could read at all. 
 Therefore, the demotic Rosettana is an extremely difficult text, on the exact philological explanation of which much remains to be done 
 after the pioneer attempts of H. Brugsch, R. Revillout, and J. J. Hess. 
 
 2 The hieroglyphic text of the Rosettana is, strange to say, one of the least treated and least understood Egyptian texts. The 
 pioneers of Egyptology turned away from it after it had furnished, in its most frequent words, the key to more promising texts. Since 
 the meritorious but imperfect study of F. Chabas {V inscription hieroglyphique de Rosette, 1867) only the compilation of Budge (The 
 Decrees of Memphis and Canopus, 1904, 3 volumes) treats rather superficially of the text, which is by no means intelligible in every word 
 01 sign. 
 
 3 The most interesting side of this style seems to be that we have in those decrees the last traces of the Neo-Egyptian style of the 
 New Empire, which, however, had, in Ptolemaic time, become in turn archaic and was therefore mixed more and more with the 
 earlier, classical styles. Notwithstanding this, the style of the decrees remained very peculiar and quite distinct from the usual, 
 purely religious, inscriptions in hieroglyphic signs. 
 
EDITORIAL NOTE. 
 
 The sudden and tragic death of Professor Miiller, on July 12, 191 9, while he was spending his 
 vacation at the seashore at Wildwood Crest, New Jersey, has closed the work of one of the most 
 eminent representatives of Oriental scholarship, known alike in Europe and America. He had 
 been an indefatigable student of Egyptology since his school days at the Gymnasium at Niirn- 
 berg, Bavaria, when he took up these fascinating studies as an autodidact, and he pursued them 
 after his abiturium at the universities of Leipzig, Berlin, and Munich. The first fruit of his labors 
 appeared in the year 1893, under the title "Europa und Asien nach agyptischen Denkmalern." 
 It was a work which at once drew the attention of the scholarly world upon the author and it 
 awakened the hope that Miiller would follow up the new road, which he had broken in the field 
 of the realia. In this hope no one was deceived. But Miiller showed himself also capable in 
 the edition of texts, when in 1899 his "Liebespoesie der alten Agypter" appeared. In the last 
 few years prior to his death he had occupied himself extensively with the Religion and the Myth- 
 ology of the ancient Egyptians, the results of which studies are laid down in his "Egyptian 
 Mythology," which appeared only one year before his death. Under the auspices of the Carnegie 
 Institution of Washington he was enabled to make three archeological expeditions to Egypt, the 
 land of his boyhood dreams, and he was one of the last to make competent observations on some 
 of the temples of the upper Nile. His plans for future scientific researches were numerous, 
 and these he had often discussed with me, since for the last three years I had been a pupil of his 
 and closely associated with him. During a protracted illness in the fall of 191 8, Dr. Miiller had 
 expressed the wish that, in case he should be unable to finish a number of his publications, their 
 completion should devolve upon me. Thus, after his lamentable death, his family approached 
 me with the request that I should put the finishing touches on the present volume. To this I 
 gladly consented, after the Carnegie Institution of Washington had approved of my doing so. 
 The work was in its final stages when I took charge of it. Nothing has been added to it, although 
 in some instances, I am quite sure, Dr. Miiller would have introduced some further additions. 
 I have merely added the brackets in the hieroglyphic and demotic texts and elucidated more 
 clearly a number of notes where some uncertainty in expression was observable. I am also 
 responsible for a few restorations in the text. 
 
 Hbnry F. Lutz, Ph. D., 
 Research Instructor in Assyriology and Egyptology 
 
 in the University of Pennsylvania. 
 (6) 
 
THE GREAT EGYPTIAN REVOLUTION. 
 
 Until rather recently it was customary among the historians, even those without popu- 
 larizing tendencies, to describe the age of the Ptolemaic kings as a kind of millennium for 
 Egypt. In order to strengthen this impression of bliss, that age was usually contrasted with 
 the preceding time of Persian rule, which was depicted in the darkest colors possible, as a time 
 of misery and cruel oppression. Even the religion of the poor Egyptians was said to have been 
 touched; the good, patient, harmless people were not allowed to worship their sacred animals 
 in peace. No wonder that the oppressed again and again rose in desperate revolts against the 
 Persian tyranny, notwithstanding the bloody cruelty with which these struggles for freedom 
 were always suppressed. Finally deliverance came by Alexander the Great. Welcomed 
 enthusiastically as a divine savior by all Egypt, he inaugurated there an era of peace, prosper- 
 ity, and happiness, the most brilliant fruit of Hellenism. Happy in religious liberty, the 
 Egyptians gave themselves faithfully and willingly to the illuminating influence of Greek 
 civilization ! 
 
 We have learned more and more that those lovely fancies are untrue. As far as we know 
 the Persian administration, it seems to have treated Egypt very mildly, leaving everything in 
 the country as much as possible in the condition in which the Persian conquest had found it. 
 It seems rather that the numerous and serious rebellions of the Egyptians were due much more 
 to the lax and over-liberal administration of the Persians than to oppression; another reason 
 for those rebellions may be found in the difficult class of population which we have to discuss 
 below. At any rate, no religious persecutions can be proved by the monuments. The calum- 
 nies of cruelty and intolerance with which Cambyses, the conqueror, is covered in the reports 
 of Herodotus are manifestly priestly lies of a very clumsy character. The Egyptian monu- 
 ments from the Persian period show us that those foreign kings tolerated and supported the 
 gods, temples, and priests of Egypt quite as much as the Macedonian and Roman rulers did 
 in succeeding times. 
 
 The pleasant picture of conditions under the Ptolemaic kings is also deceptive. It was 
 too much an argumentum e silentio, based on the fact that our knowledge of the history of the 
 Ptolemaic kingdom, as long as it rested completely on the Greek historians, was exclusively a 
 history of the foreign relations of Egypt and of her royal family. This history, moreover, was 
 confined to Alexandria, and whenever the Egyptian people were considered at all by the classi- 
 cal writers, this meant only the Greek population of Alexandria. The great mass of the native 
 Egyptians, who by their labor and their taxes supported the court, the large armies of mercen- 
 aries, the fleets, and the expensive foreign policy, are scarcely considered in the Greek authors. 
 Thus we have practically what we ought to call a history of the kingdom of Alexandria rather 
 than of Egypt. If the history of Paris and of London would give only incomplete histories of 
 France and England, the case is infinitely worse with Alexandria and Egypt. 
 
 If we should compare the position of Alexandria as capital of Egypt with that of modern 
 Calcutta as capital of India, we should express the incongruity of the nationalities far too mildly. 
 Calcutta is, after all, an Indian city, and the recognition of the native element in the English 
 
 7 
 
THE GREAT EGYPTIAN REVOLUTION. 
 
 administration of India is there (as well as in the whole country) much greater than that of the 
 Egyptian population was under the Ptolemaic rule. Alexandria was a piece of Greece trans- 
 ferred to the mouth of the Nile, keeping zealously its un-Kgyptian character; the rich finds 
 preserved in the modern museum of Alexandria show that only small separate quarters of 
 native Egyptians can have existed there. 1 Yet this Greek city absorbed all the wealth of the 
 country with few returns. The kings emphasized their Macedonian blood, 2 and it seems to 
 have been quite an exception that the unusually gifted last queen, Cleopatra, as Plutarch tells 
 us, understood the barbarous tongue of her subjects, or at least something of it. Inscriptions 
 and papyri conceal, of course, the fact that a wide gulf existed between everything Greek and 
 the Egyptian element, but we must not be deceived on this account. The best analogy is again 
 the relation between Englishman and Hindu. The brown native in ancient Egypt often used 
 a Greek name and imitated the dress and manners of the ruling class; 3 at the same time his 
 religion taught him that those aristocrats were ceremonially unclean barbarians, so that for a 
 long time the contempt of the Greeks for the strange, barbarian subjects must have been recipro- 
 cated. While from the inscriptions and papyri we are apt sometimes to mistake a man using 
 Greek writing and a Greek name for a member of the privileged nationality, the contemporaries 
 seem for a long time to have drawn the "color-line" rather strictly, and it may be said that in 
 reality Egyptian and Greek mixed like oil and water. 4 This fact has been set forth very plainly 
 by Th. Mommsen (Romische Geschichte, V, p. 561), who correctly observed that in Egypt the 
 legal superiority of the Greek race over the subjected natives was emphasized in a way un- 
 paralleled in any Hellenistic country. If under the Roman rule the theoretical inferiority of 
 the Egyptians to the Greeks was maintained even in the different mode of corporal punishment 
 for both nationalities, we may conclude that this distinction of the two nationalities must have 
 been far more rigid and more oppressive at the time when the Greeks themselves ruled in Egypt 
 under the dynasty of the Lagides. The most characteristic testimony on this sharp distinction 
 is the passage of the second Philse decree 10 / (page 72), which reports that Greek and Egyptian 
 troops kept guard side by side "as though they belonged to the same race. " This is mentioned 
 as a new and wonderful fact. The demotic contracts state, in the case of Egyptians, their 
 profession when this is different from the ordinary native occupation as farmer. With the 
 foreigners, on the other hand, we find only the designation "the Greek" replacing the men- 
 tion of the occupation. A representative of the privileged people is expected to live on a 
 pension from the government under one or another pretext. 
 
 1 For this reason Alexandria seems designated as a"fortress" (Philae decree II, line 4; see also the Buto-Stela, line 4). This seems 
 to refer more to the exclusive character of the city than to her walls. 
 
 2 Therefore, after the annexation of Egypt by the Romans, a priest of Memphis, during the first years of Augustus, mentions 
 the past dynasty as mere foreigners, i. e., as "the Greek kings who were on the shore of the sea towards the west, in the city . . . 
 whose name is Ra'-qodi" {i. e., Rakotis, Egyptian name for Alexandria; cp. Buto-Stela, line 4, Strabo 792, etc.). See Harris Stela, 
 Reinisch, Chrestomathie, 21, 1. 9. The older "Chronicle" papyrus of Paris, which speaks of "the Greeks" in a similar way, will be 
 discussed farther down. 
 
 3 This is believed by Mahaffy {The Empire of the Ptolemies, 396) to have become frequent only at a later period; see the follow- 
 ing note. I have no gathered data on this question, which is not quite identical with that of the real assimilation of both races. 
 
 4 F. Preisigke, in Schriften der wissenschaftlichen Gesellschaft in Strassburg, 19, p. 26, uses the above expression. The fusion of both 
 races progressed very rapidly only when Christianity spread in Egypt; it may have begun on a smaller scale under the later Ptolemies. 
 Mahaffy {Empire of the Ptol.) tries to trace its beginnings to Ptolemy VII (p. 359 foil.), whom he believes to have favored the natives, 
 and its progress under Ptolemy IX (p. 396). See the note above. Below we shall trace it to a slightly earlier time. For the first 
 150 years of Greek dominion, however, the above characterization may be fully accepted. 
 
THE GREAT EGYPTIAN REVOLUTION. 9 
 
 It is also true that the Ptolemies did not rule the country in a very paternal way . They 
 exploited the poor natives without mercy. While it must be admitted that the native rulers in 
 ancient time never had made the burden of the Egyptian peasants too light, the Ptolemaic 
 kings seem to have reached the greatest perfection in extorting the highest possible amount of 
 taxation (Mommsen, 560). It is questionable, indeed, whether these burdens would have 
 driven the patient crowds to serious insurrections. Of course, the religion of the natives never 
 was touched, because religious intolerance nowhere existed in heathenism; only the mono- 
 theistic religions introduced it. The privileges of the temples and the priests were consider- 
 ably limited under the Ptolemies; yet religious as the Egyptians were (in their own way, so 
 different from what we now call piety) , this would hardly have roused the masses of Egypt to 
 insurrection. Nor have we evidence that the personal despotism of the kings and their vices 
 ever had this effect. Such matters touched only the population of Alexandria. The native 
 element does not seem to have participated much in the numerous civil wars which later were 
 fought for the succession to the throne; it left these to the Graeco-Macedonian population, 
 which had practical interest in those struggles, i. e., in their spoils. 1 
 
 In general, it must be admitted that the Egyptians were unwarlike to cowardice; 
 just as Strabo (p. 819) characterized them as being patient, and used to being dominated by 
 foreigners, long centuries before the Persians and Greeks ruled in the Nile land. Still, we must 
 not exaggerate this docility beyond measure. There were, at any rate, some elements among 
 the Egyptians which were not quite as manageable as the ordinary peasants, namely, a privi- 
 leged class, the warriors. 
 
 We do not know very much as to this class of population. It is not necessary to discuss 
 here the military institutions of the Egyptians from the earliest time. On the monuments 
 speaking of Pharaoh's troops we read mostly of mercenaries who. also served as police whenever 
 they were not needed abroad. They begin with the negro troops of the sixth dynasty; sub- 
 sequently all possible nations of Africa, Asia, and Europe contributed to these troops. The 
 soldiers of Egyptian blood are not so conspicuous ; they are less well treated and in earlier time 
 often are employed in peace, not only as policemen but as common royal workingmen, even at 
 the hardest kind of public work. 2 
 
 We know especially little about the various classes of native soldiers in the Middle Empire. 
 According to their name, we should assume "the followers" (smsw) to be specially privileged 
 among them, possibly as doing personal service to the king ( ?) ; how they were distinguished 
 
 1 A very interesting illustration is the quotation from Polybius given by Strabo, 17, i (791), characterizing the native population 
 of Alexandria in the second century A. D. as <pvhov b^vxal ttoKltikov "a race sharp (-witted) and taking interest in political matters." 
 This characterization is, at first sight, very strange, because those words seem to fit only the Greek Alexandrines. Therefore, emenda- 
 tions were proposed to alter the sense into the contrary, such as airdkiTuiov (see C. Muller's edition of Strabo) — a very doubtful word, 
 which does not harmonize in idea with the other designation "sharp, quick-witted." After thinking for a while of the emendation 
 ovSiv TroXtTiKoj-, which is not much more satisfactory, I believe that the passage expressed, in its original setting, the surprise of Polybius 
 that the Alexandrines of Egyptian race were somewhat different from the dull and apathetic mass of the other Egyptian natives. 
 Originally, Polybius, in all probability, added some limiting words, at least that their number made them an element without great 
 influence in politics. In the present form, the passage does not so well show that an exception confirming the general rule was meant, 
 but I now feel sure of this sense. 
 
 2 E. g., on the famous representation of the transportation of the colossal statue (Newberry, El-Bersheh, I, pi. 15), the second row of 
 the people pulling the statue consists exclusively of soldiers, as their costume and the inscription "the young people (z;mw) of the soldiers 
 Cty.wlyw) of the hare nome" shows. When we find foreign mercenaries mentioned at such public works, they do not pull stones, as some 
 Egyptologists have thought, but superintend the work as policemen only and overseers, as said above. Cp.L. D. Ill, 140 c, 2, 17, 18, etc. 
 
10 
 
 THE GREAT EGYPTIAN REVOLUTION. 
 
 from the soldiers called mnftyw is not clear, because the latter name seems to begin soon to be 
 used vaguely. 1 We find then "the hereditary troop of the soldiers which is (always) ready" 
 (m tpt-') 2 first mentioned under one of the later kings of the twelfth dynasty (Senwosret III, 
 cp. Naville Bubastis, pi. 34A, 8). Their name means: the people who inherit with certain 
 privileges the duty to serve in war time, probably also in peace on certain occasions. Thus they 
 correspond, e. g., to the Timariots in the Turkish state. The nstitution seems to have been 
 new then, because the inscription explains it still. In the New Empire we find " the hereditary 
 soldiery" mentioned very often. From Pap. Sallier I, 7, 3, we learn that the "stable-owner" 
 hry-h{w), represented the higher class of the "hereditary troops." It is said there: "If his 
 horse (s) leave him (so that he is) afoot, he is taken to the hereditary class," i. e., here the infan- 
 try. 3 It is not expressly stated that the scenes of conscription, like Miss. Frang. V, 598, "the 
 mustering of young recruits," where the scribe "was teaching everybody his duties of the 
 whole army," refer to the "hereditary soldiers," but this is most probable. 4 In these scenes 
 they do not appear with arms; the representations in Medinet Habu (Rosellini, Mon. Stor. 125 
 = Champollion, Mon. 218) show that the royal armory handed those out to the soldiers in 
 time of war. From the Karnak inscription of Haremheb, line 25 (see my Egyptological 
 Researches I, pi. 93), we learn that the soldiers of all Egypt were divided into two big " classes" 
 (s',; not to be confounded with the small "classes," which correspond with our regiments), so 
 that the division into the so-called Kalasirians and H(?)ermotybians (Herodotus, II, 164) seems 
 to go back to the eighteenth dynasty at least. Herodotus and other Greeks describe the 
 privileges of the soldiers as consisting in freedom from taxation and a uniform fief of arable 
 land. 5 According to the inscriptions, there was no caste system connected with this. It 
 seems that the eldest son inherited the father's occupation and, evidently, the fief of land; the 
 other children were free to choose their vocation and usually sought it outside of the military 
 service. 6 When there was no suitable heir to the military position, a successor was nominated 
 by the government. Probably it was not difficult to find an applicant from the ranks of the 
 peasant class for the use of a fief of very desirable ground. According to the Greek writers, 
 nevertheless, in their time, the soldiers seem to have felt themselves to be a separate class of 
 
 1 E. g., a prince of Elephantine (Rec. Trav. X, 188, etc.) furnished mnftyw to the king "to overthrow his enemies." This makes us 
 think of Nubian troops among these and makes it doubtful whether that expression marks a fixed military class even in the Middle 
 Empire. In the same period we find the designation 'b'.wty "the warrior" (corresponding closely to the Greek designation fidx^os) 
 as profession, e. g., Garstang, Burial Customs, p. 191, etc.; see above on Newberry, El-Bersheh I, 15. 
 
 2 Literally "from that which is on the hand." This expression seems to be explained as in the parallel English idiom, i. e., of 
 readiness at tie calling of the king, less probably of the fact that those soldiers were bound to their place. 
 
 3 See de Morgan, Catalogue I, 120, "the stable-owners and officer-men (sw-snn!) of the hereditary class" in parallelism. Leyden, 
 Pap. D. 132 (Moller, Hieratische Lesestiicke III, 14), 1. 15: "the officers (snny) of the soldiers of Pharaoh and his cavalry." So snny 
 seems to be limited to the charioteers. When we find so often the designation of the hereditary soldiers as royal, as, e. g., Pap. 
 Bologna, I, 14, "the hereditary force (l) — y"yt) of Pharaoh", this is no superfluous addition. E. g., L. D. Ill, 153, 13 "the officers of 
 the hereditary force (yw't) [from] the lands of Pharaoh"; similarly line 17 "from the land of Pharaoh." The contrastis furnished by 
 Pap. Anastasi IV, 8 (Moller III, 5) "mustering soldiers (and) cavalry of the temples (their) serfs (and ?) youths at the command of 
 the officers of His Majesty." I. e., the serfs of the temples sometimes were exempted from military service, sometimes a certain 
 number of them were demanded for the Army, and even horses for the war chariots had to be furnished by the priests. Military 
 service depended also in this case on land tenure. 
 
 4 The pictures (ibid. 228, 288) ought not to have been explained as recruiting scenes; they represent the feeding at festivals of 
 soldiers commanded to serve near the king. Here they are called mnf(y)tyw. See note 1, on the vagueness of this expression. 
 
 6 In dynasty 18 special gifts of fields are given to officers, as a reward for preeminent bravery, L. D. Ill, I2d, 21. Consequently, 
 the fiefs can not always have been of uniform size at that time. 
 
 6 Diodorus I, 73, seems to assume that all children of soldiers entered on the father's profession, a proof that he had little 
 knowledge of the ancient conditions. 
 
THE GREAT EGYPTIAN REVOLUTION. 11 
 
 population, more than we should conclude from the above-described conditions ; they formed 
 thus a certain nobility, owing to their privileges and their esprit de corps. 
 
 This may be due partly to the fact that the Egyptian kings (from dynasty 20 on?) had 
 settled foreign soldiers, principally Libyans, on the vacant military fiefs. Although inter- 
 marrying freely with the Egyptians and thus soon losing their racial characteristics and their 
 foreign language, those soldiers still felt themselves to be distinct from the ordinary Egyptians. 
 Their officers formed a still higher nobility and tried to rule over whole districts, which partly 
 may have been given to them as royal fiefs in serfs, partly may have been usurped. The 
 Pharaohs of later time had to fight much with these disobedient vassals, whom we find repeatedly 
 ruling as independently as the medieval European dukes and counts. The termination of this 
 often anarchic condition by Psammetichus's suppression of the "dodekarchy," 1 i. e., the many 
 small independent principalities, was still well remembered in the time of Herodotus (II, 147). 
 He seems to give a correct tradition in describing how the royal government found in foreign 
 mercenaries the best support against those unruly vassals; those nobles in their turn must have 
 sought the favor of the hereditary soldiers by increasing their privileges. This development 
 seems to explain why the soldiers in the later period of Egyptian history showed more pride 
 than during the golden time of Egyptian conquests and held a more esteemed position in the 
 state. Their history presents thus a certain analogy to that of the Mamluk nobility of medieval 
 Egypt. 
 
 The fancifully exaggerated report that 240,000 (!) soldiers emigrated to Ethiopia (Herod- 
 otus, II, 30) when their privileges were shortened, and the not very clearly stated part which 
 they had in dethroning King Apries, etc., again demonstrates that they continued to form 
 a difficult element, even under the strongly centralized twenty-sixth dynasty. The Persians 
 apparently left their prerogatives as much as possible untouched. I ascribe the endless revolu- 
 tions which the Persians had to face in Egypt principally to this class of the population, as said 
 above (p. 7); unfortunately we have no detailed information on any of those revolutions. 
 If I am right, then the conservatism with which the Persian government treated their Egyptian 
 province seems to have been the principal reason for their difficulties with the Egyptians. 
 
 Notwithstanding all these experiences, the Persians transmitted those conditions to their 
 Greek successors, the Ptolemies. Under these we still have at least considerable remnants of 
 the old system of the ixaxwoi, i. e., "those fit for fighting," the remu-qonqen (i. e., early rmtw 
 qnqnw), which is the rare Egyptian name for "soldiers," according to the Rosetta stone, demotic 
 line 11. We shall find below the strange fact that the Ptolemaic hieroglyphic inscriptions lack 
 a fixed name for them; the various words for "warriors" which they employ are so vague that 
 they can be applied also to the privileged settled soldiers of Macedonian and Greek descent, 
 to mercenaries, and are even more ambiguous (cp. p. 60, note 6; p. 72, note 7). 
 
 In general, we again know little as to the native soldiers in the time of the Ptolemies. On 
 the treatment of this class see especially P. M. Meyer, Das Heerwesen der Griechen und Rdmer 
 in Aegypten, 1900; Jean Lesquier, Les institutions militaires de VEgypte sous les Lagides, 191 1. 
 For this we have, unfortunately, material only from the time after our two decrees, when 
 probably considerable changes had taken place. We notice, then, above all, that the name 
 
 1 Twelve is merely a symbolical number. At most times the number of principalities must have been larger. 
 
12 THE GREAT EGYPTIAN REVOLUTION. 
 
 ixaxuxoi is no longer strictly limited to the native Egyptian soldiers; it is applied also to "Greek 
 machimoi." Egyptians are then called expressly "Egyptian machimoi" and play a much 
 smaller part than before, it seems. 1 Probably the Ptolemies, after the unfortunate experiences 
 of the great revolution, had filled the vacant soldier fiefs with Greeks in order to eliminate 
 gradually that dangerous native class. 
 
 We should expect that the soldiers, claiming to be superior to the cowardly serf -class of 
 the peasants, rather lived from their fields by subletting them to the peasants, but it remains 
 to be examined whether the lots of the soldiers as described by Herodotus (II, 168, "12 Arures") 
 allowed this plan, which would agree so well with Oriental manners. The Greek papyrus 63 
 of the Louvre {Notices el extr. des manuscr., XVIII, p. 360) speaks of the economic condition of 
 the soldiers under Ptolemy Euergetes II. (Cp. Lumbroso, Ueconomie politique, 229. 2 ) This 
 petition describes the warriors as (1. 87) "in the city night and day, overworked with their 
 duties" (XeiTovpyicu) (1. 100). "Of the people (Xaoi) dwelling in the villages, the majority, 
 driven by bitter need, must work and earn a living; but many of those connected with the army 
 (twv kv tQ otpoltiwtlku) 4>epop.evwv) can not live from the state appointments. Some of the 
 machimoi, rather the majority, can not with their own labor procure from their own lot (e« 
 tov idlov nXripovs avrovpydv) enough" and must live over the winter by borrowing money. They 
 have not even enough seed for their fields (1. no). 
 
 Unfortunately, it is not clear how all these gloomy descriptions apply to the native warriors. 
 The "people" (Aaoi) ought to be distinguished from them according to the ordinary use of this 
 word (cp. below on Rosetta, 1. 12), and indeed (lines 132, 133) we find "the poor people and the 
 machimoi. " But that petition does not seem to make this distinction regularly. Finally, the 
 needy warriors there (in 165 B. C.) appear to be largely Greeks, accord ng to what has been 
 observed above. Therefore we are in doubt whether those complaints may be taken as a 
 description of the native warrior's life. Granting all this and admitting the petition to move in 
 great exaggerations, nevertheless we may conclude that the warriors always had only a very 
 moderate existence under the Ptolemies. We suspect also that not much remained of the 
 freedom from taxation which they still had enjoyed under the Persians, but we have no certain 
 data on this point. 3 
 
 It is questionable how often the Ptolemies armed the native warriors. I should not press 
 the passage of Polybius (V, 107), which we shall discuss below, so far as to imply that, up to the 
 year 217 4 B. C, they never had been used practically. It would be strange if the first three 
 kings of the Macedonian dynasty had not needed them in their numerous wars. Diodorus 
 (XIX, 80) refers to an employment of the natives in war under the first Ptolemy in a rather 
 credible way. Still we may infer from Polybius that they were not used regularly and had not 
 been called to arms for some time ; the special necessity of an unusually dangerous attack on 
 
 1 J. Lesquier, p. 10, 105, Pap. Tebtunis, I, Index. 
 
 2 I found the edition needing many corrections, after the facsimile, pi. 6, but do not have the book now at hand. 
 
 3 The Mendes stela (1. 14) reports that the king Ptolemy selected as pages or guards for the sacred ram or goat of Mendes "of the 
 fine youths from the warriors (mnflyw, see p. 38) of Egypt, the best tp(y)w from the children . " This looks as though the 
 wealthier temples had to contribute something for the support of the warrior families under such pretexts of an honorary employment. 
 Such a pretext for a sinecure would be more natural with the aristocracy of Macedonian blood, but would these people send their 
 children to the temples of the native gods for such services? 
 
 4 For practical reasons I have throughout this book, as much as possible, adopted the chronology giveu by Mahaffy, The Empire 
 of the Ptolemies, without touching various uncertainties. 
 
THE GREAT EGYPTIAN REVOLUTION. 13 
 
 Egypt forced Ptolemy IV. not to overlook any means of defense and to resort to that force. If 
 this had not been done for a longer time, the suspicion arises that those warriors beforehand had 
 proved to be a dangerous element among the natives; they may have already given some 
 trouble to the first three Ptolemaic kings. 
 
 At any rate, the number of the native warriors must have been moderate. We do not take 
 seriously the fanciful numbers of Herodotus (II, 165-166 : still 410,000 remaining after the emi- 
 gration of 240,000 to Ethiopia !) and Diodorus I, 54 (650,000, a number taken from Herodotus 
 without criticism !) . Polybius gives their total as 20,000 at the battle of Raphia, where Ptolemy 
 IV. made that fatal mistake of gathering them. It is true, we can not guarantee that those 
 20,000 represented the whole number. Ptolemy IV. might have called only a part to arms, 
 mistrusting them from the beginning. The great probability remains, even under this assump- 
 tion, that their number did not reach that of the regular Macedonian and Greek soldiers. So, 
 while it is not probable that the native warriors remained constantly quiet and loyal for the 
 whole first century of Macedonian dominion, yet their limited number and their scattering 
 over the whole country seem to have enabled the powerful first three Ptolemies to keep them 
 under control. 
 
 Various reasons increased their dangerous character under Ptolemy IV., Philopator, a king 
 with whom, in general, a certain decadence of the flourishing Lagide state seems to begin. 
 Polybius, of whom we possess a very valuable fragment on the outbreak of the great revolution 
 (V, 107), attributes the reason principally to that mistake of gathering those natives for the 
 battle at Raphia, 217 B. C. His report runs thus: 
 
 IlToAe/iaia; ye jj.7]v evdews cltto tovtcov tuv 
 Katpwv avvefiawe yiyvtaQanbv irpos Aiyvwrlovs 
 Tokefiov. 
 
 '0 yap irpoeiprj/jievos fiacnXevs KadoirYuras 
 tovs Aiyvirriovs eirl tov irpos 'KvtIoxov iroXep-ov 
 irpos p.ev to irapov evdexop-evus efiovXevaaTO, tov 
 8e fxeWovTOS rjaT ox^ce. 
 
 ^povt]p,aTLo-devT€S yap e/c tov irepl 'Pa4>Lav 
 TrpoTepq/JiaTOs ovutTi to irpoa TaTTO/xevov 010 1 re 
 rjaav viro/j,evet.v dXX' e^r/Tovv rjyejMOva /cat 
 irpoacoirov cos luavoi ftor]delv ovTes avTols. 
 /cat TeXos ( ! ) eirolrjo-av ov /xera ttoXvp xpovov ( ! ) 
 
 To Ptolemy soon then after those times it happened 
 that the war against (the) Egyptians broke out. 
 
 For the aforementioned king by arming the Egyp- 
 tians for the war against Antiochus followed a plan 
 practical for the moment, but he made a mistake for 
 the future time. 
 
 Becoming namely presumptuous by their success 
 at Raphia, 1 they were no longer able to obey orders 2 
 but sought a leader and a pretext, as people able to help 
 themselves. Which thing they finally (!) did, not 
 after a long time (! ). 
 
 We see here that Polybius does not acknowledge that those Egyptians had a real complaint ; 
 they ought to have been satisfied with the blessings of the Ptolemaic government, according 
 to his opinion. The national feeling of this Greek author, who viewed that best one of the 
 Hellenistic states with complacency and pride, is plainly visible here. Unfortunately, his 
 report as to finding a leader and "pretext" (!) is lost. The latter expression, evidently, points 
 to something which Polybius considered as not too unjust against the Egyptians or too grave a 
 matter. The probability is that some administrative measure infringing on the rights or 
 livelihood of the warrior class furnished that "pretext"; certainly it would appear, if we knew 
 
 1 So their phalanx must have played a more important part in that victory than the extant reports on that battle manifest. 
 
 2 This expression ("what was imposed on them") points to regular duties or dues demanded by the state. 
 
14 THE GREAT EGYPTIAN REVOLUTION. 
 
 it, much more serious to us than to Polybius. As a representative of the last century of Greek 
 independence, he was too much of an aristocrat to understand demands of the lower classes in 
 general. Polybius, in Book XIV, 12, returns to that revolution and mentions it in a very 
 similar way. He describes the profligate life of Philopator after his victory over Antiochus of 
 Syria and continues: 
 
 '0\pe 5e TTore fiLaadels vwb twc wpay/jiaTUV I But at some near time, forcedby the circumstances (!), 
 evtTeaev els tov vvv btbyfK^ixivov iroXe/xov. \ he fell into the here-mentioned war. 
 
 This again sounds like exonerating the king and is in such contrast with the previous 
 description of his tyranny that we can not assume the numerous personal faults of the king to be 
 held by Polybius to be responsible for the rebellion. 1 As something which might have 
 "happened" (avvefiaive, eveweae) also to a better king, it would again best be understood of some 
 administrative measure based on the system of government used by his predecessors. This 
 lenient judgment of the historian would seem to include even new taxes as something for which 
 the subject class of natives ought not to have raised rebellion. If those natives remonstrated 
 or demanded reforms, I fear even as sober a mind as Polybius would have considered this as 
 unbecoming (according to Greek thinking) to the native subjects of the Hellenistic states. At 
 present, however, it is impossible to find anything positive on that "pretext" of the machimoi. 
 
 We suspect that the forced reforms mentioned in the decree of Rosetta include the removal 
 of that "pretext," but there is nothing among the enumeration of these reforms which refers to 
 the native soldiers in special. This could be explained by the assumption that the odious 
 measure which furnished the "pretext" might have been withdrawn directly under Ptolemy IV., 
 Philopator — not a very probable explanation, according to what we know of his character. It 
 seems more plausible that those special concessions are covered by the general statement of 
 line 12 of the Greek text, "from the revenues and taxes existing in Egypt he remitted some com- 
 pletely and reduced (neicovcfriKev) others. " The redactor of the decree, evidently, saw that the 
 detailed description of those concessions, implying a considerable loss of royal prestige, would 
 be tactless. That he had the warriors specially in mind in referring to those reforms becomes 
 evident from the following clause : "in order that both the people (6 vaos, see above) and all the 
 others be prosperous." These "others" mean hardly the higher classes, such as Greek or 
 Egyptian priests ; in the first place those undeserving rebels, the warriors, are in the mind of 
 the writer. 
 
 In both passages of Polybius the revolution is said to have followed rather soon after the 
 battle of Raphia, 217-216 B. C. Not immediately, as we see from the lapse of time necessary 
 for seeking a "pretext" and a leader. This points to the facts that those soldiers in time of 
 peace were widely scattered and that the peculiar geography of Egypt, a narrow country, widely 
 extending in one direction, made possible a comparatively slow process of communication 
 between the dissatisfied elements after their disbanding. Thus the plotting of the revolution 
 ought to have taken some time. On the other hand, the repeated statement of Polybius that 
 the outbreak came not very long after that battle of Raphia, i. e., after 216 B. C. (year 6 of the 
 
 1 As the confused statement of Diodorus (28, 15) would suggest. 
 
THE GREAT EGYPTIAN REVOLUTION. IS 
 
 king?) sounds like a hint at an interval of not more than two or at the most three years. Yet 
 it seems to be an erroneous statement; 1 the interval evidently was longer. 
 
 We have, fortunately, a very valuable and precise monumental statement in the two 
 hieroglyphic inscriptions describing the construction of the temple of Bdfu. 2 Both texts state 
 that the great court gates were under construction "until ir-mn) the year 16 of His Majesty" 
 («'. e., Philopator, whose name has been mentioned before). Then came the disturbance 
 (hnw) which broke out afterwards (/[variant 'w] hpr hr s\). There rebelled (bin) godless 
 (lit. ignorant, know-nothing) people (hmw) in the southern half (m gs hnt) [addition in B.: and 
 there stopped the work in the seat of the gods as there was violence (r dndn?) in the southern 
 part] until (nfrt-r, nfrt-'w) year 19 of the son of the Sun, the heir of the Gods Fatherloving, 
 chosen by Ptah, etc., Ptolemy, beloved of Ptah, the blessed defunct, the God Epiphanes 
 [repetitious addition in A. : ... the son of the Sun, Ptolemy, everliving, beloved of Ptah, the 
 kind god 3 ] who (A.) pacified the land (sgrh t\) and conquered those rebelling against him {dr 
 btnw-f); [variant in B. : the strong one {nht), the king who conquered the disturbance in the 
 whole land, dr hnn r t\ zr-f]. 
 
 A still later date would, at first sight, seem to be given in the first Turin papyrus referring 
 to a lawsuit about a house (Pap. Taurin., ed. Peyron, I, 5, line 29-30) : tov iavrov warepa /uerijXflai 
 en rrjs Atoo"7r6Xecos p,ed' trepuv arpari-uiTcbv ets tovs ixvw tottovs kv ttj yevo/jievri rapaxfj hirl tov warpos 
 t&v fiaaCkiuv, deov 'EirKJHtvovs: "that his father had departed from Thebes with other soldiers 
 to the regions higher up in the disturbance which broke out under the father of the kings, 
 the God Epiphanes." Following this the lawyer counts for the time which the house of that 
 Greek soldier had remained deserted, the full 24 years of Bpiphanes, so that the passage could 
 be interpreted as though the revolution had broken out at the death of Ptolemy Philopator. 4 
 The above is, however, only an approximate statement. It seems that the calculation of the 
 defendant tried to shorten the number of years, and the plaintiff in repeating that calculation 
 could well afford to overlook a couple of years under Philopator. The general reluctance 
 against speaking more than was absolutely necessary of that sad episode, a reluctance which 
 we can observe throughout the Rosetta decree, seems to be noticeable also here, in this over- 
 looking of some time under Ptolemy IV. That these years must not be overlooked by the 
 historian is shown by Rosettana 27, tovs a4>r]yr}o-ap.evovs t&v airoo-TavTwv ext tov eavTov iraTpbs: 
 "the leaders of those who had fallen away under his father," and that Epiphanes (27-28) pun- 
 ished them, "taking vengeance on behalf of his father" {eirap-vvuv tu> warpi; this remark is 
 lacking in the demotic text). See also the second decree of Philse (line 11), if my restoration 
 "his father" is right. These hints that already Philopator had long and hard fights with the 
 
 1 As pointed out in the text of Polybius, quoted above, p. 13, the expressions "finally" and "not after a long time" do not har- 
 monize. I hesitate to decide whether this negligent style can be attributed to Polybius himself, whose language is very precise 
 wherever we are sure of the original text. I suspect here rather an instance of hasty redaction by the epitomizer of Polybius. Thus 
 it becomes probable that the original form of the text was much fuller and that it defined — above all — the space of time between the 
 battle of Raphia and the revolution much better than in the extant form. 
 
 2 A. Duemichen, Tempelinschriften, I, 95 { = Aeg. Zeitschr., 1878, 44; Brugsch, Thesaurus, 1330). B. Aeg. Zeitschr., 1870, pi. II 
 (p. 1 foil.) = Brugsch, Thesaurus, 1334. 
 
 3 P-ntr mnh. This title usually expresses Euergetes, but here the surname of Epiphanes, Eiixaptcrros. This looks like an almost 
 incredible error, i. e., a translation of the Greek expression without knowledge of the official hieroglyphic title. We should suppose 
 that this title was known even to the most ignorant priestly writer, but the error can hardly be explained away. 
 
 4 Thus understood it, e. g., Revillout, Revue Arch., 1877, 326, "in the moment of the death of Philopator after the Greeks 
 themselves" (!). Similarly Chrestomathie Demotique, XCII. 
 
16 THE GREAT EGYPTIAN REVOLUTION. 
 
 rebels agree well with the preceding general statements of Polybius. The texts of Edfu, on 
 the other hand, leave only the years 16 and 17 and a part of the year 18 for the duration of the 
 revolution, so far as it fell under Philopator. We should have expected a somewhat longer 
 time, and the expression of Polybius "soon" (after the battle of Raphia) appears to us 
 as a careless designation for a space of ten years after that battle. In defense of Polybius' 
 "soon," we might assume that the revolution started in Lower Egypt some time before the 
 sixteenth year. This is quite possible, because the majority of the machimoi ought to have 
 been settled in Lower Egypt; also the hard fights in the Delta, as described in the Rosetta 
 inscription, seem to confirm their frequency there. It does not seem, however, that by seeing 
 in the date of the sixteenth year merely the extension of the revolution to Upper Egypt and by 
 assuming even isolated previous revolutionary movements in this part of the country, we can 
 save much of the authority of Polybius. A year more or less will not alter the discrepancy 
 materially. On the other hand, it must be repeated that the approximate statement of the 
 Turin papyrus does not warrant that the Greek soldiers at Thebes stayed there for over two 
 years after the revolution had seized the country farther south, around Edfu. 1 
 
 Polybius (XIV, 12) complains of the difficulty in following the war in detail, giving the 
 general characterization that it was remarkable only for the cruelty and faithlessness shown 
 by both sides, but presented no larger regular battle on land or sea or siege. Comparing this 
 statement with the epigraphic reports on the siege of Lykopolis, etc., we must suspect that the 
 above characterization may be somewhat exaggerated and caused by regard for readers in 
 Greece proper. A man not very well acquainted with the geography of Egypt would find it 
 quite difficult to follow (through the confusing nomenclature of the Greeks) the endless 
 settlements of Egypt. 2 Polybius may be right, however, that the war was of a peculiar 
 type. Judging from the unwarlike, malicious, and perfidious character of the Egyptians and 
 the character of their country, I believe that the rebellion did not cause a general rising of the 
 whole Egyptian population against the hated foreigners through the whole country at once. 
 Where the native warriors could assemble in considerable numbers, the rebellion, indeed, may 
 well have assumed the character of a general rising of all natives. In other places, however, 
 those open belligerents, the hereditary warriors, according to their small number, may have 
 formed only roving bands, massacring and plundering the Greeks here and there 3 and retiring 
 to the small islands in the Delta or, in the South, to the desert mountains when larger bodies 
 of royal troops appeared. The populace probably joined them in plundering and murdering 
 the foreigners where it could be done safely. When regular troops approached, only the 
 guiltiest, I believe, withdrew to the strongholds of the machimoi; the majority subjected them- 
 selves again to the Greek authorities whenever these had any considerable number of soldiers, 
 proclaimed their unshaken loyalty to the royal house, and denounced eagerly their personal 
 
 1 If we can use the Apis inscriptions collected by Brugsch, Aeg. Zeitschr., 1884, 127 (a rather doubtful material, I fear), we should 
 know that an Apis from a place in "the territory of Thebes," i, e., the Theba'is, called P-ha or TJa (Brugsch, 1.1. 12 9, identifies it with 
 Denderah, which is very improbable; it may be a mere village) was brought to Memphis about 5 years before the enthronement of 
 Epiphanes. This presupposes that Middle and Upper Egypt were under control of the Greek government about the year 12 to 13 
 of Philopator, a good confirmation of the Edfu text against Polybius' remark about the time of the outbreak. 
 
 2 Polybius, nevertheless, must have given some account of the war. For the above reasons, however, this report was, it seems, 
 omitted by the copyists of the manuscripts of his history. European readers found too little interest in it. 
 
 3 In Pap. London, II, ed. Forshall, a Greek, who died during the revolution, is mentioned. The way in which he died is not 
 defined, because it did not appear loyal to speak too much of that sad time, as we have seen repeatedly. 
 
THE GREAT EGYPTIAN REVOLUTION. 17 
 
 enemies as rebels. Such a condition of irregular warfare is betrayed, indeed, by the mention 
 of military guards, which, apparently, had to be distributed through the loyal parts of Egypt to 
 protect life and property of loyal subjects (see Philse decree II, line lod to/). We need not 
 follow too literally our priestly historian, who clumsily limits those guards to the protection of 
 the temples and priests. The most interesting light on the warfare is thrown when he claims 
 (line ioe) that the guards against the rebels could also be recruited from native Egyptians, even 
 from "soldiers," i. e., from those who had deserted from the ranks of the machimoi. We may, 
 perhaps, apply this condition more to the later period of the insurrection, when the cause of the 
 insurgents was in the decline and the weakness of the Egyptian character would manifest itself 
 very readily. In the first years, i. e., in the reign of Philopator, the rising of the natives must 
 have been more general, to judge from the results of the revolution. Furthermore, we are 
 warned also against underestimating its importance by the way in which Polybius mentions it. 
 He reveals its very serious character by calling it a regular "war" (see p. 13). We must not 
 take too seriously the expression Tapaxn'- "disturbance, disorder" (with the exact Egyptian 
 equivalent hnn, hnw), which later was used officially for that period. It is a euphemistic word 
 and seeks to minimize the seriousness of the national uprising. 1 
 
 ■At any rate, we may be sure that the greatest part of Egypt was in the hands of the insur- 
 gents during the first years of Ptolemy Epiphanes. Conditions were worst then, when the 
 guardians of the royal child fought among themselves for the control of the government, i.e., 
 for possession of the treasury in Alexandria, and when the adjoining kings attacked the Ptole- 
 maic provinces outside of Egypt. It seems that the Egyptian government concentrated its 
 whole power on the defense of the Syrian provinces against the Seleucidan attack, a proof that 
 it considered the military power of the insurgents as far inferior to that of Antiochus. This 
 meant the temporary abandonment of the largest part of Egypt. We must ask whether much 
 ground could be maintained outside of Alexandria " in the nomes " (as Ros. hierogl. 1, demot. 16, 
 Philse II, gd, characterizes the interior country) during the most critical time. 2 Unfortunately 
 we have no knowledge what city in the Delta at that time possessed a Greek population large 
 enough to maintain itself against the natives. 3 It would be very interesting to know something 
 about the fate of the exclusively Greek cities higher up, e. g., about the colony Ptolemai's. 
 Most likely their whole Greek population had to flee northward. 
 
 It was during that critical time that the government thought it wise to offer to the natives 
 great reforms and alleviations, eVe/ca tov tj\v MLyvirrov els evblav ay ay elp (Rosetta to give, 1. 1 1) "for 
 bringing Egypt to a quiet condition," demotic text (1. 7), "to create (e t{y)-hpr) quietness 4 
 
 1 See this expression already, Ros. Greek 19. For the hieroglyphic equivalent cp. the foundation texts of Edfu. The demotic 
 expression tilth., thth (Ros. 11). 
 
 2 A recollection of this condition, Diodorns, XXVIII, 15 : (Ptolemy V) "was hated by the Egyptians and was in danger of losing 
 his kingdom" (eKivoivevcre Si a-n-ofSaXtii' jr\v &e,<n\eiav) . Only Diodorus, in his usual confused way, connects this danger with the 
 ungrateful execution of the guardian Aristomenes (about which the natives certainly did not care) and thus leads to a wrong chro- 
 nology, etc. See also the statement of a fragmentary extract from Polybius in Angelo May, Script, vet. nov. coll., II, 544: 
 "Ptolemy by a revolution was nearly driven out of the country" (6X1701; nkv twos h&ireaev). 
 
 3 It is difficult to draw a conclusion from the stela of a Syrian (?) policeman Kha'-hap, who according to the calculations of L. 
 Stern (Aeg. Zeitschr. 1884, 108), died in Memphis "in the fifth month of the second year," i. e., of Epiphanes. That, in this biographic 
 notice, he leaves it to the reader to supply the names of the kings under whom he lived is very common in such inscriptions and 
 must not be explained as caution. The Asiatic population of Egypt always seems to have considered itself as superior to the native 
 Egyptians and more akin to the Greeks, so we could not well expect the man in question to have sided with the insurgents. 
 
 4 The old meaning of this causative formation, originally "quieting," seems to be lost (as in Coptic siraht, s£reht: quietness) or is, 
 at least, uncertain. 
 
18 THE GREAT EGYPTIAN REVOLUTION. 
 
 (mt-sgrh) in Egypt" — a very remarkable confession by an inscription in the official style. 
 After a remark on liberality to the Greek troops (see below) , the same inscription informs us : 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT (1. 7). 
 
 (12) clto Tbiv VTapxovacov Of the revenues and taxes existing The taxation (hty) (and) revenue 
 
 kv AxyvirTW irpoaoSwv kcll (before) in Egypt he abandoned (Skr) 1 which had been continuing 
 
 4>opo\oyi(hv, tlvcls fxev ds some entirely and lightened others ('/j') 2 in Egypt, he had taken parts 
 
 reAos acpfiKev, aAAas 5e in order that both the (ordinary?) (p$?) from them (and) he had 
 
 KeKoixfrinev , 07TO)s re Actos people 3 and the whole rest (!) be abandoned them entirely (z,,z) to 
 
 kolI ol aXXot iravres kv (13) in prosperity under his reign. make the people (? see below) 
 
 ebQ-qvia. Sxtlv kirl T7/s kavrov and all the other men to be well 
 
 jSauiXetas. (off) at the time of his reign. 
 
 See above on the excessive caution manifested in these reluctant allusions to the rebellion 
 and on the distinction of two classes of population which seems to contain a hint at the 
 warriors. The great difficulty is that the word of the demotic version, which corresponds 
 with the Greek Aaos, is ambiguous, as it may mean "multitude, people," or "soldiers." See 
 below on Philae II, 17c, etc., about the difficulty that both Egyptian versions lacked a clear 
 distinction between those two expressions. The possibility that the demotic writer may have 
 thought here of the native warriors as the element first to be placated is increased by the hiero- 
 glyphic version (Damanhur, 12). It has "mn/V-soldiers," i. e., a word which ought to designate 
 even a privileged soldier class (p. 10; cp. p. 60). The hieroglyphic version, as usual, follows the 
 demotic and seeks to make its sense more distinct; it seems here a valuable guide, although its 
 strong disfigurement by the illiterate engraver would not exclude the possibility of connecting 
 that expression " wn/i-soldiers " with the Greek 6 Aaos instead of with "the rest." 
 
 Even more important seems the next concession (Greek, line 13): 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT (1. 8.) 
 
 to. re (iaaikiKa 6<^)6tA?//xara a and the debts due to the govern- . .... 
 
 ir poouxfreChov ol kv too Aly vtttu) ment which still were owed by the of the king which owed the Egyp- 
 
 kclI ol kv rfi Xoiirfi /3a<rtAeta inhabitants of Egypt and of the tians and all those in his kingdom, 
 
 avrov ovra 7roAAd tw ir\r]6ei rest of his kingdom, he remitted, amounting to (V) a great figure, 
 
 a<pfiKev. (although) being a great amount. he abandoned to them. 
 
 In connection with this, a far-reaching amnesty to criminals was granted, liberty to those 
 imprisoned and a remission of private debts of long standing (1. 14) ; this latter concession meant, 
 likewise, a freeing from imprisonment in many cases. 3 
 
 The inscription passes over to the concessions to the priests, which are rather moderate, I 
 think. Some modern writers exaggerate their importance in order to prove that the Ptolemaic 
 government wanted to win the pious masses first by benefits to their gods and priests. Whoso- 
 ever is not deceived by the prominence which the priests, of course, must give to their special 
 grants, and looks at the practical meaning of these grants, will judge more soberly. I think an 
 unprejudiced examination will not confirm the belief that the Egyptian rebels had fought in any 
 religious interest, for their gods and temples. The prominence given by the priests to their 
 
 1 This word means in Coptic: "rent, income from the use of something." 
 
 2 Lit. "standing, remaining, established." 
 
 3 That is, the natives; but compare the other versions. 
 
THE GREAT EGYPTIAN REVOLUTION. 19 
 
 own benefits received from the crown must not be overrated also for another reason. In the 
 priestly decree of Memphis-Rosetta the priests, after all, act as spokesmen for the people and 
 thank the king principally on behalf of these, although pretending that they have been 
 specially benefited by him. 
 
 At the side of those great reforms for the natives in general, we find no special concession 
 for the future to the rebelling warriors, as stated on page 14. The view that this silence of the 
 decree was nothing but tactful caution (p. 14) seems most plausible. Otherwise we might 
 interpret this absence of special consideration of the warriors as though the government wanted 
 to win the unwarlike masses and to separate them from the warriors, who alone were hardly 
 numerous enough to be very dangerous, as shown on p. 13. An amnesty, however, was offered 
 to the warriors and to all insurgents, another very great concession from the point of view of 
 such a despotic government as that of the Lagidae: 
 
 (Greek 19) irpoaera^ep 5e /ecu tovs KaraTropevo/Jievovs e/c re tuv nax't-p-wv ko.1 t&v aWwv, twi> 
 dXXorpta 4>povr]cra.vTwv, ev rols Kara tt\v rapaxw naipdis Karekdovras \xkvtiv eirl tuv Iditov KT^aeuv. 
 "He ordered also that those of the warriors and of the others, having different (political) 
 views (!), who, during the time of the disturbance (cp. above, p. 17) surrendered (lit. came 
 down), should remain in possession of their property." 
 
 The demotic translation is here specially interesting, showing much more clearly than the 
 Greek text that not an amnesty to those who had already deserted the rebels is meant, but a 
 promise held out to the rebels in order to make them return to loyalty : 
 
 (1. 11) "he ordered again concerning those who would come (n-nt e-wei, future!) (from) 
 among the warrior class {yi-rm{t)w qnqn, cp. p. 60) and the rest of men who had been (e—'r 
 hpr) on other ways (hr ktht m(y)t) 1 in the disturbance which had been (!) in Egypt in p-thth 
 e-'r hpr (n) Kmt) should be left (remaining?) (1. 12) in their places (e t(y) [hpr?]-st [n] 
 nw^m'w) and that their goods should be theirs" (nt(u) nw-nk(w)t hpr hr^w). 
 
 This version distinguishes thus more clearly between the two classes of rebels than the 
 Greek original. It divides the Greek expression ra 'Lfaa "their property" into movable and 
 immovable property in order to show the full value of the amnesty, and, as said above, rep- 
 resents it more distinctly as an offered inducement to the rebels by employing the verb in the 
 future. We see thereby that the government did its best to win the natives, but it contains 
 also the proof of the desperate situation in which the Ptolemaic dynasty was placed. 
 
 It is not likely that all this enforced liberality and mildness had much effect as long as it 
 could not be backed up by military successes. After such successes of the governmental 
 troops, however, the cowardly character of the Egyptians, of which we have spoken so often, 
 probably began to manifest itself and to find the reforms tempting enough to desert the 
 national cause or even to turn against it, as described above. 
 
 1 Most curiously, after mentioning the remission of the yearly trip of the Egyptian priests to Alexandria for presentation (before 
 the high priest of all Egypt), the writer of the decree by the mention of this voyage (which, of course, was made almost exclusively 
 by water) seems to be reminded of a similar matter referring to navigation, and inserts, as a postscript to the general reforms: 
 
 Tlpoaha^ei/ 5e ko.1 rty aiiWrfipiv tuv els He also ordered that the "pressing" of (demot. 9) He ordered not to seize 
 
 tijv vavTiiav fiii TvoieloSai. people for the navy should not be made. rowers (?). 
 
 Notwithstanding the fact that this reform falls out of the carefully arranged order as said here, it is not to be limited to the priests ; 
 it means another great general concession for all the natives, to whom that levying of rowers must have been a great oppression. 
 
20 
 
 THE GREAT EGYPTIAN REVOLUTION. 
 
 The turning point was, evidently, the end of the war with Antiochus of Syria, 198 B. C. 
 (year 7 of the king) . The large army 1 under Skopas became free at this moment and could be 
 used against the rebels. 2 These, in all probability, had no uniform plan of defense. On the other 
 hand, the numerous water-courses splitting up the Delta made it difficult for the royal troops to 
 deal promptly a decisive blow. As such the capture of Lykopolis, in the year 8, is represented 
 by the Rosetta stone. This inscription, dated in the 9th year of Epiphanes, month 6 (196 
 B.C.), describes the king as in possession of Memphis and of a great part at least, possibly all, 
 of the Delta. Apparently also a good stretch of land south of Memphis was in the hands of the 
 king; otherwise the coronation ceremony at Memphis would appear out of place. That coro- 
 nation seems to have been almost contemporary with the decree; likewise the victory of 
 year 8 over the rebels in Lykopolis, which secured apparently the possession of the Delta, must 
 have preceded it rather directly. That it was this victory which brought wider parts of Egypt 
 to subjection is visible from Ros. Gr. 29 : the debts of the temples must be overlooked by the 
 Ptolemaic government to year 8 (demot. 1. 17 corrects this to "year 9," perhaps because the 
 demotic version, out of flattery, wished to bring that benefit near to the date of the coronation; 
 probably because the actual subjection of the rebellious regions was very near to the beginning 
 of year 9, as said above). 
 
 The remarkable report on this military operation is as follows (Rosetta stone, Greek 1. 21) : 
 
 Trapay lp 6/x€pos (1. 22) 5e 
 /cat els Avkwv irokiv, ttjv kv tw 
 BovaLplrri fj r\v KO.TtCht]p.p.kv() 
 /cat &xvpo)fj.evri irpos 
 
 iroXiopfdav, 6ir\wv 8e irapaOeaei. 
 HaxpiXecTTepa /cat rrj aXAfy 
 Xoprjyia Traari, cos av e/c toWov 
 (1. 23) xpovov avveaTTjKvias 
 ttjs aWoTpibrriTos rots 
 k-WKTwax^eiaiv ets avrriv 
 aaefiecnv o'i -qaav ets re 
 ret tepa /cat tovs kv 
 AlyviTTW KaToiKovvTas iroXXa 
 /ca/ca awTeTekea/Jievoi /cat 
 av (1. 24) TiKadiaas x^t ia(T ' iV 
 re /cat rac/>pots /cat reixeviv 
 avrrjv a£io\6yoi.s TepikXafiev. 
 
 But moving to Lycopolis in the 
 Busirite (nome), which had been-- 
 captured and fortified for a siege 
 and with a rich store of weapons 
 and all other equipment, as for a 
 long time enmity (i. e., all hostile 
 elements) had been gathered by 
 the impious men collected into it, 
 who had committed much evil to 
 the temples and the inhabitants 
 of Egypt, and encamping against 
 {the city), he surrounded it with 
 remarkable mounds and ditches 
 and walls. 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT (1. 12) 
 
 (12) He went to the city of Shekan 
 
 (13) [which had been- captured] 
 and equipped(?) 3 by the impious 
 people (with ?) all [fortifications ?] , 
 there being much outfit, all 
 preparations, in its middle. 
 
 He besieged the mentioned (lit. 
 named) city with wall (and) 
 dam(s) (?) 4 (on its) outside be- 
 cause of the impious people who 
 were in it, who were leaders of 
 doing much violence against 
 Egypt, having deserted the way 
 of the commandments of the 
 king and the commandments 
 
 (14) of the gods. 
 
 1 Determined with the sign: "bad, hostile," owing to the special sense of the context. 
 
 2 In the meantime the Alexandrian government had to keep the soldiers, the Egyptian Macedonians and Greeks, as well as the 
 mercenaries, in good will by liberality. Before the description of the reforms, Ros., 12, mentions reus tc iavrov 5w6.fj.eaiv Trt^iXavBpunr-rjKt 
 Trao-ais. All modern translators have understood this: "he has shown himself liberal as far as he could," or, "with all his resources," 
 etc. The demotic translation is, however (1. 7) : "he has given more and more (wh-f ly) gift(s) [sp) to the whole army {t-mtgti) which 
 (was) in his high power." Likewise the hieroglyphic text renders (Damanhur, 12) dwafieaiv by "to the soldiers (read ss in place, of rd). 
 This looks at first like an incredible mistake, but at close examination proves to be the only correct sense of the obscurely worded 
 Greek text. The decree characteristically hints that before all liberality and kindness to the native masses the king first did good to 
 those who had the first claim, the Macedonians and Greeks constituting the nobility and the officials the ruling classes. This 
 thought is expressed so awkwardly, obscurely, and hastily, possibly because it was embarrassing to state in that decree, which 
 represented the thanks of the masses of the Egyptian natives (p. 19), that the government once had shown some consideration to them. 
 
 3 Correct, 'lb to sbt ? 
 
 4 The word wn is suspicious. Read t(i)n = tn below? 
 
THE GREAT EGYPTIAN REVOLUTION. 
 
 21 
 
 Tov dk NetXou tt)v 
 avafiaaiv p.eya\r]v iroiyjaa- 
 
 fxkvOV kv TW 67660? €T€L 
 
 Kal ddia/ikvov KaraKkveeiv 
 to. (1. 25) 7re5td, Karkax 6 ", ** 
 toW&v roiroiv bxvp&aas to. 
 (TTOixoiTa rcav irora/jicbv, 
 Xopi]yri<TO.s els avra xP'tP-b.Twv 
 irXijdos ovk okiyov Kal 
 KaracrTriaas i7T7retj re Kal 
 ire^ovs ivpos rfi 4>v\anfi (1. 26) 
 avTu>v 
 
 And when the Nile had made its 
 {yearly) rise {specially f) great in 
 the 8th year and was expected to 
 flood the plains, he held {the Nile) 
 under control, damming up in 
 many places the mouths of the 
 rivers {i. e., canals), 
 spending for this not inconsider- 
 able sums of money, 
 and establishing cavalry and in- 
 fantry for their {i. e., of the canals) 
 
 He put dams (to) the canals 
 which brought water to the 
 city mentioned (above, a thing) 
 which the former kings were 
 not able to do thus; 1 
 
 they (!) spent 2 much money for 
 
 them. 
 
 He counted (off) troops, men on 
 
 foot 3 and horses, to the mouth (?) 
 
 of the rivers mentioned, to guard 
 
 them safely on account of the 
 
 [inundations] of water which were 
 
 great in the year 8 (1. 15), . . to 
 
 the mentioned (lit. named) rivers 
 
 which brought water to much 
 
 ground (!), being extremely 
 
 deep(?). 4 
 
 The king took the city mentioned 
 
 by force within little time. 
 
 He made a massacre of the im- 
 pious ones in it. He made it a 
 slaughter, as did the sungod 5 and 
 Horus, the son of Isis, to those 
 who had committed impiety 
 towards them at the places men- 
 tioned formerly. 
 
 The remarkable liberty with which the demotic text proceeds makes it again a source of 
 history of its own, although its clumsiness, its dependence on the Greek text, and its inferiority to 
 the latter source must not be denied. The hieroglyphic version as preserved in the stone of 
 Damanhur, lines 19-20, is incredibly mutilated and shortened. It reads: 
 
 "His Majesty went to Khentiwy [repeated]; she was . . (which) were in it, because they 
 had made the beginning [i. e. , leadership] of many acts of violence ; they had transgressed against 
 the way of His Majesty and the commandments (shn) of the gods." The rest is too unsafe and 
 does not yield anything new. The incredibly disfigured hieroglyphic name of the city can now 
 be restored. The demotic orthography has been elucidated by Spiegelberg's discovery of the 
 
 1 It is not safe to draw from this free addition the inference that Ptolemy Philopator had attacked Lykopolis unsuccessfully. 
 
 2 Probably the third person plural is only an expression of the passive: "there was spent." It could, however, also be under- 
 stood of the former kings; possibly, the demotic writer understands it thus: "(although) these spent." This would disagree, how- 
 ever, with his usually very good understanding of the text. 
 
 3 Text erroneously : his foot ! 
 
 ' By this addition the demotic writer wishes to show that he understood the inundation of year 8 as unusually high. That 
 the Greek text is the original is shown by these explanatory words in a specially convincing manner. 
 
 6 Thus also the hieroglyphic text of Damanhur. The god " Hermes-Thouti " in such a prominent part is surprising. Still I 
 hesitate to restore the Greek text to [0p]tjs "the sungod" after the other versions. The engraver, at least, seems to have intended 
 "Hermes," only we should like to assume that the reading was a misunderstanding of the name Phre, "the sungod." 
 
 kv 6X1701 XPOJ'O), tt\v re ttoXlv 
 Kara Kparos elXev /cat rovs kv 
 airrfj dcrejSets iravTas 5ik4>0tLpev, 
 
 Kadawep ['Ep/x]ijs Kal flpos 6 
 ttjs 'IcrtSos Kal 'Oaipcos vlbs 
 kxup&o~aTO tovs kv rots avrols 
 totols airoaravTas irporepov. 
 
 he look in short time the city by 
 force {i. e., by storm) 
 
 and annihilated all the impious 
 men in it, 
 
 as Hermes {!) and Horus, the son 
 of Isis and Osiris, had overthrown 
 the rebels in the same places afore- 
 time. 
 
22 THE GREAT EGYPTIAN REVOLUTION. 
 
 name in a demotic schoolbook, the papyrus 3116, of Cairo {Die demot. Papyrus von Cairo, text 
 271, pi. CIX, col. 2, 13) /cLpi-^ S(a)gan, 3(',)g',n. Consequently the Hntywy (19), Hntynwy 
 (20), of the Damanhur stone is to be read 5',{ = Hnt J r', — ty)g{ = nty)nw, exactly as written in 
 demotic. The orthography of the Rosetta text (line 12) \\oio-D> is now to be understood 
 as Skan or ${a)kan. The varying expression of the palatal k/g may betray the beginning 
 of the soft pronunciation of that letter which we find in the Coptic letter Jima. The group- 
 ing of the names in the Cairo papyrus does not help us at all; a preceding city "house of 
 Osiris of Rakotis" confirms only the neighborhood of Busiris, evidently not of Alexandria, for 
 which the copyist seems to have misunderstood it. Would it not be possible to find our name 
 also in the part of the Busiris nome which appears in the geographic lists as S',-tp-nty or S',sf{ ! ) ? 
 Cp. J. de Rouge, Geographic Ancienne de la Basse Egypte, 58. 
 
 The description of the campaign shows that the city was surrounded by water like so many 
 Delta places and that the summer inundation had increased the strength of these natural 
 fortifications. From the sentimental story how the noble king had even to pay the guards of 
 the dykes, the inference could be drawn that the commander of the royal army wanted to pro- 
 tect the fortifications around the city mound, and at the foot of it, situated still in the plain, 
 against flooding by piercing the dykes. This would mean an extremely difficult task, how- 
 ever. Simpler is the assumption that there is meant only the protection of the long highroads, 
 which in summer stand like dykes from the inundating water ; the rebels coming on boats from 
 the city tried to cut these at the proper places ("at the mouth of canals," *. e., where navigable 
 canals met those highroads at right angle) and to isolate the besieging Greek troops. The 
 insurgents may have done this with success repeatedly; otherwise the efforts to protect the 
 dams would not be mentioned. 1 
 
 The final capture of the city was followed by a general massacre, as the Rosettana clearly 
 states (cp. Damanhur, 22 : "he made (of) them a great slaughter" (sd ",). Those occupants of 
 the city, who even endured a formal siege, must have been the most desperate elements among 
 the rebels, who had forfeited their lives repeatedly. Thus, it seems, the Greeks made an exam- 
 ple of them, which impressed the other rebels deeply. 
 
 Here Polybius sets in with a fragment of the excerpta Valesiana (23, 16 Schweighaeuser, 
 21, 19 Dindorf) : 
 
 [liroKefxalos 6 fiaaChtvs Alyvirrov] ore When he [Ptolemy the King of Egypt] (had) 
 
 Trjv Ai)K(i)v H6\li> eiroXiopKriae [ . . . ] besieged the city Lycopolis [ . . . ] frightened by 
 
 KarawXayevres to yeyovos oi Swaarai. that which had happened, the chiefs of the Egyptians 
 
 to>v Aiyvirriuv eSwKdv a(f>as avrovs els gave themselves into the faith of the king [ ... I 
 
 tt)V tov /3acrtXews it'uttiv [ . . . ] He treated these badly [ . . . ] and fell into 
 
 oh Ka/cws kxpyaa-TO [ . . . ] nal eis many dangers. 
 KLvbvvovs ttoXKovs eveireaev. 
 
 This very fragmentary excerpt 2 confirms the Rosettana in reporting a formal siege of 
 Lycopolis and terrible cruelties of the king's forces (indicated by the terror which seized the 
 
 1 Budge, in his The Rosetta Stone (The Decrees of Memphis and Canopus, vol. II), pp. 30 to 31, strangely understood the description 
 in the Rosettana that the king shut off the rebels from drinking water, until they "were driven to surrender; immediately all the stale 
 water which lay a few feet below the canal-bottoms was exhausted." A strange fancy! In summerly Egypt, at least in the Delta, 
 the slightest digging strikes ground water and should have prevented a surrendering for the sake of thirst. 
 
 2 Schweighaeuser, 7, 516, remarked correctly: in hrevius haec contracta esse a compilative eclogarum satis apparel. 
 
THE GREAT EGYPTIAN REVOLUTION. 
 
 23 
 
 rebels) , but its second and third sections must not be interpreted, as usually is done, as record- 
 ing the surrender of the rebels inclosed in the city, so that "what happened" would be the 
 progress of the siege. My understanding of the text is that it records the completed (aorist) 
 siege ; the verb thus includes also the final capture of the city. The description of the Rosettana 
 excludes a capitulation. To assume that the priestly writer wanted to hide the breach of the 
 capitulation by his expression "he took the city by storm" seems to me very unsafe. Such a 
 concealing would look like embellishing the actions of the divine ruler, the king, i. e., excusing 
 them. This could be interpreted as criticizing them, and those poor priests were careful enough 
 in their expression, especially at that time, to avoid the punishment of laesa majestas. Thus I 
 take the storming of the city and immediate massacring of the defenders quite literally. The 
 surrender of the rebels seems to mean those in adjacent districts of the Delta, east (and south?) 
 of Busiris. This and the breach of the capitulation by their execution, namely, is indicated 
 somewhat also in the following words of the Rosettana : 
 
 (2~j)tovs [5'Y a4>riyri(raiJt,evovs 
 twv cnroaTavTOJV eirl tov 
 iavrov irarpos /ecu rfiv x&P av 
 k[vo-x\rj<xl]avTas Kal ra lepa 
 adiKtiaavTas irapayevdfievos eis 
 Me/x^x.^, kiraixwCiv 2 (28) r u> 
 irarpl Kal ttj eavrov fiacnXeia, 
 ■jravras tKoXaaep KadrinovTUs 
 nad' 6v naipov irapeyevrfdy) 
 irpos to avvreKeadri \yai aurw 
 ra] irpocrr\KOVTa v6p,ip.a ttj 
 irapaXriipei. ttjs (3acn\eias 
 
 (And) the leaders of those who 
 had fallen away under his father 
 and had troubled the country and 
 had wronged the temples, when 
 he came to Memphis, {for?) aveng- 
 ing his father and his own royal 
 power, he punished them all as 
 they deserved, at the occasion when 
 he appeared, that there should be 
 accomplished to him the proper 
 ceremonies for the taking over of 
 the kingship. 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 (16) The impious ones who had 
 assembled soldiers, becoming 
 leaders to trouble the nomes, 
 doing wrong (gm') to the temples, 
 deserting the way of the king and 
 his father, the gods gave that he 
 made a slaughter among them 
 at the festival of receiving the 
 high (est) dignity which he re- 
 ceived (lit. did) from his father. 
 He caused them to be killed (on) 
 the wood. 
 
 The demotic text here again is an important source on account of its free rendering. Also 
 the hieroglyphic text is fortunately preserved, Ros. 1 (cp. Damanhur, 22-23, which is much 
 mutilated) : 
 
 . . . [Det. impious people] also (N. B.!) 3 who had amassed (zdtf) soldiers (N. B.l), who had 
 been at the head of them, upsetting (?sdm) the nomes (tsw) (and) violating (th\) the temples [Damanhur 
 completes this : at the receiving of the kingship from his father . . . killing, 5 placing them ( ?) on 6 the wood] . 
 
 The greater dependence of the hieroglyphic version on the demotic text than on the Greek 
 (p. 4) is remarkable; it elucidates the demotic somewhat, notwithstanding its mutilation. For 
 example, it confirms it in the statement that those leaders of the rebels were soldiers, 7 and fur- 
 nishes the best confirmation of the fact that the native soldiers formed the nucleus of the 
 
 1 My conception of the text prefers the restoration 8' to that of t' which is usually employed. 
 
 2 Or bia/iOviov part. pres. "avenging." 
 
 3 'sk (cp. p. 32, note 6) "and, moreover, also." 
 
 4 Cp. Senuhyt, line 130, this verb for the gathering of armies. 
 6 Only m\m left of the verb sm;(m) "to kill." 
 
 6 The circle and stroke seems to mean tp "on." The plural strokes behind belong to the pronoun (sn or si) "them " which ought 
 to stand before tp. 
 
 7 That the word is means here "multitude," not "soldiers," is extremely improbable. See ss for regular soldiers, AZ. 1884, 104. 
 It is true, the peculiar use of the Egyptian expression for "multitude" causes many difficulties, as we have had to state repeatedly. 
 
24 THE GREAT EGYPTIAN REVOLUTION. 
 
 rebels. Furthermore, both Egyptian versions give us the unedifying detail that the execution, 
 which embellished the celebration of the coronation at Memphis, was done " on the wood, " i. e., 
 by empaling or crucifixion. The Greek text hints very delicately at the cruelty of the punish- 
 ment, while the Egyptian scribes, wishing to show their loyalty, become brutal in their faithful 
 description. Modern commentators have always connected this latter section, about the execu- 
 tion of the insurgent leaders, with the capture of Lycopolis by assuming that the majority of 
 the rebels fell at the storming, and that some, especially the leaders, were spared for a more 
 cruel and solemn death. A careful examination of the text will show that two different groups 
 of rebels are meant; the wording of the Egyptian versions shows it much more clearly. Even 
 the Greek text would force us to accuse the writer of a very careless style, especially of repeti- 
 tion in describing the crimes of the rebels and contradicting thoughtlessly the previous state- 
 ment that all defenders of Lycopolis had been killed. We see that the Greek text is very 
 carefully worded. The way in which those rebels came alive into the hands of the king is quietly 
 passed over, and a hidden excuse for their execution is given in the description of their specially 
 great guilt; so far it was possible to go in representing tbe facts pleasantly without criticizing 
 His Majesty. Thus not a breach of the capitulation is meant by Polybius' criticism that the 
 king broke his faith to the rebellious natives, but a breach of the general amnesty described 
 above, p. 14. The priestly historian finds it quite proper, of course, that the special crimes of 
 those leaders excluded them from royal clemency. 
 
 The fall of Lycopolis and the coronation at Memphis can not have been widely apart, 
 according to our passage. We have shown this above (p. 20). I leave it to others to determine 
 from the mention of the high Nile something about the relation in which the shifting civil year 
 of the Egyptians stood to the astronomical year and to our present system of arranging the 
 antique chronology. The capture of the city could be assumed to be later than the time of the 
 high Nile and to fall into the autumn, but this can not be proved with certainty. 
 
 The vague final words of the extract from Polybius seem to hint that the cruel execution 
 of those rebel leaders proved to be a great mistake, i.e., that, notwithstanding the concession to 
 Egyptian national feeling by a crowning ceremony in Memphis, parts of the Egyptians rose 
 anew, fearing the faithless cruelty of the king, so that he /'entered into many dangers," i. e., so 
 that he suffered defeats. This must refer to Lower Egypt, the part of the country most difficult 
 for military operations, where also most of the machimoi were settled (p. 16) . In any case, at the 
 time of the coronation, early in the year 9, Upper Egypt must still have remained independent. 1 
 
 The Rosettana (1. 20, see p. 19), it is true, speaks of "the times during the revolution" 
 (literally: "disturbance," cp. p. 19), as though these times belonged, in the year 9, entirely to 
 the past. However, we must not be deceived by this loyal pretension. It does not furnish any 
 clue for tracing the reconquest of Upper Egypt. All the inscriptions we have of Ptolemy V. 
 above Memphis (Max L. Strack, Die Dynastie der Ptolemaer, p. 245) mention Epiphanes 
 together with the queen Cleopatra, i. e., these inscriptions are at least later than the marriage 
 
 1 Letronne, Recueil d' Inscriptions, I, 298, wondered that the enumeration of benefits done to all temples of the whole country con- 
 trasts with the mention only of the Apis and Mnevis, gods worshipped near Memphis; he missed especially a mention of the gods of 
 Thebes. This argument may be of some value, but it is not forceful. Thebes, at that time, had lost most of its ancient 
 importance, and the Apis and Mnevis were best known to the Greeks as the most famous sacred animals, so that they might simply 
 stand as types of the native Egyptian pantheon, even when the whole country was accessible. 
 
THE GREAT EGYPTIAN REVOLUTION. 
 
 25 
 
 of 193 (year 12?), even later than the reconquest of the Thebais in the nineteenth year. 1 
 Mahaffy (The Empire of the Ptolemies, 313) believes that "dated documents among the Petrie 
 Papyri (II, xlvi, viii) show that in the fourth and the eighteenth years of Epiphanes, the 
 Ptolemaic law-courts and the farming of taxes, etc., were undisturbed in the secluded Arsinoite 
 nome. " But there is the possibility that documents written during the time of the revolution 
 and lacking thus the correct and legal dating were rewritten after the suppression of the rebellion ; 
 the "legal government" would not recognize a document without proper dating, and rewriting 
 such objectionable documents was too fine a pretext for officials and lawyers to obtain extra 
 fees. Thus we must not too easily be deceived by those dates. On the other hand, it is probable 
 that the Fayum, with its strong Greek population, could be maintained against the rebels as 
 long as the royal power reached to Memphis. We may venture to draw an inference as to the 
 time of the reconquest from the legation sent by Ptolemy Epiphanes to Rome in 191 B. C. 
 (year 14?) to offer an enormous sum of money and his armies to the Romans as aid in the 
 impending war with Antiochus of Syria. If this was not a grotesque deception, the Ptolemaic 
 government ought to have had the greater part of the arable ground of Egypt under its control 
 at that time, so that the taxes flowed again into the depleted treasury of Alexandria, minus 
 those of the Thebais only. 
 
 I place here another fragment of Polybius, the continuation of the passage from the 
 excerpta Valesiana (21, 19 Dindorf, cp. p. 22): 
 
 irapawXriaLov 8e tl avvefir] Kal /caret 
 tovs KaLpovsi-rjviKa TLo\vKpa.Tr]s tovs aToaTavras 
 exet-p&aaTO. 
 
 Ot yap irepl tov 'Adlvcv /cat Havcripav 
 Kal Xeaov<pov Kal tov 'IpoftaaTOv, o'lirep 
 rjaav eri Staucof 6/j.evot. toov bwaaruv, el^avTes 
 rots irpayuaat iraprjaav els tt)v SatV 
 /cat o~4>as aiiTOvs els ttjv tov j3aai\ecos 
 exeiptfovTO tt'igtlv. '0 5e IlroAeuaios 
 adeTrqaas rets iriffTeLS Kal Sr/aas tovs 
 avdponrovs yvp.vovs rats ap.a£ais c-tA/ce 
 
 And something similar happened also at the time 
 when Polycrates (had) subdued the insurgents. 
 
 For the followers of Athinis and Pausiras ( ! ) and 
 Chesuphos and Irobastos, who still survived of the 
 (rebellious) chiefs, yielding to necessity, appeared at Sal's 
 and surrendered themselves to the discretion of the king. 
 
 But Ptolemy, disregarding the pledges and having 
 the men tied naked to the ( ! ) carts, had them dragged 
 
 Kal p-era TavTa(l) Tip.uprjo-ap.evos 2 a-weKTeive. and after this (!) had them vengefully (!) killed. 
 
 Kat irapayevopevos uera Tavra(\) els 
 tyjv NavKpariv ixera ttjs crpartas Kat(!) 
 irapao~Trio~avTos avTco tovs e^evo\oyr}p.evovs 
 
 And going after this (!) to Naucratis with his army, 
 when Aristonicus had presented to him the men en- 
 listed for him as mercenaries from Greece, he received 
 
 1 From the time before the year 19/20 date Strack, No. 71 (from Benihasan) and No. 73 (from Tehneh), because they still use the 
 second official surname of the king, evxapioros "the winsome." We find this title abandoned, above all, in our two Philae decrees; 
 that of Damanhur, copying the old decree of year 9, partly keeps mechanically that title, partly omits it. The reasons for the official 
 omission of that surname tempt us to think that the king, regarding himself a great conqueror after the first victories, did not wish 
 to be called "kind" any more. That it was omitted, e. g., on the dedicatory Greek inscription of the Asklepios temple at Philae 
 only to save space (Letronne, Recueil d'Inscr. I, 9, after Parthey), is, of course, impossible. The Egyptian priests, in other inscrip- 
 tions, tried partly to replace it by other titles. Those two inscriptions (71 and 73) thus show that Middle Egypt had been regained 
 between the .years 12 and 19. 
 
 2 A. Mai, Nova Script. Coll. II, 412, gives this as from book 21 with the variant TiixuiprtBkvras. " The text seems to aim at express- 
 ing the idea for stating a warning, example." 
 
26 THE GREAT EGYPTIAN REVOLUTION. 
 
 a.vbpas en ttjs 'EAAaSos 'ApLffTOvUov these and sailed away to Alexandria, having had no 
 
 irpoade^ajjievos tovtovs airiirXevaev els tyjv part in the military operations on account of the sus- 
 
 'A\<:£avdpeLai>, tuv p.tv tov iro\efxov irpa&uv picions of Polycrates, although he was 25 years old. 
 
 ovSep-ias MKoivriKWs, 5td ttjv TioXvuparovs 
 a.diKo5o!;Lav naiirep tx<^>v err] irevre nal tinoaiv. 
 
 This fragment is apparently not in good condition. It speaks of the followers of the 
 rebellious chiefs, but not of those chiefs themselves. The number of names given for the 
 chiefs makes it plain that the chiefs themselves surrendered and were executed, perhaps after 
 having been deserted by their followers. After having been dragged by carts, not much of 
 them ought to have remained for execution ; indeed, the strange ixtra ravra returns directly 
 below and this looks thus like a doublet, i. e., as though an attempt had been made to remove 
 these words further down to a better place. Also elsewhere, the text does not seem to be intact. 
 Consequently, the fragment needs more criticism than it has received so far. 
 
 The difficulty to fit it into the events which we know is due to the statement that the king 
 was 25 years old. This would bring us into the year 181 B. C, the twentieth year of his reign. 
 This is the time when our two decrees were engraved and when all Upper Egypt had again been 
 subjected. It would be very surprising to find then the king still fighting rebels in Lower 
 Egypt and raising mercenaries in Greece. Lower Egypt, namely, is clearly the scene of the 
 fragment. The king's encampment is at Sa'is and the rebels have, evidently, not far to 
 go to find him. Furthermore, the surviving dynasts point back to the part of the country 
 where those chiefs were mentioned before. In Upper Egypt we have only the one rebel 
 leader, according to our second decree, hardly various independent chiefs. 1 Thus it would 
 be difficult to explain them as Upper Egyptians. That Lower Egyptian chiefs, however, 
 would fight through from the eighth to the twentieth year, even to the time after the 
 subjection of the Thebais, seems impossible. A still greater incongruity between that date 
 and the events described lies in the commandership of Polycrates. That this old commander 
 of Ptolemy IV. kept his position and his favor with the king so long in that time of constantly 
 changing officials is too great an improbability ; the fragment itself points to the instability of 
 that turbulent period, mentioning the suspicions which filled the old commander. Conse- 
 quently, that date of the twenty-fifth year of the king's life does not agree with the above 
 details. It either has been taken over erroneously from other, later, events or it has been dis- 
 figured. To suit the narrative of the fragment we might propose to change the number ice 
 " twenty-five " to te " fifteen." The emphasizing of the fact that the king possessed a sufficient 
 age for taking part in military operations, however, would not be very forceful ; only for a pre- 
 cocious young king an age of fifteen would justify that remark. Neither would an emenda- 
 tion to k "twenty" (omitting the 5!) clear away the aforementioned difficulties. At any rate, 
 the commandership of Polycrates and the surrender and execution of the rebels belong 
 
 1 We are not yet sufficiently advanced philologically to explain the Egyptian etymologies of those tour names of the chiefs and to 
 determine their home from the dialect betrayed in them and from the theophorous parts. Ir{~>)-obastos does not necessarily come 
 from the city of the goddess Bubastis. Pausiras is evidently to be corrected into the ordinary Pausiris; Wilcken (AZ. 1883, 164) and 
 Herodotus (3, 15) show it specially as Low Egyptian and Fayumic; the Pha- which we should expect after the Coptic form for the 
 dialect of this part of Egypt, in place of the Pa- of our text, is not yet the rule in Ptolemaic time. For Chesuphos and Athinis I 
 prefer not to try uncertain guesses; their form may need correction. We must not overestimate the tradition in Polybius as to its 
 accuracy in these details; the names may have suffered various mutilations, even before they reached him. 
 
THE GREAT EGYPTIAN REVOLUTION. 27 
 
 to a time not long after the events of the Rosettana, i. e., not later than the fifteenth year of 
 the king. The question remains whether the following narrative really fits the twenty-fifth 
 year of Ptolemy Epiphanes. At first we are tempted to stretch the date somewhat and to 
 find a connection of the report with the events of the nineteenth year of the king's reign, 
 if not with the twentieth. Great preparations have been made, according to Polybius, 
 for a military expedition. The king, however, does not take the Greek mercenaries 
 where they are needed, i. e., to the scene of war. Instead, he leads them to Alexandria, 
 evidently for executing in the capital some coup d' Stat, to free himself of some too powerful 
 official, 1 evidently of Polycrates himself. The mentioning of the suspicions of Polycrates 
 point to this. Thus it would not do to assume that we have here the preparations for the 
 great expedition against the Thebais in the year 19 and to harmonize (as a small slip of 
 Polybius or the excerptor) the discrepancy of one year (as twenty-five years of life would seem 
 to bring us into the twentieth year of Epiphanes' reign according to the current chronology). 
 It seems impossible, I repeat, to assume that Polycrates 2 then was still in command of the 
 army and influential enough to keep the king, against his will, from the war plans and opera- 
 tions. Assuming that the fragment begins to describe his downfall, we are again brought into 
 a period considerably anterior to the eventful year 19, and again come to the result that the 
 remark about the 25 years of life can not be correct. At least I should advise the use of that 
 fragmentary extract with the greatest possible caution and should, for the present, assume that 
 it confounds names and events of different periods, although they seem to date principally from 
 the time when the king began to make himself independent from his so-called guardians, i. e., 
 presumably the time after his marriage in 193 B. C, near the date of that embassy to Rome, 
 when some serious efforts were made to consolidate the Kingdom, as we have seen above. 
 
 The Thebais, at any rate, must have been independent from the Alexandrian government 
 during the whole twenty-one years indicated by the building inscriptions of Edfu (p. 15). This 
 fact, so surprising to those who are still under the influence of the deceptive Greek historians, 
 has been revealed by the dates of Theban demotic business documents, referring to the new 
 government and the native kings installed by the rebels. These documents were discovered 
 by Revillout {Revue Archeologique, 1877, 926 foil.). Brugsch {Aeg. Zeitschr., 1878, 43) com- 
 mented upon them (independently?). Revillout {ibid., 1879, 131), in a short final discussion 
 (also in notes, Revue Egyptol., I, 190; II, 145, etc.), did not add much to his former results. 3 
 
 The names of those two kings are ^A&jS? Har-{e)m-h[eb], pronounced Hannah, Greek 
 Harmais, and z / -fi>C?h [An]ha i -{e)m-h[eb], pronounced Khamah, Greek, after the analogy 
 of the other name, probably *Chamais. The pronunciation of the last group in both 
 names has, so far, not yet been determined with absolute certainty. It is written by a 
 
 1 Certainly not for parading the troops in triumph, as was conjectured by Sharpe and Duemichen. 
 
 2 That a different Polycrates was meant would be very improbable. 
 
 8 The essays by Baillet on these questions repeat only Revillout's data, with the addition of some errors. 
 
 * The root 'nh suffers in such names a strong mutilation, which is indicated orthographically by omission of the initial letter 'Ain 
 (erroneously omitted Ros. demot. 2, p-twt 'nh in the very awkwardly engraved text). The pronunciation is furnished by the bi- 
 lingual Pap. Berlin, formerly 116, now 3116 (Spiegelherg, Demot. Pap. Berlin, p. 19, pi. 42 foil.), p. I, 8 XaTroxpar-qs = ['n[h-p-hrd, 
 p. II, 6 Xairovxticns (read rather Xa7roxwi'a"is Pap. Casati 16, 9; 28, 2) = ['n]h-p- Ifns. See Griffith, Rylands Papyri, 206, where 
 the Coptic particle looking like a preposition, se — "by" (originally "as well as lives"), in oaths, correctly is added as the later 
 pronunciation of the above verbal form. 
 
28 THE GREAT EGYPTIAN REVOLUTION. 
 
 conventional ligature which does not give a certain clue to its pronunciation and, therefore, 
 has been read in various ways. The Greek pronunciation (') Apneas for the above first name 
 has been known for a long time; see the bilingual Pap. Berl. 31 16, I, 30, with the enlarged 
 forms [Pet]armais II, 25, (P)senarmais II, 27, and compare as a further proof, Griffith, 
 Rylands Pap., p. 45 7. 1 
 
 Egyptologists still hover doubtfully between the explanation of the last part, corresponding 
 to Greek -ais, as ah(i), ahet "horizon, splendor" (still so Spiegelberg, Pap. Berl., 17) or heb 
 "festival" (Griffith, Rylands Pap., 457). However, both words, ahi and heb, are written 
 differently in demotic orthography. The truth is, the group of signs in those personal names is 
 abbreviated in a way leaving no trace at all of the original etymology, as we just have stated. 
 The only explanation of this is that the name was gradually mutilated to the senseless pronun- 
 ciation *Haremh(eb), *Har(e)meh, *Harmah. This mutilation was so strong that its graphic 
 expression very early abandoned all connection with the old etymology. 2 That Manetho 
 expresses the name of the old king Har-em-heh of dynasty 19 by Ap/xats is remarkable; 
 we should hardly have expected of that historian such a consciousness of the connection between 
 the original etymology and the living pronunciation of his age for a name mutilated 1,300 years 
 previously, or longer. For the other proposed etymology of both names, "Horus in the hori- 
 zon, " and " (may he) live in the horizon" (*. e., in splendor, like a rising celestial body), might 
 be referred to the fact that, while the inscription at the great sphinx of Gizeh (Letronne, Recueil 
 d'Inscr. II, 467) calls the sphinx the god (H)armachis, Diodorus I, 64, speaks of the king 
 Apfxaios who built the first pyramid, meaning exactly the same name as above. With this 
 writer, however, that mutilation of the name Har-(e)m-ah(i) [older ",ht, akhet] "Horus in the 
 horizon" does not mean very much. We can admit that the late abbreviation Harmah may 
 have included also the rarer name Har-(e)m-akhet in parts of Egypt where the pronuncia- 
 tion of the gutturals began to be confounded, but this does not alter the fact that the popular 
 name, after becoming meaningless, is to be traced back in the first line to "Horus in the festival" 
 (i. e., the god at his best time, in his best appearance, in his most clement mood, as Griffith had 
 correctly supposed). 
 
 This discussion of the original etymology may seem useless here, but it will be seen from the 
 result that the second name [' An\ha-m-(a)h[eb], Khamah, *Chamais, "(may he) live in the festi- 
 val," seems to be formed after the first. This would militate somewhat, of course, against the 
 fact established above, that the name Harmais, Har-mah, had become meaningless for the multi- 
 tude. If Manetho, however, still knew the old etymology of the mutilated name Harmais and 
 connected it with the king Har-em-heb, the scholars of Thebes may well have known as much as 
 he, so that they were able to form the second name, Khamah-Chamais, after the first. Therefore 
 the formation of the names discloses that Chamais was the successor of Harmais. The same con- 
 clusion was reached by Spiegelberg (Demot. Pap. Berlin, p. 17) by a different method, *'. e., from 
 
 1 See also the corresponding name Thotmais (?) Griffith, Rylands Pap., 464. 
 
 2 Thus, already in the inscription of Amen-em-heb (ult.), Ma-hu occurs as a familiar abbreviation of this name, *". e., Mah. We 
 can trace such mutilating abbreviations of long names and their strange orthography (which gives up conserving any trace of ety- 
 mology) to the pyramid time. Cp. the analogous mutilations of English names like Dick, Jack, etc. The above-mentioned abbre- 
 viation Ma-hu is very common in the New Empire; see Lieblein, Dictionnaire de Noms Index. Its frequency is explained by the fact 
 that also other names, containing various divine names composed with "in the festival," could suffer the same abbreviation. 
 
THE GREAT EGYPTIAN REVOLUTION. 29 
 
 the contents of the Berlin contracts of those two kings. Closer examination of the witness lists 
 on those documents, etc., will probably confirm this result. 
 We have of those two kings the following dates : 
 
 Harmah-Harmais : 
 
 Year 4, month 6 (?). — Pap. London, Revillout, Chrestomathie Dimotique, 395, note; Revue Archeo- 
 
 logique, 77, 328. 
 Year 4, month 3, is now furnished by a papyrus in double execution, in Five Years' Explorations 
 
 at Thebes, by the Earl of Carnarvon, plates 35 and 38. 
 Year 4, month 11. — Pap. Berlin, 3145, Revillout, Nouvelle Chrestomathie, 109; Spiegelberg, Pap. 
 
 Demot. Berlin, 17, pi. 37. 
 Year 6, month 10. — Pap. Berlin, formerly 143, 144, now 3142, Revillout, Nouvelle Chrest., 126: 
 
 Spiegelberg, Pap. Demot. Berlin, p. 17, pi. 36. 
 
 Khamah, Chamais: 
 
 Year 7, month 1. — Pap. Berlin, formerly 146, now 3146; see Revillout, Revue Eg., II, 145. 
 Year 14, month 11 (?). — Pap. Marseille, Revillout, Chrestomathie, 395; Revue Arch., 77, 1. 1. 
 
 We see this gives at least part of one year and four complete years for the first king, one 
 year common to both kings, twelve complete years and over ten months of a year for the sec- 
 ond, i. e., a total of seventeen complete and two partial years. This minimal date comes very 
 near the duration of the rebellion as furnished by the inscription of Edfu (p. 15) : one year and 
 part of a year under Philopator, then (counting year 18 of Philopator and 1 of Epiphanes as 
 identical) eighteen years and part of a year under Epiphanes. The text of Philae states more 
 precisely that the incomplete last year of the rebel king comprised 10 months and 24 days. 
 This allows the last-mentioned contract of Khamah-Chamais to be written in the month of the 
 decisive battle which ended the native dynasty of the Thebai's. 1 We have thus, after the 
 Edfu text, as maximum, nineteen complete and two incomplete years. This agrees extremely 
 well with the minimum years of the demotic documents and makes it probable that those two 
 rulers represent the whole native dynasty of rebel kings in the southern part of Egypt. 
 
 Modern historians, writing under the spell of Greek thinking, like Mahaffy and Bouche 
 Leclercq, have found it inconceivable that the Thebais could be independent for such a long 
 time. Thus Mahaffy {The Empire of the Ptolemies, 313) eagerly grasped an hypothesis of J. 
 Krall (Studien zur Geschichte des alten Aegyptens, II, 43) 2 that those kings of the Thebais were 
 Ethiopian kings who had penetrated into Egypt during those troubled years and "counted their 
 years as kings of Ethiopia, not of Upper Egypt," so that "the long period of eighteen years of 
 successful rebellion is not necessary." Bouche-Leclercq (Histoire des Lagides, 365) likewise 
 mentions this theory with favor, but he finds it difficult to believe even in any fixed government 
 of the insurgents: "C'est une exageration que de parler alors de Thebai'de independante. Ces 
 roitelets etaient des chefs de bande qui pouvaient inquieter, mais non dominer la Haute Egypte." 
 The latter statement shows that the writer had not taken time to examine thoroughly the 
 extracts from the demotic documents communicated by Revillout, a splendid illustration of the 
 
 1 Cp. also the second Philae text, line 120, about some prominent part played by the son of the "pretender" in the final battle. 
 So, the latter would not seem to have been a young man. 
 
 2 Similarly Revillout, Revue Egyptologique, v, 99, Memoire sur les Blemmyes, etc. 
 
30 , THE GREAT EGYPTIAN REVOLUTION. 
 
 contempt generally shown by the "classical scholars" of the old school towards any source not 
 written in the only decent languages imaginable, i. e., in Greek or Latin. The long duration 
 of the reigns of those last native Pharaohs, their full and formal titles, and the fixed forms of 
 government revealed by the contract protocols ought to have shown to any careful reader 
 that those native rulers were no leaders of roving insurgent bands. 
 
 The Ethiopian hypothesis of Krall, which once seemed very attractive, is now exploded by 
 our Philse text. The vanquished "impious man" is most distinctly designated as an Egyptian 
 rebel who had called the Ethiopians to aid him (line 12b). If the reverse had been true, i. e., 
 if an Ethiopian ruler aided by the Egyptian rebels had been conquered, our text would certainly 
 have designated him as such; it would have added so much to the glory of the victory that 
 we could not expect it to be suppressed. 
 
 That a great part of Egypt was independent to the year 19 is confirmed also by the general 
 remission of unpaid taxes to that year (Philse I, demot. 5/), which forms a parallel to the first 
 remission of taxes unpaid during the revolution to the year 8 (Rosettana, 1. 8). 
 
 Another valuable result which can now be taken from the second Philensis is that in 
 the Thebai's we have one ruler of all the rebels, not those many small bwaar at or "chiefs" of 
 Polybius which the peculiar geographic formation of the Delta produced there among the 
 insurgents. Also in this case the decree would rather have spoken of a plurality of rebel 
 leaders if possible ; this would have sounded much better as increasing the value of the victory 
 and showing more clearly the illegality of the secession. The mention also of the crown 
 prince of the native kingdom (line 12a; see above, p. 74, p. 75, note 1) is a certain confirma- 
 tion of the uniform government of the Thebai's. 
 
 With this agree the official protocols of those native rulers on the Theban business docu- 
 ments mentioned above. They are: "the king Harmah, living forever, beloved by Isis, 
 beloved of Amen-Re', the king of the gods, the great god." The second king's titles are quite 
 identical. These titles are very interesting. In demotic contracts the royal titles are always 
 shortened, also with the Ptolemaic kings. Moreover, the second "cartouche," containing 
 the official name of the earlier style, is always omitted in those private documents, so that we 
 need not conclude from the above protocol that a shortened titulature, indicating a more 
 democratic government, was used by those native rulers. On their own official documents and 
 on buildings they certainly employed as pompous and full titles as any rulers of gentile Egypt 
 ever used. Characteristic is the mention of Isis and Amon. It is tempting to think of the Isis 
 of Philse and to assume that the rebels came from the southern frontier of Egypt, but this is 
 by no means certain. Isis had so many temples. The mention of Amon indicates probably 
 that the residence of the native dynasty was at Thebes. Thebes still seems to have been the 
 most populous city of Upper Egypt and it had an important situation. The mention of the 
 "land of Thebes" in the Philae decree (line 5a), of course, proves nothing to that effect; it is 
 merely an awkward translation of the old Greek term "Thebai's" and thus quite vague. 
 
THE BILINGUAL DECREES OF PHILAE. 
 
 THE "FIRST" DECREE. 
 
 THE RELIGIOUS OCCASION FOR THE DECREE. 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 31 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT 
 
 [The high priests and the prophets and those 
 
 . . . | [b?]-zsr r s-m'r 
 
 who enter] the sanctuary for vesting 
 
 ntrw m hbsw-sn h' sh'.w 
 
 s • ■ 
 
 the gods with their vestments and the scr bes 
 
 zm',wt{?) ntr ty(O l pr(wy)- 
 
 of the sacred books (and) the faculty (of) the (double) 
 
 4b 
 
 'nh h' «,'-. | kyw 
 
 house of life (i.e., the library) and the other 
 
 w'bw y(y) m 'trty 
 
 priests coming from the twofold sanctuaries 
 
 rsy(?) mhyt(?) 'w 'nb-hz 
 
 of the South (and) North to The White Wall 
 
 (f. e., Memphis) 
 
 4C 
 
 'w shn 2 Hp-'nh 'b-sn ' r 
 
 for installation (of) the living Apis, who have met at 
 
 shz't 3 nty 'nb—rsy 
 
 the sanctuary of the (One in His) Southern Wall 
 
 (i.e., Ptah) 
 . . . . [k',]-sn: 
 (who) say: 
 
 [nt s(m) e(?) p{?)- m'wb e V 
 
 to the sanctuary to perform 
 
 4a 
 
 [nm n-sh(',)w 
 
 [who go 
 
 mnh 
 the clothing 
 
 n 11- ntrw] 
 of the gods] 
 
 nm nsh(',)w 
 and the scribes 
 
 m]zyw(?) 4 
 of b]ooks 
 
 'nh, 
 house of life (i. e., the library) 
 
 k"w w'bw e—r- 
 
 other priests who have 
 
 [and the scribes 
 
 [pr(wy?) 
 (of) [the (double) 
 
 nm 
 and 
 
 yiy) 
 
 come 
 
 4b 
 
 n- 
 the 
 
 n n— 'rpyw t\- Kmy] e Mn-nfr 
 
 from the temples of Egypt] to Memphis 
 
 e p- shn'e n Hp-'nh V 
 
 to the installation of the Living Apis, having 
 
 t(w)t e 
 assembled at 
 
 ht-ntr 
 the temple 
 
 n Pth (?) 
 of Ptah 
 
 [in the Southern Wall?] 
 
 [e— r zt 
 [who have said: 
 
 m-d(y)-nty 
 because has 
 
 s'-r' 
 the son of the Sungod, 
 
 REASONS FOR THE DECREE. 
 THE ROYAL BENEFITS. 
 
 4 d 
 
 wnn 
 continued 
 
 4 d 
 
 PtwWwmys, 'nh 
 Ptolemy, who lives 
 
 zt, mr(y) Pth, ntr pr, 
 
 forever, beloved of Ptah, the God Epiphanes, 
 
 s', n n-st 'byty 
 
 the son of the king of Upper and Eower Egypt, 
 
 n-tt] hr —r 
 because] used to do 
 
 4e 
 
 pr- Ptlwmys 'nh zt Pth 
 
 king Ptolemy, living forever, of Ptah 
 
 mr p-ntr [nt pr {p~?) sy 
 beloved, the God [Epiphanes, the son of 
 
 41 
 
 pr- Ptlwmys nm] pr-'t 
 
 king Ptolemy and] (of) the queen 
 
 1 A disfigurement of the old word gnbt "commission, committee, faculty," through the hieratic abbreviation of 
 this word which was first misread t',y. It occurs frequently; see Damanh. 7, our second decree, 4a, etc. 
 
 2 L/it. "the meeting, happening, lucky appearance." 
 
 3 Originally "chapel," but here used freely for "temple" in general. 
 
 4 The traces before the big, vertical, palimpsestic line look much like 'nh, i. e., as the order of both classes 
 of hierogrammates had been changed in the Philse text. I have, however, followed the text of the Rosetta stone. 
 
32 
 
 EGYPTOLOGICAL RESEARCHES. 
 
 THE ROYAL BENEFITS— Continued. 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 PtwWwmys h' hqt nbt-t',wy 
 
 Ptolemy, and the queen (and) mistress of both 
 
 countries, 
 
 Qrw'w',pdr',(t) ntrwy mriwy) ytwy, 
 
 Cleopatra (I!), 1 the two Gods Loving (their) Parents, 
 
 hr-'r{i) (')h(w)t nb(i) nfrw(t) m hwt{?)-ntrw 
 doing all things good in(!) 2 the temples 
 
 h' wn{!) m-\hnt y>(w)t-f mnhfi 
 
 and (to) those being within his benevolent office 
 
 (i. e., kingdom) 
 
 r- \w-sn (')r(y)w 
 a'lofthem, thereof (?!), 4 
 
 'r—sn (')ht-nb(f) twtw(!) n-rif) my 'r—n 
 they doing everything behooving to do as did 
 
 5 \ Dhwty, ", '; s-w',z{?) [nt-}'(?) 
 
 Thout, the very great one, ordaining the fitting things (?) 
 
 m 'b n [ntr-mnh] hr ntrw b 
 
 with the heart of [a kind god] towards the gods. 
 
 Rdyt(!)-nf nb{?!)-wrw 
 
 by 
 
 qnw n 
 
 He gave much money (and) grain in abundance 
 
 \lsyn\ n-ntrw 
 Arsinoe, the Gods 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 4i 
 
 | mr-ytw, 
 Philopator, 
 
 nm{?) [pr-'t Glwptre, n-ntrw nt pr ] 
 and [the queen Cleopatra, the Gods Epiphanes], 
 
 \mt-\njrt ['sy n n- 'rpyw Kmyt 
 
 bene[fits many to the temples (of) Egypt 
 
 nm] n—nt hn [tf-]",wt [pr— 
 
 and] to those who (are) within [his royal] office, 
 
 tr-w] 
 [all of them.] 7 
 
 5b 
 
 | (n) n- ntrw 
 to the gods, 8 
 
 e- j- ty ht pr(t), pr(!!y 'sy 
 (as) he gave money (and) grain much 
 
 [e ht(i)-f mnh] 
 [being his heart kind] 
 
 11 
 to 
 
 n- 
 the 
 
 1 The text is disfigured by running together the mention of the mother (Arsinoe) and the wife (Cleopatra) of 
 king Ptolemy V. Epiphanes. 
 
 2 We should expect the dative n "to." The sign m was begun like the hawk (ntr), which sign follows 
 directly. The engraver tried then to correct the faulty text in a vague way. 
 
 3 This poetic expression for "reign, government" hovers between the epithet ", "great" and mnht 
 "benevolent" in the various places, as the signs are quite similar. 
 
 4 This use of 'r(y)w is very obscure and seems to be due to some misunderstanding. Is "thereof" merely 
 an erroneous doublet of -sn "their"? 
 
 5 Corruptions have arisen because the redactor thought he could put in place of the comparison with Horus 
 (Ros. Gr., io) another comparison with a god, i. e., an abridged redaction of the Greek text, line 18 to 19: Qpovriluv 
 ottcos to. tldiaiieva avvTthr\Tai rols deoh Kara to Trpoar/Kov 6/xotcos dt nal to SLkcliov iraaiv a-Kevti^tv Kadairep 'Epyuijs 6 neyas Kal 
 yueyas, wrongly connecting this with ra re wpos deoiis tvepyeTiKcos 8ia.Keiij.evos of line 10-11. Evidently a good example 
 of hasty redacting. The demotic text does not correspond strictly, and the corrected rendering above still 
 remains uncertain, particularly my restoration of nt-', ent-e: "what is on the hand, what is necessary, becoming, 
 customary, proper." No n is visible above. Certain seems the emendation, sw',z. The restoration "kind god" 
 is furnished by Damanhur II (corrected reading found by me after the stone in the Cairo Museum). 
 
 6 See Ros. Gr. 14 to 15, demot. 6, Damanh. 14. The Philse text is abridged. (Nb or hz disfigured to hb.) 
 
 7 Thus after Ros. dem. 6. The traces on plate 13, line 5a, do not agree sufficiently to allow many safe resto- 
 rations. Possibly the Philae text is changed or corrupted. 
 
 8 Cp. Ros. dem. 6, near the end. The remarkable determinative of divinity after mnh seems to be kept here, 
 but we must assume a strong disfigurement. 
 
 9 The e-w',h-f ty "he added to give" of Ros. 6 has been modernized by the redactor, who then seems to have 
 mixed w',h: "to add," and nb: "gold." After noticing this, he or the copyist seems to have tried to repeat pr, 
 which certainly is superfluous. 
 
THE BILINGUAL DECREES OF PHILAE. 
 
 33 
 
 THE ROYAL BENEFITS-Continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 Jb 
 
 m 
 
 r(\)w 
 
 m 
 
 from the shares (awbnoipa.i) from [the temples?] 
 
 dy-ns(!) 2 hnb 
 
 (which) were paid (from) gardenland 
 
 [ . . . ?] 'w mn [my] wn [zr?] 
 
 [and fields?] to remain [like] that which existed [since?] 
 
 [r]k \yt-f] n-[st-sn?] 
 
 the time (of) [his father] at [their place? i. e., former 
 
 condition]. 
 
 [Rdy \ -n?] hm-f 
 [(There) gave] His Majesty 
 
 wn hr [pr-n-st?] 
 
 (that which) was with (i. e., due to) [the government] (?), 
 
 .... sn{?) 
 
 (should) be [remitted 3 to the 19th year?] 
 
 m [htr?]w nw s['nh?] h' 
 
 With [the du]es of the fields of revenue (?) and 
 
 sf , 
 
 y',wt hmw-ntry?) n 
 
 the office (-tax) (of) the prophet(s)(?) for the 
 
 pr-[n-st?] n(?) 'r-n[f?] shy 4 
 
 [royal] house, not(?) did [he] exercise the right 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 'rp\yw [t'-Kmy?] 
 
 temples [of Egypt?]. [He left their shares from 
 
 vineyards 
 
 5d 
 
 [e]-h-n n(',)y e-wn-n\-[e-w 
 and gardens ?] like 5 those which had been 
 
 ty?]-s 6 
 [paid?] 
 
 • • ■ Pf-yt. 
 
 under his father. 
 
 E-ty{?)-f wy[-w](?) . . . 
 
 He gave (that) were remitted . 
 
 sf 
 
 tsw hn-e hspt 
 
 [the taxes of?] the nomes (?!) until year 
 
 SQ 
 
 XIX n-yhw-m',(?) \ hn'(?) n-s'nhw 
 
 19, 7 (of?) the new(?) fields, 8 and(?) the revenues 
 
 nm n-{?) yhw{?) 
 
 and the(?) [divine domains?] 
 
 6a 
 
 ty{?) ht{?) rib{?) prt{?) . . 
 
 giving [silver, gold (and) grain (?) much?] 
 
 1 We should expect " (the shares) of the gods " {ntrw), after Ros. demot. 9, and we are tempted to read or 
 to emendate [m, etc.) thus. 
 
 2 Correct dy-sn. The disfigurement has caused the loss of the preposition n. 
 
 3 Ros. Gr. 15-16? This would rather require: that which was due to the temples! 
 
 4 Seems to be demotic shy, shy, syh, syh, infinitive, or noun sht, sht, of the ordinary contract formula, which 
 Griffith, Rylands Pap., 203, compared with Copt, shishi "power, might," evidently too narrowly, as the masculine 
 derivation p-shish "vengeance" shows, for which the analogy of the Greek d'acr], "right" and "punishment," 
 forms the connection. 
 
 5 The text of Ros. (Greek 14 to 15, demot. 8 to 9) seems to have been shortened here, in both versions, 
 combining the avvra^tis and the airb^oipai, etc. Therefore, I have not dared to restore too closely after the 
 early model. The most important guide for us is the trace of h(e) "like." 
 
 6 The text looks like 'n-bn "to bring bad," which, of course, would be senseless. I do not understand the 
 single groups as reproduced on the plates and must help myself by assuming here strong corruptions. In the 
 translation I have corrected boldly after Ros. Greek 16, demot. 9 end, Damanhur 15. For the obscure pronun- 
 ciation of the preposition "at the time of, under," see p. 41, note 11. 
 
 7 This shows that the remission of taxes not paid during the revolution in "the nomes," i. e., "the inland," 
 is meant. 
 
 8 This group resembles the orthography of m, (e. g., in Copt, mue, mui, "island," or m',y, "new"), but must 
 have a different meaning here. 
 
34 
 
 EGYPTOLOGICAL RESEARCHES. 
 
 THE ROYAL BENEFITS— Continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 hr-[s]n [hr-?] tp{?) r(',)w 
 
 with them 1 (i. e., due to them) over(?) the shares 
 
 (i. e., taxes) 
 
 [m-?] (hnt?) tsw 'w w'bw 
 
 [from?] among(?) the appointments (?) 2 to(?) the priests 
 
 h' T (')h(w)t nw sht(?) 
 
 and the things (i. e., work) of the weaving 
 
 mrtyw rdyt(!)-n hm-f 
 
 (of) serfs, (there) permitted His Majesty 
 
 nfry(!)-r hspt XIX{?) hm(?)-sn 
 
 until year i9(?) what they had forgotten (?) 3 
 
 51 
 
 [m?]y n(?) trw(?) \ h' kt-(')h(w)t m 
 
 as in (their) [part, time?] and other things in 
 
 tnw [",?] rdy(ty st hm-f 
 
 number [great?], (there) gave them His Majesty 
 
 [to] the ground (i. e., dropped, remitted, them). 
 
 -sn 
 remitted 
 
 'sk 
 also 
 
 [S-]w]ww 
 They 
 
 r(',)w myd pg(-) 
 
 the shares, the piece (s) of byssus 
 
 'w{!) 
 of (?) 6 
 
 byssus 
 
 [h?]r pr-n-st 
 
 (which were) with (i. e., due to?) 6 the government 
 
 6b 
 
 m prw-mVt nfry(!)- \ r hspt XIX. 
 
 from the temples until year 19. 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 e-w ty(?) nt(u)(?)[-w} 1 
 
 They gave (i. e., caused) that(?) [was] . 
 
 6b 
 
 V \n-?\ rw{?) 
 make [the?] shares (?) (of) 
 
 ssw- nst(?)w nt 
 
 the "royal" (/. e., fine) linen (pieces) which 
 
 Wy-f n(?Y 
 He remitted to 
 
 e-bnp-w V 
 had not been made 
 
 6 c 
 
 hn n-[nt 
 
 among those [which 
 
 e-w— 'r-w n pr—pr— (?) n n—'rpyw ! 
 were made for the government (?) in the temples?] 9 
 
 nt 
 
 . . . . which (they) owed (?) [to year XIX?]. 
 
 1 This seems to correspond with Ros. Gr. 16, about the remission of the tax for every priestly office. It is 
 strange, however, that in the hieroglyphic version (Damanh. 15), as well as in the demotic (Ros. 9), the wording is 
 so very different, while otherwise our text follows the original edition as much as possible. Then, numerous difficul- 
 ties in detail still need elucidation, above all the groups preceding shy, where I can not find dnw = to TihtoTinbv, which 
 we should expect. This tax here seems to be entirely remitted, while (Ros. Greek 16) the remission was only partial. 
 
 2 1 have tried to understand ti(w) according to its Coptic meaning (not according to the old sense 
 "districts"). The preceding group is not easily explained as hnt for hn "within, among, out of" (nor as 
 part of hnt-i(y) "garden-land"). So I feel uncertain whether the same income from the temples is still meant. 
 
 3 We should expect: "what they lacked, in what they were behind." The above proposed reading hm-sn 
 "what they had forgotten" or "had neglected" agrees well with this sense, but this ought to have a different 
 determinative. The restitution [k]m-sn "they completed" would remain very obscure. Cp. Ros. Gr. 29. 
 
 4 Thus for the ndy-y of the sculptor. Cp. Ros. hierogl. 2. 
 
 6 A very archaic use of 'sk. The 'w = e can not be explained with certainty. If it was intended for the prepo- 
 sition e, the construction might be understood as abandoned from "he commanded concerning the byssus," but 
 this would require hr, hi, or r-dblt, etbe(t), as preposition rather than e. Above I have tried to explain e as a mis- 
 take for en, the genitive-particle or (cp. $d?) earlier em "from." 
 
 6 This seems to be the easiest reading, considering the very tempting traces over r as accidental. 
 
 7 Everything in this line is very uncertain. The beginning seems to be analogous to Ros. dem. 17, Gr. 29: 
 the remission of many arrears in money and grain (thus above?) to the temples. 
 
 8 We should expect at least e "to," but the whole group might be disfigured for r\w "shares" (?). 
 
 9 Thus after Ros. dem. 10. This passage has, however, been changed considerably in our text (complete 
 remission in place of a partial one). 
 
THE BILINGUAL DECREES OF PHILAE. 
 
 35 
 
 THE ROYAL BENEFITS— Continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 Ws{y)-sn 'sk 'w- sbwt s(?) . . 
 They ordered also [concerning?] [the artaba] 
 
 6c 
 
 s[tt m?] hnbw nw [ntrw?] h' 
 
 (of) [the arura from] the fields ■ of [the gods ?] and 
 
 s-nbw (read: stt!) 
 
 the arura (stone: anybody!) [from the vineyards of?] 
 
 ntrw r rdy{t) dy—sn 
 
 the gods in order to cause (that) be given 
 
 (this to the ground, i. e., remitted?) 1 
 
 6d 
 
 [M?] -twtw I [m s-nb r 
 
 And that be [not taken anybody for the 
 
 kbnwt?] m gdt 
 galley] s as [crew?] 
 
 Ssp-w(?) (')ht my n z(?)d-wt 
 
 They undertook (?) thing(s) as not were said 2 
 
 (i. e. , reported ?) 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 [ Hn-w-s 'n \ e]-tb',t 
 
 [They ordered (it) furthermore] concerning 
 
 'rtb I st 3 [e-wn-n',-ew 
 
 the one artaba (of) each arura-measure [which was 
 
 6e 
 
 sty—f »] 4 n{?)-yhw b n n- \ ntrw nm 
 collected from] the fields of the gods and 
 
 n(w?)-yhw & Illy 1 [n n-htp-ntr 
 
 the(ir?) fields (of) vineyards [of the divine domains 
 
 n n-ntrw wy-f e-rw-] 
 
 of the gods, he (?) 8 remitted these.] 
 
 61 
 
 . . . . | n-mt(w)]-pht(i)w e n-ntrw 
 [Now concerning the d]ues (or : honors) for the gods, 
 
 1 A very difficult passage. It corresponds with the Rosettana and the demotic version (see this) in general, 
 but the remark about "anybody" or "everybody" can not be fitted in, if we do not assume that a confusion with 
 the passage speaking of the abolition of "the press system" for rowers for the navy (Ros. Gr. 17, dem. 10, Damanh. 
 16) has been committed in both texts (!?). After all, the most plausible explanation is that the hieroglyphic text 
 has, following the demotic version as its model, misread 'one artaba" to rome(t) "man" (cp. on this possibility 
 the remarks on the demotic text) and has tried to improve this senseless reading by adding the word nb "every." 
 By this emendation we obtain a reading perfectly parallel with the demotic text, only that the artaba and the 
 keramion seem identified here. The space and the traces make the restoration " (it?) to the ground" (sw? r t\) 
 very difficult. As the general sense of a remission is certain, apparently a shorter synonym was used here ("they 
 gave the back to it" s\ r-s?) or something similar. 
 
 2 After the couple of determinatives, which we can recognize, it would seem as though the passage mentioned 
 the pressing of civilians as rowers of the war-galleys (Ros. Gr. 17) among the practices abandoned by the reforms 
 of the king. But it is true that the hieroglyphic text (Damanhur 16) can not easily be harmonized with our traces; 
 therefore, at least our text must have been redacted strongly to differ so widely. Our restoration s-nb " anybody " 
 is taken from 6c, where this group is out of place, as shown above. The group zd is not quite certain; $d-tw "it 
 was collected, demanded," however, would hardly be possible without a determinative. Cp. note 1. 
 
 3 Without Ros. dem. 17, Gr. 30, it would hardly be possible to decipher these groups. The article p- is dis- 
 figured; the sign for "artaba" is so indistinct that I read it rm(t)w: "people" for a long time; the sign for "arura" 
 is hazily engraved or stands over an erasure. 
 
 4 I read after Ros. 17. Our stone offers indistinct, senseless traces, as though the engraver had erased his 
 blunders and had forgotten to reengrave the passage, omitting the auxiliary verb " it was," etc. 
 
 6 This is in Ros. "the fields of the divine domain(s)" n-yhw (n) p-htp-ntr. Here corrected as above. 
 
 6 Also these groups corrected over. The dot after the plural article n- looks as though the engraver had 
 thought of the possessive form new, neu, for a while. This may be accidental, however. After Ros. the word 
 "a jar" (Kepafiwv) has been omitted before these groups. 
 
 7 A single stroke represents i/y, as often in the cursive script of contracts. 
 
 8 Or wy-w "they remitted," i. e., king and queen? The whole decree is very inconsistent, ascribing the 
 benefits sometimes to the king alone, sometimes to the royal couple. 
 
36 
 
 EGYPTOLOGICAL RESEARCHES. 
 
 THE ROYAL BENEFITS— Continued. 
 
 m-{?) [hr-h',t?] 
 [beforehand?], 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 6e 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 [dy(?)-sn?] 
 [letting them?] 
 
 wn 
 be(?) 
 
 [sn?] n[ty?] myti,w{?) n 
 
 [them?] From those [which (were?)] oppressive (?) of(?) 
 
 phy(w?) 
 the honors(?), 1 
 
 ty (')h(w)t n 
 
 taking (away?) the thing (s) of 
 
 (i. e., taxes for) 
 
 6/ 
 
 wdnw nw [ntrt?] sn{w)- j mrt 
 
 the sacrifices of [the Goddess?] Loving the Brother 
 
 h' ntrwy mr(wy) (y)twy. 
 (Philadelphe?) 2 and the Gods Philopator. 
 
 ' Skw rdy-n hqt nb(t) 
 
 Also gave the queen, the mistress 
 
 t)wy Qrw'w',p',dr',(t) snt hmt 
 
 of both countries, Cleopatra, the sister- wife 
 
 re s\ R' Ptw',rwmy[s 'nh 
 
 of the son of the Sungod, Ptolemy, living 
 
 zt, Pth mr ... 
 
 forever, beloved of Ptah, [presents of?] 3 
 
 7b 
 
 hz, nb, , ",wt-nb(t) n-[m','t] 
 silver, gold, all stones [genuine] (i. e., precious) 
 
 my—'s n [kt?-]w 
 
 in great quantity for [the others?] (of) 
 
 tr-w | e-w s-mn[-w?] nt{u)-w ty 
 
 all of them they established [them ?] 4 and they took 
 
 6h 
 
 (away) 5 [the taxes for the service of the Goddess Phila- 
 
 delphe and the Gods Philopator as being burdensome 
 
 to] 
 
 n-rm{t)w nb{?) 
 the people all (?) 
 
 7b 
 
 Pr-'t Glwptre t-snt t- \ shmt n 
 The queen Cleopatra, the sister (and) wife of 
 
 p[r~ ■ ■ ■ 
 
 ki[ng Ptolemy, 
 
 living forever, beloved of Ptah, 
 
 7 d 
 
 . . . mt-pht{i)w 
 
 gave] (signs of) honor [of gold, silver, stones] 
 
 (re) m \t) 's(y?) n n-kt(i)-w 6 
 
 genuine 7 in great quantity for the others 
 
 1 Two words, the sense of which remains doubtful for the present. For phy I have compared the demotic 
 mt-pht{y) : "that which becomes, is due, honor." The trace of the determinative might point to the arm with 
 a hook (or to the plural ending -w?). The fe!-sign of m(y)h',w seems to be certain, although on the stone it looks 
 more like the ideogram {s)mn. The word means "weighty, burdensome." 
 
 2 This means Arsinoe, the sister and wife of Ptolemy II. The group which I have restored to "goddess" 
 might be merely the feminine article, t). The above expression refers to the kivonoipa of one-sixth, from gardens 
 and vineyards, formerly paid to the temples, then transferred to the royal house, under pretext of a cult to the 
 divine queen, which began in her lifetime. (See Mahaffy, Empire of the Ptol., 143.) That cult was based, I believe, 
 principally on the return to the old institution of sister -marriage, by which the royal house of Egypt once had 
 imitated the gods. The above expressions referring to it are very remarkable, trying to disguise the material 
 aim of the institution. The true character of that tax is, however, betrayed by its parallelism with what is 
 mentioned before as oppressive usage. (The orthography of sn "brother" with the phonetic complement nw is 
 not rare in Graeco-Roman time. The graphic arrangement of the groups, with the object written before the verb 
 and pronounced after it, is the same archaism which we find in the name of Ptolemy "beloved of Ptah," 
 written Pth-mr{y). 
 
 3 The space somewhat narrow for this? An indistinct bird only visible. 
 
 4 Not participle: " (they being established) " as written here. Cp. Ros. Gr. 33, dem. 19. 
 
 5 Apparently thus, although the ornamental filling stroke (usually a dot) under the sign ty is not regular in 
 our text. 
 
 6 Not the usual orthography for the plural of kt, but archaic. 
 
 7 Thus rather than [e-w] my-'Sy, which would be too remarkable an archaism for demotic. 
 
THE BILINGUAL DECREES OF PHILAE. 
 
 37 
 
 THE ROYAL BENEFITS— Continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 r[p]'y[wt](?) 
 
 [ntrwt 
 
 nw\ 
 
 Bqt 
 
 the idols [of the goddesses (?) of] Egypt 
 
 h'{?) ['hwt?]-ntr{?)-[sn?] \ hr- V(/) 
 and(?) [their(?) divine things?] making 
 
 ",bwt s[qr wdn . 
 sacrifices, [pouring out of libations(?) 
 
 holocausts (?) and the rest of the things done(?)] 
 
 n r[pr?]w nw ntrw 
 
 in (?) the temples of the gods [of Egypt?] 
 
 h' (?) [ntrwt? . . .] 
 and (?) [all the goddesses?] 
 
 | (~W?) 
 
 hr htpw{?) -sn hr hwt{?) [sn] 
 
 for(?) their cults(?) together with [their] temples(?). 
 (or : estates ?) 
 
 n shmw 
 
 of (the) statues 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 | n n- ntrw e(!) t',~Kmy 
 of the gods(!) of Egypt, 
 
 7f 
 
 e-w ! . . 
 
 they [doing everything in their honor?] 5 . . 
 
 [e] t(y) 'r-w hbw e(?) n-ntrw 
 
 n 
 
 [to] let be made festivals for 6 the gods of 
 
 tl-Kmy 
 Egypt 
 
 nrn 
 
 n-ntrwt 
 
 tr-w 
 
 and the goddesses all together . 
 
 Th 
 
 nm n[w?\ 'rpyw. 
 
 and (?) the(ir?) temples. 
 
 THE THANKS OF THE GODS. 
 
 [ (m?-)'swy nn ] rdy-n ntrw 
 
 [In return for these things] 2 have given the gods 
 
 ntrwt [nw] Bqt r-[zr?]-sn z (?) [rnpwt?] 4 
 (and) goddesses [of] Egypt all together (?) [years?] 
 
 7J 
 
 's(w) m q[nw] \ nht 'nh, wz) 
 many in might, strength, life, welfare, 
 
 snby n n-st 'byty 
 
 health, to the king of U. and L. Egypt, 
 
 [The gods have given in return for] 
 mt-nfr(!) 
 kindnesses 
 
 ny{?) 
 these (?) 
 
 1 The traces make the restoration ntrw, "gods", of which we should think first very difficult. If we have to 
 restore r^F^iy/], this word, limited to female statues, alone requires a limitation of the gifts to "the goddesses." 
 This shows the queen as feeling herself one of the goddesses in mentioning the goddesses first or exclusively. 
 (The demotic betrays its confusion of "gods" and "goddesses" in the feminine form "others"). Meaning: the 
 queen renounced an income from an alleged cult? 
 
 2 After Ros. hierogl. 5. Possibly for nn "these things" a fuller expression is to be restored. 
 
 3 The traces would then seem to be accidental. 
 
 4 The trace below would suggest that the ideograph stood between the determinative (?) and the plural 
 strokes, but it is of rather peculiar shape. I first read it nw. The text certainly varies from the Rosettana. 
 
 5 A verb ought to follow in this construction, which is usually "participial", according to the usage of Coptic 
 grammar. 
 
 6 Instead of (e)n. 
 
 7 Incomplete group. 
 
38 
 
 EGYPTOLOGICAL RESEARCHES. 
 
 THE THANKS OF THE GODS— Continued 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 s', R' PtwWwmys 'nh zt 
 
 the son of the Sungod, Ptolemy, living forever, 
 
 8a 
 
 Pth mr \ [h' s]nt hmt-f hqt 
 
 beloved of Ptah, [and h]is sister-wife, the queen 
 
 nbt t',wy Qrw)p',dr',(t) 
 
 (and) mistress of both countries, Cleopatra, 
 
 ntrwy priwy) hr-s-[mn?] 
 
 the two Gods Epiphanes, [establishing(?) 
 
 m t',-zr-\f?} 
 
 their throne (P)] 1 in the whole land, 
 
 [y',wt-s]n-wrt dd[wt?] hr[-sn] 
 
 their great [dignity] consolidated for them 2 
 
 [m].?[w-.src] [r] zt 
 [their] children [to] eternity. 
 
 h' 
 and 
 
 n 
 
 to 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 8c 
 
 pr-' Ptlwmys j 'nh zt 
 
 the king Ptolemy, living forever, 
 
 [beloved of Ptah, and the queen Cleopatra] 
 
 8d 8e 
 
 [n-] | ntrw nt pr qn{?) nht{?) \ 
 
 [the] Gods Epiphanes, might (?) of strength (?) 4 
 
 n-w'(?) 
 together(?) 5 
 
 ntu-w(?) [ty?) nw-wt{?)-pr-'{?f 
 and they [give?] their royal (?) dignity (?) 
 
 I • • 
 
 [established in the whole land for them and their 
 
 [hrt(i)]w(?) s'-zt. 
 childr]en forever. 
 
 HONORS FOR KING AND QUEEN. 
 
 8c 
 
 H' shn-n\fr] 
 With good luck 
 
 [it entered into the heart of 
 
 Sm'{t) Mhyt 
 
 the priests of the temples of Up]per (and) Lower Egypt 
 
 ?d 
 
 my-g[d]-sn \ [s-]wr 
 
 all together [to in]crease [the honors 3 of] 
 
 s',-R' Ptrwmys 'nh zt, 
 
 the son of the Sungod, Ptolemy, living forever, 
 
 ph(?)-s 7 
 
 has reached (?) 
 
 [wr- 
 ithe] 
 
 Nm p—shrie nfr 
 
 With good luck it 
 
 ht(i)w(?) (n) n- . 
 
 heart (s?) of the [priests of the temples of Egypt 
 
 all together, with regard to] 
 
 mt-pht{i) . . . Ptlwmys 'nh [zt, 
 the honors (of) [king] Ptolemy, living [forever, 
 
 1 The above restoration makes that which follows appear as somewhat repetitious, and is, of course, only one 
 of many possible guesses ("kingdom," etc.). The redactor has, indeed, tried to enlarge Ros. 5 in a way which 
 must involve some pleonasms. 
 
 2 Comparing this with Ros. hierogl. 5. The ideogram for "dignity" is possible, although not clear. Behind 
 dd the sign above seems to be a rude book roll; below, nothing is certain. A large z is probable, as trace of 
 zt; other traces are only misleading. 
 
 3 Very difficult traces which are not favorable to the restitution [mdt-] pht or phyw (cp. 6e). 
 
 4 We should expect such, or a similar reading, after Ros. dem. 20, but the text engraved offers such difficulties 
 that I know, so far, no better explanation for it than that it has been mutilated by a senseless contraction of the 
 above words. This hazardous explanation is, of course, very unsatisfactory and not convincing. Brugsch tried 
 to obtain sense by violent changes of the signs in his copy. The second group, in which I have tried to find nht 
 "strength," is written like 'wt(i)-w "between them," from which hardly any sense can be gained. Thus it seems 
 to need an emendation ; see above. It might also be explained as having the group " (their) children " worked into 
 it, which we find below. The first group would permit also the theory that it meant rnpwt "years" before its 
 disfigurement. 
 
 6 Not a satisfactory explanation, because n-w' in this sense would be a strong archaism. (Brugsch's 'rw = 
 Coptic er{r)ou "towards them" is both a bold forcing of the engraved text and senseless). 
 
 6 This is what we should expect after Ros. dem. 21, but the traces are again difficult, especially the alleged pr-'. 
 
 7 Or abbreviation for 'g-s: " it has entered "? The feeble stroke behind might be understood as a trace of 
 the singular article p- (correctly in Ros. 21), either an abandoned attempt to insert it or erased erroneously. 
 
THE BILINGUAL DECREES OF PHILAE. 
 
 39 
 
 HONORS FOR KING AND QUEEN— Continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 Se 
 
 Pthmr h' .... | Qrw'w',p',dr',(t) 
 beloved of Ptah, and [his sister- wife] Cleopatra, 
 
 m{?) hnt{?) [hwt-] ntr 
 [in the temples?] 1 
 
 ntrwy pr{wy) 
 
 the two Gods Epiphanes, 
 
 81 
 
 [']!(?) | h' ntrwy mr(wy) \ytwy] 
 
 much(?) together with the Gods Philopator 
 
 . —sn 2 h' ntrwy mnhwy 
 [who begot] them (!) and the Gods Benefactors 
 
 [qm]',-sn 
 who created these, 
 
 and 
 
 ntrwy 
 the 
 
 snwy 
 Brotherly Gods 
 
 ga 
 
 
 
 
 shp\r(?) [sn?] ntrwy nzwy 
 
 who begot [these], (and) the Gods Saviors, 
 
 zs(f)n(w) s -sn [q]m',-sn. 
 their ancestors, who created these. 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 gb 
 
 mr Pth j | ntrw 
 
 beloved of Ptah, and of queen Cleopatra, the] Gods 
 
 gc 
 
 nt pr hn n-rpy(w) nm \ n-nt 
 Epiphanes, in the temples and those which 
 
 nt{u) n- ntrw [mr-ytw nm n-nt 
 belong to the Gods [Philopator and those which 
 
 gd 
 
 nt{u) ntrw mnh \ \ n-'r- t(y)-hpr-w 
 belong to the Gods Euergetes] who begot them 
 
 ge 
 
 nt{u) | n-ntrw sn(w) 
 
 nm n-nt 
 
 and those which belong to 
 
 n-ntrw 
 the Brotherly Gods 
 
 'r-t(y)-hpr [n-'r]-t(y)- hpr-w nm 
 
 who had begotten [those having] begotten them and 
 
 n- [nt ntiu) n-ntrw nt nhm 
 those [which belong to the Gods Soter, 
 
 e t{y)-y-w.} 
 
 their forefathers, to increase them.] 6 
 
 THE ROYAL STATUES. 
 
 Mtwtw s-['h'] rpyt 
 And be [set up] an image 
 
 nbt-t',wy 
 the mistress of both countries, 
 
 gb 
 
 n hqt 
 of the queen, 
 
 Qrw'w',pw',dr',(t), snt hmt n s\ R' 
 
 Cleopatra, the sister-wife of the son of the Sungod, 
 
 gc 
 
 PtwWwmys 'nh [zt] Pth mr 
 
 Ptolemy, living [forever], beloved of Ptah, 
 
 ntrwy pr{wy) 
 
 the two( ! ) Gods( ! ) Epiphanes, 
 
 [h?]t m k)f 
 executed?] in work 
 
 gf 
 
 | w't rpyt t-pr-'t 
 
 [And be set up] an image (of) the queen 
 
 Glwptr'e 
 
 Cleopatra, [the (sister?) -wife of king Ptolemy, living 
 
 [e-h 
 
 forever, beloved of Ptah, the God Epiphanes, according to 
 
 ioa 
 
 ypt n rm(t) Kmyt?] ...... 
 
 Egyptian (?) sculpture (?) -style to be placed (?) into 
 
 1 Cp. Ros. hierogl. 5. Visible are m (the key), the ear of hnt — head, the hawk ntr, ' ', incorrectly for ' )t. 
 
 2 The plural mechanically placed according to the following enumeration, while the second decree seems to 
 have the correct limitation to "His Majesty" (13d). 
 
 3 Read: zfn(w). The following relative sentence here only as superfluous addition. Comparison of the other 
 decrees will show that the synonyms for "parents" are carefully selected and kept in a fixed, climatic order while 
 the demotic does not possess a literary style sufficiently developed to imitate those variations. 
 
 4 Head, two (3 ?) feet, and less distinct traces of the wings of a rather rudely sketched bee are visible. 
 
 5 Thus, following the version of Ros. dem. 22. 
 
40 
 
 EGYPTOLOGICAL RESEARCHES. 
 
 THE ROYAL STATUES— Continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 msntyw; \ 'h'-[s?} 1 r gs 
 
 (of) the sculptors (which) stands (?) at the side of 
 
 \hnty\ n si R' 
 
 [the image] of [her husband?], 2 the son of the Sun, 
 
 PtwWwmys 'nh zt 
 Ptolemy, living forever, 
 
 Pth mr 
 beloved of Ptah, 
 
 [ntr pr] 
 
 [the God Epiphanes,] [together with the 
 
 [ntr-tp?] p\wt(?) 3 -ntr 
 
 highest (?) god of] the (local) divine company 
 
 hr-rdt nf hps n qn 
 
 giving to him the sickle sword of victory, 
 
 of 
 
 ht hr p\ sh',[wy?] 'r-n 
 
 sculptured on(!) 4 that decree which made 
 
 w'bw [nw] prw^m','t{?) n hspfi IX{?) 
 the priests [of the] temples in the year 9(?) 
 
 loa 
 
 . . | n s\ R' PtwWwmys 
 
 [Mesor6 9?] 6 of the son of the Sungod, Ptolemy, 
 
 'nh zt, Pthmr, hr 
 
 living forever, beloved of Ptah, containing 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 [m\- nt- wnh?] 'rpy-nb 
 
 the (most) prominent place?] (of) every temple 
 
 job 
 
 t',-Km[y | Ptlwmys, 
 
 (of) Egypt [at the side of the image of king] Ptolemy, 
 
 'nh zt Pth mr p- ntr nt pr 
 
 living forever, beloved of Ptah, the God Epiphanes, 
 
 IOC 
 
 nm p-twt p-[ntr 
 
 together with the image of the [god 
 
 t-p',wt(?y 
 
 of the divine circle 
 
 e-j ty n-f hps qny 
 
 who is giving to him a sickle sword of victory, 
 
 (as) engraved on(?!) the decree of the priests of 
 
 X'rp]yw{?) n{?) hspt IX{?) 
 the temp]les [from] the year 9(?) 
 
 Ptlwmys 'nh zt 
 
 Ptolemy, living forever, 
 
 n pr- 
 of king 
 
 Pth mr hr nf-[mt?]-qnw(?) 
 
 beloved of Ptah, containing his victories 
 
 1 The reading Bqt, "(the sculptors of) Egypt," which we should expect after Ros. Greek 39, demot. 23, Philae 
 II, 14c, can be forced only with difficulty on the stone; the big oval hollow, in which I first tried to find the sign bq, 
 is secondary. The traces look most like a broad 'k' with a small 'Ain stuck through it and, after a gap, an 5. 
 This yields, of course, an awkward construction where we should expect, at least, the causative verb: s- 'h' 
 "it shall be established." (The mention of "Egyptian style" must stand in the gap before ht). 
 
 2 We should expect n h',y-s, as above restored, but the traces are very different. After the rather probable 
 high n (the crown), there seems to stand an irregular, very broad n; the traces under its nearer end like two 
 legs (?). Read simply: "the king of Upper and Lower Egypt"? 
 
 3 The sense is secured by Ros. Gr. 39, "the chief god." Tp "first, chief," is extant only in uncertain traces, 
 and p\wt (or pszt?) "divine cycle, divine company," is engraved as though it was misread nw. Cp. the "second" 
 decree, lines 15b, ijd, for an apparently different treatment of the same expression. 
 
 4 We imitate the ambiguity confusing the flat pictures on the stela and the portable statues in the round. 
 
 5 More favorable to the reading XIX (cp. 13d), but see the demotic. 
 
 6 1 first thought of the date, not of the priestly convention at which the decree was passed, but of the day 
 when the victory was reported to the king, and read "year XIX," seeing an abnormally large and straight X in 
 the two strokes over and before the IX and then, before these, the abbreviation for "year." The latter group, 
 however, seems to be the last signs of 'rpyw "temples"; therefore the expression "year" is to be found in those 
 two strokes behind, so that we have to read "year IX." Consequently, the decree of Rosetta is meant, especially 
 its lines 22-23. The priests evidently thought that the time was too short to execute the honors to the king set 
 forth in the decree of year XIX, and rather connected the new honors with those of year IX without considera- 
 tion of the fact that the latter had not been executed in many temples, owing to the insurrection. See "second" 
 decree, hierogl. 15c, for the question of a reference. 
 
 7 Thus the group (Ros. dem. 23) is to be read. See Rhind, Gloss. Moeller, No. 126. (Less probably t-pszt: 
 "the circle of nine, the ennead"?) 
 
THE BILINGUAL DECREES OF PHILAE. 
 
 41 
 
 THE ROYAL STATUES— Continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 r',w gn[w-f{?) mts]w 
 
 the reports 1 (of) the victories of him(?) and th]at 
 
 lob 
 
 [ ] | n [']qw nw ht-ntr 
 
 [the priests officiating] as 2 attendants of the sanctuary 
 
 n(?) 3 r-prw-nb [hr]-rn[-f] sms 
 
 in all temples on (J. e. bearing) [his] name 4 serve 
 
 hntyw-'pn m sp III 
 these images three times 
 
 [m hr{t)? hrw] 
 [every (?) day] 
 
 [h?]r-rdt b dbhw{t?)* \m-b\h-sn 
 
 placing (sacred) apparatus [before them 
 
 and do to them] all [things prescribed], 7 
 
 nb 
 
 twtw(?!)-nb{?) 
 everything (?) becoming 
 
 iod 
 
 n[tt?} 'r[-tw{?) 
 which is done(?) 
 
 hr?] s-h' [ntrw] n nt{!) 
 
 bringing] out in procession [the gods] of the city (?) 8 
 
 m 
 
 hbw tp trwt(!) 9 hr hrw 
 
 n 
 
 10 
 
 at the festivals (of) each season and the days of 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 iof 
 
 . . 'rpyw[-nb\ 
 
 . . . . [in] [all] temples 
 
 nt(u)-w hY tbh . . . 
 
 and that they set (sacred) apparatus before 
 
 -((u)-w u nt(u)-w V n-w [p-sp 
 
 them and that they do to them [the rest 
 
 mt-nt-n-hp e-h 
 (of) the things lawful like 
 
 p-nt e-w-'r-f 
 what they do 
 
 n\ 
 
 na 
 
 'w ntrw 
 
 (to) the] other 
 
 [n-]hbw 
 gods (at) the festivals 
 
 1 Lit. "the chapters." 
 
 2 The n = m, "as," suggests this restitution. 
 
 3 A very short n (in place of the older preposition m). 
 
 4 That is: where the king finds worship. 
 
 6 Accidentally the r indistinct so that we think of its disfigurement to V, Ros. 7 ; also the following r is corrected. 
 
 6 The engraver seems to have been uncertain with the last sign of the word. Probably his copy on papyrus 
 had the sign for "metal." The word dbht has wider sense than the Greek expression lepds nbaiios, "sacred outfit" ; 
 it includes also sacrificial vessels, etc. The pronunciation dbht for the unusual ideograph of the corresponding 
 passage, Ros. 7, is to be noticed. (There that ideograph seems to be disfigured from a square sacred chest 
 (mrt?) with ostrich plumes.) 
 
 7 Although we know the general sense, the traces do not allow any safe identifications of special signs. The 
 second (lower) sign after the big gap does not seem to be n. 
 
 8 The stone shows that the reading n-nt "of the city, local ones" has been corrected over the earlier reading 
 spt(yw) of Ros. 7 and 8, "of the nomes" (as still is read in the earlier "second" decree 15a). Also "is done" 
 stands over erasures. 
 
 9 Literally "times, periods." (In Ros. 7, the ordinary ideogram tr; therefore I assume that the termination 
 -/ is abusive, taken from the t on which the ideogram often rests, so that the group looks like "year.") 
 
 10 The sculptor seems to have corrected a broad s into n ; the sign could be read either way. 
 
 11 1 do not dare to transliterate this obscure group. J. J. Hess read it (Ros. 9, 24) e-hre, overlooking com- 
 pletely the third sign. This alone proves that it is to be read quite differently (although the Egyptian engraver, 
 Ros. 25, made the same mistake of skipping this sign). In Ros. the second stroke is always bent strongly, almost 
 to a half circle. Canop. 15, 16, indeed, has the first two strokes straight, like e, but our text agrees with Ros. 
 in the second stroke and treats the first like b. That the last sign is not hr can be concluded from the addition 
 of -t in Philse, once written tu, once te, ti; i. e., like the abbreviation of to(o)i "hand." In place of hr we might, 
 therefore, try to read ti, but the whole group, evidently, consists of abbreviations. I can not think of a hiero- 
 glyphic or Coptic preposition including both the meanings "at the time of" and "before" ; certainly hieroglyphic 
 hr does not correspond, nor m-h',(w), n-h',. See above, p. 33, line $e. 
 
42 
 
 EGYPTOLOGICAL RESEARCHES. 
 
 THE ROYAL STATUES— Continued 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 h' Jy(?) n rn-f 
 
 procession, also 1 (?) of his(!) name (i. e., specially 
 
 consecrated to him!) 
 
 loe 
 
 | [mtwtw s-h'] ssmt-hwt 2 
 
 [and be brought out in procession] the venerable 
 
 statue(!) 
 
 [n hq]t nbt t',wy 
 
 [of the que]en, the mistress of both countries, 
 
 10/ 
 
 Qrw'w\p)dr\(t) \ [ ntrt] pr(!) 
 
 Cleopatra, [the Goddess] Epiphanes, 
 
 [snt]-hmt n n-st 'byty 
 
 the sister-wife of the king of Upper and Lower Egypt, 
 
 s', R' Ptw\r\mys 'nh zt 
 
 the son of the Sungod, Ptolemy, living forever, 
 
 Pth mr [ntr] pr 
 
 beloved of Ptah, [the God] Epiphanes, 
 
 n-h'w 
 (of?) the processions, 
 
 [n-hw]w 
 [on the d]ays (bearing) 
 
 rn-w nt(u)-w t(y)~b' 
 
 their name, 4 that they bring out in procession 
 
 lib 
 
 t- | [rpyt n pr-'t .... 
 the [statue of queen Cleopatra, 
 
 t-sn]t t-s(t)-hmt in) pr-' 
 the siste]r (and) the wife of king 
 
 IIC 
 
 Ptlwmys 'nh zt Pth mr 
 
 Ptolemy, living forever, beloved of Ptah, 
 
 p-ntr [nt pr] 
 the God [Epiphanes]. 
 
 THE ROYAL SHRINE. 
 
 | [S-'h 1 ?] k',t sps(l) m z'm 
 
 [Be set up ?] a shrine, a costly one, of (fine) gold, 3 
 (or: sacred) 
 
 mh m ",wt-nb m rprw-nb 
 
 inlaid with stones (of) all (kinds) in all temples 
 
 lid 
 
 1 This very difficult group, which has given much trouble to Egyptologists, I propose to treat as a particle 
 belonging to the vernacular language. So, at least, our redactor seems to understand this mysterious group. In 
 the original form of Ros. 7, h' \y h(rw)-f m(J) rn-f, the meaning is the same, though the position of the particle 
 is different, i. e., it seems to be there a particle strengthening the h' "and, with." Could the Coptic particle tie, u 
 be compared? The latter, however, has become so strongly confused with the Greek el, that we can not separate 
 the Egyptian and Coptic meanings clearly. (I thought, at first, of a corruption of \t "time." This explanation 
 would yield only very forced literal translations; nevertheless the particle ',y might have originated from \t "time," 
 less probably the Coptic eie, ie, according to what we know of the phonetic development of later Egyptian). I see 
 now that Revillout, in his Chrestomathie Demotique, understood the particle correctly ("aussi"). Philse, II, 15a, 
 shortens the passage considerably, but very unsuccessfully. It is noticeable how anxious the copyists are to pre- 
 serve the strange words and forms of their model, considering them as stylistic gems. 
 
 2 The signs behind s$mt are indistinct. The fist holding the whip is clear and at first made me think of a 
 $ps run together with the n underneath; but the sign fps below looks different and other details make that 
 reading uncertain. (The oblique broad crossing-stroke is secondary.) During the impression I saw that we 
 have nothing but the arm holding the whip (hw) and a poor h over it. For this adjective "sacred, holy" cp. 
 line 11b, and Ros. 7, in both cases used with a statue. 
 
 3 The original meaning of this word: "light gold, electrum," is retained no more in later time. Sps signifies: 
 "fine, costly, magnificent," as well as "holy, sacred." 
 
 4 1, e., special memorial days for the gods, bearing their name in the calendar as their ^'epai eiruwixoi. Cp. 
 Philse, II, demot. 12c, hierogl. 15a (much disfigured). Without the context the above demotic expression could 
 also be translated: "the days mentioned (before)." The hieroglyphic parallel is corrupted; see on the "sacond" 
 decree. 
 
THE BILINGUAL DECREES OF PHILAE. 
 
 43 
 
 THE ROYAL SHRINE— Continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 hr rn-f 
 
 on {i. e., bearing) his name, 
 
 lib 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 [mtwtw . . . -w] 1 
 [and be placed there] 
 
 twt 2 -hw 
 the venerable image 
 
 n n-st 'byty si R' 
 
 of the king of Upper and L> Egypt, the son of [the Sun], 
 
 PtwWwmys, 'nh zt, Pth [mr] h' 
 
 Ptolemy, living forever, [beloved of] Ptah, with 
 
 lie 
 
 [shmt] s - n ntr n \ [snt]-hmt-f hqt 
 
 the divine statue of his [sister]-wife, the queen 
 
 nbt [t',wy .... 
 
 and mistress [of both countries, Cleopatra, 
 
 ntrt?] pr(t) [mtwtw?] s-[htp- 
 
 the Goddess?] Epiphanes, [and be] put 
 
 lid 
 
 s] m | b- 5 zsr 6 . . [k',wt] 'nw 
 
 [this] 4 in the holi(est) place [with] the shrines of 
 
 pr- 
 of king 
 
 Ptlmwys ; 'nh zt Pth mr 
 
 Ptolemy, living forever, beloved of Ptah, 
 
 nm p-shnt{i)t{!) (n?-) ntr n tf-[shmt 
 with the statue (!),' (the) divine, 8 of his [wife, 
 
 pr-'t 
 
 the queen, Cleopatra, the Goddess Epiphanes] . . 
 
 a! 
 
 hn-s nt{u)-w t(y)-[htp?-s ep-\ mw'b 
 in it, and they shall deposit ( ?) 10 [it in the] holiest place 
 
 nm n-k"{w) 
 with the other 
 
 g\{wtr 
 
 shrines 
 
 1 Perhaps the passive -tw was placed after the verb " be placed." 
 
 2 Notice the transliteration twt of the unusual ideogram of Ros. 
 
 3 The narrow place allows only this word (written with the sistrum) ; cp. the demotic equivalent. 
 
 4 S[-htp] to be supplied after Ros. demot. 25, while Ros. hierogl. 8 has the simple verb htp "rests." 
 
 6 The foot of b is not to be seen with certainty; the determinative "house" is strangely rounded and enlarged 
 by secondary additions. The vertical, filling dash above is visible only with imagination. Nevertheless, the 
 reading is rather certain. Cp. Ros. 8. 
 
 6 To see an r under the lion requires some imagination; the following (-t and determinative of the house?) is 
 quite invisible. (The reading zsr has its origin from a lion holding a feather, which sign, in hieratic, looks quite like 
 the arm holding this symbol, so that both signs can be interchanged.) The hr "with," which we should expect 
 after Ros., is not readable; the ideogram "chapel" requires much imagination, and the following nw can be con- 
 cluded only from the vertical stroke below. Traces of the lower part of the sign spt seem to be visible. Of the 
 'r-'r-f (lit., "referring to it, as concerns it") only the / seems to be easily recognizable, if a large space below be 
 admitted which may have been filled by a misplaced vertical stroke. Still we can risk restoring much after Ros. 
 hierogl. 8, and the other traces agree. 
 
 7 Written in a very peculiar way. The scribe seems to have hovered between the two confused words shm(t), 
 shnty "statue" (cp. also the orthography siml, line joe, etc.), and the similar word shnty ( = hieroglyphic shmtt, 
 shmty) "crown." Notwithstanding the masculine article, a feminine ending -t is added mechanically, because 
 the word is used of a goddess. The orthography is also otherwise hazy. The parallel Ros. dem. 24 fortunately 
 furnishes a plain shm "statue." See page 45, notes 1 and 5, about the difficulties with the obsolete word for 
 "crown." 
 
 8 Literally the "god-statue" (not with the adjective ntry "divine," which ought to be written differently). 
 See the parallel expression shm-ntr in Ros. dem. 24. The adjective, however, is required in English. 
 
 9 The big gap between plates e and / allows for the demotic text some additions or repetitions. 
 
 10 The traces are unfavorable to this reading and look rather as though the engraver really put down by 
 mistake t(y)-h' "bring out in procession." Above the context has been followed, however, and Ros. demot. 25. 
 
 11 Strangely disfigured ligature for gj. The meaning, however, seems clear. 
 
44 
 
 EGYPTOLOGICAL RESEARCHES. 
 
 ntrw-sptyw. 
 the local gods. 
 
 THE ROYAL SHRINE-Continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 [>r-'r]-f \m?\ hrw-hbw . . . -t(?)-s 
 
 When [at] the festival days before it 
 
 wrw n P r iP) ntr 
 
 the great ones of the coming forth (of) a god 
 
 [in qbht-f sps\t{?) rwt(y), pr~P 
 
 [from his] holy [recess] 1 outside, (when) he comes out 
 
 'm-sn mtwtw s-h' 
 
 on them, (then) shall be brought out (also) 
 
 i if 
 k',t- | Sps(t) 
 
 n ntrwy priwy) 
 
 the sacred shrine of the two Gods Epiphanes 
 
 h'-sn. 
 with them (i. e., with the other shrines). 
 
 R-rdt s",-tw(?Y k',t-tn 
 
 In order to make (that) be known this shrine 
 
 r(>y 
 
 from 
 
 hrw [-pn] 
 this day 
 
 'w hnw{??) 
 to [future times], 5 
 
 mtwtw dy 
 
 shall be given (i.e., placed) 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 n~ 
 
 (on)] the [great festivals (?) 
 
 when the gods come forth, etc. 
 
 | e-w{?) . . . [nt(u)-w t(y)-]h' 
 
 they (?)... and [be] brought out in procession 
 
 t-g',t | n nb(?) [n n-ntr nt pr] 
 the shrine of gold(?) [of the Gods Epiphanes] 
 
 nm-w(?). 
 with them. 
 
 E t(y)-hp{rY 
 
 ew-swn 
 
 t-my 
 
 To effect (that) be known the [shrine 
 
 p-hw nm psp t(i)', mn-s\-s 
 
 to day and the remaining time henceforth, 
 
 nt(u)-w ty 
 shall be placed 
 
 1 Lit. "cool place," i. e., closet, recess, shrine. The orthography of §pst, which we should expect after Ros. 
 would be strange. Possibly the synonym hwt is to be read instead of §pst as p. 42, ioe, if we recognize the 
 ending -wt. 
 
 2 This remarkable orthography for (r)-rwt(y) and the following verb furnish a very valuable explanation for 
 the strange groups, P.os. 8, which Chabas translated "d son jour," understanding them as r-s\ h(rw)-f "after 
 (i. e., according to!) his day," very improbably in both cases. We see now the text in Ros. is corrupted; the pr-f 
 becomes intelligible only by our parallel based on a better copy, and the rwty (somewhat pleonastic at the side 
 of the verb pr "to come out") could hardly have been guessed correctly beforehand. "On them" refers 
 back to the festival days, in a relative construction familiar in Semitic languages but looking very pleonastic 
 in English. 
 
 3 Another instance where, if the stone was broken, we should feel confident to restore every sign according to 
 the parallel text in Ros., while the extant traces are simply hopeless. Nothing certain can be seen of the word 
 "to know" before the very plausible determinative of the squatting man putting his hand on his mouth. Before 
 the chapel-sign the basis and the feeble body of a bird-like w seem clear at first sight, but the sign before this w looks 
 more like a clumsy 5 than a s' . Before the chapel two small, vertical strokes, almost too deep for the first hand. 
 I thought for a while of the ideogram sSm "to lead" with preceding phonetic complement s-, but neither will this 
 do. Therefore I have not attempted to harmonize between the conjectural restoration as given above after Ros. 
 8 and the traces on the stone. It seems the engraver blundered strongly and then tried confusing corrections. 
 
 4 The r is quite plain, but must be a mistake for m after Ros. and the similar error, p. 45, note 4. 
 
 5 Thus after Ros. Greek 43, dem. 25, but the identification of the extant signs is again very difficult. The 
 sign hit "period, age, long time" seems visible, but the surrounding signs are quite uncertain, e.g., the group pre- 
 ceding it is hardly sp "remnant, rest." 
 
 6 The prolongation of hpr looking like -/ seems rather an accidental scratch. 
 
 7 The restorations are supplied according to Ros. dem. 25. The space suggests additions in Philse. 
 
THE BILINGUAL DECREES OF PHILAE. 
 
 45 
 
 THE ROYAL SHRINE— Continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 12b 
 
 shn(t) x hr-tp \ [k',t-tn m-'s(wy)-n 
 
 a(!) double crown on top of [this shrine instead of 
 
 wrty wn(t) hr-tp] 
 
 the two (kinds of) uraei 2 which are on top of] 
 
 k',wt 
 the (ordinary) shrines, 
 
 r(!) 3 shnit) 
 
 (there) being (that) double crown 
 
 m hr-'b -(')r(y)w zr-ntt . psd 
 
 in the middle thereof, since (there) resplended 
 
 n-st 'byty PtwWwmys 
 
 the king of Upper and L> Egypt, Ptolemy, 
 
 I2C 
 
 'nh zt, Pth mr 'm-f r(?) 
 
 living forever, beloved of Ptah, with it towards (?) 4 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 12b 
 
 sh{?)nt n-nb X ?] 
 ten(?) golden double crowns?] 
 
 hr(?) nb(?) 
 on a we6-hieroglyph(?) 5 
 
 being 
 
 w't—'r'yt e(?)-h p- 
 an uraeus-asp like that 
 
 'r-[s?\ e n 1 -shn[ti?]ew(!) 
 to make for the double crowns!] 
 
 [nt] hp 
 
 [which is] proper 
 (or: custom) 
 
 n-nb{?) [n-zz 
 of gold [upon 
 
 I2d 
 
 t—g\t n—t—sbyt{?) t-'r'ywt nt] hpr 
 
 the shrine instead of the uraeus-asps which] are 
 
 e-zz s [psp i''(wt)]. 
 
 upon [the rest of the shrines]. 
 
 Nt(u) (?) p-shnt(i)e(!) \ hpr 9 n(?) t-mtet 
 (There) shall (?) the double crown be in the middle 
 
 n n-sh(?)nt(i)w nt-'e nt(u)f 10 nt-'e 
 
 of the crowns which is the (one) (with) which 
 
 1 This orthography imitates the demotic form. It seems to betray that, in some parts of Egypt, h and h began 
 to be confounded as in Coptic pronunciation; also a popular etymology from shn: "command" seems to underlie. 
 In Ros., the sign nb, originally the basis for the crown and not to be pronounced, has been detached erroneously ( ?) ; 
 this reading, which our text avoids, might also be interpreted as "a double crown with a lord-sign (nb) under- 
 neath." See note 5 on the demotic text for a possibility of finding this sense also there. The demotic orthography 
 in Ros. tries to distinguish shnt(i) as the ordinary, shnt(i) as the archaizing, solemn form of the word for "crown," 
 but fails in this distinction. See also above, on demotic line, p. 43, note 7, on the orthographic difficulties which 
 this word gave to the scribes. 
 
 2 With allusion to the mythological double character of the uraeus serpents. That the ornamental crowns 
 were to be ten (as Ros. states in the Greek and demotic text) is not expressed here and, consequently, does 
 neither seem to have been expressed in the hieroglyphic text of Ros., which furnishes, in general, a very poor 
 description of those details compared with the demotic version. 
 
 3 E(r) stands erroneously for the correct e(w) of Ros. as in the demotic parallel and often. 
 
 4 We should expect m "in" (Ros. 10) and the r might be disfigured from this (see above, nf) but it is also 
 possible that the writer, having in mind the demotic expression h' e(r) "going in procession towards," really meant 
 (e)r "towards," as written above. 
 
 5 The text is very puzzling. The model text (Ros. demot. 25) reads: "and that be given (i e., placed) twin 
 golden king's crowns" (shut n nb X (n) pr-'). The place on which those crowns are to be placed (i. e., the shrine) 
 follows (1. 26). The unusual expression "of a king, royal" agrees with the Greek text, line 43: ras rov /WiXkos 
 xpuo-as |8a(HAaas dkica, in which that expression seems doubly strange to us, being already contained in the likewise 
 unusual word Paoihda. "sign of royalty, royal crown." The demotic text of Philae, 12b, could be brought into 
 an approximative agreement by reading "king" and seeing before it "gold" as a disfigured sign (or X?). I 
 believe, however, that I recognize n-b either as original reading instead of "king" or as half -finished correction of 
 the latter word, and have tried to restore this sense, whether it be original or an improvement, after these traces 
 and the hieroglyphic text. Cp. directly below (13b) the same word, as nb'e. This interpretation leads to assum- 
 ing an exceptional independence of the demotic Philse text and can not be considered as quite certain, but 
 the possibility of such a correction deserves attention. 
 
 6 Rather common, faulty orthography for e. See on the hieroglyphic parallel. 
 
 7 The engraver made the e too vertical or, rather, treated s and e n- as a doublet. 
 
 8 The traces look like this rather than like the hr-zz of Ros. 26. Notice the variants with hr-, »-, and e-. 
 
 9 The e before hpr seems accidental or abandoned from "which (e) is." 
 
 10 An interesting parallel to Ros. dem. 26, which confirms the reading entof in that text and tries to express itself 
 more clearly than the original decree, correcting the short relative e- before the verb to an apparent repetition nt-e. 
 
46 
 
 EGYPTOLOGICAL RESEARCHES. 
 
 THE ROYAL SHRINE— Continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 Jft- [Pth] [m?] h'(?) [-n-st?] 
 
 the temple [of Ptah] [in the royal?] procession (?) 
 
 [m-s(iy 
 
 n-f 
 
 t]wt 2 -nb 
 
 n 
 
 [when were done to him] all things proper for 
 
 [bs]-n-st | r ht-ntr hft 
 
 the royal procession to the temple, when 
 
 ssp z -nf y,wt-f-wrt 
 he received his great dignity, 
 
 mtwtw s-k' 
 and be decorated 4 , 
 
 [m-?]my(tt)(??) k\t(?f 
 
 likewise( ?) the shrine ( ?) [with the double crown 
 
 of the princess and mistress of both countries] 
 
 Qrw']w',p',dr',(t) ntrt prt r—gs—fi?) 
 
 Cleopatra, the Goddess Epiphanes, beside it 
 
 mtwtw 
 (i. e., beside the double crown of the king) ; and be 
 
 12 i 
 
 rdy m gs~hr{y) n 
 
 placed on the upper side(!) of 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 pr- W 'm-f n{?) 
 
 the king [appeared (in procession) (therewith) in 
 
 iff 
 ht Mn-nfr e-w-\ \ V- n-f 
 
 the temple of Memphis (when) were] done to him 
 
 p-hp 'r-w (n) 
 
 the proper (things) done at 
 
 I2g 
 
 t- ",]wt- I hr{ty 
 (of) the] high (est) dignity, 
 
 nt(u) p-shniti?) 1 
 
 and the (double) crown (?) 
 
 [p-J(s)p 
 
 [the receiving 
 
 n{?) t{?)- pr't Glwptre, 
 (of) the(?) queen Cleopatra, 
 
 izh 
 
 tf-h ['-$?} 
 
 likewise [be?] 
 
 [fir?-] \t(i)- [tp?] n-'mw [e-] «(?)-/ 
 
 on [top ?] among them near it 
 
 130. 
 
 | nt(u)-w hV-s e(?Y t-r(t)~ hrt n{?) 
 and (it) be placed at the upper part of 
 
 1 In the strange m-s of Ros. the s is evidently se = set, sen "they." The m seems to follow the analogy of 
 mtw, Coptic (e)nte-, of the subjunctive, betraying already the shortening of the latter to {e)n, so that we have 
 here the extremely modern form (e)nse "and they" of both Coptic dialects. It is, however, not impossible that 
 the unusual employment in temporal sense has been caused by the archaic conjunction 'n, en "when, if" which, 
 in mss. of the New Empire, often becomes m. 
 
 2 The ideogram of the ostrich feather of Ros. (ss) is explained here by a synonym. 
 
 3 This sign in unusually low form, like dy, but the reading "was given (dydy) to him" would be unsatisfactory. 
 
 4 The passage is not very clear. We expect the decorations of that shrine further described. The verb 
 s-h', "to show," may be understood also: "to make appear brilliantly, to decorate," and the demotic text confirms 
 that the crown of the queen was decoratively used at the side of the royal crown. Ordinarily, the double crown of 
 the queen does not differ from that of the king; here, a combination with the vulture-cap seems to be meant (cp. 
 13a). (If we give to the above verb its usual sense and assume that the "bringing forth " of the shrine and statue 
 of the queen at processions, at the side of the shrine of her husband, is meant, then we must assume that the 
 redactor of the decree very awkwardly inserted this remark, which introduces a repetition, into the description 
 of the distinctive decoration.) 
 
 6 The traces of the sign of the shrine are indistinct ; the posterior traces may be all accidental and secondary. 
 The preceding sign is unusual, bearing a faint resemblance to my "like" (it is, however, open above) or to the high n. 
 Originally, probably, it represented the double crown of the queen (here misunderstood, as above, for my?). 
 
 6 We wonder at first sight at the great space filled by this restoration. It proves, however, to fit in exactly. 
 S(s)p is a sign which allows great extension. Of "dignity," ",wt, the preserved determinative as below 14a and 
 Ros. demot. 6 and 7 (later abbreviated). Hrt "high(est)" also Ros. 5, etc., abbreviated without the feminine -I. 
 
 7 This word also here treated so strangely that no exact transliteration is possible. Cp. above on 12a, etc. 
 
 8 We, rather, should expect a compound preposition. 
 
THE BILINGUAL DECREES OF PHILAE. 
 
 47 
 
 THE ROYAL SHRINE— Continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 [hpt] nty m-rwt(y) 
 
 [the square? or: frame?] which (is) outside, 1 
 
 [nfr]w-'pn m-'q(!) 2 n{?) 
 
 these decorations opposite (i. e., as supplement?) of 
 13a 
 
 1 shmtyw(y)-'[pn]: 3 
 these (twofold) crowns: 
 
 Hz(?Y h' [rs?] 
 
 A (hieroglyph) "clear" and [a "south" (crown- 
 sign)] 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 p{?y-'jf 
 
 the square 
 
 13b 
 
 nt p-bl 
 
 which (is) at the outside 
 
 [n-shnt(i)w p-mt'e p-shnt(!?) n nb 
 [of the crowns, before the crown of gold 
 
 nt sh(\) hr 
 
 which is described above, 
 
 w't hzt nm rs(y?) 
 
 a sign "clear(ness)" and a "south"-sign] 
 
 1 Ros. tries by elaborate ornamentation to distinguish this sign from the ordinary s', : "back, behind." Still 
 better, the demotic version in Ros. shows that rwt " outside" is meant. Chabas (" h dessus du support qui est 
 derriere(!) ces insignes") and others misunderstood it entirely. This mistranslation leads us to the question 
 whether we ought not to read: "which is outside (of!) these {i.e., the aforementioned) decorations" (thus 
 Chabas, etc.). Although this follows closely the Greek (and seemingly, i. e., e silentio, the demotic), I prefer to 
 refer "these decorations" to what follows as introducing the description of the further hieroglyphic symbols 
 accompanying the decorative crowns. Thus those two hieroglyphic words correspond to the Greek explanation: 
 <l>vXaKTripia xpwra- [Sitca?], not rendered in the demotic text. "Amulets" (fivKaKTr/pia, means there not a separate, 
 detachable piece of decoration (Ricardi even explained, " bands" !), but simply the brief inscriptions, the hiero- 
 glyphic signs or groups, such as were used for symbols, emblems, mottoes. This peculiar designation for the 
 (mostly flat engraved) hieroglyphic symbols is chosen, not only because such symbols were largely used on 
 amulets for persons, but because they served to hallow the cultic object, showing its use and owner, just as a 
 Christian church might seem to become sacred by the decoration of the cross surmounting it. That "amulet" 
 has this unusual meaning of "religious symbol" was not recognized by any commentator of the Greek text, as 
 can be seen also from the fact that they all used the restoration: ols (ky)ypa<f>dri<rtTa.i, "on which will be 
 written," a restoration which now has become generally accepted. According to the context gained from the 
 Egyptian version, I supply, rather, ols o-Tifiaudqaerai: "by which will be expressed, signified, indicated." The 
 hieroglyphic group itself is the "amulet," it does not form part of it. Notice another attempt to make the 
 description in hieroglyphics specially precise, with regard to those details, in the expression above, "at the upper 
 side," which aims at the sense: "at the (vertical) side of the top piece, of the frame above," a sense which it 
 renders not very successfully, it seems. 
 
 2 Text '/, while Ros. omits the q. Both follow the same faulty or indistinct original. We see here that those 
 difficult texts were copied much more slavishly by the scribes than we should have thought (p. 5). The prepo- 
 sition is not vague in its meaning as an archaizing play for "near to." It seems to express a very peculiar 
 meaning. (Of course, it never can mean "to the right side of," as Chabas proposed to explain this unusual 
 archaism.) The corresponding Greek word Kara (to PaaLKeiov) seems just as unusual. According to good Greek 
 usage it can not mean merely a vague "near to," which Heyne, Drumann, L/etronne, etc., tried to find, evidently 
 simply to obtain some sense. I assume that the classical meaning, " corresponding with," has found here the very 
 unusual application "in symmetry with," i. e., "in a way forming a symmetric group." This can be inferred from 
 the two Egyptian renderings (although I am not at all sure that the demotic p-mte corresponds to the Coptic 
 p-emto: 'front, before"). Possibly, the Hebrew expression, Genesis 2, forms a parallel. 
 
 3 The curved front ornament of the double crown seems to be visible and traces of the crown itself are plausible ; 
 then I believe to see distinctly three plural strokes, one over another, and the reed-leaf of 'pn. The traces 
 after the ideogram of the double crown seem to represent the vulture -crown of the queen (p. 46, note 4). 
 
 4 The V^ above reading according to the demotic text of Ros. 2 7 . After the traces of our text we should guess 
 rather: "a ] ( rush stalk," i. e., the emblem of the south. This would, however, be synonymous with 
 the rs(y) I \ "south" restored below. The following expression of "Southland, Upper Egypt" is clear as 
 far as the vj symbol of the vulture goddess Nekhbet is concerned; the preceding sign admits various guesses. 
 
 5 N is not visible, but the article p rather probable. 
 
 6 With strangely written determinative. The serpent-like sign of Ros. 26 is probably t(i), a pleonastic 
 repetition of the t, and the determinative is lacking. Our scribe seems to attempt the correction of this. 
 
48 
 
 EGYPTOLOGICAL RESEARCHES. 
 
 THE ROYAL SHRINE— Continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 nhbt(?Y hr nb 
 
 (and) a vulture (goddess) on a basket ( = "lord")-sign, 
 
 sm 
 
 a bush of rushes ( = "south" 
 
 hr [q'h 'mnty] 
 
 (are) on [the right side 1 of] 
 
 hr—s 
 underneath 
 
 I3b 
 
 k)t-tn 
 
 s 
 
 this chapel. 
 
 'r't dsrt{?) hr nb 
 
 An uraeus (and) a ' 'north' ' (hieroglyph) 2 on a"lord' ' (-sign) 
 
 h\ hrs z 
 
 (with) a papyrus bush (i. e., "north")-sign underneath 
 
 hr 
 (are) on 
 
 q'h-s-ybt(y) 
 its left side. 
 
 Wh'-f pw: 
 
 Its explanation is : 
 
 c 
 
 Nbtyy i 
 the Master of the vulture and uraeus crowns 
 
 (of Upper and Lower Egypt) 
 
 [sm't mhyt\ 
 
 [the South and North.] 
 
 S-hz 
 who illuminates 
 
 13b 
 
 hr (?) w'(t?!) b nbe 
 
 on (?) a «e&(=lord)-basket-sign. 
 
 Nt{u)-w hV w't(!)\ f '\ [s]m'e 
 
 And be placed a "south" sign (i. e., a bush of rushes) 
 
 hr-rt-s P(?) 7 -[p( r ) 'mntyi?) n(?) p-qh 
 underneath it (on) the (?) 8 [right of the side 
 
 e-zz t-g\t] T In nb{?y 
 upon the shrine] of gold(?). 
 
 Nt{u)-w [hY w't-r'yt w' (t?) 10 nb(e) 
 
 And be [placed an uraeus (with) a n&b-sign 
 
 136 
 
 hr-r]t-s | hr w' wt(i)(t) 
 un]derneath it on a papyrus stalk 
 
 p(r)-ybty 
 on the left side, 
 
 nt-e pf(?)-whm{?) p',{?) n 
 of which its interpretation is: 
 
 pr- [e-'r s-hz 
 
 the king [who has illuminated 
 
 sm't mht.} 
 
 the South (and) North.] 
 
 1 The front ornament of the white crown is visible (perhaps in an unusual form, like the red crown below). 
 
 2 The uraeus as symbol of the Delta goddess Buto is clear, but the following symbol of the north, Damanhur 
 27, disfigures it to mytt "likewise," proving that our sign appeared disfigured on its papyrus copy, whether it 
 is to be corrected simply to the hieroglyph of the red crown or not. 
 
 3 The second half of r and s are visible, hr is preserved in less certain traces. 
 
 4 Thus the later Egyptians seem to have expressed this old title, i. e., "the one who has both goddesses," 
 (evidently with a possessive ending -y after the dualic sign -ty); the original lengthy transcription remains 
 unknown. 
 
 5 See below (note 10) on the strange feminine indefinite article with this word, although the word itself lacks 
 the feminine ending -t (like sine, in note 6). The determinative "wood," with nbe "basket sign," is remarkable. 
 
 6 Ros. 27 more correctly the masculine for the strange feminine article; see note 5. Our text adds a remark- 
 able -e to jot'; can this be the "nisbe" (i. e,, derivative adjectival) ending? 
 
 7 The article p- ought not to stand there, of course. 
 
 8 Thus after Ros. Our text seems to differ and to be longer, offering, e. g., the sign X. It looks like: "they 
 are ([e]w hpr) lords (nbw, i. e., here, probably, 'lord signs'?) ten upon (?) [it?]." 
 
 9 Following again Ros. The traces on the stone are widely different, it seems (like "ten crown"??), indicating 
 changes in the Philae text of the obscure style. 
 
 10 See note 5 on the feminine indefinite article. On the contrary, the word wtiit) below has the masculine 
 article, as Ros. 27, but adds the feminine substantive ending -t, lacking correctly in Ros. 
 
 11 Again very uncertain traces which never could be explained without the parallel of Ros. Particularly 
 whm (?) is quite in the dark; pef "its" and still more p'„ pe "it is," are barely possible. 
 
THE BILINGUAL DECREES OF PHILAE. 
 
 49 
 
 THE SPECIAL FESTIVAL DAYS FOR KING AND QUEEN. 
 
 H I EROGLYPH I C TEXT. DEMOT I C TEXT. 
 
 s{?)n 
 
 [Now for (?) the festival days which are mentioned] 
 
 13d 
 
 hr sh',wy n ; 
 on the decree of 
 
 zr^nty 1 wn 
 since there was (of) 
 
 [ l rq] hrw 
 
 hspt XIX 
 year 19: 
 
 'bdIV smw 
 
 the 12th month (Mesore), 
 
 n ms(t) ntr nfr 
 
 [the last day], the day of birth (of) the good god, 
 
 ['nh-Yzt [d]d-(ty?) [m] hb 
 the ever [living], fixed as a festival 
 
 l3e 
 
 \ b'(?) n(?)* [hwt?]-ntr{w) hr- h)t 
 
 (of) procession (s) in the temples formerly, 
 
 mytt-(')ry(w?) n 'bdll ",ht hrw [XVII] 4 
 likewise on the second month, day [17] 
 
 I3f 
 
 'r-nf 'rw-nb n 
 
 when he did all things proper for (or : at) 
 
 Now for the days of festivals which are mentioned on 
 
 I3f 
 
 [p-\ I wt n hspt 9 XIX 10 
 the] decree 8 of year 19: 
 
 V 11 hpr-f 
 
 because (?) there was [the 12th month (Mesore), 
 
 day 30, on which is held the birthday of the king, 
 139 
 
 I [n] hb 
 
 it was established] as a festival 
 
 h'w n(?) 12 
 
 (of) processions in 
 
 ps-smt 'bt II, ",ht{?) 
 
 likewise month 2, 
 13k 
 
 I nt e-w V n-f{?) 
 
 when were made to him 
 
 n-rpyw [t-h',t; 
 the temples [beforehand; 
 
 hwXVII] 13 
 
 day 17] 
 
 n-',yrw(?) u 
 the rites (of) 
 
 h'-n—n-st m ssp 
 the royal procession, at the receiving 
 
 P~b'[n] Pf{?) 
 
 the procession (of) his (?) 
 
 y',wt (/)-/ 
 
 of his dignity 
 
 nw 5 n-styt m-dy{?) 6 
 of kingship from 
 
 ytifhf 
 
 his father 
 
 s(s)P 
 receiving 
 
 p(?)- ",wt-hrt n-tt pf-yt u e-r-f 
 
 the high (est) dignity from his father which he made 
 
 1 A very awkward literal appropriation from Ros. hierogl. 10. The traces of the r under zr are feeble, looking 
 like an abandoned blunder. 
 
 2 This sign omitted by the engraver. 
 
 3 Looked at first like -r my, but read rather as above. Has an m been corrected over these groups or vice versd? 
 
 4 Agreeing thus completely with the dating of Ros. hierogl. 10 and Damanhur 28 against the demotic text 
 of Ros., which dates 4 months later. 
 
 5 We must change the senseless sign hr of the stone as done above (the nw would then treat this word as a 
 plural, which it was originally, having collective sense: "the distinctions"), or would we better restore after Ros. 
 (Damanhur), m Isp-nj nstyt "when [m as Ros. 9, see note 1 on our line 12c) he received the kingship." 
 
 6 This group crowded into the small space at the end of 13. 
 
 7 We have to recognize, at the beginning of line 14: first the reed leaf (y) ; behind, there is space left for 
 a small sign like the cake ty, which serves, sometimes, as word sign for yt "father." Then four signs: the / small 
 and very high; below/, vertical stroke, another -/. The other traces are accidental. 
 
 8 The determinative of the loose papyrus roll preserved or simply the sign corresponding in hieratic to the 
 man with the hand to his mouth? 
 
 9 With corrections? The X is not distinct. We thus might infer a wavering between the dates IX and 
 XIX, but the hieroglyphic text is distinct. 
 
 10 In my plate, the signs may stand too close together. A little intentional gap seems to follow the date, 
 showing thus the earlier decree to be quoted. 
 
 11 In Ros. dem. 27 n-t(t) hp(r)-f. The shortening in our text is remarkable. 
 
 12 To be concluded from space. Absent in Ros. 
 
 13 It is not possible to harmonize the following difficult traces with certainty with the text of Ros. 28. 
 
 14 Restoring thus after Ros. 28, I assume that the text has been corrected in several places and that the word 
 for "rites, ceremonies," has a different orthography or an (erroneous?) addition before it. 
 
 15 The strange and hazy signs of this phrase give us the impression that at first the different text of Ros. 28 
 was copied on papyrus and then changed into the above words lacking in Ros. Cp. above, p. 46, note 6. The 
 signs seem to stand over erasures. 
 
50 
 
 EGYPTOLOGICAL RESEARCHES. 
 
 THE SPECIAL FESTIVAL DAYS FOR KING AND QUEEN— Continued. 
 
 H I EROGLYPH I C TEXT. DEMOT I C TEXT. 
 
 h' 
 and 
 
 [ms]wt 
 [the birth] 1 
 
 nbt 
 and mistress of both 
 
 tp(y) 
 the first 
 
 n 
 of 
 
 ",ht hrw 
 
 month, day 
 
 hqt 
 the queen 
 
 t',wy Qrw'w',p',dr',t 
 
 countries, Cleopatra, 
 
 nm CM-) tpy - ",ht{?) 8 hw IX (+x?) 
 and the first (month) day 9 (??), 
 
 [the birthday of queen Cleopatra. 
 
 14b 
 
 I ['s-'-f tp mijf 
 
 [because (these days were) the beginning of 
 
 (')ht-nb(t) ",]hwt 3 wrw [n] w?i[yw] 
 
 all things excellent], numerous ones, for those being 
 
 tp(y)w-r(',) 11 n-st 'nh-zt 
 under the rule of the king, living forever : 
 
 [ ] h' ssp 
 
 [the birthday of the king] 4 and the receiving 
 
 14c 
 y',wt- I f(!)-mnh[t] 5 hr ms[tf 
 
 (of) his benevolent dignity and the birth (day) (of) 
 
 [his sister- wife, the princess and mistress of both countries 
 
 [Qrw' p]dr]',t hw(w) 7 [']pn 'rq \ XVII 
 Cleopatrja, these days : the last, the 1 7th 
 
 t-hlt 
 the beginning 
 
 Since these days were] 
 n-mt—nfrw e—'r — hpr n rm(t)-nb] 
 
 (of) the benefits which came to 
 . . . 9 pr— 'nh zt 
 
 all men [under 
 
 Pth [mr] 
 the rule ?] of the king living forever, (by) Ptah [beloved], 10 
 14c 
 [p]- I ms, p-s(s)p t-",wt-hrt 
 
 (namely:) [the] birth, the receiving (of) the high (est) 
 
 dignity [and the birthday 
 
 I4d 
 
 G]lwptre 
 of queen C]leopatra, 
 
 nt[rt nt pr my{?) Ww{?) n',y-hww, 
 theGod[dess IJpiphanes, may(?) be 11 made these days, 
 
 1 See below, 14c. True, we find in ijd the singular msit) "birth," against the plural of the above orthography, 
 but such late inscriptions vary in their expressions, in order to show that the learned writer is familiar with the 
 orthography of all ages. 
 
 2 Erroneously for n in Ros., which we follow. 
 
 3 So far after Ros. Greek 46, hierogl. 10. In the latter passage the traces of wrw become now intelligible only 
 by our parallel text. 
 
 4 This expression was intended, as we see from the following repetition of the reference to the coronation 
 day, but omitted by the present text, through confusion with the preceding reference to the king. The "living 
 forever" would fit better after the mention of the birthday. 
 
 6 Rather thus than ",t "great," cp. also Ros. hierogl. n and above, p. 32, note 3, on the changing epithets of 
 this expression. 
 
 6 The traces lead to the sign ms in a somewhat awkward form. (No other reading is possible. For the mar- 
 riage day as an official yearly festival, analogies are lacking.) 
 
 7 A broad h, perhaps a trace of a small w behind. Below only two of the vertical plural strokes are visible. 
 The following abridges Ros. hierogl. 11. 
 
 8 The date looks disfigured, at least in the season sign. We might find a trace of the day number in the 
 horizontal stroke running under this group. It is not sufficiently explained as prolongation of V-/; it looks like 
 IX — at least in the original form prolonged further to the left, where an X or XX might precede it. Such a 
 restoration can not be harmonized, however, with the hieroglyphic traces, especially of iyd. 
 
 9 The visible traces allow no certain restoration like '\wt "dignity, office." 
 
 10 The space is, it must be admitted, quite insufficient for mr followed by the article p-\ the engraver may 
 have omitted some signs here. 
 
 11 The text of Ros. dem. 28 seems to be corrupted here, where we must expect a wishing form, like Coptic 
 mar-u; this is also required according to the hieroglyphic text. I restored it accordingly. 
 
THE BILINGUAL DECREES OF PHILAE. 
 
 51 
 
 THE SPECIAL FESTIVAL DAYS FOR KING AND QUEEN-Continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 XXII{?) ['r-]tw 'bd 2 -nb [m hb{w?)} 
 
 (and) the 22nd(?), 1 beheld every month [as festival (s?) 3 ] 
 
 m prw-m','t{?) nw Bqt r-',w-sn m[twtw 
 in the temples of Egypt all of them, and [be 
 
 w',h J 'h(w?) sqr ] wt{?)nw h' 
 
 set up ovens 4 (and) be poured out] 5 libations and 
 
 I4f 
 
 (')ht-nb twt n-'r(/y m hbw- 'pn 
 
 all things proper to do, at these festivals 
 
 tp 'bd-nb. 
 every month. 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 (Which things) 
 r(',)w-'pn 
 
 r-w 
 are done 7 
 
 ssrrr 
 
 m 
 in(!) 
 
 n 
 
 [nb?] 10 
 
 these rules (?) 8 (they are) prescribed (?) to everybody (?) 
 
 rq 
 the last, 
 
 hb n 
 a festival 
 
 XVII, . . . ] 
 
 the 17th and ... 
 
 hr-'bt-nb hn n-'rpyw n t'-Kmy 
 every month in the temples of Egypt 
 
 tr-w nt{u)[-w V gll wtrie 
 
 altogether and be [made holocaust (s), libation (s) 
 
 14I 
 nm p-sp n-mt-\ \ nt-n(?)-hp 'r-w 
 and the rest of the things] which it is proper to do 
 
 n{?) [»]- hb(w?) (hr?)- 'bt u [-nb?] 
 (them) at(?) 12 [the?] festival(s) [every' month. 
 
 [N-nt e-w 'r-w 'b 
 
 [The (ways in) which they (have to) bring sacrifice(s) 
 
 I4S 
 
 nt{ti)-w is hr-',t{?) n-rm{t)w 
 
 they be imposed 14 on the people 
 
 1 Proposed because we must expect the larger number to follow the smaller. The last number might have 
 this place, however, as being less important, and the signs before the two certain vertical strokes are very difficult. 
 The upper trace might be an irregular (rather triangular) ten ; the lower trace looks somewhat like an arm, but the 
 space for such a sign is insufficient. It might be a narrow ten, the space before it hiding two strokes of XVII. 
 
 2 The determinative below is a sundisk rather than a star, as in Ros. 11, but both readings are possible. 
 'Singular, "a festival," Ros. n. 
 
 4 For burning holocausts (which excluded larger animals). 
 6 Literally: "struck {i. e., hurled) down." 
 
 6 Disfigured in a remarkable way into one sign (like the "sacred eye") by the engraver. See Ros. 11 for the 
 correct form. 
 
 7 Or : the better things (to be) done ; see below. 
 
 8 Literally : "chapters, paragraphs." The meaning "rules, prescriptions " is otherwise not known. Cp. above 
 the same word in line 10a. The preposition m is unusual. 
 
 9 The determinative of two feet may be found with some space for a small sign above. Our text enables us to 
 understand the obscure group, Ros. 11. Lepsius's edition (Auswahl 18) gives an absolutely senseless s'w with 
 which no later Egyptologist could do anything. Young, Hieroglyphics 28, and Champollion-Figeac, L'Egypte 
 (German ed. of 1839, pi. 77; after the Description?), show the group to be uncertain, perhaps on account of being 
 erased and corrected, or engraved tentatively and incompletely. The reproduction in Budge, The Rosetta Stone, 
 vol. I, plate 1, likewise shows the 'w very indistinct, as though it had been corrected; through the 5 runs an oblique 
 scratch which could be interpreted as though sfm, poorly engraved or abandoned, was intended, provided that the 
 scratch is secondary. We see how far all editions of this important text are from being exhaustive. We can now 
 restore and explain the very obscurely worded Greek text of the Rosetta stone, line 48-49: ras re yivo/jLtvas (i. e., 
 iravnyvpeis) irposde[<7dai (sic!) rols irap^xofJ-evots ev rols iepoh. The best Greek scholars have preferred to leave this 
 untranslated, others have been misled by the wrong restoration 7rpo?0«[cras]. I understand the passage with the 
 help of the Egyptian versions thus: "and that the (newly) celebrated ones (i. e., festivals) be imposed as new 
 (duty) to them that present themselves (as priests) in the temples." The demotic text, Ros. 1. 2 (see above), 
 explains the Greek text completely. The hieroglyphic text follows it fairly well according to our new version. 
 Whether our redaction contains the original reading or a correction of an unfortunate, unintelligible archaism 
 may be decided later. S§m literally, "explained, described." 
 
 10 S after Ros. 11. Perhaps, the nb "' all " of Ros. was omitted in our text; it is difficult to find space for it. 
 
 11 The word corrected over (with h' "procession"?) so that it would hardly be intelligible without the help of 
 the parallel texts. 
 
 12 Stone e. 
 
 13 Our text shortens the expressions of Ros. 29. 
 
 14 Literally: "commanded, ordered, prescribed." The preposition which follows remains uncertain. 
 
52 
 
 EGYPTOLOGICAL RESEARCHES. 
 
 THE SPECIAL FESTIVAL DAYS FOR KING AND QUEEN— Continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 15a 
 
 m{?) w(n)\nw[tYsn m 
 
 at(?) their hours (of officiating) in 
 
 h[w]t-ntr mtwho V hb--li n 
 
 the temple [s], and be made a processional festival to 
 
 15b 
 . . . . I n-st i'byty] 
 
 honor? ] 3 the king of Upper and Lower Egypt, 
 
 s', R' Ptrww\mys 'nh zt 
 
 the son of the Sungod, Ptolemy, living forever, 
 
 Pth mr 
 beloved of Ptah, 
 
 h' snt-hmt-f nb{t) t',wy 
 
 and his sister-wife, the mistress of both countries, 
 
 1 So 
 
 Qrw\'w\p)dr\{t), nt[rwy pr(wy) 
 
 Cleopatra, the two Gods Epiphanes, 
 
 tit sms 
 
 who functionate : 
 
 tp rnpt s'-m ('bd) t]p(y) 
 
 every year from the] first 
 
 iSd 
 
 hrw I nfryt-* \ [r hirw) 
 
 day 1, until [the day 
 
 mh(w)] r 
 crowns] on 
 
 s-[hb] 
 
 tp-sn 
 their head, 
 
 h',wy(iy 
 
 ",ht 
 
 month (Thout), 
 
 III{?f 
 3(?) 
 
 sgr 
 
 putting in festival state the altar (s), pouring out 
 
 ise 
 
 wdnw h' [{')hwi\-nb \ twtw [n 'rty(\)Y 
 libations with everything] proper [to do]. 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 (n) nw ] 'rpyw(?y 
 (in) their] temples (?) 
 14k 
 nt{u)-w{?) V [hbw] \ h' 
 
 and that be(?) made processional [festivals] 
 
 n n-'rpyw t',-Kviy(?) w \ [tr-w] hr{?) pr- 
 in the temples (of) Egypt (?) [all] for (?) the king 
 
 Pthvmys 'nh zt Pth mr 
 
 Ptolemy living forever, beloved of Ptah, 
 
 [and the queen Cleopatra 
 
 the Gods Epiphanes, 
 
 15b 
 
 . every year] (from) the first day of the year], 
 
 Cbt) tpy{?) ",ht V h[w\ V 
 
 (the) first month, until (the) [Five Days??] 
 15c 
 
 e-w ty klm'e 
 
 they wearing crown (s) 
 
 e-w V [gll wtne nm p-sp 
 
 (and) making [holocaust (s), libation (s) and the rest (of) 
 
 ISd 
 
 mt-nt]-ph(t?) e(?) 'r-w 
 
 things] becoming to do (them). 
 
 1 A high m (the "key"-sign) ? The trace, like broad m, behind, is too high and seems secondary; it could be 
 understood, however, as the V of Ros. 11, so that we should have to read, like the Rosettana: "who perform 
 their hours." At the end of the line is a group which appears to be at a first glance either a high n or an asymmetric 
 my: ''like, as." It is, however, more probable that we have the hind part of wn, and of an n, of which latter also 
 the first stroke may be visible. No certain trace of the determinative (a star) is visible in ija, yet the word seems 
 to be intended after Ros. 11 (entirely misunderstood and changed to w by Chabas). 
 
 2 Hb appears on the stone often like nb. 
 
 3 The space requires more than "for the soul (kl) of" which we should like to supply after Ros. 7. 
 
 4 The book-roll would not fill the great space and the t is so unusual that we must suspect an attempt to 
 engrave an h under or over it; also the following traces do not fit the necessary restoration after Ros. very well. 
 
 5 Thus after Ros. Greek 50. See Philae, II, 16c, on the change of the duration of the festival from five to 
 three days. 
 
 6 For h',(y)wt. The side-support in the sign of the sacrificial table is not quite certain. 
 
 7 This strange form after Ros. 12 (for 'r-tw or 'rt?). 
 
 8 Literally: "serve." 
 
 9 The hopeless traces lead to the conjecture that the scribe tried to correct the above erroneous reading of 
 Ros. 29. The correct word wnwt "hours", which must be expected here, can not be read into the text, but the 
 initial signs of erpe(y) "temple" are visible. 
 
 10 Thus (after Ros.) on the assumption that the engraver, working mechanically, disfigured various signs: 
 e. g., the oblique stroke of Kmy seems never to have been on the stone, nor the usual horizontal stroke above; the 
 group looks more like tyi "in." 
 
THE BILINGUAL DECREES OF PHILAE. 
 
 53 
 
 THE PRIESTHOOD FOR THE NEW CULT. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 W'bw 1 nw prw- m','t{?) m 
 The priests of the holy places in 
 
 r-prw 2 -[nb] hr rn-f 3 
 
 [all] the temples on [i. e., bearing) his name 
 
 k', (w-) I -tw n{?)-sn [hm(w)-ntr] i ntrwy 
 (shall) be called prophet (s) (of) the two 
 
 pr{wy) m hr[w] r y',wt-w'bw 
 
 Gods Epiphanes in addition to the priestly offices 
 
 1 6 a 
 
 n(?) & 'm\y-sn(!) 
 to which they belong. 
 
 ht(?) -sn sw(?Y hr-tp-t', . . -[s]n 
 They (may) engrave (?) it upon 7 their [documents?] 8 
 
 [and they (may) write] 
 
 16b 
 
 | . [y',wt?] w'b n 9 ntrwy 
 
 . . . . [the office of a] priest of the two Gods 
 
 [ prwy ] hr ht(m) 10 
 [Epiphanes] on the seal 
 
 (r?)-rdt ht-sn 
 
 causing it 12 to be engraved 
 
 dt-sn(?) n 
 (on) their hands 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 N-w'bw nt n n-'rpyw in) t'-Kmy 
 
 The priests who (are) in the temples of Egypt, 
 
 ise 
 
 ['rpyw-nb{?) \ nt{u)-w] z(t) 
 [all the temples, be] called 
 
 n-w'bw n 
 the priests of 
 
 [nt] prw w {?!) 
 Epiphanes 
 
 n-ntrw 
 the Gods 
 
 e(?) u -w',h 
 
 in addition (to) 
 
 n{?) 
 (the?) 
 
 k"w w 
 other 
 
 rn[w] [n-w'b] 
 [priestly] names 
 
 [nt{u)-w sh(',)-f n g',y-n-zl' mt-nb 
 and they shall write it as protocol 16 (of) everything, 
 
 nt{u)-w sh) t-",wt (n?) 
 
 and they shall write the office of 
 
 isf 
 
 | w'b] {n?) n-ntrw 
 priest] of the Gods 
 
 1511 
 
 [(e) nw glt(iw) 17 nt] 
 [on their seal-ring(s) which] 
 
 ht-(s?) hr-',t-w(?) 
 
 (have) engraved on them 
 (i. e , on which they used to have engraved signs). 
 
 pr 
 Epiphanes 
 
 e-w 
 they 
 
 1 The determinative "man" evidently to be restored above the plural strokes. 
 
 2 Determined by "city" exactly as in Ros. 12. 
 
 3 Three to four signs here very big and clumsy (as though over erased signs?). 
 
 4 Omitted by the engraver, who was confused by the three-fold repetition of the sign for ' 'god. ' ' 
 
 6 The first sign is not high n, rather a vertical stroke, the lowest of the 3 plural strokes of w'bw. The n 
 of the very archaic expression n-sn 'my-s[n\ of Ros. 12 seems to have been engraved over 'in (or the expression 
 was unintelligible to our redactor, who shortened it erroneously?). 
 
 6 Sw in rather probable traces. The preceding verb is, probably, ht "to engrave." What looks like a small w 
 may be the hook held by the strong arm. Before it, h and t. 
 
 7 The senseless t\ "ground" (literally "on the ground of"), might have crept in by a popular etymology of 
 hi-o(o)t- "on" and by its analogy to hr-tp; but see the following note. 
 
 8 The traces of this word are very uncertain. The first group does not show a bird's feet; after it a b might be 
 found; the following round sign is not the disk with asp, but probably only a secondary hole. The whole com- 
 pound reminds of tp-(t',)-rd "precept(s) " as written in the second decree, line 8b, and the upper part of the bent 
 leg is possible for the third sign, but the lower traces are unfavorable to this reading. Hardly htmw "seals." 
 
 9 Good traces of a high n. 
 
 10 The word is abbreviated or mutilated. The determinative "seal ring" of the hieratic model copy is dis- 
 figured to a crude book roll and a (correcting?) blotch below. Without Ros. 13 it would hardly be possible to 
 recognize the word htm. 
 
 11 The probable 'r(y) "belonging to" of Ros. 13 is erroneously omitted. Behind, over an erroneously engraved 
 bird like "eagle" or "chicken," the engraver seems to have tried to put a high n. 
 
 12 St "it" ought to be read in place of sn "them," or after it. 
 
 13 The group is written very strangely, perhaps by correction, but the stroke which seems to make here the 
 declension of pr is noticeable as quite an unusual detail. 
 
 14 Read e (in place of nt) -^w',h "to add, " which is better than the seeming n-^w',h "in addition" of Ros. 30. 
 
 16 The word is engraved in an indistinct way, which suggests that the engraver at first did not recognize its 
 meaning and had to make corrections. 
 
 16 The word, corresponding with Greek xpw<>-t w/j-os, Ros. Gr. 51, Canop. Gr. 22 = dem. 24, means "documents, 
 documentary expressions, legal titles of a person in writing." 
 
 17 The word, see Griffith, Rylands Pap., Ill, 237, 400. Ros. Greek 51 has generally been restored: ko.1 us tovs 
 a[X\ovs . . .] (see Strack, Dynastie der Ptolemaer, 244, etc.); could it not be possible to restore 5[a.KTv\Lovs], if the last 
 letter before the break is not quite certain and might be 5 instead of a? 
 
54 
 
 EGYPTOLOGICAL RESEARCHES. 
 
 PRIVATE CULTS OF THE ROYAL COUPLE. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 1 6c 
 
 'sk I '[rfy?] 1 wnn-s m-dy 
 Also thus it be permitted 2 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 [wnnyiv 
 (to) people 
 
 l6d 
 
 s- I 'h' mytt{!) 
 to set up likewise 
 
 nty]-sn 'b(y)—sn 
 who 3 wish 
 
 k',t-tn 
 this shrine 
 
 n 
 of 
 
 ntrwy pr(wy) r-[rdt] wnn^-s^ 
 
 the two Gods Epiphanes to let (it) be 
 
 m 
 in 
 
 pr—sn m[twtw(!)? b \ -sn 
 their house, and they shall 
 
 hb]w -n 6 
 
 these processional 
 
 r 
 make 
 
 h'-'pn tp 
 
 'bd 
 
 [festivals every month 
 
 [-» tp] rnpt. 
 [(and) every] year. 
 
 [Nt(u)-w t(y)-hpr 7 ] 
 
 And (it) be made] 
 
 ' 's(?) \?Y-(n)?-tt 
 also (?) 8 at the disposal 
 
 16a 
 
 n-rm(t)w p-ms'{?) w nt e-w(?) -wh',-w 
 (of) the men (of) the people who are wishing 
 
 [t(y)H'(O n p(!)-smt t-g',t[-nb] 
 
 to bring out in procession (!) likewise the [golden] shrine 12 
 
 16b 
 
 n-ntrw nt{?) [pr \ nt hr 
 
 (of) the Gods [Epiphanes], which (is described) above, 
 
 e (- ? ) t{y)-bP r (~ s ?) nw-m',w nt(u)-w 'r 
 (to) let it be (at) their places, they shall make 
 
 n-hbw n—h'w nt sh\ 
 
 the festivals (of) the( ! ) processions which are described 
 
 hr hr-rnpt'. 
 above, every year. 
 
 1 The strange archaizing pleonasm of Ros. 13, 's-'ry-f-sw, was unintelligible to our redactor; he first omitted 
 the sw, not recognizing that it stood for swt and expressed a contrast: "but, moreover, however." Replacing the 
 's by the fuller 'sk, the redactor shows that the whole series of adverbial (demonstrative) particles was a meaning- 
 less stylistic ornament to him. (I am not sure whether the two very low and deep oblique scratches below the 
 secondary vertical line division express a final y; the other traces are difficult.) 
 
 2 Literally, "on, at, hands." Ros. 13 reads m-'wy, which I consider merely as an artificial archaism, without 
 historical, foundation. We might find traces of this ending -wy also here. 
 
 3 The redactor shows that the affixing of the personal pronoun -sn to the relative (?) nty, Ros. 13, looked very 
 strange to him. He wishes to move the suffix sn to its regular place behind the verb 'b(y), but has not the courage 
 to remove that interesting form nty-sn entirely, so he leaves it at the side of his correction. 
 
 4 The engraver omitted the s (see Ros. 13); whether he made a feeble attempt to scratch it over the m or 
 erased it in favor of the m is uncertain. 
 
 6 Confused orthography in Ros. 13, after which we restore here as though the third plural and the passive 
 endings were united by pleonasm. 
 
 6 This n added in our text (disfigured to ml). Cp. the demotic version. 
 
 7 The small space suggests omissions. 
 
 8 This does not seem to be es: "she is = it is" ; this would hardly be possible grammatically. We are tempted 
 to find hpr in this ligature; the space would then, however, be too small. It is in any case insufficient; see above. 
 Our redaction, certainly, omits the '« "again" of Ros. 31 as superfluous. 
 
 9 Literally, " (at) the place of the hand." The first ligature is engraved quite senselessly and does not seem to 
 have been understood by the sculptor. Cp. the parallel, Ros. dem. 31. 
 
 10 Literally, "of the multitude." Egyptian lacks a good expression for the Greek "private people," as we 
 see especially in the hieroglyphic version. 
 
 11 H' "to show, to parade" seems in Ros. and here to be written erroneously for hV "to place, to set up." 
 The other versions demand this emendation. 
 
 12 Evidently omitted in Ros. 31 by confusion of nb with the following plural article. Before might be read 
 nt wh\- j w "and they wish," which, however, could be read as in Ros. (u)-w. 
 
THE BILINGUAL DECREES OF PHILAE. 
 
 55 
 
 PUBLICATION OF THE DECREE. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 R(?) rdt s(') ^CO- 
 ln order to let it be known 
 
 i6f 
 
 tw wnn 
 
 (that) there are the 
 
 'm(y)w 2 T'-Mr(t) 
 
 inhabitants of the Inundation Country (i. e., Egypt) 
 
 hr-zsr ntrwy pr(wy) \ my(?) 3 [n]tt 
 honoring the two Gods Epiphanes according to that 
 
 which is 
 
 s pt(?y 
 
 of action (?) 
 
 r \'swy?] 
 
 for [compensation] 
 
 nfr 
 (of)good(ness) 
 
 htw{?Y-tw sh',wy-pn hr 'k'[y\ n[ty 
 be engraved this decree on stela (e) o[f 
 
 17b 
 
 ",t \ -rd(f) m ] sh', [n] mdw(t)-ntr{w) 
 hard stone in the writing of the divine words, 
 
 sh', n s'yw 6 sh', n 
 
 the writing of letters (and) the writing of 
 
 H',w(y)-nbw 7 
 the Greeks, 
 
 tn r-prw-nb 
 in all temples 
 
 rd(t?)-'h'-f m [prw-m','t(?) 
 
 setting it up 8 in [the holy places 
 
 hr rn]—f 
 on (i. e., bearing)] his [name,] 
 
 nd 
 
 mh-I, mh-II, mh-II I ; r—gs hn{ty) 
 (of) first, second (and) third (order) beside the statue 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 Nt(u)-f hpr 's swn z{t) n-nt 
 
 And that it be also (?) 9 known that those who 
 
 (») t'-Kmy] 
 (are) in Egypt] 
 
 t(y)-pht{i) w n-ntrw nt [pr 
 honor the Gods [Epiphanes 
 
 e(?)- h p-nt-n-hp n 'r-f 
 
 according to that which is proper to do (it) 
 
 nt(u)-w sh(',) p-wt n wyt 
 be written the decree on stela (e) (of) 
 
 'ny-zry n sh(',) mt-ntr 
 
 hard stone in (the) script (of) divine word (s), 
 
 sh{',)-s't , sh(',) }\ Wynn 
 
 letter script, (the) script] (of the) Ionians (i. e., Greeks) 
 
 [nt(u)-w t(y)-] 'h'-(f) 11 n n-'rpyw 
 and that (it) be set up in the temples 
 
 16S 
 
 I( = tpy), n(?) | [n-'rpyw mh-II 
 (of) first (rank), in the temples (of) second (order) 
 
 1 The ideogram of the verbal root "to know" (Pan's flute) disfigured to /. 
 
 2 In Ros. 'm slightly disfigured? 
 
 3 Like a high n, but the lower part as far as visible would be too low for this, so I rather read my, but the sign 
 is not quite clear. The Demotic version supports this reading my "like." 
 
 4 I do not understand the above expression in detail, owing to the difficulty in identifying the sign after r. 
 The above reading must assume that the 's-sign was disfigured somewhat; twt "proper thing" can hardly be found 
 there. Above, I suggest, after the apparent nfr, an emendation of spt to sp, "time, case, example, action," i. e., 
 of t to a circle (with two strokes inside). So far this is very uncertain, although the general sense is plain by the 
 Greek (53) and demotic (31-32) versions of Ros., after which we should expect twt "proper." Is it possible that 
 the passage was disfigured so strongly by the engraver? Or read simply nfrw-st(l) "their(') goodness"? 
 
 5 Expressed by an arm holding a stylus? The traces are strange (more like a foot?) and the w as third 
 consonant of this verb is quite unusual, so that we must again suspect corruptions (like confusion with miwtw) . 
 
 6 Written 'Syw by mistake. 
 
 7 The true pronunciation of this very ancient name does not seem to be known yet; I use above the popular 
 transliteration. 
 
 8 Or particularly, "being set up." The -t of rdt is, probably, without signification. 
 
 9 See above, p. 54, note 8, on this 's. Here it is even clearer that it can not be verbal. 
 
 10 Notice well the final -t{i) of our text, also with the above verbal form. 
 
 11 The Philse text omits the -/ of the subject, probably having a mere oblique dash which could be confounded 
 with the following smaller stroke, a negligent n (like e). Also the verb 'ohe' is negligently written as though 
 not understood. We correct after the general parallel (Ros. dem. 32), disregarding the two vertical strokes 
 which stand there after t(y). 
 
56 
 
 EGYPTOLOGICAL RESEARCHES. 
 
 PUBLICATION OF THE DECREE-Continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 n n-st 'byty 
 
 of the king of Upper and Lower Egypt, 
 
 nb t\wy 
 
 the lord of both countries, 
 
 s\ R' 
 
 the son of the Sungod, 
 
 nb h'w , Ptw',rw[mys | 'nh zt, 
 
 the lord of diadems, Ptole[my, living forever, 
 
 mr Pth h' 1 ] rpyt hqt 
 
 beloved of Ptah, and 1 ] the image of the queen, 
 
 wrt 
 the great one, 
 
 nb(t) t',wy 
 
 the mistress of both countries, 
 
 17/ 
 
 Qrw' I w',p',dr',(t) ntrwy priwy) , dy 'nh, 
 Cleopatra, the two Gods Epiphanes, giving life, 
 
 nbw 
 lords of 
 
 snyb-nbw(!) 
 all health 
 
 my R' zt 
 
 like the Sungod eternally. 
 
 n-'rpyw 
 (and) the temples 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 mh-III . . 
 
 (of) third (order) before 
 
 -« 2 
 
 p-twt 
 the statue 
 
 n 
 of 
 
 pr- 
 kinsr 
 
 nm 
 and 
 
 i6g 
 
 Pt]lwm[y]s 'nh 
 Pto]lemy, living 
 
 t-rpyt n pr't] 
 the image of queen] 
 
 i6h 
 
 G[lwpt[re | [n-]ntrw 
 Cleopatra, [the] Gods 
 
 [zt 
 [forever, 
 
 Pth mr 
 beloved of Ptah, 
 
 nt pr 
 Epiphanes ; 
 
 nt(u)w . . n-nb]w | ['nh 
 
 they [are(?) the master]s(?) (of) life 
 
 nm{?) hh(?y 
 and(?) eternity(?) 
 
 s']zt(?) 
 for ever 
 
 1 The space would allow fuller expressions for this word. 
 
 2 Evidently the same preposition which we have discussed in the note on iog (p. 41). Notice in Ros., which 
 we have followed in our passage, the treatment of the final -t(e) as if it were tt "hand." 
 
 3 The conclusion can not be read with entire certainty. It is terminated by a few groups a line below, plate 
 g (19), not returning to the regular beginning of the lines. 
 
THE SECOND DECREE. 
 
 The so-called "second" (in reality first) decree 1 stands to the left of the decree treated so 
 far, with only 2 to 3 inches space between. The hieroglyphic hand is very similar to that 
 of the "first" decree and may be identical, although considerably more elegant; evidently, the 
 engraver took more time in the first half of his work, so that we have here a further proof 
 that the sequence of both documents is to be reversed. The demotic text begins a little 
 over 4 inches under the last hieroglyphic line. Its writing, at first elegant, firm, and intelligent, 
 becomes heavy on plate e, and on plate / as clumsy as if the signs had been recut for correc- 
 tion. I do not hazard an explanation of these latter changes. 
 
 THE DATE. 
 
 (the hieroglyphic text op the second 
 decree is destroyed for the first 
 three wnes). 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT OF THE SECOND DECREE. 
 
 [Hspt XIX, 
 [Year 19, 
 
 nt V 
 
 which makes 
 
 IV{?)Smw, 
 Mesore (12th month) 
 
 lpl]s XXIX{?) 
 
 Apellaios?] 29(F) 
 
 'bt n rmtw t'-Kmy 
 (as) month of Egyptian people 
 
 hw IX, 
 day 9, 2 
 
 pr- p-[W 
 
 (of) the king, the young one, 
 
 'r-h' pr-' n t s -st [n pf-yt(i) 
 
 who has appeared (as) king at the place [of his father 
 
 nb n-'r'y(w)t, nt e n',-'(',)] | tf-pht(i)-t 
 lord (of) the diadems who great is] his might, 
 
 id 
 
 'r-smn t'-Kmy [ef] t{y)- \ nfr-f 
 
 who has established Egypt, (as) [he has] improved it, 
 
 [nt n',-] mnh [ht(i)—f 4 
 
 [who] kind (is) [his heart towards the gods, who . 
 
 his enemies (while) he improves the life of (the) men, 
 
 1 See p. 3, on the error in this conventional name and the demotic text on the exact date. 
 
 2 The date is not clearly readable. Neither the signs for the season nor the preceding number are plain. 
 The traces at the latter place look like a II, and thus my first reading was : second month of the second season, 
 i. e., Mechir (sixth month). This would have brought us into the middle of the twentieth year, a time when order 
 would have been restored sufficiently throughout all Egypt and the priests would have had time to come from 
 every corner of the country. But the "first," in reality second, decree mentions "the decree of the year 19" 
 (at least, line ijd, demotic ijf) and thus fixes our date, for it is not advisable to assume that "year 19" would refer 
 only to the victories over the rebels, not to the following priestly convention and its resolution. It is also much 
 more probable that the priests of Egypt did not wait for half a year to show their loyalty on such an important 
 occasion. Evidently they acted wisely and promptly, assembling as many priests from the Delta towns as was 
 possible within six days, to speak in the name of all the rest. Thus I have tried to read the third season and to 
 find traces of the month No. IV above that faint deceptive trace, considering this trace (which resembles a II) as 
 secondary. The number 9 for the day is fairly clear, less the 20. I leave it to others to control the correspondence 
 of the Macedonian date. 
 
 3 On the stone by mistake tf, evidently by confusion with the following possessive pf "his." 
 
 4 1 do not repeat the transliterations for these long restorations. See the first decree for them. 
 
 57 
 
58 
 
 EGYPTOLOGICAL RESEARCHES. 
 
 THE SECOND DECREE— Continued. 
 THE DATE— Continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 (the; hieroglyphic text of the second 
 DECREE is destroyed for the first 
 
 THREE LINES.) 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 If 
 
 I hbst{l) [m qty \ 
 
 the lord of the years of] jubilee, [in the likeness of] 
 
 Pth tn .pr- m qt[y 
 
 Ptah, the exalted one, 1 the king in the liken[ess 
 
 p-R'] (P~?) | pr~ n n-tsw nt 
 of the Sungod], the king of the territories which 
 
 hr [n-tsw nt hry 
 
 (are) above (and) [the territories which (are) below, 
 
 ih 
 
 p-]sry [n n-]ntrw • mr yt(i)w 
 
 the] son [of the] Gods Loving (their) Parents, 
 
 e stp Pth [e] ty n-f p-R' 
 whom chose Ptah, to whom has given the Sungod 
 
 2a 
 
 [p-zr(',) p-t(w)t]-'nh 'mn 
 
 [the victory, the] living [image] (of) Amon, 
 
 2b 
 
 p-sry p-R' Ptlwmys \ 'nh zt 
 
 the son (of) the Sungod, Ptolemy, living forever, 
 
 Pth mr p-ntr nt pr [s\] Ptlwmy[s 
 beloved of Ptah, the god Epiphanes, [the son of] Ptolemy 
 
 2C 
 
 nm . . . n-ntrw mr] | yt(i)w 
 
 [and Arsinoe, the Gods Loving] (their) Parents. 
 
 W'b Algsntrws [nm 
 Priest (of) Alexander [and 
 
 n-ntrw nt ] nhm 
 the Gods who] Save (d) 
 
 2d 
 
 | nm n-[ntrw snw ], n-ntrw nt mnh 
 and the [Gods Fraternal], the Gods Benefactors, 
 
 [n-ntrw mr-yt{i)w 2 
 [the Gods Parent-loving, 
 
 n— ntrw nt pr . . . 
 the Gods Epiphanes, (being) 
 
 t(i) 
 
 N. N., the son of N. N.; (being) N. N., 
 
 2/ 
 
 | . . . [P]twlm[ys] fy 
 
 the daughter of Ptolemy(?), bearer (of the) 
 
 2g 
 
 sp'e qn \ 
 
 prize of victory [of Berenike, the Beneficent ; (being) 
 
 2h 
 
 ]\ws fy tn 
 
 Demetria, the daughter of Philin]os, basket bearer 
 
 1 See the first decree on the double sense of this word. Probably, it means here "the ancient one." 
 
 2 The traces on 2e belong to the priestly name rather than to this title, although strongly reminiscent of the 
 group "father." 
 
THE BILINGUAL DECREES OF PHILAE. 
 
 59 
 
 THE SECOND DECREE— Continued. 
 THE DATE — Continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 [before Arsinoe, the one Loving her Brother; (being) 
 
 H]ryn', s)t n Ptlwmys w'b 
 
 Ei]rene, the daughter of Ptolemy, priest (ess) 
 
 3b 
 
 | [!M;y]ra; t-mr(t)- yt(i)-s. 
 
 of Arsinoe, the one Loving her Father. 
 
 THE RELIGIOUS OCCASION OF THE DECREE. 
 
 Wt V n-[mr(?)-snw 
 
 Decree (which) have passed 2 the [high priests 
 
 w'bw 
 priests 
 
 s(m) e (p-?) m'wb e V 
 go to (the) sanctuary to perform 
 
 mnh [n n—ntrw 
 the clothing [of the gods, 
 
 3d 
 
 nm n-sh(',)w ] mzyw \ nm n-sh(',)w 
 and the scribes of] books 4 and the scribes 
 
 pr(wy?)- 'nh 
 
 the (double) house of life (i. e. 
 
 n— k"w w'bw 
 the other priests 
 
 [sh',w] \ zm',wt(?)-ntr h' ty(I) 
 
 (the scribes of) the holy writings and the faculty 
 
 pr(wy)- 'nh 
 
 of the (double) house of life (i.e., the library) 
 
 h' n'—kyw w'bw 
 
 and the other priests 
 
 m 'trty sm't 
 
 from the (two classes of) sanctuaries of the South 
 
 nm n—hnw ntr nm n-] 
 and the prophets and the] 3 
 
 lit 
 who 
 
 mhyt nty m 
 
 (and) North who (are) in 
 
 'r(w)ksdrs 
 Alexander" (Alexandria) 
 
 p\-sbiy 
 "the Fortress 
 
 'b-sn 
 have met 
 
 n 
 of 
 
 'w 
 
 at 1 
 
 (who) 
 
 shzt nty 'st h' ntrwy snwy 
 
 the sanctuary of Isis and the two Brotherly Gods 
 
 h' ntrwy mnhwy h' 
 
 and the two Beneficent Gods and 
 
 ntrwy mr(wy) ytwy hr 
 
 the two Gods Loving the(ir) Parents and 
 
 ntrwy pr(wy) nbw Bqt 
 
 the two Gods Fpiphanes, the "Lords of Egypt," 
 
 (of) 
 
 nm 
 and 
 
 the library) 
 
 [who have come from the temples of 
 
 Egypt (to Alexandria?) 
 to the temple of Isis and 
 
 the Gods 
 
 31 
 
 nt mnh . ... 
 
 Philadelphus and the Gods] Euergetes [and the Gods 
 
 [m]r— yt(i)w [nm n-]ntrw nt pr 
 Philo]pator [and the] Gods Epiphanes, 
 
 nbw Bq[et] 
 
 the Lords (of) Egypt 
 
 'Literally: "towards, into." 
 
 2 No space for the usual words summing up the long date "this day," which we should expect before "decree." 
 
 3 Very abundant space, suggesting some unusual orthography or additions (?). i 
 
 4 Strange orthography of this word (the pronunciation of which is not quite certain) . 
 
60 
 
 EGYPTOLOGICAL RESEARCHES. 
 
 THE POLITICAL OCCASION OF THE DECREE: 
 SUPPRESSION OF THE REBELLION. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 lift sm'w-sn n hm—f 
 
 When it was announced to His Majesty 
 
 m r\ mh-'b 1 nw{!) hm—f 
 
 through the mouth of a Friend of His Majesty 
 
 mr n-st hr hrp nfrw 
 
 who loves the king, concerning the commander of horse, 
 
 4e 
 
 ",r(w)sd',\nyw',s pi ",r(w)sd',nygws 
 
 Aristonios, the (son) of Aristonikos, 
 
 4f 
 
 m strt 2 g',(?)m(y)nws \ nty 
 
 as commander in chief ((TTparriyovnevos) who (is) 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 'mwt 'm(yw)-b tpijw) 
 among the First Friends 
 
 hm—f m zd: 
 His Majesty saying: 
 
 nw 
 of 
 
 'h',w-sn(!y 
 (there) was fought 
 
 m | t', rs(y)t 
 
 in the land of the South, 
 
 Wist 
 Thebes, 4 
 
 m ww n 
 
 in the Territory of 
 
 h' sb(')w, bft(y) ntrw 
 
 with the impious man, the enemy of the gods, 
 
 lb 
 
 wn hr(?) b tw[t] h[n?} wnf[wf 
 
 (who) had been assembling from(?) the warriors (?) 
 
 [who had raised rebellion?] 
 
 IV-.?] lt(i)-[f? bn?] lg-f{?) . . . 
 
 upon (i. e., against?) [him?]; 7 [not] did he stop 
 
 [committing sins 
 
 against the gods(?). He had gathered] 
 
 \hr?-\l\t{i)? -f?] . . 
 against (?) [him?] [from] 
 
 fir- 
 ths. 
 
 [rm(t)w?] 
 [menl 
 
 (of) 
 
 4b 
 
 n- qn[qn?] s [e] 
 the warriors (?) [for] 
 
 [m]lh n[w?]- [ms'?]w 
 war, h[is?] [soldier ?]s 
 
 [smw 
 month 
 
 III 
 
 [XI 
 
 1 Literally: "who filled the heart of H. M." The following synonymous expression shows that the Greek 
 original must have designated him as a "Special Friend " 
 
 2 The rare sign in the value of rt; in later time ordinarily used for r. The following g is very small, almost 
 like n(w), for which it could be held. The next sign might also be w. 
 
 3 The sign s is left incomplete. 
 
 4 An awkward translation for "the Thebai's." 
 
 5 The questionable hr- traces might be secondary in part. The group before may have an n below; the sign 
 above seems to be a very narrow wn; at least the peculiarly forked tail, which our two inscriptions give to this sign, 
 seems clearly visible. Wn expresses a continual past action. It is neither the enemy striking himself nor do the 
 readings nty or hpr of the whole group appear possible. The reading kwlntr(w) " the temples " (taking the second 
 vertical stroke as part of the temple sign), is equally impossible. 
 
 6 The orthography of hn ( instead of the exact m-hn "from among ") is unusual and uncertain. The unique 
 word wnf (see again pb, nf), written here with the determinative "wicked man," shows that it was used as synon- 
 ymous with "rebels." 
 
 7 Not quite certain, but the sense is clear. 
 
 8 Abbreviation or mutilation of the expression Ros. demot. 1 1 ? 
 
 9 The group looks like a date, though this does not correspond with the hieroglyphs. This must be said also 
 of the preceding words and of the whole passage, which makes us think of additions in the demotic text. 
 
THE BILINGUAL DECREES OF PHILAE. 
 
 61 
 
 SUPPRESSION OF THE REBELLION— Continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 h' tsw 1 nw 
 
 s 
 
 and troops of 
 
 Nhs(y)w dmz-sn h'-f 
 
 the Ethiopians who had united with him, 
 
 | sm',- 2 'm(?)-sn \m m sq 3 
 slaying them, seizing as captive 
 
 pn* ['nh]. 
 
 this (wicked man) [alive]. 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 40 
 
 hspt X]IX [nm] [n- . . . ]w n 
 year i]9, [and] [the troop?] of 
 
 'gs 'r-twt nm-f. 
 
 Ethiopians having gathered with him. 
 
 ra- 
 the 
 
 n-'m-w , e-]f t(y)-'h' 
 them, h]e arrested 7 
 
 4d 
 
 E-f-s[m\* 
 He sl[ew 
 
 p-s\b rn-f e-f-'nh. 
 
 the impious man mentioned (before), being alive. 
 
 THE BENEFITS BY THE KING TO THE GODS IN GENERAL. 
 
 Sd 
 
 K',-sn: m(y)-nty \ wnn h 
 They declare: inasmuch as there was 
 
 n-st 'byty 
 
 the king of Upper and Lower Egypt, 
 
 s',-R' Ptwlrwmys 
 
 the son of the Sun, Ptolemy, 
 
 ['nh zt mr Pth } 
 
 [living forever, beloved of Ptah], 
 
 s ', n n-st 'byty 
 
 the son of the king of Upper and Lower Egypt, 
 
 Se 
 
 Ptwlrwmys hn' hqt nbt 
 
 Ptolemy, and the queen (and) mistress 
 
 t',wy 
 of both countries, 
 
 'r(w)syn',t 
 Arsinoe, 
 
 ntrwy 
 
 s 
 
 the two Gods 
 
 mr(wy) ytwy h' snt-hmt-f hqt 
 
 Loving the(ir) Parents, and his sister -wife, the queen 
 
 5/ 
 
 nbt t',wy QrwVp', \ dr',t 
 
 and mistress of both countries, Cleopatra, 
 
 E-w z(t) : n-t(t) 
 They say : since 
 
 [the king Ptolemy, living forever, 
 
 beloved of Ptah, 
 
 the son of king Ptolemy and of] 
 
 pr't(!) 
 queen 
 
 ]rs[yn',] 
 Arsinoe, 
 
 [the Gods Philopator, and] 
 
 tf-shmt pr't 
 his wife, the queen 
 
 [the Gods Epiphanes] 
 
 Glw[ptr]e, 
 Cleopatra, 
 
 1 The I is not quite plain. The sign /s (Theinhardt's catalogue Q 54) as a vocal determinative occurs below 
 lie. The word p(t) means usually "troops; " it seems to have an unusual sense here, and is not absolutely certain. 
 The usual words for "tribe" are impossible. In demotic only the determinative "foreign" is preserved (mtgt'i?). 
 
 2 Participial construction without suffixal possessive. Determinatives "knife" and "arm" (destroyed). 
 The expression of the object by m has, by no means, partitive sense (as though meaning: "(some) of them") 
 (see on this interesting influence of the vernacular grammar, demotic text, line go). 
 
 3 The orthography is not entirely clear and is certainly unusual. (Second determinative "club.") The 
 word \m before it is written with eagle and horizontal m in ligature, as 16a. 
 
 4 Pn "this" is rare in this absolute use (like the more frequent pf, "that one," with contemptuous sense); 
 the demotic version insures the general sense, however. We might also assume that the repetition of the determi- 
 native "bound captive" has caused the omission of the word sb'(w) "impious man." 
 
 6 The nn like m, but the error possibly abandoned. On wn of the imperfect, cp. p. 60, note 5. 
 
 6 S seems to be visible; the wj-sign seems to have been as straight and as far to the left as in Ros. demot. 16, 
 where this rare, obsolete word, mutilated gd, occurs. The verb may also be treated as participial, "slaying." 
 
 7 Exactly the same double sense as with the English word "to arrest." Coptic taho has the same meanings. 
 
62 
 
 EGYPTOLOGICAL RESEARCHES. 
 
 THE BENEFITS BY THE KING TO 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 ntrwy pr(wy) hr-r ^)h{w)t-nb l nfrw 
 
 the two gods Epiphanes, doing all things good 
 
 6a 
 
 n hwt-ntr 2 h' ')ii\tv(!) 3 —sn 
 to the temples and their inmates 
 
 h' wn(yw) m-hnt{!) 
 
 together with (those) being within 
 
 THE GODS IN GENERAL-Continued. 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 y,wt-sn mnht 
 their beneficent dignity 
 
 (or office) 
 
 r 4 'b-sn mnh hr 
 
 being their heart kind towards 
 
 6b 
 
 htpw{?) ~sn 
 
 their sacrifices 5 (i. e., incomes?) 
 
 r-,w-sn 
 all together, 
 
 ntrw mh 
 
 s 
 
 the gods, filling 
 furthermore 6 
 
 'w tr(i)-nb 
 at all time 7 
 
 r-sbwt 
 for the sake of 
 
 st[s]w(?Y nw Bqt 
 the institutions (?) of Egypt 
 
 'w-',w-sn h' [htpw]-ntr 9 
 
 altogether, together with the divine [domains?]. 
 
 ['w?]-sn rdt mn k'-sn ['b?] w 
 
 They gave (i. e., made) (this) firm (as) they thought (?) 
 
 [n-]'rp[yw nm n-] 
 [the] tem[ples and those] 
 
 4 h 
 
 nt hn-w. 
 
 who (are) in them 
 
 5a 
 
 [ew]—mh(?) [nw] htpw(-ntr?) [V] 
 
 [they] filled (?) [their?] (sacred) income [showing] 
 
 rws'(?) nb{?) e ty{?) ['n]h(?) 
 care(?) all(?) to give(?) life(?) 
 
 Sb 
 
 [n n-?} phty{?) .... 
 [to the?] right(s)(?) of E[gypt?] 
 
 t'-Km[y](?) nt(u)-w V(?) 
 
 Egypt(?) and they did(?) 
 
 1 Nb seems to be corrected over three plural strokes. 
 
 2 N as simple stroke; of the divine hawk, whip and tail are visible. 
 
 3 Incorrectly in place of 'my(io), the ~y being disfigured to ty. This is then abbreviated to one sign. The 
 analogy of 'mwt "within" (4/; gb, etc.) may be considered, likewise. 
 
 4 Might be, also, a small low m or an irregular n ("in their heart"), but r( = 'w "being") is most probable. 
 6 We should expect: "filling their hearts, their wish," (i. e., satisfying them), but the traces are unfavorable, 
 
 as also they are against a restoration like: "their storehouses, their magazines." The horizontal traces above 
 are somewhat high for htp{w) "sacrifices," but the t and irregular p below show that this word is meant. 
 (The cake and the plural strokes have been effaced behind.) 
 
 6 See below, demot. $d, the translation of this archaistic expression with 'on "again." 
 
 7 Thus, rather than rnpt "year," which the orthography would indicate. With tr the final -t is senseless, 
 but may be taken erroneously from the foot of tr, I'. 
 
 8 1 tried, at first, the reading sndw "the respectful (people or subjects)," literally "those who fear," which 
 seemed to me an awkward translation for some Greek expression like ev\a(leZs, "the careful, considerate, prudent." 
 The reading is, however, too uncertain, and the last two determinatives would be quite unusual. Therefore, I 
 have preferred the restoration st[s?](w), as meaning "institutions, traditions" or the like. It must be admitted 
 that with the above reading the two signs following the determinative of "saying, thinking" remain inexplicable; 
 these, furthermore, look as if preceded by a small gap above. Nevertheless, the following "all of them" shows 
 that a noun in the plural is meant. Thus we can not read: "for the sake of restoring order," or similarly with 
 an infinitive. To change the redundant last two determinatives to qnw "many" does not yield any better sense. 
 
 9 The signs look like ntrwt "goddesses," but this is senseless. Evidently the text is corrupted. The guess 
 given above (hlpw ntr "divine domains," with the goddess sign for that of the broad cake, cf. 6d, etc.) presents 
 only the difficulty that these domains are mentioned in the next section. 
 
 10 The traces fit neither this restoration nor very well tin " these, " which we should like to see after the demotic. 
 
THE BILINGUAL DECREES OF PHILAE. 
 
 63 
 
 THE BENEFITS BY THE KING TO THE GODS IN GENERAL— Continued. 
 
 H I EROGLYPH I C TEXT. DEMOT I C TEXT. 
 
 6d 
 
 r V tp-nfr n wnyw nw | Bqt 
 
 to do the very best(P) 1 to the people of Egypt, 
 
 my 'r-n Dhwty [", ",'] 
 
 as did Thout, [the very great]. 
 
 n',y n n-'r-w p-hp 
 
 these (things) to those who do (?) 10 what is right 
 
 5d 
 
 hn . . [e-h] p-e-'r Thwty \ p-", p-", 
 in [Egypt (?)] as did Thout the very great 
 
 SPECIAL BENEFITS TO THE PRIESTS. 
 
 W[z-hm-f?] 2 'sk 'w-sbwt 
 
 Ord[ered(?) his majesty(?)] furthermore on behalf 
 
 6e 
 
 htpw [-ntr?] n ntrw h' nb 
 
 of the [sacred?] domains of the gods and the gold, 
 
 hz hy r[dy?] r hwt-ntrw 
 
 silver (and) grain (to be) given for the temples 
 
 m(!)-hr 3 hspt h' p(s)swt{?) rw 4 
 
 every year (of the king) and the corresponding (?) shares 
 
 nw [?!ntr]w m hsp nw(?Y hw(ty 
 
 of the [god]s from the vineyards(?) 5 of the fields(?) 
 
 hr hnbw [...?] (')h(w)t-nb 
 and gardens, [and?] all things 
 
 7a 
 
 wn hr\-sn 
 
 (which) were (due) to(?) them 8 
 
 m 
 
 rk 9 
 
 yt?[-f] 
 
 \mn-sn\ 
 
 r{?) 
 
 in the time [of his] father [should remain] at(?) 
 
 Hn-f-s 'n e-tb{',t) n-htpw (-ntr?) 
 He ordered it again on behalf of the sacred domains 
 
 n n-ntrw [nm n-nb n-pr 
 
 of the gods; [and the money (and) the grain 
 
 nt e-w-ty-st n sntgsy(s?) (e) nw- ('rpyw) 
 which was given as tax for their (temples) 
 
 hr-rnpt nm n-t',w nt hpr n 
 
 every year and the portions which were for 
 
 n-ntr]w n n-yhw(t)-llt 
 
 \n- 
 
 yhw{t) | -ike 
 
 the god]s from the vineyards (and) the gardens 
 
 nm p-sp [nkt tr-w 
 
 and the rest [(of the) things altogether 
 
 e-w]n-n\e-w(?) 
 which] they had been 
 
 [under his father 
 
 mh[i\(?yu{?) 
 receiving(?) 
 
 OT-W 1 
 
 1 Literally, "the top (i. e., beginning, or the best) of the good." 
 
 2 The -to seems to be the phonetic complement following the sign wz, wt. 
 
 3 With a remarkable m. So far we have an exact repetition of Ros. Greek 14-15, rds diSo/ihas ets aura kolt' 
 tviavrov avvTa!-tis crm/cds re /ecu apyvpiKas. 
 
 4 For 'ry(w), i. e., "belonging to them, due, proper" (/ca^Koixxas). Reading r',w "parts" would be tautology. 
 
 5 We must follow Ros. Greek 15, and the demotic. Our scribe has exchanged agricultural words as meaningless 
 for him. Damanhur, 14-15, suggests that the obscure passage was confusing even in the original. (Cp. Brugsch, 
 Worterbuck, 968, boldly restored.) The effaced group after hnbw seems disfigured for ti "and." 
 
 6 Not the middle stroke of the plural strokes above; it is too high. Neither is hr "on, and" probable. 
 
 7 The abbreviation ht = y',ht is very archaic, like the (threefold) omission of the plural strokes. 
 
 8 Thus, reading the last sign on line 6 as the determinative "book-roll." Hr [h',t]-sn "before them" seems 
 not possible. 
 
 9 With an abnormally large determinative "way" the limits of which are not clear. 
 
 10 Grammatically doubtful. Could it not rather be read e-t{y) 'r-w "to make them do, to cause to be done" ? 
 The dot after the ambiguous sign, however, seems to point to the reading n(',)-, not ty. 
 
 11 The plural article n- seems to have been omitted by homoioteleuton with the first sign of the group yht, 
 y',ht. See the Rosetta parallel. 
 
 12 So far simply after Ros. dem. 9, with which the traces in our text do not all agree. The wn-n',e-w can be found 
 most easily, but the mh requires fancy. Mh(t)-n usually means "to seize, to grasp." The reading " (they were) 
 owing" hr-w would have a sign too much and would present other difficulties. The reading St "to demand" 
 likewise remains uncertain. Is our text corrupted? Next we might try to see also n n- "in the [temples?"]. 
 
64 
 
 EGYPTOLOGICAL RESEARCHES. 
 
 SPECIAL BENEFITS TO THE PRIESTS— Continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 [st(-sn?)Y w',h{?)-sn 2 grg{?Y 
 
 [their place] (and) be added (?) foundation (s?) (of) 
 
 :h(w)t-[snY f 'w(?) gs-sn(?Y 
 
 [their] fields to their part. 
 
 'w-[dy-f?] nb hz ",(w)t nb n— m','t 
 He [gave?] gold, silver, all genuine stones 
 
 the decoration of 
 
 my— s-sn w 
 
 in great quantity, for 
 
 T \[Pt]h wn{??) ntr-nbi?) 1 
 
 Ptah('s temple), 6 (and what) there was (for) anygod(?) 
 
 m ws m hmw 'w-[f?]-rdt wn—sn 
 
 in ruin in the sanctuaries [he ?] caused them to be 
 
 hr st-sn 
 
 on their place (i. e., in the former, good state). 
 
 7 ,i 
 
 V—wf ",hw(t)-wrw . . . [ 
 He did great benefits [many?] 
 
 h' Nb(?)-nm(?)wy % ",wy[w) 9 
 and the Mnevis (and) 
 
 to 
 
 [the Apis] 
 
 ntr(yw) 
 the sacred animals 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 . . . | ['rp?]yw 
 [for the] temples (?). 
 
 E-w',h-f nb [hz] 
 He added gold, silver, 
 
 6a 
 
 'ny [n-m','(t) ] 
 
 stone (s) [of value for the decoration of] 
 
 nw-'rp[yiv]{?) y{y){?) 
 
 their (?) temples (??) going(?) [to ruin? he was?] 
 
 ty{?) 
 
 giving(?) (i.e., causing?) [them to be repaired] 
 
 Wr-mr(!) 
 
 Mnevis 
 
 m-h',w- r 
 more than (those who) 
 
 wn 
 were 
 
 hiv | n [Km]t 
 venerated in Egypt 
 
 hr-h',t-f. 'b-f 'q 
 
 before him. His heart entered (i. e., was willing to serve) 
 
 | ['r-f mt-nfrt 'sy] Hp, 10 
 
 [he did benefits many] (to) Apis, 
 
 [nm n-k"w '", nt hwy (n) 
 
 [and the other animals which (are) venerated in 
 
 6c 
 
 t'-Kmy hw', n',y(?)-] | wn-n'-w h',t(i)-f 
 Egypt more than those who] were before him 
 
 'r(-w?) [e] 
 had done, [being] 
 
 1 The passage can not be filled after Damanhur 15, because the text has been considerably varied, expanding 
 the first words and crowding or shortening the rest. The traces behind the large determinative of rk are: a 
 round top of a high sign which might be the ideogram yt "father." Below is a heavy oblique stroke, suggesting 
 the hind leg of a w, though it is too heavy and the other traces do not confirm &w. It may be secondary, a contin- 
 uation of the crown cut over most of plate a. Next follows a sign which looks like a big square, irregular in front. 
 The following r is very high, but fairly certain. 
 
 2 W',h in irregular form. 
 
 3 This (at first) very difficult group begins g{?)r. The next sign above proved to be g, being different from the 
 ordinary form of nw in our text, and this led to the correct reading grg. Consequently, the sign below, looking 
 half like 'm "ship," half w'h "net," is the leg in a trap. A gap for a narrow sign remains, possibly filled by a 
 bookroll. 
 
 4 The three parallel plural strokes of the noun can be guessed from the traces of the first. 
 
 5 1 suppose £ is to be corrected to sn. I have tried to understand the whole passage as expanding Ros. Greek 
 15-16, from a mere conservation of the priestly lands to an augmentation. 
 
 6 The expression "for adorning Ptah" is thus to be understood because this section treats of buildings. 
 See p. 46, note 4, on the double sense of sh' "to show, to decorate." At any rate, the space does not permit a 
 noun before "Ptah." 
 
 7 All these restorations are uncertain and poor Egyptian. The traces do not agree with nb "all, every," but 
 still less with lit "temple." 
 
 8 The name is disfigured in the sign nm (misread mr by Egyptologists and later Egyptians) and has unusual 
 form, also, in the addition of nb "lord" (if this is not to be read n "to"). 
 
 9 The first stroke of final -y is preserved. 
 
 10 With a remarkable archaizing expression of the h- of Hp. The name Mnevis, with a strange determinative. 
 
THE BILINGUAL DECREES OF PHILAE. 
 
 65 
 
 SPECIAL BENEFITS TO 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 hr ss-sn m tr(t!) \ nb l 
 
 for that which was becoming to them, the whole time. 
 
 'r—nf z'r r-'b zt-sn 
 
 He did (what was) required for their (dead) bodi(es) 
 
 8a 
 
 wrwt zsr\w[i\. 
 
 in a great (and) magnificent way. 
 
 Ty-nf s[hn-sn 'w 2 ] hwt-ntr-sn 
 
 He took (on himself) [their] ex[penses for] their temples, 
 
 ['?]w-sn m hV w' > h(?)-'[h?] i 
 
 (which) were (used) in festival (s), holocaust (s), 
 
 8b 
 
 [s]gr(?) 5 wd[n] 6 h l twtw{!)-nb 
 
 the outpouring (of) libation (s) and everything proper 
 
 my 'r-sn, tp-t', (!)-rd-nb 
 
 as is done, (and?) everything prescribed 
 
 8c 
 
 n . . | 7 
 
 for [the temples of Egypt (?) 
 
 THE PRIESTS— Continued. 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 ht(i)-f hr 
 his heart for 
 
 6d 
 
 I E-f[ty?} 
 He gave those 
 
 [nw-ts-shnt] 
 [their command] 
 
 t(i)'-nb(!) -w. 
 all the time. 
 
 (things) 8 
 
 nt e-w-wh',-w wb 
 which were required for 
 
 6e 
 
 ww- qst e-w-", e-w(?)'sy(!), 9 e-w \ s'[s'] 
 their burial largely, plentifully, liberally 
 
 [E-f-ty n-nt e-w shny-w (e) ww- 
 
 [He took that 10 which was spent (for) their 
 
 (or: paid?) 11 
 
 'rpyw e-w-'r hbw e-w-'r 
 
 temples (when) were held festivals, (when) were held 
 
 6f 
 
 gll]w 12 nm p-sp mt-nt ph n(/) 13 
 holocausts] and the rest of the things proper to 
 
 'ryt{!)- j w u nm{?) 
 
 do (them) and(?) 
 
 1 Erroneously engraved k for nb. Tr(t) is so written that only the context enables us to distinguish it from 
 rnpt "year." 
 
 2 We can restore thus after Ros. hierogl. 3. The word shn (the determinative of which, i. e., the two arms 
 reaching down, is visible in rather indistinct traces) is a modernism which nobody would understand without the 
 parallel translations; see note 11 on the demotic shny. According to the prevailing archaizing tendency of the 
 hieroglyphic text we should have guessed at a sense: " installation (s)." Ty "he took away," i. e., to his account, 
 had them charged to himself. 
 
 3 A high sign hb (the upper traces of which first gave the impression of zsr) . 
 
 4 Thus after Ros. hierogl. 11; literally "a setting-up of oven(s)." The presupposed sign w'h, does not show 
 the characteristic form of the upper part; it looks more like a simple h (cp. 70). Likewise the following traces 
 are indistinct (' Ain and "metal"). The sense is, however, rather certain. 
 
 6 With the frequent confusion of g (instead of q) and hr, and, probably, without determinative, i. e., in abbre- 
 viated orthography. 
 
 6 Traces of w and of a d crossing it are visible rather high up. Behind, the determinative of water flowing 
 in an elongated spiral from the libation vase ; above, space for n. 
 
 7 The hieroglyphic traces do not enable us to find the above restoration on the stone. The bird-sign, which 
 begins 8c, is m or ',. As sign of the hawk, expressing "god, divine," it would probably have the whip behind, of 
 which we here have no trace. The apparent t before the secondary vertical line might be an accidental hole (in 
 traces like r or V?). 
 
 8 The group n) (y) here seems to be confused with ty. 
 
 9 The text of Ros. 18 here is disfigured. The copyist of Philae did not understand the form 'y "large" and 
 separated it into two words, rather unsuccessfully it seems. 
 
 10 Plural, the (things) which. 
 
 11 The exact sense of this business word seems to be "to draw from the bank," or "to incur a debt," or some- 
 thing similar. The Greek rendering rd reXurKoneva ets rd Uia (i. e., special, individual, single, local) kpa (gr. Ros. 
 32) explains it, together with the use of shn(e) "credit, expense, banking account," or similarly, Griffith, Rylands 
 Papyri, III, 287, note 3. 
 
 12 So far filled-in after Ros. dem. 18-19, with some probability, but not absolute certainty. 
 
 13 The Philae stone here confirms the small n which my personal copy of the Rosettana has as a doubtful dot; 
 it is lacking in the edition of Lepsius. 
 
 14 A very remarkable orthography, which shows that the form before personal suffixes ai- of the verb in in 
 Lower Egyptian Coptic is more archaic than the corresponding a a- of the Sahidic dialect. 
 
66 
 
 EGYPTOLOGICAL RESEARCHES. 
 
 SPECIAL BENEFITS TO 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 . -sn{?) mi?) 
 
 ",hu't 2 t',wy 3 
 
 [seeking] the very best (for) the two countries, 3 
 
 ss . . "\ m [t',?] h' 
 
 that which is proper 4 . . in [the land] 5 and 
 
 Wz{?) [~n] 
 (There) ordered (?) 
 
 (')h(w)t- wrw . 
 many things [fine?]. 
 
 [h]m-f 'w-[sbwt?] e .... w'bw(?) 
 His Majesty concerning(?) [the rights] the sacred ones (?) 
 
 Se 
 
 r{!) ['b]-f | [mnh] 
 
 being his [heart] [kind] 
 
 hr-'b(!) s 
 
 wishing (read: seeking) 
 
 hr [ntrw] 
 
 towards [the gods] 7 
 
 spw-sn nfrw 
 benefits for them 
 
 w s-m,w -sn m zr- 
 to renew them in his 
 
 time. 
 
 THE PRIESTS— Continued. 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 . . . \n-?\ nt{?) e-w{?) 
 . . . . which(?) are(?) 
 
 6a 
 
 n-{?)nfr{?) \ . . . t'-Kmyi?) ..... 
 good(?) [for] Egy P t(?) 10 
 
 6h 
 
 | nm n-k"w mtw-pht{i) nt{?) t',-Kmy 
 
 and the other proper things of(?) Egypt 
 
 (i. e., traditions) 
 
 7a 
 
 ['r-f—smn-w hr nw-g',y 
 
 [he let them remain 11 on their condition 
 
 e-h p-hp 12 e-f n ht(i) 
 
 according to what is right, he being in the mind (of) 
 
 ntr-mnh hr n-ntrw, e-f sn] 13 
 
 a kind god for the gods inquiring (for) 
 
 nw-pht(i) u n n-'rpyw 
 
 their proper (honors) in the temples 
 
 7b 
 
 I [ e t{y)-r-w m',y?}. 
 [to renew them ?] . ' 5 
 
 1 Also, the traces between the next two secondary vertical lines offer nothing positive. Group i at first looked 
 like n[t]y "which," but the final —y would show only one straight stroke with certainty. Sn "their" (or with a 
 verb "they") is more probable. The remaining traces of signs are even more problematic. 
 
 2 The h before the heron stands in a secondary hole. A bookroll between t and the plural strokes is possible, 
 but the engraving would be very shallow. 
 
 3 Or, we may read the two plant-signs more fully: "Upper and Lower Egypt." 
 
 4 Or, plural s$w? 
 
 5 This word after the trace. 
 
 6 Thus, after the analogy of line 6b, etc. Otherwise 'w might also be the auxiliary of a verb, etc. 
 
 7 Thus, after Ros. Gr. 34, dem. 20, as the following words suggest. Where we have restored mnh "kind," 
 stands a high n under or over an erasure. The engraver put this n beginning the words n ntr mnh. "as (n or, of) a 
 kind god" and omitted the next two signs, confused by the double occurrence of the sign "god." 
 
 8 This corresponds with Greek Ros. 35, irpoairvvdai'o/j.a'os (re to. twv iepwv TL/iLwrara) and Ros. demot. 20, e-f 
 ■>n, "he inquired." Consequently, the verb seems to be corrupted from $nw "asking, inquiring" (read sn, iw, 
 for 'b, nw for the heart-sign). 
 
 9 The determinative of the sundisk looks strangely disfigured, so that at first it gives the impression of 'b " heart. ' ' 
 
 10 These three doubtful traces of groups do not agree with Ros. 19, which has merely the words n-mtw ph(w?) 
 nt ph n n- 'rpyw "the things proper, which are proper in the temples." Our inscription must have expanded those 
 words considerably, perhaps, in order to improve the style which in this part of the demotic version must appear 
 to the hasty reader confused and full of repetitions. 
 
 "Thus: *. e., "he confirmed" (better than "he established"). 
 
 12 So far according to Ros. 19, but it is true that the space is not very favorable to this restoration; neither is 
 the hieroglyphic text. 
 
 13 Unusual determinative of £»(?) or of wb "for," then corrected. 
 
 14 This word seems to be recognizable under corrected traces and thus insures this whole piece of restora- 
 tion after Ros. demot. 20. 
 
 15 Thus, after Ros. 20 and our hieroglyphic text, but the space is again so scanty that we must ask whether the 
 text has not been mutilated. It is quite certain that the following words of Ros., p-j-h(\) pr- "in the time of 
 his kingship," must have been omitted, notwithstanding the fact that their equivalent has been kept in the hiero- 
 glyphic version. 
 
THE BILINGUAL DECREES OF PHILAE. 
 
 67 
 
 THE THANKS OF THE GODS. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 Rdy-n 1 [ntrw] my-qd-sn 
 (There) have given [the gods 2 ] all together 
 
 h' " ntrwt r[-db',t?] 
 
 and the goddesses 2 [in?] [return?] (for) 
 
 I -sn 
 them (i. e., for these things?) 3 
 
 V-»(?) 
 
 (that) did [the king of Upper and Lower Egypt, 
 
 the son of the Sungod], 
 
 PtwWwmys 'nh zt, Pth mr, 
 
 Ptolemy, living forever, beloved of Ptah, 
 
 [ntr] pr 
 
 [the God] Epiphanes (the success described below) : 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 [Ty? n-] ntrw 
 
 [(There) have given] the gods 
 
 [nm n-ntrwt] trw 
 [and the goddesses] all 
 
 [n-t-sbyt n',y 
 [in reward for these (things) 6 
 
 to the king Ptolemy, 
 
 7c 
 
 I . . . Pth] mr, 
 living forever,] beloved of [Ptah,] 
 
 p-ntr nt pr 
 the God Epiphanes, (the following) : 
 
 THE BAD TIMES DURING THE REBELLION. 
 
 The rebel 
 
 n 
 against 
 
 ntr(w) (?) 
 the gods, 
 
 [p?]n 
 this- (one) 
 
 ?d 
 
 n-tt{??) . sb\ I n n- ntrw, 
 
 namely (?) [that man] impious against the gods, 
 
 1 Or more mechanically, following Ros. 5, "(there) have given [to him}" (n-j), with a later resuming of the 
 object ("to the king"?). This would, of course, be awkward style. (For "have given [to them]," n-sn, the 
 space is insufficient). 
 
 2 Thus, after the parallelism. The strange traces are explained by the ligature of "god" and "goddess" 
 ( = serpent), Ros. 5. Our text seems to have given erroneously both that ligature and its explanatory dissolution 
 into two groups. 
 
 3 We should like to restore after Ros. 5, but first, it is impossible to find (m)-'swy "in reward, in return" in the 
 traces. An r (or V??) is certain; above, to the right, there seems to be merely a vertical stroke; this is probably, 
 but not clearly, one of the plural strokes of ntrwt; the traces to the left confirm this, although they are irregular 
 and partly too high to be intentional. What follows is obscure and very unlike the regular orthography of zb',t, 
 db',t "return, compensation," which we should expect. We have to read it without phonetic complement (and 
 determinative?), treating as secondary all the traces over my "sic" and running through the head of the db',- 
 hieroglyph. 
 
 4 Evidently the ktn of the stone is to be corrected into btn. The demonstrative has an unusual position. 
 
 6 This space, again, is scanty, and furthermore, the hieroglyphic text does not seem to contain these words. 
 They ought, however, to be here, forming the important logical connection between the part made up of quota- 
 tions from the Rosettana and the part treatin * the new theme of the decree. 
 
68 
 
 EGYPTOLOGICAL RESEARCHES. 
 
 THE BAD TIMES DURING THE REBELLION— Continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 9b 
 
 | (7)r wnf 1 s] b'r 'mty 
 
 who had caused?] fighting(?), instigating 2 war 3 within 
 
 gc 
 
 Kmt, twt 'wny\w i n ms'(?) 
 
 Egypt, gathering insolent people of the soldiers(?) 
 
 m w(?)[h',](w)t-nb hr(?) bt](?)[w]-sn 
 
 from(?) all districts 6 on account off?) their crimes (?) 
 
 hit(i){?) n-m-w{?) V V(.?) 8 h',t{i) n 
 blaspheming(?) them(?), 7 having acted as leader of 
 
 bks 9 
 
 rebellion 
 
 [ill 
 in 
 
 t', Kmy 
 Egypt 
 
 V(?) 
 having 
 
 1 This meaning of the root wnf, which usually signifies " to be glad," seems to occur only here. As noun, it is 
 rendered by emlah: "war, fight, battle" (gb demot. 4b?), cp. 56. Is it the same word as old wnp, Naville, 
 Deir el B. 57, 10, wnpw-t m Thmv. "thou (fern.) tightest (?) in the Libyan land"? 
 
 2 Or rather : "leading war, being leader in war." The verb S', (with a weak third radical, appearing as w or y; 
 in Neo-Egyptian style also as 'w) has not been correctly understood, Brugsch, Diet., 1424, Suppl., 1218. Better 
 Maspero, Etudes Egypt. 25. It is often a synonym of wzy: "to order, to command;" LD. Ill, 29a, both verbs are 
 connected, likewise RIH. 169 = Mar. Kant. 15, 25; connected with another synonym, shnw n Sly, Ostracon 
 Florence (AZ. 1880, 98 = Rec. Trav. 3, 5). It is a more solemn word, therefore used principally of the decrees of the 
 highest authority, of the decreeing god (Stabl Antar 11, D H I, II, 46, 4 = 7? / H 139, LD. Ill, 240, Senuhyt 126), 
 whence the god Say (Greek Psa'is) : "destiny, fate." Or it is used at least of the king decreeing specially important 
 resolutions, principally large constructions, Rec. Trav. 7, 128, Mar. Karn. 12, 5 and 8; 15, 15 = R I 11. 166; ibid., 
 150; Mar. Abyd. II, 7, LD. Ill, 24n; s; 72; Berlin Pap. 29 (AZ. 74), I 4; 8; II, 13; Siut-Rifeh IV, 56; of the very 
 highest authority, Senuhyt 51. Therefore LD. II, 149 'w Sl-ny bkw must be understood in passive sense: "works 
 were charged to me." This dative is, therefore, expressed more solemnly by m-hr, see Maspero-Brugsch : "not did 
 I forget what was ordered to me," a phrase in which we find also hr "to," Louvre C. 55; even n-tp-hr is employed, 
 Senuhyt 121. Of the "imposing" of regularly returning work, LD. II, 122, 13 (Ameni) ; of imposed socage Harris 
 12a, ib, 9; 32, 7, etc., of taxes {ibid., passim, DEI, II, 42, 10, P S B A. 1887, 42), of a time, Anast. VIII, 5, 3, 3. 
 See also Mar. Abyd. II, 30, 35; Prisse 14, 12, AZ. 1880, 49, D H I, 7, Louvre C 167. "To appoint (an official to, 
 r, a position"), Pap. Turin 17, 5; Pithomstela, 2, Pap. Salt rev. 2, 1. In evil sense as here, it is rare; see the 
 great inscription of Har-em-heb in my Egyptol. Researches I, 59, fragm. 15 and cp. pi. 91, 1. 14 "the insolent people 
 ('wnw, as above) who instigated acts of insolence (S',spw-n-wn) in the land;" with a living object, LD. Ill, i2d, 
 19, of a rebel: "he instigated his lot of companions" (Slw-f hbsw-f, a rather obscure passage). Thus the above 
 usage remains peculiar, like so many expressions of our text. 
 
 3 In Latin this would be rendered by concitans Mortem, i. e., with a poetical use of the name of the Semitic war 
 god, Ba'al = "war, battle," like Latin Mars or Greek Ares for "war" in poetical style. 
 
 4 The determinative of the sparrow partly visible. 
 
 6 The apparent absence of the bow and of the plural signs make this seductive reading difficult, it is true, but 
 it seems to be parallel to Ros. hierogl. 1. 
 
 6 The first seeming w may be secondary. We might try to read a preposition composite with m-, like m-hn(t) 
 "from within." The following feminine noun in the plural, however, can not well be anything else but whwt, 
 wh',wt "tribes," which often is used poetically for "districts, written with the stick as ideogram (as Pap. Harris I)." 
 
 7 The first group certainly is in, My in the sense: "to offend, to curse, to blaspheme" in the "Negative Con- 
 fession" of the Book of the Dead (ed. Naville, 125, 29, 35, 36), etc. The-i(j) is here, in a remarkable way, separated 
 from the root, showing that the writer knew well the original form of the root to have been Sn, Sny. Under this 
 primitive form appear both the meaning "to conjure," most akin to the above sense, and "to quarrel," while they 
 seem to have been separated, in Coptic, as Sine and Sont. Some may find this distinction here in Snt and may trans- 
 late "who quarrelled with them, strove against them, but" ; I prefer the meaning intermediate between both devel- 
 opments. (The Paris "Chronicle" (ed. Spiegelberg) , has, pi. vna, 1. 1, a similar group which the editor compares 
 with Sn: "to exclude, to keep back." The lack of a coherent context makes this comparison quite uncertain, as 
 well as that with the verb of our Philae passage.) The object (n)-'m~w "them" has been disfigured by the engraver. 
 
 8 The first V could be explained as the sign of the perfect participle, but more likely we have simply an erro- 
 neous repetition. 
 
 9 Demotic Chronicle of Paris 3, 7, bgs. Spiegelberg (Gloss. No. 78), connects this with the older ba-ga-sa of 
 the Dakhel-stela (Rec. Trav. 21, 14) "confusion" or "rebellion." Whether this be developed from the older word 
 bgs "to be sad" (Spiegelberg, 1. 1. 19) or not, our spelling bks seems to treat the g erroneously as merely assimilated 
 to the sonant letter b from original k; it is evidently the same word as above. 
 
THE BILINGUAL DECREES OF PHILAE. 
 
 69 
 
 THE BAD TIMES DURING THE REBELLION— Continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT 
 
 ['?]w',y(t!) 
 in treating violently 1 
 
 9 \ d 
 
 tsw hr-sk* hmw{t!) 
 
 the nomes, 3 profaning the sanctuaries 6 
 
 hrp-sn 
 (those who) administered 2 
 
 \ih\ shmw-ntr] -sn 
 violating] their [sacred idols?] 
 
 h' wn[y]w hwt-ntr(w) 
 
 together with those that were (in) the temples 
 
 -sn{?) hr 6 (?) ti,wy{!)-sn hsf-sn 7 
 of them and(?) their altars [prohibiting 
 
 V twt -sn 
 
 to do that which is proper (for) them 8 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 ['r-w b]tw{?) [ n ] h',{w)t(i)w 
 
 [They did] abominable things 9 (to) (the) rulers 
 
 tsw; 'r-w sg\(?) 'rpyw-'sy 
 
 (of) nomes; they profaned (?) 10 many temples. 
 
 t{y)-',t{?) [nw-shmw n] ntri?) 
 injuring(?) u [their] divine [statues] 
 
 and their priests ? suppressing(?) 12 
 
 [n-\ 
 
 [the] 
 
 mt-pht(i?) 
 due honor[s 
 
 [n nw-hwy]w 
 for their altar]s 
 
 1 The —t ought to stand before the determinative, whether it was the feminine ending or a silent part of the 
 determinative "locality." (The word wlyt: "ruin," can be used only of buildings falling to pieces. Neither is a 
 guess like "[driving into] exile" more probable). Thus the most plausible translation is the one given above, 
 assuming that the two signs after the ' ' bad bird ' ' are corrupted from the ' ' strong arm. ' ' The restoration of the pre- 
 ceding word, bt\w, is made rather certain by the traces of the sign t\ ; the reed-leaf in place of the determinative, of 
 course, needs an emendation, probably into the "bad man." 
 
 2 The hrp- scepter very poorly engraved, nevertheless sure after the demotic version. If the -sn does not 
 stand at a wrong place, hrp has here a rare verbal use. 
 
 3 The plural expressed by repeating the determinative "city" three times; the third time it is misunderstood 
 by the engraver as two parallel lines, i. e., final y. 
 
 4 Sk possibly chosen after the demotic corresponding word sg(',). It may thus confirm the view that the 
 demotic version preceded the hieroglyphic. 
 
 6 The -t seems to be a mistake for the determinative "locality" or "house"; the word hm: "holiest room, 
 sanctuary, adytum," which the demotic version demands, is masculine. See the same hmt, 14b. 
 
 6 1 try to separate the group (which looks almost like I and the determinative "cake") into n, horizontal h (the 
 hu of syllabic orthography), and a poor, round r, misread from the hieratic. This is a violent makeshift, but other 
 explanations (as taking the r for disfigured h before h',) would be much more doubtful. 
 
 7 The verb hsf in unusual form, with the crossing / quite high (and, perhaps, a short "strong arm" crossing 
 it below?). 
 
 8 The bookroll as determinative is to be read after traces of the mummy -like statue. The sn, which then 
 follows, is the possessive suffix of twt and the sense is literally "their proper things." 
 
 9 The usual orthography of this word is btw, but the shortening here could be explained as dropping only 
 the final -w for the sake of the following plural ending -w. The above restoration remains more probable than 
 other guesses, e. g., than: "they killed, ill treated," etc. The suppression of an n of the dative is quite ordinary. 
 
 10 The word is, so far, known only from this passage. Whether it is related to the substantive sq, of the Paris 
 Chronicle (5, 22) and distinguished only by the determination can not be decided while the latter word remains 
 obscure. Coptic $0(0) ge, "to hurt, to violate," seems to be used mostly with persons as object. 
 
 11 This looks like the verb It: "to do wrong, to injure," Demotic Book of the Dead, 29; written like \te, Kufi 10, 29. 
 I do not know, however, what the causative construction with ty- would mean. For this reason and on account 
 of the fact that the determinative seems to be the "bad bird," I consider as possible also the reading t(y)-',q, Coptic 
 tako, i. e., "ruined, destroyed." The q would then be poorly engraved or corrupted to t, and the expression would 
 refer to iconoclasm, while the reading given above would point to offending and wronging the majesty of the 
 gods residing in heaven. It would, however, apply poorly to the priests. 
 
 12 Of the verb, only the determinative "strong, violent, action of the arm" is clearly preserved, parallel 
 with the determinatives of the hieroglyphic text. (Before it a group like "gods.") 
 
70 EGYPTOLOGICAL RESEARCHES. 
 
 THE BAD TIMES DURING THE REBELLION— Continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. DEMOTIC TEXT 
 
 9, 
 
 [hr ] g(w)t-sn f hm[w-sn?] 
 
 [for(?)] 1 their shrines (and) [their?] adyta 2 
 
 [s/i]w[w] nw ntrw. W'—sn 
 
 [(and) the stat]ues 3 of the gods. They devastated(?) 4 
 
 nwt s h' ms'(w?)-sn 
 
 the cities together with their populace(?) 6 
 
 J oa 
 
 m [hmwt?] 
 
 (even) of [women (?) and little children. 
 
 mytt- 'r(y)w(?y k-hw 
 committing crimes] of such kind other ones 8 
 
 7h 
 
 [nw-?\ {htp?)w hn n-w- g)wt{?) -n-ntr 
 (and) their sacrifices(?) in their divine shrines(?) 9 
 
 hrtw{?) -hi 
 
 [doing to women (?) and] young children, 
 
 U{w){?) [kt-?]hew{?) 
 [committing] crimes (?) 10 other ones 
 
 'Or m, "in?" 
 
 2 The word is probable but not absolutely certain. 
 
 3 We guess this restoration from the determinative. The space would also allow the supplying of a verb of 
 its own (like "they dishonored, profaned," etc.) before this noun. 
 
 4 This verb is not frequent and therefore presents difficulties. It may be related to the root w{\y), "to be 
 distant" ; we find the Egyptian scribes, at least, confounding both words in the variants of Totb. Leps. 99, 23, 29; 
 also the verb rw': "to remove," is not easily separated from it. W", (determinative: 1, soft action of the hand; 2, 
 action of the feet) means "to remove," of booty, Memeptah-inscription (D H I II, 5, 61, etc.), of persons (determ. 
 dto) Pap. Turin 4, 5; 6, 9; Anast. I, 17, 4, shepherd story, Pap. Berl. Ill, 170 (wy, det. legs): "to carry away, to 
 kidnap." Wy in obscure passage, Rec. Trav. 8, 161. Causative s-w' (determ. legs) likewise: "to remove (thirst)," 
 Miss. Prang. V, 517. M w'-tw rj: "do not remove thyself from him," Prisse 14, n. The passage LD. Ill, 202c 
 (w' grg) is obscure. Ebers 109, 8, Stern's reading si w",t (det. arm) might be questioned; in Pap. Ebers the noun 
 w",t: "disgust," seems to mean: "the impulse of removing, abhorrence." Other passages may rather belong to 
 rw], e. g., Anast. VIII, 3, 13, Sallier I, 5, 1 (of "unloading"). The reduplication w' >w'\ is known only from a 
 single passage {Anast. I, 28, 2, det. "confusion" or "separation," and "wickedness"), applying it to a faulty 
 literary style. The meaning given by our text seems thus to be rather peculiar, including "to devastate, vacate, 
 expel, plunder." 
 
 5 The arrangement shows that three parallel plural strokes stood below, thus indicating space for a small 
 sign like -t behind the half -preserved circle of "city." 
 
 6 1 assume the hieroglyph "soldier" here to have the same meaning as Coptic me(e)le, "multitude, people in 
 the widest sense," as irregularly in demotic use. 
 
 7 The above translation (assuming an archaic use of the noun mytt: "likeness, identity, copy, likewise," 
 instead of the preposition my: "like," so that we should obtain mytt-(')r(y)w "likewise") must remain uncertain 
 with such fragmentary text. Thus I have hesitated for a long time as to whether the three traces behind, running 
 in horizontal direction, could not be read as 'r-rn "they did;" I seek these words now rather in the gap. See the 
 following note. Lacking the context, I am unable to decide. 
 
 8 This pronominal form seems to stand here not absolutely, i. e., as substantive, as mostly in archaic style. 
 Later the absolute is not the exclusive usage, as might erroneously be concluded from the too scanty quotations 
 in Erman, Neuaegypt. Gramm. § 92. Yet it stands as epithet always before the noun, e. g., Anast. I, 22, 3; Sallier 
 II, 9, 5, Harris I, 6, 6; 76, n, etc., Canop. 33. Already Totb. 175, Ani, 1, 18 ( = kt, Naville, 1. 17), often in demotic, 
 e. g., Canop. 18, Ros. 11, 19. The Coptic kekouni, kekauni "others," which, notwithstanding the assimilation of 
 the second consonant (h) to the first (k), has originated from our kt-ht, kt-(')ht "another kind" (kekauni meaning 
 really "another kind of beings"), stands between both usages, taking the place of kt-ht as substantival plural 
 and yet showing in its composition the prefixed employment of an adjective, before uni " being (s)." The sub- 
 stantival use kt-ht, indeed, still occurs in demotic (Ros. 20), and the postposition in our passage seems unique for 
 the latest style, so that it could be explained only as having half-independent, appositional, supplementary char- 
 acter. Otherwise, taken as quite substantival, it would confirm the reading "they did" ('r-sn), which we have 
 considered in the preceding note and would furnish thus the translation". . . likewise. They did other such 
 (things), did the like." The demotic text, however, seems to point to the above translation. 
 
 9 It is easiest to consider the strange group for "sacrifice" simply as disfigured form htp. The next ques- 
 tionable group seems g',wt "shrines" (with g and ', in ligature) rather than h[mw] "sanctuaries." 
 
 10 In this hazardous restoration we have to admit that the orthography of hrtw, " children," is unusual (assum- 
 ing a varying repetition of the ideographic sign "child" as determinative) and uncertain. The group suggests 
 bt(w) and seems verbal. Probably the determinative of the "wicked bird" stands there as the sign before the last. 
 Eor the restoration of the last group to k(t)hew: " other (s)," seethe note on the hieroglyphic text. I first thought 
 of e-h e-w "as though they were," but the t{i) of the ligature kt seems to be visible. 
 
THE BILINGUAL DECREES OF PHILAE. 
 
 71 
 
 THE BAD TIMES DURING THE REBELLION— Continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 m—tp SW 
 
 in the condition (of) anarchy (P). 1 
 
 iob 
 
 [H]tpsn htr nw ww 
 
 They robbed the taxes of the (administrative) 
 
 districts ; 
 
 hb—sn mw 
 
 they damaged 3 (or : ruined) the water (constructions) ; 
 
 h','-sn 
 
 they abandoned [the dam (?) constructions]. 4 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 n—h[tyw] [n- ts]w. 
 [stealing] the [taxes of the nom]es. 
 
 E-w hb(?) mw 
 
 They damaged 7 (the) water (works). 
 
 E-lV 
 
 They . . . 
 
 THE KING SPECIALLY PROTECTS THE TEMPLES DURING THE REBELLION. 
 
 Wt-n n-st 'byty 
 
 (There) made 5 the king of Upper and Lower Egypt, 
 
 s', | [R'] Ptw',twmys, 
 
 the son of [the Sun], Ptolemy, 
 
 'nh zt, 
 ever living, 
 
 Pth mr s-wzw{?) ' s{?) 'w [sbwt] 
 
 beloved of Ptah, orders(?) e also(?) for these 
 
 x . Literally :■" emptiness, condition of vacancy," i. e., time without government. This is parallel with the 
 famous passage (Harris, I, 75, 1) where the years of anarchy, without a legitimate king, are called "empty" 
 ($wyw) (priests), Mar. Abyd., I, 6, 30, (of desolated and dilapidated tombs), where we see that tp has lost its original 
 meaning "beginning," and may freely be translated "state, condition" (or "pitch, height"?). Second determi- 
 native "arm." 
 
 2 Read htf. The earliest examples of this word betray, by the syllabic orthography hu-t-f, that it is a Canaanaic 
 loanword, i. e., Hebrew hataph (not hataph, which seems to have a h- after the cognate languages) ; like that Hebrew 
 word it expresses "(open) plundering in war" (LD., Ill, 16a, 6; 65a, 4; Mar. Karn. 37, 30 = R I H. 36), while Coptic 
 hoft has assumed the sense "to steal." In our passage we can follow the transition to a disgraceful meaning. 
 
 3 The word hb(\) might be understood also as "to diminish, to cut short," cp. e. g., Sallier II, 7, 3=Anast. 
 VII, 2, 4, (of failure to clothe), AZ. 1884, 39, 1. 17 (of temple income) ; similarly Rec. Trav. 16, 43, Mon. Div. 29a, 5, 
 Mar. Abyd, II, 36, 4, Totb. Nav. 125, Intr. 13 and 16 (of sacrifices) . Eloquent Peasant, Berl. II, i8 = IV, 48, parallel 
 with hz. The word has, however, often stronger sense: "to ruin, destroy, annihilate," e. g., Lepsius, Auswahl 12 
 (object: tribes), Totb. Nav. 154, 6 (corpses), Pap. Leyden, I, 344, 15, 1 (a country), Hierat. Inscr. 29,, 7 (the god 
 annihilates sinners), Peasant, Berlin, II, 142, etc. ; above all, Damanhur 22 = Ros. Gr. 26, foafyddpuv. Consequently, 
 I should not limit the above passage to the tame measure of "digging off irrigation canals," but would include the 
 opening of dams, a means of warfare as common in Egypt as in Babylonia or Holland; cp. Polybius, V, 62, 4. It 
 was considered as a desperate action and not quite fair because it entailed long labor for restorations. 
 
 4 The determinative "house, building" seems to be recognizable. It would be easy to restore the traces to 
 ht-ntr "temple," but the profanations of sacred property by the rebels have been described before. There is 
 also no space for a plural mark with ' ' temple (s) . " Thus it is difficult to fill the gap after the verb ; with ' ' dam ' ' we 
 should not expect the determinative "building." 
 
 5 The first idea suggesting itself is to make this a relative clause: "[the constructions] {which) the king had 
 made." I think, however, the style (perhaps also the unusual verbal form in -t-n, which, of course, must not be 
 treated after the classical grammar) points to the beginning of a new section. Constructions of Ptolemy V. 
 could not be meant. 
 
 6 This meaning is probable according to the context. The reading of the hieroglyphic traces seems partly: 
 w% (with small, crossing serpent z?), bookroll, plural strokes. If the word shnw "expenses," discussed above 
 (p. 35, note 2) was meant, it would be strongly disfigured. S-zcz-k* means: "orders, administrative measures." 
 
 7 See note 3 on the hieroglyphic word hb (,',), which seems also to be employed in the demotic text. 
 
72 
 
 EGYPTOLOGICAL RESEARCHES. 
 
 THE KING SPECIALLY PROTECTS THE TEMPLES DURING THE 
 
 REBELLION— Continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 -nn zvrw 's 'r[-f\ 
 
 [things] 1 many and [he] showed 2 
 
 lod 
 
 | mh 3 -nbt r s-wz',(!y [hwt-ntr] 
 
 all care in order to protect [the temples]. 
 
 [H';?]-nf . . . [ts?]w nf 
 He [pla]eed 5 [there] [troop]s of 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 H)w-nbw 
 
 Greeks (and) 
 
 ['m]wt(y?) 
 (from) among 
 
 tns [w\ 
 soldiers 7 
 
 wny[w] 
 the people 
 
 (who had) 
 
 nwd 
 moved 8 
 
 m Bqt sdm? tp-t',-rdwy-f 
 
 in Egypt (to) obeying his orders, 
 
 lof 
 
 hnm h[r ; -[sn] 10 
 
 being joined together [with them in zeal for the gods?] 
 
 [']w-sn my ms hn'-sn. 
 
 they were like (people) born with them. 11 
 
 8c 
 
 [E-fh 
 [He] 
 
 rws 1 
 
 e(f) 1 
 for 
 
 showed care [considerably] 
 
 8d 
 
 t(y)-wz', n-'rpyw. 
 
 protecting the temples. 
 
 H','-f u mtkt{i)',t n Wynn 
 He placed a force of Greeks 
 
 m-w 
 in them 
 
 hn n- rm{t)w 
 (from) among the men 
 
 r - 
 
 who had 
 
 [reformed?], (For: done according to {n-s)?) his will) 
 
 >(.?)- hn{t?)-w [e] 
 moving themselves 16 to 
 
 n-rm{t)w t\-Kmy 
 the people (of) Egypt 
 
 si 
 
 nt e-'r p-hp hn t',-Km[y 
 
 who did the law (ful things) in Egypt . 
 
 Supplying (')ht: "things," seems unnecessary. 
 
 2 The traces can be restored with great probability after the demotic text. 
 
 3 The n stands for the horizontal hieroglyph h, the s for the sign "vertebra;." 
 
 4 The small w slung through the z\ has become meaningless. 
 
 5 To be supplied thus evidently. The seeming h is strange, however. 
 
 6 For nty~ 
 
 7 This word hardly refers to the "Greek troops" as a superfluous apposition. It seems that we can find here a 
 valuable indication that those repenting rebels belonged to the soldier class; see "warriors" §b. 
 
 8 The Greek original seems to have used Kivtiadai "to move oneself" (not only avTOfioXtlv "to desert, to go 
 over"). The awkward Egyptian imitation employs a very archaic word nwz, later nwd: "to move oneself, to shake 
 oneself, to wriggle, to jump up." (See Pyr. P. 107 = N. 75 ; If. 73, Harhotep 191, 330, 369 (causative s-), LD. II, 52 
 (s-nwz), Totb. Naville 64, 10, 19, 35; 78, 12, Med. Berlin 20, 10, Ebers 19, 5; Berlin Amonritual 7, 4, Louvre C. 107 
 (corrupted to nwr), Peasant-story, Berlin II, 6, 98, 106; IV, 25, 34, etc.) The demotic rendering seems even more 
 awkward and artificial. 
 
 9 The sign in unusual form, assimilated to the human ear. 
 
 10 Behind hnmiw), "(they) being joined," the horizontal h, with space for r. 
 
 11 Greek original, probably: like relatives, cos <rvyyevels, or similarly. 
 
 12 This reading is guessed from the rather uncertain hieroglyphic parallel. The extant traces point to an 
 unusual group (hw(w)t: "abodes?"). 
 
 13 Incorrectly n for e as often. 
 
 14 The stroke between the group expressing the root and the termination -/is strange and might lead to finding 
 in it various archaic elements of inflection. It is best understood as erroneous, having arisen from a filling-point 
 in the original manuscript on papyrus. 
 
 15 See Spiegelberg's Pe/w&arfis-glossary, No. 247, for the demotic use of Coptic hon. The demotic version 
 seems to incur repetition in rendering the difficult Greek clause. Cp. with the hieroglyphic equivalent. We 
 might find in hn(t?)-w, "they moved (themselves)," also an indication of volunteering by those Egyptian armed 
 guards, but the passage remains partly obscure. 
 
THE BILINGUAL DECREES OF PHILAE. 
 
 73 
 
 THE KING SPECIALLY PROTECTS THE TEMPLES DURING THE 
 
 REBELLION— Continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 spr 2 . 
 to approach(?) 2 
 
 'w- | [sn? n] rdt{?) 
 [They 1 did not] permit 
 
 [btn?f }[',] 
 
 followers of?] [the reb]el who had instigated] 
 
 r-f h' y[t?]*-f 
 
 against him and his father (?). 
 
 Dy(?)-f(?) \n?]-sn r 
 
 [He] gave (money?) [to?] them to 
 
 [the 
 
 6V 4 
 war 
 
 do(?) 6 
 
 lib 
 
 my^nn. Rdy-n hm-f ty-wt 
 
 thus. 7 (There) caused His Majesty that be taken 
 
 hz nb m tnw-",(w) 'w t\ 
 
 silver (and) gold in great quantities to the grounds 
 
 T [r- d]b',(?)[t) rdt 
 
 for the purpose of(?) 9 causing 
 
 'n[-t]w tsw 'w Bqt 
 
 (that) be brought troops to Egypt 
 
 m- sw-n 
 for 
 
 [sh'p 
 the tax(es) 10 
 
 WW 
 (of) the nomes 11 
 
 . . . n bk[s?\ [e-r-f] 
 
 [leader] 12 of (?) rebellion against him] 
 
 nm{?) [pf]-yt(?) 
 and(?) [hisj father (?) 
 
 -*(?) 
 
 [like?] it(?). 
 
 8h 
 
 Ty(?)-f ty-w ht nb 
 
 He caused to be taken silver (and) gold 
 
 'sy (e?) p-[t',] e-tb{\)t{?) . . . 
 
 much (to) the [ground?] 13 for(?) . . 
 
 ga 
 
 n 
 of 
 
 ra- 
 the 
 
 tsw(?) 
 nomes (?) 
 
 'Or, "he," the king? 
 
 2 This last group at first seems clear, but the traces may be deceptive. A big ty "to take" could also be found 
 in the seeming spr. The first gap of the line could also be filled by the restoration 'w'tm rdt "in order not to permit." 
 
 3 The apparent h'[-f??] "with [him??]" yields no sense. It must consequently be merely accidental. 
 
 4 Thus to be restored after line gd. The $', is partly visible (the captive before it has exaggerated execution 
 of his bound arms) ; the determinative of B'r (see on gd) is disfigured from the Seth-animal to the hare. 
 
 5 The traces over / are not very favorable to reading the cake yt, it is true, but the space behind (for the 
 ideograph stroke). 
 
 6 So according to the traces, but it yields no convincing sense. The last group seems to be clearly rr; the 
 above translation as V is almost a correction. He gave for (hr?) them "two parts," i. e., "two thirds," however, 
 would yield difficult sense; the temples would hardly have paid the missing third. A tempting restoration would 
 be 'ni?)-sn r V "they turned again to doing," i. e., "did again," implying a pause in the rebellion. The space 
 under '%{?), however, seems insufficient for the necessary determinative "legs." 
 
 7 Or connected with the following words: "/thus, likewise, H. M. caused." 
 
 8 The phrase: "to give to the ground," usually means "to remit, to overlook" (cp. Ros. hierogl. 2). The 
 above variant: "to take to the ground," must mean: "to expend." Cp. for this sense that h',w "expenses, 
 spending" means, literally: "the falling down." 
 
 9 The above translation is not easily harmonized with the space at the beginning of 11a. It seems impossible 
 to find there the preposition [r-d]b',[t], [r-z]b',[t] or its apparent variants m dbw 12J. Thus I have assumed that 
 the two signs r and db',,zb\, were crowded over the foot of the b. The following gap, requiring a normal square of 
 signs, is to be filled with t and a bookroll. 
 
 10 It would be easier to read simply 'p: "taxation," but the gap must be filled. The above restoration seems 
 to amount to the same sense, however, literally meaning "inspection, revision." 
 
 11 It is tempting to correct the w-bird into the hawk, so that we should obtain "temples." The sense of the 
 whole passage might then be changed into a statement of absolute liberality towards the temples, without taxing 
 them. It remains, however, safest to assume here a much more modest sense, namely, that the king is praised for 
 spending the income from the taxes "of the nomes" (i. e., of the whole inland, all Egypt outside of Alexandria) 
 on recruiting Greek mercenaries instead of using it for himself. (The preposition m 'swy seems to be used more 
 as "for" in the sense of "in return for something," synonymously with " because of," while r db',t and its synonym 
 r sbwt stand often also with final sense for "obtaining results.") 
 
 12 The space suggests that the demotic text was shorter than the hieroglyphic version. Both writing systems, 
 however, admit much arbitrary crowding together and extending of the text. 
 
 13 See the parallel hieroglyphic expression for the meaning of this phrase. 
 
74 
 
 EGYPTOLOGICAL RESEARCHES. 
 
 W 
 in order to 
 
 THE KING SPECIALLY PROTECTS THE TEMPLES DURING THE 
 
 REBELLION— Continued. 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 s-wz, 
 protect 
 
 [sb]'w 
 
 the impious ones 
 
 [the temples of Egypt against?] 1 
 
 [V?] [t]h',y -sn 
 (who) [had?] violated 2 them. 
 
 Ob 
 
 . s [n- ']rpy[w] Kmyt{?) . . | . . 
 
 [to protect s (?) the] temples (of) Egypt(?) [against 
 
 . . s',b{?) . . . thy{??) -s{?) 
 the im]pious [ones ?] (who) violated them. 9 
 
 THE DOWNFALL OF THE REBELLION IN THE THEBAIS. 
 
 w-sn s- r 
 (There) was brought up 3 
 
 spr m-b'h hm-f 
 a report before His Majesty 
 
 n 'bd IV smw [hrw] . . . 4 m-zd: 
 in the 12th month, day [3], thus: 
 
 hfsn "\ ' h',[q] 
 
 (there) has been seized captive [that wicked man 5 in] 
 
 wnf V h'-f hspt XIX 
 
 the battle delivered with him, year 19, 
 
 12a 
 smw 'bd III I [hrw XXIV m sq 'nh?) 
 the nth month (Epiphi) [day 24, as live prisoner (?)]. 6 
 
 s(?)[m',\-sn 
 They s[lew] 
 
 s',-f[... ?] 
 his son [the eldest?], 7 
 
 r[-w\ n- smy 
 
 [There was] brought report [before the king, 
 
 F [e-tb{\)t{?) 
 
 [concerning? 
 
 ps]\[b{?) n 
 
 that impious one(?). 10 [He was captured?] in 
 
 p-mlh I e-r-w nm-f n hspt XIX 
 the battle delivered with him, in the year 19, 
 
 'bt III sm(w) n hw XXIV ef-'nh 
 month 11, day 24, he being alive. 
 
 E-w sm',{!) I 
 
 (There) was slain 12 [his eldest (?) son] .... 
 
 1 There is space for one or two more words. 
 
 2 This restoration seems to be quite certain ; the position of the t (before the h, instead of over it) shows that 
 a sign must be restored. This leads to the restoration of V, the sign of the perfect tense (or the relative r). 
 
 3 That is, to the high throne. 
 
 4 A rather small number as date according to the space. 
 
 5 The trace at the end of line lie seems to point to the above (slightly pleonastic) restoration. 
 
 6 This restoration adds pleonasms, but seems unavoidable. 
 
 7 The space permits the filling-in of one narrow, high sign, like the standing man with staff = sms: "eldest." 
 
 8 The traces fit this restoration (which requires t{y)-wz\ or t{y) 'r-w wz\) very poorly, although it would seem 
 to be quite certain after the context. Those traces make us rather think of "sins" committed against the temples. 
 So we must assume that the engraver disfigured the passage strongly, and corrected only "the nomes" over the 
 errors, leaving the corruption for wz\. 
 
 9 We can guess after the hieroglyphic parallel as I have rendered above, but the single traces allow no certain 
 restoration. If the word s',b was employed here it ought to have the plural sign, which is certainly absent; it is 
 not very likely that the word is used as an adjective after rm[t]iv "people." Thy "to violate" is usually written 
 very differently from what we can recognize here on the stone. 
 
 10 Thus I venture to restore the isolated traces in the inner angle of the arm of the figure cut above the inscrip- 
 tion. Consequently, the verb must be sought in the following gap. (Kp "to capture" is written in Ros. 10 in a 
 way which forbids to restore those traces to [g]p or [k]p.) 
 
 11 The season sign has not the regular form, but it can not be read with a different value. Some scratches before 
 it look as though the date had been erased and recut. 
 
 12 We have to restore this verb according to the sense and the hieroglyphic text, although the engraver has 
 mutilated it quite badly. Since he did not understand the rare word in the ink copy written on stone, he cut in 
 
 three parallel vertical strokes instead of the horizontal s and interrupted the very long m!-sign; che following 
 group likewise is disfigured. The word seems to be used in the shorter form sm\ (Ros. dem. 16), not in the more 
 archaic orthography sm,m {Gnost. Paris ed. Maspero, I, 17, etc.). The mutilation by the engraver looks, at first 
 sight, like an abnormal pge, but this would be senseless. 
 
THE BILINGUAL DECREES OF PHILAE. 
 
 75 
 
 THE DOWNFALL OF THE REBELLION IN THE THEBA'iS— Continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 mr—lms'] 1 
 the chief [commander of the army] 
 
 sb'w h' wrw{?) 
 
 (of) the godless ones(?) together with [the chiefs?] 2 
 
 nt Nhs(y)w [m?]s(y) hn'—f 
 of the Ethiopians brought with him. 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 12b 
 
 'w-sn 'n 'tn-f ['w s]t nty r z 
 
 hm-f 
 
 He was led to the place where was His Majesty. 
 
 T 'w-[dy??]-sn hsf{?) n{?) b[t',w] 
 
 He was punished 4 for the cr[imes] 
 
 'r(?)-s-nf(!Y wzlw 
 
 (which) he had committed, (by) death 
 
 m spr-f(?) r-f. 
 
 at his (?) approaching to him. 
 
 I2d 
 
 My[tt-'ry? . . . sb'] w nn 6 wn 
 
 Like[wise the (other?) criminal]s those who had been 
 
 twt nm-f. E-w 'n(y) n 7 -'m-f 
 gathered with him. He was brought 
 
 of 
 
 e p-\m 1 nt-'e pr— n 7 -m-f. E-f [ty?] 
 to the place (at) which the king was. He [gave(?) 
 
 eg 
 
 | [n-mt]w-btw 
 
 (i. e., caused) him to be punished?] [for the] crimes 8 
 
 nt 
 
 which [he had done] 
 
 .... [»-(*?)-] h',t n 
 [who had been] at the head of 
 
 1 For a long time I read k',. K\ "to name, to think," furnishes, however, no sense at all. The ligature ',m, 
 "to seize," is quite impossible. Finally the ligature proved to be mr (the archaic abbreviation for 'my-r',), 
 "overseer, superintendent, chief." Thus the son of the pretender appears as chief commander, probably "of the 
 army, the soldiers" (mS'w). Less probable would be restorations like "chief of the horse" (hipparch, cp. line 
 4d; we should expect rather hrp nfrw for this expression), etc. Space and traces (bow, arrows, arm) favor the 
 above restoration. 
 
 2 Wr is probable and a disfigured plural stroke. 
 
 3 R for 'w, e. The omission of the 'm "there," pointing back to the relative pronoun, is unusual and seems to 
 be due to the preceding 'm-f. 
 
 4 Although the general sense is tolerably certain, the restoration is very difficult in detail. In the above 
 translation I have assumed that the hieroglyphic text changes the subject of the verb from the king (see the demotic 
 text) to more impersonal -sn "they," which expresses the passive. The single trace above, which would then 
 remain for a verbal root, is unfortunately very high, even for as low a sign as dy "to give," so that an erroneous 
 transposition ns for sn might be considered. The following word shows an initial hieroglyph like hz, wz (not like 
 h) and behind a small "strong arm." Below I believed at first to see traces of a "wicked bird, " but as this would 
 have an impossible position after the arm, instead of before it, I have rather tried to find a horizontal line, n, in 
 an irregularly high place. Read hsf (with an / supplied over the arm or through the top of hsf, as ge) "to hinder, 
 to ward off, to put an end to," here as "to punish," in a somewhat unusual sense. (Or, correct to nz "to 
 revenge, punish," after i<fe?). 
 
 6 We assume a corruption of 'r-n-f-s, the 5 standing for st, se, the plural or neuter collective of the personal 
 pronoun. "They did (*. e., imposed) to him death" (assuming only the assimilation of the n of «a/to the preceding 
 sen) seems to be a less probable explanation; the verb 'r{y) hardly could be used in such a way. 
 
 6 This demonstrative form seems to be used in imitation of the pe, pat, plur. ne, nai, strengthening the relative 
 pronoun in Coptic, i. e., it belongs to the following relative verb wn, not to the preceding noun. 
 
 7 The distinct (e)n before 'm-f, in place of Coptic emmof, is remarkable in both instances. The construction 
 of the object with 'm- in the first instance is a very interesting modernism. It would be possible to say simply 
 e-w 'nt-f, "they brought him," but in order to give the fully accented pronunciation of the characteristic verb, 
 i. e., to emphasize the disgraceful fact of captivity, that direct attachment of the verb is avoided. (Cp. L- Stern, 
 Koptische Gramm., §493). We understand now why the hieroglyphic text, generally so strongly archaizing, 
 uses this modernism for emphasizing the awful fate of the rebels, \m-wt "m-f: "he was seized" (16a), and sm, 
 'tn-sn: "killing them" (3c). As said there, the latter expression is intended to show how complete the slaughter 
 of the insurgents was; it stands thus in direct opposition to the archaistic use of m, after which we might think 
 that " (some) from (m) them" had been killed. 
 
 8 Because ending in -w the word "crimes" might receive the plural sign irregularly, as also in other instances. 
 The plural sign, however, seems to stand before it and leads us to the compound mt-btw, unknown to Coptic, as 
 far as I know. 
 
76 
 
 EGYPTOLOGICAL RESEARCHES. 
 
 THE DOWNFALL OF THE REBELLION IN THE THEBAIS— Continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 tp-'w[y?] 
 at the head 
 
 [of the rebels, 
 
 -w r—r',—s[n] 
 
 he decreed various punishments?] against 1 th[em] 
 
 r-mn-n \ wz',w. 
 as far as 2 death (?). 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 gh 
 
 n(?)-rm(t)w [e-?]ivn-n',-w bks n 
 the(?) people (who) 5 had rebelled in 
 
 t-t[hth?]t 
 the sedition(?) 6 
 
 [e-?] wn-n'-w 
 (which?) 7 they had 
 
 [made?] 
 
 THANKS AND HONORS TO THE ROYAL COUPLE DECREED BY THE PRIESTS. 
 
 R-[ntt V] hm-f 
 
 In[asmuch as have done] His Majesty, 
 
 n-st 'byty, Ptw',rwmys 'nh zt 
 the king of S. and N. Egypt, Ptolemy living forever, 
 
 Pth mr h' snt-hmt[-f] hqt 
 
 beloved of Ptah, and [his] sister-wife, the queen, 
 
 12/ 
 
 nb(t) t'.wy | [Qrw']w',p',dr[',t, 
 
 the mistress of both countries, Cleopatra, 
 
 ntrwy] pr my wt, 
 
 [the two Gods] Epiphanes, according to the decree 3 
 
 ss n[tt?] m—dbw 
 
 (the) proper (thing?) [which is?] for the sake of (?) 
 13a 
 
 I —n n ntrw 
 
 [the welfare of (?) the gods?], 4 the' gods (are) 
 
 I 'nh zt 
 
 [King Ptolemy] living forever, 
 
 Pth mr 
 
 beloved of Ptah, [and his wife, the queen] 
 
 T Gl[wptre] s 
 Cl[eopatra,] 
 
 n-ntrw [nt] pr P~{?) [smt?\ 
 
 the gods Epiphanes (in) the(?) [way?] 
 
 1 Neo-Egyptian orthography, it seems. 
 
 2 A very remarkable archaism, if understood correctly by me. But I fear that the above restoration of the 
 passage attributes a little too much mildness to that unmerciful time. We should expect capital punishment 
 for all prominent rebels. 
 
 3 Does this mean "according to the foregoing description of the decree, according to the text above"? Wt (for 
 early wz) might, however, mean also "order, command," and might refer to the ordering of the right things by the 
 king. Thus the sense of this phrase, occurring only here, remains very problematic in the single words, although 
 the general meaning is clear. Also the following words are unusual. See next note. 
 
 4 If we should understand m{!)- dbw in its earliest sense: "in return of," we should obtain a superfluous parallel 
 to the words following below: "in return for [the benefits]," i. e., the reason for the honors due to the king. We 
 can, however, treat that preposition as analogous to Coptic etbe: "for" pressing intention, as we have it also in 
 our demotic texts (hn-s e-tb "to order for the sake of"). See also above, note on 11c, d. Whether the m in place 
 of r has any significance is questionable; it may be merely a graphic error for r. The first signs on line 13 (like 
 the strong arm, then effaced traces, then n) would point to "for them," but these traces are very difficult. 
 
 6 If the word "people" is preceded by the definite plural article n-, then a relative e— would seem to have been 
 suppressed before the verb wn. That article «-, however, is not quite certain; the trace on the stone might also 
 be considered as the final -t of ht, h',t "before," and then the verb would not have the definite relative construction. 
 
 6 We have a feminine noun (i. e., an abstract?) describing something bad. In place of the above bold guess 
 we might try to restore also in various other ways. Thth is usually written differently. Yet "the punishment" 
 of the rebels could hardly be meant here; the leading verb is an imperfect, with wn, and not a narrative aorist. 
 
 7 The suppression of a relative e- before wn is not easily explained. It would be easier, grammatically, to 
 take the two verbs with wn-n',- as parallel principal clauses. 
 
 8 The traces have been rendered on the facsimile quite mechanically, without restoring, them according to 
 the context. They look like an erroneous addition, possibly abandoned by the engraver. 
 
THE BILINGUAL DECREES OF PHILAE. 
 
 77 
 
 THANKS AND HONORS TO THE ROYAL COUPLE DECREED BY THE 
 
 PRIESTS — Continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 hr-'r 
 
 n-sn L 
 
 wrw?] 
 
 making to them [and to their children (?) rewards many] 
 
 zsr m-'swy n [nfrw 2 
 
 (and) liberal in return for [the benefits 
 13b 
 
 'r-s]n n ntrw 
 
 which th]ey [have done] to the gods. 
 
 H' sh(?)n 3 -[nfr] msb m 
 
 With [good] luck it has been thought out 4 in 
 
 'b n 'ryw-ntr(w) 
 
 the heart of the companions of the gods (i. e., the priests) 
 
 m{?) hwt-[ntr] 
 
 [who have come?] from the temples 
 13c 
 my-qd- \ sn m . . . gnw{?) 
 
 altogether, [to increase?] the honors (?) 5 
 
 n n-st 'byty s'-R' 
 
 for the king of S. and N. Egypt, the son of the Sun, 
 
 Ptw',rwmys, 'nh zt 
 
 Ptolemy living forever, [beloved of Ptah 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 IOC 
 
 I [n—] ntrw e-w V 
 
 the gods, they are making [for them rewards] 
 
 iod 
 
 [e-w] 'y e-w s's' n t-sbyt n 
 
 [which are] great, which are liberal, 6 in return for 
 
 n-mnhw e-'r-w n [n-] ntrw. 
 
 the benefits (which) they have done to the gods. 
 
 Nm p -shrie -n[fr] . . . 
 With the good luck [it has 
 
 entered into the heart of the priests] 
 
 [n-]mtw-pht(i)w nt nt(tif pr— 
 
 the honors which belong to king 
 
 1 of 
 
 j Ptlwmys 'nh zt [Pth mr] 
 
 Ptolemy, the everliving [beloved of Ptah] 
 
 1 Thus? The traces which at first look like hr after s, are accidental; the first stroke of an n (water line) is 
 rather visible above. 
 
 2 We should like to supply nn nfrw ' ' these benefits, ' ' but the space seems to be insufficient. N in trace above. 
 
 3 Hieratic h disfigured by the sculptor to the two parallel strokes of final -y. 
 
 4 We should expect "it entered ( l q) into the heart of the priests" (Ros. 5) or "it was put (rdy) in the heart," etc. 
 (Canop. 11). Our scribe wanted to use a more choice word which implied not only a momentary thought but 
 hinted at profound deliberation. Msb(b) seems to mean originally "to turn oneself to and fro," then "to make 
 an effort, to labor, to strive, to exert oneself, especially in thought." El Amrah & Jbydos, pi. 33 (of a kind and 
 popular person) mssbbw (Det. thinking, speaking, man) hr-f, "one for whom care was taken, an effort was made," 
 i. e., "one who occupied the thoughts." Harris 500, 4, 10: "I move myself (hn), reflecting ('w-y hr msb, Det. 
 thinking man) under (hr) my love;" see my Liebespoesie der alten Aegyfter, p. 22. Griffith, Skit (Rife) VII, 29: 
 ("I am sitting to equip my tomb) reflecting (msbb, Det. Antelope, possibly a mistake for the jackal?, see below) 
 for the sake (hr mrt) of my tomb." I do not understand Rec. Trav. 9, 96: (I am alone) n tm-f msbb (det. jackal 
 turning the head back as phonetic determinative for sb and at the same time determinative of sense, then legs) 
 hr nb-f; the negation tm makes the sense, of the phrase, "making an effort, thinking, for his master," obscure. 
 Also, Pap. Turin 60, 15: m msbw (Det. bookroll, plural) 'w 'rtv-f stands in obscure connection. B. H. I. 8, 2: 
 "the gods shall listen to my (poetical) reflections" (msbb, det. thinking man); the parallelism brings it side to side 
 with hknw: "songs of praise." The word seems related to sbb. 
 
 5 The general sense of the passage is clear by the sense analogies of other texts, but the restoration of the 
 single signs is difficult. ' ' Honors ' ' is seemingly rendered by qnw (determ. ' ' strong arm ' ' and plural strokes) which 
 would be a very peculiar expression. Understanding the two words as " [recollections (?) of] the victories" we are 
 puzzled by the first word beginning with m-. The mutilated parallel, Decree I, 8d, seems to differ. Is the above 
 text mutilated by omission of the verb [s-wr] "to increase" in the infinitive, so that only "many (qnw/) honors" 
 remains? The traces also do not favor the reading of the first group mtw^w "that they," assuming that both the 
 verb and the object have been omitted. 
 
 6 Written as in Canop. 10, 49, 53, while Ros. (18) has jf'i. Also elsewhere the orthography often wavers 
 between these forms. 
 
 7 Here rather indistinct (over a correction?); restore the clear form after Ros. dem. 22. 
 
78 
 
 EGYPTOLOGICAL RESEARCHES. 
 
 THANKS AND HONORS TO THE ROYAL COUPLE DECREED BY THE 
 
 PRIESTS— Continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 13d 
 
 ] hqt 
 
 [and his sister-wife,] the queen 
 
 nb{t)-t\wy] Qrw'w',p',dr[',t] 
 
 (and) mistress of both countries, Cleopatra, 
 
 [ ntrwy pr(wy)] 
 [the Gods Epiphanes,] 
 
 [in the temples ?] 
 
 [and the honors 1 of the Gods Philopator who] 
 
 . . hm-f shpr(-sn? //) 2 hr \ 
 begat His Majesty, and 
 
 ntrwy mnhzvy gm'-sn 
 
 the Gods Euergetes who created them (i. e., these) 
 
 ti ntrwy snwy 
 
 and the Brotherly Gods 
 
 h' ntrwy nzwy 
 and the Gods Soter, 
 
 13/ 
 
 zfnyw-s[n?] 3 [gm\?] \ —sn 
 
 [their] ancestors [who created?] them 4 
 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 nm t-f] 
 [and his] 
 
 shmt 
 wife, 
 
 1 00 
 
 1 pr't 
 the queen 
 
 [Glw]ptr{!f 
 Cleopatra, 
 
 [n-ntrw 
 
 nt] pr hn n~ \ 'rpyw 
 
 [the Gods 
 
 Epi]phanes, in the temples 
 
 nm n',y 9 -nt [nt(u)] n- ntrw 10 [mr-yt(i) 
 with those which (are) [of] the Gods [Philopator 
 
 'r-t(y)-hpr-f(?)] nm n',-[nt] nt(u) 
 
 who had begotten him(?)] n and those belonging to 
 
 n-ntrw [nt] mnh [e—'r t{y)-hpr n—'e—r 
 the Gods Euergetes [who had begotten those who had 
 
 lib 
 
 t(y)-hpr-j] nm n-nt \ ntiu) [n- ntrw snw] 
 begotten him] 1 ' 2 and those of the [Brotherly Gods 
 
 nm n-nt nt(u) n-ntrw] nt nhm 
 
 who begat them 13 and those of the gods] Soter, 
 
 n-yt{i)w 
 the ancestors 
 
 [n n-f ytw] 
 [of his fathers?] 14 
 
 THE STATUES COMMEMORATING THE VICTORY. 
 
 s-'h' 6 
 set up 
 
 m[twtw] s 
 and [that] be 
 
 n-st 'byty 
 (of) the king of S. and N. Egypt, 
 
 shmty(!) 7 
 a statue 
 
 s'-R' 
 the son of the Sun, 
 
 1 The ample space shows that these words were expressed (and the text read not merely: "and of the gods, "etc.)' 
 
 2 The text seems to be in disorder; as it stands, we read: " His Majesty (who) begat" (shpr rather than shr?)' 
 Probably the plural was written first ("who begat them") and the correction to the singular was hastily executed, 
 If the traces before the secondary vertical line are indeed h', we must suspect more corruptions. 
 
 3 The traces above represent a horizontal s, although this ends much like a waved n. 
 
 4 It remains doubtful whether we have to read as is given above (cp. decree I, 1. ga) or with Ros. 6: "the 
 parents of their begetters," n- twt-sn (written there playfully, as though it meant "of their image"). 
 
 5 The determinative (thinking man) seems to be visible. 
 
 6 Strangely abridged orthography (by confu-iion with the following shm). See next note. 
 
 7 Written shtht (with the determinative of a clumsy double crown). The repetition of ht expresses Ihe dual 
 ending: -ty. The preceding 'h', engraved very much like shm, may have had a part in the omission of the sign shm 
 which we should expect. The origin of this curious word, "the powerful (image)," is but a playful, incorrect 
 etymology of the word hnty, "statue," which we find in the corresponding passage, Ros. 6. Compare the parallel 
 etymological struggles with the words ipXtvT, shmtt "crown" above, p. 43, note 7. 
 
 8 Thus quite distinctly. 
 
 9 Only here this demonstrative form for the ordinary plural article n- before the relative. 
 
 10 The trace of a dash behind is strange and superfluous. 
 
 11 Thus, after Ros. demot. 22. 
 
 12 After Ros. without consideration of the extant traces. 
 
 13 Possibly shortened, as the space is small. 
 
 14 After Ros., not with full certainty of the single words. 
 
THE BILINGUAL DECREES OF PHILAE. 
 
 79 
 
 THE STATUES COMMEMORATING THE VICTORY-Continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 I P[tw',rwmys] 
 
 P[tolemy, living forever, beloved of Ptah,] 
 
 [k]',-tw nf PtwWwmys, 
 
 (which) be called: Ptolemy, 
 
 14b 
 h' r[py]t I nt snt-[hmt]-f 
 and an image of his sister-[wife,] 
 
 nb-qn(iv) 
 Lord of Victory, 
 
 hqt 
 the queen (and) 
 
 nb(t) t',ivy Qrw',w',p',dr',(t) 
 
 mistress of both countries, Cleopatra, 
 
 ntrwy pr(wy) 
 the Gods Epiphanes, 
 
 m qbh(wy!) 
 
 in the (twofold) holi[est!] 
 
 place (s) 
 
 hr rn-f 
 
 on (i.e., bearing) his name, 2 
 
 ms'wi?) nt ht-ntr 
 
 (in) the court of the multitude 3 of the temple, 
 
 n hmt(!)-nb 
 
 of every adytum ( ! ) , x 
 14c 
 
 wsht 
 
 Ptlwmys . 
 Ptolemy, [etc.] 
 
 [nt e-w] 
 [which is] 
 
 zt n-f Ptlwmys nb 
 
 called : Ptolemy, Lord 
 
 of 
 
 qn 
 Victory, 
 
 nm rpyt 
 
 and an image [of his wife, 4 ] 
 
 t{?) pr't I Glwptr[e] 
 the queen Cleopatra, 
 
 [ntrw nt pr] 
 
 [the gods Epiphanes] 
 
 [. . . ']rpy-nb n p-m nt 
 
 [in] every temple, in the place which (is) 
 
 wnh n p- 'rpy. 
 
 (the most) prominent of 5 the temple. 
 
 1 Thus, whether we take gbh literally as "the coolest place," i. e., synonymous with the following word, hm 
 "adytum," or merely as a general word for "temple." The awkward translator wanted to use elegant words and 
 to emphasize the special holiness of the place, so that we should think of the adytum, the coolest, darkest, and 
 holiest room of the temple, if the following words did not contradict this. Not the holiest but the most accessible 
 place of the temple is meant. According to the space and traces, the sign gbh has been repeated to express the 
 idea: "temples of the South and North," as line 16a (literally "in the twofold temples"). 
 
 2 This phrase, "on his name," i. e., where he is worshiped, can be traced back to Ros. hierogl. 6 and 7, where it 
 has no counterpart in the Greek, and possibly has been repeated erroneously. Here it is equally vague. Cp. 
 Philae, I, 10b, 11a, i$e, 16c. 
 
 3 The first translation would be "court of the soldiers," cp. below, line 17. The soldiers belonging to the 
 temples in earlier time have been discussed by Wiedemann, AZ. 1885, 82, Erman, Aegypten, 411, 714. Cp. the 
 inscription of Haremheb in Turin, 1. 25: "(the king equipped the temples) with priests and ritual priests and 
 picked men (stp) of the mnf yt-soldiers." It is probable that those soldiers acted as a police troop to keep order, 
 principally for the vast domains of the temples. For keeping order in the temple itself and to restrain the multi- 
 tude at processions, etc., we find the s'ity of the temple, Eieblein, Diet. 1 186, Cat. Abyd. 1229 ; Mar. Abyd. II, 8 (also 
 Dev6ria in his commentary on the Pap. Jud. Turin). Cp. as secular parallels, e. g., the "harbor beadles" {s'Hyw 
 nt mryt), Pap. Harris I, 28 b. Those "beadles" of the temples sometimes are distinguished from the special 
 "gatekeepers" of the temple, 1. 1. 28, 7, etc. We must assume that the sticks of such small officials usually were 
 sufficient to protect the temples; but we can imagine that in the case of some larger and wealthier temples armed 
 soldiers may have been necessary to reinforce the temple guardians. Indeed, Revue Egyptol. 1881, No. 2, pi. 35, in 
 Greek time enumerates "the soldiers" n-stratiat(e)s, among the personnel of a temple. Revillout, PSB A., 1887, IX, 
 230, claims that a temple in Memphis had a garrison of Greek and Egyptian troops. The latter statement needs 
 verification; at any rate, we must not think that temple troops in the manner of the Middle Empire were possible 
 under the strictly centralized Ptolemaic government. Although we might thus understand the designation 
 "soldiers' court" as the place at the entrance where soldiers watched the gate, nevertheless that explanation is 
 not certain. We find, namely, that in earlier style the above-mentioned place, the court for the laity, is designated 
 as wsht $s(w?), Louvre A 88 (Pierret II, 16) "court of the common people, the multitude" and thus still, Canop. 37 
 (in Reinisch's second edition; det. "people male and female"). Consequently, the sign for "soldier(s)" seems used 
 here merely in the sense of "multitude" and may be read h; also the sign mi' has, in Greek time, the same double 
 sense, "soldiers" and "multitude, people." See the same orthography as in our text, in Brugsch, Zwei Fest- 
 kalender, I. 24, 'hyw n{w) p-m$'(?) "the court of the people(?)". Above, p. 70, we had a certain example of mi' 
 "multitude" (p/), corresponding with Coptic mU, meek. (For the development of sense cp. the use of beziih, 
 "many, multitude" as equivalent to "troop, army" in Ethiopic.) 
 
 4 A strangely wide space. 
 
 6 The n might also be explained as local: "the place (most) conspicuous in the temple." This would, 
 however, be archaic style. 
 
80 
 
 EGYPTOLOGICAL RESEARCHES. 
 
 THE STATUES COMMEMORATING THE VICTORY— continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 [m] k',t msntyw nw Bqt 
 
 [in?] work (of) sculptors of Egypt. 
 
 J4d 
 
 7i]tr 1 -nt(y)(?) 
 the local 2 [go]d 
 
 Mtwtw [s-]'h' .... 
 And be set up [an image of] 
 
 m ht-ntr-tn 
 
 in this temple [giving a (royal?) sickle-sword of vic- 
 
 . [t]wtw(!) 3 n nb [qnw?]* 
 
 toryto] the image of the Lord (of ) [victory?] 
 
 I4e 
 
 | nz{?)— n-f 5 h[wy?] 
 punishing for him a smitten (captive) (?) 
 
 n[ty?] .... 'm(?)-[s?]n 
 [which is?] [imploring?] [th]em(?), 6 
 
 rdy(?)-n wn[w]t(y)w 
 
 (and shall?) give (? i. e., place) the officiating priests 7 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 E-w 'ryt[-f] s e-h yp n rm{t) t'-Kmy. 
 It is made like work of Egyptian people. 
 
 no 
 
 Ntu-w t(y)-'h, | w'-twt n p-[ntr 
 And shall be set up a figure (of) the god 
 
 t-p',wt?\ n p-'rpy [e-f(?)-ty 
 
 of the divine cycle] of the temple [who gives 
 
 hps qn(iy 
 
 a sickle-sword] (of) victory 
 
 n p—twt n 
 to the image of 
 
 pr— 'h' 
 
 the king standing (?) 
 
 {?)m-b\h{?Y a - [/] 
 [before] (?) [him 11 ] 
 
 nt(u)-w(?) 
 and they(?) 
 
 1 The determinative of the sitting god is preserved, but rather rudely drawn. 
 
 2 This reading "city god, local god," seems clear on the stone and gives an excellent sense, especially if we 
 compare it with the mention of the "nome gods," Ros. 7. The demotic parallel, however, seems to show that the 
 reading ntr plwty (psdty?) "god of the divine circle," i. e., dominating the local circle of gods, was intended as the 
 original sense, at least in the Rosetta decree. The circle sign admits either pronunciation in abbreviated 
 orthographies. The parallel passage, decree I, ge, renders the passage differently, it seems, i. e. more elaborately. 
 
 3 The t is not certain; the first sign looks rather like traces of w than of t. The word "image" is here written 
 twtw (cp. 8b, etc.). The restoration [k',]-tw [-«-/], "which is called," is risked; at any rate, there seems almost 
 nothing between n and nb; the space points to as narrow a sign as that of "statue." (The vertical stroke after the 
 vertical palimpsestic line belongs to this line as a tentative scratch.) 
 
 4 The traces do not favor the restoration nb qn(w), "lord of victory," it is true, but the demotic text seems 
 to leave no other choice. 
 
 5 "To stand," 'h', is improbable without determinative, so I find a club-like ideograph and the strong arm 
 as n% (cp. I2ct or hsf, ge?). Again, the reading (after Ros. 6), "he has defended (nz-n-f) Egypt" militates against 
 the rather clear h, which could hardly be read Bqt "Egypt." The least probable explanation of the above group 
 is as a verb ending in 5. 
 
 6 1 assume that the (very probable) 'm- expresses, as explained in the note on demotic line ge in a modern- 
 izing way, the object of a somewhat emphasized verb. This verb might then be dw\ "worshipping, saluting," 
 dbh "begging," or the like; the space is, however, very narrow (especially if we understand the horizontal stroke 
 above as pointing to n[ty], the relative) to identify it in the traces below that stroke. Bold also is the restora- 
 tion of /i[wy], "a smitten man," as crowding and archaizing. (I considered, for a long time, a restoration like 
 hn' or hr "with, and.") The description of that representation, of course, admits much variety of expression. 
 
 7 The group rdy-n "have given" is by no means certain. We can not restore the group determined by 
 "people" to w'bw "priests" ; the high size of -w would be intelligible only after a w'b written with b underneath, 
 for which group space and traces are unfavorable. The -?-like trace under w, if not secondary, would also be 
 against that restoration. The expression 'trty seems, however, always to refer to the sanctuaries of Egypt (cp. 
 Philensis I, 4b; II, 4a, etc.), so that the priests must be meant. So we read, after the initial traces, wnwtyw "the 
 officiating priests"; literally "those in their hours" (cp. decree 1,74/), as synonymous with "the attendants" (I, 
 iob), although the space is scarcely sufficient and indicates unusual crowding of the signs. 
 
 8 Unusual verbal form, disfigured by the engraver. The text is already difficult in Ros. 23; especially the 
 sign V "make" is similarly disfigured. 
 
 9 The enormous extension of the last stroke does not seem to indicate a division. 
 
 10 This restoration is not at all certain. The preposition m-blh "before" would be strongly disfigured; it 
 looks quite different directly underneath in line 12J1, namely, like 'rw "they made." Yet, a reading "they (st) 
 (are?) made {'r-w) " would not easily fit into the context. 
 
 "The passage, very negligently written in Ros., seems, according to the space, to have been shortened 
 (probably the verb). The determinative "metal" of hp$, apparently, is further disfigured (like t-), etc. 
 
 12 1 do not succeed in connecting the demotic and hieroglyphic texts. Worthless guesses from the isolated 
 traces are better not discussed here. 
 
THE BILINGUAL DECREES OF PHILAE. 
 
 81 
 
 THE STATUES COMMEMORATING THE VICTORY— Continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 nty m 'My 
 
 who (are) in the (temples of) the two halves 
 
 iff 
 
 hr hn[tyw-'pn] 
 
 (of Egypt) for(!) [these (two?)] statues] 1 
 
 [dbht (m) sp III m hrt hrw 
 [(sacred) apparatus three times every day 
 
 m(?)-b',h?] -sn 'r-sn 
 
 before?] them, 2 (as) they perform 
 
 tp-t',-rd 3 -nb tw[t] n V 
 
 everything prescribed proper to do 
 
 15a 
 
 [n?] k){?) I [-w] n ntrw 
 
 [to] the spirit[s](?) 4 of the gods 
 
 spt[yw b m . —w h' 
 
 [of the nomes at the(ir) festival day]s and 
 
 [hrw] Kb n rn-f 6 
 
 [the day (s) of] festival in(!) his(!) name. 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 Sp{??) h' 
 
 times (??) procession 
 
 nt e-w 'r-w n 
 which are done to 
 
 [n-hbw n] 
 (at) [the festivals of 
 
 nm n- hw(w) rn 
 and the name days. 9 
 
 n-k"w 
 the other 7 
 
 h'w 
 processions 8 
 
 ntrw 
 gods 
 
 1 The hr— "for" before hnty{w) is very peculiar; it is not impossible that it stands there by a contracting 
 adaptation of the text as preserved in Ros. 7 and Philse, I, 10b, i. e., we must suspect that the above text 
 was simply mutilated from hr [$ms] hntyw ' pn "[worshipping] these statues." Assuming the verb Ims, "serve," 
 to be transposed to a later place, in the gap following the object, we should have even a more awkward 
 adaptation. Ros. 7 reads: "two statues," but Philae, I, 10J, the simple plural. 
 
 2 The space suffices for this restoration after Ros. 7, Philae, I, 10b, because the hieroglyphic writing allows 
 easily the necessary crowding together which we must assume here. 
 
 3 Is the sign r, which follows the group tp-t',—rd, a disfigured bookroll ? 
 
 4 Guided by Ros. hierogl. 7, twt n k',-sn "proper for their spirit(s)," i. e., for them, we can guess that the vertical 
 stroke represents the pole of the standard on which the £!-sign rests. It seems to have two pendants, radiating 
 from the point where the horizontal and vertical pole meet, a somewhat unusual hieroglyphic form. The above 
 poetical use of k', "spirit, soul, double, self," is common. Our redactor has shortened the text slightly. This 
 original text seems to have been corrected, however, since on the plates 1 have tried to read: s-[h']-sn "(when) are 
 brought out in procession," changing the unusual &!-sign to 5. At least, we can see that this disfigurement of 
 sense has been accepted in the other Philse decree, lod, which again shows its later date in this development 
 of redaction. 
 
 6 That is, the local gods. Cp. Ros. hierogl., 7 and 8. A trace of (the second?) spt is visible. 
 
 6 This error is common to all hieroglyphic parallels. Even the seemingly more correct text of Ros. hierogl. 
 7 reads: "At the festivals of each season and the day(s) of procession and also (see Philse, I, lod) the day of 
 [m erroneously for n) his(!) name." Philse, I, lod, copies the Rosetta text faithfully. But the last expression is 
 correctly "the name days," in the demotic text in Ros. 24 and Philse, I, na, the latter document trying to be 
 more clear by marking the plural rn-^w. (This expression could, unfortunately, be understood rather as ' ' the (afore) 
 mentioned days" than as "days of their name.") See our demotic text above. So n rn-f, understood here as 
 synonymous with hr-rn-f "(the days) on his name," i. e., "bearing his name," ought to read "their name 
 days." As, here and in the model text, the Rosetta stone, the special days to be celebrated for the king were 
 defined only in the following section, we have a good illustration of how carelessly the Egyptian versions were 
 worded where they wanted to be more explicit than the condensed Greek text. The singular "day" of the 
 Rosettana, in the hieroglyphic text, is especially negligent and obscure. 
 
 7 Exactly as in the demotic (24) and Greek (40) Rosettana. The hieroglyphic version, " nome gods," i. e., 
 "principal local gods," improves the above vague expression. 
 
 8 That is, festivals, on which are held processions, as in better parallels. 
 
 9 That is, at the days devoted specially to the local gods, bearing their names. This expression corrects the 
 corresponding hieroglyphic text. See note 1. 
 
82 
 
 EGYPTOLOGICAL RESEARCHES. 
 
 SMALLER REPRODUCTIONS OF THOSE STATUES. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 Ssm n [h]m-f ( — ) ht hr 'h' 
 
 an image of His Majesty (be?) engraved on the stela 
 
 isb 
 
 n[ty?]- sh',w-pn [hr-tp-f?] 3 
 of(?) this decree [on top of it?]. 
 
 'r-wt-f hr^-sm] sb(')w 'w 
 
 It is executed slaying an enemy, (while there) is 
 
 p',-n{r-nty(?y rdt{!) n-f 
 the local (?) god giving to him 
 
 hps n-st n [q]n(w) 
 
 the royal sickle sword of victory. 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 I2d 
 
 P- | twt n pr-' nt e-w -t(y)-h'-f 
 The image of the king which is paraded in procession 7 
 
 [shall also be engraved on a stela?. 8 ] 
 
 I2e 
 
 nt(u)-w 'r(?) 
 
 and that be made(?) 
 
 [hps] qn 
 
 [giving him a sickle sword] (of) victory. 
 
 FESTIVALS COMMEMORATING THE VICTORY. 
 
 Mtwtw 
 And be 
 
 hrw 
 day 
 
 III 
 
 3. 
 
 ]m-f 
 
 'r-w(f) ['bdIV] smwt{!) 
 
 made [the 12th] month (Mesore), 
 
 [hrw] n sm'w-s 'w 
 
 [the day] of reporting it towards 6 
 
 His Majesty [through the mouth of a Friend of 
 
 Nt(u)-w {'bt)IV smw, 
 
 And that be made the 12th month, 
 
 12s 
 
 p- I hw n 'n-smy [hr] 
 
 the day of bringing report [about] 1 ' 
 
 \rys{!) t(?)ws s', Wst\nyqs 11 
 
 Aris[toni](q?)os, 12 son of Aristonikos, 
 
 (hw) III, 
 day 3, 
 
 1 The text contains a serious gap. It jumps from the portable, statuary, picture of the king mentioned 
 in the demotic text (apparently much more briefly than in Ros.), to a flat picture on an immovable stone. The 
 mentioning of both pictures close together seems to have created confusion. We have noticed some rash and 
 unsuccessful shortening before. Perhaps we should place that gap in the line below, for sim seems to stand usually 
 for images in the round. Otherwise we might fill the gap simply with mtwtw "and that be." 
 
 2 If we supply "of stone" (n—'nr), then the next word would need an n "of" as connection. 
 
 3 The chief difficulty of this restoration is the small space left for -/. Read s'mply "on top," hr-tp? 
 
 4 As though a vertical stroke had been changed to hr, or rather vice versa? How would the gap be filled in the 
 first case? 
 
 6 See above, p. 80, note 2, on the corresponding uncertainty of 141!. 
 
 6 Less direct expression than the ordinary » of the dative and more respectful, consequently. Cp. the "before 
 His Majesty" of line 4/. (Or simply e as a mistake for (e)»— ?). 
 
 7 The text of Ros. 24 has here: "and that be paraded the image of the king," so that it looks as though our 
 relative clause nt-'ew had been confounded with the conjunctive nt(e)-w: "and they." Otherwise, however, the 
 wording differs. We have not read anything on bringing forth that picture. See on the hieroglyphic text, note 1. 
 
 8 Thus I try to bridge over the apparent gap between the last and the present section. This is, of course, a 
 rather violent expedient. See on the hieroglyphic version of this passage. 
 
 9 1 have not attempted to explain all isolated traces, e. g., plate d. 
 
 10 1 believe that to the scribe of the demotic text the suppression of the name of the courtier who had brought 
 that important report to the king seemed as strange as it does to us; he inserted there the name of the probable 
 prime minister and victor in the Thebais, leaving this name, however, also in its proper, later, place, so that a 
 doublet resulted, each time with some mutilations of the name, showing how hastily the scribes worked. This 
 theory seems to me easier than to assume that we have a correct tradition of a second name suppressed by the 
 other passages, although the hieroglyphic parallel, likewise, may be not quite in order, as said above. The incredi- 
 ble confusion of the names seems to have been caused also by confounding the title strategumenos with them, 
 which title, apparently, has been omitted. 
 
 11 One small letter effaced after s; less probably another over this. The i-like next letter may be read q with- 
 out too great difficulty, but we gain nothing by this. 
 
 12 Preserved either -gs(J), or -w{?)s preceded by t or q (or parts of a round »?). 
 
THE BILINGUAL DECREES OF PHILAE. 
 
 S3 
 
 FESTIVALS COMMEMORATING THE VICTORY— Continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 hr 
 about 
 
 mr{!) n n-st 
 His Majesty], a Lover of the King, 
 
 w[3>]w!.s p\- 
 
 [the commander of horse, Aristojnios, the [son] of 
 
 [fw]5|[<i]J»3'gw(?)[5] [hr?] 
 Aristonikos, [about?] 1 
 
 tnh(?)t 
 
 the capture(?) 
 
 n{??) [sb]'w nw btnw 
 
 of the (most) wicked (one) 2 of the rebel (s), 
 
 h' ('bd) III smw hrw [XXIV] 
 
 and the nth month (Epiphi), day, [24] 
 
 ISf 
 
 [r]dt{?) ',m(y)[n]ws i nty 
 
 (when) caused 3 [this Strategjumenos, who (is) 
 
 'tn[wt] 'm(yw)-b \ [tp n hm-f 
 
 among the Friends, [the First ones of His Majesty? 
 
 hm-f ',m-wt(!) 'm-f 
 
 His Majesty to be captured on it 6 
 
 that enemy of?] 1 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 fit 
 
 who [is of the friends of the king(?) about the 
 
 • • • • g(?)s 7 [s\] [\??]s{?) 
 
 commander of horse], [Aristoni]g(!)os son of 
 
 I rynyqs 
 Aristonikos 
 
 n-b',h I [pr- 
 
 before [the king, and the 24th day of the nth 
 
 P-] sb: 
 
 month, 8 there was captured the] enemy, 9 
 
 pr— n—'m—f mh(t?)-f [n-'m-f?] 'nh. 10 
 (of) the king on it, he took(?) [him?] alive. 
 
 1 Reading thus, I must admit difficulties of the group explained as mht-n, "to seize, to capture." (Only a t 
 is certain; against mht = Coptic amahte, "to seize," speaks the absence of the determinative.) The sign mh is low 
 (like a z). But n (for classical m) is very questionable; we must prefer to see the broad s or sb' in that horizontal line 
 above, because there is no trace of a high s below. It seems that this preposition n, m has been omitted by mis- 
 take, since intentional omission would be unusual and strange. I find, however, no other explanation. M zt 
 for the correct m %d, "saying, thus," is much less plausible. 
 
 2 The adjective receives superlative sense by the following genitive, as often in Egyptian and in other lan- 
 guages (above all the Semitic). In our text we may have, however, merely an archaistic phrase taken from ancient 
 literature with little or no understanding, which might mean also "the wickedness of the rebels." 
 
 3 The small w looks also like a small nw = n. Cp. 4c Hardly a proper name. 
 
 4 This most probable restoration can not consider the apparent tail of a sign hanging down behind. This 
 looks like the tail of mh, so that we should have the verb mht, amahte, of the preceding note in normal orthog- 
 raphy, " (when) seized N. N." The only explanation of such a strange doublet with the verb "be captured" 
 following below would be a grave stylistic negligence resulting from a hasty correction of the text. As we have 
 similar confusion in the parallel demotic passage, we could explain that stylistic blunder as a later attempt to 
 minimize somewhat the personal merit of the general Aristonios after he had lost favor with the king. Such 
 an explanation would be more plausible than a simple stylistic improvement producing the doublet (substitut- 
 ing archaic \m for modern mh, mht). However, we better abstain from building too much on a small stroke, 
 knowing how much we have to expect blunders of the engraver. A space shows that a preposition has been 
 effaced and that the following name is not the subject of the verb "to report." 
 
 6 The large space warns against connecting the group, "His Majesty," directly with "first friends," tempt- 
 ing as this seems after 4/. 
 
 6 The "on it" points back to a preceding, supplied relative, so that we obtain, more freely translated, "the 
 day on which N. N. caused to be captured," etc. (Less probable, as object of the verb.) 
 
 7 Preserved either -gs(I), or -w{?)s preceded by t or q (or parts of a round «?). 
 
 8 In demotic this restoration requires very little space. 
 
 9 Or wicked, impious, against the king. 
 
 10 Only the ^-circle and the vertical dash for the 'wA-ideogram seem fairly certain. The group before the 
 vertical line of the palimpsestic text seems to contain an -/ in ligature, which makes us think of a verb followed by 
 the suffix -/ as subject or object, but this does not admit any certain reading. 
 
84 
 
 EGYPTOLOGICAL RESEARCHES. 
 
 FESTIVALS COMMEMORATING THE VICTORY— Continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 m 
 
 hb 
 
 wr L 
 
 m-hnt 2 
 in 
 
 as a festival a big one 
 
 qbhwy r-tp 
 
 the sanctuaries (of both parts of Egypt) each 
 
 1(56 
 
 rnpt nb{t) \ 'w tr['](t!)- 
 
 year, 
 
 'w-s[n?] i 
 Be(?) 
 
 sqr 
 
 at each (corresponding) time(?). 3 
 
 w',h 'h, 
 
 put up oven(s) (for holocausts) (and) 
 
 wtnw 
 
 poured out libations 
 
 h\?) 
 and 
 
 [V 
 
 [made 
 
 (')ht-nb(t) 
 all things 
 
 twt] n 
 proper] 5 to 
 
 1 6c 
 
 m- | [t]wtw 
 and be 
 
 r, 
 do, 
 
 rdt mh 6 
 placed crown (s) 
 
 [as] 
 
 hb(?) 
 
 a festival 
 
 [n n-'rpy]w 7 [rnp?]t-nb . . 
 [in the temple]s every [yea]r 8 
 
 \ nt(u)-w 
 and that be 
 
 mh 
 
 [held these festivals (?) (also when) correspond (?) 
 
 . . . hr?\ wh(',)-nb '[rpy nb 
 days?] every [season?] [every temp]le(?) . . . 9 
 
 [nt(u)-w i 'r]yt-w hr-rnpt-nb ss(w)III 
 [that] they be held each year three days, 
 
 nt(e)w V kll , wtn 
 
 and that be made holocaust (s), libation (s), 
 13d 
 
 % I p-sp [n mtntjpht n 'ryt-[w\ 
 
 oblation (s), the rest [of the things] proper to do 
 
 1 This looks like a bold restoration. The trace above, preceding the big vertical line, does not resemble the 
 head of the wr- bird. It may, however, be executed negligently. 
 
 2 The calf's head is distinct; it stands without complementary -t as it seems. 
 
 3 This remark is not quite easy to understand. It looks at first like a pleonastic repetition paraphrasing the 
 words "each year"; this superfluous character is not removed by connecting it with the following description of 
 ceremonies ("each time be put up," etc.). The demotic text, which contains an addition in extending the celebra- 
 tion over three days, suggests that the hieroglyphic text here has been mutilated. I think it has been condensed 
 awkwardly from Ros. 1 1 (demot. 29, Greek 48), changing the monthly repetition of those festivals to a more vague 
 recommendation of repetition at any shorter interval than a year. The scribe of I, iod, feels the obscurity and 
 tries to correct it. 
 
 4 A trace above might indicate a horizontal 5. 
 
 5 Cp. Ros. hierogl. 11, etc., for this restoration. 
 
 6 A rather indistinct determinative ("garland") used as ideograph. 
 
 7 Narrow space only for this group ; also the following restorations imply crowding together. 
 
 8 These restorations must assume an unusual crowding together of the required groups. 
 
 9 In opposition to the preceding note we must assume lengthy additions in the demotic text, which is not very 
 satisfactory. The probable group mh, usually "to fill, to fulfill," has, apparently, here the uncommon meaning 
 "to return, to correspond," a sense which can be explained by the analogous use of mah- forming the ordinal 
 numerals. The above word for "season" (probably not quite correctly engraved) occurs again in Canop. demot. 39 
 (incorrectly reproduced by Krall; my personal collation confirms the reading by Revillout and Brugsch, although 
 the engraver seems again to have erased the vertical stroke. (See Kom el Hisn.) The Greek (20) renders "the 
 times," the hieroglyphic text doubly, by trw "times" (as in our hieroglyphic Philae text) and by phry "returning 
 time." The strange addition (Canop., 39) w-wi, looks like a second etymology of the same word. K6m el Hisn, 
 line 11 (again poorly reproduced by Krall), mutilates that addition as unintelligible to the engraver, but gives the 
 group wh\ better than Canop. We have now the etymology of the Coptic p-woil "the time," pointing to the root 
 wh\, originally "to go around, to send around," later "to go around (for) something, to seek," Coptic wo$ "to 
 desire." Spiegelberg, Petubastis glossary, No. 99, was misled by the erroneous doublet of the Canopus text, as 
 Griffith was previously by the n—p-ws of 2d Khamuas 6, 36 (Rylands Papyri, glossary, 343). The latter may, 
 however, be understood "in the gap, to fill the need," so that the popular etymology of Canop. 39 seems to 
 be isolated. That derivation from wl "to be empty, to be lacking, deficient" can now be abandoned as very 
 improbable. 
 
THE BILINGUAL DECREES OF PHILAE. 
 
 85 
 
 FESTIVALS COMMEMORATING THE VICTORY— Continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 r tp[w\-sn m hbw-pn 
 
 on their (i. e., the people's) heads at these festivals 
 
 sY-n{!) V(?) hb 
 
 beginning from the celebration (?) (of) the festival 
 
 [of the New Year (on the first day of the first month?) 
 
 i6d 
 .... | III{?) 
 
 to-day (of this month?)] 1 three (?) 2 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 I3e 
 
 [n p-\ hb 
 [at the] festival 
 
 [nt(u)w] ty klm[w?] 5 
 [and that they] wear crowns 
 
 [n] rpy [-nb?] 
 
 (in) [every?] 6 temple [celebrating these days?] 
 
 [in ceremonies?] 7 splendid (ly?) 8 
 
 SPECIAL HONORS FOR THE QUEEN. 
 
 Mtwtw [s-h' 
 
 And (when) will be [brought out in procession the 
 
 statue of the king, 
 
 mtwt]w{?) 
 shall be?] 3 
 
 'sk 
 then 
 
 svr 
 also 
 
 Nt(u)-w 
 And (when) will 
 
 p{?)-t[wt] 
 
 that statue 
 
 t(y)-b' 
 
 be brought out (in procession) 
 
 13! 
 
 ef-hpr 
 
 mentioned before(?) of the king, when it happens 9 
 
 1 This restoration taken from Ros. 12, and decree I, 15c, is somewhat long. We might try to shorten it by 
 assuming that the preposition i'(-w) had here passed from the ancient use "from" (still so, Ros. hier. 12) to the 
 latter and opposite sense which we find in demotic and Coptic $a: "until." It would then be possible to explain 
 thus the above passage "to [the end of?] the festival." As long as the text is incomplete, the decision is impossible. 
 S'-n{l) with an infinitive is, of course, an unusual construction, but the whole passage is unusually worded. Ros. 
 Greek 50, states plainly that the fifth day of the same month (Thout) was meant, i. e., that the celebration 
 extended over five days. The hieroglyphic text, Ros. 12, taken by itself could also be understood: "froii the first 
 day of the year to the Five Days," i. e., to the last, epagomenal, five days of the year. The priests, who were 
 inclined to think first of those closing days of the year which were so important in the sacred calendar, could easily 
 misinterpret that date thus (i. e., from the first festival of the year to the last, through the whole year). Conse- 
 quently, our text seems to attempt to make that date clearer by some changes; it is quite possible that even the 
 reduction of the festival from five to three days aimed at nothing else than avoiding that obscurity. For the 
 amiable negligence of ancient Egypt the duration of the festival through five days ought not to have been oppres- 
 sive enough to shorten it. To show some good will was sufficient and the execution of all details was not expected. 
 So the correct date seems to have been more important than the extension of some cheap ceremonies. 
 
 2 1 first tried to read zsrw "in splendid ways" after the demotic text. (The traces which I once tried 
 to find before the plural sign are absolutely uncertain and even improbable.) Zsr means also "holy, sacred" 
 (but hardly thus the demotic corresponding word). It occurs to me now that the three strokes are nothing but 
 the numeral. After their arrangement that number seems to be complete (III) and is not to be considered as a 
 part of V, so that this would seem to agree with the demotic text. 
 
 3 The -w is not certain enough to insure this restoration, for which the space is rather limited. (Or 'w, e = r?.) 
 
 4 Sw — swt of early Egyptian. 
 
 6 The -m half preserved, followed by part of the determinative "flower." 
 
 6 The "every" can be inferred from the absence of the article with the (not absolutely certain but very prob- 
 able) word "temple." 
 
 7 The ability of demotic writing to be crowded or extended in an incredible way makes the estimation of the 
 lost words very hazardous. The above space looks too large after the hieroglyphic text. 
 
 8 On $'$' "extended, numerous (NB!), liberal, magnificent," cp. line 6e. 
 
 9 Rather as subordinate, conditional clause (as in Coptic) than as emphasized principal clause. 
 
86 
 
 EGYPTOLOGICAL RESEARCHES. 
 
 SPECIAL HONORS FOR 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 THE QUEEN— Continued. 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 i6e 
 
 rdt h' 
 
 caused to come forth 
 
 rdt S-h'-f 1 
 
 causing it(!) (to be) 
 
 m hrww-'pn 
 on these days. 2 
 
 ssmt 
 the statue 
 
 of 
 
 hqt, 
 the queen, 
 
 paraded with him 
 
 Mwtwtil) 'gr(.?) 3 
 And be furthermore 
 
 [placed at the side 
 
 nb{t) 
 
 of the royal statue the statue] 4 (of) the mistress 
 
 t',wy m hrww-'pn tp-rnpt-nb(t) 
 
 of both countries on these days, every year 
 
 h' pst{!) | . . . . M{?)[tw]tw V 
 and the half ! of every year]. And be held 
 
 P'-grh nty [hr-?]h',t- [w?] 5 hr-sm' 6 
 the night which (is) before them, making music 
 
 p-shm n 
 the statue of 
 
 ['s?\ nt(u)-w t(y)-h' 
 [at that time?] 7 (that) be brought out 
 
 ntr(t?Y [nt pr, tf-pnt s-hmt nm?} 
 
 the goddess (?) [Epiphanes, his sister-wife also?] 
 
 -/ nt(u)-w tiyY-b'-f nm-f° 
 
 with him they (shall) bring it out with him 
 
 ii—hw(w) rn-w 
 the days mentioned, 
 
 N[t(u)~w t{y)-h\?) 
 And there shall be set up(?) u 
 
 14a 
 
 [the statue of the queen every year and 
 
 mpt n-tt{?) [ pr-{?) 
 
 (of) the year at the side of [the king 
 
 n 
 on 
 
 [t-ps]t(?) n 
 the ha]lf(?) 
 
 e-f-ty? } 
 who gives] 
 
 'nh tt 
 
 life (and) stability 
 
 p-gr[h] u 
 
 the night (before) 15 
 
 14b 
 
 zt(?) I Nt{e)-w V 
 forever. 13 And shall be held 
 
 [e-w(?) h','?]-s(?) 
 [placing] 16 it(?) 
 
 1 This looks like a pleonastic connection of the ancient (s-) and later (dy, infinitive rdt) expression of the 
 causative verb. Notice the erroneous gender of the pronoun. 
 
 2 Written like "these three days," but the stroke between hrtv and the plural strokes is to be considered a 
 mistake of the engraver. 
 
 3 Written 'hr. The learned scribe had in mind the archaic 'hr (for later hr), "now, then, furthermore." It 
 is also one of the possibilities that grt, later gr: "but, then," had been in his mind and that the sculptor confounded 
 gr and hr. This would even connect the above form with later usage, which preserved that grt in Coptic je. 
 
 4 The restoration offering itself at first is: "[a special festival be installed for] the queen." The traces of the 
 demotic text force us, however, to find a restoration of more specific sense. The trace of the verb somewhat like 
 'h', at the end of i6e, may be deceptive. The restoration used above is crowded. 
 
 6 That is, before those (3) days. The very narrow space makes the later — w, "their," probable in place of 
 the earlier pronominal suffix sn. 
 
 6 The hieratic sign hn is mutilated by the engraver. The presence of the queen's statue causes special music 
 to be introduced according to the old tradition that goddesses and queens have to exhilarate their divine husbands 
 by music, which is more proper for women than for men. 
 
 7 1 suppose that the senseless two parallel strokes have been corrupted from the ligature 's = Coptic is, "behold, 
 then." Hardly to be read e. For the subjunctive after the conditional conjunctions see Stern, Koptische Gram- 
 matik, § 442, 621, 626. 
 
 8 The stone seems to bear the masculine ntr: "god," but surely not the group "queen," which we should 
 expect. Is the text in order? 
 
 9 This sign confounded with the two preceding vertical strokes. 
 
 10 A senseless stroke after nm? 
 
 11 Only the determinative "feet" is visible, but this leaves us the choice only between the above verb t-'aho' 
 and h',', both being used of the setting up of concrete objects, never figuratively of times, days, festivals, etc. 
 This seems an important clue ro restoration. 
 
 12 The ending -t and, perhaps, part of the determinative ("strong arm") visible. 
 
 13 As there is no trace of a hieroglyphic parallel for those loyal, archaistic, phrases, I assume that the redactor 
 of the demotic text has transferred the last words of the decree (see the hieroglyphic text, 1 7/) to a place higher 
 up. This furnishes another clue to restoring the sense. 
 
 14 Grh quite distinct ; only the h destroyed. 
 
 15 Hardly space for h{',)t-w; the sense, "eve of the festival," seems to be certain. 
 
 16 Again only the determinative part of the ligature visible. The -s{?) behind is difficult. The following 
 stroke might point to nm "with." 
 
THE BILINGUAL DECREES OF PHILAE. 
 
 87 
 
 SPECIAL HONORS FOR THE QUEEN— Continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. 
 
 17b 
 
 m tp l - I rd(wy) m 
 in the way prescribed in 
 
 'My (')h(w)t-nb 
 
 the temples (of both parts of Egypt,) 2 all things 
 
 r(?) hbw-'pn ssm [-pn?] 
 
 for(?) 3 these festivals (in) [this?] manner, 4 
 
 DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 -sn 
 
 [when they serve] them 6 in 
 
 ht-ntr 
 
 s 
 
 the temple. 
 
 . . . -nb nt 
 all [ceremonies?] of 
 
 10 
 
 I pf-smt(??) n e-w-r gll, 
 
 (in) this manner, making holocaust (s) 
 
 I4d 
 
 wtn 'b',w I nt(e)w .... 
 
 libation (s), oblations, and shall be [made?] 12 
 
 s(m)s(?) 13 n p-['rpy?] 
 service (?) in the [temple]. 
 
 PUBLICATION OF THIS DECREE. 
 
 Mtwtw ht sti,wy-pn hr ['h'y nty 
 And be engraved this decree on [a stela of 
 
 I7d 
 
 't— I rdt m] 6 sh', [{n?) mdwt-ntr 
 
 hard stone in] the writing [of the divine words, 
 
 sh',- n-s'y sh', 
 
 the letter writing (and) the writing 
 
 n\ 
 of] 
 
 H',w-nbw 
 the Greeks, 
 
 n! 
 
 s-'h'-f m wsht ms'(w) 
 
 setting it up 7 in the court of the (common) people 8 
 
 [m] ht-ntr m rprw-nb hr [rn-f \ 
 
 in the sanctuary, 9 in all temples on [his name, 
 
 Nt(n)-w sh',(?) [p- wt n wy]t 
 
 And shall be written [this decree on a ste]la 
 
 n(?) 'n[y zry 
 
 of [hard stone in the writing of the divine words, 
 
 Wyn]n u 
 
 the letter writing (and) the writing of (the) Gree]k(s), 
 
 v ' 4f 
 nt{ii)-w t(y)-'h'-f n p-m' n ms' \ (w) 
 
 and it shall be set up in the place (of) the multitude 
 
 n 'rpy 'rpy—nb(?) 15 n 
 
 of (the) temple each(?) temple, (namely) in (the) 
 
 1 Thus, evidently, the i-like sign below is to be read. 
 
 2 See above, p. 80, note 7. / 
 
 3 We should expect "in," m, n. Indeed, the trace might indicate also a clumsy n. 
 
 4 Thus more probably than s$m= "the statue." 
 
 5 We should like to restore the stereotyped expression "[all things which it is proper to do] them," but the 
 demotic text seems to point to a different expression of this idea. The -sn might also refer to the subject of the 
 verb, not only to the object as assumed above. 
 
 6 After Ros. hierogl. 14; cp. also Philse, I, iya. 
 
 7 Shortening the text of Ros. In the classical language this would be the circumstantial infinitive. 
 
 8 See above, page 79, note 3, on the possibility of reading "soldiers' court" and the greater probability of the 
 translation followed here (literally "crowd, multitude"). 
 
 9 Notice the substitution of this ordinary word for the more obscure ideograph {pr-mYt?) of Ros. 14. This 
 does not furnish the pronunciation, of course. 
 
 10 The demotic text must have been shorter here than the correspondence with the hieroglyphic parallel 
 would require, because it is fuller below. 
 
 11 Thus I should propose to correct the text. The difficult traces do not look much like that reading, it is true. 
 
 12 The traces would rather point to h': "to parade," but the general sense required must be as translated above. 
 
 13 If this literal translation is correct it means "ritual ceremonies." 
 
 14 Cp. Ros. dem. 32. 
 
 16 The repetitions of the word rpy may not all be correct. The text has undergone hasty shortening by the 
 redactor, as also in the hieroglyphic version. 
 
EGYPTOLOGICAL RESEARCHES. 
 
 PUBLICATION OF THIS DECREE— Continued. 
 
 HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. DEMOTIC TEXT. 
 
 _....] mh I, mh II, mh III 
 
 in the temples] 1 (of) first, second (and) third (order) 
 
 dy 'nh my R' 
 2 giving life like the Sungod, 
 
 hh 
 
 zt 
 
 for ever (and) eternity. 
 
 'rpy mh I, 
 
 temple (s) (of) first, 
 
 140 
 
 'rpy | mh II mh III. 
 temples (of) second (and) third (order). 
 
 1 The space proves this addition over Ros. 14. 
 
 2 A stupid omission of the words "at the side of the statue of the king." See Ros. and Philae, I, ult. d, for 
 the correct text. 
 
First Bilingual Decree of Philae, a (upjper half) 
 
 i 
 
 O 
 
 t/\ 
 
 A 
 
 \Al 
 
 
 
 D D Q A 
 
 / i «■» 
 
 I ' / / / J t ( 
 
 ' <*a$£y^ 
 
 *~ / 
 
 i 
 
 nY 
 
 W 
 
 iX) v / t_ ,. ;, ■ u // , 
 
 i— ! 
 
 ^^vr^ 3 
 
 4 
 
 > 
 
 I </ 
 
 4 
 
 ( | l ut. 
 
 J - #\ >\ ^ ^k ^ >==H 
 
 PLATE 1 
 
 o dp 
 
 5ff Hi 
 
 £2* 
 
 ^4^V¥^ 
 
 % Qdl> — ff 2 ^^ 
 
 E Mr 
 
 
 ^— p. 
 
 o 
 
 '■OH 
 
 \» 
 
 ' n B^ 
 
 Nl CI 
 
 / /i U o o o p 
 
 V 
 
 V 
 
 y 
 
 /!«& c^=% 
 
 \^mp 
 
 -4Pte 
 
 Q 
 
 
 Seven-tenths of the original size 
 
 / 
 
 N 
 
 
 It 
 
First Bilingual Decree of Philae, b (upper half) 
 
 PLATE 2 
 
 ^» 
 
 o d oj3 
 
 5 J], ^Ufes^? 
 
 D D D B 
 
 5'' ^^'* l t' Sic U 
 
 #%V-^p©Or=> 
 
 - [HUD D 
 
 
 
 ® 
 
 o* o 
 
 .w , 
 
 J D'l 
 
 ? I 
 
 gl fa M^^ 
 
 OlL.-S**^ 
 
 '-&T* 
 
 a3^m^\ fir J__2 ~0 y \ 
 
 
 w& nmu&jLzd S to a 
 
 d 
 
 •^- 
 
 
 te, — 
 
 ?^ 
 
 -#?i 
 
 iO> 
 
 .*•> 
 
 >o /J 
 
 o> 
 
 Seven-tentl|is of the original size 
 
 
 ^X' 
 
 rf" r» rTTT FT" 
 
 ' J5£ 
 
 ,lV v /',&./ V/A > i 
 
 ! D 
 
 2" 
 
 -fc>- 
 
 vr~- . - 
 
 
 10 
 
First Bilingual Decree of Philae, c (upper half). 
 
 PLATE 3 
 
 D I! 
 
 ^ A^^\ (4jP 
 
 :^'^>;99'\ 
 
 .ait; >\ i wo 
 
 r~ 1 
 
 H 
 
 'Ufe 
 
 
 /: 
 
 -5-> 
 
 h 
 
 c-^-0^ ao/* 
 
 -.> i 
 
 i » 
 
 Seven-tenths of the original size 
 
 
 , A^*W 
 
 Id d o^~M^ ^ 
 
 y— r 
 
 D D 
 
 
 Aj%#{j^ : : ;;s 
 
 Vil ' 
 
 i a* ° Si Osm*: ^ 
 
 I'd 
 
 
 ! E ¥-'- 
 
 i 
 
First Bilingual Decree of Phiiae, e (upper half). 
 
 PLATE 5 
 
 A 
 
 10 
 
 D ^°P dTi o 
 
 m 5^> f( [ 
 
 
 ^H" 
 
 
 
 
 
 /* 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 f 
 
 
 X 
 
 
 0/ 
 
 #^r 
 
 '^V^ 
 
 ^\> 
 
 '^~e^r 
 
 ^^^%^ 
 
 
 
 U0 
 
 
 
 Lfl ! ^ -* n 
 
 ^4i 
 
 frf 
 
 LI jP^ v£4£) 
 
 
 
 
 'V 
 
 D 
 
 £? 
 
 
 Wl^hSd $ t~ 5 ~°° vl-S^ 
 
 «-'' A. ^ ,/x ^ 
 
 V *" 
 
 
 i^JL 
 
 * 10 
 
 Seven-tenths of the original size 
 
First Bilingual Decree of Philae, / (upper half). 
 
 PLATE 6 
 
 2^^_ _ 
 
 €g5> © ^ 
 
 D-Dd 
 
 / i 
 
 t 
 
 — ^^zzt¥ j o _g__=, ^;)k.. :r i:w^ (R| 
 A!/ If D 0- * \\ d^^Iv_. 
 
 _/ \ ! J _..___ 
 
 £ — -~-V 
 
 ) \ 1 — ^ J I // t « 
 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 ^v%^ J 
 
 l^_p^ 
 
 Seven-tenths of the original size 
 
""muirrjj^r/ ■ 
 
 
 J ^ -— ! 
 
 ,. . ...- i M. li. . , MUM-- .V ,_,____> * I 
 
 i | — * 
 
 d* HXK>-wfe4_.lk pO j 
 
 — -t — 
 
 3£ 
 
 ^»4/J— a 
 
 1 
 
 if 
 
 / / 
 
 1 
 
 \ _... 
 
 First Bilingual Decree of Philae, a (lower half). 
 
 
 ■4fa?*e- —' 
 
 •o a-*" 
 
 7*^*5 
 
 Seven-tenths of the original size 
 
 PLATE 7 
 
 ^ 
 
 11 
 
 \ 
 
 ~i^ ^- [/< 
 
 ^ 
 
 o >__■ 
 
 y 
 
 
 
 15 
 
 
First Bilingual Decree of PhiSae, b (lower half). 
 
 PLATE 8 
 
11 
 
 p n<=* R^ 
 
 4 
 
 nu 
 
 ^ 
 
 /f 
 
 ti 
 
 15 ! 
 
 v 
 
 ! 
 I 
 I 
 
 ! 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 -\\ 
 
 % ^%^W^A c==Q£=! 
 
 1 — — — - J < ^v- " ^y 
 
 • 
 
 - ^ 
 
 / 
 
 V 
 
 First Bilingual Decree of Philae, c (lower half). 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 PLATE 9 
 
 J/// 
 
 £N 
 
 Se\ en-tenths of the original size 
 

 m'4\ 
 
 *\ 
 
 ffeuks&Vt& LH— . 
 
 JW:? 
 
 f i I f | I * 
 
 
 J L 
 
 rzn 
 
 I *£UU tfi |f#l 
 
 i / 
 
 
 «» ■Sfe- 1 yr%S.fr ^ 
 
 "^1 
 
 I 
 
 — • — U. «* — «. „ ^ I I rf ■■*■- in ikMIii? ■■ mmmm 
 
 First Bilingual Decree of Philae, d (lower half). 
 
 
 i^o AdIa 
 
 PLATE 10 
 
 
 ;^MV% 
 
 DODO 
 
 
 *'*«.,. { 
 
 *>fy^ ^ 
 
 f 
 
 f /-y - — — •-, 
 
 — i !■■■!■ w — I— 4 _^ ^ }«iaM _ _ 
 
 i/ n » e->--~~^ / 
 
 i / „ "iff- ' "• 
 
 7/"^ /3 
 
 /'l 
 
 
 ii 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 z^b, 
 
 
 *e5s|pEa-Tr "IT 1 
 
 ODD A 
 
 ^ 
 
 t — ■■ — s X3-- 
 
 >T 
 
 ^v??«*%^ 
 
 -X; 
 
 )U^. 
 
 „J^wM/^^ D D D %• 
 
 25SfDflQ 
 
 \ 
 
 Seven-tenths of the original size 
 
First Bilingual Decree of Philae, e (lower half) 
 
 11 
 
 if 
 
 - / 
 
 m i 
 
 PLATE 11 
 
 15 
 
 fK 
 
 ^&&**,-^'vCbM 
 
 
 
 -In- 
 
 ! 1 
 
 -A 
 
 
 
 
 LJ 
 
 
 ? 
 
 7 V^ 
 
 ^>: 
 
 v» ^ 
 
 77 \^ 
 
 I 
 
 V 
 
 J 
 
 V \ > ..■->■■■.■■.- 
 
 15 
 
 Q O OO^ 
 
 Seven-tenths of the original size 
 
First Bilingual Decree of Philae, / (lower half, end). 
 
 PLATE 12 
 
 11 
 
 15 
 
 Seven-tenths of the original size 
 
*c 
 
 iO 
 
 '" ■*:' 
 
 *^. 
 
 
 
 ^s**-- 
 
 
 \ 
 
 i 
 
 so 
 
 
 3S 
 
 W5 
 
 **3 
 
lO 
 
 »o 
 
 " ft 
 
 1 <ffll ;* <? 
 
 
 
 ^? 
 
 (Tj)^^ 
 
 t| 
 
 
 c=3 r-^> 
 
 *A 
 
 >S>\ 
 
 <na* 1 „=£^ ^JT 7^s «D .* 
 
 u -* . , js^. — - /^=>\ ^ ,;-■ aa 
 
 "« % §= 1 IL J= 
 
 
 CO 
 
 ^iniillfflT"~-~*-*^^tiliBf«t^^^ . 
 
 
 *r 
 
 w 
 
 ^ ^ 
 
 * s \ 
 
 <^ 
 
 vv 
 
 £\ 
 
 
 \ 
 
 v 
 
 \ 
 
 •s 
 
 1 
 
 St 
 
 •§ 
 
 I 
 I 
 
 f 
 
 »} 
 
IG> 
 
 iO 
 
 1 
 
 
 o 
 
 I 
 
 4> 
 W 
 
 J-i 
 
 u 
 
 3 
 C 
 
 MP n 
 
 
 — ""-» j^» 
 
 
 Jt^o 
 
 I 
 
 •3 
 
 
 ■i 
 
 .s 
 
 a? 
 
 •sSte&l 
 
 ^ 
 
 $s 
 
 3L 
 
 ^X^V^^^sa^SS^^^^g^^g^^, 
 
 >o 
 
 J 
 
 U3 
 
to 
 
 lO 
 
 < 
 
 Q- 
 
 
 o 
 
 J 
 
 £< 
 
 Q 
 1 
 
 bo 
 
 C 
 
 a »H 
 < »-( 
 
 03 
 
 <Tk^ 
 
 _.-sy 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 'fT \ 
 
 
 fr? <^S 
 
 s? 
 
 \\ ^^—-- ■ i- iii- --* 
 
 <F* 
 
 
 
 
 ►v 
 
 ^4 
 
 
 
 N\*NT' 
 
 \ 
 
 \ WW 
 
 \ v \ 
 
 {%^ 
 
 ' i 
 
 W 
 
 
 V I _ 
 
 C 
 t 
 
 ^-<fc*r - -(H)- 
 
 *a 
 
 m -.riWifiM 
 
 c 
 St 
 
 . 
 
*o 
 
 1 
 
 ! 
 
 u 
 'JO 
 
 SQ 
 
 I 
 
 » » 
 
 4 «-' 
 
 •3 
 
 MMWUMf-rtrf i-iii-nir 
 
*G> 
 
 m 
 
 t- 
 < 
 
 Q. 
 
 9 
 
 I 
 
 o 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 ^ ^^ 
 
 ^^^ % 
 
 H ^ * 
 
 
 fk$> _ A>^$LtL 
 
 c% *.i 
 
 * — — -k 
 
 
 v » 
 
 
 NX 
 
 \ 
 
 \ 
 
 
 
 \ 
 
 _ . Jt^ — 
 
 6£ 
 
 ■3 
 
 QQ 
 
US 
 
 us 
 
 i- 
 
 < 
 
 "00 
 
 
 o 
 
 s 
 
 
 cS 
 
 at 
 
 3 
 
 CQ 
 
 -ft <#*?-==>- 
 
 c^ ^0 
 
 itf 
 
 C& > c^ 
 
 «r§s $ 
 
 ^ % 
 
 G==* 
 
 -V 
 
 V V> 
 
 > 
 
 
 5 €<®^ 
 
 
 
 §3 
 
 l^lln 
 
 
 e^ y ^ 
 
 
 SJ» 
 
 l.'j 
 
 ■c 
 
 o 
 
 ~9 
 I 
 I 
 
 CO 
 
»o 
 
 »-4 
 
 < 
 
 4) 
 
 3 
 
 «> 
 
 ft. 
 
 V. 
 O 
 
 a 
 
 §, 
 
 .£ 
 
 CQ 
 
 
 B 
 
 V 
 
 m*% 
 
 
 ,% *i - < 
 
 \ 
 
 «>• 
 
 ^ 
 
 \ 
 
 | "^te 
 
 
 .r 
 
 el 
 
 e 
 
 '& 
 
 o 
 
 I 
 
 ! 
 
 U5 
 
 tO 
 
Second Bilingual Decree of Philae, a (upper half) 
 
 PLATE 21 
 
 J DOOQ Q D 
 
 
 
 
 ' " \ D 
 
 n- — „ -~ n I a gj 
 
 
 <^> 
 
 10 
 
 4&?2&k&% 
 
 ■ A S. 
 
 D o\/"" 
 
 / 
 
 Seven-tenths of the original size 
 
 io a o 
 
 ID 
 
 D 
 D 
 
 i*—— J 
 
 10 
 

 ' 1 1 i l \ 
 
 J !■ '.ft 
 
 id a o 
 
 I 
 
 >$ WVV-3* 
 
 /ft £^ I 
 
 Oi 
 
 o 'V* 
 
 vfer-' 
 
 i q 'A^>^- jc-^v t j_;\ \ 
 
 
 **^ 
 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 Second Bilingual Decree of Philae, £ (upper half). 
 
 
 ^VVVV^ 
 
 I J8o3\ o d iM- J r§> 
 
 'r-rTTl - 
 
 PLATE 22 
 
 
 .'A_. 
 
 -Ail 
 
 
 lisSt'S: 
 
 =fli: 
 
 o o fi a 
 
 *-^i///< <?>' s,c 
 
 V u 11 --g ^gafe^^n n n 
 
 /jdjfjj 6't5DDD z===] 
 
 o o o 
 
 '^ o 
 
 £2^ 
 
 <=^ 
 
 <n 
 
 
 ^ f] <=oc=^ 
 
 r-ao^D Q D 
 
 ==00=1 
 
 QQ D 
 
 D o oo 
 
 
 I _w~ 
 
 
 c-vv/-! 
 
 a a 
 
 f 
 
 Seven-tenths of the original size 
 
 <^M=5> 
 
 »i 
 
 T 
 
 
 ' ( 
 
 
 o 
 
 10 
 
Second Bilingual Decree of Philae, c (upper half). 
 
 ^3 
 
 
 
 bC 
 
 PLATE 23 
 
 / 
 
 ( i— 
 
 
 «3 
 
 lOS 
 
 Oi_i ••*«?,:ssv»'fi^ C— ~v^s-- — ; 
 
 W/lli D# s cri<ip § 
 
 
 ^XO// 
 
 i 
 
 -j^ssm 
 
 
 
 
 r^; 
 
 7 
 
 £^ 
 
 
 .rfLILA JO) _ £E&^- 3? 
 
 n); /U) 
 
 Seven-tenths of the original sise 
 
 KjP 
 
 cizi^QrQrrzi 
 
 D D D 
 
 
 D 
 
 ^M 
 
 D Or D 
 
 ^i/Lw^ D d n D 
 
 £^ 
 
 i2%=>| 
 
 <> 
 
 O D D 01 
 
 ^£> ^^ 
 
 ^^c 
 
 
 -._ - I 
 
 Z2^ 
 
 ODD 
 
 / \ 
 
 
 z. 
 
Second Bilingual Decrfee of Philac, d (upper half). 
 
 PLATE 24 
 
 1 u n -° 
 
 J^^ o ^ ° 
 
 3 4a 
 
 10 ^4^4^ 
 
 ' *Jf > 10 
 
 Seven-tenths of the original size 
 
Second Bilingual Decree of Philae, e (upper half)- 
 
 ^3 
 
 <7\ 
 
 O/ J ,^~M' Vj 
 
 / o 
 
 / 
 
 a 
 
 c 
 
 
 <M> 
 
 J $ L@ 
 
 "U 
 
 
 ?\ 
 
 ■ y 
 
 V ^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 J^.zSgJ.^M 
 
 PLATE 25 
 
 J -. 
 
 )> 
 
 / / 
 
 
 qU/^> ;,o,x>| m 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 1 1 
 
 ^ 
 
 I u ) («^r u ^>^ / L.u D D i 
 
 -? V f 1 
 
 /" 
 
 1 1 
 
 
 
 ^ >=■ 
 
 ^ n / ' 
 
 l^f ><££==, ,'V. 
 
 i I ' L 
 
 
 v>* 
 
 i*\ 
 
 n , ^w. 
 
 1 — -w/- 
 
 ^ 
 
 (J 
 
 H fn\ <=-- 
 
 II D D 
 
 
 
 
 3<^ 
 
 > i d a/ ' 
 
 1 1 
 
 Seven-tenths of the original size 
 
 ODD \) 9^ 
 
 10 
 
Second Bilingual Decree of Philae, / (upper half) 
 
 J%%%&z#ttz&'- 
 
 \c± ^ 
 
 L^=^_L 
 
 PLATE 26 
 
 (Wa^1%1 
 
 Seven-tenths of the original size 
 
 10 
 
Second Bilingual Decree of Philae, a (lower half). 
 
 11 
 
 15 
 
 8 
 
 A* 
 
 
 \d 
 
 D) 
 
 ^ 
 
 Seven-tenths of the original size 
 
 
 J? 
 
 "• ^ D P^j 
 
 M^ 1 
 
 
 -^—1 tr-^: — — • 
 
 t» 
 
 
 t2k/i o TMM 
 
 PLATE 27 
 
 
 Ji 
 
 
 o 
 
 «. 
 
 i 
 
W5 
 
 rt* 
 
 1 
 
 < 
 
 _! 
 
 a. 
 
 5^ <C*~ 
 
 
 -V 
 
 k 
 
 ^ 
 
 43 4 
 
 .fC? 
 
 <?*? 
 
 ty 
 
 
 o 
 
 I 
 
 & 
 
 CQ 
 
 1 
 
 CO 
 
 ^ 
 
 #>**" v i ^ rsj sa ^ Y .#-- w " 
 
 
 <§** 
 
 ^X.x^oV' N v.. -J U *~^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 HS»i 
 
 N 
 
 4 
 
 .1 
 
 O 
 J3 
 
 I 
 
 r- 
 
 »» 
 
< 
 
 -J 
 o. 
 
 Si 
 
 (J 
 
 '■i 
 
 sS 
 
 Qu 
 
 s 
 
 i 
 
 J 
 
 
 
 >l* 
 
 
 a 
 
 03 
 
 Mi 
 
 1 %3fc /7v .6tf» 
 
 
 \> s 
 
 x - » *v ' »M ill! »■■ " ■ » 
 
 
 
 
 J5 
 
 .s 
 
 00 
 
 
 Ik 
 
 %i 1 1* 
 
 M 
 
 *S Wb O/pSJ ^^ S ^ *^ 
 
 [o- 
 
 %*&■ 
 
 .£& 
 
 
 C 
 'Si 
 
 I 
 
< 
 -I 
 Ol 
 
 \ i 
 
 \ I 
 
 I f 
 
 
 5 
 
 u 
 o 
 
 
 8 
 
 CQ 
 
 3 
 
 Q-^-a-^f'-n-- 
 
 ^ 
 © 
 
 
 ©> <^ 
 
 
 Q 
 
 
 
 
 i < 
 
 1 A 
 
 * V 
 
 S \ 
 
 »' 
 
 CO 
 
 " J (ft 
 
 
 01 
 
 
 K 
 
 X^O 
 
 Ar 
 
 JL? 
 
 -^ 
 
 <^&' 
 
 
 -c4^K-,- - 
 
 ^ ^ 
 
 u 
 
 <%- a 
 
 03 
 
 a 
 'Sb 
 
 I 
 
Hi 
 
 t- 
 < 
 
 WO 
 
 I 
 
 a 
 
 '£ 
 
 is 
 
 CQ 
 
 1 
 
 u 
 
 V 
 CD 
 
 J: 
 
 -^ 
 
 V 
 
 0- 
 
 if. 
 
 - - .- ' 
 
 f i 
 
 i i 
 
 » 
 
 % 
 
 
 t> 
 
 ^^^^sssss^^ _ _ 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 iCHj^qr ) j\ ^ t k f - i "F^"-"' 
 
 ■•o: 
 
 -'-- |~ -C3?S?- 
 
 
 
 a 
 'S, 
 
 "g 
 
 ! 
 
 > 
 
 \ J 
 
 ia 
 
 ** 
 
Ul 
 
 < 
 _i 
 
 a. 
 
 10 
 
 CO 
 
 8 
 
 I 
 
 Q 
 1 
 
 4> 
 
 4> 
 
 Q 
 
 OQ 
 
 1 
 
 S~\J3 
 
 
 
 -! =J^V- — 
 
 
 ^> 
 
 
 
 
 :» \ v 
 
 
 » V <: l .\ 
 
 ^-\ — 
 
 
 
 
 Vv V J 
 
 r >> 
 
 V 
 
 \^ V 1 
 
 •\ . - * 
 
 j 
 
 
 
 \ 1 
 
 1 , \ 
 
 • 1 
 
 ^ \ * 
 
 \ ' ' ' 
 
 \ 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 1 1 > 1 
 
 S 
 
 •a 
 ■§ 
 
 i« 
 
 eo 
 
Second Bilingual Decree of Philae, b (lower half). 
 
 « i 
 
 > f 
 
 PLATE 28 
 
 "W"~ UiK A \A 
 
 s /\ /\ ,>\ s\-~yK--/ v» 
 
 v \y v v v" \/ I 
 
 o 
 
 ^ 
 
 Q> (j O O O 0<A*<W^ 
 
 ^^ 
 
 in i fed- 
 
 
 / 1 cr^C^ 
 ; i*^^ n 
 
 ^4==^,. 
 
 c=00=» 
 
 D 0. 
 
 X <1 □ D 
 
 >%h i 
 
 %f 
 
 > i 
 
 
 1/ 
 
 
 z^ 
 
 
 ^ ^ 
 
 /? f 
 
 ^ L- 
 
 p 
 
 
 lfjCiti„J^mr^)P ^4 
 
 15 |u M~T4^jm< *^ 
 
 m *■ 
 
 0== 
 
 \j%Z&>' 
 
 iTl 
 
 
 AA^^^I 
 
 ft 
 
 ® 1? 0^^=J 
 
 <£^\ 
 
 y^*. 
 
 ^"11 ^ 
 
 n 
 
 D © a 
 
 SIS] 
 
 : ■"" JP ^ O 
 
 n 
 
 ^>^ - S 3 \ 
 
 
 b j' 
 
 *^ 
 
 /" ^ v // "SC 
 
 -THT 
 
 P D 
 
 D 
 
 il ^a 
 
 t z 
 
 f 
 
 < ( 
 
 fa v 
 
 .^W^^A, 
 
 Seven-tenths of the original size 
 
 n 
 
 i 
 
 
11 
 
 15 
 
 Second Bilingual Decree of Philae, c (lower half). 
 
 PLATE 29 
 
 
 s 5 o c=^=i ^caJjjJB^ & 
 
 i ■ - — ■ '/ • — T /> \ 
 
 — — — ■ »y - -. y' \ j»; ui 
 
 o d ^M^ii; 
 
 1 1 « v — . i 
 
 i 
 
 i7. 
 
 *-_—'' 
 
 ■ — - 
 
 to 
 
 
 |-5 
 
 r 3 
 
 jg^> 
 
 V~'' 
 
 EEE! _ ,jr~-| 
 
 ( r L- 
 
 ^^r~ 
 
 .Jt^a-l 
 
 sggri * 
 
 — ! \\\r ; / '4. ', 
 
 
 OOD 
 
 l^—^ <^s^> 
 
 & jS££=^o/1 
 
 
 nn fly f 
 
 ^32 ^ s ,7\\ t- 
 
 f 
 
 4L 
 
 
 rai ^ #&* 
 
 zz^ 
 
 £^ 
 
 *=^t^ 
 
 £2\ 
 
 fn)<^ 
 
 
 
 ri- 
 ll 
 
 
 ^UJ 
 
 i 
 
 i 
 
 a D! 
 
 Seven-tenths of the original size 
 
 15 
 
Second Bilingual Decree of Philae, d (lower half). 
 
 /I <A) 
 
 ! fi 
 
 n 
 
 feL 
 
 \ 
 
 
 { / 
 
 \ / 
 
 / 
 
 U 
 
 Seven-tenths of the original size 
 
 PLATE 30 
 
 'I 
 
 
 
 r > 
 
 r p D 
 
 .A^Vk 
 
 ' /( 
 
 ^, 
 
 1 ^=~" 
 
 ^1 » / A 
 
 ! 
 
 ^R 
 
 f ' 
 
 
 i&££ L i< 
 
Second Bilingual Decree of Philae, e (lower half). 
 
 11 
 
 
 m:^^^-^ 
 
 i D 
 
 =3 )c3qtr=i) 
 
 f 
 
 PLATE 31 
 
 ' ^ '< I— Awl ' » ? 
 
 U ^ ^> S/n 
 
 15 
 
Second Bilingual Decree of Philae. / (lower half). 
 
 ff 
 
 i 
 
 11 f v 
 
 i? 
 
 V ' 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 O ////' 
 
 c=DO=> 
 
 D Q D.JT 
 
 W& 
 
 ©L.D g^iJL/^ t^K > 
 
 
 
 !■ 
 
 
 r 
 
 ' < ! • 
 
 
 \v 
 
 
 
 /■» v 
 
 v7 
 
 
 y\ /^ v 
 
 PLATE 3 2 
 
 
 ii 
 
 15 
 
*o 
 
 < 
 
 Q. 
 
 I 
 
 o 
 
 J 
 
 <d 
 
 1 
 
 I 
 
 "3 
 
 i 
 
 s 
 
 o 
 
 -»-^ >. 
 
 N — i 
 
 J3 4 
 
 -x f 
 
 
 D #^ 
 Si 
 
 
 
 I .--^--i s 
 
 /*ft. 
 
 ^>" <v 
 
 
 
 v\ 
 
 r^JL.~-3c 
 
 £r4> ^„__j§fc* ^S.—!^^- 
 
 ^==> 
 
 Cr^ 
 
 Ps_itw 
 
 Vi. 
 
 t« 
 
 ^> 
 
 1 
 
 "^L.""^ 
 
 L. 
 
 V 
 
 
 ~v^cr 
 
 > "* 
 
 ■TsL t 
 
 ---^-'>SL- 
 
 |N *=SS,, 
 
 
 
 
 °M ; ^ 
 
 rx 
 
 *&*• i 
 
 i /■ 
 
 .<*?■• \ 
 
 'v,' «-- 
 
 W 
 
 j t\ 
 
 o 
 
 — ^ 
 
 n 
 
 c 
 
 tf»" 
 
 te. 
 
 /\ \ 
 
 l. K5^ i 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 .^v.^ ,-'-- 
 
 I v*" j 
 
 
 % u^- "rife" ; 
 
 -3 
 
 S3 
 I 
 
 "8 
 
tO 
 
 "* 
 
 npg 
 
 .'St 
 
 i 
 
 JSfcwjL-^LL^L.-. 
 
 
 
 
 
 SF V- 
 
 o- 
 
 ^.M 
 
 „ W «<F(\ 1^* S; !~5= 
 
 W'" 
 
 ctl^- -^ l 
 
 
 a 
 '3: 
 
 1 
 
 oo 
 
 lO 
 
 Tji 
 

 
 
 OS 
 
 .9 
 
 an 
 
 5 
 
First Bilingual Decree of Philae, i (upper half)- 
 
 PLATE 4 
 
 S^Zs 
 
 □ 
 
 
 r- 
 
 L_„ : 
 
 J vA. 
 
 Ml i 
 
 
 T" 
 
 H 
 
 1 \^^^> 
 
 .r-iAn 
 
 U'4'! i#' b?J W 
 
 
 ' ! it 
 
 
 ^'M Q 
 
 ^000 SLJ 
 
 S-'c g> 
 
 iCi, 
 
 i ; i 
 
 -4 l_j.i. 
 
 
 «„/ 
 
 1 r^W J'^w^ w 
 
 " \/ 1' \x fA 
 
 Lysyfc*-, sfr 
 
 «^ 
 
 t=> 
 
 D D 
 
 
 -LX-X*,,, , .--j. 
 
 k? 
 
 
 0fe§m$< 
 
 
 7 t-- 
 
 '^iMiV_ 
 
 -ycr 
 
 ^n 
 
 Vsi-^gS* 
 
 ) v ^__-' 
 
 K^fe'. 
 
 
 
 .A 
 
 & 
 
 
 . -A. ., it* ,£ 4 y- V y- li 
 
 
 ^mm W* 
 
 >c 
 
 
 WfZEX 
 
 =^ 
 
 ^° ' ! [LB i N 
 
 T/^2, 
 
 >// 
 
 j!Dfl ftV-H 
 
 10 
 
 *» — ^. 
 
 Seven-tenths of the original size