|
HIERATIC OSTRAKA FROM THEBES by (Published in Ancient Egypt Journal, 1914 pt 3, pp. 106-108.)
Among the ostraka at University College, London, collected from Thebes by
Prof. Petrie, one of the longer and more complete examples is here transcribed
and translated. It date from the XlXth dynasty, written on a flake of white
limestone measuring 22 x 16 cm. The verso preserves 3 lines of
text, and the recto has 9 lines. This ostraca probably came from the
clearance of the Ramesseum.
Fig.1: photo of hieratic inscription on recto.
Translation
Verso
10 "There was given to her by T-o-merut,
11 "her daughter 1/2 sack
12 "In toto 1 1/2 sacks for the woven cloth.
Translation, Recto.
1 "Year 2, 3rd month of Harvest (Epiphi) day 24 of King Set-nekht
2 "the day when Hes-su-enbof dismissed the Theban woman (?) Hunura
3 "I gave her during three years in every single month 1/4 sack of wheat (durrah),
4 "[this] makes 9 sacks. She gave me a woven cloth [1] saying : Give it to the cloth shop (?) [1]
5 "It was brought to me as valuing 1/4 sack of wheat. I gave it (but) they refused it saying : It is bad..
6 "I repeated it to her, saying : It has been refused. She gave it to me
7 "and I sent her a sack of wheat
8 "by Hoye, the son of Si-utoyet.
9 "There was given to her by Nub-em-woskhet 1/4 sack ...
Fig.2: Transcription of heratic text in hieroglyphs.
Notes.
Owing to lexicographical difficulties the contents of this curious text are by
no means clear. The principal matter is a bargain. The weaving woman Hunura
tried to sell a cloth, or what may be the sense of mrw, by the mediation of
Hes-su-enbof who had dismissed her, if I rightly understand the sense
of the second line,[2] after she had been in his service for three
years. This cloth having been refused by the draper on account of its
bad quality, Hes-su-enbof bought it himself, giving for it in all 1 1/2
sacks of wheat, i.e., 6 times as much as the woman had asked, having
paid only 1/4 sack. How all this is to be connected, is not clear to
me. At any rate the text is interesting in several respects not the
least for its date, proving that Set-nekht has reigned at least 2
years.[3]
Footnotes:
1.
One cannot read the name of a person and translate "give it to Merira
!" as in that case the preposition ought to be n and not r.
2. It is impossible to take [glyph] in the technical sense of divorce known by demotic contracts.
3. Concerning the year l0 + x Gauthier (Livere des rois. III, p. 154)
has rightly questioned the correctness of the reading of Weill (Recueil
Inscr. Sinai, p. 215, No. 118).
[end footnotes]
[Continue to next part]
[Return to Table of Contents]
|
|
