Jean Winand, The Chariots, the Hittites and the Grammar, in R. Landgráfová & J. Mynářová (éd.), Rich and Great. Studies in Honour of Anthony J. Spalinger on the Occasion of his 70th Birthday, Prague, p. V-XI.

strana I _titulní str. RICH and GREAT Studies in Honour of Anthony J. Spalinger on the Occasion of his 70th Feast of Thoth edited by Renata Landgráfová and Jana Mynářová Charles University in Prague Faculty of Arts 2016 strana II - tiráž II The book was published through a non-investment subsidy of the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of the Czech Republic for the purpose of the development of international cooperation with the Arab Republic of Egypt and the Republic of the Sudan. Reviewed by G. Pieke and B. Vachala Contributors: L. Bareš, M. Bárta, V. G. Callender, F. Coppens, L. Depuydt, T. Dobbin-Bennett, E. Frood, O. Goelet, Jr., C. R. Hamilton, J. Hellum, C. A. Hope, J. Hsieh, D. Kahn, M. I. Khaled, R. Landgráfová, A. von Lieven, E. A. Mackay, J. Malek, M. Megahed, J. Mynářová, H. Navrátilová, A. Niwiński, J. F. Quack, K. Smoláriková, D. Sweeney, K. Szpakowska, M. Verner, H. Vymazalová, J. Winand Cover: Drawing of the image of Amun-nakht in the gateway at Ayn Birbiyeh, Dakhleh Oasis, courtesy of Olaf Kaper; a photo of a statuette of an Asiatic captive, Abusir (Archive of the Czech Institute of Egyptology, Faculty of Arts, Charles University in Prague). Type-setting layout: Agama® poly-grafický ateliér, s.r.o., Praha Print: TISKÁRNA PROTISK, s.r.o. © Charles University in Prague, Faculty of Arts, 2016 ISBN 978-80-7308-668-8 Contents III CONTENTS Contents 3 List of abbreviations 4 JAROMIR MALEK, Rich and Great 6 L ADISL AV BAREŠ, A Rare Late Period Attestation of the Counting of the Year’s Seasons Scene 9 MIROSL AV BÁ RTA, “Dummy Mummification” in the Old Kingdom: A New Intact Case from the 5th Dynasty, Abusir 15 VIVIENNE G. CALLENDER, It’s all in the Family: a 6th Dynasty Conundrum 19 FILIP COPPENS, @b Ssp mnx.t. A Feast of Re-Harsomtus of Khadi on Mesore 29 29 LEO DEPUYDT, The Regnal Years of the “Mathematical Astronomical” Demotic Papyrus Carlsberg 9 Reinterpreted 39 TASHA DOBBIN-BENNET T, “Stretching out a Contraction, Softening Stiffness”. Identifying Rigor Mortis in Ancient Egyptian Religious Texts 61 ELIZ ABETH FROOD, Role-play and Group Biography in Ramessid Stelae from the Serapeum 69 OGDEN GOELET, Jr., Reflections on Papyrus Rochester MAG 51.346.1 and the End of the 20th Dynasty 89 CALEB R. HAMILTON, Conflict in the Iconography of the Protodynastic and Early Dynastic Periods 99 JENNIFER HELLUM, The King, His Body, and His Relatives in the Pyramid Texts 115 COLIN A. HOPE, Reconstructing the Image of Seth, Lord of the Oasis, in his Temple at Mut el-Kharab in Dakhleh Oasis 123 JULIA HSIEH, Where is the City of Eternity? 147 DAN’ EL KAHN, The Historical Background of a Topographical List of Ramesses III 161 MOHAMED ISMAIL KHALED, The Donation of Royal Funerary Domains in the Old Kingdom 169 RENATA L ANDGRÁFOVÁ – JANA MYNÁŘOVÁ, Some Points about Structuring Points: Aspects of the Uses of the Egyptian Verspunkte 187 ALEXANDRA VON LIEVEN, The Movement of Time. News from the “Clockmaker” Amenemhet 207 E. ANNE MACKAY, The Baneful Hedgehog of Ancient Greece 233 MOHAMED MEGAHED, The Antichambre Carrée in the Old Kingdom. Decoration and Function 239 HANA NAVRÁTILOVÁ, Khaemwaset in Dahshur: The Prince and the Stones 259 A N DR Z EJ N IW IŃ SK I, Where and for whom did Ineni Excavate the Royal Tomb? No one seeing, no one hearing reconsidered. 267 JOACHIM F. QUACK, Zur Frage der botanischen Natur des bAq-Baumes und des von ihm gewonnenen Öls mit einem Anhang: pBM 10085 „2–3“ rekto. Ein schnippischer Dialog zwischen Mann und Frau? 275 KVĚTA SMOL ÁRIKOVÁ, Ashurbanipal and Cambyses – Two Different Approaches to the Conquest of Egypt 291 DEBORAH SWEENEY, Family Gods at Deir el-Medina? 299 KASIA SZPA KOW SKA , Feet of Fury: Demon Warrior Dancers of the New Kingdom 313 MIROSL AV VERNER, Pr-twt – The Cult Place of Raneferef ’s Statues 325 HANA VYMAZ ALOVÁ, Feasts in Written EvidencVe from the 5th Dynasty Royal Necropolis of Abusir 331 JEAN WINAND, The Chariots, the Hittites and the Grammar V Indices 341 strana VI Alexandra von Lieven IV @b Ssp mnx.t. A Feast of Re-Harsomtus of Khadi on Mesore 29 V The Chariots, the Hittites and the Grammar JEAN WINAND 1 Deeper acquaintance with texts is always rewarding. A trivial disappeared in Coptic, except for some twenty nouns, most statement like this takes even an axiomatic value with well- of them expressing body parts (Layton 2000: § 138). In this known texts, which, because of their very familiarity, might apparently straightforward evolution, Late Egyptian stands give the impression that they have nothing left to tell us. in the middle, with a more or less balanced proportion of The small study presented here once again reconsiders the both constructions. The suffix pronoun is still predomi- texts related to the famous battle of Qadesh, namely the so- nantly retained with some semantic classes, as nouns express- called Poem and the Bulletin. It focuses on what might a pri- ing body parts, family membership, symbolic entities, ori seem to be a mere trifle: the expression of the possessive physical particularities and psychological states, and nouns with the Egyptian noun for chariotry, n.t-Htr. I hope that in relation with royalty or religion (see Winand in press). this study, which is at the intersection of some emblematic The case of n.t-Htr “chariotry” does not belong to any of fields of research that have always been close to his heart – the semantic classes listed above. In the Qadesh texts, the the army, the relations between Egyptians and Hittites, and distribution of the data according to the form of the the grammar of texts – will attract Anthony Spalinger’s at- pronominal possessor is summarized into the two following tention.2 figures. The first one gives the statistics for the Poem, the As may be guessed, chariots are everywhere in the second one for the Bulletin.3 Ramesside war texts, for they often constituted the key ele- At first sight, the distribution does not seem to follow ment that played a decisive role in the final result of a battle. any clear pattern. Such a feeling is particularly strong in the The compound n.t-Htr is formed on Htr, which basically Poem, where all versions can have both constructions. As a refers to entities that are considered as pairs (Kruchten 1980: preliminary observation, there is a very strong agreement be- 39–52). In the New Kingdom, Htr can specifically refer to a tween the versions if one looks at the data horizontally. The chariot, and, by extension, to the horses, challenging the two constructions never appear concurrently in the same noun ssm, which exclusively refers to the animal, never to passage, except in one case: in §28, the version of pChester the artefact (see Vernus 2010: 1–46). In Late Egyptian, Beatty opted for the possessive article whereas the two rele- maybe contrary to some expectation, one must note that n.t- vant epigraphic versions here (K2 and L1) have a suffix pro- Htr is not that common outside the royal war texts (see noun. Although pChester Beatty is almost always in lacuna infra). for the passages that are of interest in this study, one can In the texts related to the battle of Qadesh, n.t-Htr is plausibly suggest that the presence of the possessive article sometimes accompanied by a possessive. When the possessor is another case of the well-known “linguistic moderniza- is pronominal, there are two possibilities: the possessor is di- tion”, whose different manifestations have been exhaustively rectly suffixed to the noun, n.t-Htr.f, or the noun that en- studied by Anthony Spalinger (see Spalinger 2002: 99). codes the possessum is preceded by a complex form whose One would probably be hardly pressed to find any se- first element – the base – is derived from the definite article mantic significance for explaining the variations in the ex- (historically a demonstrative pronoun), followed by a bound pression of the possessor. As is clear from the data, there is person marker, tAj.f n.t-Htr (Winand in press). This of course no difference either according to the support (temple walls illustrates a basic evolution in the Egyptian language, which versus papyrus) or the writing system (hieroglyphic versus crystallized in the New Kingdom. While in the Old King- hieratic). Nevertheless a meaningful distribution suggests it- dom the adnominal possession with a bound person marker self when one considers the role of the registers or, more cor- (suffix pronoun) is used exclusively, it has almost completely rectly, of the levels of enunciation (narrative vs. discourse in 1 I warmly thank Stéphane Polis for his comments on a draft of this article. 2 Spalinger 1985: 43–75; Spalinger 2002; Spalinger 2003: 163–199; Spalinger 2013: 237–256. 3 References are made to Kuentz’s numbering system; the sigla on top of columns follow the abreviations system found in Kitchen’s edition (KRI II: 2).  Jean Winand VI K1 K2 A L1 L2 ChB S R 22 ARTPOS - - - ARTPOS 25 ARTPOS ARTPOS ARTPOS [ARTPOS] 28 SUF SUF ARTPOS 50 90 ARTPOS [ARTPOS] ARTPOS ARTPOS 114 ARTPOS ARTPOS ARTPOS ARTPOS ARTPOS ARTPOS 143 SUF SUF SUF 145 SUF SUF SUF SUF SUF 168 ARTPOS 169 ARTPOS 172 ARTPOS ARTPOS 184 ARTPOS ARTPOS ARTPOS ARTPOS 193 ARTPOS ARTPOS ARTPOS 223b ARTPOS 224 ARTPOS ARTPOS ARTPOS ARTPOS 237 ARTPOS ARTPOS ARTPOS 240 ARTPOS ARTPOS ARTPOS ARTPOS 252 ARTPOS ARTPOS ARTPOS ARTPOS ARTPOS 254 ARTPOS ARTPOS ARTPOS 323 SUF SUF 333 [ARTPOS] ARTPOS ARTPOS ARTPOS ARTPOS Fig. 1. Distribution of the pronominal possessor for n.t-Htr in the Poem the sense of Benveniste 1971). In discourse (§169, 172, 184, The suffix pronoun is consistently used except in §107. This 193, 240, and 254, in grey shading in the figure) the pos- exception can be easily explained as a reminiscence of a sim- sessive article is systematically used, while in narrative both ilar passage in the Poem (ex. 1). The tradition here splits be- constructions can appear. This distribution is largely sup- tween the epigraphic versions (ex. 2) and the version of ported by the evidence from the Bulletin, where all relevant pSallier (ex. 3): sections for our discussion belong to the narrative register. The Chariots, the Hittites and the Grammar VII L1 L2 R1 I 21 SUF SUF - 24 SUF SUF SUF SUF 48 SUF SUF 76 SUF SUF SUF 100 SUF SUF 107 ARTPOS ARTPOS 110 SUF SUF Fig. 2. Distribution of the pronominal possessor for n.t-Htr in the Bulletin Ex. 1 jw xAa wi pAj.i mSa tAj.i n.t-Htr (…) more at variance with the epigraphic versions. It is of course “… while my army and my chariotry had difficult to guess how it found its way in the text. It could abandoned me (…)” (Bulletin § 107 be the result of an interpolation made by the scribe due to [I 43 = R1 25])4 some carelessness (see Spalinger 2002: 19), but one can also Ex. 2 jw xAa wi pAj.i mSa aSA, bw nw.n wa r.i m tAj.i turn to another kind of explanation. To start with, the ver- n.t-Htr sion of pSallier is not completely farfetched: it makes an ac- “… while my army had abandoned me, and ceptable sense in context, not very different from what has no one in my chariotry was looking at me” been adopted by the epigraphic versions: (Poem § 113–114 epigraphic versions) Ex. 4 jw bn waw n mSa, bn snj Ex. 3 jw xAa <wi> pAj.i mSa tAj.i n.t-Htr (…) jw xAa wi pAj.i mSa tAj.i n.t-Htr “… while my army and my chariotry had n smn.n wa jm.sn r aHA Hna.sn abandoned me (…)” (Poem § 113–114 “there was no more soldier, no officer; my pSallier) army and my chariotry had abandoned me; The text of pSallier might of course be corrupted at this no one among them could stand to fight point (see Spalinger 2002: 25), but it is interesting to note with them (…)” (Poem § 89–91 pSallier) the convergence of its reading with the Bulletin. As shown Ex. 5 jw bn waw n mSa, bn qra by the history of the transmission of some classical texts, like pAj.i mSa tAj.i n.t-Htr m mrqHt Xr-HA.t.sn Sinuhe or Ptahhotep, the necessity of reconstructing one and n smn.n wa jm.sn r aHA Hna.sn only one Urtext as the source of the whole manuscript tra- “there was no more soldier, no shield bearer; dition has recently been subjected to intense scrutiny (Par- my army and my chariotry was disbanding kinson 2009; Winand 2014: 215–243). In this respect, the before them; no one among them could way literary pieces were created and then circulated differs stand to fight with them (…)” from the model one has inherited from Greek and Latin (Poem § 89–91 epigraphic versions) philology. This passage could thus shed an interesting light The reading of pSallier fits the context rather well: after upon the possible existence of more than one authorial deploring that there is no one left, neither soldier nor shield source in the textual tradition (see already the discussion by bearer (officer in pSallier), the king says that the army has Spalinger 2002: 101–103). abandoned him (§90), and that there is consequently no one As was already noted, the same sentence occurs again in left to fight the enemy (§91). The epigraphic versions (ex. pSallier, somewhat earlier in the text (§90), where it is once 5) unanimously have mrqHt, a word of Semitic origin, whose 4 This section is missing in the Luxor versions (see Spalinger 1985: 69–70).  Jean Winand VIII etymology remains unclear.5 The word seems to be a hapax. “…now the despicable Ruler of Hatti was Faced thus with an unknown word, the scribe of pSallier or standing in the midst of his infantry and of its Vorlage was apparently at a loss. The very common col- chariotry, watching the fighting by His location pAj.i mSa (Hna) tAj.i n.t-Htr might admittedly have Majesty, being alone, on his own, having played a trick of memory and prompted the insertion of an with him neither his infantry nor his chari- expression, present elsewhere, that offered an acceptable otry; and he (i.e. the Ruler of Hatti) began to sense. Substitutions like these in poetry are quite common turn back and shrink away, full of fear” in oral transmission (the best example remains of course the (Poem § 143sqq)7 Homeric tradition), but also in literate societies where liter- The next case is very similar to the preceding one. The ature was memorized, as was the case in ancient Egypt. caption is once more strongly reminiscent of another passage There are also three passages in the small texts – captions from the Poem. The army and chariotry are in both cases re- – that go with the scenes where n.t-Htr has a pronominal lated to HAtj.w nb “all the captains”; the possessor is in each possessor: one with the possessive article, and two with a suf- case expressed by a suffix pronoun. fix pronoun. All passages are in narrative sections. As has Ex. 8 jw Hm.f wa.w, n mSa [Hna.f] m-xt rdj.n.f m Hr been observed above, both constructions can appear in nar- n HAt[j.w nb n mSa].f n.t-Htr.f r-Dd: rative, so that one does not need to take any trouble at ex- “…and His Majesty was alone, having no plaining the variations in the expression of the pronominal army with him, when His Majesty com- possessor. My guess here is that the composition of these manded all the captain of his army, his chari- ‘captions’ is to some extent dependent on the redaction of otry and his officers saying” the Poem; in other words, these small texts are not necessarily (Reliefs: § 62 = KRI II: 143,2–4)8 genuine compositions. This seems to be more particularly Ex. 9 aHa.n rdi.n Hm.i sTA.tw n.i HAty.w nb n mSa.i Hna n.t-Htr.i, the case for the longer texts, which precisely have to be dis- “…Then My Majesty had caused to be cussed here. ushered in to me all the captains of my Our first case is quite easily explained in this respect. The infantry and my chariotry” (Poem § 323) caption closely resembles a passage from the Poem (§143). The first one belongs to a long rhetorical text that ac- This is evident from the context and the general tone, but companies the representation of the king in a chariot: one will note more particularly the presence of the very rare Ex. 10 jw.f Hr Xdb wr.w nb n xAs.wt nb nA sn.w n pA word tnbX.6 In both passages, the pronominal possessor of xr n xtA Hna nAj.f wr.w aA.w nAj.f mSa tAj.f n.t- mSa and n.t-Htr is expressed by a suffix pronoun: Htr Ex. 6 pA wr xr Xsj n xtA aHa m Hr-jb mSa.f Hna n.t- “… as he killed all the princes of all foreign Htr.f, lands and the brothers of the enemy of Hatti Hr.f anw tnbX, jb.f bdS, and his great nobles, his armies and his chari- nn pr.n.f r aHA n snD n Hm.f otry” (Reliefs § 19 = KRI II: 135,8–12) “…the despicable, fallen, Ruler of Hatti, was In the last case, there is no precise relation with the Poem, standing in the midst of his infantry and but one may compare our passage with the only two sections chariotry, his face averted, shrinking away, his of the Poem where the sequence aA.w – mSa – n.t-Htr is found; heart had become feeble. He could not come in each case, the possessive article has been used. Once again, out to fight, because of fear of his Majesty” this probably made a rhythmic unit, that could be easily (Reliefs § 42 = KRI II: 139, 3–7) memorized, and thus be made available for other uses: Ex. 7 isT pA wr Xsy n xtA aHa Hr-ib mSa.f Hna t-n.t- Ex. 11 aHa.n Dd.n Hm.f n pAj.f mSa nAj.f wr.w m-mjt.t Htr.f Hr ptr pA aHA n Hm.f waw Hr-tp.f, tAj.f n.t-Htr iw bn mSa.f Hna.f, bn t-n.t-Htr.f, “…then His Majesty said to his army, his no- iw.f Hr aHa an tnbX snD.w bles and his chariotry as well” (Poem § 252) 5 Hoch 1994: No. 185. See already Gardiner (1960: 17), who was the first to suggest that mrqHt should be a verb of motion rather than a noun meaning “booty”. 6 See wn.jn wr.w aAj.w n tA nb swA.sn Hr.sn tnbX Hr anw bdS m-xt mAA.sn “… then the ruling (great) chiefs of every land that they (= the cavalcade) passed by – they cringed, turning away fainting, when they saw the people (rmT) of the Hatti-land joining with the king’s army” (KRI II: 251,12 – transl. K.A. Kitchen). 7 On the pattern jw.f Hr aHa + pseudo-participle, see Kruchten 1982; Winand 2006: 329–333. 8 The two epigraphic versions (A and K2) are not in complete agreement here: I mainly followed K2, except for the end where I followed A by adding n.t-Htr.f wr.w.f, which are absent in K2. The Chariots, the Hittites and the Grammar IX Ex. 12 Hs.t m Htp <r> tA-mrj Hna nAj.f wr.w pAj.f Ex. 16 aHa.n spd.n.f mSA.f n.t-Htr.f mSa tAj.f n.t-Htr “and then he made his army and his “return in peace to Egypt with his nobles, his chariotry ready” (KRI II: 243,11) army and his chariotry” (Poem § 333 Finally, to conclude this short note, it was also interesting pSallier)9 to have a look at Ramesses III’s Medinet Habu war inscrip- To this, one must add a last parallel, only found in pSal- tions, which, in many respects, tried to emulate the texts of lier: his glorious eponymous predecessor. The noun n.t-Htr ap- Ex. 13 aHa.n aS Hm.f a.w.s. n pAj.f mSa r-Hna tAj.f n.t- pears only three times with a pronominal possessor. Each Htr m-mit.t nAj.f wr.w time, the suffix pronoun was used. As the noun was always “and then His Majesty, l.p.h., called upon his in a narrative section, this is well in accordance with the ob- army, his chariotry and his nobles” servations made for the texts of Ramesses II: (Poem § 223bis-ter) Ex. 17 n.t-Htr.f dmD m Hfnw To come back to the expression of possession, the system- “his whole chariotry by millions” atic presence of the possessive article – a form largely marked (KRI V: 13,12) as a Late Egyptianism (see above) – in the discourse sections Ex. 18 dj.f pA wr n mSwS m Dr.t.j Hna mSa.f n.t-Htr.f is in accordance with other observations that have already “he put the prince of the Meshwesh in my been made as regards the first attestations of Late Egyptian hands together with his army and his in some 18th Dynasty epigraphic texts. While the narrative chariotry” (KRI V: 51,5) parts are usually written in Classical Egyptian, a.k.a. Égyptien Ex. 19 mnfA.t.f n.t-Htr.f Xr nxt.w de tradition, discourse, even put in the royal mouth, can ha- “his infantry and his chariotry carried power ve a definitely Late Egyptian flavour, as witnessed, among (or victory)” (KRI V: 61,2) others, in some workmen’s speeches found in the tombs. If one moves outside the royal war inscriptions, n.t-Htr The sensibility of the scribes to the variation of registers is not very common. To complete the review of the available in one single text does not need to be demonstrated any evidence, three examples from the Miscellanies can be added. longer (see Goldwasser 1990: 120–149). As regards n.t-Htr, In this corpus dated slightly after the reign of Ramesses II the same kind of variations can be observed in two other (Merenptah – Seti II), n.t-Htr is used three times with a texts from the reign of Ramesses II, the Hittite treaty and pronominal possessor, once with a suffix pronoun and twice the First Marriage. In the first text, n.t-Htr once appears with with a possessive article: a pronominal possessor; as the word occurs in a legal section, Ex. 20 n tAj.sn n.t-Htr heavily influenced by Late Egyptian, the possessive article “for his chariotry” (LEM 20,4) was used, as expected: Ex. 21 tA s.t jr.t sxr.w n tAj.k n.t-Htr, tA s.t snh pAj.k Ex. 14 xr jr jw bn jb n pA wr aA n xtA Sm.t mSa jw.f {H}r10 di.t Hn pAj.f mSa tAj.f n.t-Htr “the place of making the counsel for your mtw<.w> Xdb pAj.f xrw chariotry, the place of registering your army” “but if the great prince of Hatti does not (LEM 28,13–14) wish to go, he will send his army and his Ex. 22 r sgnn mSa.f n.t-Htr.f chariotry, and they will kill his foe” “to anoint his army and his chariotry” (KRI II: 228,5–6) (LEM 51,14) In the first Hittite marriage, n.t-Htr appears twice with The first two examples come from texts that are largely a suffix pronoun to express the pronominal possessor. The set in the Late Egyptian business language (especially the first instance is at the beginning of the text, in the royal eu- second one, which is a letter of instructions). The presence logy, a composition that is traditionally composed according of the possessive article does not come as a surprise. The last to the rules of Égyptien de tradition. The noun appears a sec- case is more problematic. It comes from a very long instruc- ond time in a narrative section, after the aHa.n sDm.n.f pat- tion text – extending over 4 columns – that ends the recto tern, which is of course indexical of classical literature: of pAnastasi IV. This text is essentially an opportunity of Ex. 15 mk n.t-Htr.f giving long lists of products and commodities. From a lin- “who protects his chariotry” (KRI II: 235,8) guistic viewpoint, it seems quite homogeneous. The sole ex- 9 The version of pSallier is rather chaotic as regards the beginning of the last sentence, see Spalinger 2002: 79. 10 On the correction, see Edel 1997: 93.  Jean Winand X ception is precisely that of the nominal syntagm under con- “they found all the lands I had entered inside sideration here, mSa.f n.t-Htr.f, while elsewhere the possessive lying in heaps in their blood” (Poem § 231) article is used throughout. The only explanation that comes The noun Hdbj.t in the last example finds an indirect to mind is a reminiscence of this phrase from the royal war echo in the passage of the Miscellanies.12 inscriptions where it almost constitutes a refrain. In the The issue raised in this paper had its origin in a detail Qadesh texts alone, the phrase is well represented, both in question: the expression of pronominal possessor with n.t- the Poem and in the Bulletin.11 Htr “chariotry” in a well-delineated corpus, the official texts More generally, members of the middle elite class in that were composed on the battle of Qadesh. In the so-called Memphis (and later in Piramesse), to which the scribes re- Poem and the Bulletin, the suffix pronoun and the possessive sponsible for the compilation of the Miscellanies belonged, article are both attested. The scribes thus could deliberately were also acquainted with some pieces of royal literature like shift from the classical way of expressing possession to the the compositions about the Qadesh expedition, which un- new standard set by the introduction of Late Egyptian in doubtedly had a great and lasting impact, as witnessed by royal epigraphy. As no semantic difference between n.t-Htr.f the private copies of the Poem that have come down to us. and tAj.f n.t-Htr can be shown, one must look elsewhere for For instance, in a text compiled by the redactor of pAnastasi explaining the scribes’ choices. In the Poem and the Bulletin, II (“praise of Ramesses II as a warrior”), the following sen- the distribution of the data is largely a matter of register, as tence can be read: it follows the distinction between discourse and narrative. Ex. 23 sw aq m-Xnw.sn mj sA nw.t, Hdb(w).sn n hh.f In some cases, the solution that was adopted was influenced m km jA.t by other factors. Scribes could reproduce sections or parts “he has entered inside them like the son of of them taken from related texts. This is probably what hap- Nut, they have been thrown down by his pened for the texts of the captions, which seem to pay some blast in a moment” (LEM 13,12) tribute to the Poem. This is of course reminiscent of some close formulations The version of pSallier sometimes significantly differs found in the Qadesh texts as illustrated by the following ex- from the epigraphic versions. As was amply demonstrated, amples that show some shared phraseology: this can be explained by some well-known mechanisms of Ex. 24 jw.j r aq jm.sn mj Hwt.t bjk, jw.j Hr Xdb Hr corruption or linguistic adaptation to the new Late Egyptian wawa Hr xAa r jwtn standard. But this kind of explanation does not always do “I shall enter inside them like when the fal- complete justice to the facts. As one knows, composition of con strikes, killing, cutting down, and throw- literary texts is never a simple and straightforward process. ing to the ground” (Poem § 216–217) When faced with variants that seem equally acceptable, one Ex. 25 aHa.n.f Hr aq m ifd m-Xnw pA xrw r pA nty zp must reconsider the necessity of positing for ancient Egypt- n 6 n aq im.sn, iw.i mi bal m-sA.sn m A.t ian literature one and only one Urtext, which would be the sxm.f, iw.i Hr Xdb im.sn unique source for the text tradition. Furthermore, in the “and then he entered in gallop inside the process of creating new texts based upon a previous corpus, enemy for the sixth time of his entering in- as was possibly the case for the captions, or of transmitting side them, I was like Baal after them in his well-known texts, the scribes could inadvertently re-arrange time of power, killing among them” some sections, or transform some passages by relying too (Poem § 221–223) confidently upon their memory rather than carefully follow- Ex. 26 gm.n.w xAs.t nb.t aq.i im.sn sDr m Hdbj.t Hr ing a written master copy (Vorlage).13 snf.sn 11 Poem: § 28: mSa.f n.t-Htr.f Hna.f; § 143: isT pA wr Xsy n xtA aHa Hr-ib mSa.f Hna t-n.t-Htr.f; §145: iw bn mSa.f Hna.f, bn t-n.t-Htr.f; Bulletin: § 22: iw.f iw Hna mSa.f n.t- Htr.f; §76: iw pA xr Xsy n xtA iw Hna mSa.f nt-Htr.f. 12 The verb Hdb, which is far more common than the noun Hdbj.t, is always used to describe foes scattered around on the ground, most often with the adjunct Hr snf.sn. The whole expression is already attested in some inscriptions of Tuthmose III (Urk. IV: 552), it is found again during the reign of Seti I in a context very similar to that of the Poem (tjt sttj.w ptpt tAS.w, smA wr.sn Hdb Hr snf.sn, aq jm.sn mj ns.t n sD.t), which was taken over almost verbatim by Ramesses III in Karnak (KRI V: 87,8). The collocation of Hdb and hh appears again in the time of Ramesses III (m pA hh tA Sf.t nsw.t nxt Hdbw st, sxr st n tA-mrj “it is the blaze and the respect of the strong king that laid them down and befell them for Egypt”; a variant with the same theme: dj.j hh.j r tA.w xAs.wt, Hdb.j thA tAS.k “I will set my blaze against the (foreign) lands and hills, I will lay down who will transgress your border”). 13 More generally, new texts in ancient Egypt much often integrated parts taken from older or closely related compositions. A case study on a magical text is presented by Winand – Gohy 2011: 175–245. The Chariots, the Hittites and the Grammar XI BIBLIOGRAPHY (2003) “The battle of Kadesh: the chariot frieze at Abydos”, ÄuL 13, 163–199. BENVENISTE, E. (2013) “Egyptian chariots: departing for war”, in: A. Veldmeijer – (1971) Problems in General Linguistics [Miami linguistics series 8], S. Ikram, (eds.), Chasing chariots: proceedings of the First Inter- Miami (transl. by Mary Elizabeth Meek). national Chariot Conference (Cairo 2012), Leiden 237–256. EDEL, E. VERNUS, P. (1997) Der Vertrag zwischen Ramses II. von Ägypten und Ḫattušili (2010) “Réception linguistique et idéologique d’une nouvelle tech- III. von Ḫatti [Wissenschaftliche Veröffentlichung der Deuts- nologie: le cheval dans la civilisation pharaonique”, in: M. chen Orient-Gesellschaft 95], Berlin. Wissa (ed.), The knowledge economy and technological capabili- GARDINER, A. H. tes: Egypt, the Near East and the Mediterranean 2nd millennium (1960) The Kadesh Inscriptions of Ramesses II, Oxford. B.C. - 1st millenium A.D., Proceedings of a conference held at the Maison de la Chimie, Paris, France 9–10 December 2005 [Aula GOLDWASSER, O. Orientalis Supplementa 26], Barcelona, 1–46. (1990) “On the Choice of Registers – Studies in the Grammar of Papyrus Anastasi I”, in: S. I. Groll (ed.), Studies in Egyptology WINAND, J. Presented to Miriam Lichtheim, Jerusalem, 120–149. (2006) Temps et aspect en égyptien. Une approche sémantique [Prob- leme der Ägyptologie 25], Leiden – Boston. HOCH, J. (2014) “The Tale of Sinuhe. History of a literary text”, in: H. Hays (1994) Semitic Words in Egyptian Texts of the New Kingdom and – F. Feder – L. Morenz (eds.), Interpretations of Sinuhe. Inspired Third Intermediate Period, Princeton. by Two Passages (Proceedings of a Workshop held at Leiden Uni- versity, 27–29 November 2009) [Egyptologische Uitgaven 27], KRUCHTEN, J.-M. Leiden, 215–243. (1980) “Le verbe Htr et ses dérivés jusqu’à la fin du Nouvel Empire: (in press) “Pronominal non-predicative possession in Late Egyptian”, sens et traduction”, AIPHOS 24, 39–52. in: E. Grossman – S. Polis (eds.), Possession in Ancient Egyptian (1982) Études de syntaxe néo-égyptienne. Les verbes aHa, Hmsi et sDr [Mouton Companions to Ancient Egyptian 1], Berlin. en néo-égyptien. Emploi et signification [Annuaire de l’Institut de Philologie et d’Histoire Orientales et Slaves Suppl. 1], Bru- WINAND, J. – GOHY, S. xelles. (2011) “La grammaire du Papyrus Magique Harris”, LingAeg 19, 175–245. LAYTON, B. (2000) A Coptic Grammar [Porta linguarum orientalium, neue Serie 20], Wiesbaden. ABBREVIATIONS PARKINSON, R.B. AIPHOS Annuaire de l’Institut de Philologie et d’Histoire (2009) Reading Ancient Egyptian Poetry: Among Other Stories, Chi- Orientales et Slaves chester – Malden. ÄuL Ägypten und Levante SPALINGER, A. KRI Kitchen, K. A. (1975–1991), Ramesside Inscriptions, (1985) “Remarks on the Kadesh inscriptions of Ramesses II: the Historical and Biographical, 8 vols., Oxford. ‘Bulletin’”, in: H. Goedicke (ed.), Perspectives on the Battle of LEM Gardiner, A. H. (1937), Late Egyptian Miscellanies Kadesh, Baltimore, 43–75. [Bibliotheca Aegyptiaca, Vol. 7], Brussels. (2002) The Transformation of an Ancient Egyptian Narrative: P.Sal- LingAeg Lingua Aegyptia lier III and the Battle of Kadesh [Göttinger Orientforschungen Urk. IV Sether, K. – Helck, W. (1906–1958), Urkunden der IV, 40], Wiesbaden. 18. Dynastie, Leipzig – Berlin.