The Heqanakht Papyri

PUBLICATIONS OF THE METROPOLITAN MUSEUM OF ART

EGYPTIAN EXPEDITION VOLUME XXVII

Field at the site of the Middle Kingdom capital of el-Lisht, near the probable region of Heqanakht's own fields

The Heqanakht Papyri

BY

JAMES P. ALLEN

THE METROPOLITAN MUSEUM OF ART

NEW YORK 2002

Manuelian D E S I G N

PUBLISHED BY

The Metropolitan Museum of Art, NewYork

Copyright © 2002 by The Metropolitan Museum of Art, NewYork

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted

in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying,

recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission

in writing by the publisher.

ISBN I-58839-O7O-5

DIRECTOR'S FOREWORD

The Heqanakht papyri are among the most precious of all documents to survive from ancient

Egypt. Discovered by the Egyptian Expedition of the Metropolitan Museum of Art during its

1922-23 season of excavations in Thebes, they are now part of the Museum's permanent collec

tion, on display in its Egyptian galleries.Visitors to the Museum admire their elegant script but are

occasionally puzzled by the apparently incongruous presence of these prosaic letters and accounts

among masterpieces of ancient Egyptian art. The papyri are displayed, however, not only for their

artistic value but also as witnesses to the life of the civilization that produced the art around them.

For some time following their discovery, that witness was relatively mute. The director of the

Museum's Theban excavations, Herbert E. Winlock, published a preliminary translation and discus

sion of the papyri in the Museum's Bulletin of December, 1922, but the full scholarly publication

for which he wrote both a Preface and a partial Introduction never materialized. It was not until

forty years later, in 1962, that the papyri received the detailed attention they deserved, with the

Museum's publication of the superb study by T.G.H. James, The Hekanakhte Papers and Other Middle

Kingdom Documents. Now another four decades have elapsed, and in that time Egyptology has

made great advances in understanding the history and language of ancient Egypt, led in part by

the Museum's own scholars. Through the generosity of the Adelaide Milton de Groot Fund, Anne

and David Mininberg, Howard H. Schlossman, and Malcolm Wiener, the present work incorpo

rates these new discoveries, together with the technological advantages offered by computer

imaging. It represents the commitment of the Metropolitan Museum of Art to the continued study

and elucidation of the objects entrusted to its care.

PHILIPPE DE MONTEBELLO

CONTRIBUTORS TO THIS PUBLICATION

The Adelaide Milton de Groot Fund

in memory of the de Groot and Hawley Families

Anne and David Mininberg

Howard H. Schlossman

Malcolm H.Wiener

FOR SUSAN

CONTENTS

List of Illustrations xi

List of Plates xii

Preface xv

PARTI

T h e Texts

i. T H E PAPYRI 3

A. The Archeological Context : 3

B. The Individual Documents 6

2. T R A N S L A T I O N S A N D T E X T U A L N O T E S 15

A. Translations 15

B. Textual Notes 21

3. E P I G R A P H Y A N D P A L E O G R A P H Y 76

A. Individual Hands 78

B. The Scribes 81

C. Style 84

4. L A N G U A G E 86

A. Demonstratives 88

B. Prospective Forms 91

C. Negations 96

D. T h e Language of the Heqanakht Papyri 101

PART II

C o m m e n t a r y

5. P E O P L E 105

A. Heqanakht 105

B. Heqanakht's Household 107

G. Heqanakht's Neighbors 117

D. TheThmi t e s 118

E. The Individuals of Letter P ' 119

6. PLACES 121

A. Heqanakht's H o m e 121

B. TheTh in i t e N o m e 125

7. C H R O N O L O G Y 127

A. The Date and History of the Papyri 127

B. Internal Chronology 134

C. T h e Sequence of the Papyri 139

8. E C O N O M I C S 142

A. Grain 142

B. Rations and Salaries 145

C. Land 149

D. Income and Expenses 160

E. Heqanakht's Grain Budgets 164

F. T h e T h i n i t e Enterprise 172

9. C O N C L U S I O N 179

IX

APPENDICES

A. Sign List 193

B. Brush Usage 227

C. Winlock MSS 243

I). Chronology 256

E. Measures 258

B I B L I O G R A P H Y 261

A B B R E V I A T I O N S 271

I N D I C E S 275

A. Lexicon of the Heqanakht Papyri 275

B. Proper Names 282

C. Numbers 286

D. Grammatical Forms and Constructions 287

E. General Index 289

F. Passages Discussed 294

PLATES 1-57

C D WITH COLOR IMAGES OF THE PAPYRI (inside back cover)

x

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Field at the site of the Middle Kingdom capital of el-Lisht, near the probable region of Heqanakht's own fields (photo by Susan Allen) FRONTISPIECE

Map of Egypt 120

Figures in the Text

1. Courtyard of the tomb of Ipi (TT 315) and the subsidiary tomb of Meseh 4

2. Lower corridor and burial chamber in the tomb of Meseh

(after a drawing by A.C. Mace) 4

3. Inscription on the coffin of Meseh (drawn from a photograph, M3C 237) 4

4. Seal impressions from the tomb of Meseh (drawn from the originals) 5

5. The folding and sealing of Letter III (after a drawing by H.E. Winlock) 8

6. The seal of Heqanakht (drawn from MMA 25.3.269, found with Letter III,

and the sealing accompanying Papyrus Purches) 9

7. The ka-servant officiating (after Newberry, Beni Hasan I, pl. 35) 106

8. The tombs of Meketre and Ipi (after Winlock, Deir el-Bahri, 18 and 54) 128

9. The hieratic sign for 2 dar. (scale 2:1) 153

10. The flax harvest (after JJ.Tylor and F.LI. Griffith, TheTomb qfPaheri

(EEF 11: London, 1894), pl- 3) 172 11. Processing flax fibers (after N. de Garis Davies, Five Theban Tombs

(ASE 21: London, 1913), pl. 37) 174

Tables in the Text

1. Degree of Similarity Between Distinctive Signs in the Heqanakht Papyri 79 2. Heqanakht's Grain Budget for Year 5—6 166

XI

LIST OF PLATES

i. Map of the Theban Necropolis at Deir el-Bahri in the Early Middle Kingdom (after D.Arnold, Das Grab desfinj-jtj.fi, vol. i: Die Architektur (AV 4: Mainz, 1971), pl. 1)

2. MMA Excavation of the Tomb of Ipi (Museum negative M3C 191)

3. The Tomb of Meseh as Discovered

A. Antechamber, Stairway, and Blocked Corridor (Museum negative M3C 199)

B. Burial Chamber and Coffin (Museum negative M3C 205)

4. Objects from the Tomb of Meseh

A. Grass Carrying Mat from the Corridor or Antechamber (MMA 26.3.280) (Museum negative 265682, scale 1:10)

B. Leather Carrying Mat (Museum negative M7C 262, scale 1:8)

C. Stone Mauls from the Corridor or Antechamber (Museum negative M7C 278, scale 1:4)

D. Pottery Offering Tables from the Corridor or Antechamber (Museum negative M7C 263, scale 1:5)

5. Scribal Materials from the Tomb of Meseh

A. Blank Papyri from the Rubble Ramp (MMA 22.3.523G) (photo by Bill Barrette, scale 1:2)

B. Clay Cones with Reference Sealings, from the Antechamber and the Rubble Ramp (MMA 25.3.267A-C, 26.3.282) (photo by Bill Barrette, scale 1:1)

C. Pieces ofWood Ink-Box from the Antechamber and Rubble Ramp (ex-MMA 26.3.283) (Museum negative M6C 51, scale 1:3)

D. Ball of Papyrus String from the Rubble Ramp (MMA 25.3.268) (photo by Bill Barrette, scale 1:1)

6. The Heqanakht Papyri as Originally Folded (Museum negative M3C 234, scale 1:1)

A. Letter II (MMA 22.3.517)

B. AccountVI (MMA 22.3.521)

c. Letter III Sealed (MMA 22.3.518 and 25.3.269)

7. Seal of Heqanakht, from Papyrus Purches (photo by Bill Barrette, scale 8:1)

8. Letter I (MMA 22.3.516), recto (Museum negative 265645, scale 1:1)

9. Letter I (MMA 22.3.516), verso (Museum negative 265653, scale 1:1)

10. Letter II (MMA 22.3.517), recto (Museum negative 265579, scale 1:1)

11. Letter II (MMA 22.3.517), verso (Museum negative 265580, scale 1:1)

12. Letter III (MMA 22.3.518), recto (Museum negative 265647, scale 1:1)

13. Letter III (MMA 22.3.518), verso (Museum negative 265655, scale 1:1)

14. Letter IV (MMA 22.3.519), recto (Museum negative 265648, scale 1:1)

15. Letter IV (MMA 22.3.519), verso (Museum negative 265656, scale 1:1)

16. AccountV (MMA 22.3.520), recto (Museum negative 253582, scale 1:1)

17. AccountV (MMA 22.3.520), verso (Museum negative 253583, scale 1:1)

18. AccountVI (MMA 22.3.521), recto (Museum negative 265650, scale 1:1)

19. AccountVI as Originally Unfolded (Museum negative M3C 302, scale 1:1)

20. AccountVI (MMA 22.3.521), verso (Museum negative 265658, scale 1:1)

21. AccountVII (MMA 22.3.522), recto (Museum negative 265651, scale 1:1)

22. AccountVII (MMA 22.3.522), verso (Museum negative 265659, scale 1:1)

23. Account P (Papyrus Purches), recto (photo by Bill Barrette, scale 1:1)

24. Account P (Papyrus Purches),Verso (photo by Bill Barrette, scale 1:1)

25. Fragments A-E (MMA 22.3.523A-E)

A. Recto (Museum negative 265652, scale 1:1)

B. Verso of Frags. A—B (Museum negative 265660, sxiiale 1:1)

26. Letter I (MMA 22.3.516), recto (HieroglyphicTranscription)

27. Letter I (MMA 22.3.516), recto (Facsimile, scale 1:1)

xn

http://desfinj-jtj.fi

28. Letter I (MMA 22.3.516), verso (Hieroglyphic Transcription)

29. Letter I (MMA 22.3.516), verso (Facsimile, scale 1:1)

30. Letter II (MMA 22.3.517), recto (HieroglyphicTranscription)

31. Letter II (MMA 22.3.517), recto (Facsimile, scale 1:1)

32. Letter II (MMA 22.3.517), verso (Hieroglyphic Transcription)

33. Letter II (MMA 22.3.517), verso (Facsimile, scale 1:1)

34. Letter III (MMA 22.3.518), recto (Hieroglyphic Transcription)

35. Letter III (MMA 22.3



38. Letter IV (MMA 22.3

39. Letter IV (MMA 22.3

.518), recto (Facsimile, scale 1:1)

.518), verso (Hieroglyphic Transcription)

.518), verso (Facsimile, scale 1:1)

.519) (Hieroglyphic Transcription)

•5T9) (Facsimile, scale 1:1)

40. AccountV (MMA 22.3.520), recto (Hieroglyphic Transcription)

41. AccountV (MMA 22.3.520), recto (Facsimile, scale 1:1)

42. AccountV (MMA 22.3.520), verso (HieroglyphicTranscription)

43. AccountV (MMA 22.3.520), verso (Facsimile, scale 1:1)

44. AccountVI (MMA 22.3.521), recto (Hieroglyphic Transcription)

45. AccountVI (MMA 22.3.521), recto (Facsimile, scale 1:1)

46. AccountVI (MMA 22.3.521), verso (Hieroglyphic Transcription)

47. AccountVI (MMA 22.3.521), verso (Facsimile, scale 1:1)

AccountVII (MMA 22.3.522), recto (HieroglyphicTranscription)

49. AccountVII (MMA 22.3.522), recto (Facsimile, scale 1:1)

50. AccountVII (MMA 22.3.522), verso (HieroglyphicTranscription)

51. AccountVII (MMA 22.3.522), verso (Facsimile, scale 1:1)

52. Account P (Papyrus Purches) (Hieroglyphic Transcription)

53. Account P (Papyrus Purches) (Facsimile, scale 1:1)

54. Letter P ' (Papyrus Purches) (Hieroglyphic Transcription)

55. Letter P ' (Papyrus Purches, Digitally Enhanced) (Museum photographs)

56. Fragments A-D (MMA 22.3.523A-D) (Hieroglyphic Transcription)

57. Fragments A—E (MMA 22.3.523A-E) (Facsimile, scale 1:1)

xm

PREFACE

Beside the great treasures of Egyptian art from the Middle Kingdom, the collection of letters

and accounts known as the Heqanakht papyri appear rather prosaic, but their unique witness of

ancient Egypt is a treasure in its own right. Written by and for a minor official named Heqanakht

during the early years of the Twelfth Dynasty (ca. 1956—1953 BC), they preserve an unparalleled view

of Egyptian life through the eyes of a fairly ordinary individual from the lower levels of the landed

gentry. The papyri were created to deal with fleeting matters of domestic and financial affairs, daily

concerns of every ancient Egyptian that are barely reflected, if at all, in writings intended for pos

terity. For that reason, they contain a wealth of information about some of the more mundane

aspects of life in the early Middle Kingdom, such as agriculture, personal economy, family relation

ships, and the colloquial language. Data of comparable or greater detail are not available again before

the late Middle Kingdom, in the archive from Illahun, or the New Kingdom and Ramesside Period,

in the letters and accounts from Deir el-Medina.

The Heqanakht papyri were discovered by the Theban Expedition of the Metropolitan Mu

seum of Art, under the direction of Herbert E. Winlock, during its 1921—22 season of excavation

in the necropolis at Deir el-Bahri. All but one of the papyri are now part of the Museum's perma

nent collection of Egyptian art. The remaining document, Papyrus Purches, was acquired in Luxor

by a British couple, Mr. and Mrs. George Beeman, in 1922 or 1923, and given to its current owner,

Mrs.W Kate Purches, in 1958. Her generosity made it possible for me to study the papyrus in de

tail and to include the results of that study in the present work.

The Museum's papyri have been the subject of continuing Egyptological interest from the

moment of their discovery. During the Museum's 1921—22 field season in Thebes, Battiscombe

Gunn made a preliminary translation of their texts, which formed the basis of Winlock's initial re

port in the December, 1922, issue of The Bulletin of the Metropolitan Museum of Art. In 1927

Winlock began work on the introduction to a volume that was to include Gunn's publication of

these and other early Middle Kingdom documents, and in 1936 he prepared a preface for the same

volume (see Appendix C, below). Gunn died in 1950, with his study of the papyri still incomplete.

Acting on the advice of A.H. Gardiner, the Metropolitan Museum entrusted the task of publica

tion to T. G.H.James, then Assistant Keeper of Egyptian antiquities at the British Museum.This was

a fortuitous decision. James's volume of The Hekanakhte Papers and Other Early Middle Kingdom

Documents, which appeared in the Metropolitan Museum's series of publications in 1962, is a mas

terful study not only of the papyri themselves but also of their history, language, epistolography,

and metrology, and remains a true classic of Egyptological literature.

Shortly after receiving her papyrus from Mrs. Beeman, Mrs. Purches brought it to the British

Museum for identification and translation, still folded and accompanied by its sealing. James im

mediately recognized the sealing as identical to that which had been found with one of the Heqa

nakht papyri, and subsequent study of the papyrus itself revealed further onomastic associations

with one of Heqanakht's accounts. With the assent of their owner, James published both the papy

rus and its sealing as "An Early Middle Kingdom Account" in the 1968 volume of the Journal of

Egyptian Archaeology.

The four decades since the appearance of these two studies have seen great advances in our

understanding of both the language and the history of the early Middle Kingdom, and the subse

quent publication of other documents of the time, such as the series of Reisner papyri studied by

William Kelly Simpson, have given scholars access to comparanda that were not available to James.

These advantages have been reflected from time to time in new analyses and translations of the

Heqanakht papyri, most notably Goedicke's 1984 Studies in the Hekanakhte Papers, but the photo

graphs and hieroglyphic transcriptions of the papyri in James's work have remained the foundation

upon which such studies have been based.

xv

XVI PREFACE

When I joined the Metropolitan Museum in 1990, I was curious to see whether any im

provement could be made in the reading of some of the more fragmented passages in the papyri

through extensive firsthand examination under various lighting conditions and with the aid of a

microscope—advantages that were not available to James, who had to rely primarily on Gunn's

notes and on photographs of the papyri themselves for his publication. The rapid advance in com

puter technology since 1990 has also made it possible to enhance and manipulate digital images of

the papyri and thereby bring out details that are less visible by other means. At the same time, the

recent work of the Museum's Department of Egyptian Art has led to a reassessment of the histori

cal background of the papyri, most notably in the groundbreaking study published by Dorothea

Arnold in the 1991 volume of The Metropolitan Museum Journal. In this respect I have had the fur

ther advantage of being able to consult Winlock's unpublished notes on his excavation of the papyri,

which are preserved in the archives of the Department of Egyptian Art.

Together with recent advances in our understanding of early Middle Egyptian, the new data

and evaluations that have emerged from this study have been sufficiently extensive to justify a

completely new publication of the Heqanakht papyri, which is the purpose of the present work.

Part I is devoted to a study of the papyri and their texts, and includes a physical description of the

papyri and their archeological context, a translation of the texts with philological apparatus, and

analyses of their handwriting and language. Part II discusses the information that can be gleaned

from the Heqanakht papyri and their archeological context concerning the people and places

mentioned in the texts, the historical date and chronology of the papyri, and the economic exi

gencies that prompted their creation.

Both parts are based not only on the papyri themselves but also on our current knowledge of

the society and time in which they were produced. Despite improvements in our understanding of

ancient Egypt, however, the very uniqueness of the Heqanakht papyri still offers more questions

than definitive answers. In my opinion the conclusions presented here best fit the information cur

rently available, but the standards of scholarship and past experience both dictate the need for

caution in such assessments. The dominant mood of this study is therefore subjunctive rather than

indicative, and its conclusions have had to be qualified as possible, likely, or probable far more often

than certain.

The plates at the end of this volume include facsimile drawings of each of the eight complete

Heqanakht papyri and the five inscribed fragments. These were made by computer, using a com

mercial vector-based drawing program (CorelDraw) directly over high-resolution scanned images

of the papyri. The individual strokes used to make the hieratic signs are usually visible both under

the microscope and in enlarged views of the scanned images, and these have been drawn wherever

they could be seen. The signs themselves have been filled in decreasing shades of black or red to

reflect the varying density of ink on the papyrus. Because of this fill the individual strokes of the

signs are not always discernible in the published plates, but they can be seen more clearly in the

representative examples reproduced with white fill in the Sign List (Appendix A). Erasures are

marked by grey rectangles covering the area affected by the erasure. As the textual notes in Chap

ter 2 indicate, it is often possible to make out the signs of the erased text, but because of their

fragmentary nature and uncertain edges these have not been drawn. The same is true of the erased

letter and address that originally occupied Papyrus Purches; a hieroglyphic transcription of this text

is given on pl. 54. In this case, and in the transcriptions that accompany each facsimile, the hiero

glyphic signs reflect the position of their hieratic counterparts insofar as the different proportions

of the two scripts makes possible, but the columns and lines in which they are arranged have been

regularized. The numbering of these columns and lines, as well as of the papyri themselves, follows

that established by James in his publications.

The compact disk inside the back cover of this book contains full-color scanned images of

each of the papyri and the inscribed fragments. These are at a lower resolution than was used for

the study of the papyri and the preparation of the plates, because the higher-resolution images

PREFACE xvn

would not fit on a single disk and might tax the display of some computers. The images are in

Adobe Acrobat (PDF) format, compatible with both PC and Mac platforms. In order to view them

the Acrobat Reader software program is required. Adobe makes this program available free of

charge on its web site (www.adobe.com) and also permits free distribution of it; versions for the

PC and Mac are included on the disk. The program allows the images to be enlarged, so that it is

possible to confirm the physical descriptions of details in the textual notes of Chapter 2.

My work on the Heqanakht papyri owes a great deal to many people. I am particularly in

debted to T. G.H.James, who graciously offered his advice and encouragement during its creation;

to W Kate Purches, for her generosity in allowing me to examine her papyrus as a guest in her

home and in subsequently making the papyrus available for study in the Metropolitan Museum; to

Richard Parkinson, through whose efforts I came to know Mrs. Purches and her papyrus; to

Dorothea Arnold, who has not only supported but also taken an interest in my work on the pa

pyri; to Beatrice Cooper, who ferreted out for me a number of valuable references to the papyri in

correspondence preserved in the archives of the Metropolitan Museum's Department of Egyptian

Art; to Elena Pischikova and Angelique Cortals, for help with the Russian studies cited in the bib

liography; and above all to my wife, Susan, whose unfailing encouragement and understanding has

made the writing of this book possible.

To anyone who has used James's publications of the Heqanakht papyri, it will be obvious that

the present study would not have been possible without his pioneering work. Any improvement I

have been able to make on his readings and interpretations is due solely to the advantages offered

by subsequent studies, greater access to the originals, and modern technology. I owe a similar debt

to my colleagues and predecessors, whose work on the language, history, and society of the early

Middle Kingdom forms the basis for much of this study's conclusions. If I have been able to see

farther, it is because I stand on their shoulders.

http://www.adobe.com

PART I

The Texts

The Papyri

THE HEQANAKHT PAPYRI consist of eight complete documents and five fragments currently in the

collection of the Metropolitan Museum of Art (MMA 22.3.516—523 and Papyrus Purches).1 The

Museum's papyri were discovered by its Theban expedition of 1921—22 in the tomb of Meseh, a sub

sidiary burial in the tomb-complex of the vizier Ipi, and Papyrus Purches undoubtedly came from

the same locus (see below). When found, each complete document was still folded; two had been tied

with string and sealed with a lump of clay impressed by the same stamp (fig. 6, p. 8). The papyri con

tain five letters (I—IV and P') and four accounts (V—VII and P);2 the four or five documents

represented by fragments were probably also accounts (Frags. A-E).

A. The Archeological Context

The Heqanakht papyri were found in the tomb of a man named Meseh, cut into the east wall

of the entrance terrace of the much larger tomb of the vizier Ipi (TT 315, fig. 1), above the bay of

Deir el-Bahri (pis. 1—3).3 Meseh's tomb consists of an outer and inner chamber, each at the end of

a corridor, with the axis of the second (inner) complex at an angle of 400 to the north of the first.

The entrance corridor is 1.2 m wide by about 6 m long, ending in an antechamber 2.5 m square

and high. In the floor of this room a set of stairs was cut downward diagonally to a second corri

dor 1.2 m wide by 3 m long, which ends in a burial chamber some 2.5 m square but only about

1.5 111 high (fig. 2). The tomb was only roughly excavated, and none of the interior surfaces is ei

ther smoothed or finished.

Meseh's burial equipment consisted only ofa wood coffin, two pots, and a headrest.4 The cof

fin was uninscribed except for an "Eye panel" surmounted by a line of hieroglyphs, both rather

crudely drawn in charcoal on the outer face (fig. 3). The floor of the lower corridor is level, but a

ramp of rubble had been built from the second lowest stair to the mouth of the burial chamber,

undoubtedly to facilitate the introduction of the coffin (fig. 2). After the burial this corridor was

sealed at its upper end by a mudbrick wall built over the top of the ramp, and this remained intact

until the Metropolitan Museum's excavations.

The tomb's corridor and antechamber "had long stood open" and when discovered were filled

with debris of three kinds: (1) fragments of pots and uninscribed offering-tables; (2) construction ma

terial (stone mauls, leather and grass carrying mats, a broken hoe, miscellaneous bits of wood, a "filthy,

crumpled-up, linen bed-sheet," and linen rags); (3) scribal materials (strips of papyrus pith, part ofa

small wood box that may have held pieces of dry ink, and "a pinch of clay on which a trial impres

sion had been made from a seal").5 The MMA papyri were found behind the intact mudbrick wall,

1 Papyrus Purches is the manuscript published by James, "Account," and numbered VIII in Goedicke's publication (Studies, 111—18). Through the generosity of its owner it has recently been displayed with the other papyri in the Metropolitan Museum of Art.

2 The present study preserves James's numbering of the papyri: Accounts V—VII are the papyri numbered V—VII by James, not the fifth—seventh accounts. Letter P ' is the erased original text of Papyrus Purches.

3 Winlock, Deir el Bahri, 54-55, 58—59. Winlock's account refers to "the tomb of Hesem," reflecting the spelling of

the owner's name on his coffin (fig. 3, p. 4): for the name, cf. Ranke, PN I, 164, 14. 4 From a previously unpublished introduction to the papyri, written by Winlock and now in the archives of the

Metropolitan Museum's Department of Egyptian Art, published here as Appendix C; see p. 243. 5 Appendix C, pp. 245-46; see pis. 4—5. Some of the stonemasons' mauls showed signs of use (MMA Theban Tomb

Card i8i7).The clay cone and a grass carrying mat are now in the Metropolitan Museum (MMA 26.3.282 and 26.3.280, respectively). The piece ofa box (ex-MMA 26.3.283) was a nearly complete side or lid.

I .THE PAPYRI

mixed in with the rubble forming the ramp, along with more construction debris and scribal materi

als: (i) a beam that had been used as a lever (visible in the drawing, fig. 2), fragments of leather

carrying-mats, and linen rags; (2) strips of papyrus pith, pieces of a small broken box, three conical

bits of clay with seal impressions, a ball of thread, and scraps of blank papyrus.

Entrance to the Tomb of Ip i

Tomb of Meseh

10m

Fig. 1. Courtyard of the tomb of Ipi (TT 3 15) and the subsidiary tomb of Meseh.

Fig. 2. Lower corridor and burial chamber in the tomb of Meseh.

A

) * T O

0.2m

Fig. 3. Inscription on the coffin of Meseh.

Appendix C, p. 246; Arnold, MMJ 26 (1991), 48 n. 191. A list of the finds from the rubble also exists in the excavation records (MMA Theban Expedition Journal III, 165). A number of these are now in the Metropolitan Museum: the three clay cones (MMA 25.3.267A-C); the ball of linen string (MMA 25.3.268); and the blank papyri (MMA 22.3.523G), in 24 fragments, the largest of which measures 10.5cm square: see pis. 4—5). A beam similar to that found in the rubble was discovered in a corner of the burial chamber, perhaps used for maneuvering the coffin into place.

A.THE ARCHEOLOGICAL CONTEXT

M M A 25.3.267 A MMA 25.3.267c

MMA 25.3.267B MMA 26.3.282

Fig. 4. Seal impressions from the tomb of Meseh

Some of the scribal materials from these two

findspots clearly once belonged together. The box

found separated in both loci was a small container 8.5

cm long and 4.5 cm high or wide, evidently used to

store dry ink.7 One of the three bits of clay from the

rubble (MMA 25.3.267B) and the one from the ante

chamber (MMA 26.3.282) show the same seal

impressions (fig. 4). This set of relationships indicates

that the scribal material discovered in the rubble of

the ramp originally lay in the tomb's upper chamber.

Papyrus Purches and the papyri to which the fragments once belonged must have been part of the

same deposit. Exact findspots were not recorded, but there are only two places in the antechamber

where these objects could have lain. The stairway begins immediately at the end of the entrance cor

ridor, leaving two triangular areas of the chamber floor on either side of it (see fig. 1). From this

physical arrangement it is evident that the scribal material was deposited in one or both triangles and

deliberately or accidentally pushed down into the stairway when the rubble ramp was made.

Judging from its composition—inscribed and blank papyri, strips of papyrus pith (used for

strengthening the edges of papyri and fastening sheets together), box for ink, ball of string (for

sealing documents), and seal impressions—the assemblage as a whole belonged to an active scribe.

Despite Winlock's description of them as "trial impressions" (Appendix C, p. 246), the conical bits

of clay were probably reference sealings, which a scribe would use to verify the authenticity of the

sealings on goods delivered to him; similar artifacts have been discovered at Uronarti and Elephan

tine.9 The four sealings contain the impressions of two seals:10

a

flffi

sncw n wrt "Storehouse of the Great (Goddess)"

(MMA 25.3.267A/C)

sncw n hwt-[hr] "Storehouse of Hathor"

(MMA 25.3.267B, 26.3.282).

These structures are otherwise unknown, but they may have been associated with the cult of

Hathor in the mortuary temple of Mentuhotep II at Deir el-Bahri, below Meseh's tomb.11 In any

case, their presence along with the other materials indicates that the deposit was part of the

equipment ofa working scribe who was active in Thebes.12

The three sets of objects in the antechamber—scribal material, pottery and offering tables, and

construction debris—are related only by their common provenience and are probably not contem

porary, either with one other or with the construction of the tomb itself. The scribal materials could

have been used in the antechamber, but more probably they were only deposited there;13 neither

11

12

13

See pl. 5C.Winlock's description suggests that traces of ink were found on pieces of the box: Appendix C, p. 246. Cf. Appendix C, p. 246.The same conclusion appears in expedition records (MMA Theban Tomb Card 1817). G.A. Reisner, Kush 3 (1955), 28-29; C. von Pilgrim, Elephantine XVIII: Untersuchungen in der Stadt des Mittleren Reiches und der Zweiten Zwischenzeit (AV 91: Cairo, 1996), 239—41.1 owe these references to Dorothea Arnold. After Winlock: cf. Appendix C, p. 246. The restoration of hwt- [hr] is uncertain. For the $ncw ofa god, cf. H.Jacquet-Gordon, Les noms des domaines funeraires sous VAncien Empire egyptien (BdE 34: Cairo, 1962), 189 no. 30. For Hathor as wrt"the Great," cf. CTVI 6if-g, 62e-j, 239d—e, 298a—c. For the evidence ofa shrine of Hathor in the mortuary temple of Mentuhotep II, see D.Arnold, Der Tempel des Konigs Mentuhotep von Deir el-Bahari (AV 8: Cairo, 1974), 83-84; idem, The Temple of Mentuhotep at Deir el-Bahari (PMMA 21: NewYork, 1979), 18 n. 61,43. There is no record of the other elements of a scribe's equipment, such as reed brushes or their case: see W.C. Hayes, The Scepter of Egypt I (NewYork, 1953), 292—94.These presumably were not left with the other materials. The interpretation of the deposit is discussed in Chapter 7 (pp. 127-33).

The larger triangle of floor in this room, about 2 m along each wall, is ample for one scribe, seated on a mat with his equipment alongside; the smaller offers only space for a second person to rest. A scribe working in this room, however, would need a source of light, since it is quite dark. The fact that no lamps or similar materials were found in the debris suggests that the scribal materials were merely stored in the antechamber.

6 I .THE PAPYRI

scenario is conceivable until after work on the tomb had ended. The offering tables were most likely

deposited in conjunction with Meseh's burial. The construction debris in the antechamber must be a

later intrusion still; otherwise, more of it should have wound up in the rubble ramp along with the

scribal material.'4The pottery was probably introduced sometime after the burial, since no fragments

seem to have been found in the rubble ramp; it could have been deposited with the offering tables or

by the later stonemasons.

The evidence therefore indicates that the tomb stood open for a while after its construction, dur

ing which time the papyri and other scribal materials were deposited in its antechamber. When

Meseh was buried most of these objects were swept into the rubble ramp. The burial chamber was

then sealed and the offering tables placed in the corridor or antechamber. At some later date these

rooms were used as a storehouse for the equipment of stonemasons, who were probably working on

a tomb nearby.

BMThe Individual Documents

LETTER I (MMA 22.3.516, pis. 8-9, 26-29) is a first-use papyrus, 28.4 cm high by 27.1 cm

wide, inscribed in hieratic in black ink probably by Heqanakht himself.'5 The recto contains 950

signs in 17 columns of text, written from right to left. The verso has 1020 signs and two strokes in

19 columns of text, written retrograde from left to right, with the two shorter columns of the ad

dress, upside down with respect to the rest of the verso, in the upper righthand corner of the sheet.

Neither side is palimpsest; what James saw as traces of an earlier text are erasures made by the

scribe of Letter I in the course of composition.

Recto and verso are oriented the same way up. After filling the recto the scribe turned the pa

pyrus horizontally and began the verso at its lefthand edge (the back of col. 1 of the recto). After

vo. 8, the signs become smaller and the columns closer together, indicating that the scribe was

aware he was running out of room both for what he had left to write and for enough uninscribed

space at the end of the verso to serve as the outside of the letter when it was folded. After finishing

the letter the scribe rolled it from right to left, recto inside, then folded the roll three times verti

cally.''The address was written on the lower of the two final exposed faces, top toward the fold.

There is no evidence that the folded letter was either tied or sealed.

Letter I is addressed to Heqanakht's family (vo. 18-19), D u t its salutation directs it more specifi

cally to Merisu, one of his employees.'7 Its contents can be summarized as follows:

I 1—9 Instructions to send Nakht and Sinebniut to rent land in Perhaa

I 9—14 Comments on the rental fee for land previously leased

I 14—17 Instructions for the rations of Nakht on the mission to Perhaa

I vo. 1—5 Complaint about the grain that Merisu has sent to Heqanakht

I vo. 5-9 Instructions concerning Snefru

I vo. 9—12 Instructions for cultivating two of Heqanakht's existing fields

I vo. 12-17 Comments on personal matters in the household

I vo. 17 Instruction to send an account of outstanding debts collected in Perhaa.

Heqanakht directs his comments to Merisu alone except in I 7—9, where the plural is evidently

intended as a collective ("you and the others").

14 The leather carrying mats in the rubble ramp were incomplete, unlike those in the antechamber, and therefore no longer usable, but the same is true of the broken hoe in the antechamber. The beam buried in the ramp, on the other hand, was presumably still usable, like the stone mauls and carrying mats found in the antechamber, and is unlikely to have been discarded if it had been part of the antechamber cache.

15 For the identities of the scribes of these documents, see Chapter 3. 16 This differs from the description in James, HP, 13, but reflects James's current analysis of the process (private

communication): cf.T.G.H.James, Pharaoh's People (Chicago, 1984), 170. 17 For the individuals mentioned in these documents, see Chapter 5.

B.THE INDIVIDUAL DOCUMENTS 7

LETTER II (MMA 22.3.517, pis. 10-11, 30-33) is a first-use papyrus, 27.9 cm high by 40.8 cm

wide, inscribed in hieratic in black ink by the scribe of Letter I. Despite James's impression (HP,

32), neither side is palimpsest. T h e recto contains 27 columns and 17 lines of text, with 1478 signs,

writ ten from right to left beginning at the righthand edge of the sheet. T h e verso contains four

columns of text (II vo. 4 only two-thirds inscribed) and two of the address, with a total of 217

signs, one cancellation stroke, and one figure, also wri t ten from right to left beginning at the

righthand edge of the sheet.

The arrangement of II 1-27 (in James's numbering) is somewhat complex. The scribe first

wrote II 1-4 and three quarters of II 5 (5a). This was followed by a list of salaries in seventeen

short lines (numbered 7—23 by James) to the left of II 5, at the top of the sheet.' A note to the

ration list was then added at the end of II 5 (5b) and in a short column (numbered 6 by James)

between II 5 and the list. The letter resumes in four half-height columns below the ration list

(James's 24—27), the first of which begins just below and to the left of the end of James's II 6. The

remainder of the recto contains seventeen full-height columns (28—44) to the left of the ration list;

II 44, at the lefthand edge of the sheet, was only half inscribed. The lefthand portion of the recto,

beneath II 40—44, is rough and contains a number of surface flaws, features that evidently gave the

scribe some trouble in writing: the scribe has avoided some of the larger flaws,'9 and the irregular

form of many of the signs indicates that he found it difficult to make smooth strokes in this area.

The text of II vo. 1—4 is upside down with respect to that of the recto. After filling the recto,

the scribe turned the papyrus vertically and began the verso at its righthand edge (the back of cols.

1-3 of the recto). This procedure left the righthand 5 cm of the sheet inscribed on both sides, with

the remainder of the verso blank. In order to protect this edge, the scribe folded it 6.5 cm inward

(to the left), then rolled the papyrus from left to right, recto and fold inside, and finally folded the

roll three times vertically.20 T h e address was writ ten on the lower of the two final exposed faces,

top toward the fold, and an enigmatic sign drawn on the other face.2' There is no evidence that

the folded packet was either tied or sealed.

Letter II was addressed, like Letter I, to Heqanakht's "household of Sidder Grove." Its begin

ning (II 1—29) is in fact writ ten to the members of the household, but its greater part (II 29-vo. 5)

is specifically directed to the attention of Merisu and "subordinately" to Heti's son Nakht. The

contents can be summarized as follows:

II 1—5a Greetings to members of the household, comments on their salaries

II 7—23 "Wri t ing of the salary of the household," detailed by name

II 5b-6 No te concerning the salary allotted to Sinebniut

II 24—29 Justification of the salaries allocated

II 29—38 Instructions to Merisu and Heti's son Nakht concerning distribution

of the salaries and agricultural matters

II 38-44 Comments on the treatment of Heqanakht's wife

II vo. 1—4 Instructions for the lease of land for cultivation in Perhaa.

The first part of the letter, to the household in general, is largely cast in the second person plural;22

the remainder, addressed to Merisu and Heti's son Nakht, alternates between singular and plural, at

times in the same sentence (II 31).The singular clearly addresses Merisu alone; the plural, both men,

although certain passages seem to be intended for the entire household (II 38-39 and 42-44).

18 The flow of ink shows that the determinative and amount were written after each name, rather than secondarily in separate columns. The changes in the amounts in II 17—18 and 20—21 were made after the total was written in II 23, since the latter represents the sum of II 8—22 before changes (see the textual note on pp. 39-40).

19 Noted by James, HP, pl. 6A. 20 Cf. n. 16, above. The initial folding of the righthand 6.5 cm resulted in the vertical tear between cols. 4 and 5 of

the recto. 21 For speculation on the meaning of this sign (an oar?), see James, HP, 36. 22 Passages addressed jointly to two individuals may have been dual in intention but probably not grammatically,

since the dual was no longer productive in ordinary speech by this time (Gardiner, EG, § 34).

I . T H E PAPYRI

i l l s-rl s1

If I If lllli

Sheet of Papyrus Open to the Recto

Rolled Lengthwise

Folded Over

Turned Over, Folded Again,

and Addressed

1 *

II

Tied and Sealed

Fig. 5 .The folding and sealing of Letter III.

LETTER III (MMA 22.3.518, pis. 12-13, 34—37) is a reused papyrus, 26.9 cm high by 14.5 cm

wide, inscribed in hieratic in black and red ink by a scribe different from that of Letters I—II. The

original text on the recto was probably a letter, in 6/4 columns. It was upside down with respect to

the present text, beginning beneath the end of III 8 and ending beneath jb.k of III 2. After erasing the

original the scribe began Letter III in the unused portion of the recto. The verso is not palimpsest

except for an erased original address in the upper righthand section, in back of col. 7 of the recto; the

erasure in the middle third of vo. 1 (beneath hnc tm rdj cm) was made in the course of writing the

present text. The recto contains eight columns of text, with 469 signs, written from right to left. The

verso has 92 signs in two columns of text (vo. 2 only one-fifth inscribed), written retrograde begin

ning at the left edge, and a single column of the address, at the bottom of the sheet in back of col. 4

of the recto. To inscribe the verso the scribe turned the papyrus horizontally, so that vo. 1-2 occupy

the back of cols. 1-2 of the recto, in the same vertical orientation.

Before folding the letter the scribe placed a linen string across the righthand side of the upper

third of the recto, with its loose end projecting on the right (fig. 5). He then rolled the sheet three

times horizontally from left to right, recto inside, folded it twice vertically, and wrote the address

on the lower of the two exposed faces, top toward the fold. Finally, the string was tied around the

bottom of the package, secured with a lump of clay, and the clay stamped with a seal (fig. 6). The

document was still folded, with its sealing intact, when found (pl. 6C).

Letter III is addressed to "Delta-overseer Herunefer" (vo. 3). It contains a request from Heqa

nakht that Herunefer assist Heti's son Nakht and Sinebniut in recovering certain debts of barley

and emmer owed Heqanakht in Perhaa, and that Herunefer store the grain in his own estate until

Heqanakht has it collected. In contrast to Letters I—II, it is formal in tone and composition, in

keeping with Herunefer's official status.

The letter opens with a pro-forma version of the standard epistolary formula of the Middle

Kingdom (III 1-3), written with large, calligraphic signs.23 Heqanakht styles himself "Worker of

the funerary estate" (b3k n pr-dt), perhaps reflecting his inferior status as well as his actual duties.24

23 James, HP, 119—24. T h e pro- forma character of the salutation is evident from the omission of the final words in III

1 and 2.

24 James, HP, 128. For the title, see U. Luft, Oikumene 3 (1982), 118-21 , and Oikumene 4 (1983), 127-28; D. Kessler, in

Grund und Boden in Altagypten, ed. by S. Allam ( U R A A 2;Tiibingen, 1994), 376-79 .

B.THE INDIVIDUAL DOCUMENTS

A. Impression from

Letter III (MMA 25.3.269)

B. Impression

from Account P

C. The Seal

Reconstructed

The same protocol appears in circumlocutions

for the first and second person: III 3 b3k jm

"your humble servant" (literally, "the worker

therein") and III 3-5 zhl.k cnh-(w)d3-s(nb)

"Your Excellency" (literally, "your scribe,

lph").25 These conventions are gradually aban

doned in the latter half of the letter.

In contrast to Letters I—II, where the first

person singular suffix pronoun is always writ

ten, the scribe here initially avoids it, as he

does in Letter IV; it first appears in II 6 rdj.n.j

and is used regularly thereafter.Apart from the polite formula mj nfir.k nb snb.t cnh.t"if you please"

(III 5: literally, "like all your (usual) good, as you are healthy and alive"),2 Herunefer is addressed

directly only in vo. 1 jwt.fi n.k nbt hr.s "anything he comes to you about." The formality of Letter

III may also be reflected in its use ofa form of Middle Egyptian slightly different from that used

elsewhere in the Heqanakht papyri (see Chapter 4).

Fig. 6. The seal of Heqanakht.

LETTER IV (MMA 22.3.519, pis. 14-15, 38-39) is a reused papyrus in two fragments, inscribed

in hieratic in black ink by the scribe of Letter III. The fragments measure 12.5 cm high by 9.9 cm

wide (upper) and 14.6 cm high by 9.8 cm wide (lower). Restoration of the missing signs in the

middles of cols. 1—3 and the tops of cols. 1—4 indicates a gap of about 0.8 cm between the two

fragments and a minimum of 0.4 cm missing at the top.27 When complete the papyrus measured

approximately 28.6 cm high by 9.9 cm wide.

The original text was upside down with respect to the present one, and was written in col

umns on both sides.2 The present recto has four columns of text, written from right to left; the

verso, two short columns of the address in the same orientation as the recto, at the bottom of the

sheet. The recto originally contained 221 signs plus a few more lost in the lacuna in the middle of

IV 4; the verso, perhaps 23 original signs. The letter was folded in thirds, verso outside, with the

beginning of the recto on the inside fold, then three times vertically. The two columns of address

were written on the bottom third of the folded letter, one on each side.29 There is no evidence

that the document was tied or sealed.

Letter IV was written to a woman named Sitnebsekhtu by her daughter of the same name. It

was probably penned for the daughter by a scribe, whose gender is reflected in the masculine form

of the first-person dependent pronoun wj in IV 2 (see the textual note on p. 51). Its contents con

sist primarily of greetings and the request "Don't let Gereg be neglectful about his [ ... ] " (IV 4).

The latter probably accounts for the address in vo. 2, which was written by the scribe of the recto

(see the textual note on p. 50). The address in vo. 1, inscribed in a different, less competent hand,

can be restored with some probability as "[Store]house-overseer [Sitnebsekhtu]" (see the textual

note on pp. 50-51).

25 James, HP, 128—29.The term zlil.k was also employed as a circumlocution for the second person in the palimpsest letter of Account P (P' 3-4).

26 James, HP, 48. Compare P ' 3 mj bw nb nfrjrrw zhl.k "like all the goodness Your Excellency does." 27 In its present mounting, reflected in the photographs on pis. 14—15, the lower fragment is positioned approxi

mately 0.3 era too far from the upper, as indicated by the restorations in the middles of cols. 1—3. The current mounting has also repositioned the fragment containing the bottoms of cols. 3—4 too low on the recto left; the photograph in James, HP, pl. 9, shows the original, correct placement. The facsimiles on pl. 39 place the fragments in their proper relationship to one another.

28 A few signs of the original can be made out on the verso, notably two groups reading jm.j at what is now the upper left of the bottom half of the verso, visible in the photograph published by James, HP, pl. 9, and that on pl. 15 here.

29 James's description of the vertical folds (HP, 50) shows a different process but is evidently confused: the disposition of the texts on the recto and verso allows only for the reconstruction described here (see HP, pl. 9, and pis. 14—15 and 39 here). For James's contention that the address in vo. 1 belongs to the palimpsest (HP, 52), see the textual note on p. 50.

http://jwt.fi

10 I .THE PAPYRI

ACCOUNTV (MMA 22.3.520, pis. 16—17, 4°~43) is a first-use papyrus, 27.3 cm high by 48.1

cm wide, inscribed in hieratic in black and red ink by the scribe of Letters III—IV Neither side is

palimpsest; what James saw as traces of an earlier text are erasures made by the scribe in the course

of composition (21 on the recto, 2 on the verso). The verso also contains random marks below the

inscribed section, perhaps from the scribe trying out his brush. Both sides are oriented the same

way up. The recto contains 664 signs in 44 lines and 10 columns of text, written from right to left

in six sections divided by ruling lines, beginning at the righthand edge of the sheet; the lefthand 6

cm is uninscribed. This side was inscribed at two different times, as indicated by year dates: V 1—33

in Year 5, andV 34—54 in Year 8. The verso, probably written after the recto had been filled, has 103

signs in 10 short lines in the upper middle of the sheet (in back of lines 34—40 of the recto). The

papyrus was rolled from left to right, recto inside, but not folded, tied, or sealed; no docket was in

scribed.

The arrangement of signs, their relationship to the ruling lines, and the corrections made by

the scribe indicate that the recto was inscribed in the following order:

1) the first (righthand) vertical rule (omitted in James's transcription), from top to bottom,30

apparently in a single stroke

2) lines 1—2

3) the second vertical rule, from top to bottom in a single stroke; this rule ends below line 2

and is overwritten by the seated-man determinative of line 3 and the final sign of line 8

4) lines 3—8 and cols. 9—10, then lines 11—17

5) the first horizontal rule (above line 18), from left to right, in two strokes with a single

brushful of ink; this rule is overwritten by one of the signs of line 18

6) lines 18-23, cols. 25-29, col. 24; the placement of the numeral in col. 24, to the right of

the determinative and partly overlying it, indicates that col. 29 was written before col. 24

7) the second horizontal rule (above line 30), from left to right, in two strokes with a single

brushful of ink

8) lines 30—32 and col. 33

9) the third vertical rule, in two strokes, with separate brushfuls of ink: from bottom to top,

ending above line 38; then from top to bottom, ending in the space below line 36

10) the third horizontal rule (above line 37), from left to right, in several short strokes with a

single brushful of ink; the length of this rule and its placement indicate that it was made

before lines 34—36 were written

11) lines 34-36, 37-45, and 47 (see the textual notes to V 46-48 on pp. 56-57)

12) the fourth horizontal rule (above line 49), in three strokes with two brushfuls of ink; the

lefthand stroke was made from left to right, the middle stroke from right to left, and the

righthand stroke from left to right again

13) line 48; some of the signs of this line overlie the fourth horizontal rule, indicating it was

written after the rule was drawn

14) col. 46, followed by erasures and corrections in lines 47 and 48, and finally lines 49—54.

The entries on the verso were probably made after the recto had been filled; the handwriting is

more like that ofV 34—54 than that of the less accomplished hand of the earlier entries.3'

AccountV contains three sets of entries: two on the recto (VA—B, James's Accounts 1—3 and 4—

5, respectively) and one on the verso (Vc, James's Account 6). The latter is a ten-line tally of wood.

Both sets on the recto are marked by a vertical rule to their right, drawn before the text was writ

ten.

30 To make the vertical rules the scribe probably rotated the papyrus 900 to the right and drew the lines from left to right, like the horizontal rules. The left-to-right motion, opposite to the direction of the writing itself, probably reflects a quality of the reed brush, which is less well suited for extended right-to-left movement: R. Parkinson and S. Quirke, Papyrus (Austin, 1995), 32.

31 As noted by James, HP, 54.

B. THE INDIVIDUAL DOCUMENTS 11

Account VA is dated to "Year 5, 2 Harvest 9" (V 1) and is divided into three sections (VAi—3)

by vertical and horizontal rules, each with its own heading:

VAi (V 2-17): "Writing of the full barley of Heqanakht"

VA2 (V 18-29): "[Writing] of cattle that Heqanakht has entrusted [to Si]nebniut"

VA3 (V 30—33): "Writing of bread that Merisu has given to Heqanakht."

The first of these consists of three subsections, dealing with grain and flax entrusted to Merisu (V

3—10), grain designated for the cattle (V 11), and grain and flax allotted to Heqanakht's three field-

hands (V 12—16).32 The fact that the scribe drew the second vertical rule after writing line 2

indicates that this line serves as a heading for the three subsections of Account VAi, which were

therefore written probably before Accounts VA2—3.33 Despite his numbering of the lines and col

umns, James (HP, 54) argued that the entries ofV 18-29 (Account VA2) were written after those of

V 3-10 (the first subsection of Account VAi), but the fact that the scribe drew the second vertical

rule before writing V 3 does not support this conclusion. In the sequence James envisioned, the

second vertical probably would have been drawn farther to the left, accommodating both V 2 and

a longer V 18 (note the abbreviated spelling of Heqanakht's name in the latter). The second vertical

rule can only have been drawn as it was in order to separate the left and right portions of Account

VAi before Accounts VA2—3 were written.

The second set of accounts on the recto (VB) is divided into two sections by a space of 3 cm

below line 36 and a horizontal rule above line 37; the second section is further subdivided by a

shorter horizontal rule between lines 48 and 49. Both sections in this set are dated to "Year 8" (V

34/37) followed by individual headings:

VBi (V 34-36): "Writing of the balance of Heqanakht that is with Merisu"

VB2 (V 37—54): "Writing of full barley and emmet that is outstanding."

The spacing and length of the horizontal rule below V 37 indicate that the scribe drew the ruling

line separating the two sections before making the entries of Account VBi.

Judging from the dates inVA andVB and the use of red as well as black ink, AccountV was in

tended as a fairly formal document, like Letter III and unlike Heqanakht's other accounts. It is the

only document other than Letter III to use the full spelling of Heqanakht's name (V 2). Although

it was evidently penned by a single scribe, slight differences in the handwriting support James's

conclusion (HP, 54 and 58) that its entries were written three years apart, as dated: VA in Year 5 and

VB-C in Year 8.

ACCOUNTVI (MMA 22.3.521, pis. 18-20, 44-47) is a first-use papyrus, originally ca. 25.8 cm

high by 17 cm wide,34 inscribed in hieratic in black ink by a scribe different from those of the let

ters and the other accounts. The recto contains 231 signs in 20 lines and one ruling line (between

VI 13 and 15), written to the right ofa 1.5-cm strengthening strip pasted onto the righthand edge;

the verso bears only a 3-line docket, with 13 signs, upside down with respect to the recto. Neither

side of the papyrus is palimpsest, despite James's observation to the contrary (HP, 62). The only

32 Line 17, consisting solely of the numeral "12," seems to belong to Account VAi, but its significance is unclear. 33 As surmised by Baer, "Letters," 18 and n. 100. 34 The papyrus as currently mounted measures some 2 mm higher. The various fragments of the papyrus have be

come differentially warped, with three major deformities: (a) the lefthand portion of the papyrus from below line 19 upward, containingVI 20 and the left half ofVI 14, has shifted upward; (b) the vertical strip containing the ends of VI 7-11 and the right half of VI 14 has shrunk downward; (c) the righthand portion, from the break in VI 4 downward, has shifted out of position left and downward. This warping accounts for the discrepancy between the two halves of line 14, noted by James (HP, 66), and the misalignment of the portions of damaged signs in VI 4-7, visible in the photograph in pl. 18 and the one published by James (HP, pl. 13). The facsimiles in pis. 45 and 47 show the original relationship of the fragments. They were made from a high-resolution scanned image in which the warped portions of the papyrus were realigned by computer, using an image-editing program. The realignment is based on the correspondence between fibers (horizontal on the recto and vertical on the verso) and on an excavation photograph of the recto taken after the papyrus was first unfolded (MMA neg. no. M3C 302: pl. 19), showing it less warped than it is now.

12 I .THE PAPYRI

erasures are corrections made by the scribe (in VI 2, 4, 14, and vo. 2) and six lines of text in a rec

tangle at the lower left of the recto (VI [21—26]). The latter were apparently entries made in the

course of calculating the totals in VI 14, 19, and 20. Three of them contained numbers, still legible,

that correspond to those totals: " 5 3 " inVI [23], identical to the original total in VI 14 (see below);

" 1 3 " in VI [24], equal to the total of full sacks in VI 19; and a final numeral " 7 " in VI [26], the same

as that of the grand total in VI 20 (see the textual note on pp. 59—60).

After inscribing the recto the scribe folded the papyrus in half twice,35 from left to right with

the recto inside, then folded it three times vertically and wrote the docket on the upper of the two

final exposed faces.There is no evidence that the folded packet was either tied or sealed.

AccountVI contains a list of grain debts in the region known as Perhaa (vo. 1—3: see pp. 122—

24), listed by locality and the debtors resident in each. Judging from the arrangement of the entries

and the arithmetic, the scribe first wrote lines I—II, then their total to the left of line I I , in the

line James numbered 14. This was followed by the two-line qualification "as measured with the big

oipe that is in Sidder Grove" (12—13), below line 11 (see the textual note to VI 12—13 o n P- 59)- H e

then drew a horizontal rule below line 13, under which he entered four more debts (15—18) and

their total (19). T h e first of these (VI 15) is specified as "full barley." This suggests that the ruling

line separates debts of emmer (VI 2—11) and barley (VI 15—18), as James deduced (HP, 64). The

first commodity is not specified, but its identity may be reflected in the fact that the scribe appar

ently began to write m ^ ' "cons i s t ing of emmer" in VI 2 before emending it to the present entry

(see the textual note on p. 58).

The total of emmer debts recorded in VI 14 is in error. There can be little doubt that this

amount was intended as the sum of the emmer entries (VI 2—11), but both its original figure of

" 5 3 " and its emended figure of " 5 2 " are less than the actual total of 62, by 9 and 10, respectively. It

is difficult to see how the scribe could have arrived at either figure, since none of the individual

entries has been emended.3 O n e possibility is that he initially overlooked the entry in VI 5 (9),

producing the original total of " 5 3 " ; then, after noticing his error, he erased the original number in

VI 14, intending to replace it with the correct total of 62, but wrote " 5 2 " by mistake. This se

quence of events would also explain the erasure of the entire original figure " 5 3 " : if the error had

been limited to the units alone, it is more likely that only the final numeral ("3") would have been

erased (as inV 5 and VII 4: see the textual notes on pp. 52 and 61).

The grand total of line 20, as Baer pointed out, can be explained as the sum of the totals of

lines 14 (as emended) and 19 added to those of III 8:

51.5 (III 8: 38 emmer + 1 3 . 5 barley)

52 (VI 14, emmer)

13-5 (VI 19, barley)

117 (VI 20).37

Since both documents deal with debts in Perhaa, this is a plausible conclusion. Account VI was

therefore apparently intended as a supplement to the debts listed in Letter III.3 This in turn indi

cates that the debts of the two individuals w ho appear in both documents are separate rather than

cumulative obligations. The distinction seems clear in the case of Ipi Jr., since Letter III records a

debt of 13.5 sacks of barley (III 7) while Accoun tVI lists an amount of 9 sacks, which probably

refers to emmer (VI 5). Nehri 's son Ipi is recorded as owing 20 sacks of emmer in the letter (III 7)

and 21, presumably also of emmer, in the account (VI 7). If the notation " 2 " opposite the end ofVI

35 As indicated by the pattern of vertical tears, rather than three times as indicated by James, HP, 63. The first fold was approximately in the vertical center of the papyrus; the second was not quite in the vertical center of the folded papyrus.

36 Baer's calculation in "Letters," 10, is based on James's suggestion (HP, 65) that the amount in VI 9 should be " 3 " rather than "4" and on the reading of the figure in VI 11 as "2" rather than "10," but the figures "4" and "10," respectively, are clear on the papyrus.

37 Baer,"Letters," 10—11. Barley and emmer debts are also added together in the grand total ofV 48. 38 Baer, "Letters," 11.

B. THE INDIVIDUAL DOCUMENTS 13

7 belongs to that entry, it may be the scribe's way of signalling that the two debts were in fact

separate obligations.39 No such notation was added to the debt of Ipi Jr. in VI 7, perhaps because

the different amounts and commodities may have made the separate character of his two debts

self-evident.

ACCOUNT VII (MMA 22.3.522, pis. 21-22, 48-51) is a first-use papyrus, 27.7 cm high by 19

cm wide, inscribed in hieratic in black ink by the scribe of Letters I—II. Neither side is palimpsest;

what James saw as traces of an earlier text are merely two erasures made by the scribe in the

course of composition. The recto contains 204 signs in 13 lines and 2 columns of text, written

from right to left beginning at the righthand edge of the sheet. The verso is inscribed in the same

orientation as the recto in a single column with two dockets, separated by a space of 7.2 cm, con

taining a total of 29 signs. After writing the recto the scribe rolled the sheet from left to right six

times (resulting in six vertical creases), recto inside; he then folded it in half vertically and inscribed

the two dockets on the two exposed faces (in back of the righthand edge of lines 1—7 of the recto).

There is no evidence that the final packet was either tied or sealed.

The entries of the recto are arranged physically in two sections of horizontal lines, to which

two texts have been added in columns, as follows:

VIlA 1—7 Account of grain, in the upper righthand quadrant, corresponding to

the first docket on the verso (vo. 1)

VIlB 9—14 Account of flax, on the lefthand side of the middle of the sheet, corre

sponding to the second docket on the verso (vo. 2)

Vile 8 "[Total] of salary per month," in a single column below the righthand

edge of section VIlB

VIlD 15 Instructions for the distribution of rations, in a single column down the

righthand side of the sheet.

Despite the location of section VIlD, the correspondence between section VIlA and the first docket

indicates thatVIlA was probably inscribed first. The righthand edge of the recto has a pronounced

leftward slant from top to bottom, of approximately one centimeter in eight (pl. 21).40 Probably

because of this feature, the scribe began the recto farther than usual from the righthand edge of

the papyrus: the beginnings of lines 1—7 line up vertically with the righthand edge of the bottom

of the sheet.

Section VIlB was undoubtedly written next. Its purpose was to record the number of bales of

flax remaining from an original commission of 20 bales. Section VIIC is written in a column below

VIlB, and is aligned with the righthand edge of the latter section. Despite James's numbering of

the column, this arrangement and the parallel in V 30—33 show thatVIIC was written as part of

VIlB, after VII 14. It records the amount of grain available for monthly salaries, based in part on the

entries in VIlB. The final section, VIlD, adds instructions for the distribution of rations, and was

therefore written last, in the unused righthand portion of the recto.

ACCOUNT P (Papyrus Purches, pis. 23-24, 52-53) is a reused papyrus 28.1 cm high by 9.1 cm

wide, inscribed in hieratic in black ink.4' The recto contains 141 signs in 17 lines and 2 columns of

text, written from right to left beginning at the righthand edge. The verso contains 8 signs in a

single column of the docket, oriented in the same direction as the recto. The document was folded

39 The large space left between the two numbers may have been intended to prevent the second number from being misinterpreted as an amount owed.

40 Also visible in James's published photograph of the verso: HP, pl. 15. The slant was present when Account VII was written: it has affected the arrangement of col. 15 such that its final signs are 1.4 cm to the left of its beginning.

41 In the photographs on pis. 23—24 and that published by James, "Account," pl. 6, the upper third of the papyrus is mounted about 2 millimeters too low and the left two panels of the middle section are skewed up and to the right by the same amount (as can be seen from the misaligned lefthand vertical fold).The facsimiles on pis. 52-53 show these sections in their correct alignment.

14 I .THE PAPYRI

in thirds horizontally, from left to right, recto inside, then in thirds vertically, top over bottom. The

docket was inscribed on the central of the two panels, top toward the upper fold. Strands of linen

with a stamped lump of clay accompanied the papyrus (pl. 7),42 indicating that the account was

sealed after folding, probably in the same manner as Letter III. The seal impression was the same as

that used on Letter III (fig. 6, p. 8).

Account P contains a mixture of grain and flax entries. Although there is no dividing line or

space separating them, three sections can be distinguished by their contents, as follows:

PA 1-5, 18 List of grain and flax in the "lowland" and "highland" of "Great Wind"

PB 6—14 List of grain associated with individuals and services

PC 15—17,19 Balances and miscellaneous entries.

Despite the number James assigned it, P 18 probably qualifies the grain entry of P 4 and is to be

read with that line (see the textual note to on p. 66).

LETTER P ' (Papyrus Purches, pis. 54—55) is the erased text of Account P, a letter from a man

named Intef to a steward by the name of Ineswisetekh (see the textual notes on pp. 69—70). The

letter occupies five columns on the recto (col. 5 only one-fourth inscribed), written the same way

up as the later account. The address was written in the lower of the two panels produced when the

letter was folded (in the same manner as described above), top toward the fold. The presence of

this erased address probably explains the placement of the new docket of Account P in the central

panel rather than in the usual bottom panel of the folded papyrus.

FRAGMENTS A-E (MMA 22.3.523, pis. 25, 56-57) are five small pieces of papyri from perhaps

as many original documents. All are inscribed in hieratic in black ink. Frag. A was written by the

scribe of Letters I—II and Accounts VII and P; the other fragments are too small to permit conclu

sive comparison of their hands with those of the other documents.

Frag. A (3.8 cm wide by 8 cm high) contains the ends of 5 lines on the recto, with 26 or 27

signs. The verso contains traces of a docket in one column, apparently written the same way up as

the recto. There is no trace of an original text other than an erasure under the final sign of A 4.

Since the ink of the signs on the recto is uniformly dark, the preserved signs may have been fairly

near the beginning of each line. With the trace of a docket on the verso, this suggests that the

fragment comes from the bottom righthand edge of the original sheet. As James noted (HP, 69),

the use of lines rather than columns indicates that the document to which this fragment belonged

was an account. It apparently dealt at least in part with loans of grain.

Frag. B (2.6 cm wide by 1.8 cm high) is palimpsest on the recto and verso. The original was

perhaps a letter, written in columns at 900 to the present text (the original top is the left of the

present recto). Only the end ofa single line of the new text, with 5 signs, is now preserved on the

verso (original recto); the present recto (original verso) is uninscribed. Judging from its orientation,

length, and the slight separation of the "seated-man" determinative from the rest of the name, the

present text was probably part of an entry in an account rather than an address or docket.

Frags. C—E, published here for the first time, are inscribed only on one side. Frag. C (0.8 cm

wide by 0.8 cm high) may have come from the same papyrus as Frag. B, and is also palimpsest; the

present text contains two signs from a single line, probably the end ofa name. Frag. D (0.5 cm

wide by 0.9 cm high) preserves what seem to be the beginnings of two lines of an account, with 4

signs; the signs were written with a fine brush and are fairly small. Frag. E (0.6 cm wide by 1.3 cm

high) contains only traces of the lefthand side of a column of text, with the ends of perhaps 7

signs. The inscribed side is the verso (vertical fibers uppermost), so the text may have been a

docket. Neither of the two fragments D—E shows traces of an original text.

42 See also James, "Account," 51 and pl. 6, 3.The papyrus was purchased from a dealer in Luxor in 1922 or 1923 and given to its current owner in 1958, at which time it was still folded, but with the string and seal separate.

2. Translations and Textual Notes

CONSECUTIVE TRANSLATIONS OF HEQANAKHT'S LETTERS AND ACCOUNTS are presented in Sec

tion A below, followed in Section B by the textual notes pertaining to these. Within the

translations, bold words and numerals indicate red ink in the original. The abbreviations "ar." (for

stjt "aroura") and "dar." (for h3 "dekaroura") are used to reflect the numerical conventions of the

original. The expression zp 2 "twice" following the imperative ch3 tw/tn "mind you" is ignored in

translation. The textual notes deal mostly with points of epigraphy, grammar, and new readings.

More general questions of paleography and grammar are discussed in Chapters 3 and 4; technical

terms and measures, in Chapter 8.

A. Translations

Letter I

vo. 18-19 (Writing) that ka-servant Heqanakht sends to his household of Sidder Grove.

1-3 To be said by ka-servant Heqanakht to Merisu. As for every part of our land that gets

wet, you are the one who cultivates it—take heed—and all my people as well as you.

Look, I will count it against you. Be especially diligent in cultivating. Mind you that

my barley seed is guarded and that all my property is guarded. Look, I will count it

against you. Mind you about all my property.

3-9 Arrange to have Heti's son Nakht and Sinebniut go down to Perhaa to cultivate for [us] a

dar. of land on lease. They should take its lease from that sheet to be woven there (with

you). If, however, they will have collected the equivalent value of that emmer that is

(owed me) in Perhaa, they should use it there as well. Should you have nothing more

than that sheet I said to weave, they should take it valued from Sidder Grove and lease

land for its value. Now, if it will be easy for you (all) to cultivate 2 dar. of land there, culti

vate it. You should find land—1 dar. of land in emmer, 1 dar. of land in full barley—in the

[good] land [of] Khepshyt. Don't farm the land everyone else farms.You should ask from

Hau Jr. If you don't find (any) from him, you will have to go before Herunefer. He is the

one who can put you on watered land of Khepshyt.

9-14 Now look, (Merisu), before I came upstream here, you calculated for me the lease of

1.3 dar. of land in full barley alone. Mind you do not short a sack of full barley from it,

as (if you were) one dealing with his own full barley, because you have made the lease

for it painful for me, being full barley alone as well as its seed. Now look, when dealing

with full barley, 65 sacks of full barley from 1.3 dar. of land, being 5 sacks of full barley

from 1 ar. of land, is not a difficult rate. Look, 1 dar. of land will net 100 sacks of full

barley. Mind you do not take liberties with the oipe of full barley therein. Look, this is

not the year for a man to be lax about his master, about his father, about his brother.

14-17 Now, as for everything for which Heti's son Nakht will act in Perhaa—look, I have not

calculated more than one month's salary for him, consisting of a sack of full barley, calcu

lating a second one of 0.5 of full barley for his dependents for the first day of the month.

Look, if you violate this I will make it on you as a shortage. As for that which I told you,

however—"Give him a sack of full barley for the month"—you should give (it) to him as

0.8 of full barley for the month. Mind you.

15

16 2. TRANSLATIONS AND TEXTUAL NOTES

vo. 1-5 Now, what is this, having Sihathor come to me with old, dried-up full barley that was in

Djedsut, without giving me those io sacks of full barley in new, fresh full barley? Don't

you have it good, eating fresh full barley while I am outcast? Now, the barge is moored at

your harbor, and you act in all kinds of bad ways. If you will have had old full barley

brought to me in order to stockpile that new full barley, what can I say? How good it is.

(But) if you can't calculate a single (measure) of full barley for me in new full barley, I

won't ever calculate it for you.

vo. 5-9 Now, didn't I say "Snefru has grown up"? Mind you about him. Give him a salary. And

greetings to Snefru as "Foremost of my body" a thousand times, a million times. Mind you,

(as) I have written. Now, when my land gets wet, he should plow with you and Anubis—

you take heed—and Sihathor. Mind you about him. After the plowing you should send

him to me. Have him bring me 2 sacks of zwt-emmer along with whatever full barley

you find, but only from the excess of your salaries until you reach Harvest. [Don't] be

neglectful about anything I have written you about. Look, this is the year when a man

is to act for his master.

vo. 9-12 Now, as for all the area of my basined land and all the area of my basin-land in Sinwi, I

have done it in flax. Don't let anybody farm it. Moreover, as for anyone who will speak

to you (about farming it), you should go [to I]p Jr.['s son] Khentekhtai about him.

Now, you should do that basin-land in full barley. Don't do emmer there. But if it will

come as a big inundation, you should do it in emmer.

vo. 12-13 Mind you about Anubis and Snefru. You die with them as you live with them. Mind

you. Look, there is nothing more (important) than either of them in that house with

you. Don't be neglectful about it.

vo. 13-15 Now, get that housemaid Senen put out of my house—mind you—on whatever day

Sihathor reaches you. Look, if she spends a single day in my house, take action! You are

the one who lets her do bad to my wife. Look, why should I make it distressful for

you? What did she do against (any of) you, you (Merisu) who hate her?

vo. 15-17 And greetings to my mother Ipi a thousand times, a million times. And greetings to

Hetepet, and the whole household, and Nefret. Now, what is this, doing bad things to

my wife? Have done with it. Have you been given equal rights with me? How good it

would be for you to stop.

vo. 17 And have a writing brought about what is collected from those (debts) of Perhaa. Mind

you, don't be neglectful.

Letter II

vo. 5-6 (Writing) that ka-servant Heqanakht sends to his household of Sidder Grove.

1-2 A son who speaks to his mother, ka-servant Heqanakht to his mother Ipi, and to Hete

pet: how is your lph? In the blessing of Montu, lord of Thebes. And to the whole

household: how are you, how is your lph? Don't concern yourselves about me. Look, I

am healthy and alive.

3-5a Look, you are that one who ate to his satisfaction when he was hungry to the white of

his eyes. Look, the whole land is dead and [you] have not hungered. Look, before I

came upstream here, I made your salaries to perfection. [Now], has the inundation been

very [big]? Look, [our] salary has been made for us according to the state of the inun

dation, which one and all bear. Look, I have managed to keep you alive so far.

7 Writing of the salary of the household:

8-9 Ipi and her maidservant 0.8

10-11 Hetepet and her maidservant 0.8

12-13 Heti's son Nakht, with his dependents 0.8

14 Merisu and his dependents 0.8

15

i 6

17

18

19

2 0

2 1

2 2

23

5b-6

Sihathor

Sinebniut

Anubis

Snefru

Si(t)inut

May's daughter Hetepet

Nefret

Sitwerut

Totalling to

When a salary is measu

A. T R A N S L A T I O N S 17

0.8

0.7

0.4

0.4

0.4

0.5

0.3/2

0.2

7.9M2

ed for Sinebniut in his full barley, it should be at his dis

posal for his departure to Perhaa.

24-29 Lest (any of) you get angry about this, look, the whole household is just like my chil

dren, and everything is mine to allocate. Half of life is better than death in full. Look,

one should say hunger (only) about (real) hunger. Look, they've started to eat people

here. Look, there are none to w h o m this salary is given anywhere.You should conduct

yourselves with diligent heart until I have reached you. Look, I will spend Harvest

here.

29-33 To be said by ka-servant Heqanakht to Merisu and to Heti's son Nakht subordinately.

You (both) should give this salary to my people only as long as they are working. Mind

you, hoe all my land tilled by tilling. Hack with your noses in the work. Look, (Mer

isu), if they are diligent, you will be thanked, and I will no longer have to make it

distressful for (any of) you. Now, that salary I have wri t ten you about should start being

given from the first of Khentekhtai-perti and per (each) succeeding first of the month .

In this respect, don't be neglectful about that 1.4 dar. of land that is in pasturage, which

lp Jr.'s son Khentekhtai gave—about hoeing it. Be especially diligent. Look, you are

(all) eating my salary.

34-35 Now, as for any possession of Anubis's that you have, (Merisu), give it to him. As for

what is lost, replace it for him. Don ' t make me write you about it another time. Look, I

have writ ten you about it twice (already).

35-38 Now, if Mer-Snefru will be wanting to be in charge of those cattle, you'll have to put

h im in charge of them, for neither did he want to be with you plowing, going up

and down, nor did he want to come here wi th me. Whatever else he might want, you

should make h im content about what he might want. But as for anyone w h o will re

ject this salary, w o m e n or men, he should come to me, here with me, and live like I

live.

38-44 Now, before I came here, didn't I tell you (all) "Don ' t keep a friend of Hetepet from

her, whe ther her hairdresser or her domestic"? Mind you about her. If only you

would be (as) firm in everything as (you are) in this. Now, if you (Merisu) don' t want

her, you'll have to have Iutenhab brought to me. As this man lives for m e — I speak

about lp—whoever shall make any affair of the wife on the battlefield, he is against

me and I am against him. Look, that is my wife, and the way to behave to a man's

wife is known. Look, as for anyone w h o will act for her, the same is done for me.

Fur thermore , will any of you bear having his woman denounced to him? T h e n I

would bear it. H o w can I be in one communi ty with you (all)? N o t w h e n you won' t

respect the wife for me!

vo. 1-4 N o w look, I have had 24 copper deben for the lease of land brought to you (all) by

Sihathor. Now, have 2 dar. of land cultivated for us on lease in Perhaa beside Hau Jr., by

copper, by cloth, by full barley, [by] any [thing], but only when you will have (first) col

lected the value of oil or of anything (else) there. Mind you, be especially diligent. Be

watchful, and [farm] good watered land of Khepshyt.


Letter III

vo. 3 Delta-overseer Herunefer.

1-3 Worker of the funerary estate, ka-servant Heqanakht, who speaks. | Your condition is

like living, a million times. May Harsaphes, lord of Herakleopolis, and all the gods who

are (in the sky and on earth) act for you. May Ptah South of His Wall sweeten your

heart greatly with life and a (good) old age. May your final honor be with the ka of

Harsaphes, lord of Herakleopolis.

3-6 Your humble servant speaks that I might let Your Excellency know that I have had

Hety's son Nakht and Sinebniut come about that full barley and emmer that is there.

So what Your Excellency should do is to be so kind as to have it collected, without let

ting any of it get confused, if you please. Now, after collecting it, it should be put in the

house ofYour Excellency until it has been come for. Now look, I have had them bring

that oipe with which it should be measured: it is decorated with black hide.

6-8 Now look, 15 emmer are in Hathaa owed by Neneksu, and 13.5 full barley owed by Ipi

Jr. in Pool of the Sobeks. That which is in New District: owed by Nehri's son Ipi, 20

emmer; his brother Desher, 3.Total: 38 (emmer) and 13.5 (full barley).

8-vo. 1 Now, as for one who would give me a replacement in oil, he shall give me 1 jar for 2

full barley or for 3 emmer. But look, I would like to be given my property in full bar

ley.

vo. 1-2 And let there be no neglect about Nakht or about anything he comes to you about.

Look, he is the one who sees to all my things.

Letter IV

vo. 1-2 [Work]shop-overseer [Sitnebsekhtu]. Gereg.

1-2 [A daughter] who speaks to her mother, Sitnebsekhtu who speaks to Sitneb[sekht]u: A

thousand phrases of greeting you in lph. [May] you [be well], with your heart sweet. May

Hathor sweeten your heart for me. Don't be concerned about me. Look, I am healthy.

2-4 Look, as for all that is brought to [Nefer]abdu as memorandum, the same is brought to

you. And greetings to Gereg in lph. Look, I have had Si[hathor] come to check on you.

Don't let Gereg be neglectful about his [ ... ]. And greetings to the whole house in lph.

AccountV

1 Year 5, 2 Harvest 9.

2 Writing of the full barley of Heqanakht-

3

4

5

6

7

8

10

11

12

13

H

15

17

that he has entrusted to Merisu:

new full barley

new emmer

full barley

flax, sheaves

flax, sheaves

The total thereof is

its produce for the cattle:

full barley

emmer

consisting of full barley that Hec

Sihathor

Merisu

Sinebniut

12

1 1 2

63 10

6 0 0

5 0 0

1100

4

10.5

[anakL

46

50

46

sheaves 100

n o 16 land, 1 ar., flax

100

A. TRANSLATIONS 19

18-19

20

21

22

23

24

2 5 - 2 9

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37 -38

39

40

4i

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

v o . 1

VO. 2

v o . 3

v o . 4

v o . 5

vo . 6

vo. 7

vo . 8

v o . 9

v o . 10

[Writing] of cattle that Heqanakht has entrusted [to SLJnebniut:

ox 3

cow of new hair 11

raised [cow] 5

raised bull 1

team bull 15

Now, [if] Sinebniut complains to [Merisu about] the matter of a bull that goes up,

that is taken, (or) that does not go, half of its price is on him and (half on) Heti's

son Nakht .

Wri t ing of bread that Merisu has given to Heqanakht:

grilled 1000

bhsw 500

tr-zzt 3700

The total in tr-zzt is 6000

Year 8. Wri t ing of the balance of Heqanakht that is with Merisu:

full barley, sacks 12.5 13

Grand total 25.5

Year 8. Wri t ing of full barley and emmer that is outstanding, cited by man by name:

Ishetni's son Senuhetep 18

Estate-manager He tepkhnum 7.5

Semekhsen's son Big Khety 4.5

Nefersedjerut's son Sankhsobek 5

Wesret's son Ankh 5-2/4

Kha's son Ipi I

Ankhni's son Ipi's son Khentekhtai-hetep 3

Metjenuti's son Khentekhtai-hetep, sacks 30

Total: full barley, sacks 33 41.2V2

Grand total, sacks 74.2V2

Renenrehut 's son Ishetni 3

R u d d y Khety 1.5

Shed's son Nakht 1.5

Meru's son Khety 1.5

Shed's son Shed 3

Total, sacks 10.5

Wri t ing of wood:

5 willow in the backhouse

a mast in the forecourt

1 wood of moringa

3 wood of sycamore, large

1 board

a silo of willow with the value of 60 uprights

4j3m wood

5 acacia

1 acacia beam, large

A c c o u n t V I

vo. 1-3 Wri t ing of what is in Perhaa.

1 Wha t is in nor thern Hathaa:

2-3 owed by Sebeknedjem's son Nenrenef and his brother 15

20 2.TRANSLATIONS AND TEXTUAL NOTES

4 What is in Pool of the Sobeks:

5 owed by Ipi Jr.

6 What is in N e w District:

7 owed by Nehri 's son Ipi

8 What is in Place of Netting:

9 owed by Sisobek

io Sau

II Custodian of Hounds Hay

14 Total thereto

2-13 as measured with the big oipe

15 What is owed by the house of Kh

16 Sisit's son Sirenenutet

17 Seputi's son Neferqerer

18 Sikhentekhtai N u

19 (Total)

20 Grand total, sacks

that is in Sidder Grove.

etyankhef

9

21 2

4

3 1 0

52

4.5 full barley

2

1

6

13-5

1 1 7

1020

7

10

6 0

by bale of 60

3 additional

A c c o u n t VII

vo. 1 Wri t ing of emmer that is in Great Wind.

vo. 2 Wha t is with Sit(neb)sekhtu.

1-2 Wri t ing of emmer that is in [Great Wind] , lowland:

3 storehouse, sacks 30.2

4 emmer, sacks 1.9 in oipe

5 warehouse, sacks 3.2 additional

6 House of Mentunakht , sacks 20.3

7 House ofTjai's son Nakht , sacks 2

9 Wha t is with Sitnebsekhtu

10 as the balance of 20 bales

11 on the first [of] Emmer-Swell , loose:

12 sh[eave]s [of] flax

13 [What she has completed, sacks]

14 [What is] in the upper (part of the) house, sacks

8 [Total] of salary per month , sacks

15 Neferabdu should start with salaries in Big Burning [on the Procesjsion ofTepiner.

A c c o u n t P

vo. 1 Wha t is in Great Wind.

1 Wri t ing of what is in the lowland:

2 as full barley, sacks 38.2 0.3 in oipe

3 flax 7000

4/18 highland, grain, sacks 20 w3t

5 highland, house 1000

6 Due to Neferabdu 20

7 Imuenip 30

8 Ahanakht j r . 30

9 His father 35

10 ? . . . 5

11 Various women 20.1

12 Ibu Sr. 10

13 Shepherding 10

14 Abihu 10

B. TEXTUAL NOTES 21

15 2007 bundled

16 Balance

17 Highland

19 Another with ..

4030

80

Huni , wi thout his having given it.

Letter P '

,0. 1 Steward Ineswisetekh.

1-2 To be said by Meryinpu Jr.'s son Intef to steward Ineswisetekh. | Your condition is like

living, a million times. May Harsaphes, [lord] of Herakleopolis, and all the gods act for

you. [I praise(?)] every god [for] you every day(?).

2-5 Now, if you will collect the copper of those two female slave-laborers I spoke to you

about, you will be so kind as to have (it) brought—though I have been told you (your

self) will be arriving [where I am]. (Nonetheless), if Your Excellency is having (it)

brought, have (it) given to a boy of Ankhef: then he is the one w h o will bring (it) to

me.

Fragments

A

2

3

4

5

.. ka-servant Heqanakht

.. full barley to / fo r /o f Merisu

.. subtracted [from it]

.. grain loan ...

.. sack in addition to it.

B 1 ... Simeres

C 1 ... [hete]p

D 1 [T]he ...

2 Full barley

B. Textual Notes

Letter I

I vo. 18-19

11

dd hm-k3 hqp-nht r prwf n nbsyt — After writ ing nbsyt the scribe drew a long vertical

below the two columns of the address and between them, wi thout redipping his brush.

The meaning of this feature is unclear: compare the similar use of a different sign ac

companying the address of Letter II. Both may be merely a kind of flourish. T h e verb

form dd is an imperfective relative sdm.f referring to the letter itself (James, HP, 128):

the usage wi thout prepositional adjunct in a Middle Kingdom parallel (Griffith, Kahun

Papyri, pl. 32, 1), rules out an "emphat ic" sentence. Since the imperfective clearly does

not refer to multiple instances of "giving" and appears elsewhere with singular subject

and adjunct (e.g., James, HP, pl. 27, vo. 2—3), its use is evidently conditioned either by

tense or by the "plurality" of words in the implied antecedent zh3.

r dd — T o the grammatical discussion of James, HP, 120, add Baer, "Letters," 2 n. 3. The

phrase probably does not indicate that the letter was to be read to Merisu: see pp. 111—12.

Goedicke argued that it reflects dictation of the letter (Studies, 45-46), but epigraphic fea

tures show that it was in fact written by Heqanakht himself: see pp. 82—84.

jwht ... sk3 — T h e first participle could be either active or passive, but the intransitive

use of the verb in I vo. 6 (see the textual note below) suggests the former. The sense

may be simply generic—"whatever (normally) gets wet (from the inundation)"—but a

prospective reference is suggested by the probable chronology of the letter, which indi

cates that the inundation lay in the future at the time of writing: see Baer, "Letters," 2

n. 4, and p. 135 below. In these letters the te rm sk3 seems to denote cultivation in gen

eral as well as the more limited activity of plowing, as James noted (HP, 18); cf. A.

Theorides, RIDA 10 (1963), 96-97 and 112 n. 77.


mjcnw r(m)t.j nb hnc.k — T h e first person suffix of r(m)t.j was added secondarily, prob

ably after the scribe wrote the nb sign, judging from the weight of ink in both signs.

The word jcnw has been the subject of much discussion: Gardiner, Admonitions, 103;

Gardiner and Sethe, Letters to the Dead, 20; Gunn,JEA 16 (1930), 151; Grapow, Wie die

alten Agypter sich anredeten III, 54; James, HP, 109; Baer,"Letters," 2-3 n. 5; Simpson,JEA

52 (1966), 42; Grieshammer, Jenseitsgericht, 128; Faulkner, Coffin Texts I, 49 n. 25; Gug-

lielmi, Reden, 133; Goedicke, Studies, 46—47. The references of Baer and Goedicke can

be augmented by CT III, 38c; IV, ig;V, 66m, 219c M6C;VI, 96I1, 224d, 25ie—f, 2531,

262d, 29ie, 347b;VII, 5is, ioon, 20ij, 233k, 37ie, 391b.The word is found either as an

independent noun or as an interjection with following dative; both uses occur in a sin

gle passage in Gardiner and Sethe, Letters to the Dead, pl. 4, 2; and Simpson, JEA 52

(1966), pl. 9, 2. It seems to be used only as a noun; the example in CT I, 174b taken by

Faulkner and Goedicke as an example of verbal use, is simply the standard interjection

without a following dative:jcnw (j)t.j pfijm(j) P3d3t h3.n.j-nfi "jcnw, oh yonder father of

mine in the council, to whom I have descended." Both the usual determinative of the

man with hand to mouth (A2) and the uses collected by Baer and Goedicke indicate

that jcnw refers to a kind of cry (note CT VI 75i and 253! hrw jcnw "the sound of

jcnw")—often of woe, but also of greeting, especially to the sun; cf. the modern Egyp

tian custom of zagharid: E.W. Lane, Manners and Customs of the Modern Egyptians

(London, 1895), 166—72 and 510. As such, it may be related to the noun jcnj "baboon,"

whose cries greet the morning sun. Together with the normal use of the term, this

suggests a basic meaning "alert" or the like. The syntax of the two instances in Letter I

is uncertain:

ntk sk3 s(j) mjcnw r(m)t.j nb hn.k (I 1)

jrjwh 3ht.j sk3.fi hnc.k hnc jnp mjcnwJk1 hnc z3-hwt-hr (I vo. 6—7).

The use in I vo. 7, with a unique pronominal suffix (see the textual note below), can be

interpreted as a coordinate genitive—"being your jcnw as well as Sihathor('s)" (for this

use of hnc see Westendorf, GmT, § 147 aa 3; Petrovskiy, CouemanuH Cjioe, 248—49)—

and suggests in turn that I 1 jcnw r(m)t.j nb hnc.k is also a coordinate phrase: "being the

jcnw of all my people as well as you." Baer, however, has interpreted the words following

mjcnw in I 1 as a circumstantial clause ("Letters," 2), and his analysis is supported both by

the fact that the scribe dipped his brush between jcnw and r(m)t.j and by the fact that the

preceding and following clauses lay specific responsibility on Merisu alone. In that light a

similar meaning is probably also intended in I vo. 6—7, with mjcnw. rkJ as parenthetic and

hnc z3-hwt-hr a third hnc phrase belonging with the preceding two: cf. I vo. 16 hnc nd hrt

htpt hnc prw r drfhnc nfirt. In both passages m jcnw follows a kind of admonition; for the

parenthetic use of m plus noun, cf. I 11-12 m jtj-mh hr wcfhnc prtf "being full barley

alone, as well as its seed." The addition of r(m)t.j nh hn.k is apparently meant to indicate

that ntk sk3 s(j) is not to be taken as exclusive.

I 1-2 mj.kjp.j st r.k — T h e parallel of the preceding "participial statement" indicates that this

is an "emphatic" sentence. The connotation is probably one of financial liability: see

Baer, "Letters," 3 n. 6.

I 2 qn.t(j) zp 2 m sk3 — T h e root qnj "diligent" occurs five times in Letters I—II: three times

in the expression qn.t(j) zp 2 (I 2; II 33, vo. 3), with the "crossed-sticks" determinative

(Z9); once in the phrase jb qn, with the same determinative (II 28); and once as a verb,

with the "striking man" determinative (II 31). As James noted (HP, 41), the first expres

sion is used in the context of plural (II 33, vo. 3) as well as singular (I 2) second-person

addresses, which is odd for the 2s stative qn.t(j) "be diligent." An adverb ^«M'diligently"

(cf. Edel, A&G, § 705, 3b) would suit the use in II vo. 3 (c/z? tn zp 2 qnt zp 2 "mind you,

http://sk3.fi

B. TEXTUAL NOTES 23

very diligently"). In I 2 and II 33, however, this interpretation is less likely; in both

cases, the scribe also dipped his brush before writing qn. In II vo. 3, moreover, the

scribe used a 2s pronoun in the following phrase rs tp.k, which he then canceled and

followed by a verb with 2pl suffix (see the textual note to II vo. 3-4 below).This sug

gests that the form is in fact the 2s stative qn.t(j)—which influenced the original 2s

pronoun in II vo. 3 tp.k—despite its use in a plural context.

z3ww — The form elsewhere in these letters is z3w, with the sense of a conjunction

"lest, that not," followed by a sdm.f form: ch3 tw zp 2 z3w sj3t.k (I 10-11) "Mind you

lest you short"; ch3 tw zp 2 z3w shmjb.k (I 13-14) "Mind you lest you take liberties";jV

z3w qnd.tn (II 24) "Lest you get angry" (see the textual note).1 Here, however, the verb

is used as the sole predicate. The second w indicates a form different from z3w (James,

HP, 18)—probably, therefore, the prospective passive governed by ch3 tw: see the dis

cussion on pp. 95—96. This is apparently a unique construction: apart from the examples

with z3w plus sdm.f noted above, ch3 tw is followed in the same clause only by a

prepositional phrase with r or m (see James, HP, 111).

prt jtj.j— In view of the spelling of prt in I 12, this reading is preferable to prt.j (cf.

Goedicke, Studies, 47). What James read as the plural strokes of prt could also be the

three grains of •>-. (cf, e.g., I 7 jtj-mh).The same spelling of the generic term jtj also

occurs in P 4 (see the textual note).

13 ch3 tw zp 2 r ht.j nbt — This sentence has been written over an erasure. The original

text, written after a dip of the brush, began withjr wnn and ended with n.j. After eras

ing it, the scribe dipped his brush again before writing the current sentence.

jr n.k rdjt h3y — The context indicates the imperative with following dative "of advan

tage" rather than the sdm.n.f. Goedicke s interrogative sdm.n.f (Studies, 47-48) is unlikely:

Heqanakht is clearly issuing instructions rather than questioning whether previous or

ders have been carried out. The same construction occurs in I vo. 13 and also underlies

III 4 jrt r.fizh3.k pw cnh-(w)d3-s(nb) rdjt sd.t; the latter rules out Callender's reading jr n.k

r djt (Middle Egyptian, 116). Gunn noted that the imperative jr n.k sdm "seems to be

used for specially urgent injunctions":JEJl 16 (1930), 151.

pr-h33 — The pr sign and stroke are written over an incomplete and erased sign. The

scribe probably began to write the h of h33 before realizing his error. A similar error

occurs in VI vo. 2 (see the textual note below).

I 4 [s]k3.sn — T h e end of the lefthand vertical of the second 5 is preserved.

jt.sn (also 16) — 'K 3 is written over an erased sign, perhaps the first sign of the phrase ch3 (tw zp 2): the scribe evidently changed his mind after beginning the original sign,

erased it, dipped his brush, and made the new sign before continuing. Pace James (HP,

19 and pl. iA), the downstroke on the forward leg of "P? is probably not another t:

compare the form of CKD in I 9. The sentence is clearly "emphatic" in meaning, how

ever. The verb form must be either the perfective relative sdmfior the subjunctive: for

the "emphatic" use of the perfective relative, cf. Allen, LingAeg 1 (1991), 1-2; in the lat

ter case the "emphatic" meaning of the sentence is conveyed only by the context (cf.

Westcar 3, 7-8: Gardiner, EG, 331 n. 3).

qdbf—The masculine singular suffix evidently refers to the numerical quantity inher

ent in the preceding 3ht h.3 m qdb: see the discussion on pp. 151—54.

1 The conjunctive value of zSw is clear in a later example from the Karnak "Juridical Stela," in third-person context: jw.tw r rdjt crq.sn hr.s m cnh n nb cnh-(w)dS-s(nb) z3w cnn.sn hr.[s] r [n]hh "They were to be made to swear about it with an oath of the lord, lph, that they not go back on it forever": W. Helck, Historisch-biographische Texte der 2. Zwischenzeit und ncue Texte der 18. Dynastie (Wiesbaden, 1975), 68, 13—14.


p3 mn — The demonstrative probably anticipates the following relative clause: see the

discussion on p. 89. The word mn may denote a bedsheet: see G. Jequier, Les firises

d'objets des sarcophages du Moyen Empire (MIFAO 47: Cairo, 1921), 243—44.

sht c3 — The instruction sht sw in I 6 (see below) indicates that the passive participle

sht here has prospective sense. For mn referring to cloth yet to be woven, cf. James,

HP, pl. 26, 6-7 mj.k grt jr p3 mn mj.k sw w3hy "Now look, as for that sheet, look, it is

set up (for weaving)": see James, HP, 93—94. For c3, see the textual note to I 10 mjn3,

below.

I 4-5 jr grt wnn sd.n.sn — See the discussion on pp. 92—93. The conditional here is evidently

future (wnn) perfect (sd.n.sn)—i.e., if Nakht and Sinebniut will have managed to collect

some of the debts owed Heqanakht in Perhaa before they arrange for the rental of land:

see pp. 139-40.

15 s(n)ct m db3 n n3 n btj nt(j) m pr-h33 — Literally,"value in exchange for that emmer that

is in Perhaa." The masculine nt(j) resumes n3 n btj rather than btj alone: cf. Gardiner,

EG, § 511.3. This probably refers to the emmer mentioned in Letter III as owed to

Heqanakht in Hathaa (see the next two notes); for the equivalence of Perhaa and

Hathaa, see pp. 122-23. The mark inside the 1=1=1 sign is only the usual detail of this sign

(where used as a phonogram) in these texts. For the omission of n, cf. the spelling in I 6

(note below).

dd.sn st jm gr — As Kaplony (MDAIK 25 (1969), 28) points out, contra Baer ("Letters,"

3-4), the pronoun st refers neither to qdb, which is masculine, nor to s(n)ct, which

would be resumed by s(j) (cf. I 1 and vo. 4). Kaplony argues that st can only refer to the

grain (n3 n btj), but this is also unlikely, since the initial clause envisions the grain debt

being collected in some other commodity (r db3). Most probably, therefore, st refers to

the unspecified commodity. This in turn indicates that jm is locative, referring to pr-h33:

I 6 qdb.sn 3[h]t r snct.f and II vo. 1 dbn hmt 24 r qdb n 3ht indicates that adverbial jr(j)

would have been used if the referent was <^.The focus of "emphatic" dd.sn must then

be the adverb gr (pace Kaplony). The sentence evidently means that Nakht and Sineb

niut are to use whatever they get as "value in exchange for" the emmer, as well as (gr)

the sheet, to pay for the lease of land: see the discussion on p. 153.

nfr 3 hr.k r p3 mn — As James noted (HP, 104-105), nfr must be the negative particle.

The construction nfr 3 is evidently a variant, perhaps dialectical, of the more com

mon negation nfir n. The usage here is comparable to that in I vo. 4: in both cases, a

nfr 3 construction follows a sentence with conditional jr wnn sdm.n.f and indicates a

contrary condition ("If ...; but if . . . " ) . James understood the sentence to mean that

Merisu "will have no more concern with" the sheet; other translators have followed

James except for Goedicke, who renders "Nothing, indeed, with you is (worth) more

than" the sheet (Studies, 43 and 53-54).The parallel construction in I vo. 4, however,

indicates that this sentence is a contrary condition: in other words, if Nakht and Si

nebniut have not managed to "collect value" for the emmer owed to Heqanakht,

Merisu will have to use only the sheet to bargain for the lease of land. The sense of

nfr 3 is that of an existential negation: literally, "should there be nothing (more) with

you than that sheet." The contrary condition is marked by jr in I vo. 4, but jr is absent

here, perhaps because nfr serves as a predicate in its own right (cf. Edel, AdG, § 1137):

see the discussion on p. 100.

I 6 dd.n.j sht sw— As James saw (HP, 20), this is most likely an example of the relative

sdm.n.fifollowed by an imperative serving as an indirect quotation; direct quotations in

these letters are introduced by r dd (I 17, vo. 5; II 3 8).To James's references add ShS. 152,

B. TEXTUAL NOTES 25

Leb. 100—101, and Hornung, Himmelskuh, 8; also, for Late Egyptian, LRL 6, 5-6; 20, 2;

37, 9-10; 52, 3-4; 56, 11-12; 57, 8-9; d'Orbiney 2, 5. Pace Goedicke (Studies, 54), a rela

tive form followed by an indirect quotation does not require a resumptive pronoun: cf.

Griffith, Kahun Papyri, pl. 28, 26—28; ShS. 152; and the Late Egyptian examples cited

above. The argument in the preceding textual note indicates that the direct quotation

here consists only of sht sw (pace James, HP, 20).

jt.sn sw sn.w m nbsyt — For jt.sn see I 4 jt.sn, note above; snc.w is stative.The preposi

tional phrase m nbsyt has generally been understood as adjunct to snc.w. Alternatively, it

may modify jt.sn ("they should take it from Sidder Grove already valued"): cf.jtj r/n

"take to," Wb. I, 149, 14-15.

3ht — T h e bottom of the second sign (h) is preserved.

snctfi—The *«"* was written after the ^—: cf.Wente,JNES 24 (1965), 106.

I 7 ndm — See the discussion on pp. 158—59.

3ht 5 — The figure is written over an erasure.

jm — Although the immediate referent is nbsyt (I 6), the locative probably refers to the

additional land to be leased in pr-h33. Alternatively, jm may be instrumental, referring to

the sheet: cf. I 4 jt.sn qdb.fim p3 mn; also II vo. 2-3.

gm.tn 3ht— In this context the jussive is likelier than a circumstantial ("when you find

land"). For the meaning ofgm, see Baer,"Letters," 4 n. 15.

3ht h3 m btj 3ht h3 m jtj-mh — The scribe dipped his brush at the beginning of the

phrase and again before making the stroke of the "grain" determinative of btj. This pa

renthesis might seem to belong logically to the preceding sk3 sw; if so, it may have been

written here as an afterthought, after Heqanakht had already begun the next sentence

(gm.tn 3ht). Its position is more likely deliberate, however, indicating that Heqanakht

wants his men to look for land already devoted to emmer and barley rather than land

that would have to be converted from some other crop (as is the case in I vo. 9—12 and

probably also II 32—33). For the term jtj-mh "full barley," see p. 142 n. 4.

I 7-8 3ht [njffit] nfi h]psyt — The size of the lacuna suits only this restoration (James, HP, 21

and pl. 1 A); it is too small for the alternative phrase 3ht [qbt nt h]psyt of I 9. There are

two small traces of ink at the left of the lacuna, to the right of the second and fourth

signs in I 9: these can only be the lefthand side of the —» of [nfffit] and the **•»» of n[t].

Their position indicates, in turn, that the four signs of nfirt were written vertically, as in

II vo. 4, rather than as the group that James restores.

18 m h3w hr 3ht nt r(m)t nb — Literally, "don't go down on the land of everyone." The

preposition hr regularly denotes the place or thing on which someone "goes down"

(Wb. II, 472, 13; 473, 17-18; 474, 1-9); Goedicke's "go down for" (Studies, 56) is less

probable. The exclusive sense of rmt nb (Wb. II, 424, 11/13)—e.g., "Don't go down

onto the land of (just) anybody" (Baer, "Letters," 4)—is suggested by the following or

der to "ask from Hau, Jr.," but the sense could also be inclusive (Wb. II, 424, 12—13),

meaning the kind of land that everyone else uses.

dbh.tn — The traces after the determinative of dbh can only be those of tn, despite

James's question mark (HP, pl. iA).The fragment with the traces of the f-sign is tilted

slightly from its original position.

I 8-9 jr tm.tn gm m c.f— An fifii_, with a form like that at the top of I 9, has been erased after

gm at the bottom of I 8. The scribe probably began m c / i n this position before decid

ing to place the entire phrase at the top of the next column.

http://qdb.fi


I 9 hr.tn sm.tn — The same construction appears in II 35: seeVernus, Future at Issue, 61—84.

For the attempt by Depuydt, RdE 39 (1988), 204—8, to explain these as examples of par

enthetic hr "says," see Satzinger, LingAeg 3 (1993), 131-32. Depuydt s analysis assumes an

unattested use of the parenthetic after something other than a direct quotation.

hrw-nfir — A trace of the initial sign is preserved.

qbt — See pp. 149-50. The final sign of the "water" determinative is partly preserved.

I 9-10 mj.k grt jj.n.j ... hsb.n.k — At this point the scribe sharpened his brush or changed to a

new one: the signs are thinner and sharper than those preceding. The syntactic con

struction also occurs in II 3-4 [mj].tn j.n.j ...jr.n.j and II 38 nn grt j.n.j js ... dd.n.j. In

each case the first clause supplies "background" information to the second, which is the

primary focus of attention: see Vernus, GM 43 (1981), 78-79; Johnson, Studien ...

WestendorfT, 79; Junge, Emphasis, 56. Despite differences in the syntactic interpretation

of these clauses, there is general agreement—with the exception of A. Theodorides,

CdE 41 (1966), 299—about their temporal sequence: namely, that the action of the

second clause occurred prior to that of the first. This analysis supersedes Baer's argu

ments for a prior trip of Heqanakht ("Letters," 3 n. 10).

I 10 mj n3 — T h e meaning of this term, and its distinction from c3, have been the subject of

much discussion: see especially James, HP, in—12; Helck, OLZ 59 (1964), 30—31; Baer,

"Letters," 3 n. 10; Goedicke, Studies, 56-57. In part this is due to the apparent difficulty

posed by the additional adjunct m hntyt "upstream" here and in II 4 and 38, given the

supposed location of Heqanakht's family and lands south of Thebes (for which, see pp.

121—25). The instances of both terms in these letters are:

mj n3 mj.k grt jj.n.j mj n3 m hntyt hsb.n.k n.j qdb (I 9—10) "Now look, before I came mj

n3 upstream, you calculated for me the lease."

[mj].tn j.n.j mj n3 m hntyt jr.n.j cqw.tn r nfr (II 3-4) "Look, before I came mj n3

upstream, I made your salaries to perfection."

nj mrfgrtjwt mj n3 hn.j (II 36) "nor did he want to come mj n3 with me."

nn grt j.n.j js mj n3 dd.n.j n.tn (II 38) "Now, before I came mj n3, didn't I tell

you."

h3 rwd.tn m ht nbt mj n3 (II 39-40) "If only you would be firm in everything mj

n3.

c3 p3 mn sht c3 (I 4) "that sheet to be woven c3."

mj.tn ncw m wnm r(m)t c3 (II 27-28) "Look, they've started to eat people CJ ."

mj.tnjr.j smw c3 (II 29) "Look, I will spend Harvest c3."

jr grt wjnt.fi nb p3 cqw ...jwy.fn.j c3 hnc.j (II 37-38) "But as for anyone who will

reject this salary ... he should come to me c3 with me."

rdj.n.(j) jwt z3-hty nht hnc z3-nb-njwt hr n3 n jtj-mh btj nt c3 (III 4) "I have had

Hety's son Nakht and Sinebniut come about that full barley and emmer that is c o "

Pace Depuydt (Conjunction, 174 n. 85), c3 clearly refers to the location of the letter's re

cipient ("there where you are": Baer, "Letters," 3 n. 10) at least in III 4.The same sense

is evident in I 4. In II 38, however, it clearly refers to the writer's location ("here where

I am"); this also seems to suit the remaining instances best (for II 29, see the textual

note). Unlike c3, mj n3 is always written without determinative in these texts.This sup

ports Goedicke's contention that mj n3 is a variant of mj nw "like this/that"—though

his translation "sometimes" is baseless—and in fact such a meaning is required in II 39—

http://wjnt.fi

B. TEXTUAL NOTES 27

40 (see the textual note). In the remaining examples the sense is evidently somewhat

expanded: "like my present situation." The same meanings suit the other MK examples

of mj n3 cited by James. It should be noted that these examples all involve the use of

mj n3 in conjunction with the verb "come"—evidently the antecedent of its Late

Egyptian meaning "here, hither," noted by James. In contrast, c3 expresses only static

location: "here (where I am)" or "there (where you are)." This distinction explains the

use of c3 rather than mj n3 in II 38 jwyfn.j c3 hn.j, where the destination of the verb

is n.j while c3 hnc.j expresses location—"let him come to me, here with me (where I

am now)."

hsb.n.k n.j — T h e three signs of .k n.j are written over an erasure. Judging from the

traces and weight of ink, the scribe first wrote hsb.n.j n.k, erased .j n.k, dipped his

brush, and wrote the correction before continuing.

hr wc.f (and I n ) — See Goedicke, Studies, 57 n. 47. Since no t was written, as the form

in I 15 would indicate, the word may be identical with Wb. I, 277, 15 wc(c)w.

I 11 h3r jm — The scribe wrote the reed-leaf of jm, realized he had omitted the h3r sign,

and wrote the p$_ of jm half a group lower than the reed-leaf. He then dipped his

brush and wrote the h3r sign above the pi_ of jm before continuing. No erasure is evi

dent on the papyrus, though there is a slight smudge to the left of the reed-leaf.

m jr m jtj-mh nfi jmy — T h e use of n.fjmy "belonging to him" rather than jm "thereof"

supports Baer's contention that m jr m jtj-mh is participial ("Letters," 4 n. 20).The sense

of jr m here and in I 12 is probably "deal with," though in the other examples cited by

James (HP, 109, 2a) it seems to refer to working the land with a particular crop. For the

usage, cf. jrj m "treat with (a remedy)," Wb. med. I, 89 (C I b).

qdb jr(j) r.j — With reference to the method of payment ("full barley alone"): see pp.

156—57. Pace Goedicke (Studies, 58), jr(j) and r.j are two separate words, the first qualify

ing qdb, the second as adjunct to smr.n.k.

112-13 mj.k grt jr jr m jtj-mh, jr jtj-mh h3r 65 m 3ht J*^ m jtj-mh h3r 5 m 3ht st3t 1, mj.k nn s(j) m ccft qsnt — Literally, "Now look, when full barley will be dealt with, as for 65 sacks of

full barley from 1.3 dar. of land, being 5 sacks of full barley from 1 ar. of land—look, it

is not a difficult rate." For the numerals see Baer, "Land," 35—36, and pp. 151—52. The

initial clause probably contains a subjectless passive sdm.f (-*^) rather than the perfective

participle understood by James and followed in other translations. The equations that

follow suggest that jrj m jtj-mh means "deal with full barley" rather than "do (a field)

with full barley," and the context indicates that the verb jr is the prospective passive (fu

ture) rather than the usual passive 5dm/(past): literally, "When full barley will be dealt

with." For the prospective after jr, see pp. 92—93. The second "cs"^ could be adverbial to

the first clause (referring to the lease:"the full barley for it"), but the fact that the scribe

dipped his brush before writing it suggests that it belongs with what follows instead.

This in turn indicates that m jtj-mh h3r 5 m 3ht st3t 1 is appositive (Baer, "Letters," 4)

rather than an adverbial predicate (James, HP, 13-14). The words from mj.k grt to 3ht

st3t 1 are anticipatory to the main clause mj.k nn s(j) m ccft qsnt: for mj.k introducing

both the protasis and apodosis, cf. I 16. The use of s(j) rather than st indicates a specific

feminine referent: this can only be the following noun phrase ccft qsnt, since none of

the prior feminine nouns are suitable candidates. A similar case of anticipatory pro-

nominalization occurs in I vo. n jr grt jw.fi m hcp c3, where the pronoun's referent can

only be the following noun. The meaning of the phrase ccfit qsnt has been explained

convincingly by Baer, "Land," 30; for its specific meaning here, see pp. 156—58. The

scribe reinked the final figure " 5 " in I 12 before dipping his brush and continuing.The

http://jw.fi


first sign (<&_) of 3ht st3t 1 is written over an erased <fp, perhaps the preceding preposi

tion repeated in error.

I 13 mj.k cbw 3ht h3 n jtj-mh h3r 100 — For the reading W3 n, see pp. 151—52 n. 68. The

grammatical form of cbw is uncertain. The root is undoubtedly 3ae-inf. cbj, whose in

finitive cbt appears in I vo. 3 (see Baer, "Letters," 5 n. 22). Either a noun or the

prospective passive is possible: for the latter form see Allen, Inflection, § 515; the same

grammatical form appears in I 2 z3ww (see note above) and II 43 srhw. In either case

the underlying idiom is apparently cbj n "associate to" (Wb. I, 41, 2): i.e., literally "the

association of 1 dar. of land is to 100 sacks of full barley" ifibw 3ht h3 as the noun-phrase

subject ofa prepositional predicate) or "1 dar. of land will be associated to 100 sacks of

full barley" (3ht h3 as subject of prospective passive cbw).

CD"-

I 14 1 2 j m nt jtj-mh — T h e same spelling of the initial word occurs in III 6, with reference to a measuring device, and is probably ideographic for the same word as VI 12 jpyt: see the textual note to III 6 on p. 50. In view of the following qualifier nt jtj-mh, the adverb jm must refer to something other than grain—probably, therefore, to the rental agreement described in the preceding sentences: see the discussions on pp. 144-45 a n d 156—58. Despite James's impression that the position of jm "is strange" (HP, 24), this adverb normally interrupts an indirect genitive: cf. II vo. 3; also Urk. I, 50, 14; TPPI, § 20, A 6-7; CT IV, 278-79b; A. Erman, Zauberspriiche fiiir Mutter und Kind (APAW; Berlin, 1901), 8.

b3g — The partially-preserved forward leg of the determinative indicates that the sign

is probably the seated child with hanging arms (A17*) rather than James's "tired man"

(A7): cf. Moller, Pal. I, 31. The space between this sign and the reed-leaf below it is

greater than normal, suggesting that a sign has been lost, probably the sparrow (G37),

which is often used as a second determinative of this word.

jn z(j) —There are traces of the n and z to the right of the reed-leaf.

1 14-15 jr grt jrt n(j) nbt z3-htj nht m pr-h33 — The last sign of I 14 has been understood as

prepositional n.(j) "for me," following James, HP, 24. The omission of the first-person

suffix in the transition from I 14 to I 15 is conceivable, but the suffix is otherwise in

variably written out by the scribe of Letters I—II: note especially I 9, where it was

written at the very bottom edge of the papyrus; II 28-29, where it occurs at the top of

the second column; and I 1 r(m)t.j and II 29 jr.j, where it has been inserted secondarily.

In view of this general consistency, the final sign of I 14 can only be the affix o fa

sdm.n.f relative jrt.n or the adverb n(j) "for it" (Gardiner, EG, § 205, i) .The former is

grammatically more likely and would occasion no comment were it not for the in

struction in I 3, as James noted. It is conceivable that Heqanakht is referring to some

past mission of Nakht to Perhaa ("everything that Heti's son Nakht has done in Per

haa"), but the revised allocation in I 16—17 indicates that the mission lay in the future

at the time of writing. Given the time needed for the transmission of letters (see p.

135), it is unlikely that Heqanakht could have issued instructions for a prior mission,

along with its allocated "salary," via a previous letter, and still have expected the revised

allocation of this letter to have reached Merisu before the original amount had been is

sued to Nakht. This indicates that the reference here is in fact to the mission ordered in

I 3. In that case, jrt must be a perfective passive participle, with the prospective sense

common to that form (Gardiner, EG, § 369, 5), and the sign following it is therefore

the adverb n(j). The idiom is evidently jrj n "act for, act on behalf of" (see the textual

note to II 42, below); for this idiom with reference to things rather than persons, cf.

Anthes,JEA 55 (1969), 49-50.

B. TEXTUAL NOTES 29

I 15-16 mj.k nj hsb.j nfi cqw prwjbd wc m jtj-mh h3r, hsb.j ky snwj m jtj-mh 0.5 n hrw.fi— For the

te rm cqw, see pp. 145—46. Pace Goedicke (Studies, 59—60), Heqanakht does not use -«-

as a writ ing of nn (see p. 100): nj hsb.j must therefore be the normal Middle Egyptian

past negation. Since Heqanakht has already "calculated" the salary for Heti's son Nakht

(cf. I 17 n3 dd.n.j n.k r dd jmj n.f jtj-mh h3r njbd), the sentence evidently indicates that

he does not expect Nakht's mission to Perhaa to last more than one month (prwjbd

wc), as James realized (HP, 24) .The verb in the second clause could be subjunctive, ini

tiating a new sentence, or imperfective, circumstantial to the preceding clause, but the

former would probably have been introduced by mj.k: cf. the following mj.k jr th.k n3,

mj.kjr.j st hr.k m j3tw.The fact that Heqanakht places this warning to Merisu before his

order for the salary reduction indicates that the warning applies to the initial allocation.

Since the intention is clearly to give Nakht a lesser salary, however, the warning evi

dently refers to the amount allocated for Nakht's dependents, and the reduction applies

only to Nakht's port ion. Nakht and his dependents thus received an initial monthly sal

ary of 1.5 sacks. T h e current order reduces this to 1.3 sacks (0.8 for Nakht and 0.5 for

his dependents) for the month of his mission to Per-Haa, and this is further reduced in

II 12—13 t o °-8 sacks for subsequent months: see the discussion on p. 147. T h e term hrw

"dependents" probably denotes the members o f a household with reference to its head:

see D. Franke, Altagyptische Verwandtschaftsbezeichnungen im Mittleren Reich (Hamburg,

1983), 231-44.

I 16 r tpj wpw — For the t e rm see Baer, "Letters," 5 n. 24, contra James, HP, 25. Although

wpw itself denotes the first day of the month (James, loc.cit.), the analogy with tpj mddnjt

"fifteenth-day feast" (Wb.V, 269, 14-16), which Baer pointed out, shows that tpj can be

used with reference to a single day, as here.

1 16-17 jr.j st hr.k m j3tw — For jrj hr see J.F Borghouts, The Magical Texts ofi Papyrus Leiden 1348

( O M R O 51: Leiden, 1970), 153 n. 366. The sense is clear, though the idiom is appar

ently otherwise unattested in Middle Egyptian; cf. the use of hr denoting liability in V

28. The final <fip of I 16 was reinked after the scribe dipped his brush.

I 17 "—1^f.°—4 — T h i s is the normal spelling of the imperative of rdj in these letters (I 17, vo.

5, vo. 7-8 ; II 34, vo. 1-2). It may represent the normal imperative jmj (Edel, AdG, § 607;

Allen, Inflection, § 183) or the less c o m m o n imperative dj (Gardiner, EG, § 336) plus the

particle mj "please" (Gardiner, EG, § 250): see Kaplony, MDAIK 25 (1969), 32. The

division of signs in I vo. 7-8 and II vo. 1—2 suggests the former.

njbd — For the expression see Baer,"Letters," 5 n. 25.

dd.k n.f m jtj-mh 0.8— Silverman, Or 49 (1980), 199-203, has interpreted m jtj-mh 0.8

as the object of dd.k, with the preposition required to convert the usual direct object

into the focused adjunct of "emphat ic" dd.k. It is also possible that the verb has an un

expressed object of the salary,2 with the prepositional phrase a normal adjunct (here

emphasized).The construction is paralleled in Late Egyptian: mtw.k djt n.w m t3 wd3t n

jtj jnk ntj jm m djw.k "and give (it) to them from the balance of my own grain that you

owe m e there" (Gardiner, RAD, 83, 2—3).

1 vo. 1 jtj-mh js n swsyt wn m dd-swt — There is a large mark extending from the left edge of

the papyrus through the tail of the final determinative of js and the left end of the fol

lowing n. It seems to have been made with a fresh brushful of ink, after the scribe

wrote the second-last sign of js and before or just after he made the next two signs;

though largely abraded, however, it does not appear to have been erased. The shape and

Cf. the use of rdj m hr "assign" without direct object: Sethe, Lesestucke, 76, 18; Helck, Historisch-biographische Texte der 2. Zwischenzeit, 49, 10.

http://hrw.fi


position of this mark do not suit a deliberate sign or a cancellation mark (cf. the textual

note to II vo. 3 tp.k), so it is probably just a slip of the brush. T h e determinative of dd-

swt is @ rather than James's n : compare, for example, the form of © in I 3 .The phrase

js n swsyt is literally either "old, belonging to dessication" or "old because of dessi-

cation" (Gardiner, EG, § 164, 5). Besides the references for swsyt in James, HP, 26, add

probably Pyr. 123a swst, parallel to mwt "moisture" and nhbwt "fertility" in the context

of grain-production; for the assimilation (swsyt < swst), cf.V 31 s3srt < s3srt (James, HP,

60). James's translation "old, dry barley" (HP, 14) indicates that he understood n swsyt as

adjectival, although he did not remark on the construction. Goedicke's attempt to re-

construe the passage (Studies, 61-62) is belabored and unnecessary.

1 vo. 2 p3 jtj-mh W3r 10 — The phrase specifies the amount of grain mentioned in I vo. 1;

hence the use ofp3 (see p. 89).

nj hr nfr tw — T h e negative here governs the entire sentence beginning with nfr tw,

rather than the adjectival predicate alone, similar to the example noted by Lefebvre

(GEC, § 631) and pointed out by Baer ("Letters," 5 n. 29): see pp. 97—98.The construc

tion is evidently the adjectival-predicate counterpart of hrf sdm.fi, with the same

connotation of necessity (seeVernus, Future at Issue, 78—82).

jw.j r t3 — Compare rdj hr t3 " throw out" in I vo. 13.The vertical line to the right of r

t3 is puzzling. It is not a badly-made reed leaf, nor is it residual from the erasure under cbt in I vo. 3 to the right (see below). Judging from the weight of ink, the scribe drew

it immediately after writ ing the word 13. Goedicke's explanation of it as a mark of em

phasis (Studies, 62) is as good as any.

I vo. 2-3 jmw grt mjn r dmj.k— The mw sign is wri t ten over an erased, partially-completed

"boat" determinative. T h e damaged preposition after mjn is r, despite James's doubts.

The clause is undoubtedly metaphoric, as Callender sensed (Middle Egyptian, 121),

probably denoting Merisu's control over—and thus also responsibility for—the house

hold's resources: see Goldwasser, GM 40 (1980), 21-22.

I vo. 3 jr.k m bjnw nbw — The two signs of .fe m are writ ten over an erased m bj: the scribe

omitted the second person singular suffix, realized his mistake after beginning the word

bjnw, erased the three signs of m bj, added the suffix .fe, and continued with the rest of

the sentence. The scribe also dipped his brush before writ ing the quail-chick of nbw.

For jr m, see the textual note to I 11 above; for bjnw see also I vo. 16. For the passage, cf.

Vernus, Future at Issue, 38. Pace Vernus, there is no need to assume a prospective form

here, since Merisu has in fact already acted badly in sending old grain: the form is ei

ther the imperfective (circumstantial) sdm.f or the perfective (indicative) sdm.f used

"emphatically": for the latter, see Allen, LingAeg 1 (1991), 1-2.

cbt — The scribe originally began a different word (apparently scb{t): see the textual

note to P ' 2-3 on p. 72), then erased it: the first two signs of cbt are writ ten over the

erasure.

I vo. 4 nfrw(j) st — The sense may be ironic here, as suggested by the preceding "What can I

say?": cf. Goedicke, Studies, 64.

jtj-mh wct — The feminine is likelier than masculine wct(j), reflecting an understood

hq3t "grain-measure" (see p. 143).

I vo. 4-5 n nh[h] — T h e preposition at the top of I vo. 4 is n (Wb. II, 301, 7) rather than James's r.

For the shape of the nfe-bird, cf. Moller, Pal. I, 229.

I vo. 5 nj grt dd.n.j— Before beginning this sentence the scribe sharpened his brush or

changed to a new one: the signs from here to the end of the verso are generally smaller,

http://sdm.fi

B. TEXTUAL NOTES 3 I

with thinner strokes, than those in the first part of the recto and verso. The lacuna at

the top of of I vo. 5 is too short for both the probable determinative of nh[h] (like that

of I 15 jbd) and the particle j[w] that James restored. At the end of the lacuna, above grt,

the papyrus preserves not only the lower tip ofa vertical stroke (presumably the source

of James's reed-leaf) but also a horizontal trace crossing it. These traces suit only the

negative nj and none of the other words that can precede grt in such a sentence, includ

ing jw. Heqanakht's usual jr grt seems impossible: the horizontal trace extends too far to

the right of the downstroke to suit the r of \j]r, the preserved papyrus to the right of grt

shows no trace of the reed-leaf that is typically placed next to the g (though I vo. 11 is

an exception), and the following dd.n.j r dd would probably have been preceded by n3

if the word before grt had been jr (cf. I 17). Together with the probable determinative

of nh[h], the negative nj fills the lacuna exactly. The verb form following grt could be

either a subjectless passive sdm.f with following dative (per James) or the sdm.n.f nj grt

dd n.j "Now, haven't I been told" or nj grt dd.n.j "Now, haven't I said" (see p. 97). The

interpretation depends in part on the content of the damaged direct quotation that fol

lows. Although this is uncertain, its likeliest restoration indicates the sdm.n.f rather than

the passive sdm.f (see the next textual note); the sdm.n.f is also likelier in the context of

Letters I—II: cf. I 17, II 38.

jw snfirw [c]3y — T h e lacuna from the w of snfirw to ch3 contains traces of

3V2 groups, not the 3 groups transcribed by James. The first of these, as

James saw, is the seated-man determinative of snfirw: the extant traces fit

exactly the lefthand <-shaped and righthand Z-shaped elements of this

sign. The traces on the preserved bit of papyrus before the next lacuna

below are those ofa bird-sign, either $[_, 4L, or £l_: though damaged, the

two L-shaped elements are clearly visible under the microscope; James's

transcribed ^ is the bottom left of this sign. Of the three possibilities, f_

is likeliest: the righthand L-shaped element extends almost as high as the

lefthand one, typical for ^_ but not for %_ or Jfp in this scribe's hand.

With the horizontal head of this bird restored, half a group remains in

the lacuna above, below the seated-man determinative of snfirw. The la

cuna preserves two traces at the bottom of this half-group: a short L-

shaped element to the left, and a tiny horizontal trace on the vertical

sliver of papyrus to the right. The context apparently allows for only two

interpretations of these traces: either the beginning of a verb in the sta-

tive (jw snfirw ...3...) or a preposition governing a noun or infinitive

(e.g., jw snfirw [r] 3...). The final lacuna has a large vertical trace at its

right, which James transcribed as a reed-leaf. This is either part of the

preceding noun or verb—a determinative or final consonant—or a sepa

rate word. The shape and position of the trace together with the size of the lacuna to

its left do not seem to suit any signs that might be an ideogram or determinative. Of

the uniliteral or multiliteral signs, only two possibilities suit these same criteria: either a

"tall 5," or one of the two tall strokes that this scribe occasionally uses for the double

reed-leaf. The former could be the final or penultimate consonant of a noun or verb

(...3s...), with a determinative or final consonant perhaps lost to its left, or the pro7

nouns 5 or s[t] serving as object of an infinitive ending in 3, without a determinative

(...3.s or ...3 s[tj). None of these possibilities, however, suits the context or the spelling

of known words.3 The vertical trace therefore most likely belongs to a pair of double

In LingAeg 4 (1994), 8 n. 36, I suggested restoring jw snfirw r 3sjh] "Snefru is to (help with the) harvest." Upon closer examination, however, the space available in the lacuna to the left of the vertical is too small for the final consonant and determinative of Ish; it is also too small for the walking-legs sign of Is "hasten."


strokes.This indicates a word ending in ...3y, without a determinative.The ending and

absence ofa determinative suggest a stative rather than a noun governed by a preposi

tion; the half group above the bird sign must therefore have contained the beginning of

this word. Given the space available above the bird sign and the absence of a determi

native, only a few verbs come into consideration: c3y "grown up" (Wb. I, 162, 14; for

the spelling, cf. I vo. 11), m3y or m3wy "new" (cf. I vo. 2 and 4; III 7), and possibly rwy

"has left" (cf. II 6). Of these, only c3y "grown up" is feasible in the context. The traces

at the end of the half-group suit the c-arm of this word, and there is room above it and

below the determinative of snfirw for the c3 sign. The entire quotation evidently repeats

a prior notice of Heqanakht to Merisu regarding Snefru's ability to contribute to the

workforce. This accounts for the instructions that follow: "Give him a salary" (I vo. 5:

see p. 146) and "he should plow with you" (I vo. 6—7).

1 vo. 6 m dd hnt-h(t).j— Goedicke's arguments (Studies, 65—66) are cogent, and the literal

meaning suits the context; cf. Papyrus Prisse 19, 4 pr.n.fijmfi hnt hcw.fi"He emerged

from him, foremost of his limbs": Z. Zaba, Les maximes de Ptahhotep (Prague, 1956), line

630. The absence of the final t of ht is disturbing, but is paralleled—if not influenced—

by the spelling of the common MK name hnt(j)-h(t.j) in II 33 (cf. Ranke, PN I 272, 15),

probably with the same meaning: the three signs above the "seated man" were written

as a ligature, exactly as in the name in II 33.

ch3 tw zp 2 h3b.n.j —James's imperative h3b n.j "write to me" (HP, 14), followed by

most translations, is out of place in this context. The meaning of h3b could be that of

Wb. II, 480, 11 "send (messengers with supplies)" (cf. Goedicke, Studies, 44), but the use

ofa different verb in I vo. 7 zbb.k n.j sw makes this unlikely as well. These considera

tions argue for the sdm.n.f used circumstantially: i.e., "Mind you, now that I have

written (to you about this)." Cf. I vo. 9 [m cm] jb.k hr h3bt.n.j n.k nb hr.s.

jwh — The context (after conditional/temporal jr) requires the normal Middle Egyp

tian prospective (see pp. 92—93) or the subjunctive. The verb here must therefore be

active, since its form does not suit the passive of'either the prospective (sdmm.fi: see Al

len, Inflection, §§ 535, 561A2) or the subjunctive (sdm.tw.fi: cf. I vo. 3, vo. 17; II 31, 40, vo.

1, vo. 2; III 4). If so, the verb does not have its normal transitive meaning. Intransitive

use does not seem to occur elsewhere, but similar variations in transitivity are attested

for other Egyptian verbs (Allen, Inflection, § 725C).

I vo. 7 mjcnw. rfe' hnc z3-hwt-hr— See the textual note to I 1 jcnw, above.There seems to be no

alternative to James's explanation (HP, pl. 3 A note) of the sign following jcnw as a mistake

for the 2s suffix pronoun fe: "grain" (as written) makes no sense, and the stroke is not like

that which cancels the same suffix pronoun in II vo. 3 (see the textual note).

1 vo. 8 zwt h3r 2 —There are only two strokes of the numeral visible on the papyrus: the left-

hand stroke is clear, and the righthand one is mostly lost. What James saw as the third

faint stroke to the right of these is only a vertical fiber of the papyrus itself.

cqw.tn — T h e scribe wrote the first (leftmost) of the three plural strokes at the end of

this word, then dipped his brush and reinked the stroke before continuing.

1 vo. 9 mj.k rnpt n3 — T h e word rnpt and the <*««** of n3 are written over an erasure, perhaps nj

rnpt as in I 14. The scribe dipped his brush after making the erasure and reinked the

^y of mj.k before writing rnpt.

1 vo. 9-10 h3w nb sp3t.j h3w nb sj.j — The use of the direct genitive interrupted by nb is unusual

outside Old Egyptian (Edel, AdG, § 321). The older reading of sp3t as d3tt (e.g., James,

HP, 28) is now superseded by O. Berlev, Tpygoeoe HaceAenue Eeunma e dnoxy

Cpegneeo Ifapcmea (Moscow, 1972), 234-38. The sign for sp3t here is made exactly

http://sdmm.fi

http://sdm.tw.fi

B. TEXTUAL NOTES 3 3

like the "nome" sign (N24) in the Hatnub graffiti (Anthes, Hatnub, 12, 9; 24, 9). For the

meaning of sp3t and sj, see pp. 150-51. James, loc.cit., and Kaplony, MDAIK 25 (1969), 31,

suggested the possibility of dittography, but the two signs are made differently; the scribe

wrote the second h3w without dipping his brush.

I vo. 10 m sjnwj — From the context and determinative, the signs following m represent either

a geographical designation or place-name ("as for all the area of my basined land and

all the area of my basin-land in the/in ...wj") as James and most translators have under

stood it, or an appositive ("as for all the area of my basined land and all the area of my

basin-land, the pair of ..."; cf. Gardiner, EG, §§ 96.2, 162.6 n. 3a).

James offered no reading for the word following m (HP, 28, pl. 3A).

Kaplony read ^ jfe "(Drstrikt des) m3c#-Kanal(s)" (MDAIK 25

(1969), 31), emended slightly by Wente as "maawy-canal" (Letters, 60;

the sign Kaplony read as t is clearly a "curl w"); Callender suggested

m3wj "new (?)" (Middle Egyptian, 199 and 122); and Goedicke has pro-

posed , = 3 , ^ rmnwj "both sides of the valley" (Studies, 44). None of

these readings suit the extant hieratic below the m and above ,_^ (re

produced in facsimile here at 2:1). There is a horizontal break at this

point, which somewhat obscures the hieratic; the papyrus above the

break has rotated slightly downward and to the right (the facsimile

here and in pl. 29 shows the pieces restored to their original relation

ship). The Z-shaped element at the upper left is clearly distinct from the vertical to its

right; this makes Goedicke's suggested rmn sign unlikely, and his reading does not ac

count for the lefthand vertical below. The latter is either a separate stroke or a

continuation of the diagonal above: the relationship is obscured by the break, but the

flow of ink suggests that the two elements belong to a single stroke. If the lefthand ver

tical is separate, however, it cannot belong with the horizontal to its right. The latter is

complete and separate; its righthand end shows a downturn often found in signs such

as *~"> in this scribe's hand. The shape and distinct character of these elements rule out

Kaplony's JeE: the vertical to the right of the Z-shaped element cannot be the m3c sign

(Aan), and the lefthand stroke and the horizontal together cannot represent the B—•

arm, since the upright and horizontal elements of this and other "arm" signs are always

joined in this scribe's hand. If it is distinct from the stroke below, the Z-shaped element

could represent the m3 hoe, but the only possible reading is then ^ m3c, which is an

unparalleled spelling and an unlikely grouping of the signs. Other readings of the Z-

shaped element, such as the =-sign or a ligature, yield no better solutions. Since the

lefthand vertical seems to belong to this element, and since the horizontal is most likely

an *«»*o, the two elements conceivably represent mMK: the j'n-sign in II 19 is identical,

with a slightly shorter tail due to the fact that it is written in a line rather than a col

umn; for a similar contemporary form, though with much less prominent tail, see

Frandsen, JARCE 15 (1978), pl. 5. The position of these signs, shifted to the left of the

column, is dictated by the presence of a sign or signs to their right, to which the two

righthand traces belong. The shape and position of these traces are best suited to a "tall

5," as restored in the facsimile (the bottom of the righthand vertical is free-standing); an

alternative such as , is improbable in this grouping. Unfortunately, the resulting term

1—1 /*ww 'I sjnwj is unknown, as either a common noun or a proper name, though there is

some reason to think it is equivalent to the place name , mtf@ (Griffith, Kahun Papyri,

pl. 21, 12—13): see the discussion on p. 124. A connection with zjn "rub, erase" is

unlikely since s is not used for original z in these texts, and a relationship to the word

sjn "clay" is also improbable in the absence of the usual determinative O.The determi-


native may indicate a district rather than a settlement, as in VII vo. i s r t3w-wr, but

the same determinative is used in place of® in the spelling of II vo. 6 nbsyt.

jr.n.j st m mhcw — Pace Kaplony, MDAIK 25 (1969), 31, an imperative is ruled out by the

instructions that follow in I vo. 11—12. Moreover, since m mhcw is clearly the focus, a

command would undoubtedly have been rendered as jrr.k n.j st. The presence of the di

rect object st makes a relative construction such as Goedicke's "which I had planted with

flax" (Studies, 44) grammatically impossible. The only possible reading is therefore the

sdm.nfi. Although Merisu would undoubtedly be aware of the previous disposition of the

plots, Heqanakht apparently mentions it here by way of contrast to the instructions that

follow: see Baer, "Letters," 6 n. 38, and cf. also I 14-16. As Kaplony saw, st must refer to

the preceding h3w (or more likely to the entire phrase h3w nb sp3t.j h3w nb sj.j m sjnwj); it

cannot refer to the more immediate referent sp3t.j (see the textual note to I 5 dd.sn st,

above), and can hardly denote the place-name sjnwj.

m rdj h3 r(m)t nb hrf— Literally, "Don't let anyone go down on it": see the textual note

to I 8 m h3w hr 3ht nt r(m)t nb, above. The first sign of h3 is certain, though smaller than

normal: the fragments are skewed at this point. The phrase h3j hr 3ht in I 8 indicates

that the masculine pronoun refers to land of some sort rather than the more immediate

referent mhcw (Baer, "Letters," 6 n. 39;/wee Kaplony, MDAIK 2$ (1969), 31).The likeli

est referent is the pronoun st of the preceding sentence (cf. Gardiner, EG, § 511.5),

although a resumption of the implicit dual of h3w nb sp3t.j h3w nb sj.j is also possible

(cf. Gardiner, EG, § 511.1a).

I vo. io-u jr mdwt.fin.k nb sm.k hrf [n z3-j]p hrd hnt-h — T h e sense of mdwt.fi n.k nb in this context

is clearly "anyone who will speak to you (about going down on the land)."The inter

pretation of what follows depends on the referent of hrf, on the meaning of the phrase

smj hr, and on the content of the lacuna below hrf {fine spelling of the pronominal form

hr.J"with the stroke is unique in these papyri, but the word can hardly be anything else).

The referent of hrf could be the same as that of I vo. 10 hrf, or it could be the more

immediate participial phrase mdwt.fi n.k nb. In the first case the phrase sm.k hrf might

denote the opposite of h3j hr — i.e., to "go off" one's own land, so that another may

lease it: cf. h3j hr"come down from" a place (Wb. II, 472, 7; similarly,^' hr. Gardiner,

EG, § 165.2); also, prj/wd3 hr"come /proceed from" a door (CT IV, 222-23K 226—273).

If so, im.k hr.fi is probably a clause of purpose, as Goedicke suggested (Studies, 44 and

68-69), rather than the main clause understood by James, and the required resumptive

of mdwt.fi n.k nb will have occurred in the following lacuna: i.e., "As for anyone who

will speak to you so that you might go off it, "The phrase smj hr, however, seems to

be unattested with this meaning elsewhere, and the more likely referent of hrf is the

participial phrase that immediately precedes it. More probably, therefore, sm.k hrf

means "you should go about him," as Baer suggested ("Letters," 6).Wente's suggestion

"you should proceed against him" (Letters, 60) is also worth considering, though this

meaning of smj hr is apparently not attested until the Late Period (Wb. IV, 464, 9). The

lacuna following hrf contains six traces at its lefthand side and several more at its end.

The initial L-shaped element was made with two strokes and is therefore most likely

the lefthand side of a p or k3 sign; its position reflects the presence ofa sign to its right.

The papyrus directly below this is preserved and uninscribed except for a small diago

nal trace at the rectangular corner, opposite the m of I vo. 10. The long rectangular

piece extending into the lacuna from the right, opposite the zp 2 of I vo. 12, is also

blank, but it consists only of the horizontal fibers of the recto; the surface of the verso

is lost here (the spot of ink at the top of this trace is from a sign on the recto). Below

and on the left are four traces: the end of a vertical and the lefthand side of two hori-

http://mdwt.fi

http://mdwt.fi

http://mdwt.fi

http://hr.fi

http://mdwt.fi


zontals with a small trace between them. T h e traces at the bo t tom of

the lacuna almost certainly belong to the seated-man sign (Ai); b e

sides those recorded by James there are also traces of the Z-shaped

element typical of this sign to their right. This must be either the is

suffix pronoun or the determinative of a proper name. In the first case

the lacuna above would probably have contained a verb (with 2s suf

fix) and a noun or prepositional phrase: i.e., "you should go about

him and . . . m e / my " T h e verb [s]k3.[k] would fit the traces, as

James noted, but this seems impossible to reconcile with the preced

ing sm.k hr.fi.The uninscribed space below the L-shaped element also

seems to rule out other verbs, such as spr "petition." If the seated man

is the determinative of a proper name, however, the traces, together

with the uninscribed portion below the L-shaped trace, exactly fit the writ ing of the

name z3-jp hrd hnt-h in II 33, suggesting the restoration sm.k hrf [n z3 j]p-hrd hnt-h

"you should go about him to lp Jr.'s son Khentekhtai." The only obstacle to this resto

ration is the preposition n, which should occur between hrf and the proper name. The

fragment containing the tail of the ^f-snake of hrf and the L-shaped element below has

shifted downward 1.5 m m (see the textual note to I vo. 10 m sjnwj, above), and when

this is restored to its original position the space available for the preposition is quite

tight. The size and spacing of the «-sign elsewhere in Letter I is equally minimal, how

ever: compare, for example, jr. n.j in I vo. 10 just to the left. As restored, the sentence is

an instruction to Merisu to refer any lease offers to lp Jr.'s son Khentekhtai, perhaps

because the same man was the source of land acquired by Heqanakht himself (see the

textual note to II 33 below).

I vo. 11 jtj-mh — A trace of the determinative is preserved.

jr grt jwf m hcp c3 — T h e pronoun is evidently anticipatory to the following noun: cf.

the textual note to I 12-13, above. T h e te rm hcp c3 probably refers to the height o f a

normal inundation: see Golovina, VDI 1995 no. 2, 15-16.

I vo. 12-13 mj.k nj prw.fm p3 pr hnc.k — T h e use of nj rather than nn identifies this as an existential

negation rather than the negation of a sentence with prepositional predicate: see pp.

96—97. The term prw "more" is evidently the same as that of I 15, but the referent of its

suffix is not clear. Neute r " i t" is unlikely, since the sentence m cm jb.k hr.s immediately

following shows the usual Middle Egyptian feminine with that value (Gardiner, EG, §§

51 and 511.4). James's suggestion that ./refers only to Snefru (HP, 29) is also question

able, in view of the preceding sentence with its plural resumptives hn.sn. Perhaps the

best explanation—despite the preceding plurals—is the use of the masculine singular to

resume a dual antecedent (Gardiner, EG, § 511, ia): i.e., "there is nothing more than

the pair of them." A similar use may occur in I vo. 10 m rdj h3 r(m)t nb hrf (see the tex

tual note above).

I vo. 13 m cm jb.k hr.s — T h e scribe dipped his brush after writ ing jb.k and reinked the liga

tured hr before continuing.

jr n.k grt rdjt — See the textual note to I 3 jr n.k rdjt h3y, above.

13 blkt nt pr znn — The demonstrative suggests that this is a matter previously dis

cussed, perhaps in a previous letter: see p. 90.

ch3 tw zp 2 — T h e f-sign has an unusual tick, perhaps influenced erroneously by the

form of the bookroll sign.

I vo. 14 z3-hwt-hr — T h e ligatured r has the form of d rather than its normal shape; cf. the same

name in I vo. 7.


jrjr.s hrw wc m pr.j, jr, ntk ddjr.s bw bjn — T h e scribe has made the vertical stroke of the

seated man in pr.j wider than normal, apparently to span the vertical seam running

down the middle of this column. The signs of jr ntk below it are written over an era

sure. The horizontal traces below the seated man of pr.j, and the two traces below them,

which James recorded in his transcription (pl. 4A), belong to the erased text. There is

no evidence that a secondary sign was written in this area, despite the unusually large

space between the seated man and the following -«s . If such a sign had been present in

the hole here, it could only have been a short, thin vertical of some sort, and no such

signs suit the context. The hoe-sign of Kaplony's suggested jig m3 "look (to it)!"

(MDAIK 25 (1969), 31) is impossible in the spacing, and the extant traces do not suit it,

even if they had not been erased. There is also no trace of a secondary text to either

side of the hole between -*&. and ntk. Given these considerations, -*»• can only repre

sent the imperative jr "act!" as apodosis to the preceding jr jr.s hrw wc m pr.j. Its use

without object can be compared to the common expression jry.j "I will act" (Wb. I,

109, 14—15). Alternatively, it may reflect the initial command jr n.k grt of I vo. 13: i.e.,

"do (it)!"

I vo. 15 mj.k dd.j wg n.k hr jh — As James noted (HP, 30), the position of the dative indicates

that wg n.k is governed by dd.j as a clause without expressed subject. For this con

struction with a governing verb, cf. Urk. I 195, 12 j.mr.(j) nfr n.(j) jm hr nswt (similarly,

Urk. I 198, 18; 203, 3); also CG 20543 a 16 w mrwt nfr n.(j) m r n tpw-t3 (similarly, CG

20503,3).

h(j) jrt.s r.tn p3 msd s(j) — Goedicke's suggested reading msd (Studies, 72) rather than

James's msw is perceptive, though his interpretation of the meaning is unwarranted. The

sign following the "tall 5" of msd is made with two strokes, representing the head and

tail of the (/-snake, and not with the single curve normally used for the "curl w" and

the determinative of the speaking man also supports this reading. The sign read by

James as the numeral 5 and dismissed by Goedicke as ephemeral is in fact visible on the

papyrus. Though extremely faint (it was the last sign written before the scribe refilled

his brush), under the microscope it is clearly visible as a "tall s." Both this pronoun and

the preceding pronominal suffix of jrt.s undoubtedly refer not to I vo. 13 t3 b3kt nt pr

znn but to I vo. 14 hbswt.j, which is the more immediate referent. This indicates in turn

that h(j) jrt.s is past ("What did she do?") rather than James's prospective ("What can

she do?"). The phrase p3 msd s(j) is undoubtedly vocative (see Edel, AaG, § 195), ad

dressed to Merisu alone rather than to the preceding plural r.tn, which is used in

reference to the entire household.

mjwt.j jpj — The downstroke crossing the feet of the vulture-sign is probably part of

this sign rather than a ligatured t, which is always made horizontally in this hand; com

pare the forms of the jt and sm signs in I 6 and 9 (see the textual note to I 4 jt.sn,

above). The determinative of jpj is the usual seated woman plus stroke used to deter

mine feminine nouns in this papyrus: the horizontal "head" of the seated woman has

simply been positioned farther to the left than normal.

I vo. 16 bjnw — T h e reed-leaf is written over an incomplete and erased "curl w": the scribe

evidently began to write bw-{bjn), as in I vo. 14, before deciding to write bjnw instead.

mh tw mht — Since the context calls for a command to stop, an imperative is likelier

than an adjectival predicate (Baer, "Letters," 6 n. 44) or aphorism (Kaplony, MDAIK 25

(1969), 32; Silverman, Interrogative, 39).The verb is "fill" rather than "seize" (James, HP,

30; pace Goedicke, Studies, 74). The second form could be the 2s stative (as Goedicke,

loc.cit.) or the complementary infinitive: in either case, "Fill yourself full." The usage

could also be that of Wb. II, 118, 6—7, with understood complement—i.e., mh tw mht (r

B. TEXTUAL NOTES 37

tm jrt bjnw) "Assert yourself fully (to not doing bad)"—but this seems less probable in

the context.

I vo. 17 n jw.k dj.t hn.j m pzsy.j— Literally, "Are you given with me as my sharer?" Despite

the use of pzsw with the apparent meaning "arbitrator" in Peas. Bi , 132 and 279, the

sense of the context supports James's interpretation of pzsy here as "partner" (HP, 30—

31, pace Goedicke, Studies, 75, and Menu, "Gestion," 114): i.e., one of two or more bene

ficiaries among whom property is divided. Compare Mes N 2 jw. tw hr pzst [n] wr[n]r

[hnp snw.s "a division was made for Werel and her siblings": G.A. Gaballa, The Mem

phite Tomb-Chapel of Mose (Warminster, 1977), pl. 58. The expression pzs hnc "divide

(property) with" in that passage suggests the same meaning in I vo. 17: cf. Lacau, Stele

juridique, 26—27, noted for I vo. 17 by Menu, "Gestion," 114 n. 4.The form pzsy suggests

that the seated man is the is suffix rather than a determinative: i.e.,pz<>w.j > pzsy.j "my

co-beneficiary" (see Allen, Inflection, §§ 20-21).The introductory n jw.k is undoubtedly

the affirmative interrogative (pace Goedicke, Studies, 74); the same spelling occurs in II

42 (which Goedicke accepts as interrogative, Studies, 19, without comment): see James,

HP, 102; Silverman, Interrogative, 39.The sense is evidently rhetorical: "Are you in a po

sition to dictate what should be allowed in my house?," implying the answer "Of

course not!".

gr. k nfrw(j) st — The semantic interrelationship of the two clauses is dictated by the

context. Syntactically, gr.k is probably the infinitival subject of nfirwfj), here preposed and

resumed by st (Goedicke, Studies, 75); cf. Papyrus Prisse 11, 9-10 gr.k 3h st r tfitfi'"Your si

lence, it is more effective than ^f-plants" (Zaba, Les maximes de Ptahhotep, line 365).The

protasis-apodosis relationship reflected in James's translation (HP, 14; followed by Baer,

"Letters," 6; Callender, Middle Egyptian, i22;Wente, Letters, 60) is also possible: condi

tional sentences in these letters are normally introduced by jr, but cf. the textual note to

I 5 nfr 3 hr.k, above. The verb gr is used of inaction in Late Egyptian (Wb. V, 180, 6—7),

but earlier seems to denote primarily or only verbal inaction (Wb.V, 180, 1; the use in

Sethe, Lesestucke, 84, 3, may also have this sense). Heqanakht's use of the term evidently

indicates that the abuse of his wife was verbal.

sdt — Although the collection of debts is clearly subsequent to this letter (James, HP,

31), Heqanakht is not requesting an account of debts owed, as implied by James's trans

lation "what is to be collected" (followed by Baer, "Letters," 6;Wente, Letters, 60): that

account is drawn up by Heqanakht himself in Letter III and Account VI. His request

here is for a record of what his men actually manage to collect—and probably more

specifically in what form they manage to collect it, given the concerns expressed in

Letter III.This sense was apparently recognized by Callender (Middle Egyptian, 122; fol

lowed by Goedicke, Studies, 75—76).

m n3 n pr-h33 — As James noted (HP, 31), m c is the usual preposition when the source

is people; m, however, is commonly used for "collecting" something from a place (Wb.

IV, 561, 4/10/14). Its use here indicates that n3 refers to the debts owing, as Baer

understood ("Letters," 6 and 10, without comment).

Letter II

II vo. 5 T h e top of the seated-man determinative is preserved.

11 vo. 6 The scribe dipped his brush after writ ing the b of nbsyt and reinked this sign before

continuing.

II 1 mjwt.fi... mjwt.fi— The downstroke at the end of the forward leg of the vulture is part

of the sign: see the textual note to I vo. 15 mjwt.j jpj, above. The first instance here has a

http://mjwt.fi

http://mjwt.fi


horizontal stroke absent in the second, which probably represents <=> rather than the

horns of the^snake. Pace James, HP, pl. 5 A, it is absent in the second instance.

jw.tn mj jh n cnh-wd3-s(nb).tn (also II 2) —James (HP, 124-25) and subsequent transla

tions have interpreted the n after jh as a writing of interrogative jn (also Silverman,

Interrogative, 19). In these letters, however, the latter is invariably spelled jn except im

mediately before jw (I vo. 17, II 42). If n is not a spelling of jn, it could be the

preposition, introducing an elliptical wish similar to m hzt nt mntw, which follows it

("For your lph"). Alternatively, and perhaps better, it may be the indirect genitive

modifying jh, as in Late Egyptian (Cerny and Groll, LEG, 35): literally, "You are like

what of your lph?"The intervening zp 2 in II 2 presumably then indicates that jw.tn mj

jh is to be read twice: first, as an independent question and second, governing the geni-

tival phrase.

hzt — The damage to the papyrus makes the exact form of the hz sign uncertain. The

short vertical visible at the lower left of the sign is probably a continuation of the di

agonal of the Z-shaped element normally used for the upper part of the sign.

II 2 There is a small blob of ink at the very upper edge of the papyrus above this column,

probably accidental.

II3 p3 wnm — See Baer, "Letters," 7 n. 45. The use of p3 here—denoting an unreferenced

topic familiar to both parties (see p. 90)—supports James's guess (HP, 37) that a prover

bial character is meant.

hqr r b3h[t] jrtj.jj — The scribe dipped his brush after writing the first three signs of

b3h and reinked the third before continuing. The form of the verb hqr is 3ms stative.

For b3ht"white (of the eye)" in this passage, see Roccati, Papiro ieratico, 29.The lacuna

above jrtj.jj seems too large for the determinative of b3h alone (probably identical to

that of rs in II vo. 3), but is just right for that sign preceded by the feminine ending

of the noun.

mj.tn t3 — The size of the lacuna indicates that the suffix pronoun was written with

plural dots.

nj hqr.fin] —There is room for restoration suggested by James: it would end at about

the same level as II I. In that case, hqr.fin] is probably the negated sdm.firather than nj

plus infinitive with expressed subject. The negation could be read as a writing of the

preposition n, followed by the simple infinitive—mj.tn t3 r dr.fi mt nj hqr "Look, the

whole land is dead because of hunger"—but this spelling of the preposition is other

wise unattested in the papyri.

II 4 j.n.j ...jr.n.j— For this construction see the textual note to I 9—10 mj.k grt jj.n.j.

jn [grt] jw hcp [c3 w]rt— The lacuna between jn and jw requires an enclitic particle

(James, HP, 38): Heqanakht's favorite grt is the likeliest candidate (cf. I vo. 1 jn jr grt, II 38

nn grt) and suits both the extant traces and the size of the lacuna, although with the g

written below the jn group rather than next to the reed-leaf as it normally is in jr grt (I 6,

14, vo. 16; II 34-35).The traces do not suit the enclitic particles hm (cf. II 42), swt, or tr,

and the upper of the two traces is too far below jn to suit rf (suggested by Silverman, In

terrogative, 39 n. 214) or rr. The negation nn is also unlikely, both grammatically and

because the lower of the two traces is too far above jw. The tops of the two signs of jw are

preserved on a small fragment that has become dislodged and is visible on the photo

graph to the left of mjtt in II 25, rotated 900 counterclockwise. The identity of the

predicate following hcp is conjectural. The signs at the end of the lacuna are probably a

ligatured ^ , supporting Gunn's restoration of wrt, adopted by James, HP, 3 8. This points

to an adjective verb: the lacuna offers space enough only for n (cf. I vo. 11) plus the wr

http://sdm.fi

http://dr.fi

B. TEXTUAL NOTES 39

bird of wrt, and thus rules out the restoration [r c3t w]rt suggested by Theodorides, CdE

41 (1966), 302. The interrogative is ostensibly a question for information, but the geo

graphical background of the letters makes it unlikely that Heqanakht's family would have

information about the inundation that Heqanakht did not (see pp. 121—25). Most prob

ably, therefore, the question is intended rhetorically, expecting the answer "Of course

not!," as in the similar construction n jw.k dj.t hnc.j m pzsy.j (I vo. 17: see the textual note

above). Both the preceding and the following sentences are in the past tense, indicating

that the question here is not about the state of the current inundation (which had not yet

peaked at the time of writing: see p. 135) but about the previous year's flood, which has in

fact dictated (in Heqanakht's argument) the present shortage of grain. As Gunn conjec

tured, the missing verb was therefore most likely stative, but with past rather than present

sense. For the past connotation of the stative of an adjective verb in this construction, cf.

Westendorf, GMT,§§ 167c, 168a.

jr n.n cq[w.n] — The signs of jr n.n and the first sign of cq[w.n] are written over three

erased signs of cqw.The scribe apparently began to write mj.tn cqw. (n) before deciding

to insert jr n.n. For the "emphatic" sense of passive jr, cf. CG 20518, 1 msy.j m rnpt-hsb 1

n z3 rc JMN-M-H3T"! was born in Year 1 of the Son of Re AMENEMHAT."

115a whd mj mw— Goedicke's interpretation of whd as an attributive modifying qd n hcp

(Studies, 23—24) is superior to James's imperative (HP, 32), but his suggestion for the

following mj mw, though ingenious, is merely speculative. The prepositional phrase is

best understood as in Baer's translation ("Letters," 7, despite the caveat in "Letters," 7 n.

48), serving as subject of the relative whd.

mj.tn ph.n.j p3 hrw jm.tn hr scnh.tn — Literally, "Look, I have reached today with you

while causing you to live."

II 7-23 As James noted (HP, 34), the sum of the amounts in this list (6.95 sacks) differs from

the total given in line 23 ("7.9V2"), because some of the allocations were changed after

the total was written. The alterations in the amounts allocated to Anubis ("0.5" >

"0.4") and Snefru ("0.8" > "0.4") are clear. The salary of May's daughter Hetepet has

also been altered (> "0.5"), but there is no trace of the original numeral; on the basis of

the total in line 23, James restored the original as "0.9." James and Baer ("Letters," 7 n.

50) differ in their reading of the original amounts for Sinebniut and Nefret. James saw

the latter ("0.3/4") as unaltered and the former ("0.7") as possibly altered from an

original "0.8." Baer saw no trace of emendation in Sinebniut's allocation (original

"0.7"), but did note the probability of one in Nefret's, which he suggested had been al

tered to "0.3 VP from an original "0.4V2." James's suggestion of the alteration in

Sinebniut's amount is correct. Baer's observation of a change in Nefret's salary is accu

rate, but his restoration of the original amount is questionable. The three dots that

compose the first part of the amount are unaltered: this indicates an original "0.3"

rather than Baer's "0.4," since the latter is written with a single horizontal line (II 17—

19). The second part of the amount ("/4") has been written over an erasure, which

must have been another fraction. Either "VP or "VP are possible, the latter likelier since

emendation of the former to "VP would involve an increase. The surviving traces also

indicate an original "VP (as in Moller, Pal. I, 707): the trace that Baer saw as an erased

fourth dot is longer than the three preceding dots, and there is a second horizontal

trace just below the right end of the final "VP If Nefret's amount was originally "0.3%"

(> "0.3V2"), and if the total in line 23 reflects the original allocations, the erased

amount in line 20 must have been "0.8%" (> "0.5"). The original and final values are

therefore as follows:


8-9

10— I I

1 2 - 1 3

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

jpj b3kt.s

htpt b3kt.s

z3-ht(j) nht hnc

mr-sw hrw.fi

z3-hwt-hr

z3-nb-njwt

jnp

snfirw

z3(t)-jnwt

z3(t)-mjy htpt

nfirt

z3t-wrwt

dmd r

hrf

0.8

0.8

o.8

o.8

o.8

o.8

0.5

0.8

0.4

o.8%

o.pA 0.2

7.9M2

>

>

>

>

>

>

0.8

0.8

0.8

0.8

0.8

0.7

0.4

0.4

0.4

0.5

o.3]/2

0.2

[6.9M2

The flow of ink indicates that the determinatives and numbers in lines 8-22 were wri t

ten sequentially after each entry rather than separately from top to bot tom. The begin

ning of line 23 was writ ten immediately after line 22, with the same brushful of ink.

T h e numerical corrections seem to have been made one by one (after the total in line

23); each emended numeral was wri t ten with a fresh dip of the brush.

II 14 mr-sw hrwf—The determinative before the numeral is a seated woman rather than the

seated man transcribed by James (HP, pl. 5A), evidently the second of the two determi

natives of hrw.fi, as in II 13 .The plural dots of hrw.fiwere wri t ten summarily below the

seated man.

II 18 snfirw — T h e seated-wo man determinative has been corrected over an original seated

man. Since II 17—lojnpw and snfirw are clearly male names (as throughout Letters I—II),

the correction must have been intended for II 19, which should then be female z3(t)-

jnwt (see the next note). The scribe apparently noticed that he had written a male de

terminative for this name as he was making the alterations in the numerals of II 17—21,

but emended the determinative of II 18 by mistake.

II 19 z3(t)-jnwt — The first sign (z3) is written over an erased m of the abbreviated form in II

20 just below. The scribe evidently began the name of II 20 here before deciding that he

wanted the current name in this line instead. Omission of the feminine ending of z3t is

unusual but not unparalleled in Middle Kingdom names: cf. Ranke, PN I, 280, 25; 285,

25; 286, 6 /8 /15; 287, 4; 288, 22; 289, 13/22; 290, 1; 292, 11; 294, 3; II, 313, 5.

II 20 htpt — The first sign is apparently the htp sign alone rather than a ligature of this sign

with ^ : the ligatured forms in II 1, 10, 37, and 39 have a third horizontal missing here.

II 5b-6 h33.t cqw n z3-nb-njwt m jtj-mh.f wnn.fi m htw.fi r rwt.fi r pr-h33 — As James noted (HP,

38), the scribe added these words after writ ing II 23 and before beginning II 24.There

is an erased © to the left of the first <f_ of h33, indicating that the scribe originally

started the addendum farther to the left and lower below scnh.tn of II 5a.The abbrevi

ated form of the two ^ - b i r d s of pr-h33 was apparently used to conserve space. T h e

sentence evidently has to do with how Sinebniut's salary is to be apportioned (h33.t cqw n z3-nb-njwt) in view of his projected mission to Perhaa (r rwt.f r pr-h33: cf. I 3-4,

III 4). A similar provision was made for Heti's son Nakht in I 14—17. The first clause of

the sentence (h33.t cqw n z3-nb-njwt mjtj-mh.fi) is evidently background information.

T h e sense of the second clause hinges on the meaning of m htw.fi and r rwt.f. O f the

various translations suggested for m htw.f—"on his threshing floor(?)" (James, HP, 38),

"among his followers" (Goedicke, Studies, 26), "at his disposal" (Wente, Letters, 61)—the

http://hrw.fi

http://hrw.fi

http://hrw.fi

http://wnn.fi

http://htw.fi

http://rwt.fi

http://mjtj-mh.fi

http://htw.fi

B. TEXTUAL NOTES 41

best in this context is Wente's, evidently based on the New Kingdom variant of m htf

(Wb. Ill, 344, 8 and 347, 1) considered but rejected by James (HP, 38).The following r

rwt.f is less likely to be the r sdmt.f construction ("until he has left for Perhaa") than r

plus infinitive ("with respect to his departure for Perhaa"), since the former makes no

provision for Sinebniut's salary while away from home (and none was made in Letter

I). The sentence as a whole therefore apparently was intended to allow Sinebniut to

draw an advance salary for the mission from his allotment, as James surmised (HP, 34).

Grammatically it is a balanced sentence consisting of two clauses each headed by a

sdm.f form (h33.t ... wnn.fi...).

11 24 jr z3w qnd.tn — Baer's suggestion ("Letters," 8 n. 52) that Heqanakht started a conditional

sentence (jr ...) "and changed his mind after the first word" is not supported by the pa

pyrus, where the signs of jr z3w qnd are written with a single brushful of ink and with no

hesitation after the first two signs. The construction is therefore intentional. As noted

above (I 2 z3ww), z3w in these letters is used with the force ofa conjunction "lest." The

present construction is evidently intended to allow a clause headed by z3w to introduce a

sentence, in the manner of III 5 jr grt r s3 "Now after ..." as Wente's translation suggests

(Letters, 61; cf. Gardiner, EG, § 178 m ht 4).

11 25 m mjtt hrdw.j — The traces to the left of mjtt in the photograph are on a stray frag

ment belonging to jw of II 4 (see the textual note above). There is an extant trace to

the left of the lacuna that suits the "elbow" of the seated man; judging from its

weight, the sign was written with a fresh brushful of ink. It is uncertain whether any

signs were originally present below this at the end of the column. The space available

(2-2/4 groups) would suit an addendum such as ds.j ("my [own] children"), or an in

troduction to the following jnk ht nb (see the next note). The preceding column,

however, ends at the same height, even though there is room at its end for at least the

first two signs of the following mj.tn (cf. II 3—4 for this division; also I 2—3 mj.k).This

suggests that there was a flaw or gap at this point in the papyrus that the scribe

wished to avoid, and consequently that no signs have been lost at the end of II 25, as

James concluded (HP, 39).

II 26 jnk ht nb r dd nfrgs n cnh r mt m zp wc — T h e initial pronoun was written with the same

brushful of ink used for the suffix pronoun at the end of II 25; the scribe then dipped his

brush again before writing ht nb. This pattern could indicate that jnk belongs with the

preceding phrase, as an emphasizing element ("like my children"); cf. CT IV 93q: J.R Al

len, in For His Ka: Essays Offered in Memory of Klaus Baer, ed. by D. Silverman (SAOC 55:

Chicago, 1994), 10.The next words would then have to belong to a separate clause.This is

possible if the group following the preposition r is not dd but ht (M3), yielding a circum

stantial clause ht nb r ht "everything (else) being subordinate" (cf. Wb. Ill, 340, 12-15).

Despite the pattern of brush dips, however, this interpretation is unlikely, for several rea

sons: paleographically the sign looks more like ligatured dd (compare, e.g., II 27) than the

ht of II 6, the spelling of r ht with the ht sign alone would be unusual, and the emphasis of

the suffix pronoun makes little sense in the context; the scribe also dipped his brush be

tween the first two words of the next sentence (II 26 nfr gs), as he did between jnk and ht

nb. The independent pronoun therefore belongs with ht nb rather than the preceding

clause. As such it is certainly a writing of the possessive predicate n(])-jnk "mine," as all

translations have understood it; for the possessive, see Gilula, RdE 20 (1968), 55—56; also

Ranke, PN II, 265, 9. Goedicke restored the negation nn at the bottom of the preceding

column, reading [nn] jnk ht nb "I don't have everything" (Studies, 18 and 27), but this is

grammatically improbable (Gilula, op.cit., 61). Pace Goedicke, the statement at the top of II

26 makes sense contextually as it stands: Heqanakht is reminding his household that he is

http://wnn.fi


its head ("the whole household is just like my children") and as such has ultimate control

over the disposition of its assets ("everything is mine"). James's interpretation of r dd as an

elliptical introduction to the following aphorism—"(for it is said) that" (HP, 39 and

120)—is based on its use in Letters I—II to introduce direct quotations (I 17, vo. 5; II 38)

as well as the letter itself or a portion of it (I 1, II 29; also P ' 1 and James, HP, pl. 24, 1),

and has been followed in most translations: "(It) must be said" (Baer, "Letters," 8), "To

wit" (Goedicke, Studies, 18), "A message" (Parkinson, Voices, 106). Wente, however, ana

lyzed r dd as a clause of purpose: "so that it should be said" (Letters, 61). Wente's analysis is

preferable syntactically, since the elliptical use demanded in James's reading is otherwise

unparalleled; but James's interpretation is better semantically, since there is no logical con

nection between the two statements jnk ht nb and nfr gs n cnh r mt m zp w. In light of

these difficulties r dd may belong with the preceding sentence, with dd in the sense re

flected in V 38, here referring to the allocations that Heqanakht has just "said" (II 7-23; cf.

V 37—38): thus,j'nfe ht nb r dd, literally "Everything is mine with respect to saying (the al

location of it)."

II 27 mj.tn dd.tw hqr r hqr— The sense was recognized by Baer, "Letters," 8: dd.tw is " e m

phatic," focusing on r hqr.

s3cw — Subjectless passive sdm.f The same form occurs wi thout ending in II 42 rh, the

only other example of the passive sdm.f in these papers. For the variation in ending, cf.

the noun wp ~ wpw "first (of the mon th ) " in II 32.

II 28 mj.tn nj ddw n.sn p3 cqw m st nbt— A negative existential sentence rather than one

with adverbial predicate (m st nbt), which is negated by nn in these letters (I 13): see pp.

96-97.

II 29 jrj smw c3 — The first person suffix was added secondarily, probably when the scribe

dipped his brush after writ ing the word c3, j udg ing from the weight of ink.

r dd jn hm-k3 — W r i t t e n over an erasure. The erased text is illegible.

1130 nqr.w m nqr— Cf. Shore,JEA 76 (1990), 164-66. The first form is stative, denoting the

state expected to result from the action of the preceding imperative jkn (cf. Lefebvre,

GEC, § 350; Allen, Inflection, § 589).The referent is the preceding feminine singular 3ht

but the form is either masculine singular (cf. I 6 snc.w) or plural, probably influenced

by the preceding nb (cf. Gardiner, EG, § 510, 2).

II30-31 srt.tn — T h e determinative is c7 rather than James's & (Baer, "Letters," 8 n. 56).

1131 nfr 3 dd.j wg n.tn — The scribe wrote the lefthand element of the first a—A of the verb

immediately after nfr, then erased it and wrote the &L sign before continuing with the

verb and the rest of the sentence. H e also originally wrote the dative after wg as singu

lar n.k (ligatured), then erased it and substituted the plural tn before continuing. For the

construction, see I vo. 15 mj.k dd.j wg n.k, textual note.

1132 m wp n hnt-hty-prtj n wpw n m3wt — Literally, "on / f rom the first day of Khentekhta i -

perti per first day of newness." For the m o n t h - n a m e see Vernus, Athribis, 3 84-85 . The

scribe originally began to wri te m hnt-h(ty-prtj), then erased the beginning of the

m o n t h - n a m e and wrote the present, more specific text. At the end of hnt-hty-prtj he

first wrote the circle of the determinative 2 , then dipped his brush, reinked the p re

ceding dual strokes of prtj, and overwrote (without erasing) the circle wi th the

present determinative. T h e phrase m wp n hnt-hty-prtj undoubtedly indicates the point

at which the n e w salary schedule was to take effect, as it has universally been unde r

stood: thus, "on / f rom the first of" the m o n t h (Wb. II, 1, 8—10; Gardiner, EG, § 162, 2;

Petrovskiy, CouemaHUH Cjtoe, 151). T h e significance of the second phrase, n wpw n

B. TEXTUAL NOTES 43

m3wt, is less clear. The term wpw, undoubtedly the same as that in the preceding

phrase, indicates a temporal reference of some sort, but the meaning of the other

words is uncertain.Theodorides, CdE 41 (1966), 299-300 n. 3, interpreted the initial

n as genitival and the entire phrase as appositive to n hnt-hty-prtj, but this produces a

tautologous m wp ... n wpw. James (HP, 41) understood the first n as a preposition

with the datival meaning "for," and this has been followed in most translations, with

the exception of Goedicke's "until" (Studies, 18). Before time expressions, the

preposition n also means "for/during/within/per" a period of time (Wb. II, 194, 7;

Gardiner, EG, § 164, 8; Petrovskiy, CouemaHUM Cjioe, 154; Goedicke's suggested

"until" is not attested). Of these meanings, only "per" is applicable here: thus, either

datival "for the first day" or "per first day." The term m3wt evidently derives from the

root m3wj "new" but its reference is unclear. James (HP, 41 and n. 1) understood n

m3wt as the adjectival phrase of Wb. II, 27, 3—5, here modifying wpw ("for a new first

day": HP, 33; similarly, Wente, Letters, 61). Other translations have understood wpw n

m3wt as analogous to the preceding wp n hnt-hty-prtj or VII 11 wp n sfi-btj, with m3wt

as a term for "new month" (Baer, "Letters," 8; Parkinson, Voices, 106) or the proper

name ofa month (Goedicke, Studies, 18). The parallels support the interpretation of

m3wt as a reference to months, but the latter are regularly masculine (jbd "month"; cf.

also the later month-names p(3)-n-X "the (month) of X": Wb. I, 492, 9). James's

analysis is thus preferable; the proper name suggested by Goedicke is purely hypo

thetical. Adjectival use of n m3wt is otherwise unattested before the New Kingdom,

but the construction is paralleled by I vo. 1 n swsyt (see the textual note above).The

determinative of m3wt is probably = rather than James's =; the plural strokes probably

reflect the abstract ending (Gardiner, EG, § 77).

m cm n(j) jb.tn — The element intervening between m cm and jb.tn must be either

the dative n.(j) "for me" (proposed by Goedicke, Studies, 31) or the prepositional ad

verb n(j) (argued by James, HP, 41). The orthography of Letters I—II favors James's

interpretation: see the textual note to I 14—15 jr grt jrt n(j) nbt, above; pace Goedicke,

adverbial n(j) would occupy the same position in the phrase as its prepositional coun

terpart, before the direct object. James's understanding of n(j) as adverbial for the

dative "of advantage" n.tn following the imperative, however, is unlikely, since the ad

verb consistently implies a third-person object of the corresponding preposition. In

this case the referent is apparently the sentence about the distribution of salaries,

which immediately precedes: literally, "Don't be neglectful for it about that 1.4 dar.

of land." By means of this link Heqanakht evidently intended to indicate that the

salaries of Merisu and Heti's son Nakht, as much as those of the rest of the house

hold, were dependent on their work.

II33 p3 3ht j ! nt(j) m smt — T h e sign James read as M^ (D61) is more probably Jw (M21: cf.

Goedicke, OHP, M21 "Funerary"), yielding the phrase m smt "in pasturage" (Wb. IV,

120, 4), which is more likely than the rarer and later m s3ht (James, HP, 41).The de

monstrative pronoun and relative adjective modify the numeral (masculine): see the

textual note to I 4 qdb.fi, above.

rdj.n z3-jp-hrd hnt-h(t) hrjkn.fi—James's understanding of hr jkn.fi as "reiterated" (HP,

107) seems to be the only possible reading: a similar example occurs in III vo. 1 hr nht

hr jwt.f n.k nbt hr.s. Both Goedicke's "for stripping it" (Studies, 32) and Menu's "pour

qu'il les laboure a la houe" ("Gestion," 128) assume a clause of purpose, which would

be expressed differently (rjkn.fior jknf sw). This indicates, in turn, that Khentekhtai is

not the agent of jkn, and therefore that the land was given by him (sdm.nfi relative)

rather than to him (passive participle plus dative).

http://qdb.fi

http://hrjkn.fi

http://jkn.fi

http://jkn.fi


II34 nt(j) m c.k — T h e following sentence, in which Merisu is ordered to "replace" Anubis's

property, suggests that the sense of m c.k here is contractual rather than simply posses

sive: J.Janssen,J£Jl 8o (1994), 129-36.

jmj nfi sw — T h e small dot of ink between the two signs of sw is apparently accidental.

n 35 jrgrt wnn mr-snjrw hr mrt — See Vernus, RdE 39 (1988), 149 n. 8, and Future at Issue, 176;

Depuydt, RdE 39 (1988), 205 n. 5. The reading of Vernus and Depuydt is more likely

than the "mixture" of constructions suggested by James (HP, 41); mr-snfirw is probably

the fuller name of the individual elsewhere called snfirw in these letters: see p. 113. In

support of James's analysis, however, it should be noted that the scribe dipped his brush

twice after writ ing the initial mr—once after the s of snfirw and again after the determi

native of the same name—and could therefore have writ ten hr mrt as the verb without

remembering that he had already used the sdm.f form of the same verb.

n3 n k3 — For the construction with singular noun , cf. Peas. B i , 40 = R 9, 4 wc m n3

n c3 "one of those donkeys." The n o u n probably refers to cattle rather than bulls, as

i n V 18.

hr.k dj.k — See I 9 hr.tn sm.tn, textual note.

II36 nj mr.figrt ... nj mr.fi grt — T h e subordination of these two independent constructions is

contextual rather than syntactic: cf. P. Lacau and H. Chevrier, Une chapelle d'Hatshepsout

a Karnak (Cairo, 1977), 137, 13-14: jw wr r sdg hprw pn, nn j(s) m cbc m grg, nj sdm.twgrt

dr rk t3 pn "This happening is too great to conceal, and is not boasting or lying, nor has

it been heard of since the time of this land." For the position of the particle grt, see the

discussion on p. 99.

hr prt hr h3t — Probably with reference to the motion of plowing rather than the daily

practice of "going u p " to the fields and "down" to home, since the verbs involved would

indicate that the farmland lay at a higher elevation than Heqanakht's residence.

1138 jwyfn.j c3 hncj — See the discussion of I 10 mj n3, textual note above. T h e verb form

in this example is probably the relative sdm.f in non-attributive "emphat ic" function:

see the discussion on p. 94.

nn grt j.n.j js mj n3 dd.n.j n.tn — T h e supposedly anomalous character of this construc

tion (James, HP, 42; Gilula, RdE 20 (1968), 61) is in fact illusory. As Wente has seen

(Letters, 62), nn negates the sentence as a whole: see p. 97. T h e reading suggested by

Theodorides, CdE 41 (1966), 298—"mais il n'est, certes, personne qui vienne a moi

ici"—is grammatically impossible.

1139 hnmst — The term here clearly refers to subordinates rather than social equals (cf. Wb.

Ill, 294, 15; 295, 3—4/9), and probably does not denote a family relationship: Franke,

Verwandtschaftsbezeichnungen, 357-58.

prt.s — Pace Baer, "Letters," 8 n. 62, the context clearly indicates a domestic servant of

some sort, probably from outside the household: see pp. 109—10.

II39-40 h3 rwd.tn m ht nbt mj « ? — Literally, "Would that you would be firm in everything like

(you are in) this," evidently a sarcastic remark based on the family's obstinacy in keeping

Hetepet s servants away from her. For this meaning of rwd, cf. Sethe, Lesestucke, 84, 16—18,

jst grt rdj.n hm.(j) jrt twt n hrn.j) hr t3s pn jr.n hm.(j) nj mrwt rwd.tn hrf n mrwt ch3.tn hrf

"And My Incarnation has had the image of My Incarnation made on this border that My

Incarnation has made so that you might be firm and fight for it"; the root meaning of

"firmness" also suits most if not all of the instances cited in Wb. II, 411, 14—16. For mj n3

see the textual note to I 10, above. The gap before the bookroll determinative of ht is due

to a flaw in the papyrus avoided by the scribe.

http://mr.fi

http://mr.fi

B. TEXTUAL NOTES 45

II 40 nj grt mr.k s hr.k dj.kjn.t n.j jwt-n-hb — The initial clause of this sentence has been in

terpreted both as an independent statement and as an implied condition or concession:

James, HP, 33 and 42—43, "Now (if) you do not want her"; Baer, "Letters," 8—9 and n.

63, "But you do not like her"; Goedicke, Studies, 19 and 33, "Now as you don't want

her with you"; Depuydt, RdE 39 (1988), 206, "But you told me you would not like

her"; Wente, Letters, 62, "But since, as you say, you don't want her"; Parkinson, Voices,

107, "Yet, you have not loved her." The first reading, however, results in a mere tautol

ogy that is unlikely in the context; for the same reason, an interrogative is also

improbable ("Now, don't you like her?"). The implied condition first suggested by

James is therefore more likely. Although the negation is syntactically independent, its

contextual subordination here is analogous to that attested in "virtual" relative clauses

(Gardiner, EG, § 196, 2); for the syntax of the negation itself, see the discussion on pp.

98—99. The element hr.k has been understood with dj.k as part of the hr.fi sdm.f con

struction (James, Baer, Parkinson), as a parenthetic verb (Depuydt "you told me,"Wente

"as you say"), and as a prepositional phrase in the first clause (Goedicke "you don't

want her with you"). Only the first of these is likely: parenthetic hr.k is used only after

direct quotations (see the textual note to I 9 hr.tn sm.tn, above), and II 36 nj mrfgrt wnn

hn.k suggests that the sense of Goedicke's translation would have been expressed dif

ferently (mrj hr is apparently unattested in this meaning). Part of the difficulty with this

passage has been the apparent anomaly of the pronoun s(j) used prior to its referent

(James, HP, 43; Baer, "Letters," 8—9 n. 63), since the normal referent should be II 39

htpt. The problem is illusory, however, since jwt-n-hb is probably another name for the

woman otherwise called htpt (see the discussion on pp. 108—109). The continued ad

monition against her ill-treatment in II 40—44 suggests that this sentence is meant as a

further warning rather than an instruction to be taken literally.

II 40-41 cnh n.j z pn dd.j r jp jrt(j)fi zp nb hr pg3 n hbswt jw.f r.j jwj r.f— Following James (HP,

43), this has been almost universally analyzed as a rather complicated oath, with z pn

the oath's authority and the phrase dd.j r jp a parenthetic explanation of z pn. The apo-

dosis of the oath has been understood as the balanced expression jw.f r.j jwj r.f, with the

subject of the first clause, jrt(j).fizp nb hr pg3 n hbswt, preposed because of its length and

the balanced phrasing of the apodosis. Goedicke, however, interpreted dd.j r jp as the

main clause ("I shall accuse 'lp": Studies, 19 and 33—34).This analysis results in a more

straightforward sentence, and is supported by parallels in several Middle Kingdom ex

amples (see Wilson, JNES 7 (1948), 131—32), albeit with a different use of dd: compare

especially cnh n.j Z-N-WSKT dd.j m m3ct"As SENWOSRET lives for me, I speak in truth"

(Senwosret I, Wilson's example 1: Anthes, Hatnub, no. 49); similarly, cnh n.j) z-n-wsrt

dd.n.j) m m3ct (Senwosret III, Wilson's example 2: Garstang, El Ardbeh, pl. 5 c 4-5). It

runs into difficulty, however, in the clause beginning jrt(j).f zp nb, for which Goedicke

can only suggest "when he instigates any case," with an unattested circumstantial use of

the sdmt.fi (Goedicke's reference to Edel, AdG, § 739, is irrelevant: that discussion deals

with the sdmt.fias object of verbs). The introduction of an otherwise unreferenced an

tagonist " lp" is also unmotivated: both the present context and other references to this

problem in Letters I and II clearly indicate that it is the members of Heqanakht's im

mediate family that are causing difficulties for his hbswt. Goedicke's interpretation of

the dd clause could be salvaged if ^ D [1 is not a proper name but a form of the verb jp

in its meaning "recognize, notice" (Wb. I, 66, 10—13), either passive participle with de

terminative or relative sdm.f with is subject, modified by the jrt(j).f clause: literally, "the

noticed one who shall make" or "the one I notice who shall make." The spelling argues

against such a reading, however, since the verb jp has the bookroll determinative else

where in these papyri (I 2—3), as usually in Middle Egyptian. James's analysis thus seems

http://hr.fi

http://sdmt.fi

http://sdmt.fi


to be the only one possible in the context. The parenthetic use of ("emphatic") dd.j r jp

is also supported by the form of the oath's protasis, cnh n.j z pn. This substitutes the

phrase z pn "this man" for the more usual Old and Middle Kingdom authorities, with

the classical demonstrative pn in place of the prenominal p3 that Heqanakht uses else

where.4 Although z pn may be unparalleled as an authority, the use of pn rather than p3

suggests that it was in fact drawn from a repertory of standard formulas.5 If so, this

would account for the need to specify its referent (by dd.j r jp) here, where the referent

may not have been sufficiently obvious from the context.

II 41 jrt(j).fizp nb hr pg3 n hbswt — The large blank area between the second and third signs of

pg3 is evidently due to an irregularity in the surface of the papyrus at this point, as James

noted (HP, 43 and pl. 6A). There are several flaws at this end of the papyrus, and most of

the surface beneath cols. 38—44 seems to have been difficult to write on, resulting in nu

merous ill-formed or tenuous signs. The d sign in pg3 is a case in point (compare the

form in II 31 wg), its right side abruptly abbreviated. It is unclear whether the large stroke

to its right, made with a new brushful of ink, was meant to complete the sign or to indi

cate that the word continued below the blank area. The use of jrj zp with negative

connotation is well attested (Wb. Ill, 435, 9). Baer recognized the literal meaning of the

parallel chc hrpg3 n h3rt (Siut III, 5) "he who stands (firm) on the widow's battlefield" but

failed to see its relevance to the present context ("Letters," 9 n. 65). The spelling of pg3

indicates the usual meaning "battlefield" (Wb. I, 562) and contains nothing to support ei

ther the sexual connotations argued by James (HP, 43) and Baer (loc.cit.) or Goedicke's

hypothetical "dowry" (Studies, 34—35). The context itself supports the literal meaning of

the term; the clause as a whole is meant metaphorically. The final noun is perhaps to be

read hbswt. (j) "my wife," but II 44 provides a parallel for absolute use, and Letters I—II do

not otherwise omit the is suffix pronoun.

hbswt.j — The weight of ink indicates that the first person suffix was written immedi

ately after the "clothing" determinative of hbswt, apparently because the scribe did not

think there was enough room for it below. He then evidently realized that he had

forgotten the female determinative, dipped his brush, and added it at the end.

II 42 jrjrt(j).jn.s nb mjtt jr. t n.j — Wente's translation (Letters, 62), and the similar though un-

grammatical rendering of Goedicke (Studies, 19 and 36), are preferable to those of

James (HP, 43—44) and Baer ("Letters," 9). The latter produce an unresolved protasis;

moreover, the normal sense of jrj n is positive "do for" someone rather than negative

"do to" someone: cf. Anthes, JEA 55 (1969), 41-42; Goedicke, BES 4 (1982), 73 n. 9;

Willems, JEOL 28 (1983-84), 98. The former sense is evident in II 42 rh jrrt n hbsyt nt

z, just preceding this sentence. In Wente's reading, jr jrt(j).fi n.s nb is a topicalized parti

cipial phrase; the remainder of the sentence consists of a subject-stative construction.

Goedicke's relative sdm.fi is grammatically possible but contextually unlikely, since the

antecedent of the subject would have to be the malefactor against whom Heqanakht

has just inveighed. Moreover, in these letters, nb normally agrees in gender with a pre

ceding feminine (I 1, 3, 15; II 28, 40; III vo. 1, vo. 2); exceptions are I 2, vo. 9; II 30, vo. 3

4 For the demonstrative, see p. 88; pn also occurs in Urk. I, 39, 6 snb find.(j) pn "As this my nose is healthy."The usual authorities, as collected by Wilson, JNES 7 (1948), are the proper names of the king, a high official, or gods (131, examples 1-3; 134, ex. 23; 140, ex. 63), nswt "the king" (134, ex. 22; 144, ex. 86; Urk. I, 223, 17), and ntr nt(j) tn hrf "the god you are before" (Urk. I, 223, 17); other authorities include jt.j "my father" (131, ex. 4), the speaker himself (cnh.j"as I live": 132, ex. 6),find.(j) pn "this my nose" (140, ex. 64), and jrtj mnj nb.(j) "the eyes of Mereri, my lord" (K. Baer, ZAS 93 (1966), 2 col. 7).

5 H. -W Fischer-Elfert has drawn my attention to another possible instance in Papyrus Ramessum I, B iii 10, [c]nh n.j z pn r hm rn.fi J.W.B. Barns, Five Ramesseum Papyri (Oxford, 1956), pl. 3. Unfortunately, this text occurs on a fragment, with the preceding and following context lost. If it is in fact an oath, the meaning is apparently "As this man lives for me more than one whose name is unknown."

http://sdm.fi

http://rn.fi

B. TEXTUAL NOTES 47

twice: of these, all but I vo. 9 and II 30 involve the phrase ht nb (vs. I 3, II 40, III vo. 2 ht

nbt).

II 42-43 n jw ...jh whdj— See Silverman, Interrogative, 43;Vernus, Future at Issue, 104—105.The

verb form srhw is a prospective passive serving as object of whd: see p. 95.There are two

dots of ink between the two signs of jh, and the latter are more widely separated than

usual. If the dots are not accidental, they may reflect the scribe's attempt to begin the

second sign of jh closer to the first before realizing that the surface was unsuitable.

11 43 ptr qy n wnn.j hnc.tn m tt wct — Literally, "What is the manner of my being with you

in one community?" See Silverman, Interrogative, 66 and n. 376. The translation of tt as

"community" is Wente's (Letters, 62); despite Baer's objection ("Letters," 9 n. 67), the

word is undoubtedly the same as tt "staff," attested elsewhere in Middle Egyptian

(Gardiner,JEA 24 (1938), 170—71 and 179;Ward, Titles, 12 and 69).The short stroke at

the bottom left of the final sign of ptr is apparently accidental.

II 44 nj nn tr.tn n.j hb(s)wt — Interpretation of the initial J£J has varied between a spelling of

nn (Goedicke, Studies, 36;Wente, Letters, 62) and an interjection «j"No!" followed by nn

(James, HP, 44; Baer, "Letters," 9).The scribe clearly had difficulty writing the first -»-

(the signs of this column are written over a vertical reinforcing strip pasted on the edge

of the papyrus). It is possible that the scribe was not satisfied with its shape and merely

repeated it, intending to write only nn, but the fact that it was not erased or canceled

makes this unlikely. Since the three signs were all written with the same brushful of

ink, the spelling is evidently deliberate. Moreover, since the two negatives nj and nn are

otherwise written normally (-«- and z£z) in these letters (see pp. 96—100), a variant

spelling is unlikely. These considerations favor James's interpretation of the three signs

as two separate words. His analysis of the first -«- as an interjection "No!" is

improbable, however: the interjection is m-bj3 in Middle Egyptian (Wb. I, 442, 1; II, 55,

10); ^ in Peas. Bi , 231, is an adverb "(or) not" (pace Gardiner, EG, § 258). Silverman

has suggested that the first -«- is a writing of the interrogative jn (Interrogative, 66;

followed by Parkinson, Voices, 107). This is possible in the context but is unlikely in

view of the regular phonetic spellings jn and n (before jw) elsewhere in these letters (I

vo. 1, vo. 16—17; II 4, 42; for II 1—2 n cnh-(w)d3-s(nb).tn see the textual note above). For

the same reason, a spelling of the preposition n (cf. Gardiner, EG, § 164) governing the

following clause is also unlikely, as James noted (HP, 38). Since a double negation is

ruled out by the context, the only alternative would seem to be the use of -«- to

negate the following clause as a unit; the following nn tr.tn is a negated adverb clause

with expressed subject: see the discussion on p. 99. The passage as a whole is an

elliptical answer to the preceding question: literally, "Not without you respecting for

me the wife."

hb{s)wt — The separation of the final determinative from the rest of the word, re

marked by James (HP, 44), is probably due to a desire to lengthen the text in this final

column; the papyrus in the uninscribed gap is no different in quality than in the in

scribed portion. The same consideration evidently governed the vertical arrangement

of the first two signs in the word, as opposed to the grouping used elsewhere in these

letters.

11 vo. 1 3ht — The scribe dipped his brush after writing this word and reinked its last three

signs before continuing.

jn z3-hwt-hrw — This could be the agent of either jn.tw or the infinitive qdb. As James

realized (HP, 44), the former is more probable. In I 3-4 it is Heti's son Nakht and

Sinebniut who are charged with renting land.


II vo. 2 There is vertical line of black blobs to the left, and partly over, the first eight signs in

this column, apparently accidental. The substance of these blobs is quite thick and

unlike the normal ink of the hieratic signs.

m hmt m hbsw — The first two signs are writ ten over an erasure. The erased text may

have been hr rdjt "giving. . . ," intended as an adverbial modifier of the precding clause.

James's transcription (HP, pl. 7A) omits the ^ of hmt (clearly wri t ten as a separate sign)

and the plural strokes of hbsw. The absence of the demonstrative 13 before hmt suggests

that hmt is used here generically rather than wi th specific reference to the 24 deben just

mentioned, a sense indicated also by the context.

II vo. 3 wnn swt sd.n.tn snc jm n mrht n ht nb — See the textual notes to I 4-5 jr grt wnn sd.n.sn

s(n)ct. As in I 4 - 5 , the sdm.n.f clause here is governed by wnn, the latter used circum

stantially (see the discussion on pp. 92—93). Theoretically, jm could refer either to the

commodities just ment ioned ("the value thereof") or to the locale (Perhaa: "the value

therein"), but the following genitive n indicates the latter. Heqanakht's men are in

structed to attempt to recover the debts owed him in Perhaa in oil or in "anything" and

to use this in negotiating the lease; if necessary, they are then to use the other com

modities as well. This instruction repeats and complements that of I 4—6 (see the textual

note to I 5 dd.sn st jm gr). The size of the lacuna indicates that snc was writ ten with

plural dots.

11 vo. 3 rs tp.k — T h e stroke through ^ ^ may be part of the sign itself. Ra ther than the slip of

the brush envisioned by James (HP, pl. 7A, notes), it may be a clumsy continuation of

the ligature representing the top of the basket, which does not connect on the left with

the lower stroke representing the basket's bot tom. If it is a separate sign, however, it was

probably meant to cancel the fe-sign, deleting the singular pronoun (perhaps occasioned

by the preceding qn.tj) zp 2: see the textual note to this expression in I 2, above) in

conformance with the second-person plural of the context. If so, the correction was

made immediately after the basket was drawn: both signs were made with the same

brushful of ink, and the darker ink of the first preserved sign in vo. 4 indicates that the

scribe dipped his brush before beginning the next column.

II vo. 4 [h3].tn —James 's suggested restoration of [mj.tjn at the top of II vo. 4 makes little sense

in the context: as in I 7—9, Heqanakht's men are instructed to obtain "good watered

land of Khepshyt"—they are not yet " o n " it. T h e lacuna at the top of vo. 4 is too large

to have contained just the suffix pronoun tn (replacing the deleted fe at the bo t tom of

the preceding column) followed by n.tn or r.tn: i.e., rs tp.fin] n.tn/r.tn (for the syntax, see

Edel, AdG, § 616). T h e traces above the preserved tn are in fact the bottoms of two

horizontal strokes, not one. Together with the size of the lacuna and the following

prepositional phrase hr 3ht, this suggests the restoration [h3].tn, a subjunctive continuing

the preceding imperative rs or expressing a clause of purpose; the particle grt indicates

the former. The traces above tn suit the walking-legs determinative of this verb. For h3j

hr 3ht, cf. I 8 and I vo. 10.

Letter III

III vo. 3 mr t3-mhw hrw-nfr — Goedicke's doubts (Studies, 80) about James's reading of the sign

preceding hrw-nfir are unfounded: the form of the "city" determinative is in fact quite

similar to that used throughout Letter III, and it is visibly unlike the "egg" sign used for

z3 in III 4 z3-hty nht. A contemporary parallel for this spelling can be found in Garstang,

El Ardbeh, pl. 4 (E 238). Moreover, as Goedicke himself notes, his reading results in the

otherwise unattested title jmj-r t3. See also Golovina, VDI1995 no. 2, 22-23.

B. TEXTUAL NOTES 49

III i b3k n pr dt — For the formal terms and formulae employed in this letter, see James, HP,

119-23. For the title, see U. Luft, Oikumene 3 (1982), 118-21, and Oikumene 4 (1983),

127-28; D. Kessler, in Grund und Boden, 376-79.

hq3-nht dd | — T h e sign after dd could be the preposition n with omitted object or a

dividing line. James opted for the former (HP, 48 and 119), but the parallel in P ' 1 ar

gues in favor of the latter (see the textual note below). The well-attested formula jw

hrt.k mj cnh (James, HP, 120—21) rules out interrogative n jw (as in I vo. 17 and II 42).

Ill 2 m cnh — T h e preposition is written over an erased y sign. The scribe originally omitted

the preposition, realized his mistake after writing the cnh sign, erased the latter, dipped his

brush, and wrote the preposition over the erasure before continuing. The "ear" of the owl

incorporates the original vertical stroke representing the loop of the cnh sign.

Ill 3 wn jm3h.k nfr hr k3 n hr-s.fi—This formula regularly follows the wish for a good old

age, as it does here:James, HP, 123. Given this progression, the formula is perhaps better

understood as the subjunctive form of a sentence with prepositional predicate (hr k3 n

X) rather than that of the subject-stative construction (jm3h.k nfr): cf. Urk. I, 218, 9/17

wnn jm3h.tn hr ntr c3; also Urk. I, 84, 3 n wnjm3h.(j) mjb.fi(Edel, AaG, § 712). Since the

state of jm3h is inherently "good," nfr probably has the meaning "final" here, as Goe

dicke understood it (Studies, 79, without comment).

dj.j) — Despite James's arguments (HP, 129—30), the verb form is best understood as

the subjunctive with unwritten first-person subject, here and in the other examples

James cites. The clause of purpose with this form is also suited to the "emphatic" nature

of preceding dd b3kjm and the variant dd.j.

Ill 4 jwt — The unusual "head" of the hieratic quail-chick is due to a horizontal flaw in the

papyrus, which caused the scribe's brush to skip.

n3 n btj ntj) c3 — See the textual note to I 5 n3 n btj nt(j) m pr-h33, above.

jrt r.fizh3.k pw cnh-(w)d3-s(nb) — See the textual note to I 3 jr n.k rdjt h3y, above. De

spite James's comment about its "awkward position" (HP, 48), the copula pw is in fact

normally placed, following the first separable element of the A pw B sentence.

rdjt sd.t — The second verb is probably the sdm.tw.fiwith unexpressed subject (cf. Ill 5

dd.t), although a second infinitive is also possible (cf. Gardiner, EG, § 303).

nn rdjt — Contrast I vo. 2 and vo. 14, where nj plus infinitive is used for the same func

tion (negative circumstantial): for this variation, see p. 97.

in 5 jm — T h e "shadow" line to the right of the reed-leaf was apparently caused by a split

in the tip of the scribe's brush. A similar phenomenon can be seen in the p and deter

minative of the second instance of zp in II 35.

mj nfir.k snb.t cnh.t— Literally, "like your goodness, as you are healthy and alive": see

James, HP, 48; cf. P ' 3 (p. 73, below).

r jwt r.s— Heqanakht seems to be asking Herunefer to facilitate the collection of his

debts by Nakht and Sinebniut. The verb form is most likely the sdmt.fi with unex

pressed subject rather than the infinitive or a sdm.f with impersonal subject (jw.t(w): cf.

Pyr- 733b; Allen, Inflection, § 242). The sdmtf in Westcar 11, 15—16, is used in a similar

passage: h3 dj.tn p3 jtj c3 m ct htm.tj rjwt.n "Would that you would put this grain here

in a sealed room until we have come back." An unexpressed first-person subject—r

jwt.j) r.s "until I have come for it"—is unlikely: Letters I and II indicate that Heqa

nakht intends to have his agents use this grain, or its equivalent, in bargaining for the

lease of land.

http://mjb.fi

http://sdm.tw.fi

http://sdmt.fi


III 6 ^ | 2 — T h e determinative argues for the reading jpyt despite the later use of , fi as a

spelling of hq3t (Gardiner, EG, § 266, 1). See the discussion on pp. 144—45.

K3t — literally perhaps "weighed," but the looser meaning "measured" is also possible

(cf. Wb. Ill, 223,9-11).

cn.t—Janssen, Commodity Prices, 155 and n. 101, argues for the meaning "mended," but

the determinative supports the interpretation of James (HP, 49) and Cerny (cited by

Janssen).

btj 15 m hwt-h33 —There are stray flecks of red ink under the lower right of btj and the

upper right of m, but no erasure is evident. The preposition m is written over an erased

sign in black ink, perhaps a partially-completed hr. The determinative of hwt is certainly

© rather than the o transcribed by James: cf. the textual note to I vo. 1 dd-swt, above.

ill 7 swnw-sbkww — For the reading, see the discussion on p. 123.

ill 7-8 ntt m sp3t-m3t ... dmd 38 13.5 — A consecutive version of the usual list form of the ac

counts (cf., e.g., AccountVI).

Ill 8 sn.fi—The top of the sn sign is written over an erasure, the top of an original sn sign

begun too far to the left.

dd.f— See the the discussion on p. 94.

hbnt— See Altenmuller and Moussa, SAK 18 (1991), 45.The exchange rate establishes

the relative value of emmer as two-thirds that of barley: see James, HP, 49.

hr btj 3 — The erasure of the palimpsest beneath these words seems to have coarsened

the surface of the papyrus, causing the scribe's brush to skip and the ink to soak into

the papyrus and to run. As a result, the form of most of these signs is irregular and

blurred.

Ill vo. 1 hnc tm rdj cm —Written over an erasure extending from the top of the first sign to the

top of the m of cm. The extra element visible in the middle of the second sign of rdj is

probably part of the erased text; the stroke across the forward leg of the m of cm is ap

parently meaningless, perhaps from a slip of the brush. After rdj the scribe originally

wrote cm.tw, without determinative, then corrected the suffix tw to the "speaking-

man" determinative by drawing two thick verticals through both signs (for the original

w, cf. the form at the end of III i ) .The emended verb form is probably the infinitive

(Gardiner, EG, § 303).

Letter IV

IV vo. 1-2 The traces below the seated-man sign of IV vo. 2 are part of the palimpsest. As James

noted (HP, 51), these two addresses were written by different scribes. Pace James,

however, there is no reason to suspect that the hand of vo. 2 is different from that of

the recto: compare the £-sign in IV 4 and the seated-man sign in IV 2. James (HP,

52) suggested that an original address to the elder Sitnebsekhtu had been inscribed

above vo. 2 and subsequently erased, but the only erasures visible on the verso are

those of the palimpsest. IV vo. 2 grg is thus the address written by the letter's scribe,

despite the fact that the letter itself was written to Sitnebsekhtu; for a similar practice,

cf. LRL 21: Janssen, JEA 73 (1987), 166. Following Winlock (Deir el Bahri, 59), James

interpreted vo. 1 as part of the palimpsest, but this is unlikely, since the rest of the

original was upside down with respect to vo. 1 and thoroughly erased. The initial

sign of vo. 2, which James read as pi_, is almost certainly a ligature for <yL: there are

no other examples of the hieratic hand of this address, but the final portion of the

sign (lower right) extends forward horizontally after the downward stroke of the leg,

http://sn.fi

B. TEXTUAL NOTES 5 I

a feature absent from hieratic forms of pi_ alone; compare the similar ligature in II 3

and III 6. The addressee of vo. 1 was thus a feminine (j)mt-r pr—most likely, therefore,

the Sitnebsekhtu mentioned in IV 1. Only a few traces remain below this title. These

do not suit the signs of the name z3t-nb-shtw, but they are compatible with the title

(j)mt-r pr n sncw (Fischer, Varia, 70, 78; Ward, Feminine Titles, 4), and the name itself

could fit in the lacuna to just above the (lost) bottom of the sheet. The "workshop"

of which Sitnebsekhtu was "overseer" was probably the flax-processing establishment

of which she seems to be the head in Account VII: see the discussion on pp. 174—75.

James (HP, 67) suggested the identification of the Sitnebsekhtu of Account VII with

the intended recipient of Letter IV

IV 1 [z3t] ddt n mjwt.s — T h e head of the d-snake is preserved. Despite James's transcription

(HP, pl. 9A), the downstroke across the feet of the mjwt-sigty is probably part of the sign

itself and not a ligatured <=•: see the textual note to II 1, above.

z3t-nb-[sht]w (also IV 2 [jb].t and IV 3 nd hrt) — See the comments on the arrange

ment of the fragments of Letter IV on p. 9.

smdt— See G. Posener, in Melanges Maspero I (MIFAO 66: Cairo, 1935-38), 331. The

first determinative is probably the diagonal stroke (Z5) rather than the determinative

transcribed by James, HP, pl. 9A (cf. James, HP, 126).

IV 2 [nfir].t — Judging from the amount lost at the top of col. 1, there is room only for a

single tall group and perhaps a low horizontal sign at the top of col. 2. James's sug

gested [wd3].t (HP, pl. 9A, note 2a) is possible only if |^_ or g9 was written as a

group and without a following complementary ^ j _ , but omission of the complement

is not likely. More probably the missing verb was written in a single group with no

determinative: this suits nfr (cf. Ill 5), or perhaps snb (as lower in IV 2). The space

available at the top of the column and the following jb.t ndm indicate that the damaged

sign above jb.t must be the 2fs suffix pronoun and not the bookroll determinative ofa

verb governing jb. t. %

mj.t wj snb.kw — The seated-man determinative of the first-person singular pronoun

probably reflects the hand of a male scribe writing under dictation. Contrast the nor

mal use of the seated woman for the first-person singular suffix (22 of 28 instances) in

LRL 37, probably written by a woman (Janssen, JEA 73 (1987), 167): J. Cerny, Late

Ramesside Letters (BA 9: Brussels, 1939), 57—60.

IV 2-3 [nfrj-jbdw — Goedicke (Studies, 100) restores "[Gereg]" without comment, but the ex

tant traces do not support this reading. James read the first preserved sign in IV 3 as the

walking legs (see HP, 51—52), but its form does not have the long forward leg of this

sign in IV 3. The trace above looks like that of a horizontal like hieratic *~~» or the

lower part ofa sign like hieratic -«=*-, which James restored with a question mark. The

half-group lacuna James gives above this is probably too much (see the textual note to

IV 2 [nfir].t, above). Since Account VII contains both the name of Sitnebsekhtu and an

instruction (cf. IV 3 tn-nw-r "memorandum") to Neferabdu, the damaged name can be

restored as ^ xLo-sLI-The lacuna at the bottom of IV 2 is sufficient for the signs of nfr

written as a group (cf. Ill 5): see the textual note to IV 3—4, below. The traces at the top

of IV 3 could be those of the ~~$e sign, made with a vertical stroke (lost), horizontal, and

caret-shaped bottom. For the form, cf. Moller, Pal. I, 314 (Peas.); Simpson, Papyrus Reis

ner I, 99 (N14), and Papyrus Reisner IV, 22 (N14); Goedicke, OHP, 24a (N14, Abusir).

For the reading of the name, see the textual note to VII 15.

IV 3 rdj.n.j) jwt (also IV 4 3w.[fi] m) — See the comments on the arrangement of the frag

ments of Letter IV on p. 9.


IV 3-4 z3-[hwt-hr] — James (HP, 52) thought the space below z3 in IV 3 and above the first

preserved sign (r) in IV 4 insufficient for "a long name" such as z3-nb-njwt or z3-hwt-hr,

but the spelling of hwt-hr in IV 2 as a single group would extend not much lower in

the lacuna at the end of IV 3 than the preserved end of IV 1, and the seated-man de

terminative easily fills the available space at the top of IV 4: there are two traces of ink

above the r at the top of IV 4 that suit the vertical stroke and forward leg of this sign.

Sihathor was the messenger of previous correspondence to Heqanakht (see I vo. 1) and

was to have returned with Letters I and II (I vo. 14, II vo. 1).

IV4 m rdj cm jb n grghr [ ... ]fi—James (HP, 52) restored hr [ddt.n.j nj.fi, with the is suffix

written as the seated man, but the scribe does not use this spelling of the first-person

pronoun elsewhere in the letter and the spacing between the upper and lower fragments

indicated by the restorations in cols. 1—3 is too small for this restoration. The spacing is

also too large for ddt.n.j) n, with unwritten first-person suffix, judging from the two ex

amples of ddt n in IV i.This restoration must therefore be considered doubtful. A word

such as [k3t]f"his work" or []rt].fi"his duty" might fill the lacuna. The construction of the

main clause is apparently the third-person counterpart of the more usual imperative m cm

jb.k (I vo. 13, 17), also plural m cm nj) jb.tn (II 32) and impersonal hnc tm rdj cmjb (III vo.

1) (see the textual notes). As James saw (HP, no) , the form of cm is probably that of the

infinitive, as in III vo. 1: literally, "don't allow swallowing of the heart of Gereg," or per

haps "don't allow swallowing of the heart for Gereg."

hrt — The scribe dipped his brush after writing the bookroll determinative, then re

inked the bookroll before continuing.

r 3w.[f] — The sign of the preposition r is oddly made, but the reading must be correct;

a determinative such as that in I vo. 16/19 and II 2/vo. 6 is impossible. The gap below

the plural strokes is probably too large for r 3w to have been written without a suffix

pronoun (Wb. I, 4, 13).

A c c o u n t V

V 1 There is a spot of ink to the right of this line, lighter than that of the first sign of the

line, perhaps accidental. For the ruling lines on the recto, see p. 10.

V 2 As Baer realized ("Letters," 18), this line probably serves as a general title for three sepa

rate parts of Account VAi:V 3-10 (a),V n (b), andV 12-16 (c): see the discussion on p.

n .

V 3/18 swd.n — T h e caveat inV 25—29 indicates that the verb denotes the transfer of responsi

bility ("entrust") rather than its normal meaning of the formal transfer of ownership

("bequeath"), as James saw (HP, 55).

V 4 jtj m3 mh 112 — T h e spelling separates the two elements of the usual form p", indica

ting that the latter is to be read jtj-mh rather than simply mh. For the first numeral,

written over a correction, see James, HP, 56.

V 5 btj m3t 63 — T h e first word is written over a correction: from the shape and position of

the traces, the scribe began to write jtj-(mh), perhaps the entry subsequently relegated

to V 6. For the gender of btj see James, HP, 67, and the textual note to VII vo. 1. The

form of the numeral "60," though badly made, is comparable to that in VII 12. The final

numeral is written over an erased "0.5": i.e., "62.5" emended to "63" (see James, HP,

56).

V 6 jtj-mh 10 — James (HP, 5 8) adopted Gunn's restoration [jtj-mh js], followed in all sub

sequent translations. The extant traces and the size of the lacuna, however, suit only the

http://nj.fi


two sequential groups of jtj-mh; the determinative is placed so as to align with those in

the two lines above. As Gunn evidently suspected, however, this fine probably denotes

barley from the previous harvest, in contrast to the "new" grain specified inV 4—5.

V 7-8 s3rw — See the discussion on p. 172.

V9-10 dmd pw nj) 1100 — These words were written in two columns and indented from the

right probably because they refer to lines 7—8 rather than to the preceding section as a

whole.The determinative is written over an erased •=>.Judging from the form of I inV

31, the short horizontal above this sign is probably *»•«», as James transcribed it, rather than

a separate "cap" of the J sign, despite its abnormally short length (compare the second

*«"»* inV 45). If so, it is undoubtedly adverbial, referring to the sums inV 7—8: there is no

need to assume an omitted (s3rw) as James does (HP, 5 8). The spot of ink to the left of

this sign may have resulted from the scribe's brush accidently touching the papyrus before

the sign was made: a similar phenomenon can be seen in the two -~— signs ofV 33.

V 11 msw.fi— Since this line is a subsection of account VAi (see p. n ) , the suffix pronoun

probably refers toV 2 jtj-mh. The shape of the "curl w" was probably conditioned by its

position above the/snake; cf. the forms inV 3 and vo. 10. Goedicke's suggested msdfi(3)

"feed" (Studies, 94), though paleographically plausible, is otherwise unattested and thus

less likely than the msw.f of Gunn and James: HP, 58-59: Wb. II, 142, 1-2 = A.H. Gar

diner, The Wilbour Papyrus (Oxford, 1948), II, 206 n. 10. The amount of grain allocated

is also unlikely to represent feed: see the discussion on pp. 161—62.

jtj-mh 4 — The scribe wrote three strokes of the number, then dipped his brush and

reinked the last stroke before adding the fourth.

btj 10.3 — Despite the abbreviated form of its initial sign (contrast V 5/37), the word is

undoubtedly btj "emmer," as indicated by the red ink used for its quantity and by the

contrast with preceding jtj-mh "barley." The number is written over an erased "10," also

in red ink: the scribe originally began to write the number lower than its present posi

tion. The erasure also touched the lefthand side of the determinative of btj, lightening

that portion of the sign and leaving a vertical streak of black ink below it.

V 12 jr m jtj-mh jr.n hq(3)-nht n chwtjw.fi—The initial verb form is a passive participle modi-

fying jtj-mh of V 2: see Baer, "Letters," 18 n. 100, and p. n , above. The sense of jr m is

evidently that of Wb. I, 109, 17 and n o , 2—6; that of the relative jr.n ... n probably cor

responds to Wb. I, i n , 6-8. The grain and flax that Heqanakht assigns to his three

fieldhands were evidently intended as amounts additional to those recorded inV 4-10

and, unlike the latter, given for each man's personal use.

V 13-15 The name in V 13 seems to have been written directly after the final sign ofV 12,

with the same brushful of ink; the scribe then dipped his brush before continuing.

The numeral and the following word s"3rw are written over several erased signs in

black ink followed by an erased numeral of three strokes in red. The original text in

black probably consisted of a numeral, perhaps the same as in the emended text,

and—to judge from the use of red ink—the words btj 3, with the numeral in red.

Heqanakht evidently originally planned to give the three men, or at least Sihathor,

barley and emmer, then decided to substitute flax for the latter instead, in accordance

with the heading in V 12. For the amounts see James, HP, 56—57. Since these were

not intended to balance against account VAi (Baer, "Letters," 18), it is possible that

the grain amounts inV 13 and 15 are in fact "40.6" rather than "46"; but the ratio of

n o (V 14) to 100 (V 13/15) deduced by James argues for the latter reading; for the

form of the numeral "6," cf.VI 18.

http://msw.fi


V 16 3ht st3t i (m) mhcw — This Une was written with a fresh brushful of ink, probably after V

15, as James's numbering indicates. Since it is slightly higher thanV 14, it may have been

intended as an allocation to be shared by the three men; James, however, saw it as an ad

dendum to V 14, and therefore an allocation to Merisu alone (HP, 56; followed by

Goedicke, Studies, 94). For the reading, cf. I 7 3ht h.3 m btj 3ht h3 m jtj-mh.

V 17 This notation was probably written immediately after V 16, with the same brushful of

ink. The amount seems to be part of account VA3, but "lacks any specification"

(Goedicke, Studies, 94). Since it was evidently written after V 16, it is probably not an

operator related to the calculation of the amounts in this section. Goedicke suggested

that it "refers to 12 monthly alimentations or to an unaccounted for remainder"

(loc.cit.). The latter is perhaps likeliest, but it could also refer to the twelve household

units dependent on Heqanakht (cf. II 8-22).

V 20 [j]w3 3 — The space from the righthand edge of the preserved trace to the vertical rul

ing line (see the next textual note) is too large for just the <J= restored by James (HP,

59). The spacing would suit an initial LJ sign, but the word k3 "bull" is consistently

spelled without LJ elsewhere in the account. The bottom left end of the preserved

trace also curves to the left, unlike that in the other examples of e = in this hand, and

the trace itself is unusually high in the line for this sign. As James noted (HP, 59), the

context points to an entry for male cattle. The shape of the trace suits the left end of

the / T sign of fe^/r r jw3 "ox," though somewhat shorter than normal (James, HP Pal.

V4; Moller, Pal. I, 524 Hatnub; Goedicke, OHP,V^ Turin), and the spacing would ac

commodate the righthand portion of that sign and the initial reed-leaf.

V 21-23 As currently mounted, the fragment with the beginnings of these lines is approximately

2.25 mm too far to the right and 1 mm too low. The fibres of the verso and recto and

the ruling line on the recto indicate that the fragment belongs about 5.5 mm to the

right of the preserved continuation of V 21 and a bit higher, as shown in the photo

graph in James, HP, pl. 10.

V 21 jdt snj) m3 11 —The trace to the left of the first group probably belongs to the usual de

terminative j (for the form, see the textual note to V 26—27, below), which would fill the

lacuna before /« (see the preceding textual note). James's restoration of the second word

as sn[t] was apparently prompted by the abnormally high position of the *•*•* sign in the

line, but the adjective m3 points to the normal masculine snj); the preserved surface be

low the *~~> shows no trace ofa lost pair of dual strokes for the final consonant of snj.The

qualification snj) m3 may refer to the age of these animals (James, HP, 59).

V 22-23 These two entries list two further kinds of female and male cattle, probably animals

"raised" (mn) in stalls, perhaps for slaughter: Montet, Scenes de la vie privee, 113; H.

Pitsch, LA III, 1129 n. 4. James's "young" (HP, 59) is less likely: cf. James, Khentika, 61,

rn n bhz, probably "raised calf" rather than "young calf." The entry in V 22 was more

likely rnt [nt jdt] than James's rnt [nt k3], since the feminine rnt is normally followed by

a feminine designation (Wb. II, 429, 7); this also suits the size of the lacuna somewhat

better. The spacing in V 23 is generous for James's restored rn [n] k3, but the lacuna

cannot have held anything more than the genitival *~~* and the righthand side of the

<3= sign, given the traces and the normal spelling of rn and k3 (see James, HP, 59, and

the textual note to V 20, above). The numeral at the end of V 23 is written over an era

sure; the original numeral was probably "2."

V 24 (h)trw 13 —This line was written after V 29, judging from the position of its numeral,

which is squeezed in between the determinative of (h)trw and the first signs of V 29. To


the references for htrw in James, HP, 59—60, add Fischer, Dendera, 180; Polotsky, Zu den

Inschrifiien der 11. Dynastie, § 62; Abdalla, JEA 79 (1993), 250, line 6. These animals are

probably additional to the 20 listed inV 20—23, pace James, HP, 60, since only male cat

tle seem to have been used for teamwork: cf. Blackman, Meir I, pl. 3; Davies, Deir el

Gebrdwi II, pl. 6; Newberry, Beni Hasan I, pis. 11, 29; idem, Bersheh I, pl. 31 no. 8; Grif

fith and Newberry, Bersheh II pl. 8; Davies, Antefoker, pl. 5. The scribe originally wrote

the second sign of (h)trw to the left of the first, then erased it.

V 25-26 [j]r grt j3i z3-nh-njwt n [mr. j)-sw hr m]dt nt k3 — The size of the lacuna and the posi

tion of the g-sign indicates that the preceding jr was written vertically rather than in a

group; there is a small trace of ink above the £-sign that suits the bottom of the r. The

name lost in the lacuna in V 26 must be that of Heqanakht, Merisu, Sihathor, or Heti's

son Nakht, the four individuals superior to Sinebniut (see p. 113). Only the first two

are feasible in terms of space: the last two would leave not enough room for 1 •?> above

the mdw sign at the bottom of the lacuna. Of Heqanakht and Merisu, the latter is more

probable in light of V 28-29 hrfhnc z3-htj nht: see the textual note below. While Nakht

is "the one who sees to all my property" (III vo. 2), Merisu seems to have had supervi

sory responsibility for the workforce, judging from II 35—36.

V 26-27 k3 3q.fi jt.t.f tm.fi sm — T h e erased sign to the right of the final sign inV 26 is | : the

scribe evidently intended to write k3 jdt "bull or cow" (the latter ideographically: cf.

Blackman and Apted, MeirV, pl. 32) but changed his mind before completing the sec

ond word. The unusual form of the suffix pronoun of tm.f is due to a poorly-formed

and aborted first attempt (the shorter, righthand portion) that was emended (by the

longer, lefthand portion). Goedicke's understanding of the verb forms (Studies, 95) is

superior to that of James (HP, 57 and 60) and Baer ("Letters," 19), both grammatically

and semantically. In James's interpretation, the subject of 3q.f refers to the bull while

those ofjtt.fi and tm.f sm refer to one of the two human antecedents. In Goedicke's

more plausible analysis, all three verb forms are virtual relatives modifying (undefined)

k3: active 3q.fi, passive jt.t(w).f and negative tm.f sm; for the latter, see Westendorf, GmT,

§ 209b (p. 146).The verbs apparently refer to a bull that escapes or dies (James, HP, 60),

that is seized for some reason, or that is unable to work. Baer's interpretation is based

on the usual meaning of £5 « . . . hrf but requires interpolation of an omitted r of pur

pose before infinitival jtt.f"to take him (the bull) away"; James's understanding of jw gs

n swnt.fihr.fihas some support in I 16—17 mj-kjrj st hr.k m j3tw"Look, I will make it on

you as a shortage."

V 28 swnt.fi—The arrow determinative is slanted about 450 from its normal, nearly horizon

tal position (cf. Moller, Pal. I 439; Goedicke, OHP,Tn).The break at the top portion

of the sign makes the connections between the preserved traces uncertain, but the

traces probably belong to strokes representing the usual triangular arrowhead.

hr.fi—The referent of the pronoun is unclear, but the more immediate name inV 26 is

likelier thanV 25 z3-nb-njwt. If the "entrusting" of the cattle to Sinebniut entailed fi

nancial responsibility, the addendum in V 25—29 would be superfluous. Heti's son

Nakht bears half of the financial responsibility, although he is not directly "entrusted"

with the cattle: this suggests that the other half is imposed on Heqanakht's other super

visor, Merisu, rather than on Sinebniut.

V 29 htj — T h e second sign is a reed-leaf altered to | (James, HP, pl. 10A, n. 29a).

V 32 tr-zzt — A trace of the final t is preserved at the left of the lacuna. The determinative

was originally written at the top of the line, then erased and repositioned.

http://3q.fi

http://tm.fi

http://ofjtt.fi

http://3q.fi

http://swnt.fi

http://hr.fi

http://swnt.fi

http://hr.fi


V 33 To the right of the column, from the determinative of dmd to the initial sign of tr-zzt,

there are vertical dabs of ink and a diagonal stroke leading downward to the left. To

gether they probably represent an errant slip of the brush, made after the scribe dipped

it before writ ing the initial sign of tr-zzt. T h e scribe erased the diagonal before writ ing

the first sign of tr-zzt, but left the verticals because they overlie and are close to signs

previously writ ten. The dabs of ink to the left of the two — signs were probably made

w h e n the scribe drew the horizontal element of these signs. For the calculations see

James, HP, 60—61, and p. 148, below.

V 34/37 rnpt-hsb 8 — Goedicke's suggested reading of the numeral as " 6 " (Studies, 93) is improb

able. T h e numeral has the same form (two horizontal lines) as that of " 8 " i n V 39 and is

different from the form of " 6 " in V 13-15 (see the textual note above). Moreover, the

supposedly similar examples of 6 cited by Goedicke are in fact quite different—either

much shorter (Moller, Pal. I, 619 Illahun) or with pronounced vertical ticks at the right

edge (ibid., Bulaq 18); cf. also Goedicke, OHP, 619.

V 34 wd3t "balance" — See M. Megally, Notions de comptabilite a propos du Papyrus E. 3226 du

Musee du Louvre (BdE 72: Cairo, 1977), 69-78.The reading is established by P 16: James,

"Account," 55.

V 35 The numerals in red ink are writ ten over an erased btj (in black ink); the two leftmost

verticals have been reinked. A following amount in black ink, probably h3r 3, has also

been erased.

V 37 rnpt-hsb 8 — The date is writ ten over an erasure. The original text was probably zh3:

the scribe apparently decided to write the date after beginning the account of this sec

tion.

zh3 n jtj-mh btj ntj) r hntw — The determinative of hntw is probably the "sky" sign

(Ni ) rather than James's house sign (O i ) , since it has two clear horizontal elements.

T h e masculine singular relative ntj) resumes both preceding nouns: Gardiner, EG,

§ 511, 1. In Middle Kingdom literary texts r hntw means both "toward the outside" and

"forward": Leb. 82 and 131 prj r hntw "go outside;" Adm. 6, 10 dj.w r hntj " thrown out

side;" ShS 66 crq sw r hnt " H e was bent forward" (describing a serpent). T h e context

here supports James's "outside" (HP, 61), referring to grain owed but not yet recovered,

but the meaning "forward" is also applicable, since the grain was advanced to each

debtor. See the discussion on p. 163.

V 39 The number is wri t ten over an erasure, perhaps an original " 2 1 . "

V40 hq3 hwt htp-hnmw — The determinative of the title is © rather than James's n . T h e fi

nal numeral is writ ten over an erasure, probably an original "0.2."

V 41 htj-c3 — T h e break below the c3 sign preserves vertical traces of ink on both sides, not

noted by James. These undoubtedly belong to another sign or signs. The shape and

context indicate a short stroke, somewhat wider than normal.

V 42 The numeral in red is writ ten over an erasure, also in red. The original seems to have

been the sign for 5 heqat, altered to that for 5 sacks.

V 43-44 There is a large mark somewhat like a ligatured n.k between these two lines and in

front of their seated-man determinatives. Since it appears to have been at least partly

erased, it may be merely a slip of the scribe's brush, unless it was meant as an insertion

mark for the entry in col. 46.

V 46 z3-mjtnwtj) hnt-hty-htp h3r 30 — This column was writ ten after the totals in lines 4 7 -

48, and the latter two lines then emended: see the next two textual notes. T h e scribe

dipped his brush before making the lefthand element of the z3 sign (H8) .The words

B. TEXTUAL NOTES 57

h3r 30 are written in red ink, the notation for which is omitted in James's transcription

(HP, pl. 11 A).The second sign of the first name is a—A: hence not m c tnwtj).

V 47 As James saw (HP, 61), the total for emmer, in red, was emended from an original

" 11.2/4" to "41.2/4" to reflect the additional entry of col. 46. Pace James's comments,

however, the emendation was made by erasing the original number, also in red, and

writing the present sum, not by merely adding the sign for "30."

V 48 The numeral "70" is written over an erased "40." The original numeral had the normal

hieratic form «—3^.

V 50 htj pg — As James noted (HP, 135), a parallel to this otherwise unattested name is nfr

Pg (HP, pl. 24). James read f»g as the word "scribe" ("Khety the Scribe," "Nefer the

Scribe"), and suggested that the unusual word order with title second was a means of

distinguishing individuals with very common names. While plausible, this theory is

contradicted by V 40 hq3-hwt htp-hnmw, where the title precedes a name equally as

common as htj and nfr in the Middle Kingdom. Rather than a title, the sign fig may be

a writing of the adjective tms "ruddy" as a distinguishing feature ("Kheti/Nefer the

Ruddy"): cf. Ranke, PN I 278, 4 hty dnb "Khety the Lame."

V 52 mrw — There is a small erasure to the upper left of the rw sign, probably from an

aborted attempt to begin the sign too far to the left.

V 53 This line is written over an erasure. The scribe wrote dmd h3r (the first four signs of

line 54), followed by a numeral in black, before realizing that he needed to include an

additional entry before the total. The original total, of lines 49-52, was 7.5 sacks. The

erased numeral could be a partially completed "7"; there is no trace of an erased sign

representing 0.5 sacks to its left.

V vo. 2 The first three signs of this line are written over an erasure. The original text seems to

have been identical with the beginning of V vo. 3 (the word ht followed by the t3w

sign). The scribe evidently began to write the entry of V vo. 3 and changed his mind

before completing it.

V vo. 2-3 pr-h3 and wb3 — See the discussion by P. Spencer, The Egyptian Temple, a Lexicographical

Study (London, 1984), 6—7. Although Spencer may be correct in identifying wb3 used of

a temple as more than just its "forecourt," the broader meaning "temenos" for which

she argues makes little sense here, if the items were in fact stored in Heqanakht's house.

Her suggestion that the wood in these lines may have been stored in a temple precinct

is interesting but unprovable. Given the context, it is likelier that the wood was all at

Heqanakht's house: wb3 then denotes in some manner the front part ("opening") of the

house—which also suits the temple evidence adduced by Spencer, op.cit., 7—13—as op

posed to pr-h3, the "back (part of the) house." For pr-h3, see Goedicke, RdE 46 (1995),

210-11; cf. also pr-hrj "upper (part of the) house" in VII 14 (see the textual note below).

Golovina's understanding of pr-h3 as workers' quarters (VDI 1976 no. 2, 126) is based

on Mes N 35 w3h jmn w3h p3 hq(3) mtwj dd cd3 jwj rphwj pr"As Amun endures, as the

Ruler endures, if I speak wrongly, I am for the back of the house": A.H. Gardiner, The

Inscription of Mes (UGAA IV, 3; Leipzig, 1905), 22 and pl. 51; Gaballa, The Memphite

Tomb-Chapel of Mose, pl. 52. The difference in terminology, however, makes this inter

pretation questionable.

V vo. 3 wb3 — In drawing the last sign of this word the scribe appears to have made a poorly-

formed left vertical, which he then corrected by drawing another vertical over it before

drawing the horizontal element. The original lefthand vertical was not erased.

V vo. 5 The first word (hi) is written over an erasure. The stroke below c3 is small, but the par

allel inV vo. 10 indicates that it is in fact a numeral.


V vo. 6 The ink mark above the "curl w" (Z7) appears to be an aborted start of this sign too

high in the line and too far to the left.

V vo. 7 t_3rt nt trt m s3w mc3c 60 — For t3rt see Jacquet-Gordon, Les noms des domaines funeraires,

46; A.R. Schulman, BES 1 (1979), 29-40; D.Jones, A Glossary of Ancient Egyptian Nauti

cal Titles and Terms (London, 1988), 193-94. The phrase m s3w (Wb. IV, 404, 15/17)

suggests a valuation in terms of mc3c "upright ofa ladder" (cf. Pyr. 468b), presumably

of a fairly standard size. The extra tick behind the head of the vulture sign of s3w may

represent an aborted horizontal "top" begun too low. For the numeral, Goedicke (Stud

ies, 97) suggested "6," as the cubit measurement of the upright. While the reading is

paleographically feasible (cf.VI 18), the probable size of the structure makes "60" more

likely: for the form, cf.VII 12.

Account VI

Vivo. There is an ink mark some 3.75 cm above and to the left of the docket, which must

have been made before the papyrus was folded and the docket inscribed, since it would

not have been on either of the two exposed faces of the folded papyrus. Its significance

is unclear, and it may be merely accidental.

VI vo. 2 The initial sign has been corrected from EH to n by erasing the extra element of the

former and extending the lefthand vertical. The scribe apparently began to write h33

before noticing that he had omitted pr. a similar error occurs in I 3 (see the textual

note, above).

VI 1 The placement and the weight of ink indicates that mhtt was written before the deter

minative of hwt-h33 and not added secondarily as James suggested (HP, 65).

VI 2 The second sign (sbkw) is written over an erasure. The erased elements included the

vertical visible below the sbkw sign and a long diagonal that extends down to the right

through the beginning of VI 3, the latter apparently the result ofa slip of the brush. The

vertical and the erasure under the sbkw sign could belong to an original "emmer" sign

(M34): the scribe may have begun to write m btj "consisting of emmer" but changed

his mind after writing the first sign of btj. The correction would account for the omis

sion of c (of m c "with" = "owed by"), noted by James (HP, pl. 13 A).

VI3 The ink marks above and to the right of the determinative are accidental.

VI 4 The determinative is written over an erased "seated man" sign like that in VI 3 above.

VI 7 The dot of ink at the beginning of the line is too small to be deliberate, and is probably

accidental. The bottom of the second numeral, omitted by James, is well preserved.

Though it is somewhat far from the first numeral, the spacing is not significantly

greater than that of the two numerals in VI 2; it is also directly below the numeral of VI

5. The two strokes at the end of the line, 4.5 mm to the left of the second numeral,

were also omitted in James's transcription; though faint, they have not been erased.

From their alignment they were apparently meant to be read with this line, but they

could also be a separate notation, similar to the isolated number of V 17. For their pos

sible significance, see the discussion on pp. 12—13.

VI 8 st-ch — The questionable sign is more like V 12 3 than James's | (HP, 65), whose

hieratic form has a pronounced vertical element and lacks the left tick visible here

(Moller, Pal. I, 181; Goedicke, OHP, F36; Arnold, Control Notes, 41 F36). It is also unlike

the W sign, whose bottom invariably ends in a left diagonal, like the hieroglyph; this

also has no evident ideographic value, which seems called for here. The Y\ suggested by

Goedicke (Studies, 87) has an even more pronounced vertical and lacks entirely the

bottom features of the sign here (Moller, Pal. I 503). A form of 3 identical to that in VI

B.TEXTUAL NOTES 59

8, but without the two ticks, occurs in R.A. Caminos, Literary Fragments in the Hieratic

Script (Oxford, 1956), pl. 27, 6.

VI 11 The numeral is "10" rather than "2," as James suspected (HP, 65).

VI 14 This line was probably written immediately afterVI II ; the scribe refilled his brush af

ter writing the dmd sign. The final r of jrj), below the bookroll determinative of dmd, is

clear on the original papyrus: there is a defect at this point in the photograph published

by James (HP, pl. 13).The numerals have been written over an erasure; preserved traces

indicate that the original text was the number "53" (written III n | ) . The traces in the

break are probably the remains of the first sign of this erased number. They do not suit

a h3r sign as in VI 20, and the bottom trace is too vertical to suit either the dual strokes

transcribed by James or the numeral "100." For the arithmetic of this total, see the dis

cussion on p. 12.

VI 12-13 Pace Goedicke, Studies, 87—88, the dividing rule between VI 13 and 15 indicates that ntt

m nbsyt belongs with the preceding line. The weight of ink suggests that VI 12 was

written after the original number of VI 14, with the same brushful of ink. The expected

feminine ending of VI 12 c3[t] could have been present in the lacuna to the left; the ar

rangement would be atypical, but was perhaps conditioned by the determinative of the

preceding word, which extends partly beneath the c3 sign: compare the arrangement of

mhtt in VI i .The relative h3t may have prospective sense (as understood by James, HP,

63), but most likely indicates simply the means by which the preceding amounts were

measured. The dot of ink before the determinative of nbsyt is apparently accidental. The

ruling line was drawn after VI 13, from left to right, crossing the bottom of the fip

sign.

VI 16 The father's name is perhaps to be read z3-zt "The woman's son" rather than James's

z3t(y): see Ranke, PN I, 428, 3. In the son's name the scribe has apparently written 99

rather than the expected 90 transcribed by James.

VI 17 nfr-qrr — James read this name as nfir-hwt-{h)r, but it is unlikely that the scribe would

have written only « ^ rather than the normal ligature for P^, and the initial sign of the

second element is more like J than the [J sign in VI 1. The sign below, which looks like

<=>, could be a simplified •&• like that of nfr in the first element of the name. The result

ing name is otherwise unattested, but apparently means "The Frog is good" (cf. Ranke,

PN II, 320, 19/21 qrr/qrrj).The father's name—perhaps to be read sj)-pw-tj "Which is

it?"—is also unique: see the discussion in the index of personal names.

VI 18 z3-hnt-hty nw — The sign James read as y is unlike that in VI 15 and lacks the custom

ary horizontal element of that sign, but it is identical in form to the preceding sign, and

the two together are the same as the pair in VI 11 h3y and 15 hty. Unless the scribe has

omitted the cnh sign by mistake, the ligature following is unlikely to represent # , but

it is identical in form to the ligatured 0 of II 34 andV 39. Since z3-hnt-hty is a com

mon Middle Kingdom name (Ranke, PN I, 284, 5; cf. James, HP, 137), the element nw

may be a second name (cf. Ranke, PN I, 182, 20-21) added here to distinguish this in

dividual; for the combination, cf. Vernus, Surnom, 55 no. 249. The scribe dipped his

brush before adding the final stroke of the "curl w."

VI 20 See Baer, "Letters," 10—11, contra James, HP, 64. Goedicke's suggestion of "total dues"

for dmd mj qd (Studies, 88) is unwarranted: V 47—48 clearly shows that the expression

means "grand total"—there, the sum of the totals of barley and emmer.

VI [21-26] Below VI 14 and to the left ofVI 12-13/15-18 are six erasures. Nothing can be made

of the first two (VI [21-22]). The third (VI [23]), opposite VI 15-16, probably consisted

of the number "53," written IN n | , followed by a vertical stroke taller than those of the


final numeral. The fourth (VI [24]) consisted of the number "13" preceded by a stroke;

the initial element is well preserved and cannot be the | sign representing the numeral

"30."The fifth erasure (VI [25]) is illegible, and the sixth (VI [26]) ended with the nu

meral "7." The fact that the entries in VI [23—24] consisted solely of numbers suggests

that these lines were not part of a separate account. Instead, they may have been writ

ten in the course of calculating the totals in VI 14, 19, and 20. The number in VI [23] is

the same as that originally entered in VI 14, that in VI [24] is the amount of full sacks in

the total of VI 19, and the preserved numeral of the final erased line (VI [26]) is the

same as the final numeral of the grand total in VI 20. The final stroke of VI [23] and the

initial one of VI [24] apparently represent some sort of arithmetical notation rather than

numerals—perhaps the equivalent of our "sum" line.

Account VII

VII vo. 1 btj nth1 — The abbreviated form of the sign for f is similar to that inV 11 and VII 1.

The relative adjective following appears to be masculine ntj rather than the expected

feminine ntt (for the gender, see Wb. I 486, 14, andV 5 btj m3t), but there is a miniscule

tick of ink to the left of the first t that may represent the feminine ending written

summarily. The reading QM ((hi is possible here but not inV 11, where the red number

indicates emmer, nor in VII 1 (see the textual notes), and this spelling of jtj "grain" is

otherwise unattested.

t3w-wr — The reading is established by P vo. 1: see James, "Account," 55. After writing

this name, the scribe refilled his brush, reinked its three signs, and then wrote the sec

ond docket (VII vo. 2).

VII vo. 2 z3t-(nb)-shtw — T h e nb sign was evidently omitted in error; there is no trace of it to

the left. The determinative of shtw here and in VII 9 appears to be a hand holding a cir

cular object, presumably a ball of thread.

VII 1-2 zh3 n btj nt[t] m [t3w-wr] hrw — A trace of the diagonal tick of the first sign of btj re

mains at the righthand side of the lacuna. Although the parallel in P 1 reads zh3 n ntt m

hrw, the placement of hrw "lowland" on a separate line here argues for restoration of m

[t_3w-wr] in the rest of the lacuna at the end of VII 1, and against the possible alternatives

zh3 n btj nt[t] m hrw "Written record of grain that is in the lowland" and zh3 n btj nt

hrw "Written record of emmer of the lowland." The fact that the scribe began VII 2

with a fresh brushful of ink also argues for the longer text in VII i .The trace of ink to

the left of nt is too low and too far to the left to belong to the second t of ntt (cf. the

writing of this word in VII 9), and probably belongs instead to the foot of the m sign;

the second t of nt[t] is probably lost in the lacuna. The order m [t3w-wr] hrw—i.e., "in

the lowland of Great Wind"—is standard: Fischer, JARCE 10 (1973), 6, nos. 4-5. This

heading indicates that all the grain entries in VII 3—7 refer to emmer; for the specifica

tion btj in VII 4, see the textual note below. For hrw "lowland" see Eyre,J£Ml 80 (1994),

69-70, with references to previous discussions.

VII 2 hrw — T h e form of the "falling man" (A15), with one arm behind the back, is some

what unusual: cf. the textual note to P 1, below.

VII3 The beginning of this line was written with the same brushful of ink as VII 2. The

scribe refilled his brush after writing the determinative of mjhr, reinked the final two

signs of this word, and completed the line with the fe'rsign and the number. The ink of

the number is considerably lighter than that of the h3r sign, perhaps because the scribe

paused to add or look it up.

B. TEXTUAL NOTES 61

VII 4 btj h3r 1 .g mjpt — The second numeral has been written over an erasure and then partly

reinked. Traces of two horizontals indicate that the erased numeral was "o.8."The form of

the emended numeral, "0.9," appeared "strange" to James (HP, 68), but it is apparently

only a ligatured version of the form in a contemporary papyrus (ibid., pl. 17, 12): both ex

amples are more detailed versions of the cursive form in II 23. All but its upper horizontal

was subsequently reinked, probably in conjunction with the emendations in VII 5—6 (see

the textual note to VII 4—7, below). The final word in the line is jpt, as James transcribed

it: the feminine ending is a comma-shaped element between the upper and lower signs.

This rules out Goedicke's suggested m jp "in counting" (Studies, 107); moreover, the verb

jp "count" is not attested with this determinative. The qualification mjpt also appears in P

2, where the feminine ending is clearer. If taken literally here, as "in the oipe," it would

involve an oipe not only larger than the sack but also, at 86.4—91.2 liters (see Appendix

E), too large for practical use as a measuring device (cf. Goedicke, Studies, 107).The paral

lel of P 2 might suggest that the two numerals are to be read separately, with only the

second, fractional amount qualified as m jpt: thus, "emmer, 1 sack—0.9 in the oipe." But

that reading would leave unexplained the initial amount of "emmer, 1 sack," since "All

the items in this list are supposed to be emmer" (James, HP, 68: see the textual note to

VII 1-2, above). The line thus seems to have been meant to record an amount of emmer

m jpt and not to tally emmer per se. Since the entire amount cannot have been literally

" in" a single oipe, the notation evidently refers instead to grain that had not yet been

transferred into sacks: see the discussion on p. 144.

VII 5 mjhryt h3r 3.2 m hr— Goedicke's proposed reading of mj hry t as m crryt (Studies, 107) is

ill-advised: the second sign is clearly Q—A rather than n— (contrast the forms in VII 3

and 9), and the third sign is not a ligatured -*=» (cf. the ligatured form in VII 3). The

word is evidently related to the noun mjhrj) "buyer" of the N e w Kingdom onomastica:

Gardiner, Onomastica I, 95*; James, HP, 68; J.E. Hoch, Semitic Words in Egyptian Texts of

the New Kingdom and Third Intermediate Period (Princeton, 1994), 150—51. In the present

context it may denote a place where grain was bartered. Its determinative, the h3r sign,

and the number are writ ten in darker ink than the rest of the line, and the number is

wri t ten over an erasure. The original text probably had no h3r sign: an original "house"

determinative is visible to the right of the h3r sign and between the vertical elements of

the rewritten sign, in very light ink. T h e scribe evidently dipped his brush after writ ing

this determinative and continued with the original number and the rest of the line.

Wi thou t a h3r sign, the original number can only have represented tenths o f a sack (see

James, HP, 117). Preserved traces indicate that it was "0.6," writ ten with the first dot

perhaps ligatured to the horizontal. The emendation seems to have been made in con

junct ion with the those in VII 4 and 6 (see the textual note to VII 4 -7 , below). James

read the qualification at the end of the line as m njwt "in the town." As Goedicke points

out (Studies, 108), this reading is questionable because the stroke found in all other ex

amples of the word/determinative njwt in these texts is absent here and in column 8

(the only instance James could cite as a parallel). Goedicke's proposed m ht, however,

also lacks a determinative (the bookroll, found in all examples of ht in these texts), and

his translation "in kind" is mere conjecture. The sign following m is undoubtedly <?• (cf.

the forms in I 8, vo. 2, vo. 13, vo. 17; II 36, vo. 4), giving the adverbial phrase m ^ " a d d i

tionally" (cf. Wb. Ill , 131, 24; Gardiner, EG, § 165.8).The same phrase occurs inVII 8

(see the textual note be low) .The two numbers there are to be read separately, but this

does not seem to have been the case here.

VII 6 h3r 20.3 — T h e second numeral has been partially overwritten with shorter strokes in

darker i n k . T h e original number was clearly "23," with three strokes as tall as those in


VII 5 and 7. Since the other reinkings carefully cover the original strokes, this emenda

tion was evidently meant to change the amount from 23 to 20.3 sacks: see the next

note. A similar numerical emendation made by overwriting without erasing occurs in P

2 (see the textual note below).

VII 4-7 The emendations in VII 4—6 involve a change of 1.8 to 1.9 (VII 4), 0.6 to 3.2 (VII 5),

and 23 to 20.3 (VII 6). The first two of these represent a total increase of 2.7 sacks, and

the third a reduction by the same amount, indicating that the emendations represent a

shift in allocations. The sequence in which the changes were made can be conjectured

from this and from the flow of ink. After writing the original number in VII 6, the

scribe began the next line without dipping his brush. He then seems to have stopped,

refreshed his brush, and altered the second numeral inVII 6 from " 3 " to "o.p" Next, he

erased the second numeral in VII 4 and wrote the new one. After this, he erased the

number in VII 5, dipped his brush, partially reinked the new numeral in VII 4, and then

wrote the new number in VII 5, followed by the new "house" determinative and h3r

sign to its right. Finally, he reinked the first sign of VII 7 with the same brushful, re

freshed his brush, and wrote the remainder of VII 7.

VII 9-12 The scribe dipped his brush four times in writing these lines: before VII 9 ntt,Vll 10

(w)d3t, the numeral at the end of VII 10, and the plural strokes of VII 12 s3[r]w. The pat

tern of brush dips indicates that these lines are probably to be read consecutively.

VII 9 z3t-nb-sh[t]w — The traces remaining at the bottom left of the lacuna and the spacing

suit the "curl w" (Z7) rather than the quail-chick of VII vo. 2.

VII 10 (w)d3t — See the textual note to V 34.

nwyt — As James saw (HP, 68), this word is the same as Westcar 12, 13 nwt; both occur

in connection with flax. James associated these with the word nwt "yarn" (Wb. II, 217,

3—6 and 8; Janssen, Commodity Prices, 437). In the present context, however, nwyt is evi

dently a unit of flax, consisting of 60 sheaves (cf. also the textual note to VII 12, below).

This suggests that the word refers to the bale of flax depicted in tomb reliefs in the

process of being tied up (see the discussion on pp. 172—73). Both nw(y)t"hale" and nwt

"yarn" undoubtedly share the same root, which may also exist in the word nwt "ball"

(Wb. II 217, 9), perhaps with a common meaning "roll" or the like: cf. J. Allen, in Relig

ion and Philosophy in Ancient Egypt, ed. by WK. Simpson (Yale Egyptological Studies, 3:

New Haven, 1989), 16-17.

VII 11 m wp n sfi-btj fih.t— The final group at the end of the line, which James did not tran

scribe, is probably j J . T h e larger sign is made with two overlapping strokes like p", but

it is more vertical and there is a trace at the bottom right that must belong to the ex

tended bottom of one of the long strokes, or to a separate "foot" (cf. Moller, Pal. I, 522),

features that the p^ sign does not display in these papyri. The smaller sign is separate, and

can hardly be anything but ^ .The first sign is probably ideographic forfih "loosen."The

word is apparently a feminine passive participle or 3fs stative. Despite its position, it

probably does not modify the preceding month-name, which is masculine in form as

well as reference (see the first textual note to II 32, above). Since this line is probably to

be read consecutively with those preceding and following (see the textual note to VII 9—

12, above), the group most likely, represents the 3fs stative fih.t j) "loose," modifying VII 10

(w)d3t, apparently a reference to the s3rw of VII 12, which were not bundled into nwyt

(see the next note).The alternative reading crq.tj) is less likely.The verb crq "tie" (Wb. I,

211, 19—23) seems to be used only of putting cloth or clothing on someone (for a Middle

Kingdom example, see CT VII, 258b); the verb crq "complete" is apparently not attested

before the Ramesside Period (Wb. I, 212, 3—4)—although this is clearly the origin of crqy

B.TEXTUAL NOTES 63

"last day of the month," which does occur in the Middle Kingdom (Wb. II, 212, 8)—and

in any case does not suit the present context.

VII 12 s3[r]w [n] mhcw 1020 hr nwyt m 60 — T h e only certain elements in this line are the signs

corresponding to n | ^J^[9j,II mhcw 1020. James read the sign preceding these (the

first preserved at the end of the lacuna) as ^— and tentatively restored the beginning of

the line as \_Pi\\: i.e., the three initial phonetic complements of mhcw. The space in

front of the first preserved sign is too large for just vPl\\, however, and the traces pre

served at the beginning of the lacuna do not suit either of these signs. The sign James

saw as 0—. is made with three elements, unlike the ^— sign in VII 9, and can be read as

the plural strokes ofa preceding word. Its position at the top of the line indicates that a

low sign originally lay in the lacuna below, most likely <*•**».The word mhcw would then

have been spelled only with an initial ideogram, as in P 3. The traces at the beginning

of the line, the size of the lacuna before the plural strokes, and the context all suit

I 9MM^P: thus, s3[r]w [n] mhcw"sheaves of flax."The word order—in place of the nor

mal mhcw s3rw (cf.V 7-8)—probably reflects the purpose of the entry, which is to tally

the number of "loose" (VII 11 fih.t: see the preceding note) sheaves rather than flax per

se. The sign above the numeral at the end of the line is probably =. rather than James's

tentative -=*-. The sign preceding it, which James did not transcribe, is a smaller version

of the determinative of nwyt "hale" in line 10, used here evidently as an ideogram for

the same word, complemented by the following ^.The partially-preserved sign preced

ing it looks like a stroke. It could be the end of a " 3 " or "4" to be read with the

preceding "20," but the lefthand edge of the lacuna to its right preserves two overlap

ping traces that do not suit an initial stroke. The traces are better suited to the sign <?>:

this fits in the lacuna, and the two signs together are the preposition hr in its "distribu

tive" function (cf. Gardiner, EG, § 165.6; and Letter III 8 hbnt 1 hr jtj-mh 2 hr btj 3). The

abbreviated spelling of nwyt, and the placement of the numeral below the ^, are due to

lack of space. The final numeral could be either "6" (cf.VI 18) or "60" (cf.V vo. 7, tex

tual note above). To its right is a trace of ink not recorded by James. From its angle and

the size of the lacuna, this suits the end of either a cursive Jp like those in VII 4—5 and

8-9 or the final f of the numerals "100," "200," "300," or "400" (higher hundreds in

volve combinations of 100—400 and are excluded by the size of the lacuna). The end of

the line can thus be restored as either hr nwyt m 6/60 "by bale consisting of 6/60

(sheaves)" or hr nwyt 160/106 (or 260/206, etc.), "by 160/106 bales." The notation evi

dently indicates the number of bales represented by the amount of 1020 sheaves. This in

turn argues for pL rather than a numeral, since none of the possible numbers in the al

ternative reading divides evenly into 1020.' The final numeral probably represents "60"

rather than "6" (see the discussion on pp. 172—73), giving a total of 17 bales (1020 -r 60),

as James suspected (HP, 69). The line as a whole tallies the number of loose sheaves, and

the bales they represent, that were still remaining to be processed. The notation at the end

of the Une was presumably added to make the entry s3[r]w [n] mhcw 1020 "sheaves of flax,

1020" conform with the heading of this section (VII 9-11), in which the unit of measure

is nwyt "bale."

VII 13 [kmt.n.s h3r] 7 — T h e reading suggested for VII 12 in the preceding note implies a bal

ance of 17 bales, and this could have been enumerated explicitly here: e.g., [jr n nwyt

i]j "amounting to 17 bales." The arithmetic of VII 8, however, suggests that this line

tallied seven sacks of grain (see the discussion on p. 175). The restoration suggested here

is conjectural, but is based on other Middle Kingdom accounts: cf. Simpson, Papyrus

Reisner I, 83.

The nearest whole number is 6.375 (1020 -r 160), involving an improbable fraction ofa bale.


VII 14 [ntt m] pr-hrj — Despite James's certainty (HP, 69), the second preserved group in this

line is not J^, since that group is not ligatured elsewhere in these papyri (II 38;V vo.

9—10) and shows a clear vertical element, missing here (cf. also Moller, Pal. I, 521).The

ligature here is undoubtedly , ^ , and is in fact identical to the form in I vo. 10

(wrongly recorded as I in James, HP, Pal. 10 R).The trace that follows is not the a— or

<=. suggested by James; it shows two distinct "points," probably the bottoms of dual

strokes (cf.VI 7). The word thus seems to be hrj rather than James's conjectural snc; for

the expression pr-hrj, cf. Wb. I 511,9 = Sethe, Lesestucke, 76, 9; for the initial pr without

a stroke, cf. VII 6—7. The lacuna at the beginning of the line probably contained two

groups rather than the one restored by James. A small trace of ink at the beginning of

the lacuna, before the first preserved sign, suits the fifil_ tentatively restored by James, in

its cursive form; the first group was probably [ntt]. The line as a whole thus records 10

sacks on the upper floor of some building. The fact that the grain is recorded by site

suggests that it represents an asset rather than a payment.

VII 8 [dmd] cqw njbd h3r 60 3 m hr — James's numbering of this column, and his comment that

it seems "oddly placed" (HP, 68), reflects his conclusion that it represents the total of the

amounts listed in VII 3-7. The placement, however, shows that the column was written

after VII 14, as part of this section of the account; compare the same arrangement inV

30-33. The flow of ink also indicates that the scribe wrote the end of VII 14 and the first

part of VII 8 with the same brushful of ink. James restored [dmd n] "[Total of]" at the be

ginning of the column, but there is not enough space for the full spelling with

complementary d and bookroll determinative. The difference in the weight of ink be

tween the final sign of VII 14 and the first preserved sign of VII 8, however, indicates that

something has been lost in the lacuna. The word dmd, written without determinative as

in II 23, would suit the available space. The traces above the quail-chick clearly belong to

s sfj despite James's hesitation (HP, 68): both feet and part of the body are still visible (cf.

the form in VII 15). The final qualification is m hr "additional," as in VII 5, rather than

James's m njwt "in the town" (see the textual note to VII 5, above). In line with his inter

pretation of VII 8 as the total of VII 3-7, James read the figures following the h3r sign as

"60.3." The first numeral could be either "6" or "60," but the larger figure is likelier,

representing the total of whole sacks in VII 3—7 plus the "3 additional" (see the discussion

on p. 175). The second numeral is clearly " 3 " rather than the "0.3" transcribed by James

(cf. HP, 68 and pl. 14A note 8a), and its position—below the first numeral rather than

beside it—shows that it is to be read separately ("additional"): contrast the writings of

"65" in I 12 and "13.5" in III 7 and 8. If the first number is "60," the entry in VII 8

probably represents the total grain available to pay monthly salaries rather than the total

ofa month's salary. For this interpretation of [dmd] cqw njbd, cf. Griffith, Kahun Papyri, pl.

17, 6 h3w hrt-c nt rnpt "excess of arrears of the year."

VII 15 s3c — Grammatically the form is probably the subjunctive, as Goedicke argued (Stud

ies, 109). For the placement of this column, see the discussion on p. 13.

nfir-jbdw — The same name, apparently of the same individual, occurs in Account P 6

with a similar spelling and probably also in IV 2-3 without the final w or plural strokes

(see the textual notes). It also appears in Simpson, Papyrus Reisner I, C156 and N22, as

J « . ^ J = a n d I-es. ~JK 2 , respectively; and in a Middle Kingdom graffito from Thebes

(Winlock, Rise and Fall, pl. 40 no. 1), in the form |.«_^ -£• Q I. These spellings indicate

the reading jbdw for the second element: for the determinative in Papyrus Reisner I,

compare the spelling of jbd"month" in I 15. For the name, see Ranke, PNI, 194, 22.

cqw — After writing this word the scribe partially reinked the quail-chick and deter

minative, but not the plural strokes, before refilling his brush.

B.TEXTUAL NOTES 65

m rkh-c3 [m wd]3 n tp-jnr — The signs from the beginning of the month-name to the

walking-legs determinative have been written over an erasure—presumably some other

designation of the time when "Neferabdu should start with salaries," which was subse

quently emended. Nothing of the original can be made out, but it was undoubtedly

shorter than the current text. The scribe may have first written only m wd3 n tp-jnr (for

the restoration, see the final note to VII 15, below), and emended this by inserting the

month-name (see next).

m rkh-c3 — James read fff as a group after the partially-preserved ^=* and above the

"divine" determinative. The "wavy" bottom of the f is preserved (cf.VI 11, P 13): the

sign undoubtedly began just below the extended handle of the ^ ^ . T h e top of the "di

vine" determinative lies to the left of the lower half of the f rather than beneath it. To

the left of the upper half of the | , and just above the determinative, is the end ofa ver

tical stroke, written with a new dip of the brush, and traces ofa horizontal element just

below the break. The space above, between the basket of the ^=* and the vertical trace,

amounts to only half a group. This is too small for the "fire" determinative restored by

James (cf. Moller, Pal. I, 394), and the trace does not suit the other standard determina

tives of festival or month names. The lost sign may therefore have been one of the

qualifications associated with the festivals and months called rkh "Burning" in the Mid

dle Kingdom: wr or c3 "Great" and nds "Little" (Wb. II, 459, 4; Luft, Fixierung, 168). Of

these, the preserved portion of the sign and the size of the lacuna suit only =-» c3. The

signs following m can thus be read as rkh-c3. Since this expression is followed by refer

ence to a festival (see the next note), it probably denotes a month rather than the

festival of the same name.

[m wd]3 n tp-jnr — The name tp-jnr is attested as a geographical term associated with the

god Sobek in a list from the temple of Seti I at Abydos: KRII 181, 16 (16A); A. Mariette,

Abydos I (Paris, 1869), pl. 44 col. 16, corrected by L. Habachi, Tavole d'offerta, are e bacili da

libagione, n. 22001—22067 (Catologo del Museo Egizio di Torino, Serie Secondo—

Collezione, 2: Turin, 1977), 68. See Brugsch, ZAS 30 (1892), 75;Yoyotte, BIFAO 61

(1962), 123—24. As used here, it evidently refers to a god—perhaps the nisbe tpj)jnr"he

who is upon the stone" as an epithet of Sobek in the form -2= (cf. Gardiner, EG, Signlist

l5*).This suggests restoration of the words preceding as [m wd]3 n "on the procession of"

(cf. Wb. I, 403, 3/14; Siut I, 274); for m "on" with feast names, cf. CT II, 356a, 357b; New

berry, Beni Hasan I, pl. 24, top. The lacuna offers enough space for only two groups after

the "divine" determinative of rkh-c3, but the first two signs of wd3 could have been writ

ten as a group. The phrase as a whole seems to denote the specific (feast)-day within "Big

Burning" on which the salaries were to be dispensed. The chronological implications of

this restoration are discussed on pp. 135-36.

Account P

P vo. 1 t3w-wr — The final sign does not look like the determinative 1=3 of the same name in

VII vo. 1 (also I vo. 10 sjnwj, I vo. 11 and II 4/5 hcp, II vo. 6 nbsyt,W!\ 15 jnr), nor like

the determinative UK in I vo. 9 sp3t. It may represent instead an elaborate version of

the sign = E , as James suggested ("Account," 55); this determinative is used in the name

t3-wr in an early MK ostracon,7 although that does not have the righthand tick visible

here (Moller, Pal. I, 334; Goedicke, OHP, N36).

7 Hayes,JNES 7 (1948), 5 and pl. 2, 15. Not gmj or s : cf. op. tit., 4 and pl. 1, 5; 5 and pl. 2, 8/13.The determinative of tZw-wr in Papyrus Reisner II E 2 is probably the usual 1=3, despite the transcription = c in Simpson, Papyrus Reisner II, pl. 8.


P i hrw— Goedicke's emendation (Studies, 113) is certainly correct.The sign here is appar

ently the normal hieratic form of A15 (Moller, Pal. I, 52), with both arms extended in

front rather than with one arm behind the back as in VII 2. The upper arm of the latter

form might have been present here in the damaged area and lacuna above the back, but

the space available seems too small for it.

P 2 m jtj-mh — T h e initial preposition suggests that the grain was not jtj-mh per se, but was

only tallied as such: see the discussion on p. 176. If Eyre's recent analysis of hrw "low

land" as land that did not drain well is correct, the fact that this grain was "in the

lowland" (P 1) also points to some other cereal, since young barley plants do not do

well in damp soil: Baer, "Letters," 6 n. 41; Eyre,JEA 80 (1994), 70.

h3r 38.2 0.3 mjpt — T h e left side of the numeral "30" overlies traces that do not seem

to be part of the palimpsest, since they lie between two columns of the original letter

(P' 3—4) and do not suit the recoverable text of that letter (see the textual notes on pp.

71—73). The traces suggest that the scribe began to write the numeral "50" (cf. James,

HP, pl. 22) but stopped before completing it. The numeral following "30" has been

largely destroyed. Extant traces show a clear lower horizontal, indicating either "6" or

"8" (the apparent lefthand "tick" of the first numeral is part of the upper righthand

portion of the horizontal, which has rotated out of position); the surface of the papyrus

above it is lost except at the very left. James opted for "6" ("Account," 53), but there is

reason to think it may have been "8": see the discussion on p. 176.The qualification 0.3

mjpt that follows is clearly to be read separately, unlike the similar notation in VII 4, al

though it was written with the same brushful of ink as the preceding signs; Goedicke's

reading (Studies, 112) overlooks the first fraction. For the meaning of this phrase, see p.

144.

P 4 q3t jtj h3r 20 —There are three dots above the CT>.. sign that do not seem to be part of

the palimpsest. The sign is probably CD-., rather than James's CD"-., apparently representing

jtj "barley." For the generic use of this term, cf. I 2 prt jtj.

P 18 w3t — The erasure to the right of this column is not part of the palimpsest. It seems to

have been written after P 4, with a new brushful of ink. Traces remaining suggest that

its text was the same as that of P 18, with somewhat smaller signs or without the f_.

From its placement, the column was meant to be read with P 4; its erasure was evi

dently motivated by the desire to move it farther left, perhaps to accommodate the

longer line below (P 5). James read the first sign as 01, but there are no traces of the in

ner diagonal or vertical of this sign (see O4 in the Sign List, Appendix A), and the

upper right has a clear cross-stroke. The latter suggests that the sign is / T , despite the

rather short "tail." The next sign is clear, despite James's hesitation, but what James took

as the feet of the £ is actually a ligatured . . T h e column as a whole thus reads w3t

with the "plant" determinative. The term is apparently unattested elsewhere, but its po

sition suggests that it is meant to specify the generic jtj' 'barley" of P 4.

P 5 qlt pr 1000 — T h e sign before the numeral is clearly n : Goedicke's suggested / T (Stud

ies, 113-14) is paleographically untenable. For ^?r "highland" see Eyre,J£:Jl 80 (1994),

69-70, with references to previous discussions. From the amount, this entry probably

refers to sheaves of flax rather than sacks of grain.

P6 jnt n nfir-jbdw 20— Grammatically, either the sdm.n.f relative or the passive participle

plus dative is conceivable (cf. James, "Account," 52, and Goedicke, Studies, 114, respec

tively; also Simpson, Papyrus Reisner II, 18). This entry heads a list (P 7-14) that

probably refers to payments rather than income, since it includes an entry for herding

(P 13: see the textual note below): see the discussion on p. 176. Neferabdu is therefore


most likely the recipient rather than the provider. The sdm.n.f relative is possible if the

sense is something like "what Neferabdu has gotten (by his labor)" (cf. Wb I, 91, 5-6 jnj

rjsw), but the passive participle plus dative is likelier, with the meaning "due to" (liter

ally, "what should be gotten for"): for this use, cf. Scharff, ZAS 57 (1922), 5** (12, 3-5),

8** (25, 3-4), 12** (41, 5-7); similarly, Griffith, Kahun Papyri, pis. 15, 40, 21, 4, and p.

53. The numeral "20" has been emended over an original "2", without erasure. The

original number was written with the same brushful of ink as the preceding signs; the

new number was made with darker ink, though perhaps without a fresh dip of the

brush.

P 7 jmw-n-jp — Probably a proper name, rather than James's "Ip's boat" ("Account," 54), in

light of the other entries: cf. Goedicke, Studies, 114-15. Ranke, PN II, 263, 15 jmw.s

(cited by Goedicke) is probably the same as PN I, 76, 4 (which Ranke read as wj3w.s).

Cf. also PN I, 75, 24—27 and 76, 2—3.The sign damaged in the lacuna is £~jj rather than

James's $l_ (cf. I vo. 2); traces of its two upper horizontals remain.

p 8 ch3-nht hrd — The trace after the first sign probably belongs to a ligatured _^r, with a

ligatured ° lost in the lacuna: cf. VII 7. The name ch3-nht is common in the Middle

Kingdom: Ranke, PN I, 44, 11. Pace James ("Account," 54), the entry in P 9 does not

require a filiation here: cf. Ill 8 and VI 3.

p 10 The initial sign in this line consists ofa diagonal element similar to that of the mh-sign

(seeV23 in the Sign List, Appendix A) and a smaller rectangle open on the left. The tip

of another sign overlies the left end of the bottom horizontal of the rectangle. To the

left of the following break are three further traces of ink: from their weight, they are

probably part of the palimpsest (see the textual note to P ' 2, below). The signs lost in

the break cannot be identified from the extant traces alone, and this in turn hampers

the reading of the initial sign. As James noted ("Account," 54), the latter has no con

vincing parallels. Goedicke suggested 2^ p3 (Studies, 115), but the absence of feet and

the tripartite "wings" make this unlikely (see G41 in the Sign List, Appendix A), and p3

elsewhere in these papyri has an initial complement. The sign is most similar to those

offish (Moller, Pal. I, 253—57). As such it is unlikely to represent either of the more

common phonograms jn (Ki = Moller, Pal. I, 253) and h3 (K4 = Moller, Pal. I, 257),

since the former has a different shape in these papyri (see the Sign List, Appendix A)

and the latter usually has a prominent nose, lacking here. If it is a fish it is therefore

probably ideographic for a particular species, some of which are reflected in personal

names (Ranke, PN II, 182-85). Of these, the likeliest here is perhaps K14 PPP, repre

senting the species Synodontis schall; the tripartite element could reflect its prominent

spiny dorsal fin. The Egyptian word for this fish, whc, is attested as a male name in the

Old Kingdom (Ranke, PN I, 83, 29), and the tip of the following sign, lost in the break,

could belong to a complementary B _ . Such a spelling is both unusual and unprece

dented, however; the Old Kingdom name, like the noun (Wb. I, 350, 12—13), is spelled

out consonantally.

P n hjmwl sbnw 20.1 — Goedicke's restoration of the signs following hjmwt (Studies, 115) is

paleographically untenable. James's suggested *«"«» is probable. The righthand portion of

a sign above it overlaps the leftmost of the preceding plural dots. The angle of this trace

suggests a diagonal, and the spacing of the lacuna would suit the crossed sticks often

used as the initial sign of sbnw "various" (Wb. IV, 441, 10). Although it functions as an

adjective, the word is probably an abstract noun from the verb sbn "mix" serving as the

second noun ofa direct genitive: literally, "women of variety." This explains the absence

DJ. Brewer and R.E Friedman, Fish and Fishing in Ancient Egypt (The Natural History of Egypt, 2; Warminster, 1989), 67.


o f a feminine ending here, as elsewhere (Wb. I, 440, 11). For the number, James's " 2 0 . 1 "

is paleographically preferable to Goedicke's " 2 1 " (Studies, 112).

P 12 jbw wr— As James noted, the second sign is unparalleled as a writ ing of the 1-bird

("Account," 54), which always has a horizontal top stroke in the abbreviated form G i *

(see the Sign List in Appendix A). It is also unlikely to represent the m3-hoe, since that

sign has a longer bot tom stroke and almost always (except for V 4) a horizontal top

e lement .The sign is probably L : a similar form occurs in II 34 ( ^ ) . For the name, see

Ranke, P N I , 19, 20; 20, 23.

P 13 h(w)-cwt— Pace Goedicke (Studies, 115-16), James's reading of the first sign as | is vir

tually certain. The second sign could be the reed-leaf read by James and Goedicke, but

it lacks the usual distinguishing medial stroke (cf. the form in P 12 just above). If it is

not a reed-leaf, it is most similar in form to the throwstick (T14: Moller, Pal. I, 457;

Goedicke, OHP, 37) and can be read with the following signs as ct^("small animals" (cf.

Gardiner, EG, p. xxxvi, addition to p. 513). The initial sign then represents a form of the

verb hwj, used of driving animals (Wb. Ill, 46, 20—21), here probably a verbal n o u n . T h e

compound as a whole is apparently an expression for "shepherding." The final determi

native then probably represents a sheep or goat rather than the "wood" sign (M3) read

by James and Goedicke. Though quite similar to the "wood" sign, it has an additional

"ear" and is comparable to the later hieratic determinative of cr "goat" (Moller, Pal. I,

138) or the more common kid sign (E8) without the latter's tail (Moller, Pal. I, 138).

Since the entry does not have a human determinative, it probably refers to the activity

of shepherding rather than a single "small-animal-driver."

P 15 2007 nch.w — This line was wr i t ten immediately after the preceding one, wi th the

same brushful of ink; the scribe then filled his brush and reinked all but the initial

numeral (£2 only partially). Since it follows the number, the final word is not a

noun of measure; it is probably the stative (3ms: Gardiner, EG, § 261) of an otherwise

unattested verb, source of the later n o u n used in flax measures (Janssen, Commodity

Prices, 364-65; see the discussion on p. 176). T h e spelling wi thout determinatives is

paralleled in the later noun: J. Ce rny and A .H . Gardiner, Hieratic Ostraca I (Oxford,

1957), pb 59 no. 1.

P 16 wd3t 4030 — T h e amount indicates that this entry refers to flax.

P 17 q3t 80 —James 's reading of the numeral as " 8 " is supported by earlier sources (Moller,

Pal. I, 621; Goedicke, OHP, 52), but these papyri elsewhere consistently use two hor i

zontal strokes for both " 8 " and "o .8 ."The reading "80" is supported by I 12, where six

strokes are used for the numeral "60." The placement of this entry also suggests that it

refers to flax rather than grain, and the higher quantity is likelier for flax.

P 19 fey — The position of this column and the fact that the scribe refreshed his brush be

fore writ ing it suggest that it was added after the entry in P 17. Goedicke's reading of CD--

the first two signs as u'' (Studies, 117) is less likely than James's fey. The first sign here

lacks the diagonal tick that is always present in this scribe's hand (see p. 80). For the ab

breviated form of the double reed-leaf, cf.VII 5 and 10.

.. . h-n.j) — T h e sign below the break is probably $j, as James transcribed it, although it

is otherwise apparently unattested in this form before the Second Intermediate Period

(Moller, Pal. I, 16). This argues in turn for James's reading of the name.9 Below and right

of the B__ of the preceding m c are three traces of ink whose bottoms are lost in the

9 The only other possibility would seem to be t£l — representing the divine name qjs(j) "He of Qus" (cf. Ranke, PN I 157, 28, and 333, 13—i5;James, HP, 138) and giving the personal name n(j)-qjs(j) — but this is unlikely, since only one arm is depicted.

B. TEXTUAL NOTES 69

break.10 From the quality of ink and their position, none of these can belong to the pal

impsest." The lefthand trace is written over an erasure that must also have been made by

the scribe of Account P, since it does not correspond to the columns of the palimpsest.

The lefthand trace is probably the top of the sign | , as James transcribed it, or else the left

and middle traces are the tops of the two signs 9j[; no obvious restoration of the

righthand trace suggests itself. Judging from the weight and consistency of ink, the era

sure and correction were made only after the rest of the name had been written, perhaps

before the scribe added the seated-man determinative. The emendation probably in

volved the addition ofa title, an initial element omitted by mistake (i.e., X-h-n.jj), or a

filiation. Given the rarity of the name h-n.j), the last is unlikely.

nj rdjt.f sw — The element between a-_A and the diagonal body of —*» may represent

merely the horn(s) of the latter but is more probably a ligatured ^: compare the liga-

tured form of py in II 37. James interpreted the verb form as the infinitive with

expressed subject ("Account," 53), but Goedicke is correct in seeing it as the sdmt.fi

(Studies, 117), since the construction with expressed subject involves the sdm.f Gunn,

Studies, 159—60. The parallel in Urk. IV, 892, 9 probably also contains the sdmt.fi, as Gar

diner suggested (EG, § 402):jw whm.n.j n.j) m33 qnn.fi, jwj m smswt.fi h3q.n.[fidmj n]

qdsw, nj tstj r bw hrf "I saw another instance of how brave he was, when I was in his

following: he plundered the town of Qadesh, without my having deserted him." Al

though the normal meaning of the sdmt.fi ("before I deserted him") does not suit the

context here, semantically the two values are in fact identical: see A. Loprieno, GM 37

(1980), 23-26, and Das Verbalsystem im Agyptischen und im Semitischen (GOF 17: Wies

baden, 1986), 61-62.

Letter P'

F' vo. i/P' 1 mr pr j(n)swj-sth — The title and name occur in the address on the verso and in the

salutation in the first column of the recto. The signs of the title are clear in both cases.

The first sign of the name, fairly well preserved on the verso, contains the traces ^ ;

the same traces, though fainter, appear in P ' 1 (see the next note).These best suit the

signs f=£ (E9) or \PL (E2i),less so ^& (15a) or 4^ (G39); traces of the tail that usually

accompanies the first two signs (see Moller, Pal. I, 143—44, and the Sign List in Appen

dix A) may also be present on the verso. The following two signs, which appear as a

group after the initial sign on the recto, are '| P, as James saw ("Account," 52): the reed-

leaf is unmistakable on the verso; the lefthand vertical of the "[ is barely visible there,

but can be seen more clearly on the recto. The sign that follows these occupies a group

by itself in P ' 1 and appears above the seated-man determinative in P ' vo. 1; its size and

visible traces in both instances are similar to those of the nw-jar. Taken as a whole, the

elements of the name most probably represent j(n)swj-sth "Seth's testicles." The word

jnswj "testicles" is attested in the Coffin Texts (CT I, 30b B4C; IV, 236b M4C;VI, 324J;

VII, i6oq; also singular jns: CT III, i24i;VII, 220b), twice in the phrase jnswj sts/sth as a

variant of the more common hrwj stPsth (CT I, 30b B4C; IV, 236b M4C).The spelling

T**»J J r ^ i n CT IV, 236b M4C, substantiates the reading jnswj and suggests that the

usual vertical order in which *«*~ follows '] \> is conditioned by graphic considerations.

This in turn indicates that the final sign of the name here is probably not the nw-jar

representing the dual nwj) but the testicles-sign <J5 (D279) often found as the determi

native of jnswj and hrwj in the Coffin Texts. The omission of the <*»*•» here may be

merely graphic, but it could also represent an early instance of the variant jswj attested

10 The black horizontal is part of the palimpsest B—4; see the textual note to P ' 4, below.

11 The middle trace is too high for the "ear" of the palimpsest pl_ whose bottom is visible below the break, and is of

a different consistency.

http://sdmt.fi

http://sdmt.fi

http://qnn.fi

http://smswt.fi

http://sdmt.fi


in Ptolemaic texts (Wb. I, 131, 12): the same form may occur in the related O K word

^ ^ 7 5 (Wb. I, 130, 15), ancestor of Cop t i c x c o y i "sack" ( W Westendorf, LA II, 1228).

T h e n a m e j(n)swj-sth is o therwise unat tested bu t can b e c o m p a r e d w i t h its m y t h o l o g i

cal coun te rpa r t jrt-hrw "Eye of Horus , " attested as a n a m e in the Midd le K i n g d o m

(Ranke , PN I, 42, 13); for Midd le K i n g d o m names h o n o r i n g Seth, see R a n k e , PN I,

132, 12; 284, 19; 321 , 29; 322, 4.

P' 1 r dd jn z3-mry-jnpw(?) hrd jn-[tj.fi n mr pr j(n)swj-sth — T h i s o p e n i n g is similar to that of

Let ter I. Traces of the erased signs are mostly clear. T h e y can b e seen on the papyrus

and in the pho tog raph on pl. 55, as follows:

(F=* - u n d e r P 1 fig; fp, l igatured

p — above and u n d e r P 2

<*•«* — below P 2 pi_

/gr - under P 3 H and the top of P 4 X—see below

^ - under the bottom of P 4 X

¥ Y — above and under the top of P 5 X

Pl_ - under the bottom of P 5 X a n d the top of P 6 ^ f t .

0 — under and between the bottom of the two groups of P 6 ^ f[

H — under P 7 a

[J*r] — lost in the break between P 7-8, probably ligatured

—* - under P 8 ^ 0

3£L ~~ above and be tween the two groups of P 9 -=* fifiP

"*~> — jus t above the first sign of P 10

fifL — u n d e r and be low the first sign of P 10, l igatured

1 C2 - under P 11 O

yt - under P 12 | J

IP - to either side of P 13 |

£3 - below P 13 1 and under the top of P 14 =M

35 — under and below P 14 =M.

Except for mry, the first part of the sender's name is uncertain. The space between jn

and mry shows a clear vertical (to the left of the lefthand arm of P 4 X a n d under the

foot of P 3 q_) and a horizontal to its right (above the head of P 4 X)- Although a title

might be expected to precede the sender's name, these traces do not seem compatible

with any known from the Middle Kingdom.12 As an alternative, the clear element mry

suggests a god's name in honorific transposition, and the traces preceding it best suit

/gr jnpw (see E16 in the Sign List, Appendix A). The vertical may continue in a curve

upward and to the right, in much fainter ink, to the left side of the horizontal of P 3

/W, and there appears to be a trace between the tops of the left two verticals of the

same sign that could represent the jackal's ear; the smudge below the middle vertical

could be part ofa short vertical as in I vo. 7. The name mry-jnpw seems to be unknown

elsewhere, but it follows a pattern common in Middle Kingdom names (Ranke, PN II,

226).The space between this name and jn-[t].f, most likely occupied by a filiation, is too

large for the usual egg-sign, or even the less common z3-hird. The visible traces are

very faint, but would suit the diagonal element of the ^ - b i r d (for hrd "Jr.") and the

top of the egg-sign below it.

12 The nearest possibility is | ® | hrj-h3b "lector priest," but there is no trace of the | sign, which should have been at least as dark as the two preserved traces.

http://tj.fi

B. TEXTUAL NOTES 71

jw hrt.k mj cnh hh n zp — T h e signs of this common epistolary formula (James, HP,

120—22) are situated as follows:

4_p - to the right of and under P 15 I I

-*§•- — below P 15 I i and right of the break, ligatured

•ft - above and under P 16 J.9

*fP - under the bottom of P 16 J, 9 and below it, ligatured

ifi - under P 17 X . form as in III 1.

The remaining signs are visible in the space below P 17 X; the • and © of zp are liga

tured as in II 35. The space between the seated-man determinative of the addressee's

name and the following jw is inordinately large, and there are very faint traces of a

horizontal above and to the right of P 15 I I that could represent the same element

found in III 1. James interpreted the latter as prepositional n "to" (HP, 48 and 119), but

the wording here establishes it as a dividing line.

P' 1-2 jry n.k hr-s.finb nn-nswt ntrw nbw — T h e first two words, at the end of P ' I, are visible

below the preceding ones at the bottom of the papyrus (J^> ligatured). The rest occur

at the top of P ' 2 as follows:

i-e»-i — from above P 1 P2 to above P2 CD-.., ligatured

fy - under and below P 2 CD-.,; vertical lost in the break right of P 3 Jr

I M — under the top of P 3 Jr and to its right

c«~3 _ u n cler the bottom of P 3 J# and P 4 d>.,

* \ — below P 4 CD-,, 1 [2] - to the right of P 5 a

P — above and under P 6 X§

^ ^ - under the bottom of P 6 7^1

4. - under the right of P 7 fe-.

For the spelling of nn-nswt, cf. CT I, 78I BiP;VII, 75b. For the combined form of its

first two signs, cf. Ill 1.

P' 2 [dw3.j)(?) n].k ntr nb rc nbj?) — Some 3 72—4 groups are lost in the vertical break span

ning P 8-11.The first four signs below the break are clear:

^ - below P 11 iXE 1 f - between and under P 12 fy 9

^y - under and left of P 13 P„.

The syntactic position of the ^3^ and its long upper diagonal indicates the presence

of a preceding ligatured *«««». The mention of ntr nh "every god" suggests that these

words are part of the salutation, though otherwise unparalleled as such; for a similarly

short salutation with the two preceding clauses followed by a (different) third clause,

cf. James, HP, pl. 24, 2—3.The lacuna before [nj.k must have contained either a verb

of which ntr nb is the nominal subject ("May every god [ ... ] for you") or a verb

and its subject, with ntr nb the object. The lacuna seems too long for the former but

is ample for the latter with a is pronominal subject: dw3.j) "I praise" would suit both

the available space and the common idiom dw3 ntr n "praise god for" someone (cf. II

31), if the is subject was unwritten (cf. Letter III, where the is subject is also unwrit

ten in the beginning of the letter, III 3—5). If this restoration is correct, the traces at

the left of the break in P 10 could represent the back and head of the "worshipping

man" determinative of dw3. The space of one group following nb contains traces that

72 2 . TRANSLATIONS AND TEXTUAL NOTES

would suit ^L p nb "every day" (under and below P 14 ^(HC); for this spelling, cf.

James, HP, pl. 20, vo. 3.

PM-3 j[r] gr[t] scb.k hmt t3 hmt 2 b3kt ddt.n.j n.k hr.s — Most of the signs of these words are

visible, as follows:

E°3 p — above and under P 15 iU

-«=- - under the bottom of and below P 15 Q__ , |, , ligatured a—, n SHOO

L'l - above and under the top of P 16 H H

pp - under and below P 16 I I I I , ligatured

• c) - above and under P 17 n n n n . , „ nnnn

- below P 17 nnnn-

The signs of the phrase 13 hmt 2 b3kt are preserved in the space at the bottom of the

papyrus that has not been reinscribed.The determinative of hmt is the abbreviated form

of the seated woman (Bi*: see the Sign List, Appendix A). The first two signs of b3kt

are ligatured: the final ^ is clear, as is the ^ * above it, and the traces between 11 and

^^>, though faint, suit a ligatured p^ as in II 11 and III 3; the absence ofa determina

tive is not unusual (Wb. I, 426).The signs of the relative clause occur at the top of P ' 3,

as follows:

(Pi — above and under P 1 ^PL, ligatured ***** ^~a yj n<n

$£ - under the bottom of P 1 ^"PL and the top of P 2 r> ft, ligatured; for the traces below and left of the seated man, see the textual note to P 2 h3r 38.2 on p. 66, above.

J ^ - under the bottom of P 2 n ft and the top of P 3 I I I I , ligatured

'I — under the bottom of and below P 3 I I I I , ^ ligatured.

For a similar abrupt beginning of the body of the letter immediately after the saluta

tion, cf. James, HP, pl. 24, 3; for grt in the initial clause of the body, cf. James, HP, pl. 26,

6.The verb in scb.k appears in the New Kingdom with the preposition m in the sense

of "be provided with" (Wb. IV, 44, 2-4) but is probably originally a causative of cbj

"amass" (cf. I vo. 3); the causative sense "cause to amass" suits this context as well as that

of I vo. 3, where an original scb(t) has been altered to cbt (see the textual note on p. 30).

There is only a trace of the a— at the top of the break, but the only other possibility,

snb, makes no sense in the context. The bookroll determinative is mostly covered by P

16 I I I I , but there is a large enough trace between the two middle verticals of this sign

to rule out **««.Tb.e sign for fj is comparable to that in II vo. 1, but with a shorter,

rounder top portion; its shape is similar to the hieratic versions of £ and n , but has a

clear horizontal between the upper and lower portions that these signs do not. For the

syntax of the following t3 hmt 2, see Gardiner, EG, § 261. The final word at the bottom

of P ' 2 is evidently an adjective modifying this phrase; the combination hmt b3kt appar

ently denotes a female slave (hmt) employed as a domestic or other household worker

(b3kt): for the two terms in the Middle Kingdom, see O. Berlev, Tpygoeoe Hacesie-

nue, 45-73 and 147—65.The final prepositional phrase is unusual, since dd r is normally

used for "speaking about" something (Wb.V, 620, 6), but the sense is clear from the

context; cf. I vo. 9 h3bt.nj n.k nb hr.s "anything I have written you about."The femi

nine singular pronoun of hr.s (and P' 4 jn.t.s) evidently resumes the singular

demonstrative 13.

P' 3 rdj.kjn.t — T h e signs of this clause can be made out as follows:

-<=»- - under P 4 rift

n—* - below P 4 n f t

B. TEXTUAL NOTES 73

^* — under the top of P 5 I

f[ - under the bo t tom of and below P 5 I

*^* - under P 6 ^ 9, ligatured.

This clause is the apodosis of the preceding conditional. T h e initial verb is a prospective

sdm.f: see p. 94. There is no trace o f a pronominal suffix ("||); it was probably omitted, as

in P ' 3 and 4 (see below).

mj bw nb nfr jrrw zh3.k — T h i s phrase, literally "like all the goodness your scribe does,"

is a more elaborate form of III 5 mj nfir.k; it reappears (with nb " lord" in place of zh3.k)

in later Middle Kingdom letters: Griffith, Kahun Papyri, pl. 35, 14 /16 .The omission of

I I T cnh-(w)d3-s(nb) after zh3.k follows the practice of Old Kingdom letters: James, HP,

129.The signs can be made out as follows:

[(S]£ - under the bo t tom of P 7 n P and the top of P 8 t ^

4.L ~ below P 8 J£\ and under the top of P 9 ^

^ ^ — between P 9 § and P 10 §

I - below P 1 0 1 and between P 11 H » »»

—» - below P 11 f^nn

-«=»- — between P 12 %p\

-««*- - under the top and right of P 13 ^c\{\

-<=- - right of the bottom of P 13 <pi\

q_ - above and right of P 14 p

ffj)] - b e t w e e n P 14 ^ and P 15 9©

%_ — under the bottom of and below P 15 9©

^* — below P 15 9©, partly lost in the break.

V 3-4 mj.k swt dd n.j wnn.k hr spr [ ... ] — T h e signs of this sentence are mostly clear except

for the end, which is lost in the erasure of the secondary text to the right of P 18:

fijp - the feet are preserved at the bottom of the break above P 16 n lpfifi — left of and under P 16 n •

The signs of swt dd n.j wnn.k are clearly visible in the space below P 16 n that has not

been reinscribed; fip, & , and <^» are ligatured.The remaining signs occur at the top

of P ' 4:

1 <? - above and under P 1 4., larger than normal; the form of ^ is

apparently like that of the ligatured fi^ in P ' 3, similar to that of Middle Kingdom literary papyri (Moller, Pal. I, 8OB)

^J\ - under the bottom of P 1 %_ and the top of P 2 »oo 00; ^ ligatured

y*- — faint traces below P 2 000 00

A. — the top and the righthand leg are visible to the left of P 3 I I I .

The context and the absence of r dd make passive dd n.j "I have been told" more likely

than active dd.n.j "I have said." The clause wnn.k hr spr serves as subject of the passive

(cf. Gardiner, EG, § 184). The context indicates that wnn is prospective; the construc

tion as a whole is the prospective counterpart of jw.k hr spr (cf. Gardiner, EG, § 326).

The end of the sentence consisted of some 3V2—4 groups from below the walking-legs

determinative of spr to the bottom of the numeral in P 6. This undoubtedly mentioned

the place or person to which the addressee would be "arriving."Very faint traces below

the walking legs may represent the preposition r normally used with this verb, and

traces above and under the numeral of P 6 would suit a ligatured ^ . These traces and

the space available suggest the restoration r [bw h]rj "to the place where I am" (Wb. I,


450, 13). If so, the sentences that follow indicate that the sense of mj.k swt is that of the

English parenthetic "though."

P' 4 jn jw zh3.k hr rdjfi] jn.t — Most of the signs of this clause are clear:

- to the left of P 7 nr?

- left and under the top of P 8 nn°

- under the bo t tom of P 8 70 a n d the top of P 9 f, n

- under P 10 ,(

- under P 11 £

- below P 11 n 1 ® — under and left of P 12 n; form as at the top of P ' 4

-=*- - under P 13 n

n—4 — above and under the top of P 14 n

- lost under P 14 n, possibly ligatured with the preceding

ft. - below P 14 n

*"£» - left of P 19 Jif\

For the construction and its use as a conditional apodosis, see Silverman, Interrogative, 45—

48 and 105—107. The form of the first *«««« is similar to that of the final prepositional «*»»

in this column. Although the space between it and the preserved top of the preceding

reed-leaf is fairly large, an alternative reading of this sign as •«- is unlikely, since the con

struction jr jw.f hr sdm is otherwise unattested in Middle Egyptian. For the omission of the

feminine singular subject of jn.t, see the textual note to P ' 3, above.

jmj dj.t n hrd n cnh.f i—This clause was begun with a fresh dip of the brush. The signs

are readily visible as follows:

B — 4 - below and right of P 19 L—

Pl_ - above, right of, and partly under P 19 fy, top lost in the break

0 — 4 — under the bo t tom and right of P 19 p

Q — 4 — under and right of P 19 *««»

«=» - right of P 19 %_

o"*** - above and right of P 19 -»-

•=*** — under the top and right of P 19 -*=»

•o- — under the bo t tom and right of P 19 -*=>-

•=> - under and right of P 19 Q—A

y^_ — under and right of P 19 —*

^ — under and right of P 19 4=-

The remaining signs are visible below P 19. The Ijjfi of cnh.fi is ligatured, and the

seated-man determinative of this name is writ ten at the very bot tom of the papyrus.

T h e te rm hrd here probably refers to a household servant: see O. Berlev, "K coiiMa.ihHofi

TepMHHOJiorMH apeBHero Emma (On the Social Terminology of Ancient Egypt)," in

Jfipesiiuu Eeuneni u gpeennn Acppuna (Moscow, 1967), 12-13.

P' 5 jh ntfijn.fi n.j fit?] — T h e signs of this final clause are larger and more widely separated

than normal, probably due to" the desire to lengthen the final column: a similar motive

can be seen in the final word of II 44 (see the textual note on p. 47) .The signs are ar

ranged as follows:

P - left of P i , *

© - under P 2 ° D

http://nh.fi

http://nh.fi

http://ntfijn.fi

B.TEXTUAL NOTES 75

J^5 - below P 2 CD"--, ligatured

I. - under and left of P 19 $[_

^*« ~~ under P 19 J r , ligatured (see below)

fe - below P 19 # , ligatured

The *»»•» of *fifi)% has a pronounced slant downward at the left and the body of the —*» is

very faint, but the ligature can hardly represent anything else; HZS, is improbable. The

"tm. in the following ligature is similarly though less radically slanted; cf. also the liga

tured form of J^> in III 1. There are very faint traces of ink at the top of the break

below the final ligature that could represent the '1 of the pronominal object s[t], but the

pronominal referent may also have been omitted, as it is in the preceding jmj dj.t. T h e

"participial statement" is not otherwise attested after jh (Vernus, Future at Issue, 101),

but the meaning seems clear from the context and suits the usual value of this particle

in Middle Egyptian (Vernus, Future at Issue, 106-11).

Fragments

A 3 pry... — From the context, probably Wb. I, 525, 1 = Peet, Rhind Mathematical Papyrus,

63 and pl. J (Problem 28) .The verb form is either 3ms stative or a passive participle. It

was probably followed by a prepositional phrase such as jmfior n.f (for the latter, cf. C T

VI 343p: Allen, Genesis, 77); a small trace of ink at the left of the papyrus would suit the

bot tom of the reed-leaf ofjmfi.

A 4 t_3bt — The determinative CD-., was originally begun farther to the right and subse

quently erased and repositioned (with the same brushful of ink) when the scribe

realized he had not left enough room for the tick.

A 5 h3r hr.fi— T h e traces to the right of the h3r sign do not suit James's suggested "grain"

determinative (U9).

A vo. 1 The traces are evidently part o fa docket.

C 1 ...p — Restore perhaps [X-ht]p.

D 1 [n]3 n... —Apparent ly the plural demonstrative, perhaps before a te rm for grain (cf. I 5,

III 4) or a designation of place (cf. I vo. 17).

http://hr.fi

3. Epigraphy and Paleography

THE HEQANAKHT PAPYRI exhibit a number of common epigraphic features reflective of their era

and physical media. Each of the complete documents was written on a single sheet of papyrus.

Heights are fairly standard, ranging from a minimum of 25.8 cm (AccountVI) to a maximum of

28.6 cm (Letter IV), averaging 27.5 cm; widths vary from a minimum of 9.1 cm (Account P) to a

maximum of 48.1 cm (AccountV). Both dimensions are somewhat at variance with those of other

Middle Kingdom papyri, whose sheets have a full height of 30—33 cm and a maximum width of

38-42 cm.1 The width of AccountV, however, is comparable to the maximum height of 48 cm cal

culated for Old Kingdom papyri, and it is conceivable that this document represents a full-height

sheet turned sideways rather than a sheet of aberrant width.

The signs are arranged in columns for continuous text and lines for account entries; columns

are also employed in the accounts for entries added secondarily (V 24, 46; P 19) and occasionally

for totals (V 9—10, 33;VII 8). Compound numbers in columnar text are written horizontally (I 12;

II vo. 1; III 6-8;V 24, 33), with a single exception (V 10).

Continuous columnar text shows the normal right-to-left order except on the versos of Letter

I and Letter III, where the columns are retrograde; the text on the verso of Letter II, however,

shows the normal order. The two different arrangements of the verso apparently reflect an orienta

tion to the righthand edge of the recto (the beginning of the document). The text on the verso

always begins at the same edge as that on the recto, and the use of normal or retrograde columns is

therefore dependent on which way the scribe turned the sheet over before inscribing the verso.

Letter II was turned vertically (verso upside down with respect to recto), leaving the righthand

edge on the right, and was inscribed in the normal order from right to left on the verso; Letters I

and III were turned horizontally (recto and verso the same way up), putting the recto's righthand

edge on the verso's left, and were therefore inscribed in retrograde columns, from left to right.

Both these arrangements contrast with what is seen in contemporary letters written in columns,

where recto and verso both begin at the right and are oriented the same way up.2 The inverted

verso of Letter II is particularly unusual in this respect, since the normal (and natural) practice in

volves a horizontal turn of the sheet, preserving the vertical orientation of the recto. In this case

the scribe may have wished to avoid the numerous flaws in the papyrus that he had encountered

on the lefthand side of the recto.

Most of the documents were written on unused sheets of papyrus; only Letters III—IV, Account

P, and Frags. B—C are palimpsests. The original text in each of the complete palimpsests was a letter

written on the present recto, upside down with respect to the new text in Letters III—IV and the

same way up in Account P. The original text of Frag. B may also have been a letter. It seems to

have been written in columns, but at 900 to the current text: when reusing the papyrus the scribe

apparently reversed the original recto and verso. Frag. C may have come from the same papyrus as

Frag. B; the nature of its original is uncertain.

All of the documents were inscribed in black ink; red ink was used for emmer entries in Let

ter III and Account V The writing instrument was evidently the standard reed brush: traces of its

1 Jaroslav Cerny, Paper & Books in Ancient Egypt (London, 1947), 8; Richard Parkinson and Stephen Quirke, Papyrus (Austin, 1995), 16.

2 E.g., Berlin 8869: Hieratische Papyrus aus den Koniglichen Museen zu Berlin III (Leipzig, 1911), pis. 2—3; Berlin 10447a: U. Luft, Das Archiv von Ulahun, Briefe I (Hieratische Papyri aus den Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin, 1; Berlin, 1992); BM 10549:James, HP, pis. 24-25; MFA 38.2121: Simpson,JLJ1 52 (1966), pl. 9.

nt\

3. EPIGRAPHY AND PALEOGRAPHY 77

individual bristles can be seen in some signs (e.g., II 35 zp, III 5 jm, P 13 numeral). Its nib was nor

mally about 1 mm wide but could expand with pressure to 2 mm or more; it also tended to widen

slightly with use, as can be observed in the course of the longer documents (Letters I—II). As far as

can be determined, the scribe used only a single brush to write each document, with the excep

tion of Letter I, where twice he either sharpened his brush or used a new one (in I 9 and I vo. 5:

see the textual notes on pp. 26 and 30—31). Full-size signs made with these brushes average about 1

cm in height. Somewhat thinner strokes and smaller signs were used in the body of Letter III, in

Fr. D, and at the end of Letter I in an effort to conserve space; larger signs, up to 2 cm in height,

appear in the formal epistolary opening of Letter III and in parts of Letter PJ

Most dips of the brush are clearly marked by the abrupt change from lighter to darker ink (see

Appendix B).A single dip was used on average for 21—22 strokes except in Account VII (average

29) and the continuous text of Letter III (average 32, but 23 in the account of III 6—8), but could

be used for as few as 4 strokes (II 31 ntr) or as many as 70 (III 8 jr grt rdjt f n.j db3 m mrht). New

dips normally correspond to natural units of text such as the beginning of a word, clause, or sen

tence, or a new column or line, but were also made within words and even individual signs.

The present text in each of the documents except Letter IV and the smaller fragments (B—E)

also shows erasures and corrections made by the scribe in the course of composition. These are

somewhat more frequent in the accounts than in continuous text.3 Corrections are of four kinds:

in order of frequency these are (1) changes in the text, including the correction of mistakes such as

the omission of one or more signs or words; (2) alterations of numerical amounts; (3) repositioning

of signs; (4) deletions (only in Account VI). After refreshing his brush the scribe occasionally re

inked the last one or more signs made with the previous dip.

Most of the individual signs were made with one to four strokes, but some have as many as

nine separate elements (E16). From the weight of ink and the overlap of individual elements (fea

tures visible under the microscope), it appears that signs were normally drawn from top to bottom

and, with the exception of right-to-left diagonals, from left to right. The number of strokes and

their order is generally consistent for each example of the same sign, but exceptions to these char

acteristics can be observed even within a single hand (e.g., N35, Z7; O29, Q3,V23: see the Sign

List, Appendix A). Ligatures occur in all the complete documents and Frag. A, constituting from

5% to 11% of all hieratic characters; they generally involve two or three signs but may join as many

as four (II 6 wnn.fi III 1/3 hr-s.f).

Some hieroglyphic signs have both a regular and an alternate hieratic form (the latter indicated

by an asterisk in the Sign List of Appendix A). The alternate form is usually more abbreviated than its

regular counterpart. It is also generally more restricted in use, as described in the following list:

A i * used as part of the determinative p * and as determinative in accounts, exception

ally also for the is suffix pronoun in II 29 (inserted secondarily in columnar text)

B i * used as part of the determinative pfl, twice also as determinative (II I I , P ' 2)4

D54* distinguished from the regular form by a tick across the back leg; used only for the

phonogram jw, and only (as preserved) in Letter III

G i * eight instances only, in pr-h33 (II 6;VI 1, vo. 2) and s3c (II 3i,VII 15)

G17* used primarily in horizontal text (accounts) and in groups of two signs in columnar

text (jm,gm, sm), exceptionally as a single group in columnar text (VII 8, P 19)

G39* used in filiations in accounts

I9* distinguished from the regular form by the absence of a tick for the horns; used

primarily in nfr

3 The percentage of textual units with corrections is as follows: 16% in Letter I, 10% in the text of Letter II (50% in the account), 18% in the text of Letter III (33% in the account), 38% in AccountV, 16% in AccountVI (not including the erasures in VI [21-26]), 18% in Account VII, and 17% in Account P.

4 Except in accounts, the normal form is regularly used with a following stroke (Zi). Compare the tick or stroke used with the abbreviated form in other Middle Kingdom texts: Moller, Pal. I, 61.

http://wnn.fi

78 3 • EPIGRAPHY AND PALEOGRAPHY

M34* distinguished from the regular form by the abbreviation or absence of the "head,"

only in Accounts V and VII

N37* distinguished from the regular form by the absence of interior detail; used only as

determinative (the regular form is used only for the phonogram s)

O50* the usual form of O50, distinguished by the absence of an internal tick

R4* abbreviated form used only in ligature with X i , only in AccountV

V28* schematic form used only as phonetic complement to R4*+Xi , only in AccountV

Y5* abbreviated form ofY5, used only for the phonogram mn. The fuller form is used

only as ideogram for mn "sheet" in Letter I.

Z3* except for P ' 2, used only in accounts, as a full-height group

Z4* upright variant of Z4, with two forms, tall and short. The tall form is used as an

abbreviated form of Mi 7—Mi 7 (yy) and as the numeral 2. The short form is used as

a variant of Z4 for the ending j in a group under t (Xi) or h (F32), and as the nu

meral 2 designating two heqat (two-tenths ofa sack). The slanted form (Z4) is used

as a phonogram for the ending j and as the numeral 2 in zp 2.

Aai* distinguished from the regular form by the absence of an internal tick; used pri

marily in ligatures with Xi or D21, rarely as an independent variant of Aai.

Similar variations can be observed for some of these signs in other Middle Kingdom texts.5 A

number of the alternate forms anticipate the standard form of the sign in later hieratic.' D54* ap

pears to be an idiosyncrasy of the scribe of Letter III.7

A. Individual Hands

In his study of the Heqanakht papyri, James characterized their hieratic as the work of several

scribes, as follows:

• Letters I—II, written by a single scribe (HP, 13); Frag. A in a similar hand (HP, 69)

• Letters III—IV and AccountV, written by a single scribe (HP, 51) in a hand different from

that of Letters I—II (HP, 45); Account P in a "not dissimilar" hand ("Account," 52)

• Accounts VI—VII, written in similar hands distinct from those of documents I—II and III—V

(HP, 62, 66)

• the address of IV vo. 2, written in a hand different from that of the letter itself (HP, 51)

• the address of IV vo. 1, written in a hand different from that of IV vo. 2 (HP, 51)

• Frag. B, written in "a rough, badly formed hand" (HP, 70).

These impressions suggest the involvement of at least three different scribes in the production of

the major documents: Scribe A, who wrote Letters I—II and perhaps also the account of Frag. A;

Scribe B, the writer of documents III—V and perhaps also Account P; and Scribe C, who penned

Accounts VI andVII.Three additional scribes may be attested in the two addresses of Letter IV and

in Frag. B, and a fourth in the erased letter of Account P.

James did not detail the reasons for his identification of these different scribes, leaving the

documents and the paleographic tables derived from them to speak for themselves. Handwriting

analysis inevitably involves a degree of subjective interpretation, even in modern cases. Statistics,

however, can provide some objective background for such interpretations. The Sign List in Appen

dix A shows each sign and ligature in each of the Heqanakht papyri, in both typical and aberrant

5 A I * , B I * G l * G17*, l9*,V28*-R4*+Xi*,Y5*: Moller, Pal. I, 33, 61, 192, 196, 263, 552 n. 1, 540. 6 Ai*, G I * , G17*, M34*, O50*,Y5*: Moller, Pal. I, 33, 192, 196, 293, 403, 540. 7 Cf. the Old Kingdom forms in the Abusir papyri and pBoulaq 8 (phonogram and determinative): P. Posener-

Krieger and J.L. de Cenival, The Abu Sir Papyri (HPBM 5: London, 1968), Pal. Ill (D54); K. Baer, ZAS 93 (1966),

3-4 (f). 8 Cf.J.J. Janssen,JEA 73 (1987), 162 n. 7.

A. INDIVIDUAL HANDS 79

I-II

III

IV

V

VI

VII

p

I-II —

11% (4/36)

5% (1/22)

16% (7/43)

33% (9/27)

64% (18/28)

76% (35/46)

III

1 1 % (4/36)

—

89% (17/19)

79% (19/24)

4 1 % (7/17)

8% (1 / i 3)

0% (0/21)

IV

5% (1/22)

89% (17/19)

—

7 1 % (10/14)

27% ( 3 / i 1)

8% (1/12)

0% (0/12)

V

16% (7/43)

79% (19/24)

7 1 % (10/14)

—

24% (6/25)

17% (4/24)

1 1 % (3/28)

VI

33% (9/27)

4 1 % (7/17)

27% (3/11)

24% (6/25)

—

42% (5/12)

7% (1 / i 4)

VII

64% (18/28)

8% (1/13)

8 % ( l / l 2 )

17% (4/24)

42% (5/12)

7 1 % (17/24)

P

76% (35/46)

0% (0/21)

0% (0/12)

1 1 % (3/28)

7% ( M H )

7 1 % (17/24)

—

Table 1. Degree of Similarity Between Distinctive Signs in the Heqanakht Papyri.

examples. By tabulating the similarities and differences between the documents sign by sign,9 it is

possible to quantify the identification of different hands. This procedure confirms most of James's

conclusions but also suggests a number of different alignments.

As overall impression suggests, and as James concluded, Letters I and II were undoubtedly

written by the same scribe. Their signs show the greatest degree of similarity and the least degree

of difference between any of the documents: of 70 distinctive common signs, 66 (95%) are virtually

identical, while only four show significant differences. Table 1 shows the degree of similarity be

tween all the major documents based on the same kind of analysis.10 This kind of analysis is less

conclusive for the fragments, since they preserve only a few distinctive signs. Frag. A is most similar

to the hand of Letters I-II and Accounts VII and P, and unlike that of documents III-VThe hand

of the erased Letter P ' cannot be judged on the same basis, but it appears unlike that of the other

documents—for example, in the "face" sign (D2), which seems to lack the upper righthand curve

that is standard in the other hands.

From the data in this table it seems likely that Accounts VII and P were written by the scribe

of Letters I—II: the signs of both accounts show considerably more similarities than differences

with those of the two letters (64%~76% similar). Letters III—IV and AccountV were almost cer

tainly written by a second hand. These three documents display a high degree of similarity in their

common signs (71%—89% similar), indicating a single hand, and comparatively few similarities

(o%-i7%) with those of documents I-II, VII, and P. AccountVI was probably written by a third

scribe, since its signs consistently show more differences than similarities with those of the other

documents (jaVo-\2% similar).

The table of similarities thus validates James's conclusions regarding the writers of Letters I—II

and documents III-V but suggests a different interpretation of the hands in Accounts VI-VII and P.

Based on the preceding discussion, the eight complete documents of the Heqanakht archive can

be attributed to three separate scribes, as follows:

Scribe 1 — Letters I-II, Accounts VII and P, and Frag. A

Scribe 2 — Letters III—IV and AccountV

Scribe 3 —AccountVI.

There is not enough evidence for this kind of analysis of Frags. B—E, except to indicate that Frag.

B was probably not written by Scribes 1 or 3 (see S29 in the Sign List, Appendix A).The hands of

the two addresses in Letter IV (vo. 1-2) are clearly distinct from one another. The few signs pre

served in IV vo. 1 do not look like those made by Scribes 1-3 and are probably attributable to a

9 For those signs that have features distinctive enough to be diagnostic: thus, for example, U9 but not the similarly shapedV3i. Comparison must also be tempered by the realization that individual writers may use more than one form ofa particular sign, even in a single document (for example, D2): see Janssen,JE/l 73 (1987), 161-67.

10 The first figure in each cell of the table indicates the percentage of similar signs; the following fraction shows the number of similar signs and the total number of distinctive signs.

80 3. EPIGRAPHY AND PALEOGRAPHY

fourth scribe, as James concluded. The signs of the name in IV vo. 2, however, are not appreciably

different from those of the same name in IV 4, and were therefore most likely made by the scribe

of the letter itself (Scribe 2), despite James's impression to the contrary.

Clear differences in the three main hands can be seen in some signs: among all three hands in

O4 and W18; between Scribes 1 and 2 in F31, N3i ,T25, and the numeral 30; between Scribes 1

and 3 in Gl*; and between Scribes 2 and 3 in 15a andT24. Other differences in the hands of these

three scribes are less obvious but generally consistent, particularly in some of the more frequently

used signs. The following list details some of the more distinctive of these differences in individual

signs:

A2 The space between the upper hand and the vertical is open in the signs made by

Scribe 1 and closed in those of Scribe 2.

B i * Used only by Scribe 1 (and the scribe of Letter P').

D36—37/40 The upright element tends to join the left end of the horizontal in the signs of

Scribe 1 and 3. In those of Scribe 2 the upright is more distinct and usually far

ther right.

D46 The signs of Scribes 2 and 3 normally have a tick over the righthand element;

those of Scribe 1 do not.

D54* Attested only in the hand of Scribe 2. This distinctive sign is preserved only in

Letter III; unfortunately, the crucial lefthand portion of the sign is lost in its one

occurrence in Letter IV.

G i * Used by Scribes 1 and 3 only, distinct in the two hands.

I9* Used by Scribe 1 only.

N29 The rounded form appears only (as a variant) in the hand of Scribe 1.

O4 Scribe 1 makes this sign with a diagonal tick; Scribe 2, with a bottom horizontal

in addition to the tick; and Scribe 3, with a vertical tick.

S23 This sign looks like a capital M in the hands of Scribes 2 and 3; Scribe 1 adds a

horizontal base.

S29 Scribes 1 and 3 regularly make this sign with two verticals. In the hand of Scribe

2 these elements are regularly joined by a top horizontal stroke; the same feature

appears in Frag. B.

U9 Scribe 1 distinguishes this sign from V31 by a long diagonal tick on the right, a fea

ture that also appears in Frag. A. The tick is absent in signs made by Scribes 2 and 3.

W25 The legs are vertical in signs made by Scribe 1 and A-shaped in the hand of

Scribe 2.

Y2 The tick tends to be vertical in the signs of Scribe 1 and horizontal in those of

Scribe 2. Signs made by Scribe 3 vary between the two positions.

Aai* Used only by Scribes 1 and 3 (and the scribe of Letter P').

Aai7 Scribe 1 uses a short horizontal base; Scribe 2, a longer base.

grt The signs of this word are regularly ligatured in the hand of Scribe 1 (and the

scribe of Letter P'). In that of Scribe 2, the first two signs are made separately.

This list illustrates the fairly consistent differences visible between the hands of Scribes 1 and 2.

It also demonstrates how the hand of Scribe 3 varies between those of the other two scribes, con

sistently allied with neither of them, and thus agrees with the broader survey tabulated above. In

this list, the hand of Scribe 3 is like that of Scribe 1 in four instances and similar to that of Scribe 2

in three; overall, the data in Table 1 indicate that the hand of Scribe 3 is similar to that of Scribe 1

in 40% of the instances noted (19/48) and like that of Scribe 2 in 30% of the cases (16/53). If the

document attributed to Scribe 3 (Account VI) was written by either of the other two major

scribes, it is therefore likeliest to have been written by Scribe 1, but it is more probable that Ac

countVI was written by neither of these two scribes.

B. THE SCRIBES 81

B. The Scribes

Following typical Egyptian practice, the scribes whose hands appear in Heqanakht's letters and

accounts are not named as such in the documents. It is therefore impossible to identify any of

these individuals with absolute certainty. Nevertheless, the papyri themselves contain a few textual

and epigraphic clues to the identity of their scribes.

The Heqanakht papyri are almost certainly original documents rather than archival copies."

The accounts exhibit secondary correction of some numbers (V 4-5, 11, 13, 35, 39—40, 42, 47—48;

VI 14; VII 4—5; P 6) and a few interpolated entries (V 24 and 46), both of which are unlikely to

appear to this extent in copies. Of the letters, I—III contain numerous emendations that are also

more likely to occur in original manuscripts than in copies, and the content of Letter IV is hardly

likely to have merited an archival duplicate. As original documents, the letters were written either

firsthand by their authors—Heqanakht in Letters I—II or Letter III and the younger Sitnebsekhtu

in Letter IV—or by scribes at the authors' dictation.12 Patterns of brush usage and emendations in

the letters provide some objective criteria forjudging between these two possibilities.

Although there is little direct evidence to show how letters were dictated in ancient Egypt, the

use of "verse points" in school texts indicates that dictation was normally given and transcribed in

units corresponding to complete clauses or sentences rather than word by word.'3 Most such units

require at least one brushful of ink to transcribe, and the dictation of each unit provides a natural

opportunity for the scribe to refresh his brush.14 In dictated letters, therefore, most textual units

should begin with a new dip of ink. The need to transcribe each unit while it is still fresh in the

scribe's mind should also result in a fairly even flow of ink, with fairly long runs for each dip and

dips within a unit occurring mostly in the longer units. Since the scribe taking dictation was es

sentially transcribing a fixed text, dictated documents are also likely to contain relatively few

emendations—although corrections are always possible, both because of mistakes in transcription

and because the author may decide to emend the text after it has been transcribed.

In firsthand documents there is a more immediate relationship between the author's thoughts

and their written transcription. Because of this immediacy, autographed manuscripts may display a

somewhat different pattern of brush usage and emendations. The flow of ink can be comparable to

that of dictated manuscripts when the author's thoughts themselves flow smoothly, but it may be

more irregular when the scribe is "thinking on paper," less certain of what to say. Since the author

does not need to divide longer or more complex sentences into discrete units for transcription,

brush dips should also occur more often within such units and even within individual words or

signs. Autographed documents can also be expected to contain a greater number of emendations,

since there is less impetus for the author to compose his thoughts fully before committing them to

writing.

On the basis of these criteria, Letter IV was probably written from dictation. The body of this

letter contains 13 textual units, which the scribe transcribed with 26 dips of the brush (see Appen

dix B). All but one of the textual units were begun with a fresh dip of the brush; the exception

(unit 7: IV 2 mj.t wj snb.kw) involves the second of two clauses that were probably commonly

linked together, and the scribe had used only seven strokes with a fresh brush to transcribe the end

11 Archival copies seem to have been marked as such: cf. Sethe, Lesestticke, 97, 5. See also Wente, Letters, 4. 12 For evidence of autographs and dictation, see Janssen, JEA 73 (1987), 162—67; Wente, Letters, 6—10. 13 See H. Brunner, "Verspunkte," LA VI, 1017—18. The evidence of verse points should be compared with that of

brush usage. Publications of pointed texts, however, have not recorded such information, and published photographs of pointed texts are not a good basis for evaluating the flow of ink.

14 The percentage of units involving more than one dip in the continuous text of letters is as follows: 72% in Letter I, 80% in Letter II, 81% in Letter III, and 77% in Letter IV.The accounts generally have shorter textual units and correspondingly fewer that use more than one dip: 57% in the account of Letter II, 50% in the account of Letter III, 56% in AccountV, 63% in AccountVI, and 28% in Account P; in Account VII all but four of the units (71%) show more than one dip, but two of the units are longer than normal (VII 9—11 and VII 15).The identification of what constitutes a textual unit is not always certain, but the general pattern is clear.

82 3- EPIGRAPHY AND PALEOGRAPHY

of the first clause.15 Only one of the dips was made in the middle ofa word (dip 6: IV I smdt). The

text contains no corrections and only one reinking (dip 25: determinative of IV 4 hrt).The fact

that the letter's author was a woman also makes dictation likelier than an autographed text, since

the evidence for female scribes is slight;1' the use of the seated man in the writing of the first-

person singular pronoun (IV 2 wj) may also reflect a male scribe.17

The text of Letter III, written in Heqanakht's name by the scribe of Letter IV, is more complex

than that of Letter IV, as well as longer. It consists of three distinct sections: a formal opening based

on the standard Middle Kingdom epistolary formula (III 1—3),1 the connected text of the letter itself

(III 3—6 and 8—vo. 2), and a short account written as connected text within the latter (III 6—8). Not

all of these sections are useful in determining whether Letter III is more likely to have been written

from dictation or by Heqanakht himself. Given its standard content, the first section was probably

written by the scribe from memory. The fixed character of this text accounts for the fact that four of

its five units were begun with a fresh brushful of ink; its autographed nature, however, is reflected in

the fact that two of its eleven dips (18.2%) were made in the middle ofa word (III 2 cnh, III 3 nfr), as

opposed to only one of thirteen in Letter IV (7.7%) and none at all in the rest of Letter III. In the

account (III 6—8) the scribe used red as well as black ink, interrupting the normal pattern of brush

usage; the pattern is otherwise characteristic of that found in accounts, with only half of its six units

displaying more than a single dip of black ink (see n. 14, above).

Although the first section of Letter III is most likely an autograph, epigraphic features in the

body of the letter itself indicate that the document as a whole was written by a scribe taking

dictation. This section consists of some twelve textual units. All but two were begun with a new

dip of the brush, and the two exceptions are not significant.19 The dips in this section were used

on average for 36 strokes, with average or higher runs usually at the beginning ofa textual unit

and those with fewer than average strokes at the end (see Appendix B).20This is much higher

than the normal average of 22 strokes per dip visible in Letter IV—undoubtedly reflecting in

part the longer clauses and sentences of Letter III, but also consistent with the need to tran

scribe those units after dictation with minimal interruption, as noted above. The body of Letter

III contains only two corrections, both in unit 22 (III vo. i) .The beginning of this unit (hnc tm

rdj cm) is written over an erasure of the same length, and the final word was emended from

^tPpifi— to \fig_plfi— by altering the final %p (see the textual note on p. 50). Such corrections

are a priori likelier for an autographed text, but they could also reflect changes dictated by

Heqanakht after the text was written; both corrections suggest an uncertainty on his part about

the precise phrasing of this passage.

In contrast to Letter III, the epigraphic features of Letters I—II indicate that these letters proba

bly were not dictated, but were written by Heqanakht himself.21 While textual units in Letters III

and IV only exceptionally begin without a fresh dip of the brush, more than a quarter do so in

Letters I (27%) and II (26%). Unlike the exceptions in Letters III—IV, these occur not only after a

15 Cf. the parallel in II 2; also similar clauses in Late Egyptian letters: Bakir, Epistolography, 79. 16 For letters written by women in the New Kingdom, see Janssen, JEA 73 (1987), 167; Wente, Letters, 9. For female

scribes in the Middle Kingdom, see H.G. Fischer, Egyptian Studies I: Varia (NewYork, 1976), 77-78;W.A.Ward, Essays on Feminine Titles of the Middle Kingdom and Related Subjects (Beirut, 1986), 16—17.

17 Cf. Griffith, Kahun Papyri, pl. 22, 1-10, in which the female sender is referenced both as masculine b3k jm (note especially col. 6 h3k jm jj ds.f and b3k jm cq) and by the seated man for the first-person singular suffix pronoun (col. 8 hr.j).

18 See James, HP, 119-25. 19 Both occur immediately after a few strokes ofa new dip used for the end of the preceding unit: III 4 nn rdjt (unit 9)

after 12 strokes used for the last word of unit 8 (III 4 Id.t) and before a new dip for the beginning of the next column (III 5), III vo. 1 mj.k swt mr.j (unit 21) after 9 strokes used for the last phrase of unit 20 (III vo. 1 r pw) at the top of the first column of the verso. These two cases are similar to the exception in unit 7 of Letter IV (see above).

20 See p. 77, above.The letter shows more normal averages of 25 strokes per dip in the formal opening (III 1—4) and 23 in the account (III 6—8). The higher average may be conditioned in part by the thinner brush and generally smaller signs used in Letter III.

21 Also concluded by Baer, "Letters," 19, for other reasons.

B. THE SCRIBES 83

few strokes but also after fairly long runs.22 From 16% (Letter I) to 21% (Letter II) of all dips were

made within words and even individual signs, as opposed to only one instance (4%) in the dictated

text of Letter IV and none in that of Letter III.23 Since AccountV, written by the scribe of Letters

III—IV, shows a similar pattern,24 this feature probably reflects not simply an idiosyncrasy on the

part of the scribe of Letters I—II but rather the less constrained brush usage of autographed text as

opposed to that transcribed from dictation. This is especially true of sequences such as I vo. 2-4

(dips 108-15), II 31-32 (dips 83—92), and II 40—41 (dips 148-55), which contain several such dips.

The emendations in Letters I—II are also indicative of manuscripts written firsthand by their

author. Some of these could have been made by a scribe transcribing dictation, but others are diffi

cult to envisage in anything other than autographed text. Five kinds of emendation occur in the

connected text of Letters I—II (see Appendix B and the textual notes in Chapter 2):

1. LLEINKING. In seven cases the scribe devoted the first strokes ofa new dip to reinking one or

more signs made at the end of the previous dip: I 16 (dip 90), vo. 8 (dip 145), vo. 9 (dip 149),

vo. 13 (dip 172); II 3 (dip 16), 32 (dip 90), vo. 1 (dip 179). In one instance he reinked the last

sign before making a new dip: I 12 (dip 69).These are all compatible with dictated text, since a

similar example occurs in IV 4 (dip 25).

2. A SIGN ERASED IMMEDIATELY AFTER WRITING AND REPOSITIONED. One example occurs in

each letter: I 8 (dip 47), II 5b (dip 45). These are also conceivable in the transcription of dic

tated text; a similar example appears in the account of Letter III (III 8, dip 34).

3. INSERTION OF AN OMITTED SIGN. Five examples appear in the two letters: I 1 (dip 6), 6 (dips

30 and 33), 11 (dip 61); II 29 (dip 66). In the first three instances the scribe noticed the omis

sion after writing a single sign and inserted the missing sign immediately without redipping his

brush. The fourth case is similar, but here the scribe left space for the omitted sign and wrote a

second sign before dipping his brush and adding the missing sign with the new dip. No exam

ples occur in Letters III—IV, but the immediacy of the insertions could be consistent with the

transcription of dictated text. In the fifth instance, however, the scribe wrote an entire word

before inserting the omitted sign with a new dip. This suggests an author with the leisure to

read what he has just written before proceeding rather than a scribe transcribing dictation.

4. CORRECTION OF ERRORS. There are eight instances in which the scribe of Letters I and II

made an error in the text and corrected it:

I 3 (dip 17): (r) h(33) corrected to (r) pr-(h33) after erasure (Dl written in error for n )

I 10 (dips 55-56): (hsb).nj n.k corrected to (hsb).n.k n.j after erasure, with a new dip

I 12 (dip 70): (m) m corrected to (m) 3(ht) after erasure (second pi_ written in error for &[_)

I vo. 2 (dip 108): ^p&p'V corrected to '^'ZZMP'r after erasure (original fer incomplete)

I vo. 3 (dip 110): (jr) m bj(nw) corrected to (jr).k m bjnw after erasure

II 31 (dip 81): (nfr) Q—A corrected to (nfr) 3 dd.j after erasure (original n—& incomplete)

II 31 (dip 82): (n).k corrected to (n).tn after erasure

II vo. 3 (dip 191): tp.k corrected to tp by striking through the ^^».

In each case the error seems to have been noticed and corrected immediately, usually without

a new dip of the brush. All of these conceivably could have been made by a scribe transcribing

22 See Appendix B. Examples in Letter I occur after runs of 2—27 strokes (average 10) and in Letter II after 1-29 strokes (average 9.3). Examples after exceptionally long runs occur in I 2 (unit 7: after 24 strokes), 14 (unit 41: 22), 16 (unit 46: 27), vo. 3-4 (unit 58: 25), vo. 17 (unit 108: 20); II 1 (unit 2: 19), 26 (unit 38: 20), vo. 3 (unit 102: 29).

23 Dips in individual signs occur in I 7 (dip 40) and II 41 (dip 153). Only a few dips within a word occur at the top ofa new column or after a correction: I 3 (dip 12), 5 (dip 24), 10 (dip 56), vo. 11 (dip 158); II 31 (dip 77), 32 (dip 85), 40 (dip 143), vo. 2 (dip 180). A number of such dips occur within the demonstratives p? and n3: I 5 (dip 29), vo. 1 (dip 98), vo. 2 (dip 104); II 5a (dip 29), 28 (dip 63), 32 (dip 85), 35 (dip 115).

24 In AccountV, 15% of all dips occur within a word, none of these at the beginning ofa new line or column; dip 78 (V 46) was made in the middle ofa sign. Similar patterns occur in Accounts VI (17% of all dips, dip 18 within a sign) and VII (11% of all dips).

84 3- EPIGRAPHY AND PALEOGRAPHY

dictation, particularly when the error involves a wrong or omitted sign. The incorrect pro

nouns in I 10, II 31, and II vo. 3, however, are more likely to have come from the pen of an

author writing his own thoughts.

5. CHANGE IN THE TEXT. Letters I and II contain eleven instances in which text written over an

erasure probably or certainly represents a change in the text rather than an error:

I 3 (dips 13—14): original jr wnn [ ... ].j replaced by ch3 tw zp 2 r htj nbt, written with two

new dips

I 4 (dip 20): the first sign of jt.sn overlies an erasure, perhaps a different word begun and

aborted before completion

I 7 (dip 36): the 3 sign overlies an erasure, perhaps originally -J~

I vo. 3 (dip 112): original scb(t) (incomplete) replaced by cbt

I vo. 9 (dips 148—49): an original text, perhaps nj rnpt as in I 14, replaced by rnpt n3, with a

new dip

I vo. 14 (dips 178—79): original text erased and replaced byj'r ntk, with a new dip

I vo. 16 (dip 191): the scribe began to write bw-(bjn) and altered it to bjnw

II 4 (dips 24—25): original cqw (incomplete) replaced by jr n.n cqw.n, with a new dip

II 29 (dip 67): an original text erased and replaced by r dd jn hm-k3

II 32 (dips 88—89): original hnt-h(ty-prtj) altered to wp n hnt-hty-prtj, with a new dip

II vo. 2 (dip 184): an original text, perhaps hr rdjt, replaced by m hmt.

The altered text in III vo. 1 shows that changes such as these can occur in a letter written from

dictation. That instance is comparable to the extensive alterations in I 3 and II 29, as examples

in which the author probably changed his mind after an entire textual unit was written. A

number of the changes in Letters I and II also seem to represent such second thoughts after the

scribe began to write a textual unit but before he completed it (I 4, vo. 9, vo. 14: II vo. 2). All of

these are theoretically possible in dictated as well as autographed letters. In other cases, how

ever, the change occurs within a textual unit (I vo. 3, vo. 16; II 4, 32). These are less likely to

occur in dictation, where an entire unit is dictated for transcription, and are therefore probable

indications ofa text written firsthand by its author.

Although they have parallels in the dictated text of Letters III—IV, none of the emendations in

Letters I—II is incompatible with autographed text, and a number of them are more probable in

such text than in transcribed dictation. The sheer number of emendations is also likelier in an

autographed document. The evidence of emendations therefore agrees with that of brush usage,

indicating that Letters I—II were most likely written by Heqanakht himself. Since Accounts VII and

P and Frag. A were also written by the scribe of Letters I and II, Heqanakht can be identified as

their writer as well, and therefore as the scribe of the majority of the Heqanakht papyri. The writ

ers of Letters III—IV and AccountV (Scribe 2) and of Account VI (Scribe 3) remain anonymous.

There is some textual evidence to support Baer's identification of Scribe 2 as Sihathor, but not his

conclusion that AccountVI was written by Merisu.25

C. Handwri t ing Style

Hieratic manuscripts usually can be dated only in very general terms on the basis of their pale

ography alone.2 'The hieratic of the Heqanakht papyri is similar overall to the style employed in

letters since the late Old Kingdom,27 with fairly distinctive forms for the individual signs. Its main

25 Baer,"Letters," 19. For the evidence, see p. 113. 26 See J.J. Janssen, BIFAO 84 (1984), 305,andJ£L4 73 (1987), 161. 27 E.g., Boulaq 8 (C 58043): Baer, ZAS 93 (1966), 1-9; H. Goedicke, MDAIK 22 (1967), pl. 1 (photo), and ZAS 115

(1988), 136-46. Berlin 8869: Konigliche Museen zu Berlin, Hieratische Papyrus III (Leipzig, 1911), pis. 2-3 (facsimiles), and P.C. Smither, JEA 28 (1942), 16—19. Turin 54002: A. Roccati, JEA 54 (1968), 14-22 and pl. 4

C. HANDWRITING STYLE 85

differences with Old Kingdom handwriting are a greater proportion of ligatures; the use of alter

nate forms such as Gi*, G17*, and X7 (9) for G43 ( 4 j ; and the replacement of X8 (P) by D37

(O__A) in forms of the verb rdjj This developed style persisted at least into the second half of the

reign of Senwosret I, as shown by dated inscriptions from the alabaster quarries at Hatnub.29

A somewhat different form of hieratic appears in the Reisner papyri, written for the most part

between Years 15 and 25 of an unnamed king who was almost certainly Senwosret I.3°The hand

writing of these documents lies midway between the style of the Heqanakht papyri and that of the

later Middle Kingdom papyri from Ulahun.3' It is characterized by predominant use of alternate

forms such as Gi* , G17*, and X7; simpler forms of the more complex signs; and the replacement

of D37 (n—4) by D36 (&—) in forms of the verb rdj and in the particle mj.tn. Some of these features

were undoubtedly conditioned by the nature of the documents, which are primarily accounts, but

they also appear in the columnar text of the three letters copied in Papyrus Reisner II.32 The

Reisner papyri thus provide evidence for a change in the style of hieratic handwriting as early as

Year 15 of Senwosret I. At the same time, however, the use of the older style in the Hatnub

inscriptions of the same reign shows that the earlier and later styles coexisted for a period of

perhaps two decades.33

These data indicate that the Heqanakht papyri, which use the older hieratic hand, could have

been written as late as the fourth decade of Senwosret I, despite the appearance of a new style of

handwriting earlier in the same reign. The hieratic of the Heqanakht papyri is closest in style to

the older hand visible in the entries of Years 7—8 on the verso of Papyrus Reisner IV and in the

erased original on the recto of the same papyrus.34 It is uncertain whether these earlier entries

were also written under Senwosret I or under one of his predecessors; but the persistence of the

older style into the later years of Senwosret I makes a date in the reign of that king a distinct pos

sibility.

(photo). CJ 49623: B. Gunn, ASAE 25 (1925), 242-55 and pl. 1 (photo); A.H. Gardiner, JEA 13 (1927), 75-78; B. Grdseloff, ASAE 48 (1948), 505-512.

28 For the last, see WK. Simpson,JiJ4 52 (1966), 48-49. 29 P. Posener, JEA 54 (1968), 67-70 and pis. 8-9 (dated to Year 22 of Senwosret I). R. Anthes, Die Felsinschriften von

Hatnub (UGAA 9: Leipzig, 1928), 76—78 and pl. 31 (dated toYear 31 of Senwosret I). Also WK. Simpson, MDAIK 16 (1958), 298-309 and pis. 29—30, and JNES 20 (1961), 25-30 (dated to Senwosret I without year date).

30 WK. Simpson, LA IV, 728.The four papyri (Reisner I—IV) contain dates in Years 7-8 (IV), 15-18 (II), 22-23 (HI), and 24-25 (I): WK. Simpson, Papyrus Reisner I (Boston, 1963), Papyrus Reisner II (Boston, 1965), Papyrus Reisner III (Boston, 1969), Papyrus Reisner IV (Boston, 1986). The identification of the unnamed ruler ofYears 15-25 as Senwosret I is based primarily on the appearance of three letters of the vizier Intefiqer, dated to Year 17, in Papyrus Reisner II: Simpson, Papyrus Reisner I, 19—20; for the letters, see Simpson, Papyrus Reisner II, 20—23 a n d ph. 7—8 and 10. Although Simpson has also argued in favor of Amenemhat I (Papyrus Reisner III, 10—11; LA IV, 728), the only king with whom Intefiqer's service as vizier can be associated with certainty is Senwosret I: see D. Franke, Per-sonendaten aus dem Mittleren Reich (AA 41: Wiesbaden, 1984), no. 146; C. Obsomer, Sesostris F: etude chronologique et historique du regne (Connaissance de 1'Egypte Ancienne 5: Brussels, 1995), 210—15. Intefiqer's tomb near the pyramid of Amenemhat I at Lisht was almost certainly built under Senwosret I, since work on the pyramid complex dates to Year 20 of Amenemhat I at the earliest and was probably completed during the sole reign of Senwosret I: Do. Arnold, MM] 26 (1991), 15-16.

31 Simpson, Papyrus Reisner I, 19. 32 For the use of alternate forms in accounts, see pp. 77—78, above. The letters show a greater percentage of standard

forms such as Gi , G17, and G43, but they also use the alternates G i * and G17* more freely than the columnar text of the Heqanakht papyri, and regularly substitute D36 for the older D37.

33 See n. 29, above. All three of the inscriptions cited in that footnote use only the standard form of G17. The text of Year 22 published by Posener uses only the alternate form Gi* , but the other two have the regular form Gi . No examples of rdj or mj.k/mj.tn occur in these texts.

34 Simpson, Papyrus Reisner IV, 12, pis. 21 and 23. The other entries of this papyrus are undated, but are written in the later hieratic style common to the Reisner papyri.

4. Language

THE LETTERS AND ACCOUNTS OF HEQANAKHT are written in a form of Middle Egyptian that has

features both typical and atypical of the classical language found in contemporary literary texts. A

number of these were discussed by James in his publication of the papyri.1 Some, however, have

elicited little or no comment, while others have been revealed or refined through subsequent ad

vances in our understanding of Middle Egyptian and its Old Egyptian ancestor. These features fall

into the areas of phonology, morphology, and syntax.

The language of the Heqanakht papyri is generally more conservative than classical Middle

Egyptian in its phonology. It still maintains the Old Egyptian distinction between z (—) and 5 ()'),

though contemporary and even earlier texts show occasional conflation of the two consonants.2 It

also regularly preserves the feminine ending (r) of nouns, adjectives, and attributive verb forms,

with one exception: the quantifier nb "all" occasionally appears without the feminine ending in

Letters I and II, written by Heqanakht, but not in Letters III and IV, written by a different scribe.3

These cases of omission, however, are probably grammatical rather than phonological in origin:

that is, they reflect the substitution of unmarked nb for marked nbt rather than loss of the feminine

ending.

Despite their phonological conservatism, however, the texts also display some of the features

that characterize contemporary Middle Egyptian documents. Depalatalization of original t (*=») >

t (p is reflected in the verb jtj > jtj "take," which is always written with complementary t (I 4, 6;V

27); in the noun j3tw > j3tw "shortage" (I 16—17) and the causative sj3t > 5/jM'shorten" (I 11); and

perhaps also in the use of *=> for the initial radical of the verb trj "respect" (II 44).4 The parallel

depalatalization of original d ( \) > d (<=•) appears in spellings of db3 > db3 "exchange, replace" (I

5; II 34; III 8) and dmd < dmd"total" (II 23; III 8;V 33, 36, 47-48, 54;VII 14, 20), and perhaps also

in the use of \ for the initial radical of the noun dbn (II vo. 1). The early Middle Egyptian

change of the feminine ending -wt > -yt is attested in II 42 hbsyt"wife" (vs. hbswt in I vo. 14, 16; II

41, 44); probably also in the nouns nbsyt"Sidder Grove" (collective: I 6, vo. 19; II vo. 6;VI 13), hntyt

"upstream" (I 10, II 4), and swsyt" dryness" (I vo. 1); and perhaps also in the nouns jpyt "oipe" (VI

12), mhryt "warehouse" (VII 5), nwyt "bale" (VII 10), rwyt "board" (V vo. 6), and the place name

hpsyt (I 8—9, II vo. fi).s The ending -wt is preserved in the nouns j3wt "old age" (III 2), m3wt "new

ness" (II 32), and nswt.s "her hairdresser" (II 39), perhaps for phonological reasons. A similar

change appears in the masculine nouns t3y < t3w "male" (II 37) and pzly "co-beneficiary" (I vo.

17),7 though the latter may reflect the presence of a is suffix pronoun (pzsw.j > pzsy.j: see the tex

tual note on p. 37).

1 HP, 102-14,119-30. 2 Edel, AUG, §§ 116-17; Schenkel, FmdS, § 21. 3 For the scribes of Letters I-IV, see pp. 78-84. Examples with omitted ending are htj nb (I 2) and ht nb (II 26, vo. 3),

h3bt.nj n.k nb hr.s (I vo. 9), and 3htj nb (II 30, with following 3ms stative nqr.w); with written ending, htj nht (I 3), ht nht (II 4o),jwht nbt (I 1), st nbt (II 28), und jrt n(j) nbt z3-htj nht (I 14-15). For Letters III—IV, see III vo. 1-2 and IV 2.

4 The last could also represent a secondary palatalization (i.e., *tiri > *fin); Coptic Tppe suggests an original vocalization similar to that of nppe ~ ne ipe .

5 See Schenkel, FmdS, § 14. For *hntwt > hntyt, cf. hsjwt > hsfyt: Edel, AdG, §§ 691—92. These nouns may have had the vocalization pattern *-dwat > *-dyat, except for jpyt (Coptic o i n e < *dypa < *dpyat).

6 See Schenkel, FmdS, §§ 15—17. In these nouns the ending may not have followed immediately after a stressed vowel: e.g., *md3wat (> Coptic (F) Moyoyi), *n—Iwdt—s. For the latter, note also II 42 hbsyt vs. I vo. 14 and 16 hbswt.j (but also II 41, 44 hbswt without suffix pronoun).

7 Cf. Schenkel, FmdS, § 18a.

86

4- LANGUAGE 87

In its morphology the language of the Heqanakht papyri is generally similar to that of other

Middle Egyptian texts. For instances in which clear morphological differences with earlier Egyp

tian can be observed, the papyri consistently display the later forms.These include:

• the preposition jr without an initial reed-leaf with both nominal objects and suffix pronouns

(e.g., I 3 r htj nbt and r.k), where Old Egyptian prefers the full form for the latter use;

• the full form of the particle jw with suffix pronouns (I vo. 17; II 1-2, 30, 41; III 6) instead

of the form with omitted w found earlier;9

• the passive suffix tw (II 27, 31, vo. i ; P ' 3) rather than Old Egyptian tj;10

• the is and 3ms stative suffixes kw (II 2, IV 2) and w (I 6, II 30) instead of the older kj andj';"

• the independent pronouns ntk (I 1; vo. 14) and ntfi (I 9; III vo. 2, P ' 5) for older twt and

swt;

• the dependent pronoun st (I 2-3, 5, 16, vo. 4, vo. 10, vo. 17; III 5-6), nonexistent in Old

Egyptian;13

• the enclitic particle grt with the Middle Egyptian ending t, as opposed to the older jgr/gr;14

• the noun-clause marker ntt (III 4) in place of the older wnt; .15

• the Middle Egyptian negative nn used in addition to the older unitary negation nj (dis

cussed in Section C, below);

• complete absence of prefixed verb forms.

The older forms of most of these features can be found to varying degrees in early Middle Kingdom

Coffin Texts.1 Their consistent absence in Heqanakht's documents thus identifies the language of

the papyri more closely with that of secular Middle Egyptian than with the more archaic speech

of contemporary funerary texts. The only morphological feature of the papyri evocative of earlier

traditions is the regular spelling L—DMsk—D of the imperative jmj" give" (I 17, vo. 5, vo. 7-8; II 34, vo.

1-2; P ' 4), which is closer to the forms found in Old Egyptian than to the usual Middle Egyptian

spelling t j j^4_= 0 .1 7

On the whole, the language of the Heqanakht papyri is Middle Egyptian in its grammar, as

shown by features such as

• circumstantial clauses introduced by the particle jw (I vo. 2; II 30);1

• the hr.fi sdm.f construction (I 9, vo. 2; II 35, 40);19

• direct quotations introduced by r dd (I 17, vo. 5; II 38);20

• the interrogative pronoun ptr (II 43).2I

A number of its distinctive features, however, involve forms or constructions that occur rarely if at

all in classical Middle Egyptian literature. Some of these are more characteristic of later Middle

Egyptian texts:

8 Edel, AdG, § 760. The reed-leaf is regularly written in the initial topicalizing and conditional functions of the preposition ("as for; if/when"): I 4, 6, 8, 12, 14, 16—17, v o- 1. v ° , 3~4, v o- 6, vo. 9—11, vo. 14, vo. 16; II 24, 31, 34-35, 37,42; HI 5, 8; IV 2; [V 25].

9 Edel, AdG,§ 881. 10 Edel, AiG, §§ 142, 177. 11 Edel, ^4(jG, §§ 142, 573. 12 Edel, AdG, §§ 172-73. 13 Edel, AdG,§ 169. 14 Edel,AdG,§ 830. 15 Edel, AdG, § 1022. 16 E.g., CT IV, 287dT3Be jr.fiV, 84a T3L j.sp, i 0 2 d T i C mh.kjp, 90a T i C swt; IV, 290b BiP^r ; II, 360a wnt.sn; IV,

305a-bT3Be nj = T i C b rin;V, 46gbTiBej.hm.k. 17 Edel, AdG, § 607; for the reading jmj, see the textual note to I 17 on p. 29. Heqanakht's spelling of jmj also appears

in the Coffin Texts (CT II, 117c, 334-35C; III, 333b;V, 286Q, alongside the usual Middle Kingdom form. 18 Cf. James, HP, 102; for the earlier counterpart see Edel, AdG, § 18 (p. 10). 19 Edel, AdG, § 19;Vernus, Future at Issue, 65-71. 20 Edel, AdG, § 19 Nachtrag. 21 Edel, AdG, §§ 203, 1010.

http://hr.fi

•

4- LANGUAGE

the interrogative jh/hy/h (I vo. 4, vo. 15; II 1— 2);2

• use of the demonstratives p3/t3/n3 in place of standard pn/tn/nn.2i

Others have counterparts in Old Egyptian or contemporary funerary texts (Coffin Texts) but have

largely or completely disappeared elsewhere in Middle Egyptian:

• interruption ofa direct genitive by nb (I vo. 9-10 h3w nb sp3tj h3w nb sj.j "all the area of

my basined land and all the area of my basin-land");24

• productive use of the prospective sdm.fi ("sdmw.fi"), active and passive;

• extended use of the negation nj, and corresponding restricted use of the negation nn;

• the negation nfr 3 (I 5, vo. 4. II 31).25

The most extensive and significant of these distinctive features in the grammar of the Heqanakht

papyri are the demonstratives p3/t3/n3, the prospective sdm.f and the use of the negations. These

are discussed in more detail below.2

A. Demonstratives

With a single exception, the Heqanakht papyri use the prenominal demonstratives p3/t3/n3

instead of the normal Middle Egyptian postnominal series pn/tn/MM. The exception is II 40 cnh n.j

zj) pn "as this man lives for me," which occurs in the initial clause of an oath. In this case the

postnominal demonstrative was probably conditioned by the standard formal language of oaths and

is therefore not representative of the normal language of the papyri (see the discussion in the tex

tual note to II 40-41 on pp. 45-46).

James characterized the distribution of the p3/t3/n3 demonstratives in the Heqanakht papyri

under four basic headings: (a) with full demonstrative force; (b—c) after jn jr plus the infinitive and

before titles followed by personal names, where "the demonstrative force still seems to be intended

although it is clearly much weakened, ... functioning as a strong definite article"; and (d) before a

noun followed by a relative clause, where "it must be translated by the definite article and not by

the demonstrative" (HP, 107—108). James's sense of the "weakened" value of the demonstratives in

most of these uses has led to the common perception that the language of the Heqanakht papyri,

at least in this respect, is a kind of proto-Late Egyptian.27 It is clear that the Late Egyptian definite

articles are direct descendants of these demonstratives, as several studies have shown.2 In the

Heqanakht papyri, however, the p3/t3/n3 series still has the full force of other Middle Egyptian

demonstratives; in none of their uses is the "weakened" sense of the later definite article either

clear or necessary.

Loprieno has identified three pragmatic motives for the use of the p3/t3/n3 demonstratives in

Heqanakht's texts: anaphora to a topic mentioned earlier, deixis to a following relative clause, and

reference to "the common experience between writer and interlocutor."29 To these may be added

a fourth use, in vocatives. There are thirty-five examples of p3/t3/n3 in the Heqanakht papyri, all

but two in Letters I-III.30 Each conforms to one or another of these motives, and is paralleled

elsewhere in Middle Egyptian by examples with other demonstratives.

22 Gardiner, EG, § 501. 23 James, HP, 107-108. See Gardiner, EG, §112 end. 24 See Edel, AdG, § 321; Gardiner, EG, § 85. 25 James, HP, 104-105. Cf. Edel, y4<j'G, §§ 1130-40; Gardiner, EG, § 351, 1. 26 The discussions that follow are based on readings and analysis established in the textual notes of Chapter 2. An

earlier version of this chapter appeared in LingAeg 4 (1994), and is superseded by the present discussion. 27 E.g., F.Junge's characterization of Heqanakht's language along with that of later Middle Egyptian texts such as the

Illahun papyri and Papyrus Westcar as "Spatmittelagyptisch": LAV, 1190. 28 Most recently, A. Loprieno, Oriens Antiquus 19 (1980), 1—27; DP. Silverman, RdE 33 (1981), 59—65. 29 Loprieno, Oriens Antiquus 19 (1980), 1-11. 30 The exceptions occur in Frag. D, where only the demonstrative n3 n is preserved, and in Letter P ' (2).

http://sdm.fi

http://sdmw.fi

A. DEMONSTRATIVES 89

i . ANAPHORA. Ten examples of the demonstrative involve phrases referring to something m e n

tioned previously in the same text:

mj.k jr th.k n3 (I 16) "Look, if you violate this," referring to the salaries specified in I 14—16

nj rdjt n.j p3 jtj-mh h3r 10 m jtj-mh m3 nfr (I vo. 2) "wi thout giving me those 10 sacks of full bar

ley in new, good full barley," referring to I vo. 1 jtj-mh js n swsyt wn m dd-swt—possibly also

conditioned by the motive of c o m m o n experience (see no. 3, below)

r cbt p3 jtj-mh m3 (I vo. 3—4) "in order to stockpile that new full barley," referring to I vo. 2 jtj-

mh m3

jrr.k grt p3 sj m jtj-mh (I vo. 11) "Now, you should do that basin-land in full barley," with refer

ence to I vo. 10 sj.j

hnc rdjt jn.t(w) zh3w hr sdt m n3 n pr-h33 (I vo. 17) "And have a writ ing brought about what is

collected from those (debts) of Perhaa," referring to I 5 n3 n btj ntj) m pr-h33

jr z3w qnd.tn hr n3 (II 24) "Lest you get angry about this," mj.tn nj ddw n.sn p3 cqw m st nbt (II

28) "Look, there are none to w h o m this salary is given anywhere," dd.tn p3 cqw n r(m)tjjw.sn hr

jrt k3t (II 29-30) "You should give this salary to my people only as long as they are working,"

and jr grt wjntj).fip3 cqw (II 37) "But as for anyone w h o will reject this salary," all referring to

the salary allocations detailed in II 7—22

h3 rwd.tn m ht nbt mj n3 (II 39—40) "If only you would be (as) firm in everything as (you are) in

this," referring to the mistreatment of Heqanakht's wife implied in II 38—39

mj.tn hbswt.j n3 (II 41—42) "Look, that is my wife," referring to the woman w h o is the subject

of discussion in II 38-41 .

A parallel use of the normal Middle Egyptian demonstrative is attested, for example, in ShS 154—

55 chc.n dpt tfijj.tj) mj srt.n.f "Then that boat came as he had predicted," referring to ShS 119-20

jw dpt rjjt m hnw "A boat is to come from home."

2. DEIXISTO A FOLLOWING RELATIVE CLAUSE. Seven examples of the demonstrative occur before

a noun followed by a relative clause:

p3 mn sht c3 (I 4) "that sheet to be woven there"

n3 n btj ntj) m pr-h33 (I 5) "that emmer that is in Perhaa"

p3 mn dd.n.j sht sw (I 5-6) "that sheet I said to weave"

p3 cqw h3b.nj n.tn hrf (I! 31—32) "that salary I have wri t ten you about"

p3 3ht (h3) 1.4 ntj) m smt rdj.n z3-jp hrd hntj)-h(tj) (II 33) "that 1.4 dar. of land that is in pastur

age, which lp Jr.'s son Khentekhtai gave"

n3 n jtj-mh btj ntj) c3 (III 4) "that full barley and emmer that is there"

t3 jpyt h3t st jm.s (III 6) "that oipe with which it should be measured"

t3 hmt 2 b3kt ddt.n.j n.k hr.s (P' 2-3) "those two female slave-laborers I told you about."

Two further examples, in which the demonstrative directly precedes a participle or relative form,

can be regarded as the same construction with unexpressed antecedent:

n3 dd.n.j n.k (I 17) "that which I told you"

p3 wnm r z3.f (II 3) "that one w h o ate to his satisfaction" — possibly also conditioned by the

motive of c o m m o n experience (see no. 3, below).

The same usage is attested with other demonstratives elsewhere in Middle Egyptian: for example,

ShS 175 jnw pnjn.nj "that cargo I had got ten" and ShS 149 nn dd.nj"fhat which I had said."31

31 This function is unremarked in Middle Egyptian grammars, with the exception ofWestendorf, GmT, § 104.

90 4- LANGUAGE

3. WITH REFERENCE TO A SUBJECT OF COMMON EXPERIENCE. Most of the remaining examples

of the demonstratives in the Heqanakht papyri can be analyzed as conditioned by this motive:

jn jr grt p3 rdjt jwt n.j z3-hwt-hr hr jtj-mh js (I vo. 1) "Now, what is this having Sihathor come to

me with old full barley?": i.e., "this (which you and I both know you did)"

mj.k nj prw.fim p3 pr hnc.k (I vo. 12-13) "Look, there is nothing more (important) than either

of them in that house with you," referring to the c o m m o n domicile of the writer and in

tended recipient of the letter

jr n.k grt rdjt t3 b3kt nt pr znn hr t3 n pr.j (I vo. 13) "Now, get that housemaid Senen put out of

my house,"32 referring to an individual known to both parties and perhaps one that had been

the subject of previous communications

jn jr grt p3 jrt bjnw r hbswt.j (I vo. 16) "Now, what is this doing bad things to my wife?": i.e.,

"this (which you and I both know you are doing)"

jr grt wnn mr-snfirw hr mrt wnn m s3 n3 n k3 (II 35) "Now, if Mer-Snefru will be wanting to be in

charge of those cattle," evidently the subject o fa prior communication.

Similarly, the four examples of the expression mj n3 in Letters I—II can be understood as referring

to the writer's situation, which is known to his interlocutor as well (see the textual note to I 10 on

pp. 26—27). Here also may belong two examples cited under the two preceding headings:

p3 jtj-mh h3r 10 "those 10 sacks of full barley" (I vo. 2): i.e., "those 10 sacks (that you have just

sent me)"—or anaphoric (see no. I, above)

p3 wnm r z3.f (II 3) "that one w h o ate to his satisfaction," possibly referring to a proverbial

character (HP, 37)—or deictic (see no. 2, above).

T h e same motive governs references to contemporary time, which is the common experience of

the speaker and his interlocutor:

mj.k nj rnpt js n3 nt b3gjn zj) hr nb.fi(! 14) "Look, this is not the year for a man to be lax about

his master"

mj.k rnpt n3 nt jrr zj) n nbf (I vo. 9) "Look, this is the year when a man is to act for his mas-" 3 3

ter

mj.tn ph.n.j p3 hrwjm.tn hr scnh.tn (II 5a) "Look, I have managed to keep you alive so far" (lit

erally, "Look, I have reached this day with you while keeping you alive").

Examples of demonstratives governed by the motive of c o m m o n experience also occur elewhere

in Middle Egyptian, with other demonstratives: for instance, ShS 109—10 chc .n.j) jn.kw r jw pn jn

w3w n w3d-wr "then I was brought to this island by a wave of the sea," where jw pn refers to the

c o m m o n location of the speaker and his interlocutor, and Neferti 4 j.zj jn nj qnbt nt hnw prt c3 r

nd hrt m hrw pn "Go, get me the council of the capital that came forth here to express greetings on

this day," with a reference to time.

4. VOCATIVE. The preceding examples include all but one of the instances of the demonstrative

in Heqanakht's letters. T h e remaining example occurs in the context o f a vocative:

hj) jrt.s r.tn p3 msd sj) (I vo. 15) "Wha t did she do against you, you w h o hate her?"

This use corresponds to the c o m m o n Middle Egyptian construction in which a vocative is mod i

fied by the demonstrative pw or pn.u

32 This usage, before a title and proper name, was cited by James as an example of the demonstrative •with "weakened force" (HP, 107). Cf., however, Sin. B 142—43 hq3 pn cmw-nj-n(j "that ruler Ammulanashi" (anaphoric to R 54, B 99-101, and B 113-14).

33 For the construction, cf. Sin. B 23 dpt mt nn "this is the taste of death" (anaphoric to R 47). 34 For the common Middle Egyptian construction, see Lefebvre, GEC, § 101; Westendorf, GmT, § 102, 7; H.

Grapow, Wie die Alten Agypter sich anredeten I, 18-21.

http://prw.fi

B. PROSPECTIVE FORMS 91

As the preceding discussion shows, each of the four uses of p3/t3/n3 in the Heqanakht papyri

is paralleled elsewhere by examples with the standard Middle Egyptian series pn/tn/nn.This places

Heqanakht's demonstratives squarely in the grammatical tradition of Middle Egyptian. In each in

stance they evidently have the full value of a demonstrative rather than the "weakened" sense of

the later definite article, a role that has not been suggested for their classical counterparts pn/tn/nn.

Although p3/t3/n3 are primarily characteristic of later Middle Egyptian texts such as the Illahun

documents and Papyrus Westcar, they are also found in the Eloquent Peasant and in letters closer

in time to those of Heqanakht, in the same uses discussed above.35 Most of these texts also avoid

pn/tn/nn, as do the Heqanakht papyri.3 Taken together, both facts indicate that p3/t3/n3 are full

equivalents of the classical demonstratives in the form of the language represented by these early

Middle Kingdom texts. Since most of the documents exhibiting it are letters, this common feature

would seem to be representative ofa nonliterary dialect of Middle Egyptian.37

B. Prospective Forms

The prospective sdm.f ("sdmw.fi") and its passive counterpart (sdmw.fi/sdmm.fi) are productive

forms of the suffix conjugation in the language of the Pyramid Texts and their Middle Kingdom

descendant, the Coffin Texts, but have largely disappeared elsewhere in Middle Egyptian.3 With

few exceptions, survivals in the classical language of Middle Egyptian literature seem to be limited

to "future wnn" and examples of the active form in the conditional jr sdm.f construction, the latter

alternating with the subjunctive sdm.f39 Otherwise, the prospective has been replaced by the sub

junctive sdm.f and the analytic future jw.fr sdm, a process whose beginnings are already evident in

Old Egyptian.40

The extent to which the prospective has survived in Middle Egyptian is uncertain, partly be

cause its written form is not always distinctive. The clearest marker in the active, a final —MJ4' is not

always written and does not appear at all in the 2-lit., 2ae-gem., 3-lit., and anom. classes; the active

prospective in these last four classes looks like other forms of the sdm.f and can be distinguished

only by meaning or use.42 The clearest marker of the passive, gemination of the final radical, occurs

35 The other examples in the letters published by James, HP, represent the motives of anaphora (pl. 24, 8; pl. 25, vo. 2; pl. 26, 8), deixis (pl. 24, 6: Wente, Letters, 65), and common experience (pl. 21, 7?; pl. 24, 3/7; pl. 26, 6—8/10—11; pl. 28, 10-11; pl. 30, B n - 1 2 ) . Other examples occur in CG 25375, 2-3 t3 b3ktjmjw ntt mr.t(j) "that servant Imiu, who is ill" (deictic) and 7 t3 b3kt "that servant" (anaphoric); Papyrus Reisner II, D3 n3 n dnhw "those oar-blades" and D5 p3 cr-gmtj "that . . ." (both anaphoric to D3 3tpw "the cargo"), E4 t3 zwt "that wheat" (anaphoric to E3 zwt), G2 n3 n mrw-pr nt\(j)w r] jtj "those stewards who are to take" (deictic), G3 p3 Ipw.tn "that fleet of yours" and G6 p3 hcw"that fleet" (uncertain): Gardiner and Sethe, Letters to the Dead, 7 and pl. 6; Simpson, Papyrus Reisner II, pis. 7—8, 10.

36 The documents published by James use pn only in the phrase zh_3 pn "this writing" in a standard epistolary formula (HP, pis. 26, 5; 28, 8; 30, B3: see HP, 126—27); contrast the usual construction p3 zh3 in HP, pl. 28, 10.The Reisner letters and C 25375 have no examples of pn/'tn/'nn.

37 Note also the use of Heqanakht's interrogative jh in CG 25375, 4~5 tnrr.k wLt(w) cryt.k hr jh "Why do you want your home to be stripped bare?": Gardiner and Sethe, Letters to the Dead, pl. 6.

38 For Old Egyptian see Edel, AdG, §§ 511-31; J. Allen, "Synthetic and Analytic Tenses in the Pyramid Texts," in L'egyptologie en iQ7g, axes prioritaires de recherches (Colloques internationaux du CNRS, 595: Paris, 1982), 21-26; Allen, Inflection, §§ 260—62, 285—88, 322—25, 360—92, 515—29.The form can be found in early Old Egyptian biographical inscriptions (e.g., Urk. I, 39, 7) but seems to disappear from secular texts in the Sixth Dynasty. For the Coffin Texts see W Schenkel, LingAeg 7 (2000), 27-112. For Middle Egyptian see Vernus, Future at Issue, 29—60.

39 Vernus, Future at Issue, 31, 45—51. For the prospective and subjunctive after conditional jr see M. Malaise, "La conjugaison suffixale dans les propositions conditionnelles introduites par Ir en ancien et moyen egyptien," CdE 60 (1985), 152-67.

40 See Allen, in L'egyptologie en 1979, 26; Allen, Inflection, §§ 265-67;Vernus, Future at Issue, 32. 41 E.g., Peas. Bi , 352—53 = B2, 86—87 gtn.tw kfiwt.s zbw.s r jm3h "When its revelation is made, it will lead to honor"

(prospective zbw.s). 42 E.g., ShS 70—72 jr wdfi.k m dd n.j jn tw r jw pn rdj.j rh.k tw jw.k m zz "If you delay in telling me the one who

brought you to this island, I will make you find yourself as ash" (prospective rdj.j); Peas. Bi , 283 = B2, 5-6 jrjn.k jmj n sn.kAf you will get, give to your brother" (prospective jn.k).

http://sdmw.fi

http://sdmw.fi/

http://sdmm.fi

http://jw.fr

92 4- LANGUAGE

only in the 2-lit. and 3—lit. classes; examples of this form (sdmm.fi) are not attested in classical Middle

Egyptian texts. For other classes the prospective passive looks like the active, and its identification is

further complicated by the fact that the non-prospective passive sdm.fi in Middle Egyptian also

shows an occasional ending —w.43 Given the latter feature and the absence of the marked form

sdmm.fi, it is possible that the relatively rare Middle Egyptian examples of the passive with prospec

tive sense are extended uses of the passive sdm.f rather than survivals of the older prospective

passive.44

The Heqanakht papyri contain numerous examples of the active sdm.f with prospective sense.

Most of these can be identified as examples of the usual subjunctive form, but two clear instances

of the prospective occur in Letters I and II:

jrr. k grt p3 sj m jtj-mh

m jr btj jm

jr grt jw.fim hcp c3,jrr.k sw m btj (I vo. 11—12)

Now, you should do that basin-land in full barley.

Don't do emmer there.

But if it will come as a big inundation, you should do it in emmer.

jr wnn mr-snfirw hr mrt wnn m s3 n3 n k3, hr.k dj.k sw m s3jrj) (II 35-36)

Now, if Mer-Snefru will be wanting to be in charge of those cattle, you'll have to put him

in charge of them.

The identification of jw.f and wnn as the prospective in these passages is assured not only by their

meaning (prospective) and use (after conditional jr) but also by their morphology, which is not that

of the subjunctive jwt and wn also found in this construction. The construction in II 35—36 is syn

tactically equivalent to other examples in which wnn is followed by a prepositional phrase; this

usage can be analyzed as the "conversion" ofa clause with adverbial or "pseudoverbal" predicate in

the conditional protasis.45 A further example of the same construction probably exists in P' 3-4

wnn.k hr spr "you will be arriving," although here wnn could also be the imperfective relative sdm.f

used nonattributively (nominally).

Two additional instances of prospective wnn after conditional jr involve the compound con

struction wnn sdm.n.f expressing the future perfect:

jr grt wnn sd.n.sn Pt m db3 n n3 n btj ntj) m pr-h33, dd.sn st jm gr (I 4—5)

If, however, they will have collected the equivalent value of that emmer that is (owed me)

in Perhaa, they should use it there as well.

jr wnn rdj.n.kjn.t(w) n.j jtj-mh js r cbt p3 jtj-mh m3, hy ddtj (I vo. 3—4)

If you will have had old full barley brought to me in order to stockpile that new full barley,

what can I say?

This construction has been the subject of considerable discussion, mostly focused on substitutional

analysis derived from comparison with examples in which wnn is followed by a prepositional

phrase.4 In the two instances cited here, however, a common syntactic motive does not seem

possible. The sense of I vo. 3—4 is clearly "emphatic": since Heqanakht has already been sent the

grain to which he refers, the condition applies not to the verb phrase ("if you will have had old

43 Gardiner, EG, § 420. For the passive sdm.fi in Middle Egyptian, see WWestendorf, Der Gebrauch des Passivs in der klassischen Literatur der Agypter (VIO 11: Berlin, 1953). For the original distinction between the two passive forms, see Allen, Inflection, §§ 488, 515.

44 E.g., Sin. B 212-13 whm snd.k m t3w h3swt, wfin.k Inntjtn "Fear of you shall be repeated in foreign lands, and that which the sun-disk encircles shall be subjugated to you." See Westendorf, Der Gebrauch des Passivs, 38—46.

45 See Gardiner, EG, § 150; Satzinger, LingAeg 3 (1993), 125. Contrast the "unconverted" form in P ' 4 jn jw zh3.k hr rdfitjjn.t "IfYour Excellency is having (it) brought."

46 M. Malaise, CdE 60 (1985), 163-67; P.Vernus, RdE 39 (1988), 149-50; L. Depuydt, RdE 39 (1988), 204-208, and JEA 77 (1991X69—78; H. Satzinger, LingAeg 3 (1993), 129—33, a n d LingAeg 4 (1994), 271—74^. Kruchten,_/E/1 80 (1994), 97-108; L. Depuydt, RdE 46 (1995), 81-88.

http://sdmm.fi

http://sdm.fi

http://sdmm.fi

http://jw.fi

http://sdm.fi


full barley brought to me") but to the following prepositional phrase ("in order to stockpile that

new full barley"). In I 4-5, however, the reverse is true, since Heqanakht does not know

whether his men will have managed to collect the grain-debt or not.47 If the example in I vo. 3—

4 can be regarded as the "conversion" of a "emphatic" construction, the former cannot, and

vice-versa. Both constructions would therefore appear to be governed by considerations of

meaning rather than by the exigencies of syntax. The common motivation in the two examples

lies in the prospective value of wnn, which serves to cast an expression of completed action

(sd.n.sn, rdj.n.k) into the future.The sense can be paraphrased as follows:"if (by the time they are

ready to negotiate for the lease of land) they will have collected the value," and "if it will turn

out (when you explain it to me) that it is in order to stockpile that new full barley that you have

had old full barley brought to me."

Further evidence for this analysis is supplied by a third example of the construction from the

Heqanakht papyri, which does not occur after conditional jr but in a clause of future circum

stance:

jmj grt sk3.t(w) n.n 3ht (h3) 2 m qdb m pr-h33 r gs h3w-hrd m hmt m hbsw mjtj.mh [m ht] nb,

wnn swt sd.n.tn snc jm n mrht n ht nb (II vo. 1—3)

Now, have 2 dar. of land cultivated for us on lease in Perhaa beside Hau Jr., by copper, by

cloth, by full barley, [by] any [thing], but only when you will have (first) collected the value

of oil or of anything (else) there.

Dependent clauses of future circumstance are well attested in Late Egyptian.4 The existence of

such clauses in earlier stages of the language is less certain, but is perhaps to be recognized in some

Middle Egyptian examples of the "pseudoverbal" SUBJECT r sdm construction without initial jw

and in some earlier examples of the Old Egyptian counterpart of this construction, the prospective

sdm.f49 The latter use seems probable here.50 The motivation for the compound construction is

exactly the same as that of the two examples after conditional jr, to cast an expression of com

pleted action (sd.n.tn) into the future (wnn). A common syntactic motivation in all three examples,

however, seems impossible to rationalize.

The other instances of the active sdm.f after conditional jr in the Heqanakht papyri all involve

2-lit. and 3-lit. verbs, for which the prospective cannot be distinguished formally (I 8 tm.tn, I vo. 6

jwh,V 25 j3s), or examples with a pronominal suffix, in which the distinctive ending — w can be

omitted (I 16 th.k, I vo. 147V.5, II 31 qn.sn, P ' 3 sch.k). These could all be be instances of the sub

junctive sdm.f rather than the prospective. The latter, however, is somewhat likelier in light of the

unambiguous examples cited above. Clear examples of the subjunctive in this construction also

seem to be generally less common than the prospective in Middle Egyptian.51

The active prospective also appears as the predicate in a main clause in a sentence from the

palimpsest letter of Account P:

47 An "emphatic" reading ("if it is in exchange for that emmer that is in Perhaa that they will have collected value"), is theoretically possible but does not suit the context: the preceding sentence (I 4) is not about "collecting value" but about the means used for payment, as in the non-"emphatic" reading of I 4—5. See also the discussion on pp.

152-55-48 E.F. Wente, "iwiw.f sdm in Late Egyptian," JNES 20 (1961), 120—23; PJ- Frandsen, An Outline of the Late Egyptian

Verbal System (Copenhagen, 1974), § 103; Cerny and Groll, LEG, 251. 49 For Middle Egyptian see HJ . Polotsky, Egyptian Tenses (The Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, Proceed

ings, II no. 5: Jerusalem, 1965), § 46. For Old Egyptian, see Allen, Inflection, § 286. 50 II vo. 3 wnn could be analyzed as the imperfective sdm.fi which is used in clauses of concomitant circumstance:

e.g., CT IV, 186—87a wnn.j wc.kw "when I was alone," confirmed as adverbial by the variant m wnn.j wc.kw fIJBe). But the combination of imperfective wnn and the sdm.n.f is, not otherwise attested, and in any event makes no sense. Since the sdm.n.f itself is often used circumstantially as an expression of prior action, there is no evident motive for its subordination by circumstantial wnn, if a simple expression of prior circumstance ("but after you have collected") had been intended. An "emphatic" construction, which could theoretically have been "converted" circumstantially by wnn, is excluded by the context (*"but only when it is there that you have collected the value of oil or of anything").

51 Malaise, CdE 60 (1985), i54-s8;Vernus, Future at Issue, 31.

http://sdm.fi

94 4- LANGUAGE

j[r]gr[t] scb.k hmt t3 hmt 2 b3kt ddt.n.j n.k hr.s, rdj.k jn.t, mj bw nb nfrjrrw zh3.k (P' 2—3)

Now, if you will collect the copper of those two female slave-laborers I spoke to you

about, you will be so kind as to have (it) brought.52

The identification of rdj as the prospective here is assured by the context as well as its form.53 A

further example of this use may occur in Letter II:

jr grt wjntjj.finb p3 cqw m hjmwt t3ywjwy.fin.j c3 hncj, cnhfmj cnhj (II 37-38)

But as for anyone who will reject this salary, women or men, he should come to me, here

with me, and live like I live.

The form jwy.fi in this passage and other instances of the same written form in the Coffin Texts

have been analyzed as the "nominal" form of the sdm.f with equal weight given to the possibility

that they represent the prospective sdm.f in "emphatic" use.54 On balance, the evidence favors the

first of these alternatives. A clear example of the "nominal" form occurs in Letter III in the same

kind of sentence and with the same injunctive value:

jr grt rdjt.fi n.j db3 m mrht, dd.fn.j hbnt 1 hr jtj-mh 2 hr btj 3 r pw (III 8—vo. 1)

Now, as for one who would give me a replacement in oil, he shall give me 1 jar for 2 full

barley or for 3 emmer.

The "emphatic" sense of this example, signaled by the use of the relative ("nominal") form dd.fi as

predicate, is clearly focused on the two prepositional phrases at the end of the sentence, which

specify the rate of exchange; the sense can be made somewhat clearer in English by a cleft sen

tence: "it is for 2 full barley or for 3 emmer that he shall give me 1 jar (of oil)." In the preceding

example the emphasis signaled by the form jwyf lies on the dative n.j, reinforced by the adverbial

phrase c3 hnc j ; the following clause is probably a parallel "emphatic" construction: i.e., "it is to me,

here with me, that he should come, and it is like I live that he should live." The injunctive sense

evident in both examples is a common feature of this form of the verb in the Heqanakht papyri.5

The same sense, however, is rare and perhaps even nonexistent, in clear examples of the prospec

tive form, which essentially denotes an objective, indicative future.57 Finally, jwyf is not attested

unequivocally as a written form of the prospective sdm.f of the verb jwj "come."5 These features,

coupled with the parallel of the clear "nominal" form in III 8—vo. 1, argue against the analysis of II

38 jwyf as an example of the prospective sdm.f''9

The palimpsest letter of Account P also contains an example of the prospective sdm.f as the

predicate in the future counterpart of the "participial statement":

52 Cf. ShS 70—72, cited in n. 42. For the final phrase "be so kind as to," see the textual note on p. 73.

53 The rare affirmative perfective ("indicative") sdm.f is excluded by the context. An "emphatic" reading (cf. n. 57, below), with stress on the following prepositional phrase, is improbable in view of the normal parenthetic use of such phrases (e.g., Ill 4—5, where an "emphatic" sentence is excluded by the construction).

54 M. Gilula, "The 'Emphatic' Form of the Verb iw 'to come'," in Form und Mass, Festschifit fur Gerhard Fecht, ed. by J. Osing and G. Dreyer (AAT i2:Wiesbaden, 1987), 137-41.

55 Noted by Vernus, Future at Issue, 45 n. 60. 56 Examples with clear written forms are I 5 dd.sn, I 17 dd.k, I vo. 7 zbb.k, I vo. 12 jrr.k, II 28 jnn.tn, II 29 dd.tn, II 37

dd.k, and III 5 dd.t(w). 57 See Vernus, Future at Issue, 35—37.Vernus also argues for use of the prospective sdm.f as a subjective future, like the

subjunctive form, or as an "emphatic" counterpart of the latter: Future at Issue, 38—45.The examples he adduces, however, can also be understood either as the relative ("nominal") sdm.f with injunctive sense or as the prospective with other values. The only examples that do not suit the normal written form of the sdm.f in "emphatic" use involve the form rdj (Vernus's examples 83—85, 87, 91, 94). If "emphatic," these can be analyzed as instances of the perfective relative form; for this use, note Sin. B 202 jr.tw nn mj mj "How was this done?": Allen, LingAeg 1 (1991), 1-2. If prospective, they need not necessarily be either injunctive or "emphatic": for example, Peas. Bi , 67—68 (Vernus, Future at Issue, 39 ex. 83) h3 rdj.t(w) swd3.j jb.k hr p3 hn n mdt"U only I will be allowed to inform you about this problem" (objective rather than subjective).

58 It could, however, be the relative sdm.fi used nonattributively. One possible example of this written form in attributive use occurs in CT IV, 143a B7C Imljwyfir mrr.fi'at whose wish he comes and goes" (unfortunately in broken context). Note also the masculine singular active participle jww ~ jury in CTVI, 370a/t (sim., CTVII, 414c).

59 This discussion supersedes my arguments to the contrary in LingAeg 4 (1994), 2-4.

http://wjntjj.fi

http://t3ywjwy.fi

http://jwy.fi

http://rdjt.fi

http://dd.fi

http://sdm.fi


jmj dj.t n hrd n '~nh.fi, jh ntfijn.fin.j (P' 4-5)

Have (it) given to a boy of Ankhef: then he is the one who will bring (it) to me.

This use of the prospective form is standard in Middle Egyptian for the verbs jnj and rdj, though

the subjunctive of other verbs is also attested in the same use. °

The Heqanakht papyri also contain at least two examples ofa passive form of the sdm.fi that

can be analyzed as the prospective passive:

ch3 tw z3wwprtjtjj z3ww htj nb (I 2)

Mind you that my barley seed is guarded and that all my property is guarded.

j)n jw hmj wc jm.tn r whd srhw n.fihjmtf(ll 42—43)

Furthermore, will any of you bear having his woman denounced to him?

The construction in the first of these examples is similar to that in two other instances from the

same letter, in which the imperative phrase ch3 tw "mind you" (HP, i n ) is followed by the im

perative z3w "beware" with the sense of the English conjunction "lest, that not:"

ch3 tw zp 2 z3w sj3t.k jtj-mh h3r jm (I 10— 11)

Mind you do not short a sack of full barley from it.

ch3 tw zp 2 z3w shm jb.k r jpyt jm nt jtj-mh (I 12—13)

Mind you do not take liberties with the oipe of its full barley.

In I 2, however, the verb z3ww cannot have the same meaning, since it governs a noun rather than a

following verb form. The form could be the imperative, which often follows the phrase ch3 tw/tn, 2

if the ending — w is that of the plural, but the clear second-person singular context of the passage

makes such a reading unlikely. As James recognized (HP 18), z3ww must therefore be a passive form

with the verb's primary meaning "guard"; its prospective sense is evident from the context.

The prospective passive meaning of II 43 srhw, which serves as object of the verb whd, is also

clear from the context: literally, "to bear that his woman will be denounced to him." Both Old

Egyptian and the Coffin Texts contain occasional examples of the prospective passive sdm.f as the

object ofa verb where the action of the noun clause is subsequent to that of the governing verb. 3

The passive sdm.fi, however, is not clearly attested in this use. 4 This evidence indicates that II 43

srhw is the prospective passive rather than an example of the Middle Egyptian passive sdm.f with

final — w. The same form and function probably exist in I 2 z3ww as well—i.e., literally "fight you

that my barley seed will be guarded"—despite the fact that ch3 tw/tn does not seem to be other

wise attested governing a following sdm.f.

Further examples of the prospective passive may occur in two passages from Letter I'.jrjr m jtj-

mh "when full barley will be dealt with" (I 12) and mj.k cbw 3ht h3-{3 n jtj-mh h3r 100 "Look, 1 dar.

of land will net 100 sacks of full barley" (I 13). The verb form in the first of these is probably a

subjectless sdm.f (-<&>-) rather than the perfective participle understood by James and followed in

other translations (see the textual note on p. 27), and the context indicates that it has prospective

sense. As such, it can be analyzed as an example of the prospective passive, despite the absence of a

formal ending; it apparently serves as a passive counterpart of the active jr sdm.fi discussed above,

which also uses the prospective form. If cbw in I 13 is a verb form, it is probably the prospective

passive (literally, "will be associated"), but it could also be a verbal noun serving as the subject ofa

nonverbal predicate ("Look, the association of 1 dar. of land is to 100 sacks of full barley"); the first

alternative, however, seems more likely.

60 Gardiner, EG, § 450, 5 (e). ' 61 Gardiner, EG, § 338, 3: see the textual note to I 2 z3ww on p. 23. A third example of the z3w construction occurs

in II 24 jr z3w qnd.tn. 62 James, HP, 111. Examples in the Heqanakht papyri are I vo. 6, vo. 17; II 30. 63 Allen, Inflection, § 521. C T I, i99f B12CJU' wd.n n.j rc rdj n.k (pj'.fe"Re has commanded me that you be given your

head"; other copies have the prospective form rdj.t(w), for which see Allen, Inflection, § 553 B. 64 Westendorf, Gebrauch des Passivs, 58-60; GmT, § 253.

http://~nh.fi

http://ntfijn.fi

http://sdm.fi

http://sdm.fi

http://sdm.fi

96 4- LANGUAGE

The Heqanakht papyri also contain one instance of a passive sdm.f with final — w that is

probably not the prospective form: mj.tn s3cw m wnm r(m)t c3 (II 27-28) "Look, they've started

to eat people here." Despite its ending, s3cw in this example must be the regular Middle Egyp

tian passive sdm.fi, since s3c evidently belongs to the class of 3 —lit. verbs, which use gemination

(sdmm.fi) rather than an ending as the mark of the prospective passive. The ending here may be

related to the use of the verb with unexpressed subject. 5 Nonetheless, its existence lends a note

of uncertainty to the interpretation of other examples with final — w in these texts as the pro

spective passive.

Examples of the prospective active sdm.f in the Heqanakht papyri involve uses that survive in

Classical Egyptian: the conditional jr sdm.f construction, future wnn, the "participial statement," and

the less common use as the predicate in a main clause. Examples of the prospective passive, how

ever, though less certain than the active, are more reflective of Old Egyptian than of Middle

Egyptian grammar. In this respect Heqanakht's language appears somewhat more conservative than

that of contemporary Middle Egyptian texts.

C. Negations

Five kinds of negation appear in the Heqanakht papyri: the verbs jmj and tm with following

negatival complement, the particles nj and nn, and the phrase nfr 3. The uses of the negative

verbs, which occur in Letters I—IV and AccountV, are typical of both Old and Middle Egyptian:

m as the negation of the imperative (I 8, [vo. 9], vo. 10-11, vo. 13, vo. 17; II 2, 32, 34, 38; IV 2, 4);

and tm as the negation of the imperfective sdm.f in an adverb clause (V 27 tm.fi sm: "virtual" rela

tive), of the prospective sdm.f after conditional jr (I 8 jr tm.tn gm), and of the infinitive (III vo. 1

hnc tm rdj).

The most common negations in the Heqanakht papyri, as throughout Middle Egyptian, are

the particles nj (-«-) and nn ( ^ ) . These appear in Letters I—III and Account P, in the following

uses:

nj sdm.f with past reference (I 15; II 3, 36)

nj sdmt.fi (P 19)

nj ... js negating a sentence with nominal predicate (I 14)

nj in a nonverbal existential sentence (I vo. 12-13; II 28)

nj plus the infinitive in an adverb clause (I vo. 1-2)

nj in a rhetorical question with hr plus adjectival predicate (I vo. 2) and the sdm.n.f (I vo. 5)

nj negating a clause (II 40, 44)

nn sdm.f with future reference (I vo. 4-5)

nn negating a sentence with adverbial predicate (I 12-13)

nn plus the infinitive in an adverb clause (III 4—5)

nn sdm.fiin an adverb clause (II 44)

nn ... js in a rhetorical question with the sdm.n.f (II 38—39).

Of these, the first three uses of nj and all but the last of nn are well attested in Middle Egyptian. 7

The remaining uses are either unique or occur in Old Egyptian but not Middle Egyptian.

Older constructions are represented by the use of nj rather than nn in the nonverbal negation

of existence and with the infinitive in a negative adverb clause:

65 Other examples of the passive sdm.f in the Heqanakht papyri occur with expressed subject and without ending (II 4-jr, II 42 rh, ?P dd).

66 Edel, AdG, §§ 1110, 1117-18, 1127; Gardiner, EG, §§ 340.1, 347.6 (and the discussion in Section B, above), 348; Westendorf, GmT, § 209b (p. 146), and the textual note to V 26—27 o n P- 55-

67 For nn sdm.fiin an adverb clause, see Gunn, Studies, 159—60. nn sdm.n.fijs occurs as a variant of the standard construction nj sdm.n.f js in the i8th-Dynasty version of the Instruction of Ptahhotep (L2, 3, 16): Gunn, Studies, 127.

http://sdm.fi

http://sdmm.fi

http://tm.fi

http://sdmt.fi

http://sdm.fi

http://sdm.fi

C. NEGATIONS 97

mj.k nj prwf m p3 pr hnc.k (I vo. 12-13)

Look, there is nothing more (important) than either of them in that house with you.

mj.tn nj ddw n.sn p3 cqw m st nbt (II 28)

Look, there are none to w h o m this salary is given anywhere.

jnjrgrt p3 rdjt jwt n.j z3-hwt-hrw hr jtj-mh js n swsyt wn m dd-swt, nj rdjt n.j p3 jtj-mh h3r 10 m

jtj-mh m3 nfr (I vo. 1-2)

Now, what is this, having Sihathor come to me with old dried-up full barley that was in

Djedsut, wi thout giving me those 10 sacks of full barley in new, good full barley?

The negation nj is attested in both of these constructions in Old Egyptian but is replaced by nn in

Middle Egyptian texts. These uses all appear in documents that were probably writ ten by Heqa

nakht himself (see pp. 82—84). I n Letter III, writ ten by a different scribe, the adverbial construction

shows the standard Middle Egyptian form with nn rather than nj:

jrt r.f zh3w.k pw cnh-(w)d3-s(nb) rdjt sd.t(w), nn rdjt thth nh jm (III 4—5)

So what Your Excellency should do is to have it collected, wi thout letting any of it get

confused.

This passage represents the only instance of nj and nn as variants in the same construction in the

Heqanakht papyri. T h e use of nn here rather than Heqanakht 's usual nj could reflect the prefer

ence of the scribe w h o transcribed the letter. If it is an accurate transcription of Heqanakht 's

dictation, however, it may represent a deliberate attempt to employ a more standard form M i d

dle Egyptian in keeping with the tone of the letter, which is more formal than that of the other

documents .

Both nj and nn are also used in the Heqanakht papyri in some unique rhetorical questions.

This function appears in three passages in Letters I and II:

nj hr nfr tw hr wnm jtj-mh nfr, jwj r t3 (I vo. 2)

Don ' t you have to be well off, eating good full barley while I am outcast?

nj grt dd.n.j r dd jw snfirw [c]3y (I vo. 5)

Now, didn't I say "Snefru has grown up"?

nn grt j.n.j js mj n3, dd.n.j n.tn r dd m snc hnmst nt htpt hr.s (II 38-39)

Now, before I came here, didn't I tell you "Don ' t keep a friend of Hetepet from her"?

The rhetorical nature of these questions, assuming an affirmative answer, seems evident from the

contexts in which they occur. Their syntax is more difficult to analyze, since the constructions ap

parently have no exact parallels elsewhere. The sense of each question, however, suggests that the

negation applies to the sentence as a whole rather than to the predicate itself-—in other words, an

affirmative statement that is questioned in the negative: "Isn't it true you have to be well off?,"

"Isn't it true I said . . .? ," and "Isn't it true that I came here having said .. . ?"The converse, in which

a negative statement is questioned, seems to employ the particle jn before the negative statement:

for example, j)n nj ch3.n.k hr.s "Don ' t you fight for her?" and jn nn r.fidj.k sw3.j "So, won' t you let

me pass?

68 For nj as an existential negation with adverbial adjunct in Old Egyptian, see Pyr. 462a—b, 484d, 2071c. For the adverbial use of nj plus infinitive in Old Egyptian, see Pyr. 789c, 1357b. For Middle Egyptian counterparts with nn, see ShS 100-101, Peas. B2, 109—11; Gunn, Studies, 155—56. For I vo. 12—13, cf. W Helck, Die Lehre des Dw3-Htjj I (Wiesbaden, 1970), 26: nn prwf htp.w"there is none more content than he."

69 Gardiner and Sethe, Letters to the Dead, pl. 6, 3, and Peas. R 9, 3, respectively. See Silverman, Interrogative Constructions, 64—67. These questions are apparently made in expectation of an answer, without indicating whether a reply in the affirmative or negative is anticipated, and correspond to the category of "open" questions in Latin, while the examples from the Heqanakht papyri are similar to Latin nonne interrogatives, expecting an answer in the affirmative. For the two kinds of questions, see J. Lyons, Introduction to Theoretical Linguistics (Cambridge, 1968), 308; similarly, Gardiner, EG, §§ 490-91.

98 4- LANGUAGE

Some support for this analysis is provided by the example in I vo. 5.This construction is indis

tinguishable from the negation in which nj governs the verb form itself,70 but the context clearly

rules out its normal meaning ("nor do/can I say").The negation must therefore govern the sen

tence as a whole rather than the sdm.n.f alone. Although the distinction between these two

meanings seems to be indicated only by their context, the ambivalence is comparable to that at

tested for other negative constructions in Middle Egyptian.71

In I vo. 2, however, the difference in negative scope is apparently signaled by the negative par

ticle itself. This construction, in which nj questions a sentence with adjectival predicate, is similar

to that attested in a text of the mid-Twelfth Dynasty:

nj wrwj) c3wj) hzwfijjjptn hr j)tj hr ntrj

Are not these my blessings from my father and my god exceedingly numerous and great?72

This contrasts with the Middle Egyptian negation of the adjectival-predicate construction, which

uses the particle nn:

mj.tn nn srrp3 t h(n)qt jrrw n.j t3 qnbt nt hwt-ntr (Siut I, 295)

Look, that bread and beer that the staff of the temple make for me is not trivial.73

It is similar, however, to another Middle Egyptian construction in which the particle nj is used to

negate the adjective itself, as a word: nj wr n.k cntjw (ShS 150) "Myrrh is inconsiderable for you."74

In light of these constructions, the use of nj in I vo. 2 may have been prompted by the need to dis

tinguish the sentence as a negative rhetorical question from the negated sentence with adjectival

predicate ("you don't have to be well off"). The added complication of the unique use of hr with

the adjectival predicate, however, makes this motivation uncertain. The same feature also makes it

impossible to determine whether the scope of the negation in I vo. 2 was distinguished by context

alone from the alternative value exemplified in ShS 150.

The motivation for the use of nn rather than nj in II 38—39 is less problematic. The Old and

Middle Egyptian construction nj sdm.n.f js negates the pragmatic focus of the "emphatic" sentence

(here, the dd.n.j clause) rather than the verb form or the sentence itself; the use of nn therefore in

dicates that the scope of the negation governs the entire sentence instead.75 Syntactically, the

question in II 38—39 consists of nn governing an "emphatic" sentence; the particlejs in this case is

not part of the negation but serves instead to signal the subordinate status of the "emphatic" sen

tence.7 The construction therefore conforms to the common Middle Egyptian use of nn as an

existential negation; as such, its interrogative value apparently derives from the context rather than

the construction itself: i.e.,"Isn't it true that before I came here, I said . . .?"

The scope of the negation in another sentence from the Heqanakht papyri seems to be sig

naled by word order rather than by the negative particle itself:

nj grt mr.k sj), hr.k dj.kjn.t(w) n.j jwt-n-hb (II 40)

Now, if you don't want her, you'll have to have Iutenhab brought to me.

70 Cf. Siut I, 310 nj grt hd.n h3tj-c nb jmj h3w.fhtmt ky h3tj-c "nor does any current high official damage the contract of another high official"; sim. Siut I, 281; Griffith, Kahun,pl. 30, 11-12; Smith 10, 21.

71 E.g., Peas. Bi , 126—27 nj jw js pw jwsw gs3w "Isn't a tilted balance an injustice?," which clearly does not have the normal meaning of this construction ("A tilted balance is not an injustice"). The latter is attested in Peas. Bi , 196 nj wrjs pw wr jm "Such a great one is not a great one."

72 Newberry, Bersheh I, pl. 33 = Urk.VII, 46, 18. See Lefebvre, GEC, § 631, and Baer,"Letters," 5 n. 29. 73 Sim. Prisse 9, 7 nn h jrt.n.j tp (I "What I have done on earth is not trivial."The adjectival-predicate expression of

possession, however, is negated by means of nj ... js: M. Gilula, RdE 20 (1968), 60—61. 74 I.e., "you don't have much myrrh." For the use of nj as the negation of a word, cf. Smith 15,15 nj ht pw "It is

nothing." Both of these examples are affirmative statements: i.e., [nj wrjA"! n.k cntjw (cf. Sin. B 82 wr n.fijrp r mw "Wine was more considerable for it than water") and [nj htfi°'JNpw (cf. Siut I, 301 htjpw"lt is my property").

75 For the scope of nj ... js see A. Loprieno, LingAeg 1 (1991), 219. This construction is apparently used in "emphatic" sentences only for the negation of the pragmatic focus. The use of nj rather than nn in II 38—39 would therefore presumably have indicated the meaning "It is not having said ... that I came here," which is excluded by the context.

76 For this function of js see, e.g., CT I, 228d—f (object of dd) and Adm. 12, 1 (adverb clause).

C. NEGATIONS 99

The position of the enclitic particle grt in this sentence contrasts with that in a second passage

from the same letter, in which it follows the negated verb form:

jr grt wnn mr-snfirw hr mrt wnn m s3 n3 n k3, hr.k dj.k sw m s3 jrj), nj mr.fgrt wnn hnc.k hr sk3

hr prt hr h3t, nj mr.fgrt jwt mj n3 hncj (II 35-36)


in charge of them, for neither did he want to be with you plowing, going up and down,

nor did he want to come here with me.

The construction in II 36 involves the standard Middle Egyptian negation nj sdm.fi with past refer

ence. This is a bound negation, and the position of grt after the verb is probably conditioned by the

inseparability of its two elements.77 The position of grt between nj and the verb in II 40 would

then seem to reflect a different negation—most likely, that of the clause as a whole rather than the

verb form itself.The construction is syntactically analogous to I vo. 5 nj grt dd.n.j, though used here

as a statement rather than a question: "Should it not be true you want her."7

The particle nj is also used as the negation of a clause in the Heqanakht papyri in an elliptical

sentence from Letter II:

ptr qy n wnn.j hnc.tn m tt wct, nj nn tr.tn n.j hb(sfivt (II 43—44)

How can I be in one community with you? Not when you won't respect the wife for me!

The construction exemplified here is apparently unique, but the syntax of its negations is paralleled

elsewhere in Middle Egyptian. The nn clause is a negated adverb clause ("without you respecting

the wife for me"); the verb form is probably the subjunctive sdm.f that is normally used after nn in

Middle Egyptian.79 The particle nj, in turn, negates the negated adverb clause as a unit ("Not

without you respecting the wife for me"), a function analogous to the use of nj in other Middle

Egyptian texts as the negation ofa single word (see n. 74, above). The construction as a whole

serves as an elliptical reply to the preceding question—more precisely, as the negative specification

of the noun qy "manner": i.e., literally "What is the manner of my being with you in one commu

nity? (The manner is) not without you respecting the wife for me." °

Analysis of all the examples of the negative particle nn in the Heqanakht papyri indicates that

its use conforms to that of standard Middle Egyptian. This is true not only for the more usual

Middle Egyptian constructions—nn sdm.fi, with the subjunctive form (I vo. 4—5, II 44); the nega

tion ofa sentence with adverbial predicate (I 12—13); and nn plus the infinitive in an adverb clause

(III 4—5)—but also for the unusual construction nn sdm.n.f js (II 38—39), which is syntactically

analogous to the common Middle Egyptian use of nn plus noun as an existential negation. The

common feature underlying all of these uses appears to be consistent with Gunn's analysis of Mid

dle Egyptian nn as a predicative (adjectival) negation.

The uses of the negative particle nj in the Heqanakht papyri are less consistently reflective of

standard Middle Egyptian grammar. Except for the standard negation nj ... js in a sentence with

nominal predicate (I 14), however, most if not all examples of nj in the papyri can be analyzed as

sharing a common feature: the negation of some element as a word. This analysis applies not only

to the negation of verb forms—the perfective sdm.f (j 15; II 3, 36) and the sdmt.fi (P 19)—but also

77 Cf. James, HP, 42—43. For Middle Egyptian nj sdm.f as a bound construction, see E. Meltzer, in L'egyptologie en 1979, 49-51; A. Loprieno, LingAeg 1 (1991), 202. For another example of nj sdm.f grt, see the textual note to II 36 on p. 44.

78 The verb form of II 40 mr.k is uncertain. From its meaning and the position of grt, it is probably not the perfective sdm.f. It may be the subjunctive, which sometimes appears in "virtual" initial conditions (e.g., CG 20003, a l' Gardiner, EG, § 216), or the imperfective, which is occasionally used as an initial form (e.g., Sin. B 66).

79 For the construction and verb form, see Gunn, Studies, 159—60. 80 Another instance of an elliptical statement with a negated adverb clause is Westcar 8, 16 nj js nj r(m)tjty cnh-(w)d3-

s(nb) nbj "But not of people, sovereign, lph, my lord!" In this case, however, the adverb clause itself is not further negated but is dependent on a main clause that is unexpressed because its elements were mentioned in preceding sentences (Westcar 8, 13-14): i.e., (jwj rh.kw t_3z tpj hsq), nj js nj r(m)t "(I know how to tie on a severed head), but not (that) of people." For the syntax of this sentence, see also Loprieno, LingAeg 1 (1991), 225—26.

81 Gunn, Studies, 197-98.

http://sdm.fi

http://sdm.fi

http://sdmt.fi

100 4- LANGUAGE

to that of entire clauses or sentences (I vo. 2, vo. 5; II 40, 44), where nj negates the proposition as a

unit. The use of nj with the infinitive in adverb clauses (I vo. 1—2) and as an existential negation (I

vo. 12—13; II 28) conforms to Old Egyptian practice rather than that of Middle Egyptian, but this

too may be consistent with the same general function of the particle.

The atypical uses of nj and nn in the Heqanakht papyri have been interpreted as evidence that

these documents represent a stage of the language in which the two negations were not distinguished

as rigidly as they are in standard Middle Egyptian. 2 The preceding discussion, however, indicates that

the syntactic distribution of nj and nn in the papyri is almost completely complementary, whatever

their basic function or meaning may have been. The sole exceptions involve the use of both particles

with the infinitive in an adverb clause (I vo. 1-2 nj vs. Ill 4—5 nn) and as the negation of an affirma

tive proposition (I vo. 2, I vo. 5, II 40 nj vs. II 38—39 nn). In each case, the use of nn is the exception.

The first can be reasonably analyzed as reflecting the preference of different scribes or the deliberate

use of standard vs. nonstandard language in two different social settings (addressing a superior in the

one case and subordinates in the other). The second reflects the usage of a single scribe in a single

social context, but is apparently governed by syntactic considerations. The use of nn rather than nj in

this instance actually demonstrates the contrastive nature of the two particles, as does the appearance

of both negations elsewhere in a single clause (II 44). Although the language of the Heqanakht papyri

differs from standard Middle Egyptian in some uses of the negation nj, therefore, it does seem to dis

tinguish the two particles nj (-*-) and nn (**»»») as consistently as do texts that are more representative

of the classical language of the Middle Kingdom.

The language of the Heqanakht papyri is also nonstandard in its use of the negation nfr 3. This

construction appears in three sentences from Heqanakht's Letters I and II:

nfr 3 hr.k rp3 mn dd.n.j sht sw, jt.sn sw snc.w m nbsyt, qdb.sn 3ht r snctf(! 5-6)

Should you have nothing more than that sheet I said to weave, they should take it valued

from Sidder Grove and lease land for its value.

jr nfr 3 hsb.k n.j jtj-mh wct m jtj-mh m3, nn hsb.j n.k sj) n nh[h] (I vo. 4—5)

If you can't calculate a single (measure) of full barley for me in new full barley, I won't ever

calculate it for you.

mj.kjr qn.sn, dw3.t(w) n.k ntr, nfr 3 dd.j wg n.tn (II 31)

Look, if they are diligent, you will be thanked, and I will no longer have to make it dis

tressful for (any of) you.

As James noted, this negation conforms to the pattern of the Old Egyptian negation nfr n, which

also appears, though rarely, in Middle Egyptian. 3 Parallels with nfr n exist for the syntax of each

use of nfr 3 in the Heqanakht papyri, in both older and more contemporary texts. 4 Despite James's

caution, therefore, nfr 3 appears to be nothing more than a variant of the more common nfr n. 5

The use of nfr n has been analyzed as possibly complementary with that of the negative verb tm in

Old Egyptian. ' In the Heqanakht papyri, however, both negations appear in the same syntactic

environment, after conditional jr (I vo. 4 and I 8). This suggests that they differ primarily in mean

ing rather than syntactic function. If so, nfr 3 probably represents a more categorical negation than

either tm or the other negations used in the papyri—somewhat akin to English "not at all"—

reflecting the semantic value of its primary component, nfr "he at an end." 7

82 Gunn, Studies, I95;james, HP, 42; Gilula,JEA 56 (1970), 209. 83 James, HP, 104—105. For Middle Egyptian, see Edel, AdG, § 1130; Gardiner, EG, § 351, 1. 84 With adverbial predicate: Gardiner and Sethe, Letters to the Dead, pl. 6, 6. With the "nominal" (nonattributive im

perfective relative) sdm.f: Edel, AdG, § 1133, and Gilula,JEA 56 (1970), 214. In a subordinate clause following the main clause, after conditional jr, and in an unmarked initial conditional clause: Edel, AdG, §§ 1135-37.

85 The element 3 is probably a phonological variant of n: cf. Edel, AdG, § 130, 4. Pace James, HP, 105, it is evidently obligatory, like n in nfr n: note II 31, where the scribe corrected its omission (see the textual note on p. 42).

86 Gilula JEA 56 (1970), 214. 87 Gardiner, RdT 40 (1923), 79.

D. THE LANGUAGE OF THE HEQANAKHT PAPYRI 101

D. The Language of the Heqanakht Papyri

As the preceding discussions demonstrate, the language used in the Heqanakht papyri is essen

tially Middle Egyptian in its phonology, morphology, and syntax, but with a number of features

that distinguish it from the standard form of the language found in Middle Egyptian literary texts.

Some of these features reflect Old Egyptian forms and constructions no longer used in standard

Middle Egyptian. These include a somewhat more conservative phonology, a possibly more pro

ductive use of the active and passive prospective sdm.fi, wider use of the negative particle nj in place

of Middle Egyptian nn, the negation nfr 3, and the interruption of a direct genitive by nb. Other

features reflect usages that are not characteristic of Old Egyptian but which are attested in other

nonstandard Middle Egyptian texts, particularly letters. These include the demonstratives p3/t3/n3,

which conform in usage but not in phonology and syntax with their standard Middle Egyptian

counterparts pn/tn/nn, and the interrogative jh/hy/h.

Together, these features characterize a form of Middle Egyptian that is probably a distinct dia

lect rather than merely an older stage of the language represented in literary texts. Although it is

more conservative than standard Middle Egyptian in some respects, overall it is much closer to the

latter than to Old Egyptian, not only in features that it shares with Middle Egyptian but also in the

fact that its nonstandard demonstratives are used in essentially the same manner as those of the lit

erary language. These characteristics are better suited to differences of dialect than to those of

chronological development. The two dialects may have been distinguished not only by syntax but

also phonologically: this is suggested both by Heqanakht's generally more conservative phonology

and by the essential equivalence between his p3/t3/n3 and Middle Egyptian pn/tn/nn, on the one

hand, and his nfr 3 and Old—Middle Egyptian nfr n, on the other. The uncharacteristic use of nn

rather than nj in Letter III then reflects either its scribe's familiarity with the literary dialect or

Heqanakht's own conscious effort to adapt his nonstandard dialect to a form of the language that

was perhaps more appropriate in addressing a superior official.

The geographical focus of Heqanakht's dialect is uncertain, but the likelihood that his home

was near Memphis (see pp. 121—25) suggests that it was spoken in the same region. This origin may

also explain its preservation of features typical of Old Egyptian, which seems to reflect a dialect of

the Memphite area.

For Old Egyptian as a Memphite dialect, see WF. Edgerton, BASOR 122 (April, 1951), 11-12; Edel, AdG, § 2i;A. Loprieno, Ancient Egyptian, a Linguistic Introduction (Cambridge, 1995), 8; J.P. Allen, "Des traits dialectaux dans les exemplaires des Textes des Pyramides du Moyen Empire," paper presented at a conference on the Pyramid Texts and Coffin Texts at the Institut Francais d'Archeologie Orientale du Caire, September 2001, to be published in the proceedings of that conference. Heqanakht's p3/t3/n3 demonstratives are not typical of Old Egyptian, but the earliest appearance of p3 is in a Giza tomb scene (Edel, AdG, § 195), suggesting that this linguistic feature was also present in the Memphite area.

http://sdm.fi

PART II

Commentary

5. People

OF THE PEOPLE MENTIONED IN THE HEQANAKHT PAPYRI, only one is possibly attested elsewhere:

the vizier Ipi, in whose tomb-complex the papyri were found (see pp. 3—6) and who may be the

individual referenced in Heqanakht's oath in Letter II (see below).The remainder belong to one of

four groups: Heqanakht and his household, his neighbors and debtors, the people associated with

the Thinite nome, and the individuals mentioned in Letter P' . Although Heqanakht's letters and

accounts are the only evidence for the existence of these people, the documents contain a few in

ternal clues that tell us more about some of them than the mere occurrence of their names.1

A. Heqanakht

Heqanakht's name appears in more of the documents (Letters I—III, Account V, and Frag. A)

and more often (12 instances) than any other. It is preceded by the title hm-k3 "ka-servant" in all of

its occurrences except those of AccountV. This title presumably indicates Heqanakht's primary of

fice, although he could also have served as a temple official, a function perhaps reflected in the

sample sealings associated with his papyri.2 The texts make no reference to his duties in either ca

pacity, but like other ka-servants he was undoubtedly active in the cult of a high official's statue.3

The statue was usually, though not necessarily, located at the official's tomb, and its cult could

commence before the official's death.4 In the Middle Kingdom such cults employed a single ka-

servant, usually from outside the official's immediate family, for both religious and administrative

purposes.5 His religious duties included daily rites before the statue (fig. 7) and the coordination of

its cult with the ceremonies held in local temples on important feast-days; he also played a major

role in his employer's funeral and served as chief officiant in the posthumous continuation of the

statue cult.' The ka-servant's administrative responsibilities involved management of the lands and

personnel that provided offerings and income for the cult of his employer, a function reflected in

the additional title b3k n pr-dt "worker of the funerary estate" that Heqanakht uses in Letter III.7

Arrangements for this service were established by a contractual relationship between the tomb-

owner and his ka-servant, best illustrated by the document recorded in the tomb of the nomarch

Djefaihapi at Asyut:

Hereditary noble, mayor, priest-overseer Djefaihapi speaking to his ka-servant: Here are all

the things I have contracted with these lay-priests under your supervision. For look, the

ka-servant of a man is the one who makes firm his things and makes firm his loaf. Look, I

have had you know the things I have given to these lay-priests in return for the things they

have given me, so that nothing of them may be reversed. Thus, you should speak for my

things that I have given them, and have your son hear it, your heir who will act as ka-

1 For documentation of the personal names mentioned in the Heqanakht papyri, see Section B of the Indices. 2 See p. 5. For ka-servants as temple personnel, see Golovina, VDI1992 no. 1, 13—14 and n. 96. 3 For the role and duties of the ka-servant see P. Kaplony, LA III, 282-84, and IA VI, 679-93; Golovina, VDI 1992

no. 1, 4, 12—13; Luft, Oikumene 5 (1986), 117—53. 4 A. Bolshakov, AoF 18 (1991), 204-18. 5 Golovina, VDI 1992 no. 1, 8 and 13-14. 6 For the ka-servant's role at major local feasts, see Siut I 273—320; for his participation in the funeral, see Davies, Antef

oker, pl. 21. See also W Helck, Wirtschafitsgeschichte des Alten Agypten im 3. und 2. Jahrtausend vor Chr. (HdO 1, 1,5; Leiden/Koln 1975), 169-72.

.7 See Kessler, in Grund und Boden, 376—79.

105

i o 6 5. PEOPLE

servant for me. Look, I have made you functional like any official of Siut, with fields, with

people, with herds, with basin-lands, with everything, for the sake of your doing something

for me with your heart effective. You should attend to all my things that I have put under

your hands: look, it is before you in writing. These things will belong to your one son you

prefer from your children who will act as ka-servant for me, indivisibly, without allowing

the division of it for his children, just like this text that I have put before you.

Judging from this and similar texts, the ka-servant's compensation consisted of a permanent en

dowment of land, personnel, herds, and other property granted him by the tomb-owner.9 He was

entitled to use this endowment as his own and could pass it on to his designated successor, but

could not subdivide it among his heirs.

With a single exception, all of Heqanakht's papyri were almost certainly written at Thebes, at

some distance from his own home and lands (see pp. 121—25), a n d his Letters I and II indicate that

he had spent some time there before writing and intended to remain there for most of a year after

dispatching them (see pp. 138—39). It is virtually certain, therefore, that the statue for which he

acted as ka-servant was located in Thebes. Since the papyri were found in a tomb subsidiary to that

of the vizier Ipi, it has been universally assumed that this official was Heqanakht's employer, and

that Heqanakht carried out his duties as ka-servant in Ipi's tomb. Neither of these assumptions,

however, is beyond question. The association of the papyri with Ipi's tomb-complex is essentially

circumstantial, and the statue whose cult Heqanakht served could have resided in another tomb or

even in one of the local temples.10

Though neither assumption is incontrovertible, the available evidence makes at least the first of

them a distinct possibility. The high official who employed Heqanakht must have been a person of

some consequence, to engage and provide for the services of a ka-servant whose family was not

resident at Thebes.11 This description amply suits an

official of the rank of vizier, such as Ipi. Heqanakht's

reference to a man named <J D j f as the authority of

his oath in Letter II has been taken as evidence in

support of this identification: "As this man lives for

me—I speak about lp" (II 40—41).12 It may be mere

coincidence that this name appears in a letter found

near the tomb of a vizier of the same name, but

there are several reasons to think otherwise. The au

thority of Old and Middle Kingdom oaths is a god,

the king, a superior, or the individual himself.13

Heqanakht's cnh n.j z pn "As this man lives for me,"

with its parenthetic dd.j r jp "I speak about lp," must

i j V I

Fig. 7.The ka-servant officiating.

10

11

12

13

Siut I, 269-272. Cf. also BM 1164, 7-14 (Clere andVandier, TPPI, § 33; Schenkel, Memphis-Herakleopolis-The 235). For the term "indivisibly" (m wnm nj sbjn.n.f), see A.Theodorides, RIDA 24 (1977), 31-37, 40—43. Golovina, VDI 1992 no. 1, 14—16; U. Luft, Oikumene 5 (1986), 117—52. For lands given to ka-servants, cf. also zh3 n 3hwt rdj.n nb cnh wd3 s(nb) n hm-k3 jpj "Writing of lands that the Lord lph gave to ka-servant Ipi" (James, HP, 85 and pl. 22). For the last point see Bolshakov, AoF 18 (1991), 208-12.

For non-residents employed at Thebes, see Helck, ZAS 80 (1955), 75—76; von Beckerath, LA IV, 67.

See the textual note on pp. 45—46. The vizier's name is uniformly spelled with a final reed-leaf on his sarcophagus, the only inscribed object from the tomb (unpublished: MMA drawings AM 138-40 and 773-75): see L.S. BuUJEA 10 (1924), 15. The absence ofa final reed-leaf in II 41 is probably not significant, however: cf. CG 20559, where the owner's name appears as jpj, jp, and jpw. Heqanakht, the scribe of Letter II (see pp. 82—84), consistendy writes a final reed-leaf when the name is that ofa woman (I vo. 15; II 1, 8) but omits it when the name is that ofa man (I vo. [11]; II 33, 41); the other scribes of the papyri always use the final reed leaf (III 7;V 44—45;VI 5, 7: all men). God: Urk. I, 223, 17; Siut III, 1 (Brunner, Siut, 42). King: Urk. I, 119, 6; 158, 2; 223, 17; also Hatnub 49, 4-5, and J. Garstang, El Ardbah (ERA 6: London, 1901), pl. 5, 24-25. Superior: Baer, ZAS 93 (1966), 2 col. 7; Hatnub 22, 19-20; Sethe, Lesestucke, 84, 11. Self: Urk. I, 39, 6;A.H. Gardiner andT.E. Peet, The Inscriptions of Sinai I, 2nd ed., ed. by J. Cerny (EES 45: London, 1952), pl. 17 no. 53, 16. See Wilson, JNES 7 (1948), 131 (exx. 1-4), 132 (ex. 6), 134 (exx. 22-23), 140 (ex. 64), 144 (ex. 86); Baer, ZAS 93 (1966), 2 col. 7.

B. HEQANAKHT'S HOUSEHOLD 107

refer to a superior, and this is most likely to be the official for whom he acted as ka-servant.'4The

atypical demonstrative pn suggests that the wording cnh n.j z pn derives from a standard repertory

of authorities, and this would also explain the need for a specifying parenthesis. Of the four mo

tives for the use of demonstratives discussed on pp. 88—91, the only one that seems applicable here

is deixis to an unexpressed relative clause: i.e., cnh n.j z pn jrr.j nfhm-k3) "As this man (for whom

I act as ka-servant) lives.'"5 Since the referent is in fact unexpressed, however, Heqanakht then

specifies it in the following parenthesis.

The likeliest explanation for the wording of Heqanakht's oath in Letter II is therefore that it

refers to a superior of his named Ip(i).This individual, in turn, is most likely to have been the high

official for whom Heqanakht acted as ka-servant. In that light, the association of the papyri with

the tomb of the vizier Ipi is more likely to be significant than circumstantial, indicating that Heqa

nakht's employer probably was the vizier. Whether the statue Heqanakht served was located in Ipi's

tomb or elsewhere is immaterial.

Heqanakht's papyri reveal little of a personal nature about him. At the time they were written,

he was perhaps in his mid to late thirties (see Section B, below). As a ka-servant he was undoubt

edly educated, and the probability that he wrote most of the papyri himself attests to his literacy

(see pp. 82—84). His nonstandard dialect, however, may reflect a degree of uncertainty about his

command of literary Middle Egyptian and its epistolary style, which could account in turn for his

use of another scribe to draft the formal Letter III (see p. 101).

B. Heqanakht 's Household

Letters I and II are addressed by Heqanakht to "his household," of which he was clearly the head:

"look, the whole household is just like my children, and everything is mine to allocate" (II 25—26).

The salary list in II 7—22 provides a census of its members.1 The list includes allotments for twelve

individuals and six or more additional members who are not named: two maidservants (b3kt: II 9—11)

and the dependents of two men (hrw: II 12—14), probably at least a wife and one child in each case.17

The total household therefore included at least some eighteen persons, apart from Heqanakht him

self. Three servants mentioned in the papyri (I vo. 13, II 39) are probably not included in the salary

list and were therefore not considered members of the household (see below).

The allotments in the salary list diminish in size from 0.8 sack, at the head of the list, to 0.2 sack,

at the end, indicating that the names are arranged for the most part in order of diminishing impor

tance.1 The list begins with a woman named Ipi (II 8), who is identified as Heqanakht's mother in

the greetings in Letters I and II (I vo. 15; II 1); her precedence over the rest of the family is also re

flected in the same greetings. The fact that she was part of Heqanakht's household almost certainly

indicates that his father, who is not mentioned in the papyri, was no longer alive.19

14 For the term zj "man" referring to such an individual, see Siut I, 269 hm-k3 n z.The parenthesis rules out reference to the king or a circumlocution for the first person (for the latter, see Wb. Ill, 405, 15—18).

15 The demonstrative is not vocative, and the use of parenthetic dd.j r jp indicates that it is not conditioned by the common experience of the interlocutors. Anaphora to an individual previously mentioned is also unlikely: lp Jr.'s son Khentekhtai is mentioned earlier in the letter (II 33), but the father is an improbable referent of II 40 zpn and may in fact be identical with the Ipi Jr. who appears in AccountVI as one of Heqanakht's debtors (VI 5). If the similar phrase in Papyrus Ramessum I, B iii 10, noted on p. 46 n. 5, is an oath with the same authority, the demonstrative there may be anaphoric to an individual mentioned in the preceding lacuna.

16 For the allotments in this list as salaries rather than "rations," see pp. 145—46. Golovina, VDI 1976 no. 2, 127, distinguishes between Heqanakht's "household" (prjw) and his "people" (r(m)t.j: I 1, II 30), but the two terms certainly denote the same group of individuals, since Heqanakht speaks of giving "my people" p3 cqw "this salary" (II 29—30), which must refer to the salaries allocated to the household in II 7-23 (see p. 146 n. 35).

17 The word hrw has plural strokes in II 14 and a male and female determinative in II 13. For the term, see Franke, Verwandtschafitsbezeichnungen, 231—44.

18 For this order, see Fischer,JARCE 10 (1973), 5—9. 19 For a mother as member of her son's household, see Griffith, Kahun Papyri, pl. 9, 3 and 17. Since ka-servants in the

Middle Kingdom were rarely employed from the immediate family (Golovina, VDI 1992 no. 1, 8), it is unlikely

108 5. PEOPLE

Heqanakht's family also included a woman designated as his hbswt/hbsyt, who was being mis

treated by the rest of the household (I vo. 14, 16: II 41, 42, 44). This expression seems to be used

elsewhere of a woman who was not her husband's original spouse, unlike the usual word for

"wife" (hjmt, literally "woman").20 Like hjmt, however, it probably denoted a true spouse: Heqa

nakht's question in II 42—43 ("Furthermore, will any of you bear having his hjmt denounced to

him?") indicates that mistreatment of his hbswt was equivalent to denunciation of his hjmt.21 From

the references to her mistreatment in Letters I and II, it is obvious that she was not a welcome

member of the household, and this in turn suggests that she was a newcomer in their midst, re

placing a previous spouse of Heqanakht, who was either dead or divorced.22

Heqanakht usually refers to his wife only by the term hbswt/hbsyt, but in the passage discussing

her mistreatment in Letter II he also uses two proper names, Hetepet and Iutenhab:

Now, before I came here, didn't I tell you (all) "Don't keep a friend of Hetepet from her,

whether her hairdresser or her domestic"? Mind you about her. If only you would be (as)

firm in everything as (you are) in this. Now, if you (Merisu) don't want her, you'll have to

have Iutenhab brought to me. As this man lives for me—I speak about lp—whoever shall

make any affair of the wife on the battlefield, he is against me and I am against him. Look,

that is my wife, and the way to behave to a man's wife is known. Look, as for anyone who

will act for her, the same is done for me. Furthermore, will any of you bear having his

woman denounced to him? Then I would bear it. How can I be in one community with

you (all)? Not when you won't respect the wife for me! (II 38—40)

Both names refer to a woman who is the object of mistreatment: in the first case, denied access to

her servants by members of the household;23 in the second, unwelcome to at least one of them.

The two names have been uniformly interpreted as those of two different women, but the passage

indicates otherwise. From its first sentence it seems to be about the persecution ofa single individ

ual, and would probably have been understood as such were it not for the two different names.

Heqanakht's use of the 3fs dependent pronoun s(j) "her" in II 40, however, indicates that both

names in fact refer to the same person:

nj grt mr.k sj), hr.k dj.kjn.t(w) n.j jwt-n-hb

Now, if you don't want her, you'll have to have Iutenhab brought to me.24

The use ofa pronoun before its referent is avoided in Egyptian.25 The pronoun sj) in II 40 there

fore most likely refers to the proper name Hetepet, like the 3fs suffix pronouns in the preceding

sentences (II 39 hr.s "from her," nswt.s "her hairdresser," prt.s "her domestic," r.s "about her").

Grammatically and contextually, however, the clause following sj) should belong either to the

that the official whom Heqanakht served in this capacity was his own deceased father. As noted in Section A, above, Heqanakht's employer was probably the vizier Ipi. Heqanakht himself, however, apparently held none of the government posts or titles that might be expected of a vizier's son, and his inferiority vis a vis the Delta-overseer Herunefer, reflected in Letter III, indicates that his family was not of particularly high status.

20 The most recent treatments are by Ward, Feminine Titles, 65—69, and G Robins, Women in Ancient Egypt (Cambridge, 1993), 61—62. The term is sociologically parallel to the English "stepmother," but with reference to the relationship between a woman and her husband rather than her husband's children by a former wife. It may mean literally "she who is clothed": "When you become established and found your house, your should love your wife (hjmt.k) with ardor. Fill her belly, clothe (hbs) her back" (Papyrus Prisse 10, 8—9): Zaba, Les maximes de Ptahhotep, lines 325—27.

21 Noted by Ward, Feminine Titles, 66. 22 Suggested by Theodorides, CdE 41 (1966), 298 and n. 2; see also Robins, Women, 61. Pace Goedicke (Studies, 15

and 33), it is unlikely that Heqanakht's hbswt was the second of two concurrent wives.The evidence for polygamy outside the royal family is inconclusive at best: Allam, LA I, 1166; Robins, Women, 64—67; E. Feucht, Das Kind im Alten Agypten (Frankfurt and NewYork, 1995), 44.

23 Heqanakht's use of the plural (II 38—40 n.tn, ch3 tn, rwd.tn) indicates that more than one individual was seen as an actual or potential antagonist of his wife. For the term hnmst, see the textual note to II 39 on p. 44.

24 For the grammar of this sentence, see the textual note on p. 45 and the discussion on pp. 98—99. 25 Gardiner, EG, § 507, 1. Heqanakht's letters provide two exceptions to this rule, but in both cases the pronoun's refer

ent appears in the same clause: see the textual note to I 12—13 o n P- 27-


same sentence, or at least to the same topic.2' In any case, the fact that the sentence begins with a

pronominal reference indicates that it was not intended to introduce a new topic. In this light,

Heqanakht's use of the name Iutenhab in the second clause is understandable only if the name re

fers to the same individual discussed in the preceding sentences. The most likely reading of the

passage from Letter II therefore indicates that Heqanakht's wife was known by two names, Hetepet

and Iutenhab. Such double names are well attested in the Middle Kingdom.27

As a member of his household, Heqanakht's wife should appear in the salary list of Letter II.2

The name Iutenhab does not occur in the list, but two of its allocations are assigned to a woman

named Hetepet (II 10 and 20). The first of these, which allots 0.8 sack to "Hetepet and her maid

servant," is the second entry in the list (II 10—11), following that of Ipi and her maidservant, who

are given the same amount. This position and size of the allocation indicate that this woman was

second in rank in the household after Heqanakht's mother. As such, she is probably the Hetepet

greeted immediately after Ipi and before the rest of the household elsewhere in the letters (I vo.

15—16, II 1-2). The second Hetepet appears toward the end of the list, where she is identified as

"May's daughter Hetepet" and allocated half a sack, reduced from an original 0.8% sack.

Heqanakht's wife was probably the second of these two women.29 Despite the size of her

original allocation, the largest in either version of the list, she is ranked below several members of

the household who receive lesser amounts rather than with the other senior women, a position

perhaps explained by her status as a newcomer. The filiation that precedes her name is probably

meant to distinguish it from that of the other Hetepet, but it also points to her origin from outside

the immediate family. Finally, the size of her original allocation indicates that she was of some im

portance despite her status in the household, and this is most likely to have been the case for

Heqanakht's wife. Heqanakht's relationship to the first Hetepet is unclear, but judging from her

status she may have been his sister or aunt; her presence in the household suggests that she was

widowed, like his mother, or unmarried.

Both of the two senior women in the salary list receive an allocation for a maidservant (b3kt) as

well as themselves, but Heqanakht makes no such provision for his wife. In Letter I, however, he

orders Merisu to dismiss a housemaid (b3kt nt pr) who has been mistreating his wife:

Now, get that housemaid Senen put out of my house—mind you—on whatever day Si

hathor reaches you. Look, if she spends a single day in my house, take action! You are the

one who lets her do bad to my wife (I vo. 13—14).

Although Senen is not identified specifically as the wife's maidservant, the order for her dismissal

here would explain the absence of such a servant in the salary list. Her title is slightly different

from that of the other two maidservants in the list, but the fact that it is followed by her name in

dicates that the title alone was not sufficent to indicate which female servant was meant, and that

b3kt nt pr was therefore merely a fuller form of the title b3kt. Her absence from the salary list may

also explain in part Heqanakht's reduction of his wife's original allocation.

Letter II mentions two additional servants of Heqanakht's wife, a hairdresser and a domestic (II

38—39). Heqanakht's instruction about giving his wife access to them indicates that they were not

26 The hrf sdm.f construction is used only in subordinate clauses or sentences that continue the discussion ofa topic: Vernus, Future, 71.

27 One of the names is occasionally derived from the full name, but the use of two different names is more common: for women, see Vernus, Surnom, nos. 2, 11, 50, 68, 73, 76-80, 83, 92-93, 122, 127-28, 157, 163-65, 169, 174, 193, 195-97, 252-60, 268-69, 275- 289-92, 297-300, 310, 313,316, 323. 338-40, 343, 347-

28 Baer ("Letters," 8—9 n. 63) suggested that Heqanakht made no provision for her in the list because she was to be sent to him. This is unlikely, however. The continued admonition against her ill-treatment in II 40-44 suggests that Heqanakht meant the sentence as a further warning rather than an instruction to be taken literally. Moreover, the list in II 7—22 specifies salaries rather than rations (see pp. 145-47), which the wife should have received even away from home, as is the case for Heti's son Nakht and Sinebniut (I 14-17; II 5b—6). Goedicke (Studies, 34) suggested that the wife might not yet have entered the household, but this is based on an unsubstantiated interpretation of hbswt as "bride," and is in any case unlikely in view of the subsequent references to her mistreatment in Letter II

29 Suggested by Goedicke (Studies, 15), but as the first of Heqanakht's two wives, with Iutenhab the second.

I IO 5. PEOPLE

part of the household itself, and as such they probably do not receive allocations in the salary list.

Although the list contains the names of several women besides Ipi and the two Hetepets, the fact it

mentions the maidservants of Ipi and Hetepet only by their title indicates that none of the other

women named in the list are servants. One of the women in the list, Nefret (II 21), also receives

greetings from Heqanakht in Letter I (I vo. 16), and is therefore unlikely to have been a mere ser

vant. Since the hairdresser and domestic came from outside the household, Heqanakht's wife

would have had to pay for their services from her own resources, and this may also explain in part

the large allocation originally assigned to her in the salary list.

The nature of the mistreatment suffered by Heqanakht's wife has been a matter of some specula

tion. Most studies have understood the passage in II 40—42 as referring to sexual advances made upon

her, most probably by Merisu.30 This analysis is based on a misunderstanding of the phrase jrtj)f zp

nb hr pg3 n hbswt "whoever shall make any affair of the wife on the battlefield" (II 41) and of the

connotation of jrj n "act for" in the sentence jr jrtj)fn.s nb mittjr.t nj"as for anyone who will act for

her, the same is done for me" (II 42).3I Heqanakht's comment to Merisu—"Now, if you don't want

her" (II 40)—hardly reflects sexual desire, and in Letter I he uses nearly identical phrases—"do bad to

my wife" (jr.s bw bjn r hbswt.j I vo. 14) and "doing bad things to my wife" (jrt bjnw r hbswt.j I vo.

16)—to describe the abuse by both the housemaid Senen and Merisu.32 In fact, the household is evi

dently culpable as a whole, as indicated by Heqanakht's use of the second-person plural pronoun in

his reference to keeping outside servants from attending her (II 38—39) and in his reproaches "What

did she do against you?" (I vo. 15) and "How can I be in one community with you? Not when you

won't respect the wife for me!" (II 43-44).

The sum of evidence indicates that at least a few members of the household were subjecting

Heqanakht's wife to harassment, perhaps because they viewed her as an interloper. The antagonism

of the housemaid Senen (I vo. 13—14) could have had the same origin, particularly if she had been

attached to Heqanakht's previous wife and was now reassigned to serve the new one. Merisu

seems to have been guilty primarily of condoning or at least permitting the wife's mistreatment—

"You are the one who lets her do bad to my wife" (I vo. 14)—but he may also have abused her

verbally, judging from the normal connotation of the word gr "be silent, stop talking" that Heqa

nakht uses when he advises Merisu, at the end of Letter I, "How good it would be for you to

stop" (I vo. 16: see the textual note on p. 36-37).

The names that follow those of Ipi and the senior Hetepet in the salary list of Letter II are

those of six men (II 12—18),33 each of whom is also named at least five times in the papyri: Heti's

son Nakht, Merisu, Sihathor, Sinebniut, Anubis, and Snefru. The first of these is identified by filia

tion as well as name, as he usually is elsewhere in the papyri. This distinction is probably

conditioned by the extreme frequency of the name Nakht in the Middle Kingdom, but it could

also indicate that he did not come from Heqanakht's immediate family.34 Although he was a mem

ber of the household, Heti's son Nakht also had dependents of his own, and his allocation is

specified as being for them as well as him (II 12-13; also I 15-16).

The other five men are identified only by their own names in the salary list, as throughout the

papyri. James used this feature to argue that the men were Heqanakht's sons, but the sum of evi

dence in the papyri indicates that this was true for perhaps only two of them.35 Most telling is the

30 James, HP, 33 and 43; Baer, "Letters," 9 and nn. 65—66;Wente, Letters, 62; Parkinson, Voices, 107. Goedicke, Studies, 34—35, is an exception.

31 See the textual notes to these passages on pp. 46—47. 32 The latter indicated by the following imperative mh tw mht "Have done with it," addressed (in the masculine sin

gular) to Merisu: see the textual note on pp. 36—37. 33 The name in II 19 is that ofa woman: see the textual notes to II 18 and 19 on p. 40. 34 See Ranke, PN I, 209, 16. Other men named Nakht are also distinguished by filiation in the papyri (V 5i;VII 7).

The order of names in the salary list and their possible family relationships are discussed at the end of this section. 35 James, HP, 9—11. James's reading of p3 msw 5 "you 5 boys" in I vo. 15, which he cited as additional evidence, is in

error: see the textual note on p. 36. The identification of the five men as Heqanakht's sons was first suggested in print by Winlock, Deir el-Bahri, 64-65.


designation of Merisu, Sihathor, and Sinebniut in AccountV as chwtjwf "his (Heqanakht's) farm

ers" (V 12), a term that seems to describe only individuals who were engaged in one way or

another in farming and is never used of filial relationships.3 Each man actually worked for Heqa

nakht: Letters I-II indicate that Merisu and Sihathor, along with Heti's son Nakht, were engaged

in sk3 "plowing," jkn "hoeing," and b3 "hacking" the land (I 1—2, vo. 6—7; II 30, 33, 36), and Ac

count V entrusts Sinebniut with management of the cattle (V 18—19). Heqanakht also reminds

Merisu that "this is not the year for a man to be lax about his master" (I 14) and "this is the year

when a man is to act for his master" (I vo. 9), suggesting that their relationship is one of employer

and employee.37 The men were not mere fieldhands, however. The papyri indicate that they were

also entrusted with responsibilities for the management of Heqanakht's household and property.

Merisu is listed after Heti's son Nakht in the salary list and after Sihathor in the list of chwtjw

in AccountV, but Letters I and II, which are addressed to him in whole or major part, show that he

held a position of authority over other members of the household in Heqanakht's absence. He di

rected their work (I vo. 13—14; II 31, 35—36), paid their monthly salaries (I 16—17, vo. 5; II 29—32),

and could dispatch them on various missions (I 3, vo. 1, vo. 7; II 40). He was also responsible for

Heqanakht's property. In this capacity he negotiated the lease of land for Heqanakht even when

the latter was present (I 9-10: see pp. 156-58), planted his fields (I vo. 10—12), managed his grain (I

2-3, n , 13-14, vo. 1-4, vo. 17; alsoV 1-3 and fr. A), distributed bread to Heqanakht himself (V 30),

rendered account to him for grain debts collected (I vo. 17), and was financially liable to him for

the grain (I 1-3, 16—17; alsoV 34) and probably also for his livestock (V 25-28).3 Heqanakht's re-

monstration in Letter I—n jw.k dj.tj) hncj m pzsy.j "Have you been given equal rights with me?"

(I vo. 17: literally, "Are you given with me as my sharer?")—indicates that there were limits to

Merisu's authority; but the term pzsy, with its connotation of property division,39 may also reflect

his involvement with the management of Heqanakht's goods. Merisu's name is never preceded by

a title in the papyri, but his responsibilities closely parallel those of the jmj-r pr "steward" in the

households of Middle Kingdom officials and kings. Like Merisu, this functionary was the head of

his employer's household and responsible for its production.40

In the salary list of Letter II, Merisu and his dependents are given an allocation of 0.8 sack,

equal to those of Heqanakht's mother and the senior Hetepet as well as Heti's son Nakht and his

dependents, Sihathor, and originally Sinebniut (the latter subsequently reduced to 0.7 sack). In Ac

count V, however, his allotment of grain and flax is ten percent larger than those of Sihathor and

Sinebniut, and may include an aroura of land in flax as well (V 13—16).4' Merisu's authority over

these men is reflected in the fact that he had sent Sihathor to Heqanakht (I vo. 1) and is instructed

to send Heti's son Nakht and Sinebniut on a mission to Perhaa (I 3, 14-15). His priority over

Heti's son Nakht is also clear in the second part of Letter II, which is addressed to the latter as

subordinate (hr c) to Merisu (II 29),42

The mention of Merisu's dependents in the salary list (II 14) shows that he had a family of his

own and was therefore probably at least in his twenties when the letter was written.43 Taken liter

ally, the phrase r dd jn hm-k3 hq3-nht n mr.j)-sw"To be said by ka-servant Heqanakht to Merisu" in

36 See Golovina, VDI 1976 no. 2, 130-33, with references. Particularly illustrative in this respect is an early Middle Kingdom stela noted by Golovina, which shows six men, each identified as chwtj: S. Schoske, ed., Staatliche Sammlung Agyptischer Kunst, Munchen (Mainz, 1995), 97.These men, all named (and therefore representing real individuals), appear in procession below and after family members, and have the common label n(j)-dt.f "his personnel," identifying them as employees (Wb. II, 369,25V, 511,4).

37 Golovina, VDI 1976 no. 2,128; the significance of this passage is discussed further at the end of this section. 38 For the last, see the textual note to V 25—26 on p. 55. 39 See the textual note on p. 37.The significance of the term is discussed further at the end of this section. 40 W Helck, Zur Verwaltung des Mittleren und Neuen Reiches (PA 3: Leiden, 1958), 92-93. 41 For the last, see James, HP, 56. 42 See James, HP, 40. For the significance of Heqanakht's statement that Nakht "is the one who sees to all my

things" (III vo. 2), see below.

43 Most Egyptian men seem to have married only after embarking on their professional careers, and therefore in their

late teens or early twenties at the earliest: S. Allam, LA 1,1163—64; Feucht, Das Kind im Alten Agypten, 31-32.

112 5- PEOPLE

Letters I and II (I i; II 29) could indicate that the letters were to be read to Merisu by someone

else and that he was therefore unable to read and write. But an employee with his responsibility

for property would probably have been literate,44 and that talent is perhaps reflected in Heqa

nakht's references to his "calculating" grain (hsb: I 10, vo. 4) and in the order that he send "a

writing" of the grain debts collected in Perhaa (I vo. 17).

The responsibilities of Heti's son Nakht are less well attested than those of Merisu in the pa

pyri, but where they are, they are similar. He could be empowered to negotiate the lease of land (I

3) and collect grain debts (III 4); he was also involved with Merisu in the distribution of monthly

salaries (II 29—32) and shared with him financial liability for the management of Heqanakht's cattle

(V 25-28). In Letter III, Heqanakht notes that Nakht "is the one who sees to all my things" (III vo.

2). Since Merisu's superior position seems clear from Letters I—II, this statement was probably in

tended not to reflect Nakht's responsibility in the household as a whole but to establish his

authority in specific connection with the mission for which Letter III was written. Nakht's

responsibility for the leasing of land and collection of grain debts, in fact, only appears in the con

text of this mission away from home. His involvement in the distribution of salaries may have been

similarly restricted, perhaps to those of the other chwtjw.

These considerations might suggest that Nakht's position in the household was one of deputy

to Merisu, since he exercised similar responsibilities outside the household. The fact that his name

appears before that of Merisu in the salary list of Letter II, however, makes such a specifically sub

ordinate relationship unlikely. Instead, he may have been something like an agricultural foreman,

with immediate responsibility for the management of fields, fieldhands, and livestock.45 This would

explain both his status relative to Merisu, who had ultimate authority over Heqanakht's property,

and his responsibilities mentioned in Letters I—III, which are related in one way or another to

fieldwork.4 As foreman he may have paid any hired hands, probably after receiving the necessary

amounts from Merisu each month, and could also have distributed salaries to members of the

household insofar as their pay depended on their agricultural labor (II 29-30).

Heti's son Nakht is not included among Heqanakht's "farmers" in AccountV, but the same ac

count assigns him financial liability for the management of Heqanakht's cattle (V 25—28). Since this

section of the account is probably three years older than Letters I—III (see pp. 134—35), he may

have received a promotion by the time the letters were written, perhaps from an original position

as jmj-r jhw "overseer of cattle." Like Merisu, he had dependents of his own (I 16; II 13) and was

therefore at least in his twenties.

Sihathor, whose name appears in the fifth entry of the salary list (II 15), is also mentioned in

AccountV as one of Heqanakht's "farmers" (V 13), and Letter I makes reference to his fieldwork

along with Merisu and other household members (I vo. 6—7). Apart from this his major role in the

papyri is that of messenger. Letter I mentions that he had been sent by Merisu to Heqanakht with

a quantity of grain (I vo. 1-2), and Letters I-II both refer to his projected return trip (I vo. 14; II

vo. 1). He is probably also mentioned in Letter IV as messenger from the junior Sitnebsekhtu to

her mother (IV 3—4), and this was most likely to have been planned in conjunction with the same

return voyage.47 These data do not tell us much about Sihathor's place in the household, but some

indication of it can be gleaned from other evidence in the papyri.

44 See Newberry, Beni Hasan I, pl. 29, where in jmj-r pr n pr dt is shown writing. 45 If this position carried a title, it may have been jmj-r t_3zt "foreman." Such individuals appear in Middle Kingdom

tomb scenes in connection with livestock (e.g., Blackman and Apted, MeirV, pl. 41; see Helck, Verwaltung, 174), a component for which Heti's son Nakht also bore some responsibility (V 25—28), but the same title is also used of the foremen of crews of workmen (Simpson, Papyrus Reisner II, 41). The Middle Kingdom title jmj-r 3hwt" overseer of fields" (Ward, Titles, nos. 29—32) is not applicable: officials with this title seem to have had responsibility for the measurement and assessment of fields for tax purposes (Helck, Verwaltung, 112-13).

46 For the relationship of the collection of grain debts in Letter III to the leasing of land in Letters I—II, see pp. 153 and 155.

47 See the textual note on p. 52 for the probable restoration of Sihathor's name in IV 3-4. The relationship of Letter IV to the return trip noted in Letters I—II is discussed on p. 136.

B. H E Q A N A K H T ' S HOUSEHOLD 113

Sihathor probably brought Account V with him on his trip to Heqanakht. This document

seems to have been drafted at Heqanakht's home prior to his departure in Year 5 and was most

likely retained there when Heqanakht left (see the discussion on p. 132). The entries of grain debts

at the end of the recto, and probably also the inventory of wood on the verso, were added in Year 8

(V 34/37), and the need to convey this information to Heqanakht is ample reason for Sihathor to

have brought the document with him to Thebes. Account V was written by the same scribe who

wrote Letter III for Heqanakht and Letter IV for the younger Sitnebsekhtu (see pp. 78—80). Since

the account was written at Heqanakht's home and the letters in Thebes, the scribe of AccountV

and Letters III—IV must have been present in both places. It is possible that Heqanakht had a per

sonal secretary who had accompanied him to Thebes, but such an individual is neither mentioned

nor provided for in the papyri, and it is far more likely that the scribe was Sihathor himself.4 Si

hathor thus seems to have served as the household's scribe, and in this capacity he may have

worked for Merisu as well as Heqanakht, regardless of whether the former was literate himself. His

role as the scribe of AccountV could also explain the precedence given to his own name over that

of Merisu in the list of Heqanakht's "farmers." Letter III indicates that he was versed in the lan

guage and formulae of standard Middle Egyptian, perhaps more so than Heqanakht himself (see p.

101).

The hand of Letter III is more competent than that of the earlier entries in AccountV, and the

same appears to be true of the later entries in the account.49 The salary list of Letter II also indi

cates that Sihathor had no dependents. Together, these features suggest that he was fairly young and

had perhaps just begun his scribal career when the documents were written.

The third man identified as one of Heqanakht's "farmers" in Account V, Sinebniut, seems to

have been subordinate to the other two, Merisu and Sihathor. Letters I and III note that he was to

accompany Heti's son Nakht to Perhaa to lease land (I 3) and collect grain debts (III 4), and in this

role he was probably subordinate to Nakht as well. Apart from this mission, his role in the house

hold is indicated only by Account V, where he is entrusted with the care of Heqanakht's cattle (V

18—19).This duty apparently carried no financial liability (V 25—29), which suggests that Sinebniut

was essentially only a farmhand, without the administrative responsibilities of his superiors. None

theless, his allotment of grain and flax in Account V is equal to that of Sihathor and his salary in

Letter II was originally the same as those of his superiors,50 indicating that his duties were consid

ered as important to the household as theirs. Like Sihathor, he appears to have been unmarried

when the salary list was drawn up.

The last two men in the salary list are named Anubis and Snefru (II 17—18), the latter most

likely a shorter version of II 35 Mer-SnefruJ1 These were apparently the most junior men, judging

from the size of their final allotment. Their roles in the household also seem to have been relatively

subordinate: plowing with the other men (I vo. 6—7) and, in the case of Snefru, being given charge

of cattle (II 35—36). Nevertheless, Merisu is ordered to take special care of them:

Mind you about Anubis and Snefru. You die with them as you live with them. Mind you.

Look, there is nothing more (important) than either of them in that house with you. Don't

be neglectful about it. (I vo. 12-13)

In view of their junior position in the salary list and their minor roles in the household, the value

Heqanakht evidently placed on these two men can only indicate that they were important to him

personally, and this would suit the generally accepted conclusion that they were his sons.

48 As concluded by Baer, "Letters," 19. For the drafting of the letters at Thebes, see p. 132. 49 The latter noted by James, HP, 54; Baer, "Letters," 19. 50 See the textual note to II 7-23 on pp. 39-40. 51 See the textual notes to II 18 and II 35 on pp. 40 and 44. Omission of the nondistinctive element in "nicknames" is a

well-attested practice: Vernus, Surnom, no—15. A similar basilophoric pair is attested for a Middle Kingdom official named ttj-m-z3.fi also called ttj:Vernus, Surnom, 70 no. 322, n o . Since the latter is described as rn.fnfr n dd r(m)t "his nickname in popular speech," Heqanakht's preference for Snefru's shortened name in Letters I—II may also reflect colloquial usage.

http://ttj-m-z3.fi

114 5- PEOPLE

Such a conclusion is at least likely for Snefru, since Heqanakht greets him as "Foremost of my

body, a thousand times, a million times" (I vo. 5—6), with the same addendum that is appended to

Heqanakht's greetings to his mother (I vo. 15). The phrase hntj)-h(t)j "foremost of my body" is

unusual, but it echoes the more common expression z3 n ht "bodily son."52 Taken literally, it could

also indicate that Snefru was Heqanakht's eldest son. This might appear to contradict the prece

dence given to Anubis in the salary list and the admonition cited above, but Anubis could also have

been a younger brother of Heqanakht himself rather than an older brother of Snefru. As James and

others have remarked, the papyri seem to reflect a degree of favoritism toward Snefru.53 Besides

giving him a special and affectionate greeting in Letter I, Heqanakht also fixed his salary as origi

nally equivalent to those of the senior men,54 and in Letter II he orders Merisu to cater to Snefru's

wishes: "Whatever else he might want, you should make him content about what he might want"

(II 36—37). This would make sense if Snefru had been Heqanakht's oldest (and only) son, but is

perhaps less likely if he had been the younger of two sons. If Anubis was a younger brother of

Heqanakht, he would naturally receive less preferential treatment than that accorded to Heqa

nakht's son, while his close family relationship to Heqanakht would also explain his inclusion with

Snefru in the passage from Letter I cited in the preceding paragraph.

Snefru's identity as Heqanakht's only son may also underlie Heqanakht's desire to have Snefru

with him in Thebes (I vo. 7; II 36), where he could be instructed as his father's eventual successor

in the role of ka-servant. In Letter I, Heqanakht orders Merisu to have Snefru help with the plow

ing and then come to Heqanakht with a supply of grain (I vo. 6—8), and in Letter II Merisu is

ordered to put Snefru in charge of the cattle (II 35—36).55 These duties indicate that Snefru was old

enough both for fieldwork and for adult responsibilities when the letters were composed.5' In Ac

count V, written some three years earlier (see pp. 134—35), however, he is not included in the

workforce, and responsibility for the cattle is assigned to Sinebniut (V 18-19).57 This suggests that

Snefru had only recently become mature enough to be considered an adult, and Heqanakht says as

much in Letter I: "Now, didn't I say 'Snefru has grown up'?" (I vo. 5). Most probably, therefore, he

was in his early to middle teens when the letters were written, the age at which the transition to

adult responsibility seems to have occurred;5 this also suits the evidence of the salary list that he

was unmarried. As Snefru's father, Heqanakht himself would then have been most likely in his mid

to late thirties, contrary to the persistent impression that he was an old man.59 Like Snefru, Anubis

appears without dependents of his own in the salary list. He may therefore have been in his late

teens or early twenties—in any case, no older than Heqanakht himself, if he was in fact Heqanakht's

younger brother.

52 Wb. Ill, 357, 6—7. See the textual note to I vo. 6 on p. 32.

53 James, HP 10, 16—17, 35; Baer, "Letters," 7 n. 50; Goedicke, Studies, 32, 65. Originally also Winlock, Deir el-Bahri, 65-66.

.54 0.8 sack, subsequently reduced to 0.4 sack: see the textual note to II 7—23 on pp. 39—40. 55 For the apparent conflict between the orders in the two letters, see pp. 140—41. Snefru's increased responsibility

with regard to the cattle may also account in part for the large salary originally allotted him in Letter II. 56 Tomb scenes show young children plowing and tending cattle (Feucht, Das Kind im Alten Agypten, 309—15), but it

is unlikely that Snefru would have been ordered to be sent with grain if he were only a child. There is no evidence that the wording of Heqanakht's order in I vo. 7 (zbb.k n.j sw) implies accompaniment.The verb zbj can be used of "conducting" as well as "sending" someone (Wb. Ill, 431, 4—9), but in both cases it seems to be used only of adults. Apart from this instance, the Heqanakht papyri regularly speak of sending men on their own (rdj h3y/jwt "cause to go/go down": I 3, vo. 1; III 4; IV 1) and of sending things or women accompanied (rdj jn. tw "cause to bring": I vo. 3, 7-8, 17; II 40, vo. 1; P ' 3—4).The same distinction appears elsewhere: e.g., Moller, Pal. I, pl. 5 no. 2.

57 The transfer of this responsibility to Snefru does not necessarily signal disfavor toward Sinebniut, since the latter is given a larger (final) salary in Letter II. In any case, Sinebniut was to be seconded to Heti's son Nakht on the mission to Perhaa, which was expected to take him away from home for a month (I 14—15), during which time someone else would presumably have had to tend the cattle.

58 Feucht, Das Kind im Alten Agypten, 237-38.

59 See n. 43, above. In his initial discussion of the papyri in Deir el Bahri, 58-67, Winlock characterizes Heqanakht as "old" no fewer than 15 times. This impression is probably based on the identification of Merisu as his oldest son (see n. 35, above).


The last four individuals named in the salary list (II 19—22) are women. ° Apart from Heqa

nakht's wife, Hetepet (II 20), their relationship to Heqanakht and their role in the household is

mostly uncertain. Nefret, who follows the wife in the list (II 21), is also singled out for personal

greetings in Letter I (I vo. 16). Heqanakht seems to have reserved other such greetings in Letters I

and II for individuals to whom he was probably closely related: his mother, Ipi (I vo. 15; II 1); his

aunt or elder sister, Hetepet (I vo. 16; II 1); and his son, Snefru (I vo. 5-6). Nefret may therefore

have been a daughter of Heqanakht, perhaps by Hetepet, whose name precedes hers in the salary

list. The same criterion would indicate that Snefru was Heqanakht's son by a previous wife rather

than by Hetepet. The other two women, Si(t)inut (II 19) and Sitwerut (II 22), appear only here.

Si(t)inut's order in the salary list, after Anubis and Snefru and before Heqanakht's wife, suggests that

her relationship to Heqanakht was similar to those of the two men: that is, his younger sister or his

daughter by a previous wife. Sitwerut may have been another daughter of Hetepet. She was proba

bly not a servant, since no others are named in the list.

If the relationships and roles identified above for the members of Heqanakht's household are at

all accurate, they indicate that the ranking of the salary fist in Letter II was based primarily on senior

ity. Gender, family relationships, and status do not seem to have been major considerations: the

women are named in two groups, at the beginning and end of the list (II 8—11 and 19—22); the two

men who seem to have been of primary importance in Heqanakht's eyes (I vo. 12—13), probably his

younger brother and son, are listed after his employees (II 17—18); and the entry for one of the em

ployees appears before that of his superior (I 12—13). At least for the first nine entries (II 8-19),

ranking by seniority also agrees with the evidence cited above for the ages of the various individuals.

Its applicability to the last three entries (II 20—22) is less certain. It is not impossible that these names

were also the youngest in the list. Marriage at the age of 13 was customary for Egyptian women in

Roman times and is also attested earlier. ' If Hetepet had married Heqanakht at that age and had

given birth to one or two daughters, she could have been no more than 15 or 16 years old when the

salary list was drawn up, and therefore conceivably younger than Snefru and Si(t)inut, whose names

precede hers in the list. If Nefret and Sitwerut were her daughters, however, this is unlikely: the fact

that both these women were given salaries indicates that they were old enough to work, a condition

that Heqanakht clearly ties to the reception of salaries (II 29—30). More probably, therefore, the posi

tion of Hetepet s name in the salary list is an exception to the general order of seniority, as it is to the

descending order of allocations. This in turn indicates that the two women whose names follow hers

were somehow related to her, most likely as her daughters.

The last three entries are thus appended to the list as a separate group, perhaps because Heqa

nakht considered them a distinct family unit. If Nefret and Sitwerut were Heqanakht's daughters

by Hetepet, and Snefru his son by a previous marriage, Nefret could have been no older than Snefru,

and the fact that she and Sitwerut drew salaries indicates that they were no younger than about

seven years of age. This would put Hetepet herself in her early to middle twenties.

One final bit of evidence for the relationship of some household members to one another may

lie in Heqanakht's admonition to Merisu in Letter I: "Look, this is not the year for a man to be lax

about his master, about his father, about his brother" (I 14). As noted above, the precedence of the

term nb "master"—repeated in the similar warning "Look, this is the year when a man is to act for

his master" (I vo. 9)—reflects Merisu's status as Heqanakht's employee. The other two terms in this

sentence, jtj "father" and sn "brother," can be used not only of blood relatives but also more loosely

of unrelated individuals, denoting respectively a dependency relationship and social equality or as

sociation. 2 The term "master" undoubtedly refers to Heqanakht himself, but the referent of the

other two designations is uncertain. A priori, they most likely refer to Heqanakht as well. In that

case, the word "father" must be meant only in the looser sense: if it had been intended literally, the

60 For the name in II 19 as female, see the textual notes to II 18—19 o n P- 4°-61 Feucht, Das Kind im Alten Agypten, 32-33. 62 Wb. I, 141, 18, and IV, 150, 11; Franke, Verwandtschafitsbezeichnungen, 311.

I l 6 5. PEOPLE

third term would then be meaningless. The same relationship of dependency underlies Heqa

nakht's statement in Letter II that "the whole household is just like my children" (m mjtt hrdw.j II

25). 3 The term "brother," however, could have been used in its literal sense, since a fraternal rela

tionship between Merisu and Heqanakht would not necessarily rule out the employment of a

younger brother by the older. If the terms "father" and "brother" do not refer to Heqanakht, they

may reflect Merisu's relationship to other members of the household: perhaps Heti's son Nakht in

the first case (which could also explain the order of their names in the salary list), and Sihathor or

Sinebniut, if not both, in the second.

Of these various possibilities, the identification of Merisu as a younger brother of Heqanakht

seems the likeliest. His relationship with Heqanakht would then have been similar to that de

scribed between the two brothers in the Late Egyptian story: >4

Now as for Anubis, he had a house and a wife, [while] his younger brother was with him

in the manner of a son, it being he (Anubis) who took care of him, while he was in charge

of his animals in the fields, for he was the one who did the plowing. He was the one who

harvested for him, and he was the one who did every chore for him in the fields.

In this light Heqanakht's question to Merisu in Letter I, "Have you been given equal rights with

me?" (I vo. 17), takes on further significance. The root of the term pzfy "sharer" in this question

(see p. i n , above) is used of the division of property between heirs. 5 The negative connotation of

Heqanakht's question, together with his statement that "everything is mine to allocate" (II 26),

would be particularly meaningful if he had been his father's sole heir. ' His position would also

explain the role of the younger brothers as his employees.

From the evidence of the papyri, the members of Heqanakht's household, as specified in the

salary list of Letter II and including Heqanakht himself, can therefore be identified with some

probability as follows:

• Heqanakht — head of the household, perhaps 35-40 years of age

• Ipi (II 8) — Heqanakht's mother, probably widowed

• Hetepet (II 10) — an aunt or older sister of Heqanakht, widowed or unmarried

• Heti's son Nakht (II 12—13) — Heqanakht's foreman, married with dependents, at least in

his twenties and more probably older

• Merisu (II 14) — the household steward and a fieldhand, perhaps also Heqanakht's brother,

married with dependents, at least in his twenties (younger than Heti's son Nakht)

• Sihathor (II 15) — the household scribe and a fieldhand, unmarried, probably in his late

teens or early twenties (younger than Merisu)

• Sinebniut (II 16) — a fieldhand and in charge of Heqanakht's cattle, unmarried, probably

in his late teens or early twenties (younger than Sihathor)

• Anubis (II 17) — Heqanakht's youngest brother, unmarried, probably in his late teens or

early twenties (younger than Sinebniut)

• Snefru (II 18), more fully Mer-Snefru (II 35) — Heqanakht's son by a previous marriage,

probably in his early to middle teens (younger than Anubis)

• Si(t)inut (II 19) — a younger sister of Heqanakht or his daughter by a previous marriage,

probably younger than Snefru

• May's daughter Hetepet (II 20), also known as Iutenhab (II 40) — Heqanakht's wife, per

haps in her early to middle twenties

• Nefret (II 21) — Heqanakht's daughter by Hetepet, an older child or young teenager

(younger than Snefru)

63 For hrdw as a term denoting a household employee, see O. Berlev, in flpeenuu lyunem u gpeennn Afipuica (Moscow, 1967), 12-13.

64 Papyrus d'Orbiney 1, 1—3: A.H. Gardiner, Late Egyptian Stories (BA 1: Brussels, 1932), 9. 65 See the first textual note to I vo. 17 on p. 37. 66 For patterns of inheritance in families with several sons, see Feucht, Das Kind im Alten Agypten, 210-23.

C. HEQANAKHT'S NEIGHBORS 117

• Sitwerut (II 22) — another daughter of Heqanakht and Hetepet (younger than Nefret)

• two unnamed female servants of Ipi and the senior Hetepet (II 9/11).

The household had also included a female servant named Senen, whom Heqanakht orders dis

missed (I vo. 13). She may have been the personal servant of Heqanakht's current wife and of his

previous wife before his remarriage.

C. Heqanakht 's Neighbors

Letters I—III and Accounts V—VI record twenty-eight men and one estate (VI 25) with whom

Heqanakht had financial dealings. At least sixteen of the men, mentioned in Letters I—III and listed

in Letter III and AccountVI, can be called neighbors of his, because they are associated with place

names in the area of Perhaa, a regional center near Heqanakht's own village of Sidder Grove (see

pp. 122-24).

Heqanakht's most prestigious neighbor was evidently Herunefer (I 9, III vo. 3), who is clearly

addressed as Heqanakht's social superior in Letter III. The docket of this letter identifies him as mr

t3-mhw "Delta-overseer" (III vo. 3), a title that seems to have distinguished state officials who had

responsibilities in Lower Egypt but were not necessarily resident there. 7 The same letter indicates

that he had a house in Perhaa (III 5). In Letter I, Heqanakht tells his men that Herunefer is "the

one who can put you on watered land of Khepshyt" (I 9). This may reflect his ownership of fields

in the area, but it could conceivably mean only that he was able to serve as intermediary in locat

ing leasable land there, just as Letter III presumes his willingness to facilitate the collection of debts

owed to Heqanakht.

Two of Heqanakht's neighbors, lp Jr.'s son Khentekhtai and Hau Jr., were apparently fairly

prosperous landowners. The first had sold or leased fourteen arouras of land to Heqanakht (II 33)

and evidently had more land available for rent (I vo. 11), and Heqanakht considered the second a

likely source for the ten or twenty arouras he wished to lease in the future (I 8; II vo. 2). Heqa

nakht's other neighbors all owed him various amounts of grain. They are listed by name and in

some cases also by locality, along with their debts, in Letter III (7—8), Account V (39—52), and Ac

countVI (2-18).68

The entries of Letter III and AccountVI complement one another as a list of debts owed by

twelve men and one estate in the region of Perhaa. 9 Two of the men appear in both papyri, with

different debts in each (III 7;VI 5/7); one of these, Ipi Jr. (Ill 7;VI 5), may be the same man whose

name appears in the filiation of lp Jr.'s son Khentekhtai.70 One of the debtors in Account VI is

identified by the title mnjw tzmw "Custodian of Hounds" (VI 11) as well as by name;7' the other

twelve debtors are listed by name only, and may have had no official titles. The four names at the

end of AccountVI (15—18), in a separate section, are recorded without specific reference to their

locality.72 Since this account is a "written record of what is in Perhaa" (VI vo. 1—3), these debtors

were probably also neighbors of Heqanakht, like the others in the account. The fact that they are

listed without an attendant place name suggests that they were associated with Perhaa proper

67 For the title and office, first attested in the reign of Mentuhotep II, see Ward, Index, no. 415; Helck, LA III, 920; Helck, Verwaltung, 12 and n. 9; S. Quirke, Rde 37 (1986), 122 n. 44, 126.

68 For the identification of these entries as debts owed Heqanakht, see p. 163. 69 James, HP, 64-65; Baer, "Letters," 10-11. James suggested that the Neneksu of III 7 was the same as the unnamed

brother of Sebeknedjem's son Nenrenef in VI 3 (HP, 65), but this is based in part on his attempt to explain the arithmetic of Account VI, which has been countered by the more plausible explanation of Baer: see pp. 12—13. If Neneksu was in fact the brother of Nenrenef it is curious that he is mentioned by his name alone, while Nenrenef is listed by filiation as well as name: contrast the consistent reference to Nehri's son Ipi in both documents (III 7,VI 7)-

70 For the difference in spelling, see n. 12, above.

71 For this title, see Ward, Index, no. 796; H.G. Fischer, LA III, 77—78.

72 Goedicke, Studies, 87—88, interpreted VI 13 ntt m nbsyt as the heading of these names, but this is unlikely: see the textual note to VI 12-13 o n P- 59-

I l 8 5. PEOPLE

rather than the four subdivisions listed in the first part of the account and in Letter III. The refer

ence to the "house of Khetyankhef" in VI 15 may indicate that the debt had passed to the estate of

the individual in question after his death.

The debtors named in Account V are not associated with a specific locality. Since the other

individuals with whom Heqanakht had financial dealings were all from the area of Perhaa, the

same may be true of these men.73 Two of them have the same filiation (V 51/53) and may there

fore have been brothers, like others in Letter III and AccountVI (III 6-7; VI 2-3). One of the

debtors is identified by the title hq3 hwt "Enclosure Ruler" as well as by name (V 40). In the Old

Kingdom this title was fairly prestigious, denoting the official responsible for a regional administra

tive entity of the central government, but its status in the Middle Kingdom is less certain.74

Frags. B—C, probably from accounts, provide a further two names of men with whom Heqa

nakht presumably had financial dealings. The fragments reveal nothing about these individuals

other than the mere existence of their names; they were perhaps other debtors of Heqanakht.

D. The Thinites

Letter IV and Accounts VII and P preserve the names of another group of people and estates

with whom Heqanakht seems to have conducted business. The two accounts locate most of these

names in "Great Wind," a place in the Thinite nome (see p. 125); Letter IV is tied to them by the

mentions of Neferabdu (IV 2-3; VII 15; P 6) and Sitnebsekhtu (IV i;VII 9, vo. i).75The latter is a

name borne by two women, mother and daughter (IV 1). Of these, the individual located in

"Great Wind" was probably the mother, while the daughter was apparently resident at Thebes (see

p. 131). In Letter IV the daughter sends greetings to "the whole house" (IV 4), as well as to her

mother, suggesting that the family home was situated in "Great Wind" as well. The household evi

dently included the man named Gereg (IV 3, 4, vo. 2), who is also singled out for greetings and to

whom the letter was jointly addressed.

Part of Account VII is devoted to a reckoning of "what is with Sitnebsekhtu" (VII 9-14), in

cluding sheaves of flax for processing and ten sacks of grain, the latter perhaps deposited with her

as an advance for the work (see the discussion on pp. 173—75). In view of the quantities involved,

the elder Sitnebsekhtu was probably not the sole employee hired for the work, but rather the

"overseer" responsible for a flax workshop—an office that may have been formalized in her title

j)mt-rpr n sn[c] "workshop-overseer" (IV vo. 1: see the textual note on pp. 50—51).

Neferabdu, whose name appears in each of the three Thinite papyri, is charged with dispensing

the monthly salaries of Sitnebsekhtu and her workshop. The words that Heqanakht uses to impart

this responsibility (VII 15) are similar to those in Letter II addressed to Merisu and Heti's son

Nakht (II 31-32). This suggests that Neferabdu held a position in the "Great Wind" enterprise

analogous to those of Merisu and Heti's son Nakht in Sidder Grove—i.e., as Heqanakht's local

steward or foreman (see Section B, above). Account P records twenty sacks of grain "due to" him

(P 6), perhaps including a salary for his services.

The rest of the names listed in the Thinite papers occur in connection with two kinds of grain

entries: stores that could be drawn on (VII 6-7) and payments made or due (P 6-14, including

Neferabdu). The relationship of these individuals to each other and to the Thinite enterprise as a

whole is uncertain. The men and women listed in Account P, however, may have been employed

in the cultivation and harvesting of the flax recorded in this account and Account VII: see the dis

cussion on pp. 176—78.

73 The fact that the names are not listed by place may indicate that these debts were ofa different nature than those listed in Letter III and AccountVI: see p. 163.

74 J.C. Moreno Garcia, Hwt et le milieu rural egyptien du IIF millenaire: economie, administration et organisation territoriale (BEHE 337: Paris, 1999), 145, 229-32, 280-84.

75 For the occurrence of Neferabdu s name in IV 2—3, see the textual note on p. 51.

E.THE INDIVIDUALS OF LETTER P 119

E/The Individuals of Letter P '

The palimpsest letter of Account P preserves the names of three men who do not appear in

the other Heqanakht papyri: the sender, Meryinpu(?) Jr.'s son Intef (P' 1); the addressee, a steward

(mr pr) named Ineswisetekh (P' 1, vo. 1); and Ankhef (P' 4), an individual known to both corre

spondents.

The contents of the letter clearly indicate that Intef was socially inferior to the steward, who is

addressed in terms like those with which Heqanakht addresses Herunefer in Letter III. He appar

ently had no title (see the textual note to P ' 1 on p. 70): Heqanakht's use of his titles, b3k n pr-dt

and hm-k3, in the salutation of Letter III indicates that Intef would have used his own title in the

opening of Letter P ' if he had had one. The filiation used with his name may be in lieu ofa title

but is more likely due to the fact that Intef was an extremely common name.7 '

Apart from these indications of their social status, there is no clear evidence of the relationship

between the two correspondents. Intef may have been a junior employee in the household that

Ineswisetekh served, sent on a mission by the steward; the fact that Intef does not address Ineswi

setekh as "master" (nb) suggests that he was not an employee of the steward himself. The letter

mentions "the copper of those two female slave-laborers I spoke to you about" (P' 2—3), apparently

the price of their service or sale,77 which Intef wants the steward to send to him. The use of the

verb dd "speak" suggests a face-to-face conversation about this subject prior to Intef's departure,7

and Intef may have wanted the copper for use in carrying out his mission (cf. II vo. i).The men

tion of Ankhef's "boy" (P' 4 hrd) indicates that Ankhef had employees of his own (see the textual

note on p. 74), but Intef's suggestion that the boy be sent to him with the copper implies that

Ineswisetekh had some authority over Ankhef as well. The latter could therefore have been a

member of the same household with a family of his own, like Heti's son Nakht and Merisu in the

household of Heqanakht.

The papyrus on which Letter P ' was written was reused by Heqanakht for one of his own ac

counts, presumably after the letter had been delivered. This indicates a relationship of some sort

between Heqanakht and the steward to whom the letter was addressed, but the documents offer

no further clues as to its nature. Since Account P was probably written by Heqanakht himself in

Thebes, the household that the steward served, or at least the steward himself, was probably located

in Thebes as well.79 Nothing is known of the way in which inscribed papyri were recycled, ° but it

is possible that the unidentified scribe of Heqanakht's Account VI was also employed by Ineswi

setekh, and that Heqanakht acquired the papyrus of Letter P ' from him after the letter had served

its purpose.

76 Ranke, PN I, 34, 1; see p. 110, above. 77 Cf. Griffith, Kahun Papyri, pis. 13 (12) and 39 (3-7, 14—I7);T.E. Peet.JTM 12 (1926), pl. 17 bottom, 2-4. 78 Cf. II 38, where this connotation of dd is clear, vs. II 31—32 and 34-35, where h3b is used of correspondence. 79 For Heqanakht as the writer of Account P, see pp. 82—84; for Thebes as the place in which most of the papyri

were written, see p. 132. There is no indication of the place from which Intef was writing: for the reference to "Harsaphes, lord of Herakleopolis" in its salutation (P' 2), see p. 125.

80 For the puchase of new papyrus in the Ramesside Period, see Janssen, Commodity Prices, 447—48 (discussion of prices only).

119

Map of Egypt

Showing Places Discussed in Chapter 6

Saqqara.

Dahshur

Fayum

Medinet Madi

Bahr

Yussef

50

100

Djedsut

(Memphis)

Lisht 'Meidum

y / I l lahun

Herakleopolis

Thinite Nome

Thebes e l - R i z e i q a t - f f A r m a n t

Gebelein

Gebel el-Silsi la

200 km • Aswan

100 mi

(Larger type indicates known places mentioned in the papyri)

6. Places

FOURTEEN PLACE NAMES ARE MENTIONED IN THE HEQANAKHT PAPYRI, but only five of these de

note sites whose identity is certain. Thebes (wist II i) and Herakleopolis (nnj-nswt III 1—3; P ' 2)

appear in salutations invoking their gods; t3w-wr"Great Wind," the Thinite nome, is the locale of two

accounts (VII [1], vo. 1; P vo. 1); t3-mhw, the Delta (III vo. 3), occurs in the title of an official; and in

Letter I Heqanakht mentions receiving barley from dd-swt "Djedsut" (I vo. 1), a toponym abbrevi

ated from the name of the pyramid estate dd-swt-TTJ "Stable One of TETl's Places" in Saqqara and

occasionally used pars pro toto to designate the entire Memphite area.' The other place names are as

sociated with the region of Heqanakht's home, and with one or two exceptions are unidentified.

Nonetheless, the papers contain a number of clues that point with some consistency to their gen

eral location.

A. Heqanakht 's H o m e

Most of the Heqanakht papyri were probably written in Thebes, where they were found, and

the letters and at least some of the accounts were meant to be dispatched.2 This indicates that their

intended destinations, including Heqanakht's family home, lay outside Thebes. There is no evi

dence in any of the documents relating to the affairs of Heqanakht's household—Letters I—III,

Accounts V-VI, and perhaps Frag. A—that his home was in or near Thebes. None of the personal

names in these documents honors Montu, Amun, or other deities characteristic of the Theban area;

in the accounts from the Thinite nome, close to Thebes, however, one of the individuals is named

Mentunakht (VII 6).

Heqanakht twice describes the locale from which he is writing as upstream from his house

hold (I 9—10, II 3— 4).3 Given the probability that he was writing from Thebes, his home therefore

lay to the north. Heqanakht's reference to the "old, dried-up full barley that was in Djedsut," sent

to him by Merisu (I vo. 1), evidently indicates that he had stores of grain near Memphis,4 and this

indicates in turn that his fields and home were most likely somewhere in the area. If so, the name

of his son, Mer-Snefru "Beloved of Snefru" (see p. 113), might suggest that they lay in sight of the

pyramids of Snefru at Dahshur or Meidum.

Despite these general indications of Heqanakht's northern origin, however, James followed the

preliminary analysis of Gunn and Winlock in placing the area of Heqanakht's home and fields to

the south of Thebes.5 That identification has since been accepted almost universally, although it

requires a good deal of argumentation with respect to the two major pieces of evidence just cited.

James appreciated the geographical implication of Heqanakht's references to travelling "upstream,"7

but was then forced to conclude that Heqanakht was writing to his home from somewhere farther

south of Thebes, for which the documents themselves offer no evidence. James's analysis also pro-

1 For the last see James, HP, 8; C. Zivie, LA IV, 25; Gomaa, Besiedlung II, 24-26. 2 See pp. 131-32.The Theban origin of Letter II is perhaps reflected in Heqanakht's invocation of "Montu, lord of

Thebes" in its initial salutation (II i):see the discussion in Vernus, Athribis, 14-15. 3 For the grammar of the two passages, see the textual notes to I 9—10 and I 10 on pp. 26—27. 4 Goedicke's explanation of the reference as a literary allusion is strained: see the textual note to I vo. 1 on pp. 29—30. 5 Winlock, Deir el Bahri, 59—60 (between Gebelein and el-Rizeiqat, after Gunn); James, HP, 7—9 (Armant). 6 A.H. Gardiner concluded that Heqanakht's home lay in the north, in the region of the Fayum: letter of Septem

ber 11, 1927, to Winlock, in the archives of the Metropolitan Museum's Department of Egyptian Art. 7 HP, 9, 13,21,32.

121

122 6. PLACES

vides no explanation for Heqanakht's storage of grain in Djedsut, apart from his suggestion that

the name perhaps refers to a place other than the Memphite settlement, otherwise unknown. Baer

understood the place name with its usual meaning, but argued somewhat abstrusely that Heqa

nakht's travels "upstream" had not necessarily originated from his home. Goedicke's attempt to

discount both pieces of evidence rests on questionable philological grounds.9

Without resort to special pleading, it seems impossible to analyze Heqanakht's references to his

travels "upstream" and the storage of his grain in Djedsut as anything other than what they appear

to be on the surface: clear indications that his home lay in the north, near enough to Memphis to

make storage of his grain there feasible. This is the simplest interpretation of the evidence, and

therefore the one most likely to be correct. Although the specific names denoting Heqanakht's

home village and region are otherwise largely or totally unknown, the papers do offer a few addi

tional pieces of evidence about them.

The place to which Heqanakht's letters home were directed, nbsyt, is mentioned a total of four

times in the papers (I 6, vo. 19; II vo. 6;VI 13). Heqanakht's entire household seems to have resided

there. The name is undoubtedly a collective derived from nbs "sidder" (ziziphus spina-christi): hence,

"Sidder Grove."10 It is usually determined by the "town" sign (O49), denoting a settlement, but once

instead (II vo. 6) by the empty rectangle (N37*). Heqanakht uses the latter determinative else

where in the place names sjnwj (I vo. 10), where he had fields, and t3w-wr (VII vo. 1), the name of

the Thinite nome (see below).11 This suggests that nbsyt was the name of an agricultural area as

well as its settlement. Its farmland probably included at least some of Heqanakht's own fields: the

fact that they were farmed by Heqanakht's own household (I 1, vo. 6-7) shows that they were

probably not far from the family's home. Sidder Grove may also have included fields that Heqa

nakht leased to others (see p. 159) and the "1.4 dar. of land that is in pasturage, which lp Jr.'s son

Khentekhtai gave" (II 33). If so, it was probably home to households other than that of Heqanakht.

In any case, it appears to have been a large enough settlement for economic transactions, as indi

cated by Heqanakht's reference to the valuation of woven cloth there (I 6).12

The locale cited most often in the Heqanakht papers is not Sidder Grove but Perhaa (pr-h33),

which appears a total of seven times, always determined by the "town" sign (I 3, 5, 15, vo. 17; II 6,

vo. 2;VI vo. 2—3). Names compounded with pr can have administrative as well as geographical ref

erence,13 but passages in Letters I and II indicate that Perhaa was a specific locality: "Arrange to

have Heti's son Nakht and Sinebniut go down to Perhaa" (I 3),"his departure for Perhaa" (II 6).

Account VI lists debts in four sites under the general heading "Writing of what is in Perhaa"

(VI vo. 1-3): hwt-h33 mhtt "northern Hathaa" (VI 1), swnw-n-sbkww "Pool of the Sobeks " (VI 4),

sp3t-m3t "New District" (VI 6), and st-ch "Place of Netting" (VI 8).H These were apparently set-

8 "Letters," 3—4 n. 10. Baer's arguments are based largely on his understanding of the syntax of I 9-10 and II 3-4, since superseded: see the textual note to I 9—10 on p. 26.

9 Studies, 56-57 and 61-62: see the textual notes to I 10 and I vo. 1 on pp. 26-27 a n d 29-30. 10 The element nbs also appears in Old Kingdom estate names of the pattern nbs-X. "Sidder of X," also unidentified:

Jacquet-Gordon, Domaines, 65 and 465; note nbs-SNFRW (Jacquet-Gordon, Domaines, 249 no. 18; Gauthier, DNG III, 85), which recalls the name of Heqanakht's son mr-snfrw.The place name hwt-nbs "Enclosure of the Sidder" is attested for the nomes of Deir el-Gebrawi and Herakleopolis in Upper Egypt and Saft el-Hinna in Lower Egypt (the latter also j 3t-nbs "Mound of the Sidder"): Gauthier, DNG I, 27—28, and III, 80-81; Gomaa, Besiedlung II, 327—28.

11 This sign is different from the phonogram /, which is regularly made with an interior stroke: see p. 78.The determinative in hcp "inundation" (I vo. 11; II 4-5) may be the same sign, or a variant of N36; a different form of the latter is used in the writing of t3w-wr in P vo. 1 (see the textual note on p. 65).The similar sign in VII 15 jnr is evidently for O39, the block of stone.

12 Cf. Menu, "Gestion," 127 and n. 3. 13 See P. Spencer, The Egyptian Temple, 15-16; H. Brunner, IA I, 140. 14 For the reading of the last, see the textual note on pp. 58—59. These are probably the same debts that Heqanakht

refers to in I 5 "that emmer that is (owed me) in Perhaa" and I vo. 17 "have a writing brought about what is collected from those (debts) of Perhaa": see the discussion on pp. 139-40. The order of the list may be from south to north, despite the specification "northern" added to Hathaa in VI 1, since this is the general practice observed in lists of place names: Gardiner, Onomastica I, 40. For the incorporation of the four sites within Perhaa, cf. Helck, LA II, i52:"Mehrere Dorfer konnen ein pr bilden."

A. HEQANAKHT S HOME 123

dements, both because they are determined by the "town" sign and because individuals are associ

ated with them. The first three names also appear, in the same order, in the list of debtors in Letter

III, which complements that of Account VI (see pp. 139—40): hwt-h33 "Hathaa" (III 6—7),

^ ' P j ^ ^ r r t ? 1 "Pool of the Sobeks" (III 7), and sp3t-m3t"New District" (III 7)-There can be little doubt that the names in the two documents are in fact identical. The first is clearly related to

the name Perhaa, and is either a variant form of the same toponym or a designation of the admin

istrative district of which Perhaa was perhaps the chief site.15 The two names honoring sbkww"the

Sobeks" are related not only by their final element but also by their common association with Ipi

Jr. (Ill 7, VI 4—5); this indicates that they are not names of separate sites, but variant designations of

a single place, with the initial element in III 7 ideographic for VI 4 swnwf The two occurrences of

"New District" differ only in spelling and are associated with the same person, Nehri's son Ipi, in

both texts (III 7 and VI 6-7).

The four sites mentioned in Letter III and AccountVI did not comprise the whole of Perhaa.

Letters I—II refer to another place associated with it, known as hpsyt (I 8—9; II vo. 4). The same

name also appears in the identification of a group of minstrels in the Opet-Festival reliefs of Tut

ankhamun in Luxor Temple, but is otherwise unknown.17 James envisioned it as encompassing

Perhaa, but the reverse is also possible. In Letter I, Heqanakht instructs his men to rent "[good]

land [of] Khepshyt ... from Hau Jr." (I 7-8); in Letter II he reiterates the instruction, but with the

words "in Perhaa beside Hau Jr." (II vo. 2). The two passages together clearly associate Khepshyt

with Perhaa; the second suggests that, unlike Khepshyt, Perhaa was sufficiently extensive that it

needed to be specified further by the more precise identification "beside Hau Jr."1

With its farmland and settlements, Perhaa seems to have been a good-sized regional center. It

was important enough to house the Delta-overseer Herunefer (III 5), who may also have had

farmland in Khepshyt (I 9). The debts noted in Letter III and AccountVI are said to be in the

various localities of Perhaa (III 6-7; VI 1, 4, 6, 8); the same expression is also used of Perhaa itself (I

5). These point to the general agricultural character of the area and its villages, and may indicate

that Heqanakht himself had fields there, which he leased to other farmers (see p. 159). The letters

refer to Khepshyt as an area of "watered" land (I 9, II vo. 4). Since Heqanakht's desire to rent land

there may have been prompted by his anticipation ofa low flood (see pp. 149—50 and 159), the

fields in Khepshyt were probably close to the Nile or a major canal, and therefore inundated even

in years of a minimal flood—more so than Heqanakht's own land in Sidder Grove, which seems to

have been more dependent on a high flood (I 1, vo. 11—12). The wording of I 3 "Arrange to have

Heti's son Nakht and Sinebniut go down to Perhaa" also indicates that Perhaa lay at a lower eleva

tion than Sidder Grove.iy Judging from Heqanakht's provisions for the journey of these two men

(I 14-17, II 5—6), the fields and villages associated with Perhaa were apparently far enough from

Sidder Grove to rule out a daily commute.

15 For variation between hwt and pr, see James, HP, 131—32, s.v. hwt-h33. For the relationship between hwt and pr, see J.C. Moreno Garcia, Hwt et le milieu rural egyptien, 202.

16 Suggested by Goedicke, Studies, 11; note also the ideographic spelling of sp3t in III 7 vs. the phonological writing in VI 6.The sign = , whichjames read as jw (HP, 131), occasionally occurs as a variant of >=> "lake" in the Coffin Texts (CTV, i58e;VI, i7id; cf. also CT 1,129b, 130b; IV, 35c, 314a, 36ic;V, 3781). For the association of swnw with Sobek, cf. Papyrus Ramesseum VI 3, where Sobek is called hn zwnww"he who sails the pools": Gardiner, RdE 11 (1957) 45 n. 4. The plural dots are evidently deliberate: for the plural "Sobeks," cf. CT IV, i22g;V, 187a, 2i8b;VI, 107J, 171I. Given the clear parallel between III 7 and VI 4, James's reading of the initial group as jw is unlikely. This in turn rules out his suggested identification of the name in III 7 with jw-swtfi) "Isle of the Dangerous (Crocodile)," near Armant (HP, 7; alsoVandier, Mocalla, 26—27: see Gomaa, Besiedlung I, 126—27).

17 Gauthier, DNG IV, 174; cf.James, HP, 6-7.James used the LuxorTemple label as an argument for Khepshyt being near Thebes since "It is unlikely that dancers used in temple ceremonies would be drawn from far afield" (HP, 6). It should be noted, however, that the reliefs show the "singers of Khepshyt" (hsw n hpfyt) followed by "singers of Libya" (hsw n tjmhw): Epigraphic Survey, The Festival Procession of Opet in the Colonnade Hall (Reliefs and Inscriptions at LuxorTemple I, OIP 112: Chicago, 1994), pl. 99.

18 Following the typical Egyptian order from general to specific: cf. H.G. Fischer, JARCE 10 (1973), 5-6. 19 Baer, "Letters," 3 n. 7. The verb h>j "go down" could also indicate that Perhaa lay north of Sidder Grove: cf. the

references to Harkhuf's "going down" from Nubia to Aswan (Urk. I, 128, 11; 129, 12).

124 6. PLACES

The second element in the names pr-h33 and hwt-h33 derives from the verb h3j "go down," as

indicated by the determinative J\ in III 6—7, and is evidently the imperfective active participle.The

masculine form in the latter name indicates that the participle does not modify the initial element;

its referent, however, is unclear. Megally has drawn attention to the perfective active participle of

the same verb in two similar toponyms: r-mw-h3 ("Mouth of the Descending Water"), in a Middle

Kingdom epithet of Sobek, and p3-mw-h3 ("The Descending Water"), an agricultural area in Dyn.

XVIII.The two names in the Heqanakht papyri may then mean "House/Enclosure of the De

scending (Waters)."20 Partly on this basis, Megally suggested that both sets of names referred to the

region of Gebel el-Silsila, where the waters of the Nile are constrained and therefore flow more

rapidly than usual. This identification is unlikely, however, not only for the names from the Heqa

nakht papyri, as noted above, but also for the two later names as well.21

If the place names associated with Perhaa are suggestive of any particular area, it is the region

around the Fayum.The name swnw-(n)-sbkww "Pool of the Sobeks" is quite similar to the Fayum's

sj-(n)-sbkw "Lake of Sobek,"22 the land reclamation suggested by the toponym "New District" re

calls the extensive agricultural development of the Fayum later in the Twelfth Dynasty, and the

name "Place of Netting" could indicate that Perhaa contained marshland as well as farms and set

tlements, like the Fayum. The names Perhaa and Hathaa themselves could denote an area between

the Nile Valley and the entrance to the Fayum, where the BahrYussef tributary and its surrounding

terrain "descend" to the oasis. An association with the Fayum may also be reflected in the fre

quency with which the names of Heqanakht's neighbors honor the god Sobek and his counterpart

Khentekhtai.23

These associations are only suggestive, but the Heqanakht papyri also contain one place name

that may be identical with that of a site more firmly associated with the region of the Fayum. In

Letter I, Heqanakht refers to his "basined land" and "basin-land" in |' ^^,_, sjnwj (I vo. 10).24 The

toponym 1 = p ® occurs in a later Middle Kingdom papyrus from Illahun in a context that places

it in the area of the Fayum.25 At first glance the two names appear to have only their ending in

common, but the probable reading of III 7 s as swnw suggests that the second name could repre

sent a nisbe swnwj "The One of the Pool," or the dual swnwwj "Two Pools." If so, Heqanakht's sjnwj

may be a phonological variant of the same name,2 ' and would then indicate that he had fields

somewhere in or near the Fayum.

20 M. Megally, Recherches sur I'economie, Vadministration, et la comptabilite egyptiennes a la XVIlf dynastie d'apres le papyrus E. 3226 du Louvre (BdE 71: Cairo, 1977), 19—25. Compare the divine name t3-tnn "Rising Land": J. Allen, Genesis in Egypt (YES 2: New Haven, 1988), 71 n. 141. Goedicke (Studies, 11) suggested that h33 refers to "the original founder or owner" of the area, but this is unlikely, since personal names are rarely formed with the imperfective participle (Ranke, PN II, 24).

21 The Middle Kingdom toponym occurs in a list of local epithets of Sobek from Papyrus Ramesseum VI: A. Gardiner, RdE 11 (1957), pl. 2, col. 22. Megally (Recherches, 23) supports his identification of r-mw-h3 by noting that it follows a reference to Sobek as "chief in Ta-Seti."The latter, however, is the last ofa series (Papyrus Ramesseum VI 16—21). The reference to r-mw-h3 begins a new series (Papyrus Ramesseum VI 21-28, starting with j.nd hr.k), which then mentions, in order, a site near Herakleopolis (si),Thebes, Gebelein (smnw), two Middle Egyptian sites (Kynopolis and Kom el-Ahmar Sawaris), r-w3h (unknown), Abydos, and a final Middle Egyptian site (jw-ns'3): see Brovarski, LA V, 1001—1002, with references. The sequence is hardly indicative ofa particular geographical order; if anything, it suggests that r-mw-h3 lay near Herakleopolis. The later toponym p3-mw-h3 is the source of rather substantial deliveries of grain (Megally, Recherches, 20): this hardly suits the region of Gebel el-Silsila, which has almost no agricultural land.

22 For sj (n) sbkw and related place names in the Fayum area, see Gomaa, Besiedlung I, 389—92. 23 Noted by James, HP, 7. Names compounded with Sobek occur in V 42; VI 2, 9. Those honoring Khentekhtai ap

pear in I vo. n ; II 33;V 45-46,VI 18.Together, these constitute more than half of the theophoric names of Heqanakht's family and neighbors. The name Sirenenutet (VI 16) is perhaps also indicative: the Twelfth-Dynasty temple of Medinet Madi, on the southern edge of the Fayum, was dedicated jointly to Renenutet and Sobek.

24 For the reading of this name, see the textual note on pp. 33—34. 25 Griffith, Kahun, pl. 21, 12-13; Gomaa, Besiedlung I, 424. 26 For swn > sjn, cf. zwnw "physician" (Wb. Ill, 427) > Coptic CABIN; also CTVI , 282i sjnm, apparently a variant of

the more common snm "feed," causative oiwnm "eat."

B. THE THINITE NOME 125

The god Khentekhtai, who is more frequently honored than Sobek in the names of Heqa

nakht's neighbors, is more specifically associated with the site of Athribis in the Delta than with

the Fayum.27 Apart from this, however, there is nothing to indicate that Heqanakht's home was

situated in Lower Egypt. Letter III, which was meant for delivery in Perhaa, salutes its recipient

with the blessings of "Harsaphes, lord of Herakleopolis" (III 1 and 3). This could be taken as an

indication of either its destination or the regional origin of its sender (which in this case would

amount to the same thing), but it probably reflects only the standard epistolary formulas used in

the salutations of formal letters, like the invocation of "Ptah South of His Wall" in III 2.2 The fact

that a few of Heqanakht's neighbors bore the Herakleopolitan name Khety (V 41, 50, 52), or

names compounded with Khety (VI 15), is not necessarily significant, since such names were fairly

common in the Middle Kingdom.29

On the whole, the evidence for the specific location of Perhaa—and therefore, of Heqanakht's

home in Sidder Grove, which was nearby—is inconclusive, and will remain so unless further attes

tations of the place names mentioned in his papers are discovered in more revealing contexts.

Nonetheless, the sum of the evidence does point unequivocally in a single direction: certainly

north of Thebes, and most likely in the area of Memphis or the Fayum. The former is supported

by more direct evidence than the latter, though only to the extent of indicating that Heqanakht

had stored grain there. If Heqanakht's fields were located near the Fayum, he could well have cho

sen to store some of their crops in Memphis because it lay on the Nile and was thus more

accessible for trading. The large urban centers of Herakleopolis and Lisht were nearer the Fayum,

but the former had apparently been reduced by the war of reunification under Mentuhotep II and

the latter had only recently been founded (see pp. 127—30).

B. The Thinite Nome

Although the precise location of Heqanakht's family home remains uncertain, that of the en

terprise represented by Letter IV and Accounts VII and P is clear. The letter contains no place

names, but the accounts mention one: t3w-wr "Great Wind" (VII [1], vo. 1; P vo. i).3°This name is

fairly well attested in the Middle Kingdom as a variant of t3-wr "Great Land," the name of the

Thinite nome, whose center was the religious site of Abydos.31 In the accounts, t3w-wr seems to

refer to a locale more specific than the entire nome, but such a use is comparable to that of the

name Perhaa, noted above.32 The nome's relationship to Abydos is underscored by mention of a

feast of tp-jnr "He who is on the Stone" in VII 15: this deity occurs elsewhere only in Abydos, and

may have been a local form of the god Sobek.33 The nome's proximity to Thebes is reflected in the

personal name Mentunakht (VII 6), the only directly theophoric name in the Thinite papyri, hon

oring the Theban god Montu. Its location between Thebes and Heqanakht's home in the north is

consistent with the probable background of the two accounts and the intended delivery of Letter

IV by Sihathor on his way back from Thebes (see p. 132).

The accounts show that "Great Wind" contained two kinds of agricultural fields, "highland"

(q3t P 4-5, 17) and "lowland" (hrw VII 2, P 1), probably denoting respectively fields that did and

did not drain readily when the annual flood receded.34 In keeping with this identification, the

"lowland" is associated with emmer (VII 1—2) and most of the flax listed in Account P (P 1/3),

27 Vernus, Athribis, 372-75, 381—90. It is possible that at least some instances of the name Khety are related to the same name (Ranke, PN I, 277, 24): see the discussion ofVernus, Athribis, 375.

28 Cf.James, HP, i24;Vernus, Athribis, 14-15. 29 Ranke, PN I, 53, 16; 277, 25—26; 278, 3—10 and 12. For a discussion of the name, see Vernus, Athribis, 375. 30 For the readings, see James, "Account," 55, and the textual note to P vo. 1 on p. 65. 31 Gomaa, Besiedlung I, 191— 93. 32 For a similar use of t3-wr, see Hayes,JNES 7 (1948), 9 n. 47. 33 See the textual note toVII 15 on p. 65. 34 See Eyre JEA 80 (1994), 69—79, with references to previous discussions.

I2<;

126 6. PLACES

two crops that need a good deal of water; "highland" crops included a type of barley known as w3t

(P 4/18) and a small amount of flax (P 5, probably also P 17).35 "Great Wind" also contained a

grain "storehouse" (VII 3); a "warehouse," perhaps where grain was bartered (VII 5); and houses

where grain was stored (VII 6—7, 14; P 5).3> One of the latter, which had an upper floor (VII 14),

may have housed the flax-processing enterprise of Sitnebsekhtu and perhaps also her home (see

the discussion on pp. 174—75). Letter IV indicates that the family home of the two women named

Sitnebsekhtu, mother and daughter, was also located in "Great Wind."

35 For flax, see D.J. Brewer et al., Domestic Plants and Animals: the Egyptian Origins (Warminster, [1994]), 35.The affinity of emmer for well-watered soil is reflected in Heqanakht's instructions in I vo. 11—12 ("if it will come as a big inundation, you are to do it in emmer"). The "full barley" mentioned in P 2 may have been emmer tallied in terms of barley: see p. 176.

36 For the structures mentioned in VII 3 and 5, see James, HP, 67—68, and the textual note on p. 61, above.

7- Chronology

THE HEQANAKHT PAPYRI PRESENT TWO PROBLEMS OF CHRONOLOGY: the date of their composi

tion, and the sequence of the events and circumstances mentioned in their texts. Neither can be

resolved definitively, but the documents themselves and the archeological circumstances of their

discovery provide enough evidence to indicate probable solutions to both.

A. The Date and History of the Papyri

The Heqanakht papyri fall into two main categories.1 Six of the documents deal with the

household and business affairs of Heqanakht himself (Letters I-111, Accounts V-VI, and Frag. A),

and can be called the family group. Heqanakht is mentioned in all of these except AccountVI, but

the latter is related to Letter III by a number of personal names common to the two documents

and by its account, which seems to include the entries of Letter III (pp. 12—13). The other three

documents (Letter IV and Accounts VII and P) are concerned with an enterprise in the Thinite

nome, and can be called the Thinite group. These are interrelated by the name of Neferabdu,

which is mentioned in all three,2 and by that of Sitnebsekhtu, which appears in Letter IV and Ac

count VII. The two groups are associated with one another by several pieces of evidence: the

common seal of Letter III and Account P, two common hands (of Scribe 1 in Letters I—II and Ac

counts VII and P; of Scribe 2 in Letter III, AccountV, and Letter IV), and the mention of Sihathor

in Letter IV as well as Letters I—II and AccountV3

This evidence establishes beyond question that the papyri are part of a single assemblage. As

such they were undoubtedly all deposited together, rather than piecemeal over a period of time, in

the antechamber of Meseh's tomb, where archeological evidence shows they once lay (pp. 3—6).

Scribal equipment found with them indicates that the deposit as a whole was associated with a

working scribe (p. 5), and epigraphic evidence identifies the documents as original compositions

rather than archival copies (p. 81). On that basis the papyri are most probably contemporary with

the deposit itself.4

Dates according to the normal Egyptian system of regnal years occur only in Account V, sec

tions of which are headed "Year 5" (V 1) and "Year 8" (V 34, 37).s Since the documents are all

contemporary with one another, these two years represent the probable span of time within which

all the papyri were written. Except for the earlier entries of Account V, they can be dated with

some certainty to a period ofa few months in Year 8, as James concluded.

1 A third group consists of Frags. B—D and the palimpsest letter of Account P. The accounts represented by these fragments cannot be associated with certainty with either of the two main groups, and Letter P ' is apparently related only circumstantially to the rest of the papyri (see p. 141, below).

2 For the presence of this name in Letter IV, see the textual note to IV 2—3 on p. 51. 3 For the seal, see Fig. 6, p. 9. For the scribal hands, see pp. 78—80. For the restoration of Sihathor's name in IV 3-4,

see the textual note on pp. 52. 4 Only four or five of the papyri in the deposit were palimpsests (Letters III—IV, Account P, and the one or two docu

ments to which Frags. B-C belonged). The rest were capable of reuse, and might therefore have been acquired from an older archive for that purpose. The presence of the palimpsests, however, cannot be explained in the same manner. Statistics on the reuse of papyri have not been compiled, but no contemporary palimpsests seem to show more than one erased original. For palimpsests in general, see Parkinson and Quirke, Papyrus, 47—48.

5 For Goedicke's suggested reading of the date in V 34 and 37 as "Year 6" (Studies, 93), see the textual note to V 34/37 on p. 56.

6 HP, 3.The evidence for this conclusion is discussed in Section B,below.

127

128 1. CHRONOLOGY

Tomb of Meketre

Tomb of Wah

Embalming r j C M ^ >

0 5 10m Cache M?

Tomb of lp

(Secondary Tomb o f I n t e f )

Model Chamber

Model Chamber

Embalming Cache

Tomb of Meseh

Coffin with Canopic Chest

Below

* r ^

Sarcophagus and Canopic Chest

Fig. 8. The Tombs of Meketre and Ipi

None of the year dates in the Heqanakht papyri names the king to whose reign it refers. In his

preliminary description of their discovery and contents, Winlock assigned the documents to the

reign of Mentuhotep III, and James supported the same conclusion in his publication.7 Until re

cently this dating has been viewed as one of the more well established in the history of the early

Middle Kingdom. Subsequent studies by Goedicke, Arnold, and Spalinger, however, have argued

that the papyri were written twenty to forty years later, during the Twelfth Dynasty, in the reign of

Amenemhat I or that of Senwosret I.

There can be little doubt that the papyri date to the reign of one of these three kings. The

lower limit is firmly established by the sealed context in which the papyri were found, the undis

turbed burial of Meseh (p. 3). This is dated rather conclusively by its pottery to the early reign of

Senwosret I.9 The dedicatory inscription on Meseh's coffin, in which the word ddw "Busiris" was

altered from an original ffc_=:,.p to if I I P . provides additional evidence for the same date, since

the latter spelling does not seem to occur until the reign of Senwosret I.10

7 Winlock, BMMA 17, Part 2 (December, 1922), 37-48, repeated essentially verbatim in Winlock, Deir el-Bahri, 58-67; James, HP, 2-3. Years 5-8 of Mentuhotep III correspond to 1996-1993 BC in the "high" chronology, which places the accession of Amenemhat I in 1981 BC (see Appendix D, p. 256).The "middle" and "low" chronologies date this event to ca. 1974 BC and 1938 BC, respectively, but the latter is probably to be discounted: see D. Franke, Das Heiligtum des Heqaib aufi Elephantine: Geschichte eines Provinzheiligtums im Mittleren Reich (SAGA 9: Heidelberg, 1994), xi-xiii.The present chapter follows an emended high chronology: see Appendix D T h e lower dates of the middle system have little bearing on the internal chronology of the papyri, since they involve a difference of only two days in the solar year and two weeks at most in the lunar calendar.

8 Goedicke, Studies, 8-10 (assigning all the papyri to Amenemhat Is Year 5, ca. 1977 BC); Arnold, MMJ 26 (1991), 35-38 (Years 5 and 8 of Senwosret I, ca. 1957-1954 BC); Spalinger, ZAS 123 (1996), 85-96 (Years 5 and 8 of Senwosret I, based on the low chronology). Dates for the reign of Senwosret I reflect the traditionally accepted overlap of his Years 1-10 withYears 21-30 of Amenemhat I. Recent arguments against this coregency (Obsomer, Sesostris F, 35-135), which would lower the reign of Senwosret I by ten years, are less convincing than the evidence for it: see K.Jansen-Winklen,"Zu den Koregenzen der 12. Dynastie," SAK 24 (1997), 115-35.

9 Arnold, MMJ 26 (1991), 36-37. 10 For the inscription, see Fig. 3 on p. 4, (based on MMA Theban Expedition photograph M3C 237 and Tomb Card

1823).The sign below nb in the group preceding ddw may belong to an aborted spelling ,—^(jj^p )» also attested early in the reign of Senwosret I (Lange and Schafer, Grab- und Denksteine II, 113); it was erased, probably before

A. THE DATE AND HISTORY OF THE PAPYRI 129

The upper limit for the date of the papyri is less certain, but it is not likely to be earlier than the

date of the tomb itself, since the documents were probably written not long before they were depos

ited there. Meseh's tomb cannot be dated precisely, but it can be no earlier than that of the vizier Ipi

(TT 315), in whose eastern facade it was excavated. Ipi's complex is one of the largest in the north

ern cliff of the Asasif, similar in size and layout to those of the treasurer Khety (TT 311) and the

steward Henenu (TT 312) in the same cliff (pis. 1-2). The careers of the latter two officials are dated

firmly to the late Eleventh Dynasty, and Winlock assigned the tomb of Ipi to the same period.11 Ipi's

complex, however, contains three elements not attested in those of Khety and Henenu or in other

Theban tombs of Dynasty XI: a subsidiary cache of embalming equipment east of the main entrance,

a chamber for models in the floor of the entrance corridor, and a canopic chest. The combination of

these features is paralleled elsewhere for the early Middle Kingdom in Thebes only in the tomb of

Meketre (TT 280: see Fig. 8).I2 Winlock dated Meketres tomb to the late Eleventh Dynasty as well,

but Arnold has recently shown that it was not constructed before the early part of Dynasty XII.I3

The tomb of Ipi therefore belongs probably in the same period. Ipi served as vizier most likely in the

first or second decade of Amenemhat I's reign.'4 Since his tomb was unfinished at the time of his

death (n. 11), its construction can be dated more narrowly to sometime within the same two decades.

This in turn provides the earliest possible date for the tomb of Meseh.

Winlock and James assumed that Meseh was a dependent of Ipi, based on the location of his

tomb in the vizier's complex and its similarity to the tomb of Wah in the complex of Meketre.15

Wah was Meketre's storekeeper, and his tomb was constructed not long after that of his master; the

tomb is only roughly finished, perhaps because it was excavated only shortly before Wah's funeral,

but the burial itself was richly furnished.'' If Meseh was in fact a similar dependent of Ipi, his

tomb might have been constructed at about the same time as the vizier's, even though he was not

buried in it until some ten or twenty years later.'7

Meseh's tomb is more elaborate in plan than that of Wah, but it is equally rough in execution,

if not more so.1 This might indicate that it was constructed only shortly before the funeral of its

occupant, like that of Wah. There is, however, no evidence for the relationship between Meseh and

Ipi other than the proximity of their tombs. If Wah's burial equipment is indicative of the resources

available to the employee of a high official, then the minimal nature of Meseh's burial (p. 3) sug

gests that Meseh was not in fact part of the vizier's household. The quality of Meseh's burial also

the rest of the original was written. For the spelling with two dd signs, see C.J.C. Bennett,_/£L4 27 (1941), 78—79. The spelling j j ^ appears on a model coffin of Mentuhotep II's steward Henenu (unpublished: MMA Theban Expedition Tomb Card 1723) and on several of his queen Neferu (Hayes, Scepter I, 327 fig. 215). The form |f t_3_P' occurs on stela Louvre C3, dated to Senwosret I's Year 9 (Simpson, Terrace, pl. 15).The spelling with two dd signs is attested on a stela dating to about Year 39 of Senwosret I (BM 581: Simpson, Terrace, 27 no. 30 and pl. 12), and on a number of undated monuments from the same reign: MMA 12.182.1 (Hayes, Scepter I, 333 fig. 221: see Simpson, Terrace, 27 no. 37); WF. Petrie, A Season in Egypt, 1887 (London, 1888), pl. 10 no. 273.The altered inscription on Meseh's coffin may be the earliest instance of this spelling.

11 Winlock, Deir el-Bahri, 54. For the careers and tombs of Khety and Henenu, see J. Allen, in Studies in Honor of William Kelly Simpson, ed. by P.D. Manuelian (Boston, 1996), I, 5—12. Ipi himself is attested only by the sarcophagus in his burial chamber; his tomb was neither decorated nor inscribed. The sarcophagus is recorded in MMA excavation photograph M12C 8 and drawings AM 138—40 and 773—75 (all unpublished); see L.S. BulLJLJl 10 (1924), 15.

12 Allen, in Studies in Honor of William Kelly Simpson I, 16—17. 13 Winlock, Deir el-Bahri, 19. Arnold, MMJ 26 (1991), 21-32. See also Allen, in Studies in Honor of William Kelly Simp

son I, 1-3 and 24-25. 14 Allen, in The Theban Necropolis: Past, Present and Future. 15 Winlock, Deir el-Bahri, 55;James, HP, 3. 16 Wah's relationship to Meketre is established by the scarab found on Wah's mummy, which was inscribed with the

titles and names of both men: Hayes, Scepter I, 230 Fig. 145. His burial is dated by its linen marks and pottery to Year 15 of Amenemhat I at the latest: Arnold, MMJ 26 (1991), 34-35 and 37.The tomb is recorded in MMA excavation photographs M C 62—68 (unpublished). For Wah's burial equipment, see Hayes, Scepter I, 211-12, 230—31, 240, 258, 260, 303-305, 307-308, 310, 313.

17 Meseh was about forty years old at death (James, HP, 3); his tomb could therefore have been commissioned as much as twenty years earlier.

18 MMA excavation photographs M3C 199—200/202-206 (see pl. 3), and personal observation.

130 7- CHRONOLOGY

contrasts with the fairly ambitious plan of his tomb. Since Meseh was evidently a man of limited

means, it is possible that the tomb was simply appropriated for his burial. If so, its location suggests

that it was originally commissioned by or for a dependent of Ipi, perhaps during the latter's life

time. Its rough state may then indicate that it was abandoned before completion, possibly as a

result of the vizier's death.

The archeological evidence thus supports two possible dates for the construction of Meseh's

tomb: either contemporary with that of Ipi himself, in the first or second decade of the Twelfth

Dynasty, or shortly before the burial of Meseh, in the early reign of Senwosret I. Since the latter is

feasible only if the tomb was commissioned by Meseh himself, which is unlikely, the former is

more probable. The Heqanakht papyri could therefore have been deposited in the tomb as early as

the first half of the reign of Amenemhat I, when work on the tomb ended, or as late as the first

decade or two of the reign of Senwosret I, before the burial of Meseh.

Since the papyri are probably contemporary with the date of the deposit itself, this effectively

rules out the earlier date proposed by Winlock and James. Associated as they were with the kit ofa

working scribe, the papyri can hardly have remained unused, and in some cases still sealed, for a

minimum of some twenty years between Year 8 of Mentuhotep III and the earliest possible date of

the deposit in the first decade of Dynasty XII. For the same reason, if the papyri were deposited in

the tomb only shortly before the burial of Meseh, they are unlikely to date to the reign of Amen

emhat I, some ten or twenty years earlier.The year dates in AccountV therefore refer either to the

reign of Amenemhat I or to that of Senwosret I. The deposit itself argues for the later date. If the

papyri had been left in the tomb during the early reign of Amenemhat I, they must have sat undis

covered and undisturbed for at least a decade until Meseh's funeral. This is conceivable, but

unlikely.'9 The Heqanakht papyri therefore date most probably to the reign of Senwosret I, and

more specifically to his Regnal Years 5 and 8. This in turn dates the burial of Meseh most likely to

the same Year 8.

The evidence of the documents themselves supports this conclusion. Their paleography is con

sistent with a date in the first decade of Senwosret I's reign and is even paralleled by entries of

Years 7—8 in Papyrus Reisner IV, which were probably written in the same reign (see-p. 85). A date

contemporary with the burial of Meseh is also indicated by the orthography of the place name

II Hi]®* * * dd-swt in Letter I (vo. 1), in which the initial element displays the same spelling as that

of ddw"Busiris" on Meseh's coffin, first attested under Senwosret I.20

The likeliest sequence of events revealed by the archeological and textual evidence can be

summarized as follows. The tomb of Ipi was constructed during the first or second decade of the

reign of Amenemhat I and a subsidiary tomb, intended for a dependent of Ipi, was begun in its

eastern facade at about the same time. Work on the vizier's tomb ceased at his death, and the sub

sidiary tomb was apparently abandoned at the same time. One or two decades later, in Year 8 of

Senwosret I, the antechamber of the subsidiary tomb was used for temporary storage of Heqa

nakht's papyri and some scribal equipment. Soon afterward—probably within days—the tomb was

appropriated for the burial of Meseh. To facilitate the introduction of Meseh's coffin into the bur

ial chamber a ramp was built over the stairway leading from the antechamber, and most of the

scribal deposit was deliberately or accidently incorporated in the rubble of this ramp. The burial

chamber was then blocked with a wall of mudbrick, sealing the papyri behind it.

It is less clear how the papyri came to be deposited in the antechamber in the first place. Pre

vious studies have assumed that they were simply discarded there.21 This is unlikely, however. Most

of the papyri had been used only once and were therefore capable of being erased and reused at

19 Arnold, MMJ 26 (1991), 37. 20 See n. 10, above. Other examples of dd-swt from the early Middle Kingdom show only one )f sign: C. Firth and B.

Gunn, Teti Pyramid Cemeteries I (Cairo, 1926), 187, 190-91, 274—75, 278, 280; James, HP, 8 n. 3; Gomaa, Besiedlung II, 24—26. For the place name, see p. 121, above.

21 Winlock, Deir el-Bahri, 58; James, HP, 2; Goedicke, Studies, 6.

A. THE DATE AND HISTORY OF THE PAPYRI 13 I

least once more, an economy that was apparently common, as indicated by the four or five palimp

sests among them (see n. 4, above). The accompanying scribal equipment points as well to a

temporary deposit rather than deliberate abandonment.22

The notion that the papyri were abandoned rests in part on the assumption that Thebes was

their final destination. General opinion has held that most or all of the documents were written

elsewhere and dispatched to Thebes, where they were subsequently discarded either by Heqanakht

himself or by one of his agents.23 The evidence of the papyri themselves, however, indicates that

they were intended for dispatch to places other than Thebes.

Of the documents in the family group, all but Account V were to have been delivered to Heqa

nakht's home, undoubtedly by Sihathor (I vo. 13-14; II vo. 1). Letters I and II are addressed to his

household at Sidder Grove, which was in the region of Memphis or the Fayum (pp. 121-25). Letter

III, though addressed to "Delta-overseer Herunefer," was meant to accompany these, since it con

cerns the mission to the neighboring region of Perhaa discussed in Letter I. Apparently Heqanakht's

agents were then to deliver it to Herunefer; this, as well as Herunefer's official status, probably ex

plains why it was sealed. The letter asks Herunefer to assist the agents in recovering grain debts owed

Heqanakht by men in or near Perhaa (III 6—vo. 1). AccountVI lists related debts, with a grand total

that apparently includes those noted in Letter III (pp. 12—13).This last feature indicates that Account

VI was composed in conjunction with Letter III. It is not clear why some of the debts were singled

out for inclusion in the letter, but the purpose of AccountVI is perhaps best explained as a reference

for Heqanakht's agents in collecting further debts during their mission to Perhaa. The account to

which Frag. A belonged dealt at least in part with loans of grain; since it also mentions Heqanakht's

employee Merisu, it was perhaps intended as a similar guide for Merisu in recovering those loans.

The group of documents concerning the enterprise in the Thinite nome was meant for de

livery there. Account VII contains grain entries (VII 1—7) and an account of the flax enterprise of

Sitnebsekhtu along with the salary allocated for that operation (VII 8—14); the account as a whole

is labeled "Writing of emmer that is in Great Wind" (VII vo. 1), indicating that the two sets of en

tries are somehow related and that the flax enterprise was also located in "Great Wind."24 Since

Account VII also contains an instruction for the distribution of salaries by Neferabdu (VII 15), it

must have been written for delivery to the Thinite nome. This in turn identifies the destination of

Letter IV as the same locale. The letter's sender and intended recipient are both named Sitneb

sekhtu (IV 1), but the latter is most likely the woman in the Thinite nome, since the text probably

also mentions Neferabdu as being in the same location (IV 2—3).25 Neferabdu appears in Account

P as well. This document, labeled "What is in Great Wind" (P vo. 1), carried a sealing impressed

with the same design as that of Letter III (see Fig. 6, p. 9), suggesting that it too was meant for dis

patch, most likely to the Thinite nome.

Since all the papyri except Account V were intended for destinations other than Thebes, it is

most likely that they were written in Thebes, where they were found. This origin is reflected in

Heqanakht's invocation of "Montu, lord of Thebes" in the opening of Letter II, which is appar

ently unmotivated otherwise. The intended destinations of both groups lay north of Thebes: this is

22 The presence of this equipment also makes unlikely Goedicke's suggestion that the papyri were discarded by thieves who had waylaid their carrier (Studies, 6). According to Goedicke, the motive for the robbery was the sheet mentioned in I 4, which he assumes was "worth 24 deben of copper" and was being transported by Heqanakht's messenger. These assumptions, however, are based on two misinterpretations: (1) the passage in I 3—9 indicates that the sheet was already in Sidder Grove when Heqanakht wrote, and therefore did not need to be transported; (2) the 24 deben mentioned in II vo. 1 are clearly of copper, not cloth (see James, HP, 44). Goedicke also overlooks the apparently uneventful journey of Sihathor with ten sacks of grain (I vo. 1)—surely a more tempting commodity for robbers when, in Goedicke's words,"difficult times prevailed in the country and ... hunger was widespread." See also S. Quirke, DE 12 (1988), 97-98.

23 Winlock, Deir el Bahri, 59; James, HP, 1-2 and 9; Baer, "Letters," 3 n. 10 and 17-19; Helck, OLZ 59 (1964), 31; Goedicke, Studies, 5—6.

24 For the relationship between the two accounts, see the discussion in Chapter 8, pp. 175-78. 25 See the textual note on p. 51.The letter was addressed to a female "[Work]shop-overseer" (IV vo. 1), an appropri

ate title for the head of the Thinite flax operation: see the textual note on pp. 50—51.

132 7- CHRONOLOGY

clear in the case of the Thinite documents and probable for the papyri addressed to Heqanakht's

household as well. As noted above, the latter group was to have been delivered by Sihathor, and

Letter IV probably mentions the same man in a context indicating that he was to have delivered

the Thinite papyri as well: "Look, I have had Sifhathor] come to check on you" (IV 3— 4).2 This

evidence is best explained by a single trip from Thebes, with a stop in the Thinite nome on the

way back to the family's home farther north.

Account V, however, seems to have been written at Heqanakht's home. This is true at least for

the Year 5 entries, which are best understood as preparations made prior to Heqanakht's departure,

as James concluded (HP, 2). The document's presence with the other papers has two possible ex

planations: either Heqanakht had taken it with him for reference or safekeeping, or it was kept in

Sidder Grove and brought to Heqanakht after the Year 8 entries were added. Of these, the second

is likelier. The Year 5 entries record allocations of grain and flax to Heqanakht's employees, a tally

of cattle and assignment of responsibilities for their care, and the amount of bread given to Heqa

nakht by Merisu. These would have had greater referential value for the family at home than for

Heqanakht in Thebes. The wood entries on the verso apparently list items at Heqanakht's house,

also suggesting that the document was written there. These seem to have been added to the

document after the entries of Year 8 on the recto, which record grain on hand and outstanding

debts, indicating that the latter were probably written at Sidder Grove as well (see p. 134, below).

The papyrus was apparently carried to Heqanakht by Sihathor (I vo. 1) for the purpose of convey

ing this new information.

Previous studies assumed that most of the papyri had already been delivered and must there

fore have been brought to Thebes "to study" before being discarded in the tomb of Meseh.27 It is

more likely, however, that the documents were never dispatched. This is clearly true of Letter III,

which was found still folded and sealed (pl. 6c). It could also have been true of Account P, whose

string and seal survive, although there is no record of its condition at the time of discovery.2 Ac

countV was roiled horizontally but not folded vertically (p. 10) and must have been transported

from Sidder Grove to Thebes in that state, probably unsealed. The other papers bore no seal or ties,

but they too were evidently still folded when found.29 Their lack of a seal has generally been in

terpreted as evidence that these papers were actually dispatched and delivered, though Goedicke

has suggested that they were "in the condition of their original shipping" and not sealed "due to

the restriction of private sealing in private business, which was restricted to official matters."30 Ac

count V shows that some documents were in fact sent unsealed, at least between members of the

same household.3' Most of Heqanakht's unsealed papyri fall into this category, with the sole

exception of Account VII.

The evidence thus indicates that all the papyri except AccountV were written in Thebes and

were meant to be delivered from there to the Thinite nome and Sidder Grove by Sihathor on his

26 For the reconstruction of Sihathor's name, see the textual note on p. 52. 27 Winlock, Deir el Bahri, 59;James, HP, 2. 28 The papyrus was purchased in Luxor in 1922 or 1923 (James, HP, 51) by a Mr. and Mrs. George Beeman and pre

sented as a gift to its subsequent owner in 1958, at which time it was still folded, although its string and seal were separate (W. Kate Purches, personal communication). Its internal losses are limited to what would have been the outer edges of the document while folded and were probably caused while the papyrus was still sealed. The reuse of the papyrus may also have contributed to its deterioration.

29 According to Winlock's introduction published in Appendix C, below, the papyri were "unrolled and pieced together by the writer and A.C. Mace" (p. 244; see pl. 6).

30 Studies, 5. Goedicke supplies no supporting references for his statement about sealing practices. 31 There is not much evidence for sealing practices in Middle Kingdom correspondence to either confirm or refute this

impression. WF. Petrie, Kahun, Gurob, and Hawara (London, 1890), 31, notes that the letters in the Illahun papyri "were many of them ... sealed with a clay seal," but there is no indication whether the seals (ibid., pl. 10, nos. 19—20 and 26— 64) were actually found on the papyri or only in association with them. Griffith, Kahun, 19, 31, 35, notes seals only in connection with the legal papyri. Most of the Illahun letters were addressed to superiors, like Heqanakht's sealed Letter III. The group of sealed New Kingdom letters noted by Bakir, Egyptian Epistolography, 28-29, are from high officials or members of the royal family and are mostly addressed to servants or subordinates.

A. THE DATE AND HISTORY OF THE PAPYRI 133

return north; it is possible that AccountV was also meant to be taken back to Sidder Grove on the

same trip, having served its purpose of communicating to Heqanakht the information that had

been added in Year 8. The papyri must then have been deposited in the antechamber of Meseh's

tomb, along with the other scribal materials, at some point after they were written and before Si

hathor's scheduled departure. The empty tomb evidently offered a convenient place for such a

deposit, but its choice for this purpose was most likely conditioned by its proximity to the tomb of

the vizier Ipi, the official for whom Heqanakht probably acted as ka-servant (pp. 106—107). The

presence of scribal materials along with the papyri suggests that the documents were composed

somewhere nearby, perhaps in the entrance to Meseh's tomb, which offered both shade and suit

able light.32 The deeper recesses of the antechamber would then have offered a logical place to

store the materials temporarily.

It is less clear who placed the papyri and scribal materials in the tomb and why the deposit was

not recovered before Meseh's funeral. Barring the involvement of other individuals who are not

reflected in the available evidence, the deposit must have been made by one of the three scribes

who wrote the documents (pp. 78—84).This is most likely to have been either Heqanakht himself,

to whom the papyri belonged, or Sihathor, who was to deliver them. The reference sealings that

were part of the deposit seem to implicate Heqanakht, since these are less likely to have belonged

to Sihathor (p. 5). In that case, Heqanakht was either prevented from retrieving his property before

Meseh's burial or else was unaware of the impending funeral. Neither of these possibilities is likely,

however. One or both of the other scribes would probably also have known of the deposit and

could have recovered it in lieu of Heqanakht himself. Meseh's funeral is also unlikely to have oc

curred without Heqanakht's knowledge. As ka-servant of Ipi, Heqanakht would presumably have

been aware of plans for a burial in the vizier's complex,33 and therefore would not have placed his

papyri and equipment in such jeopardy, or at least would have taken steps to recover them before

the funeral.

These considerations identify Sihathor as the individual most likely to have placed the papyri

in the tomb, presumably after receiving them from Heqanakht and with the intention of recover

ing them before his departure. If so, the reference sealings and other scribal materials were most

likely deposited by someone else. Since the evidence seems to rule out Heqanakht himself, this

was probably the writer of AccountVI, who may have served as Heqanakht's customary scribe in

Thebes. If both Account VI and Letter III were composed at Ipi's tomb complex, Heqanakht's

probable place of employment, Sihathor could have observed the scribe's practice of storing some

of his equipment in the empty tomb nearby, and this may have prompted him to leave the papyri

there as well. Neither man, however, would necessarily have known of the impending funeral. The

presence of Letter IV among the papyri also implicates Sihathor, since it was written by him for

Sitnebsekhtu—presumably elsewhere in Thebes—and is therefore more likely to have been in his

possession than in Heqanakht's.

There are undoubtedly other scenarios that could explain why the papyri were left in the

tomb and not recovered before Meseh's funeral, but the available evidence seems best suited to the

one proposed above. In any case, it is most likely that the papyri other than AccountV were writ

ten only shortly before they were deposited in the tomb, and that the deposit itself occurred only

shortly before the funeral, probably in Year 8 of Senwosret I. Once they had been sealed behind

the mudbrick wall blocking Meseh's burial chamber, they remained there, undisturbed, until dis

covered by the Theban expedition of the Metropolitan Museum of Art in its 1921—22 season.

32 The tomb's antechamber is a less likely locale: see p. 5 n. 13. 33 Cf. Siut I, 269 mj.k grt jn hm-k3 n z srwd hwt.fi'biow look, the ka-servant ofa man is the one who makes firm his

things." Although Meseh's family may have appropriated the tomb for his burial, its use probably bore some official sanction, particularly in this prime area of the Middle Kingdom necropolis. Such a sanction may be reflected in the htp-dj-nswt formula on Meseh's coffin; cf. J.E. Gauthier and G Jequier, Memoire sur les fouilles de Licht (MIFAO 6; Cairo, 1902), 85 fig. 102: jr qrst tn jn (njswt [dj] n.(j) st m [z(mj)t] m htp-dj-(n)swt "As for this burial, the king is the one who [gave] it to me in [the necropolis] as a royal offering."

134 7- CHRONOLOGY

B. Internal Chronology

The concerns expressed in Heqanakht's papyri are largely agricultural, and the chronological

framework of his letters and accounts is therefore that of the natural year. Like the civil calendar

based on it, the agricultural year in ancient Egypt was characterized by three seasons: Inundation

(3ht), Growing (prt), and Harvest (smw).The annual Nile flood began in Aswan in late May, crested

in the first part of September, and left the fields ready for planting about mid-October; the same

sequence occurred two weeks later in Memphis.34 After a growing season of some three to four

months, barley was harvested between mid-February and mid-March, flax from mid-March to

mid-April, and emmer in early April.35

The earliest entries in the Heqanakht papyri are undoubtedly those ofV 1—33, which bear the

heading "Year 5, 2 Harvest 9" (V 1). Since the papyri as a whole were composed most probably

under Senwosret I, as determined above, the year date almost certainly refers to his reign.3 This

corresponds to ca. 1956 BC, when the date of 2 Harvest 9 in the civil calendar fell around Septem

ber 12. At that time of year the inundation was near or at its crest in the area of Memphis and the

Fayum, the probable region of Heqanakht's home village (pp. 121—25). The harvest would have

been completed some five months earlier, grain debts collected and paid, and arrangements con

cluded for land leases during the coming agricultural year.37 With planting a month or so away, this

would have been the ideal time for Heqanakht to leave home for his duties in Thebes. The Year 5

entries of AccountV seem to reflect preparations made prior to his departure: a tally of produce on

hand (V 2—10), set aside for the cattle (V 11), and disbursed to the top three employees (V 12—16);

a record of the cattle and arrangements for their care (V 18—29); and a memorandum of the bread

supplies that Heqanakht was to take with him to Thebes (V 30—33). As noted above (p. 132), the

account probably remained in Sidder Grove after his departure.

The accounts ofYear 8 (V 34—54) were added to the papyrus three years later. Since these ex

haust the remainder of the recto, the account on the verso was probably written sometime later

still, perhaps immediately after the last entry on the recto; a single scribe, most likely Sihathor,

wrote the entire papyrus, but the accounts on the verso and those ofYear 8 both show a hand

somewhat more practiced than that of the earlier entries (see p. 113). The later accounts record

grain supplies on hand (V 34—36), outstanding debts of grain (V 37-54), and miscellaneous pieces

of wood (V vo. 1—10).The first of these is specified as being m c "with" Merisu (V 34).This prepo

sitional phrase can connote an obligation (see the textual note to II 34 on p. 44), but its more

common locative sense and the fact that its object is Merisu both imply that this account was

drawn up at Sidder Grove. The second account, specified as grain "that is outstanding" (V 37), is

almost certainly a record of debts owed to Heqanakht by the individuals listed rather than the re

verse.3 The similar lists in Letter III and AccountVI clearly refer to Heqanakht's debtors, and the

phraseology of P 6 jnt n nfrjbdw "due to Neferabdu" suggests that a different wording would have

been used for debts owed by Heqanakht (see the textual note on pp. 65—66). The debts listed in

Letter III and AccountVI record the locations of the various debtors. The fact that this specifica

tion is omitted in Account V suggests that the debts tallied there were owed by Heqanakht's

neighbors in Sidder Grove. The account on the verso is best understood as a record of wood at

Heqanakht's home.

34 Schenkel, L4VI, 832; Spalinger, ZAS 123 (1996), 90-91. 35 Guglielmi, LA I, 1271; II, 256. See also the chart in K. Butzer, Early Hydraulic Civilization in Egypt (Chicago and

London, 1976), 49. There is no evidence in the papyri for more than one harvest per year: see p. 161 n. 113. All dates in this section are cited according to the Gregorian calendar: see Appendix D.Julian dates at this period are 17 days later: R.A. Parker, The Calendars of Ancient Egypt (SAOC 26: Chicago, 1950), 8.

36 See nn. 7—8, above. The other papyri are contemporary with the later entries of AccountV, dated to Year 8 (see below).The date in V 1 could conceivably refer to the reign of Amenemhat I, but this is improbable, since the two sets of entries would then be separated by a minimum of 23 years.

37 For the timing of land leases, see pp. 136—37. 38 As concluded by James, HP, 58.

B. INTERNAL CHRONOLOGY 13 5

The later entries of Account V, like its earlier ones, were therefore drawn up at Sidder Grove.

Since the papyrus was sent from there to Thebes, the later accounts were undoubtedly meant to con

vey the information in them to Heqanakht. The papyrus itself must then have been brought to

Thebes shortly after the accounts ofYear 8 were added.The dates inV 34 and 37 do not specify the

time of year when the entries were made, but a date after the spring harvests seems likely. The un

usual qualifier "outstanding" (V 37) appended to the heading of the debts in the second account may

reflect the fact that other debts of grain owed to Heqanakht had already been paid, while the first

account may be a tally of his personal grain supplies remaining (V 34 tWjM'balance") at home after

the deduction of the ten sacks of barley sent with Sihathor (I vo. 1-2) and the settlement of his own

debts.The amount on hand, 25.5 sacks of barley and emmer (V 35—36), is paltry compared with the

185 sacks recorded in the late summer ofYear 5 (V 4—6).39 This would explain both why Merisu sent

Heqanakht "old, dried-up" barley from the family stores in Memphis and why Heqanakht's letters

are so concerned with the conservation of grain and the recovery of grain debts.

Though the letters themselves are undated, it seems likeliest that they were composed in re

sponse to the information in AccountV and the other news from home brought by Sihathor, and

therefore in Year 8 as well. Heqanakht's references to the current state of affairs in Letter II—

Look, the whole land is dead and [you] have not hungered (II 3)

[Now], has the inundation been very [big]? Look, [our] salary has been made for us

according to the state of the inundation (II 4-5 a)

Half of life is better than death in full. Look, one should say hunger (only) about (real)

hunger. Look, they've started to eat people here (II 26—28)—

indicate that he was writing not only after a low inundation but also after the following harvest,

when its effects had become apparent. Letter I also indicates that he was writing before the height

of the next inundation was known:40

Now, you should do that basin-land in full barley. Don't do emmer there. But if it will

come as a big inundation, you should do it in emmer (I vo. 11—12).

These two features place the composition of the letters between mid-April at the earliest, when

the grain harvest had been completed, and the first week of September at the latest, when the in

undation reached its crest in Thebes. Assuming that Sihathor was sent to Thebes after the grain

harvest was over and accounts had been settled at home, Heqanakht probably could not have writ

ten in response to the information he carried until sometime in May at the earliest, since the

journey from Sidder Grove to Thebes would have taken about two weeks with a stop in Memphis

to pick up the ten sacks of barley from Heqanakht's stores there.41

The probable date of composition can be narrowed further by the reference to three month

names in Letter II and Account VII: hnt-hty-prtj "Khentekhtai-perti" (II 32), sfi-bdt "Emmer-Swell"

(VII 11), and rkh-c3 "Big Burning" (VII 15). These are the earliest known instances from a set of

names that denoted lunar months rather than those of the civil calendar.42 The lunar months are

attested primarily in connection with religious festivals, but the use of these names in the agricul

tural context of the Heqanakht papyri suggests that farmers also followed the lunar calendar—

39 Baer, "Letters," 12. This amount probably did not represent all of the household's available grain at the time, however: see the discussion on p. 167.

40 See Golovina, VDI 1995 no. 2, 15-16. 41 For travel times between Memphis and Thebes, see R. Krauss, LA V, 222—23; W.J. Murnane, The Road to Kadesh, 2d

ed. (SAOC 42: Chicago, 1990), 96-97. 42 The discussion of the lunar calendar here is based on L. Depuydt, Civil Calendar and Lunar Calendar in Ancient

Egypt (OLA 77: Leuven, 1997), which subsumes and supercedes previous studies.The lunar names are also used for months of the civil calendar in texts from the Ptolemaic Period at Edfu: ibid., 220—22. Although the existence of this practice earlier in Egyptian history cannot be disproved conclusively, the Edfu texts probably represent an artificial archaism: ibid., 238. Heqanakht's use of the term wp(w) rather than tpj to denote the beginning of the months in II 32 and VII 11 also argues against the interpretation of these as designations of civil months (ibid., 121), and the association of the month in VII 15 with a religious festival is evidence in favor of its lunar character.

136 7- CHRONOLOGY

understandably so, since the phases of the moon were much easier for them to keep track of than the

artificial sequence of numbered days in the civil calendar.

The Egyptian lunar month began with the new moon on the day known as psdntjw, when the

last crescent of the waning moon could no longer be observed at dawn in the eastern horizon.43

The lunar year began with the first occasion of psdntjw in the civil calendar, in 1 Inundation, and

contained 12, or occasionally 13, months of 29 or 30 days each.44 The months of the lunar year

were therefore roughly parallel with those of the civil calendar, with an overlap ranging from

nearly exact (psdntjw on day 1 of the civil month) to a minimum of 1 day (psdntjw on day 30 of the

civil month).The lunar months mentioned in the Heqanakht papyri began in the civil months of

1 Growing ("Emmer-Swell"), 2 Growing ("Big Burning"), and 2 Harvest ("Khentekhtai-perti").

In Year 8 of Senwosret I the first day of each lunar month occurred in last few days of the corre

sponding civil month (Appendix D,Table 3).

The earliest of the three lunar months mentioned in the papyri occurs in Account VII, in the

heading of a flax account: "What is with Sitnebsekhtu as the balance of 20 bales on the first [of]

Emmer-Swell" (VII 9—11). The wording of this title indicates that the account represents the situa

tion as of the beginning of the month in question, around May 3. It was therefore most likely

drawn up sometime in the same lunar month, between early May and early June, on the basis of

information received from the Thinite nome.45 The same papyrus refers to the next lunar month,

which began on June 2, in an instruction about the issuance of salaries: "Neferabdu should start

with salaries in Big Burning [on the Proces]sion ofTepiner" (VII 15).The date of the "Procession

of Tepiner" is not known, but the choice of this festival for the issuance of salaries rather than the

usual beginning of the month suggests that Heqanakht may not have expected his instructions to

reach Neferabdu before the start of the month. The composition of Account VII can therefore be

placed with some certainty in mid to late May.

The probable mention of Sihathor in Letter IV indicates that he was to carry the letter to the

Thinite nome, and it seems likely that he would deliver Account VII and probably also Account P

at the same time. If that visit was to take place on his way back to Sidder Grove, the rest of the pa

pyri must have been written before the end of May as well. Sihathor could then have reached

home before the end of June.

The lunar month mentioned in Letter II occurs in the context of Heqanakht's instructions to

Merisu and Heti's son Nakht about the household's salaries: "Now, that salary I have written you

about should start being given from the first of Khentekhtai-perti" (II 31-32).The date in question

occurred around September 28, and Heqanakht's instructions had to arrive in Sidder Grove some

time earlier. Given a two-week return journey from Thebes to Sidder Grove, the letter must

therefore have been written at the latest in early September. Such a late date is impossible, how

ever, since that was the time of the inundation's height, which was unknown when the letter was

written. Letters I and II also contain Heqanakht's instructions for the leasing of additional farm

land (I 3-9; II vo. 1-4), almost certainly conditioned by his need to replenish his surplus of barley

after the poor harvest just concluded (see p. 159). Documentation from the Ramesside Period in

dicates that such transactions typically took place during the month of July, before the flood had

covered the fields and made precise surveys impossible.4 Given the urgency of the task and the

43 Depuydt, Civil Calendar, 140—41. 44 Depuydt, Civil Calendar, 224—25. 45 This agrees with the indication of the account that Sitnebsekhtu had processed only 3 of the 20 bales of flax

given her on commission, since the flax harvest ended in mid-April and at least two weeks were needed to produce linen thread from the harvested stalks: see p. 174. If the original tally was recorded on the first day of the month and then sent immediately to Thebes, Account VII could have been drawn up at the earliest about four days later. The distance between Thebes and the Thinite nome is somewhat less than a quarter of that between Thebes and Memphis, and therefore about three days'journey: see n. 41, above.

46 JJ. Janssen,JNES 46 (1987), 136; A. Spalinger, ZAS 123 (1996), 90. In the Saite period leases were also negotiated during the inundation, with the terms finalized in September once the height of the inundation was known: G R . Hughes, Saite Demotic Land Leases (SAOC 28; Chicago, 1952), 4 and 74.

B. INTERNAL CHRONOLOGY 13 7

likelihood of competition from neighboring farmers in equally difficult straits, Heqanakht would

have wanted the negotiations to begin as soon as possible. He was also concerned to keep his own

land from being leased (I vo. 9-11), and this would need to be conveyed to Merisu before the be

ginning of July as well.

Heqanakht therefore seems to have intended his letters to reach home sometime in June.47 To

gether with the evidence discussed above, this allows the probable internal chronology of the

papyri to be reconstructed as follows:

YEAR 5

September early entries of AccountV (September 12); Heqanakht leaves

Sidder Grove for Thebes

YEAR 8

mid April to early May grain harvest concluded, Year 8 entries added to Account V,

Sihathor travels to Thebes

late April to early May reports drawn up in the Thinite nome and sent to Heqanakht

in Thebes 4

mid to late May papyri written in Thebes on the basis of information received

from Sidder Grove and the Thinite nome

late May to early June Sihathor to return north, delivering Letter IV and Accounts VII and P in the Thinite nome and the other papyri to the household in Sidder Grove.

Since the papyri were never dispatched, they were probably left in the antechamber of Meseh's

tomb sometime in late May, and Meseh's burial can be dated to the same time. Internal evidence

therefore supports James's conclusion that all the undated papers were written at the same time of

year, no more than a few weeks apart.4y

Letters I and II contain several references to events prior to their composition. Three of these

clearly occurred at Sidder Grove before Heqanakht left for Thebes, and a fourth undoubtedly took

place there as well:

Now look, (Merisu), before I came upstream here, you calculated for me the lease of 1.3

dar. of land in full barley alone (I 9—10)

Look, before I came upstream here, I made your salaries to perfection (II 3—4)

Now, before I came here, didn't I tell you (all) "Don't keep a friend of Hetepet from her,

whether her hairdresser or her domestic"? (II 38—39).


in charge of them, for neither did he want to be with you plowing, going up and down,

nor did he want to come here with me (II 35—36).5°

47 In that light it is unclear why Heqanakht postponed the beginning of the household's new salary schedule to late September, since the probable date of Sihathor's projected return to Sidder Grove would have allowed for a start two or even three lunar months earlier. The new schedule undoubtedly represented a reduction from the previous one (see the discussion in Chapter 8, pp. 146—47), but the papyri suggest no obvious motive for its timing; one possibility is discussed below. In any case, this difficulty is outweighed by the other chronological indications in the papyri.

48 There is no reference in the papyri to the delivery of these reports, but the timing would have made it possible for Sihathor to stop in the Thinite nome to pick them up on his way south to Thebes—a possibility reinforced by the likelihood of his return visit there on his way back home.

49 James argued that Letters I and II were written about a month apart, with a third missive, delivered to Sidder Grove, between them (HP, 4-5), but the chronology outlined here and the fact that both letters were undelivered makes this impossible. The sequence of the letters is discussed in Section C below.

50 For the past tense of the verbs in this passage, see p. 99. Heqanakht's use of the prepositional phrase hnc j "with me" instead of n.j "to me" as in II 38 indicates that the last clause refers to Snefru's unwillingness to accompany Heqanakht on his most recent journey from Sidder Grove to Thebes.

138 7- CHRONOLOGY

Heqanakht also makes reference to at least one letter prior to the extant correspondence, which he

wrote home while he was in Thebes:

Don't make me write you about it another time. Look, I have written you about it twice

(already) (II 34~35)-51

His observation in I vo. 5—"Now, didn't I say 'Snefru has grown up'?"—could refer to an earlier

letter as well, although it is also possible that Heqanakht delivered this utterance in person, while

still at home in Sidder Grove.

These references indicate that Heqanakht had been in Thebes for some time before the letters

were written, long enough to have written back to the household at least once. If the timing of his

trip in Year 5 is any indication of normal practice, he had been there since the preceding Septem

ber, if not before. His absence could have dated from Year 5, but this seems unlikely, since he would

then have been away from home for more than two and a half years and the letters indicate that he

planned to remain there for another year (see below). Heqanakht mentions setting the household's

salaries before he left (II 3—4, cited above). If he had not been home since Year 5, the household

would have had the same salary schedule for three years by the time the new one took effect in

September ofYear 8. But Heqanakht also notes that "[our] salary has been made for us according

to the state of the inundation" (II 4—5a), which suggests a more likely annual calibration of the

schedule. That could not have been done until after the harvest; it may have been timed to coin

cide with the height of the inundation in September, when Heqanakht could estimate the

probable size of his next harvest and therefore how generous he could afford to be with his exist

ing stores of grain. Such a practice may explain why the new salary schedule was to begin in

September. In any case, it indicates that Heqanakht had been back to Sidder Grove at least once

since his departure in Year 5.

The letters also make numerous references to events planned for the coming agricultural year,

after Sihathor had returned home in June. The earliest of these is the mission of Heti's son Nakht

and Sinebniut to Perhaa to rent additional farmland and collect grain debts (I 3—9, 14—17, vo. 17; II

5b—6, vo. 1-4; Letter III and Account VI). As discussed above, this trip was probably planned for

July; Heqanakht evidently envisioned it as lasting no more than a month (I 14-17). The house

hold's new salary schedule was to begin with the lunar month of Khentekhtai-perti (II 31-32), in

late September (see above). After the inundation, in October and November (p. 134), the fields

were to be sowed and plowed (I 1, vo. 6—7; II 29-31). Following this, in November or early De

cember, Snefru was to be sent to Thebes with "2 sacks of zw(-emmer along with whatever full

barley you find" (I vo. 7-8) and probably also Merisu's account of the grain debts collected in Per

haa (I vo. 17) as well as other correspondence (I vo. 6). Heqanakht himself planned to return home

in Year 9, after the harvest (II 28-29).

The date of Heqanakht's projected return, a year after the composition of his letters, is revealed

by the message to his household in Letter II: "Look, I will spend Harvest here" (II 29). There has

been some debate about whether this statement refers to the season of the civil calendar, which

ended on December 4th, or to the agricultural season, which ended in April of the following

year.52 The latter usage of the term "Harvest" (smw) is clear in Heqanakht's instructions for Snefru's

trip in Letter I:

After the plowing you should send him to me. Have him bring me 2 sacks of zwt-emmer

along with whatever full barley you find, but only from the excess of your salaries until

you reach Harvest. (I vo. 7-8)

51 One of the two messages referred to in this passage could be that of Letter II itself, given the usual Egyptian practice of writing from the point of view of the recipient: cf. James, HP, n o ; Baer, "Letters," 2 n. 3 and 3 n. 10. Note also I vo. 9 "[Don't] be neglectful about anything I have written you about," which most likely refers to the preceding instructions in the same letter.

52 James, HP, 4 and 16; Baer, "Letters," 8 n. 54; Goedicke, Studies, 28; Golovina, VDI 1995 no. 2, 14-15; Spalinger, ZAS 123 (1996), 92-94.

C. THE SEQUENCE OF THE PAPYRI 13 9

This must refer to the agricultural season, since it follows the time of plowing and the context re

lates it to the conservation of available grain resources, which could not be replenished until the

next crop; at the time of writing, the calendrical Harvest began on August 6, well before plowing

season. Despite arguments to the contrary, Heqanakht's use of the same term in Letter II undoubt

edly involves the same reference, as James realized.53 If Heqanakht had intended to return home in

December, after the end of the calendrical Harvest, he would not have ordered Snefru sent to

Thebes at the same time of year ("after the plowing").The ten sacks of grain that Sihathor had just

brought suggests that Heqanakht needed supplies for an extended stay in Thebes, and his request

for an additional "2 sacks of swt-emmer along with whatever full barley you find" indicates that he

intended to remain there for some months after Snefru's arrival.

The span of time covered by the Heqanakht papyri is therefore nearly four years, from Heqa

nakht's departure for Thebes in September ofYear 5 to his projected return sometime after mid April

in Year 9. During that time he had been back to Sidder Grove at least once, in Year 7, when he set the

household's salaries. By the time he planned to return again, he would have been away from home

about two years. In both cases, his return probably took place in the summer, after the harvest and

before the inundation crested. Heqanakht therefore seems to have visited his family once every two

years, leaving Sidder Grove in September ofYear 5 and returning sometime in the summer ofYear 7,

coming back to Thebes perhaps in September ofYear 7, and intending to return home again in the

summer ofYear 9. The initial period from September ofYear 5 to the summer ofYear 7 also agrees

with the pattern indicated by Heqanakht's bread rations ofYear 5 (V 30-33: see p. 148) and the addi

tional supplies he received in May ofYear 8 (I vo. 1).

C. The Sequence of the Papyri

The discussions in the preceding section have established that, apart from Account V, Heqa

nakht's letters and accounts were probably written within a few days of one another sometime in

the latter half of May ofYear 8. These papyri also contain some evidence to indicate the sequence

in which they were written.

If the reports on which the Thinite accounts (VII and P) were based were sent to Heqanakht

by means of a messenger other than Sihathor, they could have reached him before Sihathor's arri

val in Thebes, and the corresponding accounts could then have been drawn up before the other

documents; if they were brought by Sihathor, however, their sequence with respect to the other

documents cannot be determined. Between themselves, Account VII is probably earlier than P,

since the initial entry of P 2 seems to reflect the grain entries ofVII 1-7 (see p. 176).

Of the family papers, Letter III and Account VI are complementary. The account must have

been written after the letter, since its "grand total" (VI 20) includes the figures in III 6—8 (see pp.

12—13). James (HP, 64) considered AccountVI to be a report drawn up by Merisu for Heqanakht

in response to the request at the end of Letter I: "And have a writing brought about what is col

lected from those (debts) of Perhaa" (I vo. 17). Baer accepted the same conclusion, despite his

explanation of the complementary relationship between Account VI and Letter III.54 Only

Goedicke seems to have realized that the two documents must have been drawn up in tandem,

though his arguments are speculative.55 Letter III refers to a mission of Heti's son Nakht and Si

nebniut to collect grain debts (III 3-4).This is certainly the same mission to Perhaa mandated in I

3-9 and provided for in I 14-17 and II 5b—6. Letter III and AccountVI were therefore probably

composed after Letters I—II. It is unclear why the debts listed in Letter III were singled out for in

clusion in that letter rather than in the more general list of AccountVI; Heqanakht's request that

the collected grain "be put in the house ofYour Excellency until it has been come for" (III 5) sug-

53 HP, 411. 3, 35. 54 "Letters," 19. 5 5 Studies, 86.

140 7- CHRONOLOGY

gests that he may have intended it as a reserve, most likely for his agents to use if necessary in bar

gaining for the lease of land, as indicated by his comment in Letter II:

Now, have 2 dar. of land cultivated for us on lease in Perhaa beside Hau Jr., by copper, by

cloth, by full barley, [by] anyfthing], but only when you will have (first) collected the value

of oil or of anything (else) there" (II vo. 1-3).

The list of AccountVI was presumably intended as a guide for Nakht and Sinebniut in their col

lection of "that full barley and emmer that is there" (III 4). The request in I vo. 17 is then for an

accounting of the results of that mission.

Letters I and II thus seem to be the first of the family papers written in Thebes. The two are

clearly complementary: both discuss the leasing of land, the family's mistreatment of Heqanakht's

wife, and salaries. Their exact relationship has been a matter of some debate, although most studies

have analyzed Letter I as the older of the two. Winlock's argument that Letter II was written a year

after Letter I was effectively countered by James, who placed the two a month apart, with Letter II

written "in answer to a letter ... which in turn answered" Letter I.5' Goedicke saw the two docu

ments as nearly contemporary, but in reverse order, with Letter I as "a second more detailed"

follow-up to II.57 On the whole, James's interpretation of the sequence is the likelier, although the

probability that both letters were never dispatched rules out the intervention of a third missive.

Letter II instructs Merisu and Heti's son Nakht to "have 2 dar. of land cultivated for us on lease in

Perhaa beside Hau Jr." (II vo. 1—2). As James saw, this is the same mission detailed in Letter I: since

Heqanakht clearly felt it necessary to explain his wishes for the lease at some length in I 3-9, the

mention in II vo. 1—2 is much more likely to be a recapitulation of that instruction than an initial

introduction of the topic.5 A similar relationship pertains between the salary of 0.8 sacks assigned

to "Heti's son Nakht, with his dependents" in II 12—13 a n d the detailed instructions on the same

topic issued in I 14—17.

There are, however, two apparent discrepancies between the letters that must be addressed if

this analysis of their chronological sequence is correct. In Letter II, Heqanakht mentions that he is

sending "24 copper deben for the lease of land,"59 and he orders that the lease be paid "by copper,

by cloth, by full barley, [by] any [thing], but only when you will have (first) collected the value of

oil or of anything (else) there" (II vo. 1-3). Letter I evidently deals with the same lease, but con

tains no mention of copper: it orders Merisu to use cloth for the rent, with "the equivalent value

of that emmer that is (owed me) in Perhaa" to be used as well if his agents manage to collect it (I

4-5).The key here is evidently Heqanakht's caveat in Letter II,"but only when you will have (first)

collected the value of oil or of anything (else) there" (II vo. 3). In view of his overriding concern

to conserve his existing stores of grain, Heqanakht had apparently decided after writing Letter I to

send copper to supplement the cloth as a means of payment. Letter II instructs his men to lease the

land at all costs, but to use every available means before resorting to payment in grain.'° Letter II

thus represents a refinement of the instructions in Letter I, and the latter was therefore written

first, as James realized.

The second apparent discrepancy involves Heqanakht's instructions concerning Snefru. In Let

ter I he orders that Snefru should first lend a hand with the plowing "when my land gets wet" and

then come to him with additional grain "after the plowing" (I vo. 6—8). In Letter II, however, he

tells Merisu to honor Snefru's wish to be put in charge of the cattle, "for neither did he want to be

with you plowing, going up and down, nor did he want to come here with me" (II 35—36). It is

56 Winlock, Deir el Bahri, 61; James, HP, 4-5. James's analysis was accepted by Baer, with some refinement in the time of year involved ("Letters," 9 n. 71).

57 Studies, 17. 58 Similarly, Quirke, DE 12 (1988), 97. 59 Heqanakht's use of the past tense ("I have had ... brought") is an example of writing from the point of view of

the recipient: see n. 51, above. The fact that the copper is described as being brought by Sihathor confirms this. 60 As seen by Baer, "Letters," 9 n. 70.

C.THE SEQUENCE OF THE PAPYRI H 1

this discrepancy that suggested to James the existence ofa third letter between I and II, in which

Snefru objected to Heqanakht's orders. The two instructions, however, do not necessarily contra

dict one another. Letter I orders Merisu to "send him to me" (I vo. 7 zbb.k n.j sw), while Letter II

notes that Snefru did not want to come south with Heqanakht (II 36 nj mr.figrt jwt mj n3 hnc j : see

n. 50, above). The wording points to two separate situations: one in the past (probably in Year 7),

when Heqanakht had evidently asked Snefru to come with him to Thebes; and one in the future

(probably in November ofYear 8), in which Snefru was to come to Heqanakht "after the plowing."

With regard to Snefru's work at home, it is possible that his duties with regard to the cattle were

assigned as a continuing responsibility, while his obligation to help with the plowing reflects a

short-term need dictated at least in part by the increased amount of acreage that Heqanakht

wanted his men to farm; in this respect, it is revealing that Anubis was to help with the plowing as

well (I vo. 6-7)."

Insofar as it can be determined, the internal evidence of the papyri thus reveals the following

probable sequence of their composition:

A. AccountV (Year 5 entries)

AccountV (Year 8 entries and verso)

B. Letters I—II, in that order

Letter III and AccountVI, in that order, probably after Letters I—II

C. Accounts VII and P, probably in that order.

Group A is clearly the oldest. The order of groups B and C is uncertain, particularly if the reports

on which group C was based were brought to Thebes by Sihathor along with AccountV. Letter IV

was written by Sihathor in Thebes and therefore belongs somewhere in the sequence B—C.>2 The

account represented by Frag. A, written by Heqanakht, was probably also drawn up within the

timeframe of groups B—C.The relationship of the accounts represented by Frags. B—E to the other

papyri cannot be determined; they could have been written in Thebes as well, or brought there

from Sidder Grove or the Thinite nome.

The palimpsest letter of Account P contains nothing to link it to the other papyri, and its reuse

by Heqanakht is therefore puzzling. Perhaps the best explanation of its origin is the unknown

scribe of AccountVI, who may have been regularly employed by Heqanakht in Thebes (p. 133). If

this scribe also served the household of the steward to whom Letter P ' was addressed, Heqanakht

could have acquired the letter from him after it had served its purpose (see p. 119).

61 Note that AccountV, which assigned the cattle to Sinebniut in Year 5, also calls Sinebniut a "farmer" (V 18—19 and 12). For the latter term, see p. 111. For the workload of Heqanakht's employees, see pp. 158-59.

62 Unlike the other papyri, there is no reason to think that Letter IV was written at Ipi's tomb-complex; it could well have been dictated and composed at Heqanakht's residence in Thebes (where Sihathor was presumably staying) and brought from there to the tomb by Sihathor (see p. 133, above).

http://mr.fi

8. Economics

THE SUBJECT OF ECONOMY, in the original sense of the word,1 dominates the Heqanakht papyri.

With the exception of Letter IV, from Sitnebsekhtu to her mother, these documents are solely or

primarily about economic matters. The concerns Heqanakht that expresses in his letters and re

flects in his accounts have to do with grain distribution, debt collection, land management, and the

operation of an agricultural enterprise in the Thinite nome. The fact that the papyri exist at all is

due to his attempts to manage these affairs both in absentia and in the face of an apparent shortage

of grain that seems to have affected the economy of his contemporaries as severely as it did his

own. The documents therefore reflect Heqanakht's economic situation as it was at the time they

were written. As such, they offer unparalleled insights into the economic life ofa moderately well-

to-do Egyptian family at the beginning of the Middle Kingdom.

The unique nature of the Heqanakht papyri, however, also presents serious problems in the

analysis of their economic data. Many of the topics they cover are represented only sparsely in ear

lier or contemporary documents and do not recur to the same extent in surviving texts until the

New Kingdom or later, and then under largely different circumstances. There is also uncertainty

and debate about the specific meaning of some of the crucial terms used in the texts, and the un

derstanding of these has led to varying interpretations of the underlying economic realities J Such

differences in interpretation have a direct bearing on how we understand what Heqanakht is talk

ing about in his letters and recording in his accounts. For that reason, the present chapter is

devoted to a detailed consideration of the economic aspects of the papyri.

A. Grain

Although the diet of Heqanakht's family undoubtedly included most of the foods available in

Egypt at the time, its staple was grain, as was true for the Egyptian diet in all periods of ancient

history and is still largely so today.3 This is reflected in Heqanakht's letters and accounts, where

grain and grain products (bread) are the only edibles mentioned. Apart from the generic term jtj

"barley," four specific kinds of cereals appear in the papyri: jtj-mh "full barley," btj "emmer," zwt (a

kind of emmer), and w3t (an unidentified type of barley).4 Barley was used for brewing beer and

for making some kinds of breads, while emmer and zwt were primarily converted to bread and

other baked goods.5

i "The management or regulation of domestic or household affairs": Webster's New International Dictionary, 2d ed. (Springfield, Mass., 1950), s.v. "economy," def. 1.

2 Cf. Baer, "Land," 34-36; idem, "Letters," 9—19; Menu, "Gestion," 111-29; Golovina, VDI 1976 no. 2, 122-42; R.L. Miller,JESHO 34 (1991), 259-62; U. Luft, in Grund und Boden, 351-54; Golovina, VDI 1995 no. 2, 4-27; C. Eyre, in Agriculture in Egypt from Pharaonic toModern Times (Proceedings of the British Academy 96; Oxford, 1999), 48-51.

3 Cf. W. Helck, LA I, 1267-71J. Janssen, SAK 3 (1975), 164-66. 4 For the generic term see the textual notes to I 2 and P 4 on pp. 23 and 66. The more specific term jtj-mh is used

generically in V 2, 35, and 47, where it heads tallies that also include emmer. For jtj-mh as "full" rather than "northern" barley, probably a designation of Hordeum hexastichum, see R. Muller-Wollermann, VA 3 (1967), 39—41. The reading jtj-mh rather than simply mh(j) is confirmed by V 4 jtj m3 mh: see the textual note on p. 52.The terms btj and zwt refer, respectively, to Triticum dicoccum (olyra in Greek MSS: see D.J. Thompson, in Agriculture in Egypt, 128) and another variety of emmer: R. Germer, LA VI, 1209-10. For w3t, see the textual note to P 18 on p. 66. Despite its spelling, the word btj "emmer" is feminine in the Heqanakht papyri: see the textual notes to V 5 and VII vo. 1 on pp. 52 and 60.

5 W. Helck, LA II, 586-87; H.Wild, LA II, 554.

142

A. GRAIN 143

Amounts of barley and emmer are occasionally treated as equivalent in the accounts (V 36, 47;

VI 20), but barley seems to have had greater importance for Heqanakht. It is mentioned a total of

44 times in the papyri, four times more often than emmer (11 instances); zwt and w3t each appear

only once (I vo. 8; P 18). Letter III indicates that Heqanakht valued barley at a rate of 1V2 times

that of emmer (III 8—vo. 1), and the same ratio may be reflected in the relationship between the

grain entries of Accounts VII and P (see p. 176, below). Heqanakht's letters also express a prefer

ence for barley over emmer (I vo. 11-12; III vo. 1). The Year 5 entries of his household's grain in

AccountV include more than three times as much barley as emmer, 268 vs. 73.5 sacks (V 4—6 and

11—15), which could also reflect the amount of land that Heqanakht devoted to the two crops (see

p. 165, below). Although the two grains seem to have been equally important in the Egyptian diet,

this general preference for barley may indicate that it had a greater commercial value than emmer,

perhaps also reflected in the fact that the salaries of Heqanakht's household seem to have been paid

in barley (p. 145).

The system of measurement used for grain throughout the Heqanakht papyri is consistent, as

established by James (HP, 116—18).The primary unit of volume was the "sack" (fr h3r), which con

sisted of ten smaller units. Amounts in the papyri are specified according to the usual Egyptian

"list" convention, in which the commodity is written first, followed by the unit of measurement

(in the singular, often omitted) and a number: e.g., jtj-mh h3r 10 "10 sacks of full barley" (I vo. 2).

The regular hieratic numerals are used for multiples of the sack, with the sign I (mcb3 "spear")

sometimes replacing the numeral 30 (mcb3). A separate set of numerals is used to indicate tenths

of the sack, corresponding to the "dot" notation of hieroglyphic.7

As James noted (HP, 117), the sign fr does not appear in the papyri before amounts of less than

a full sack. This suggests that parts of a sack were designated not as such but in terms of a separate

unit of volume. The term for this unit does not occur in the Heqanakht papyri, but it was un

doubtedly hq3t "heqat," which designated the basic component of the sack from the later Middle

Kingdom onward. The term is attested in a contemporary text, and is probably to be understood

as the referent of the feminine adjective wct in I vo. 4 jtj-mh wct"a single (heqat) of full barley."9

The size of the hq3t seems to have remained constant at about 4.8 liters (5.07 quarts).10 On that

basis, the sack of 10 heqat in Heqanakht's letters and accounts contained about 48 liters (50.72

quarts) of grain.

Texts from the later Middle Kingdom reckon not only with the heqat but also with a double

heqat, and the Rhind Mathematical Papyrus of the Second Intermediate Period uses a sack of five

quadruple heqat." James proposed the existence of this "double sack" (of 20 heqat) underlying the

totals in AccountVI of the Heqanakht papyri, and Golovina has argued for the same measure in an

attempt to explain the yields discussed in Letter I.12 In neither case, however, is there evidence for

such a measure other than the context; no distinctive notation is used.13 Both passages can also be

understood without recourse to a larger sack.14 In fact, the "double sack" of Egyptological discus-

6 James, HP, 61 and 117. The spear occurs in III 8;V 13—15, 47;VI 14—all but the first in combination with the signs for 10 or 20 as writings of the numerals 40 and 50.The regular hieratic sign for the numeral 30 occurs inV 46~47;VII 3; P 2, 7-9, 16.

7 The numerals are clearly distinct only in the case of 4, 5, 7, and 9 tenths.The signs for 1, 2, and 3 tenths can look like short strokes rather than dots (compare, for example, V 43 and 45), the sign for 8 tenths is identical to that used for 8, and the same may be true of the signs for 6 tenths and 6 (see the textual note to VII 5 on p. 61).

8 Gardiner, EG, § 266, 1; Helck, LA III, 1201. 9 Suggested by James, HP, 116, and adopted in subsequent translations. The term first appears in Siut I 279 jtj-mh

hq3t"a heqat of full barley" (Helck, LA III, 1206 n. 20), from the reign of Senwosret I (cf. Siut I, pl. 4). 10 For the size of the hq3t, see Gardiner, EG, § 266, 1; Helck, LA III, 1201. A table of volume measures is presented in

Appendix E, below. For the constant hq3t, see Helck, OLZ 59 (1964), 3o;Janssen, SAK 3 (1975), 178-79. 11 Gardiner, EG, § 266, 1; Helck, LA III, 1201. 12 James, HP, 64 and 117; Golovina, VDI 1995 no. 2, 25-26. 13 Noted by James, HP, 117. 14 James's interpretation of the totals in AccountVI, supported by Cenival, RdE 15 (1963), 141—42, was effectively

countered by Baer, "Letters," 10—11. For the interpretation of I 11—13, see pp. 156—58, below; Golovina herself offered an explanation of the passage based on the normal sack of 10 heqat: VDI 1995 no. 2, 25.

144 8. ECONOMICS

sion does not exist as such in the ancient sources: the texts employ only the term "sack." In the

later Middle Kingdom and the Second Intermediate Period it is the smaller measure of the heqat

that is specified by notation, as single, double, or quadruple; the sack seems to have varied in size

depending on the kind of heqat involved.15 Since the multiple heqat does not seem to have come

into use until the late Middle Kingdom, the sack in Heqanakht's time was evidently a uniform

measure equivalent to ten single heqat.

The papyri also contain several references to the jpyt "oipe" in the context of grain measure

ment (I 14, III 6,VI 12,VII 4, P 2). In the New Kingdom this term refers to a measure equivalent

to a quadruple heqat, one fourth ofa standard sack,1' but its significance in the Heqanakht papyri

is less certain. The reference to a total of 52 sacks "as measured with the big oipe that is in Sidder

Grove" (VI 12—14), however, indicates that the oipe could vary in size and that it was used to

measure (h3j "weigh") amounts of grain.17

The size of the oipe mentioned in the Heqanakht papyri is unclear.The entry "full barley, 38.2

sacks, 0.3 m jpt" (P 2) may reflect a measure capable of holding three heqat and thus consistent

with the New Kingdom oipe of four heqat. If the similar entry in VII 4 was meant to be read in

the same way, as "emmer, 1 sack, 0.9 (< 0.8) m jpt," it could reflect the "big oipe" ofVI 12, which

may then have been equivalent to the size of a full sack. The context, however, indicates that this

entry was intended to record a quantity of emmer as a whole, with the qualification applied to the

entire amount: thus, "emmer, 1.9 (< 1.8) sacks mjpt" (see the textual note on p. 61). This probably

does not reflect an oipe equivalent to two sacks, since at that size—96 liters, holding more than 75

kg (see Appendix E)—it would have been impractical as a measuring device. The qualification w jpt

is therefore unlikely to connote a single oipe. It may have been meant instead to indicate that the

grain had been measured—probably by oipe (see below)—but had not yet been transferred into

sacks: thus, "1.9 sacks (as measured) by oipe" or "1.9 sacks (as reckoned) in oipe(s)."The same may

be true for the "0.3 by/in oipe" of P 2.1 Neither entry, therefore, can be used as a reliable indica

tor of the size of Heqanakht's oipe. As noted above, the mention of a "big oipe" in Account VI

implies the existence of at least two such measures. The "big oipe" may have held a full sack of

grain, since the entries measured with it (VII 1—14) all involve whole sacks. The smaller oipe may

have been equivalent to the later quadruple-heqat measure of the New Kingdom, but in any case

was probably smaller than a sack and larger than a heqat.

From its spelling with the determinative —« in later texts, the oipe seems to have been a con

tainer made of wood.19 This object is undoubtedly referenced in Letter III, where the spelling

p 1 fi) and context indicate that it was a device for measuring grain: "Now look, I have had them

bring that oipe with which it should be measured: it is decorated with black hide (III 5—6)."The

group 1 2 is tater used as a writing of hq3t "heqat,"20 but the spelling in III 6 must represent jpyt

"oipe," since the references in Heqanakht's accounts (VI 12, VII 4, P 2) all indicate that grain was

measured by means of the oipe and the word hq3t is elsewhere determined only with the sign for

grain (dM).21 The same group appears in Letter I, without the determinative of III 6: "Mind you

15 The size of the sack is clear only in the Rhind Mathematical Papyrus, where it is specified as containing five quadruple heqat: Helck, LA III, i20i .With the introduction of the double heqat in the late Middle Kingdom, however, it may have varied between 10 (single) and 20 (10 double) heqat. The standard sack of 16 (4 quadruple) heqat was introduced in the New Kingdom: Gardiner, EG, § 266, 1; Helck, LA III, 1201 and 1206 n. 24.

16 Gardiner, EG, § 266, 1; Helck, LA III, 1201; first attested as such in Dyn. 17: Helck, LA III, 1206 n. 23. 17 See the textual note on p. 59. For the variable oipe, cf. Wb. I, 67, 8. For h3j, see the textual note to III 6 on p. 50. 18 The entry in VII 4 is part ofa list of grain stores in various locations (VII 1-7). That of P 2 may refer to the same

grain: see p. 176, below. 19 Wb. I, 67. Such an object may be depicted in Newberry, Beni Hasan I, pl. 29, upper right, as a barrel-shaped con

tainer being used to measure grain into sacks. From its apparent size this could be the "big oipe" of the Heqanakht papyri.

20 Gardiner, EG, § 266, 1. Cf. p. 148, below. 21 Wb. Ill, 174.The "container" determinative (Wio) in III 6 is unique, but is comparable to the "wood" determina

tive in later spellings of jpyt. The use of the heqat as a unit of volume must reflect the existence of a similar kind of container, but this is rarely attested as such (Urk. IV, 429, 11; 502, 2).

B. RATIONS AND SALARIES 145

cry. do not take liberties" r \ 2 j m nt jtj-mh (I 13—14). Following James's "with one hekat (?) from it of

barley" (HP, 14), the final prepositional phrase of this sentence has been understood uniformly as a

reference to a measure of volume.22 Its phrasing, however, is different from that of the "list" con

vention regularly employed in such references, in -which the unit of volume follows the commodity: pry, 7-j , , CTJ*'

i.e., *r jtj-mh 1 2 jm- This indicates that the group 1 2 does not denote a unit of volume but

rather the measure itself, which must therefore be the jpyt "oipe" as in Letter III: thus, "Mind you

do not take liberties with (respect to) the oipe of full barley therein."24 In other words, Heqanakht

is warning Merisu to be especially scrupulous when he uses the oipe to measure out the barley

involved in the lease agreement discussed in the preceding sentences.

The Heqanakht papyri thus provide evidence of a uniform system for tallying grain in the

early Middle Kingdom. Grain was measured into sacks with a standard capacity of 10 heqat (about

48 liters, or 50.72 quarts) by means of the oipe. The latter was a container that came in at least two

different sizes: a "big oipe," perhaps equivalent to a full sack, and a smaller oipe of perhaps 4 heqat

in volume. Smaller quantities were probably measured by means of the container known as the

heqat, after which the basic unit of grain volume was named. The two oipes themselves seem to

have been used only as grain measures and not as units of volume.

B. Rations and Salaries

Grain served not only as the staple of the ancient Egyptian diet but also as the base of the

Egyptian economy. Several passages in the Heqanakht papyri reflect its use as a medium of ex

change (I 4-5, 9-12; II vo. 2; III vo. 1), and in the Middle Kingdom it was also the basis on which

wages were calculated, even if these were actually paid in other edibles.25 Throughout the papyri

the term used for grain as distributed to individuals is cqw.2 The letters refer to cqw as "given" (rdj

I i7,vo.5;II 28, 29—30, 31—32), "calculated" (hsb I 15—16), or "made" (jrj II 4),27 but as grain it was

also "measured" (h3j II 5; cf. Ill 6) and tallied in sacks (I 15—17; II 7-23; VII 8). The cqw of Heti's

son Nakht and Sinebniut was barley (I 15—17; II 5b—6), and the same was therefore probably true

for other members of the household as well; the cqw tallied in Account VII, however, seems to have

consisted of emmer (see pp. 174—75, below).

• The term cqw means literally "income" (from the root cq "enter"), and income in the economic sense is the primary meaning recorded for it in the dictionary; with respect to individuals, cqw referred to income received either in return for work or as a benefit of patronage, usually in the form of bread.2 Since it consisted of food, cqw could of course be eaten (II 33), and in some contexts this connotation seems paramount.29 Following James, the references to cqw in the Heqanakht papyri have been understood primarily in the latter sense, as "rations," "(food) allowance,"

22 Translations include: "with (even) one hk3t of northern barley therefrom" (Baer, "Letters," 5); "for even one bushel of Lower Egyptian barley" (Callender, Middle Egyptian, I2i);"avec une mesure hekat (?) d'orge du Nord de (cette rente)" (Menu, "Gestion," 123); "concerning I measure of the barley thereof" (Goedicke, Studies, 43); "about even a hekat-measure thereof of northern barley" (Wente, Letters, 59); "(even) one sack of northern barley from it!" (Parkinson, Voices, 104).

23 See p. 143, above. Compare I vo. 4 jtj-mh wzt "a single (heqat) of full barley," discussed on p. 143, above, and I 11 jtj-mh h_3rjm "a sack of full barley from it."

24 The adverb jm "therein" probably refers to the rental agreement that is the topic of this passage: see the textual note on p. 28 and the discussion on pp. 156—57, below.

25 See D Mueller, JNES 34 (1975), 254—63; also, for New Kingdom and Ramesside Period, Janssen, Commodity Prices, 455-88, SAK 3 (1975), 166-70, and AoF 15 (1988), 10-23.

26 See James, HP, 25 and 109.The word is usually written as a plural (exceptions: I vo. 5;VII 8) but is grammatically singular (II 28, 29-30, 31-32, 37).

27 For the last term (Wb. I, 233, 1-2), see James, HP, 109. 28 Wb. I, 232, 16-18. See Mueller,JNES 34 (1975), 255-57. 29 Wb. I, 232, 19—233, 2. A good illustration is the following passage from the Karnak Juridical Stela, in which cqw

heads a list of the benefits of an office: cqw.s h(n)qt.s wcbt.s df(3)w.s hmw-k3.s t3zwt.s pr.s "its bread (salary), its beer, its pure meat, its (other) food, its ka-servants, its personnel, and its house": Helck, Historisch-biographische Texte der 2. Zwischenzeit,6$, 17.

146 8. ECONOMICS

"food," or "provisions."30 This has led in turn to the general impression that the cqw allocated in II 7-23 constituted the bare minimum needed for subsistence: only one-third to three-quarters of the normal daily caloric requirement of most of the household, though nearly all that of two of its members (II 15 and 20).3I

The papyri, however, contain several clear indications that Heqanakht has used the term in its

economic sense, referring to payment given in return for work rather than simply food. As rations,

the cqw in Letter II would be grossly unequal, providing the same amount for a single worker as

for a worker and his family (II 15 vs. 12—14), and a similar disparity would exist in I 14—17, where

Heqanakht allots 0.8 sack of barley to Heti's son Nakht for a month's duty (not involving manual

labor) but only half a sack for his dependents, evidently at least two people. These allowances could

also be rejected (II 37), likelier for a salary than for subsistence rations. When Heqanakht instructs

Merisu to have Snefru lend a hand with the plowing, he also orders him to "give him cqw" (I vo.

5): this can hardly have been meant simply as an order to feed Snefru, and must therefore refer to

wages. The same sense applies in Letter II, where Heqanakht orders Merisu and Nakht to "give

this cqw to my people only as long as they are working" (II 29—30). In contrast, none of the in

stances of cqw in the papyri either demands or better suits the secondary connotation of food per

se.32The Heqanakht papyri therefore use the term cqw uniformly in its primary sense of "income"

and, since all instances in explicit contexts have to do with labor, specifically with reference to in

dividual wages or salary.33

Salaries seem to have been dispensed monthly (I 15,VII 8), usually on the first day of the lunar

month (I 16-17; II 31-32), though in some cases they could be paid in midmonth (VII 15).34 The

circumstances of Account VII indicate that the salary paid to Sitnebsekhtu for work on a flax-

processing commission was issued in monthly installments after it had been earned, although a de

posit toward the total cost of the commission was made in advance (see p. 175, below). Whether all

salaries were issued for work done is unclear. In Letters I and II, however, Heqanakht gives specific

instructions for issuing the salaries of Nakht and Sinebniut prior to their mission to Perhaa (cer

tainly so in II 5—6, and probably also in I 14-17), and the need to do so suggests that salaries

normally were not paid in advance. The norm is probably reflected in Heqanakht's instruction,

cited above, that the salaries detailed in II 7—23 be issued to members of the household "only as

long as they are working."35

The monthly salaries allocated in Letter II range from a low of 0.2 sack to a high of 0.8 sack,

based at least partly on seniority and rank, particularly in the original schedule (see p. 115 and the

textual note on pp. 39—40), though in the emended list the largest salaries are mostly designated for

more than one individual (II 8-14).They amount to a monthly total of 6.95 sacks, reduced from an

original 7.95 sacks (II 23: see the textual note on p. 39).The reductions were made in the salaries of

30 James, HP; Baer, "Letters"; Callender, Middle Egyptian, 121—22; Goedicke, Studies; Wente, Letters, 58—62; Parkinson, Voices, 103—107. The primary meaning is also given for some passages by Callender ("wage-rations," "wage-provisions,") and Goedicke ("income").

31 See Table A in Appendix E, p. 258. A Middle Kingdom sack of barley provided about 121,824 calories: see R.L. Miller, JESHO 34 (1991), 260-62, superseding the rougher estimates of Baer, "Letters," 35 n. 70. Daily calories from all sources in the Ptolemaic Period have been estimated at 3780 for men and 2520 for women and children in good times, and 2840 and 1820 in bad:T. Reekmans, La sitometrie dans les archives den Zenon (Brussels, 1966), 108. For other estimates, see B. Kemp, ZAS 113 (1986), 132; Miller, JESHO 34 (1991), 257-60. In a letter from Egypt, dated 17 March 1926 and now in the archives of the Metropolitan Museum of Art's Department of Egyptian Art, B. Gunn writes to H.E. Winlock: "I am told here that a kela of barley feeds a man for about ten days."This amounts to a substantial 4203 calories per day.

32 Heqanakht's reference to the household eating his own cqw (II 33) is closest to this secondary meaning, but the sense here is most likely either to cqw as "income" in general (cf. II 26 "everything is mine to allocate") or to the image ofa father's sacrifice on behalf of his family (cf. II 25 "the whole household is just like my children" and II 5a "Look, I have managed to keep you alive so far").

33 Cf. Menu,"Gestion," 114-15; Golovina, VDI 1976 no. 2, 126. 34 See p. 136. For the monthly issuance of salaries, see also A. Spalinger, A&L 7 (1998), 43—57. 35 Since II 29—30 p3 c<2iM'this salary" must refer to the salaries allocated in II 7-23, the "people" in question must be

the members of the household, pare Golovina, VDI 1976 no. 2, 127.

B. RATIONS AND SALARIES 147

individuals at the bot tom of the list (II 16-18 and 20-21), probably reflecting their lesser seniority or

rank in the household, but Heqanakht's arguments throughout Letter II indicate that the other sala

ries were lowered as well, presumably from the schedule set the year before (see p. 136 and p. 137 n.

47). The extent of the reductions can be gauged from Heqanakht's instructions in Letter I:

Now, as for everything for which Heti's son Nakht will act in Perhaa—look, I have not

calculated more than one month's salary for him, consisting o f a sack of full barley, calculat

ing a second one of 0.5 of full barley for his dependents for the first day of the month .

Look, if you violate this I will make it on you as a shortage. As for that which I told you,

however—"Give him a sack of full barley for the mon th"—you should give (it) to him as

0.8 of full barley for the month . (I 14-17)

The original allocation here is clearly 1.5 sacks for the month of Nakht's mission in Perhaa, of which

Nakht was to receive one sack and his dependents half a sack in his absence. Nakht's allotment is

then reduced to 0.8 sacks, the same amount allocated in Letter II for Nakht and his family together

(II 12—13). This might suggest that the schedule of Letter II represents a reduction of nearly half in

the family's monthly income.3 Although Heqanakht clearly intends to reduce Nakht's salary, how

ever, he also warns Merisu not to alter the allocation, and he does so before ordering the cutback.

This warning cannot apply to the one sack originally allocated to Nakht; it must refer either to the

period of payment ("not . . . more than one month") or to the half sack allocated for Nakht's family.

In either case, the rate of 1.5 sacks per month thus seems to be exceptional. Since Heqanakht specifi

cally notes that the allocation for Nakht's family is ky snwj"a second one" (undoubtedly referring to I

15 cqw "salary"), this, rather than the period of payment, was evidently the exceptional element,

which then explains Heqanakht's caution to Merisu about issuing it. The family's normal monthly

salary was therefore probably the one sack originally allocated to Nakht, and the extra half sack was a

special allotment for his family's needs while he was away.37 O n that basis the allocation in II 12—14

represents a reduction of 20% in the salary received by Nakht and his family, and this in turn may be

indicative of the scale of cutbacks for the household as a whole.3

T h e salary schedule of II 7—23 was intended to take effect in late September o fYear 8, some

four months after Letter II was writ ten, replacing the previous schedule, which had probably been

instituted a year earlier (see pp. 136—38). If the original figure of 7.95 sacks represents 80% of the

previous monthly total, the latter would have amounted to some 9.5 sacks of barley a month . In

food alone the household would also have needed, as a rough min imum estimate, perhaps 7 sacks

of emmer and 2 of barley each month for a normal diet.39 Wha t proport ion of this would have

been included in salaries is unknown, though the evidence discussed on p. 146, above, suggests that

the two were separate.40 In food and salaries together, therefore, Heqanakht's household seems to

have consumed some 18.5 sacks of grain a mon th under normal conditions.

36 As deduced by Baer, "Letters," 5 n. 23, 14. 37 Cf. Peas. R 1, 5—6, where the peasant takes 6 heqat of grain for his journey to Herakleopolis and allocates 2 heqat

for his wife and family in his absence. Nakht's mission to Perhaa was almost certainly intended to take place in June—July, while the new salary schedule of II 7—23 was not to take effect until two months after that, in late September: see pp. 136—37. Since the instructions in Letter I concern only the month of Nakht's mission, the rate was apparently intended to revert to the normal 1 sack per month for his family thereafter until September.

38 The allocations of grain to Sihathor, Merisu, and Sinebniut inV 12—15 do not represent salaries: see p. 163, below. 39 The calculation is based on the household population estimated in Chapter 5, assuming a wife and one child each as

the minimum dependents of Heti's son Nakht and Merisu, a total of 18 people. Using the figures of 3780 calories a day for each of 6 men and 2520 for each of 11 women and children (n. 31, above), the household's total requirement would have been about 50,400 calories a day, and 1,512,000 a month. Of this, perhaps 75% came from grain, a monthly total of 1,134,000 calories. In modern rural Egypt 31% of total calories come from wheat and 73% from all cereals, the latter including rice:WJ. Darby et al., Food: the Gift of Osiris (London, 1977), 478. The percentage from grain in ancient times was undoubtedly somewhere between these two figures, and probably similar to the higher one since the ancient diet had no rice and meat was less plentiful. The consumption of calories in grain would have been largely in bread and therefore largely in emmer, 'which was the primary bread grain. The monthly requirement of 1,134,000 calories in grain could have been met by 7 sacks of emmer and 2 of barley (see Table A in Appendix E, p. 258), a ratio of 80% emmer to 20% barley

40 Cf. also Mueller,JNES 34 (1975), 259;Janssen, Commodity Prices, 455-66.

148 8. ECONOMICS

These figures do not include Heqanakht's own use of the household's grain resources. Two in

stances of this occur in Letter I, where he records the receipt often sacks of barley from home (I

vo. 1—2) and asks Merisu to send another "2 sacks of zwr-emmer along with whatever full barley

you find, but only from the excess of your salaries until you reach Harvest" (I vo. 7-8). The chro

nology of the letters indicates that Heqanakht received the ten sacks of barley in early May and

expected the additional grain probably in November or December of the same year; the total had

to supply his needs for about a year (see pp. 136—39). As food alone the barley would been ade

quate for some 15 months (see nn. 31 and 39, above).41 Some of it, however, was undoubtedly

needed to purchase other commodities, as well as to feed Sihathor during his stay in Thebes—

hence Heqanakht's request for additional grain.

Account V records a number of loaves of bread that Heqanakht received before his departure

from Sidder Grove in Year 5 (V 30—33), undoubtedly intended for his use during an extended stay in

Thebes.42 The bread is tallied as 1000 "grilled" (s3srt), 500 bhsw, and 3700 tr-zzt, and totaled as 6000

tr-zzt. The tr-zzt was evidendy a standard unit: Middle Kingdom texts indicate that laborers were

paid eight to twenty tr-zzt a day.43 Inscribed tags from the later Middle Kingdom fort of Uronarti

record 80 tr-zzt baked from two-thirds heqat (, 2) of full barley and 90 tr-zzt baked from one heqat

of z(tvj(-emmer.44 One such tr-zzt of barley would have weighed about 28 grams (1 oz.) and a tr-zzt

of emmer about 42 grams (1.5 oz.), providing respectively about 101.5 and 148.2 calories.45 At that

rate Heqanakht's 3700 tr-zzt would have supplied between 375,624 and 548,348 calories, enough for

about four to six months' rations if they constituted 75% ofa daily diet of 3780 calories (see n. 39,

above). His other two kinds of bread amounted to 2300 tr-zzt, implying an equivalence of the 1000

s3srt to 800 tr-zzt and the 500 bhsw to 1500 tr-zzt, as James deduced (HP, 61). If this equivalence was

based on weight, as seems likely, a s3srt would have weighed 22.5—33.5 grams (0.8—1.2 oz.) and a bhsw

84.6—125.6 grams (3—4.4 oz.), depending on whether they were made of barley or emmer. This

amounts to 81—118.5 calories per s3srt and 304.5—444.6 per bhsw.4' The 1000 s3srt and 500 bhsw

would then have provided an additional 233,496—340,865 calories, enough for a further three to four

months' rations. The bread listed in V 30—33 would therefore have supplied Heqanakht's needs in

Thebes for some seven to ten months.

The evidence discussed in the preceding chapter (p. 139) indicates that Heqanakht arrived in

Thebes in late September or early October ofYear 5, returned home in the summer ofYear 7, and

went back to Thebes in September ofYear 7, where he was to stay until after the harvest ofYear 9.

With the bread rations he took for the first of these sojourns, he would have needed to be resup-

plied from home at the earliest sometime in the following May. His rations thus seem to have been

calculated to last at least until after the following harvest, which would have been the most oppor

tune time for replenishing his supplies. This is exactly the pattern reflected in Letter I, which

indicates that Sihathor had arrived in Thebes in May ofYear 8 with further supplies of grain (p.

135) during Heqanakht's second sojourn there.

41 Cf. Miller, JESHO 34 (1991), 259—60, assuming full use of the barley as food. 42 James, HP, 58; Menu, Recherches, 129. See p. 134, above. 43 Simpson, Papyrus Reisner I, 25-26, 35, 44-45, 85; Papyrus Reisner II, 32-33. See Mueller, JNES 34 (1975), 255-57;

Miller,JESHO 34 (1991), 257-59. 44 WK. Simpson, JEA 59 (1973), 220-22, 221 fig. 1 B-C.The figures of 60 and 70 tr-zzt given by Simpson in his dis

cussion—and repeated in Menu, Recherches, 133 n. 26; Miller,JESHO 34 (1991), 257-58—are in error. Simpson's hieroglyphic transcription shows the figures 80 and 90, respectively, as in the original publication of the tags: D. Dunham, Second Cataract Forts II: Uronarti, Shalfak, Mirgissa (Boston, 1967), 35 nos. 17 and 9, pis. 28 (3) and 27 (1).

45 See Table A in Appendix E, p. 258.This is at most half the size ofa loaf of modern commercial pita, which weighs around 86 grams (3 oz.) and has some 240 calories, comparable to the wheat bread common in Egypt today. Miller, JESHO 34 (1991), 257-60, reaches a figure of 213.6 calories per tr-zzt of barley using a slightly different value for the heqat and the erroneous figure of 60 rather than 80 tr-zzt (for which, see the previous note). The calculations of Menu, Recherches, 129—30, are based on a misreading of the amount of grain in I vo. 2 as 10 heqat rather than 10 sacks.

46 Based on the caloric values of barley and emmer: see Table A in Appendix E,p. 258.

C. LAND 149

Based on the calculations above, the bread Heqanakht took to Thebes in Year 5 would have

required 5 sacks of barley or 6% sacks of emmer to produce. Neither this nor the 10 sacks of barley

he received in May ofYear 8 are described as Heqanakht's salary (cqw), although the latter are

likely to have been needed at least in part for disposable income. That he received one, however, is

clear from the reference to cqwj "my salary" in II 33 and is implied in II 4 jr n.n cqw.[n] "[our] sal

ary has been made for us." Like the salaries of the other family members, this would have come

from the household's resources.47 It would undoubtedly have been larger than 1.1 sacks per month,

the largest of the household salaries under normal conditions.4 Heqanakht's food, which also

came from the household's resources, would have required another 0.5 sacks of emmer and 0.15 of

barley (see n. 39). His food and salary together would then have amounted to perhaps 2.5 sacks of

grain per month. With the figures derived above, the total grain requirements of Heqanakht and

his household can therefore be estimated at around 21 sacks per month.

C. Land

Heqanakht refers in his letters to "my land" (I vo. 6), "all the area of my sp3t and all the area of

my sj" (I vo. 9—10), and "all my land" (II 30), and the possessive indicates that these were lands

owned in some respect by Heqanakht himself. The reference to "our land" in I 1 probably also

connotes fields owned by him, since there is no evidence that they belonged to other members of

the family and Heqanakht states elsewhere that "everything is mine" (II 26). Besides lands that he

may have inherited, those that Heqanakht considered his own undoubtedly included fields he had

received as a perpetual endowment in return for his duties as ka-servant (see pp. 105—106). Other

land was acquired on lease (see below), and the "land that is in pasturage, which lp Jr.'s son

Khentekhtai gave" (II 33) must have been purchased or leased.49

All the lands to which Heqanakht refers in his letters were near his home at Sidder Grove and

in the area of Perhaa nearby (see Chapter 6), since he orders his family to cultivate them. At the

time the letters were written, these consisted of at least his sp3t and sj as well as the fields noted

above. The first two were separate from the other fields, since Heqanakht notes that he had planted

them "in flax" (I vo. 10), while the. land acquired from Khentekhtai was "in pasturage" and the

field leased by Merisu was devoted to barley, as shown by the calculations concerning it. The fields

in Sidder Grove apparently lay some distance from those in Perhaa, and perhaps at a higher eleva

tion (see p. 123). The "watered land" (I 9, II vo. 4) that Heqanakht wanted to lease in Perhaa, on

the other hand, was probably closer to the river—an important consideration, given his evident

concern for the height of the coming flood.

The term used for Heqanakht's fields throughout the papyri is 3ht, which denotes land devoted

to cultivation; the texts refer to 3ht as plowed or tilled (I 4, 7, vo. 6-7; II 30, 33, vo. 2) and in crops

(I 7, 12—13, vo. 9-10, vo. 11-12; II 33;V 16). It is also described as subject to the annual inundation:

besides reference to the flood itself (I vo. 11—12), by means of the term jwh "get wet" (I 1, vo. 6: see

the textual note on p. 32) and probably also qbt "watered" (I 9; II vo. 4). The latter qualification

concerns land that Heqanakht wanted his men to lease. Its sense is uncertain. James opted for

"unworked" or "idle" rather than Gunn's original "easy to irrigate, well-watered," but subsequent

translations have followed Gunn.50 James presumably based his interpretation on the connotations

"calm, detached, comfortable, idle" attested elsewhere for the verb qbb, but these seem to be used

47 There is no indication that Heqanakht's income was derived or calculated separately, and the references in I vo. 1— 5, I vo. 7-8, II 4, II 33,V 1-3, andV 34-36 all point to the household as the source of his grain.This probably included the grain produced by fields he had received in his capacity of ka-servant.

48 The largest figure in the salary list of II 7—23 is 0.875 sack, originally allocated to May's daughter Hetepet (see the textual note on pp. 39—40). If this represents a reduction of 20%, her normal allotment would have been 1.1 sacks per month.

49 See the textual note on p. 43.The fields reflected in AccountsVII and P are discussed on p. 177, below. 50 James, HP, 21. See Baer,"Letters," 4 n. 16.

150 8. ECONOMICS

only of people.51 In Letter I 3ht qbt is contrasted with 3ht nt r(m)t nb "the land of everyone" (I 8);

this might suggest "unused" as an extension of the meaning "calm," which is applied to the walls of

a fortress in a much later text.52 Such qualifications of inanimate objects are exceptional, however.

Gunn's interpretation is evidently based on the cognate transitive verb qb "pour water" and is per

haps likelier.53 The term qbt can be understood as a passive participle used in the "extended" sense:

i.e., land on which water is "poured" by the inundation.54

Besides 3ht, Heqanakht also uses the terms sj and sp3t to refer to his lands. Both of these

probably reflect the system of basin irrigation commonly used in ancient Egypt.55 The term Sj

generally denotes a body of water ("lake, pond, pool"), but it is also used of something that can

hold liquids temporarily; in agricultural contexts it refers to a depressed field that filled with water

to create a temporary "lake" during the annual inundation.5' The term sp3t has been studied in

detail by Berlev, who deduced its basic referent as the cultivable land between settlements.57 The

ideogram • = with which it is written in its only occurrence in the Heqanakht papyri (I vo. 9) is

evidently the hieratic version of the hieroglyphic SH (see the textual note on pp. 32-33). The lat

ter has been interpreted as "land marked out with irrigation runnels," but Schenkel has established

that it represents instead an area of land divided into irrigation basins by levees of earth.5 Both

terms thus refer to basin-land. As such they could be synonyms, but their usage in I vo. 9—10 seems

rather to denote two different kinds of land. Schenkel's analysis suggests that the basins of sp3t land

were artificially created: thus, land made into basins, or "basined land."59 This implies that such land

itself did not offer the kinds of natural depressions that held water long enough to form "lakes"

during the inundation. In contrast, sj could then denote natural "basin-land."

This interpretation of the term sp3t cannot be argued from its use in the Heqanakht papyri,

but the context of Letter I offers some support for sj as a natural flood basin. The passage mentions

both sp3t and sj, but it is concerned only with the cultivation of the latter:

Now, as for all the area of my sp3t and all the area of my sj in Sinwi, I have done it in flax.

Don't let anybody farm it. Moreover, as for anyone who will speak to you (about farming

it), you should go [to I]p Jr.['s son] Khentekhtai about him. Now, you should do that 5)' in

full barley. Don't do emmer there. But if it will come as a big inundation, you should do it

in emmer. (I vo. 9—12)

Heqanakht notes that he had planted both areas in flax, but he wants the sj converted to grain in the

coming agricultural cycle.>0 His preference is for barley, but he acknowledges that the coming inun

dation may fill the sj with too much water to make this crop feasible, since young barley plants do

not do well with excessive watering." Heqanakht therefore seems to have had little or no control

over the water level in his sj, but he apparently anticipated that the inundation would fill the sj in any

51 Wb.W, 23, 4-6. 52 Wb.V, 23, 20 (Dyn. 19). For the sense of I 8 3ht nt r(m)t nb, see the textual note on p. 25. 53 Wb.V, 24, 6-11. 54 Understanding 3ht qbt (n.s qbhw/mw) "land (to which water is) poured": see Gardiner, EG, § 376. 55 For basin irrigation, see W Schenkel, LA I, 777—78; idem, Die Bewasserungsrevolution im Alten Agypten (Mainz,

1978), 21-22; C. Eyre,_/EL4 80 (1994), 77-80. 56 Wb. IV, 397-98; as temporary receptacle, Wb. IV, 398, 10—11. For sj as basin-land, see Schenkel, Bewasserungs

revolution, 62; Eyre JEA 80 (1994), 68. 57 O. Berlev, TpygoHoe Hacejieuue, 234—42. 58 Gardiner, EG, 488 (Sign-list N 24). Schenkel, Bewasserungsrevolution, 28—29. See the Frontispiece. 59 Schenkel notes that the open ends of the sp3t hieroglyph are more suggestive of natural rather than artificial levees

(Bewasserungsrevolution, 28—29), but this is based on the understanding that the word essentially denotes an administrative division ("nome": Wb. IV, 97-99), which should have clearly defined borders. Berlev's analysis (n. 57, above), however, suggests that the topographic reference was at least as important, though perhaps not primary.The root meaning'may be "organized land" (see Moreno Garcia, Hwt et le milieu rural egyptien, 133—34), both agriculturally ("basined land") and administratively ("nome"). In the early Middle Kingdom inscriptions of Djefaihapi at Asyut the ends of the sp3t sign are closed as well as open: P. Montet, Kemi 3 (1930), 72 and pl. 8 nos. 25 and 31.

60 For the singular sr"it" as referring to both "areas," see the textual note on p. 34.The fact that Heqanakht goes on to speak only of the sj also suggests that it was distinct from the sp3t.

61 Baer, "Letters," 6 n. 41.

C. LAND 15 I

case. Both these considerations point to a natural depression. The area of the sp3t may also have been

naturally inundated, but if the levees apparently reflected in its ideogram were in fact artificial, this

would indicate that it did not retain water as well as a natural basin. With the development of artifi

cial irrigation in the First Intermediate Period it is also possible that sp3t had come to denote basins

that were flooded artificially. 2 The extent of such irrigation in Heqanakht's time, however, is uncer

tain. In any case, Heqanakht seems not to have employed it on his own lands. In Letter I he warns

Merisu: "As for every part of our land that gets wet, you are the one who cultivates it—take heed—

and all my people as well as you" (I i).This suggests that there were parts of his land that did not "get

wet," and therefore that their watering was essentially dependent on the inundation.

Heqanakht's "basined land" and "basin-land," which had been planted in flax in Year 7, may

also be the source of the 1410 sheaves (s3rw) of flax recorded in Year 5 (V 7-10, 13-15), less the

plot of 1 aroura given to one or more of his men in the same year (V 16).>3 The first figure gives

some idea of their acreage, though only a vague one, since there is no indication how much of the

crop is represented in the 1410 sheaves, the size ofa sheaf itself is imprecise, and the number of

sheaves produced by a field is uncertain (see p. 173, below). At any rate, the flax fields were cer

tainly larger than a single aroura, as indicated by the grant in Year 5.

Letters I and II specify the size of the additional fields Heqanakht had acquired. In both cases,

Heqanakht uses the special sign "J" to express their dimensions, rather than (or in addition to) the

usual hieratic numerals:

Now look, before I came upstream here, you calculated for me the lease of -f" of land in

full barley alone. Mind you do not short a sack of full barley from it, as (if you were) one

dealing with his own full barley, because you have made the lease for it painful for me, be

ing full barley alone as well as its seed. Now look, when dealing with full barley, 65 sacks of

full barley from Z% of land, being 5 sacks of full barley from 1 ar. of land, is not a difficult

rate. Look, "f" of land will net 100 sacks of full barley. (I 9-13)

In this respect, don't be neglectful about that jZ of land that is in pasturage, which lp Jr.'s

son Khentekhtai gave. (II 32-33)

The ratio in Letter I, in which 5 sacks from 1 aroura is equivalent to 65 sacks from ^J,, shows that

the hieratic group represents a measure of land and that the area in question must be larger than a

single aroura.64 Reading the grain quantities as 9 and 69, James deduced the value of Z\^ as 7V2

arouras and interpreted the group as representing a special sign for 2V2 arouras (-f-) multiplied by

three («**). '5 Baer subsequently revised the reading of the grain quantities in Letter I, yielding the

more plausible ratio of 5 sacks per 1 aroura as equivalent to 65 sacks per Zl* and the value of 13

arouras for the last element. This indicates that the sign -f- denotes 10 rather than 2/4 arouras and

the following *** represents an additional 3 arouras instead of a multiplier. The use of dots rather

than strokes for the latter reflects a convention similar to that used for grain, where quantities are

expressed in sacks and tenths ofa sack (p. 143, above). 7 The group Z\t thus represents more spe

cifically 1.3 dekarouras (dar.) rather than 13 arouras. This in turn indicates that the figure jZ in

62 For the origins of artificial irrigation see Schenkel, Bewasserungsrevolution, 25—36. Until the Ptolemaic Period this kind of irrigation remained essentially a means of expanding the system of basin lands to areas that were not naturally watered by the inundation: Schenkel, LA I, 778.

63 For the last, see the textual note on p. 54. For the meaning of s3rw, see p. 172, below. 64 One aroura is equivalent to slightly more than Yt hectare or % acre: see Table B in Appendix E, p. 258. 65 James, HP, 15, 115-16. As James noted, the ratio 9:1 = 69:7!^ is only approximate with this value, since 69 divided

by 9 produces 7% rather than 7V2.James's readings were accepted by J.-L. de Cenival, RdE 15 (1963), 141; C.H.S. Spaull,JEA 49 (1963), 185; and Menu,"Gestion," n. 2.

66 Baer, "Land," 35—36. Baer's conclusions have largely been followed in subsequent studies, with the exceptions noted in the preceding footnote.

67 Cf. B. Gunn JEA 12 (1926), 126; James, HP, 23; O. Berlev, BiOr 22 (1965), 265 n. 11. 68 The term "dekaroura" and its abbreviation "dar." have been coined here to reflect the area of 10 arouras as a unit. In

the New Kingdom this area was known as a h3, more fully h3-t3 or h3-n-t3, denoting 1000 (h3) hundredths of an aroura (t3): Gardiner, EG, § 266, 3; Wb. Ill, 220, 3-4. Although the dekaroura and the h3 are mathematically

152 8. ECONOMICS

Letter II represents 1.4 dar., with the horizontal line denoting four tenths as in grain notations. 9

From the context, the group -f- in Letter I seems to represent the same amount of land as Zl^. It

is unlikely to denote 3 **\~,7° as in grain notation (e.g.,VII 5 lllfr "3 sacks"), since the numeral 3 is

not written as ^ in these papyri. The sign ^ is occasionally employed as a writing of plural strokes

(II 7;V 39;VII 12; P 3, 14), and this could indicate an indeterminate plural "dekarouras," but a nu

merical value seems likelier in the context. The variation between ^ and *** may be no more

significant than that noted for other numerals in this scribe's hand.71

The identification of "7 as a sign for 1 dar. (10 ar.) also suits the other evidence amassed by

James (HP, 115-16). The notation =5= ViV in a Middle Kingdom ostracon indicates that the first

group (on the left) has a value larger than the 7 arouras evidently represented by the second

group.72 The use of the ideogram for st3t "aroura" in both groups obviously reflects a convention

different from that of the Heqanakht papyri, but the notation can be explained if the sign Hb has

been employed as a writing of 10 ar. rather than 1 dar. (i.e., 10 ar. + 7 ar. rather than 1.7 dar.).This

equivalence is confirmed by two copies ofa passage from BD 72: Pb jw di.tw nfi ^ "he is given

=TK" for which Pa has jw dj.tw n.f 3ht st(3)t 10 "he is given 10 arouras of land."73

The passage from Letter I cited above thus indicates that Heqanakht had acquired 13 arouras

of land on lease before the agricultural season ofYear 7-8. In addition to these, Letters I and II are

also concerned with the lease of new fields for cultivation in the coming agricultural year. Much

of the recto of Letter I is devoted to this topic, as is the verso of Letter II:

Arrange to have Heti's son Nakht and Sinebniut go down to Perhaa to cultivate for [us] ^

of land on lease. They should take its lease from that sheet to be woven there (with you). If,

however, they will have collected the equivalent value of that emmer that is (owed me) in

Perhaa, they should use it there as well. Should you have nothing more than that sheet I

said to weave, they should take it valued from Sidder Grove and lease land for its value.

Now, if it will be easy for you (all) to cultivate y of land there, cultivate it. You should find

land—*^T of land in emmer, " j ' of land in full barley—in the [good] land [of] Khepshyt.

Don't farm the land everyone else farms. You should ask from Hau Jr. If you don't find

(any) from him, you will have to go before Herunefer. He is the one who can put you on

watered land of Khepshyt. (I 3-9)

Now look, I have had 24 copper deben for the lease of land brought to you by Sihathor.

Now, have 7 of land cultivated for us on lease in Perhaa beside Hau Jr., by copper, by

cloth, by full barley, [by] anything], but only when you will have (first) collected the value

of oil or of anything (else) there. Mind you, be especially diligent. Be watchful, and [farm]

good watered land of Khepshyt. (II vo. 1-4)

equivalent, the reading of •+• as h.3 is uncertain. In the Old Kingdom the land measure K3 denoted one tenth of an aroura: Helck, LA III, 1200. Figures such as XI1111 i n t n e early Middle Kingdom (Siut I, 313) may follow this older convention (representing 0.22 arouras) or that of the New Kingdom (representing 22 arouras). The latter, however, seems likelier. In the case cited here, the land consisted of nine units of 11 and one of j j j (, given to ten individuals in return for their continuing service to a funerary cult (Siut I, 313—3163). Under the older system this would amount to minuscule plots of 0.2—0.4 arouras (55—110 m2); in the later convention it would represent a more plausible 2-4 arouras (0.55-1.1 ha). On that basis the sign -f- has been read as h3 in the present study.

69 In I 13, however, the horizontal below the sign -J- is probably a hieratic *»•»»»: see p. 156, below. 70 Suggested by Parkinson, Voices, 103. 71 Different signs are used for the numeral 5 in I 12 and P 10, for 0.9 sack in II 23 and VII 4, and probably also for

the numeral 60 in I 12 andVII 12: see the textual notes in Chapter 2. 72 Baer,"Land," 35. 73 E. Naville, Das aegyptische Todtenbuch der XVIII. bis XX. Dynastie (Berlin, 1886), II, 157; the group JrL in Pa is un

doubtedly corrupt (or miscopied) for ^ f j st(3)t "aroura." As 10 ar., the Hr" of land that the deceased plows in BD 189 (cited by James, HP, 116) is also compatible with the amount of land that could be farmed by a single man (see p. 159, below). The passage from BD 99 cited by James, HP, 115, has a parallel in CT 404, studied by D. Muller, CdE 42 (1967), 259—65. Muller proposed a value of 7 arouras for the sign Hh based on this parallel, but the CT passage has clearly been reinterpreted in the BD: 3ht st_3t 1 mh 7 m jtj btj1"! aroura and 7 cubits of land in barley and emmer" (CT V, i99d) = 3ht st3t =8= mjtj btj n mh 7 "=h arouras of land in barley and emmer of 7 cubits" (BD 99): cf. CTV, 209f dj n.f st3t I... ] m btj n mh 3 m q3.f"he has been given [ ... ] arouras with emmer of 3 cubits in height."

C. LAND I 5 3

The chronology of the letters indicates that these two passages refer to the same lease, with the

instructions in Letter II supplementing and refining those issued in Letter I (pp. 139—41).

Heqanakht's initial instruction (I 3-6) is for Nakht and Sinebniut to be sent to Perhaa to rent

land using cloth that they were to take with them from home. His orders on this point—"They

should take its lease from that sheet" and "they should take it valued from Sidder Grove and lease

land for its value"—indicate that he initially expected the cloth's value to be sufficient for the

amount of land he wanted to lease. While in Perhaa, however, Heqanakht's men were also to at

tempt collection of the debts owed him there, and to use the value of these in the negotations as

well.This was evidently the motive for AccountVI, which lists some of the debts, and Letter III, in

which Heqanakht asks a local official to aid his men in collecting others (p. 131). Heqanakht was

apparently uncertain about the degree of success he could expect from this part of the mission, as

indicated not only by the existence of Letter III but also by his use of the conditional in Letter I

("If, however, they will have collected the equivalent value of that emmer that is in Perhaa") and

by his acknowledgement that his men might ultimately have "nothing more that that sheet" to use

for the lease. After writing Letter I, he therefore decided to send copper back with Sihathor to en

sure that his agents would have enough resources to rent the land he wanted (II vo. 1). His final

instructions, in Letter II, show that he wanted his men to make every effort to collect what was

owed him in Perhaa (cf. I vo. 17) and to use that before anything else to pay for the lease: his refer

ence to "the value of oil" evidently reflects his expectation that some of his debtors would try to

settle in that commodity rather than grain (III 8). If necessary, Nakht and Sinebniut were then to

use the copper he was sending, the cloth he had initially mentioned in Letter I, and finally, as a last

resort, barley or anything else to secure the land.

The amount of land Heqanakht wanted to lease is specified first as

" 3 ; of land" (I 4), then as "y of land" and ""T" of land in emmer, 'Y of

land in full barley" (I 7), and finally as "7 of land" (II vo. 2). The use of

the sign for 1 dar. in I 7 indicates that Heqanakht was interested in ac

quiring 20 arouras, with half to be used for growing emmer and half for I 7 II vo. 2

barley.74 The same plot is evidently denoted by the preceding " 5 of r. „ . . Fig. 9.1 he hieratic sign

land," indicating that the sign 5 represents 2 dar.75 The fact that this sign £• 2 ^ (sca]e 2-i)

is not followed by the feminine ending or a determinative argues for its

identification as a measure rather than an adjective, and this is confirmed by its use in a more

complex measurement elsewhere.7 Since the same lease is discussed in Letter II, the sign *T there

is undoubtedly a variant form of 5 , a s n a s been universally recognized: apart from the additional

tick in the former, the two signs are made with the same basic components (Fig. 9).77 Berlev iden

tified the sign as the hieratic form of the hieroglyph 3 , used as an ideogram in the words cht

"farmland" and chwtj "farmer," and suggested that its use to denote 2 dar. (20 ar.) derives from the

fact that this was the amount of land a single chwtj could normally be expected to cultivate.7

If the signs 5 a n d T denote 2 dar., the initial group ^ in Letter I must have a different value.

As Baer noted, it is unlikely that two different means of expressing the same measure would have

been employed, and the convention discussed on pp. 151—52, above, rules out James's intepretation

74 Baer, "Letters," 4 n. 14; "Land," 36 n. 73. See the textual note on p. 25. The universal interpretation of the two phrases as coordinate ("and") rather than disjunctive ("or") is supported by the absence of the disjunctive specifier r pw (cf. Ill 8—vo. 1) and by the evidence discussed below. Heqanakht's instructions also show that the prepositional phrases m btj ... m jtj-mh cannot refer to the means of payment for these plots.

75 James, HP, 116; Baer, "Letters," 4 n. 14 and 9 n. 69; Baer, "Land," 36 n. 73.The analysis of James and Baer has been universally accepted, with the exception of Goedicke, Studies, 43 and 55 (for which, see the next footnote).

76 James, HP, 116, evidently representing 2 dar. + 3 ar. + 0.5 ar. + 0.25 ar. + 0.125 ar. + 0.06 ar. = 23.935 ar.This rules out Goedicke's speculative translation of the sign as "a trifle" (Studies, 19, 43, 55).

77 For variable use of the tick, cf. the sign P5 in VII vo. 1 and P vo. 1, and the apparently superfluous tick in the sign N36 in P vo. 1 (see the textual note on p. 65).

78 O.D Berlev, "I'affu nap/i" 0 Ezunme Snoxu Cpegnoeo u,apcmea (Leningrad, 1965), 5—6, cited by Golovina, VDI 1995 no. 2, 24-25. See pp. 158—59, below.The hieratic sign also appears in V 12 and VI 8, written by hands different from that of Letters I and II.

154 8. ECONOMICS

of the group as 2 X *7^.79 Baer suggested that Heqanakht may have been thinking initially of an

amount of land smaller than 2 dar., and the wording of the passage bears this out. Heqanakht's ini

tial instruction concerns only the lease of " ^ of land," which is to be paid for by cloth (I 3—4). He

then orders his men to collect the value of debts owed him in Perhaa and to use that "there as

well" (I 4-5: see the textual note on p. 24).This suggests an addition to the original amount and

therefore the lease ofa larger amount of land. In other words, the men are to rent at least " 3 ; of

land" using the cloth, but if they manage to collect additional resources they are to lease a larger

plot—which is essentially what Heqanakht says in the next two sentences. The remainder of the

instruction then discusses the rental of 2 dar. This must be the optimum lease Heqanakht had in

mind, since he ultimately decided to send copper to ensure its acquisition and Letter II refers to it

as the only option. °

The initial figure of " ^ of land" therefore represents something less than 2 dar. The first sign

of the group is clearly identical to that used for 1 dar. The second sign, ^ , has generally been in

terpreted as a numeral augmenting the first, but this is unlikely. ' Its shape is most like that of the

hieratic form of the "land" determinative = (cf. I 4 3ht, just preceding).This is a plausible reading,

since the sign >y* itself is not specifically a numeral but a measure of area (h3 "dekaroura"), analo

gous to fr h3r "sack" and a or 1=1 st3t "aroura." 2 The use of the determinative ar after the sign in

I 4 suggests that the scribe was thinking of it as such ("a dar.") rather than in its numerical value

("1 dar."); the other instances of the sign in the Heqanakht papers, without determinative, occur in

numerical contexts (I 7, 10, 12-13).

The group in I 4 can thus be fitted without difficulty into the overall scheme of land notation

already discussed. The reading suggested here indicates that Heqanakht intended his men to rent at

least ten arouras in exchange for cloth, to be supplemented if feasible by another ten arouras in

exchange for "the equivalent value of that emmer that is (owed me) in Perhaa." The notion of two

ten-aroura plots may also underlie the parenthesis in I 7:"i dar. of land in emmer, 1 dar. of land in

northern barley." With these new fields, Heqanakht would have a total of 47 arouras plus his own

sp3t and 5)' for cultivation in Year 8-9.

Baer's analysis has shown why it was more economical for Heqanakht to rent additional land

instead of purchasing it outright. 3 In the Saite Period and later, land was usually leased for an an

nual term, with arrangements finalized during late August and early September, at the height of

the inundation. 4 Rent was paid after the harvest as a fixed share—usually a third—of the crop, at

which point the lease ended. 5 Heqanakht's leases were also negotiated during the summer (pp.

136—37). In other respects, however, they differ considerably from the annual sharecropping ar

rangements of later periods. Heqanakht uses the noun qdb (I 4, 10—11; II vo. 1-2) and the cognate

verb qdb (I 6) to refer to his leases of land. These are the major source for our understanding of the

79 Baer,"Land," 36 n. 73;James, HP, 115. 80 The lease was envisioned as dependent not only on the resources available to pay for it but also on whether it

would be ndm "easy" for Heqanakht's men to cultivate.The latter factor is discussed below, p. 158. 81 Only three such numerals are possible paleographically:"2" as used in date notation, and "0.7" or "0.8" as used in

grain notation. For the hieratic form of these numerals, see the Sign List in Appendix A and James, HP, Pal. 14 G and 15 O—P. The first of these is improbable, since the other numerals after the sign for 1 dar. do not use the date form: I 10 and 12 (13 arouras), II 33 (14 arouras); contrast the "date" forms of " 3 " and "4" (James, HP, Pal. 14 H—I; Moller, Pal. I, 658—59; Simpson, Reisner I, 107; Arnold, Control Notes, 47) with the forms of " 3 " and "4" used with the dar. sign. Of the two grain-numerals, "0.7" is likelier than "0.8," since the two horizontals of the latter are not ligatured: cf. I 17; II 8, 11-12, 14-15; III 8;V 34, 37, 39; also Simpson, Reisner I, 106. Although the grain-numeral "0.7" is ligatured, however, it is also questionable here: the sole example in these papers (II 16, by the same scribe who wrote I 4) shows two horizontals of different lengths, with the lower one distinctly shorter and downward-sloping, as in other MSS (Simpson, Reisner II, 54).

82 Cf. Berlev, BiOr 22 (1965), 265 n. 11. 83 Baer,"Letters," 12-16. See also C. Eyre,JESHO 40 (1997), 367—90, and in Grund und Boden, 107-33. 84 Hughes, Land Leases, 4 and 74; H. Felber, Demotische Ackerpachtvertrdge der Ptolemderzeit (AA 58; Wiesbaden, 1997),

89—98, 125-29; see also pp. 136-37, above. 85 Baer, "Land," 34; Helck, Wirtschaftsgeschichte, 281; Hughes, Land Leases, 4 and 74; Felber, Demotische

Ackerpachtvertrdge, 151—84.

C. LAND 155

nature of a qdb lease, since the term is attested only rarely elsewhere, but the papyri offer enough

information to determine its general character.

Heqanakht's instructions for the new lease of 2 dar. in Letters I—II show that payment was re

quired in advance, before the lessee had actually made use of the land. His discussion of the lease

arranged by Merisu (I 9—13) indicates that that agreement was at least a year old ("before I came

upstream here, you calculated for me the lease of 1.3 dar. of land": see pp. 137-38), and his warn

ings about the use of its barley suggest that he intended to renew it on the same terms (see below).

The lease was thus apparently renewable at the discretion of the lessee, and the rate established at

its beginning seems to have remained fixed for its lifetime, due each year probably on the anniversary

of the initial agreement. Golovina views the feature of prepayment as the fundamental characteristic

of qdb leases, while Menu argued that their long-term nature was more significant. The Ramesside

instances of 3ht qdbyt set aside for the cult of a royal statue tend to support Menu's interpretation,

but these endowments were evidently established by means of an initial grant. Both conditions

were probably integral to such leases.

In the case of Heqanakht's new lease, the prepayment was to be settled in oil, copper, cloth, or

barley, while the earlier lease arranged by Merisu was paid in barley alone. This suggests a process

whereby the two parties negotiated the product(s) in which the lease was to be paid as well as the

amount of the fee. Since dissimilar commodities were being exchanged, the relative value of the

payment with respect to the land had to be established as part of the agreement. This relationship

is expressed in the abstract noun sncw/snct/sct "value" (I 5-6, II vo. 3), and its cognate verb snc

"value" (I 6). 7 The process required the lessee to "collect the value" (sdj snct) of the commodity (I

4-5, II vo. 3), which could then be used for (M'with respect to") the initial payment: "they should

take it valued (snc.w) from Sidder Grove and lease land for (r) its value" (I 6). This kind of valua

tion was probably done with reference to a commonly accepted standard of equivalences, but

Letter III shows that one party—in this case, the lessor—could also set the rate of exchange (III 8—

vo. 1). In some cases the process of valuation may have involved an actual exchange of commodi

ties for some standard medium of "value." This seems evident in I 4—5: "If, however, they will have

collected the equivalent value of (sct ra db3 n: literally, "value in exchange for") that emmer that is

in Perhaa." It can also be inferred on that basis in II vo. 3: "but only when you will have collected

the value of oil or of anything (else) there." The nature of this medium is not specified, but a text

of the early New Kingdom suggests it may have been a metal. 9 If so, the practice offers a further

clue to Heqanakht's motive in sending "24 copper deben for the lease of land" in Letter II. This

sum also provides some evidence for the amount of "value" Heqanakht needed to lease 2 dar. of

land. As such, however, it is only partly instructive, since the metal may have constituted only a

portion of the projected payment, with the remainder to be made up from the valuation of "oil or

of anything (else)," supplemented if necessary "by cloth, by full barley, [by] anything]" that had

been similarly valued (II vo. 2—3).90

The terms are more specific in the case of the previous lease of 13 arouras arranged by Merisu,

as revealed by Heqanakht's discussion of them in Letter I:

86 The primary studies ofqdb leases are those of Baer, "Letters," 11-17, and "Land," 34-36; Menu, "Gestion," 111—29; and Golovina, VDI 1995 no. 2, 4-27. For four later instances of the noun qdb see A. Gasse, Donnees nouvelles administrati-ves et sacerdotales sur Vorganisation du domaine d'Amon I (BdE 104; Cairo, 1988), 35, 228, pis. 13 (11, 7) and 15 (12, 8/11 /17). The verb reappears in the passive participle qdbyt (3ht qdbyt "qdbed land") in two instances: Menu, "Gestion," 118-21; D. Kessler, SAK 2 (1975), 105, 4, and 109-10. All these later examples of the term date to the Ramesside Period.

87 James, HP, 113; Kaplony, MDAIK 25 (1969), 29; Helck, LA IV, 1082; Menu,"Gestion," 127-28; O.D. Berlev, PS 15 (1978), 21-24. Golovina, VDI 1995 no. 2, 18—19.The omission of <*~~» in I 5 sct and its secondary insertion in I 6 snct (see the textual notes on pp. 24-25) suggest that the term in the Heqanakht papers was already similar to its later descendant sctj: cf.Wente,JNES 24 (1965), 106 and 108.

88 As was the practice in the Ramesside Period:Janssen, Commodity Prices, 101—11, 520-23, 545—50. 89 James, HP, 113. See Berlev, "dpeBiieeimncKaH iieHeacHan ejwiiHiia." PS 15 (1978), 21-24. F ° r later evidence, see

Helck, Wirtschaftsgeschichte, 270;Janssen, Commodity Prices, 102-103. 90 Cf. James, HP, 36; Baer,"Letters," 9 n. 70. See also p. 158, below.

156 8. ECONOMICS

Now look, before I came upstream here, you calculated for me the lease of 1.3 dar. of land

in full barley alone. Mind you do not short a sack of full barley from it, as (if you were) one


ing full barley alone as well as its seed. Now look, when dealing with full barley, 65 sacks of

full barley from 1.3 dar. of land, being 5 sacks of full barley from 1 ar. of land, is not a diffi

cult rate. Look, 1 dar. of land will net 100 sacks of full barley. Mind you do not take

liberties with the oipe of full barley therein. (I 9-14)

Apart from the question of its figures, discussed above, this passage has been the subject of some

extended debate about the meaning of its equations. The key problem is the relationship of the

two rates to one another: 5 sacks per aroura and 10 sacks per aroura (100 sacks per dar.). James in

terpreted both as gross yield: the first (which he read as 9 sacks per aroura) as the yield from a

previous harvest, and the second as the ideal yield.91 Baer saw the first rate as that of the rental fee

and the second (read as 100 sacks from 20 arouras) as Heqanakht's projected net, while Kaplony

suggested a contrast between net and normal yield.92 These interpretations are based in part on

differing views about what may have constituted a normal gross yield from one aroura of cropland

in Heqanakht's time. The evidence, discussed below (p. 160), supports Baer's interpretation, and

indicates that Merisu had agreed to a fee of 65 sacks of barley for the lease of 13 arouras, or 5 sacks

per aroura.

This analyis assumes that the passage cited above refers to a lease undertaken by Merisu for

Heqanakht as lessee, as most studies have understood it. Menu, however, analyzed it as one involv

ing Heqanakht's own fields, in which he was the lessor.93 Using James's readings of the figures, she

argued that the first rate, of 9 sacks per aroura, was that of the current year's harvest, which Merisu

had used to justify his acceptance of a rental fee (unspecified) that was "less than usual because of

the circumstances" ofa poor harvest; the second rate, of 10 sacks per aroura, she saw as the norm,

cited by Heqanakht to counter Merisu's excuse. This is an intriguing interpretation, but ultimately

untenable. Arithmetically, it depends on James's readings of the numbers: with Baer's likelier values

the rate of 5 sacks per aroura, though certainly a poor harvest, could hardly qualify as "not a diffi

cult" one, in Heqanakht's words.94

The wording used in the passage also argues against Menu's theory. The lease is "of" (n) 13

arouras and "in" (m) barley, and comparison with Heqanakht's instruction in I 4 indicates that the

barley is the rental fee:

jt.sn qdb.fi m p3 mn "They should take its lease from that sheet" (I 4)

hsb.n.k n.j qdb n 3ht 1.3 m jtj-mh "You calculated for me the lease of 1.3-dar. of land

in full barley" (I 10),

The lease is also described as "for" barley; although the adverbial form of the preposition (jr) is

used, without a specified object, the previous sentence, to which the adverb must refer, concerns

only the barley, and comparison with I 6 indicates again that it is the mode of payment:

qdb.sn 3ht r $nctf "and lease land for its value" (I 6)

qdb jrj) "the lease for it" (I 11).

9r James, HP, 15 and 22-23; followed (except in the reading of the numbers) by Helck, OLZ 59 (1964), 30, and Wirt-schaftsgeschichte, 156—57. Menu, "Gestion," 116 n. 2, 123, adopted James's readings with a different understanding of the lease itself: see below.

92 Baer, "Land," 34-36; followed by Goedicke, Studies, 59. Kaplony, MDAIK 25 (1969), 30; followed by Wente, Letters, 59 (reading 100 sacks from 10 arouras). Golovina, VDI 1995 no. 2, 25, adopts Baer's reading of the figures but interprets both rates as equivalent yields. Parkinson, Voices, 104, accepts James's reading of 9 sacks but follows Baer's understanding of this as a rental fee.

93 "Gestion," 122-23. 94 Cf. Baer,"Land," 35. Golovina's attempt to explain the rate as normal (VDI 1995 no. 2, 25) is based on a misread

ing of the same rate in the Wilbour Papyrus as gross yield and on the possibility that the grain measure may have been a "double" sack: for the figures in the Wilbour Papyrus, see Janssen, SAK 3 (1975), 141—47; for the "double" sack, see pp. 143—44, above.

http://qdb.fi

C. LAND 157

The latter phrase is used in the clause "you have made the lease for it painful for me," to which

Heqanakht adds the words m jtj-mh hr wc f "being full barley alone." This addendum is actually his

second use of the same prepositional phrase. The first occurs in the sentence immediately before:

Now look, before I came upstream here, you calculated for me the lease of 1.3 dar. of land

infiull barley alone. Mind you do not short a sack of full barley from it, as (if you were) one


ing full barley alone as well as its seed. (I 9-12)

Heqanakht then continues with a third iteration of the same topic:

Now look, when dealing with full barley, 65 sacks of full barley from 1.3 dar. of land, being

5 sacks of full barley from 1 ar. of land, is not a difficult rate. Look, 1 dar. of land will net

100 sacks of full barley. Mind you do not take liberties with the oipe of full barley

therein. (I 12-14)

This repeated emphasis on the nature of the commodity, "full barley," is a good indication of

the true subject of Heqanakht's concern. What he is criticizing is not the lease itself or the amount

of the rental fee but the mode of payment. This accounts for his complaint about the lease being

"painful for me, being full barley alone as well as its seed." In James's interpretation, the last phrase

(hnc prt.f) reflects Heqanakht's fear that he might have to use seed grain as well as "barley set aside

for ordinary purposes" to pay the rent.95 Since the text goes on to describe the rate in fairly posi

tive terms, however, this seems unlikely. Rather, Heqanakht is evidently complaining that he will

have to use his available barley not only for seed, which would be necessary in any case, but for the

rental fee as well, which Merisu had agreed to pay in barley alone (hr wc.fi). This condition may

have been acceptable when the lease was first negotiated, but it proved critical ("painful") after the

harvest ofYear 8, when Heqanakht's barley was in short supply (see pp. 168—69, below), since it

restricted him from substituting other commodities of equal value. In that light his caveat in Letter

III also becomes more understandable: "But look, I would like to be given my property in full bar

ley" (III vo. 1). This is probably also the reason for Heqanakht's repeated injunction about

"shorting" (sj3t I 10—11) or "taking liberties" (shm jb I 13—14) with this grain.9' Since it had to be

used for the rental fee, Merisu could not treat it "as one dealing with his own full barley." What

ever other needs Heqanakht may have had for barley in the coming year, he had to come up with

65 sacks of it in the immediate future to meet his obligation for the renewed lease of the "1.3 dar.

of land in full barley alone" as well as a further amount for seed to use for crops on this plot of

land.

The rental fee of 5 sacks per aroura out ofa projected crop of 15 sacks per aroura is compara

ble to the standard rate of one third of the crop found in later sharecropping leases. Whether such

arrangements also existed in the Middle Kingdom is unknown, but in any case Heqanakht's lease

was not of this type. Despite the comparable rate, Heqanakht does not refer to it as a percentage of

the crop but as a fixed amount: "65 sacks of full barley from 1.3 dar. of land."97 A sharecropping

agreement would also have required him to pay a percentage of what was actually grown on the

land, whether barley or some other crop: in either case, he could hardly complain about having to

pay "in full barley alone."9 Since the letter points to this commodity as the specific cause of his

concern, the "65 sacks of full barley from 1.3 dar. of land" is more likely to represent a fixed annual

fee, set when the lease was first negotiated: "Now look, before I came upstream here, you calcu-

95 James, HP, 22. The evidence discussed above rules out Kaplony s translation of prt as "yield," which is based on an understanding of the 5 sacks per aroura as net yield rather than rent: MDAIK 25 (1969), 30.

96 Note Peas. Bi , 135—36 (cited by James, HP, 21): h3w n chcw hr sj3t n.fi"The weigher of grain-piles is shorting for his own benefit." The sense is clearly that of diverting the grain to another purpose, as James saw.

97 The Saite leases consistently refer to the rental fee as a fraction of the crop (e.g., p3 'A): Hughes, "Land Leases," 4. 98 This rules out Menu's suggestion that the commodities discussed in I 4—6 and II vo. 1-3 were a kind of down-

payment required in addition to the normal sharecropping agreement ("Gestion," 123-24).The wording of I 4—5 also points to the grain as (part of) a fixed fee payable in advance rather than as a percentage of the crop (see p. 156).

158 8. ECONOMICS

lated for me the lease of 1.3 dar. of land in full barley alone" (I 9—10). His discussion of the lease

indicates that its rental fee of 65 sacks had yet to be paid at the time of writ ing (mid to late May of

Year 8). Since this was a preset fee rather than a share of the crop, its due date probably reflects the

anniversary of the initial agreement (and payment), and the fact that it is discussed at all indicates

that Heqanakht intended to continue the lease.

If the 20 arouras of new land that Heqanakht wanted to rent in Year 8 were comparable in

value, their rental fee would have been 100 sacks of barley at the same rate. The debts listed in Let

ter III and AccountVI , whose value Heqanakht preferred to use for this fee (II vo. 3), amount to

27 sacks of barley and 90 of emmer (see p. 12), equivalent in sum to the value of 87 sacks of barley

at the rate of exchange noted in Letter III. This may not have been enough to secure the lease, and

the amount recoverable in time to pay for it seems to have been uncertain in any case. T h e short

fall would then explain Heqanakht's decision to send 24 deben of copper for the lease (II vo. 1).

The purchasing power of a deben of copper in Heqanakht's t ime is unknown, but the 24 deben

may have been enough to add the value of perhaps 19-38 additional sacks of barley.99 Any addi

tional deficit would have to be made up by the value of the cloth, perhaps equivalent to 50 sacks

of barley,100 and as a last resort by barley itself.

The lands that Heqanakht intended his men to farm in the agricultural season ofYear 8—9 thus

consisted of an unknown amount of his own sp3t and sj, 13 arouras of leased cropland, 14 arouras

of pasturage to be converted to crops,101 and an additional 20 arouras of newly rented fields. The

letters suggest that he could rely on the services of five men and one teenage boy from his house

hold to cultivate these fields: Merisu, Sihathor, and Sinebniut (identified as Heqanakht's chwtjw

"farmers" in V 12), Heti's son Nakht , Anubis, and Snefru (see Chapter 5). This evidence offers a

further clue to the overall size of Heqanakht's land. Baer noted "a certain amount of hesitation" on

Heqanakht's part in ordering the lease of 20 rather than 10 additional arouras for the coming sea

son, as expressed in the conditional jr grt ndm n.tn sk3 3ht 2 jm "Now, if it will be easy for you to

cultivate 2 dar. of land there" (I 6-7). I 0 2 This suggests that the addition of 20 arouras would bring

Heqanakht's farmland close to the limit of what his men could be expected to work.103 His order

99 In the New Kingdom and Ramesside Period, 1 sack of grain was generally valued at 1—2 deben of copper: Janssen, Commodity Prices, 116—30 (and 101—102 for the deben in these prices as copper). A deben of copper in the Middle Kingdom weighed three tenths as much as that of the New Kingdom (see Table C in Appendix E, p. 258), but the heavier New Kingdom deben may reflect a comparable decrease in the value of copper. If so, Heqanakht's 24 deben would have been worth as much as 24 New Kingdom deben and therefore could have purchased 19.2-38.4 (MK) sacks of barley at the New Kingdom rate of exchange. Evidence for a considerably higher value of copper in the Middle Kingdom is only indirect: see Golovina, VDI 1995 no. 2, 26.

100 Heqanakht's instructions in I 3-6 indicate that the mn-sheet was sufficient for the rental of 10 arouras (see p. 153), and therefore equivalent in value to some 50 sacks of full barley (see pp. 156—57). Similarly high values for woven cloth are attested in the Ramesside Period: see Janssen, Commodity Prices, 265—71, 278—82, 290.

101 Pasture land is normally uncultivated: P.N.Ward, in The Agriculture of Egypt, ed. by G.M. Craig (Centre for Agricultural Strategy Series, 3; Oxford, 1993), 245. Heqanakht's instruction "about hoeing" this land (II 32—33) thus suggests that he intended it to be planted.

102 Baer, "Letters," 11. Based on the dictionary definition of ndm n "be pleasant/agreeable for" (Wb. II, 380, 15—16), this condition has usually been interpreted as Heqanakht's deference to the judgment or wishes of his men: "if it pleases you" (James, HP, 13);"if it seems pleasant to you" (Baer,"Letters," 4);"if you want" (Baer,"Land," 34);"if, too, it seems desirable to you" (Callender, Middle Egyptian, 121); "if it is convenient for you" (Wente, Letters, 59); "if you'd like" (Parkinson, Voices, 103). Only Goedicke seems to have realized that this is inconsistent with the rest of Heqanakht's instructions (Studies, 43, 54—55). Since Heqanakht clearly intended his men to cultivate the 20 arouras, the condition is more likely to refer to the difficulty of the task than its attractiveness. A similar connotation underlies the negative nj ndm.n n in the medical papyri: e.g.Jr nj gm.n.fi dg3.f n cwj.fj hnc q3[bt.fi nj ndm.n n.f pw dg3.fi nj cwj.jj, nj ndm.n n.f dg3.fn q3btf"As for 'he does not find that he can look at his arms and his chest,' it means that it is not easy for him to look at his arms and it is not easy for him to look at his chest" (Papyrus Smith 1, 25—26): J.H. Breasted, The Edwin Smith Surgical Papyrus II (OIP 4: Chicago, 1930), pl. IB.

103 Menu, "Gestion," 128, has suggested that Heqanakht contracted additional help to cultivate his fields. The papyri themselves, however, give no indication of this. His "team-bulls," moreover, comprised only 15 head (V 24), at least in Year 5. At two animals per yoke (the normal "team"), this would provide enough teams for only one laborer more than the six Heqanakht already had. Menu's suggestion that this additional man was "lp Jr.'s son Khentekhtai" (II 33) is not supported by the grammar of the passage: see the textual note on p. 43. For Golovina's interpretation of Heqanakht's r(m)t"people" (I 1, II 30) as additional laborers (VDI 1976 no. 2, 127), see n. 35, above.

http://dg3.fi

C. LAND 159

that Snefru lend a hand with the plowing (I vo. 6—7) in addition to his newly assigned responsibili

ties as cattle-herd (II 35—36) also points to an increased workload.

Texts of the Ramesside Period indicate that an adult farmer (chwtj) working as a hired hand

was expected to produce a crop of 200 sacks of grain, and a teenage boy half as much.104 Based on

an estimated annual yield of 10 sacks per aroura (see p. 160, below), this amounts to an adult work

load of 20 arouras.105 This is probably a maximum figure: a lower rate of 10 arouras per man is

attested in the late Middle Kingdom.10 'At these rates, Heqanakht's current and projected holdings

in Year 8—9, worked by five men and one boy, could have totaled between 55 and n o arouras. Mi

nus the 47 arouras specified in Letters I—II, his own sp3t and sj would then have amounted to some

8-63 arouras.

Besides the land farmed by his household, Heqanakht probably also owned fields that he had

leased to others. In Letter I, he instructs Merisu not to allow anyone to make use of his sp3t and sj (I

vo. 10). The idiom employed in this passage—h3j hr "go down on" (land)—is the same as that used to

describe the actions of Heqanakht's men in leasing land from others (I 8; II vo. 4), and the need for

such an instruction indicates that he had allowed such leases in the past. The latter may underlie the

debts of grain listed in Letter III and AccountVI. Most of these are described as "in" various places,

indicating that they were tied to the localities and possibly therefore to fields in those areas. The debts

in question total 113.5 sacks of grain. If these were owed to Heqanakht from (^-leases at the rate of

5 sacks per aroura, they would reflect a total of 22.7 arouras of his own land that he had rented out.10

The individual leases would range from 0.6 to 4.2 arouras in size.These are quite small in comparison

with the fields rented by Heqanakht himself (perhaps reflecting the lesser resources of his neighbors),

but are comparable in size to transfers of land attested elsewhere.10

Heqanakht would probably not have allowed such leases unless he had more than enough land

for his own needs. His lease of 13 additional arouras thus points to an unanticipated need.This may

well have been occasioned by the low inundation ofYear 7 (II 4). With the flooding of his sp3t and

sj dependent on the height of the flood (pp. 150—51), some of his fields would probably have re

mained unwatered that year. He would therefore have needed more land in areas that were

reached by the flood in order to grow the amount of crops he needed annually. The demand for

such land may also explain why it was necessary for Merisu to agree to pay for the lease "in full

barley alone."

These considerations indicate that the lease of 13 arouras negotiated by Merisu was undertaken

in Year 7, and that any contracts for leases of Heqanakht's own land had been made in Year 6 or

earlier. Heqanakht's efforts to conserve barley also indicate that the harvest ofYear 8 had been

poorer than normal, despite the additional 13 arouras. In that light, his desire to farm even more

land in the coming year was probably conditioned by the need to replenish his stores of grain as

well as by the realization that he could not count on his debtors, who were in equally difficult cir

cumstances, to settle their debts in grain. Fear of a second low inundation may also have been a

factor but probably not the major one, since Heqanakht also envisioned the possibility ofa higher

flood (I vo. n ) .

104 Gardiner, Wilbour Papyrus II, 115; Baer, "Letters," 12; Janssen, SAK 3 (1975), 148; C. Eyre, in Labor in the Ancient Near East, ed. by M.A. Powell (American Oriental Series 68; New Haven, 1987), 206—208.

105 Berlev suggested that the term cht may refer to this standard unit of production, and the nisbe chwtj to a man assigned to this quota: see n. 78, above.

106 Griffith, Kahun Papyri, 53.The lower rate could also be reflected in Heqanakht's order to have Heti's son Nakht and Sinebniut "cultivate" 20 arouras in Perhaa (I 3—7).This instruction, however, refers only to a month's mission during the summer, when the land was to be leased (p. 138); it says nothing about the actual farming of this land, which was to take place later, in the fall.

107 In this respect, Heqanakht's anticipation that some of his debtors might try to settle their obligations in oil rather than grain (III 8—vo. 1) would also indicate that the lease arrangements were not as strict as those negotiated for him by Merisu.

108 See Eyre, in Grund und Boden, 114—15; Luft, in Grund und Boden, 351-54; and n. 68, above. For plots of land involving fractions of an aroura, cf. James, HP, 116; Griffith, Kahun Papyri, 54 and pl. 21, 15—20.

160 8. ECONOMICS

D. Income and Expenses

In addition to fees from the lease of his land, Heqanakht's income as reflected in the papyri

derived from his crops. In Year 5 these included barley, emmer, and flax (V 1—16); the same crops

seem to have been grown on his land in Year 7-8 (I 9-14, vo. 3-4, vo. 9-10; V 34-36), together

with zwt-emmer (I vo. 8).'°9 His instructions for the use of his fields in the coming agricultural

season ofYear 8—9 concern only barley and emmer (I 7, vo. 11-12), but it seems likely that he

would have continued to grow flax as well, perhaps on the 14 arouras that were to be converted

from pasture land (II 32-33).

Besides the barley required to pay the lease arranged by Merisu, Heqanakht's grain harvest had

to supply a number of other annual needs, including the family's food and salaries, seed for the

next year's crops, and taxes on Heqanakht's own land and livestock. The amounts needed for some

of these uses are specified in the letters and accounts; the remainder can be estimated from data in

the papyri and evidence from other sources.

Heqanakht's rental expenses in grain may have included only the 65 sacks of barley for "the

lease of 1.3 dar. of land in full barley alone" (I 10—13). The "1.4 dar. of land that is in pasturage,

which lp Jr.'s son Khentekhtai gave" (II 33) may have been purchased rather than leased, and even

if it was rented the contract may have allowed Heqanakht some flexibility in the mode of pay

ment. Arrangements for the new lease were to include grain only as a last resort.

The discussions in Section B, above, indicate that Heqanakht and his family consumed some

7.5 sacks of emmer and 2.15 sacks of barley a month as food and perhaps another 11.35 sacks of

barley a month in salaries (in normal times). In this category the yearly total was therefore be

tween 136.2 and 252 sacks of grain, with the higher figure likelier.

Grain for seed is mentioned twice in the papyri: "Mind you that my barley seed is guarded" (I

2) and "full barley alone as well as its seed" (I 11-12). Neither occurrence gives any indication of

the amounts involved. Texts from the Ptolemaic and Roman periods, which are the earliest sources

of information for this category, regularly calculate seed at 1 artaba per aroura, perhaps equivalent

to 1 Middle Kingdom sack per aroura, but more recent practice suggests the higher figure of 10%

of the crop.110 The calculations in Letter I show that Heqanakht expected to net 10 sacks of barley

from each aroura of leased land after paying a rental fee of 5 sacks (p. 156). This indicates that a

normal crop of grain was 15 sacks per aroura, comparable to the yield of 10 New Kingdom sacks

per aroura reflected by a letter from the reign of Ramesses XI:

They mentioned to me the matter of another field in the region of Edfu that had not been

(completely) inundated—4 arouras of land being what was inundated in it—and on which

I had put one man and one team (of cattle), and they cultivated the little land they found

(usable) in it. And when harvest-time came, they got 40 sacks of barley grain for me from

it, and I guarded them strictly and did not touch one oipe of them, and I handed them

over to the scribe Patjaumdiamun as 40 sacks.111

The context and wording of this passage might suggest that such a yield was minimal, but it is in

fact consistent with what is known about the productivity of Egyptian farmland before the advent

of modern agricultural methods.112

109 The crops mentioned in Accounts VII and P were evidently used only in connection with the flax enterprise in the Thinite nome: see the discussion in Section F, below.

110 Baer, "Land," 30; Hughes, Land Leases, 102 n. 62; Eyre, in Agriculture in Egypt, 114-15 n. 32; J. Rowlandson, in Agriculture in Egypt, 152; M. Sharp, in Agriculture in Egypt, 169-70.

i n A. Gardiner, Ramesside Administrative Documents (Oxford, 1948), 73, 4-9, and RdE 6 (1951), 115-3 3. A recent translation of the full letter is provided by Wente, Letters, 130—31.

112 See Baer, "Land," 30, and "Letters," 12 n. 79. J.G.Wilkinson, Topography of Thebes and General View of Egypt (London, 1835), 268, cites 4 ardabs per feddan (10.8 MK sacks per aroura) as the average yield for wheat and 8 (21.6 MK sacks) as the maximum. H. Kees notes an average yield of 6 ardabs of barley per feddan for fields of Middle Egypt in 1937, which equates to 16.2 MK sacks per aroura: Ancient Egypt: a Cultural Topography, ed. by T.G.H. James, translated by I.F.D. Morrow (Chicago, 1961), 75 n. 3. Between 1935 and 1950 the average wheat crop ranged from a low of 4.7

D. INCOME AND EXPENSES 161

Heqanakht would therefore need perhaps 1.5 sacks of seed a year for each aroura of his land to

be sown in grain.113 Since seed grain does not figure into the equations involving leased land in

Letter I, Heqanakht has apparently included it in his net of 10 sacks per aroura. His mention of the

seed grain in I 11—12 and his warning about preserving it in I 2 are more understandable in that

light. With sowing some five months in the future and the current stores of grain in short supply,

Heqanakht was apparently concerned that Merisu might be tempted to appropriate some of the

seed grain temporarily for other purposes. Moreover, Merisu not only had to conserve the usual

1.5 sacks of seed for each aroura of the existing grain fields: he also had to set aside a further 21

sacks for the 14 arouras to be converted to grain (II 33: see n. 101, above), another 15 sacks each of

emmer and barley for the new leases of "1 dar. of land in emmer, 1 dar. of land in full barley" (I 7),

and a further amount for the conversion of the Heqanakht's flax fields (I vo. 9—12).

Heqanakht also had to budget some of his grain for the payment of taxes. These were probably

due yearly as a percentage of the grain grown on the fields that he owned and as an assessment on

his livestock."4 Heqanakht's letters and accounts make no mention of the former, either because

the taxes had already been paid when the documents were written or because they had yet to be

expended, like the grain needed for seed.115 The rate of taxation in the Middle Kingdom is un

known, but it may have been about ten percent of the harvest, as was true for crops grown on

normal land in later times."

Heqanakht's taxable livestock in Year 5 included 35 head of cattle: 15 team bulls, used to work

the fields; 11 cows, most likely for dairy production; 3 oxen; and 6 "raised" cattle, perhaps kept for

slaughter (V 20—24: see the textual notes on pp. 54—55). Account V records 4 sacks of barley and

10.5 of emmer set aside as msw "grain-produce" for these cattle (V 11: see the textual note on p.

53). The purpose of this grain is uncertain. James (HP, 59) suggested that it may have been meant

"to pay for the fodder or general up-keep" of the herd. Little is known about the normal food re

quirements of ancient Egyptian cattle, but judging from modern data, an adult bull or cow might

have eaten perhaps 8000 pounds of fodder a year."7 Normal cattle were apparently pastured,

where they fed on grasses and the stalks of harvested cereals; grain may have been fed only as a

ardabs per feddan to a high of 5.9, or 12.7 to 16 MK sacks per aroura: T. Ruf, in The Agriculture of Egypt, 202. The contemporary evidence cited by Gardiner, Wilbour Papyrus II, 71, is similar (average 14.4 MK sacks): cf. B. Menu, Le regime juridique des terres et du personnel attache a la terre dans le Papyrus Wilbour (Lille, 1970), 81. For the equivalences, see Table A in Appendix E, p. 258. Helck has argued that an average yield was only half this amount for normal land, based on values in the Wilbour Papyrus: OLZ 59 (1964), 30; Wirtschaftsgeschichte, 156—57; Materialien zur Wirt-schaftsgeschkhte des Neuen Reiches II (AAWLM i960, 11; Mainz, i960), 1074 = 292. This is undoubtedly too low, however: more recent studies have shown that the Wilbour figures probably represent net yield alone: B. Menu, Recherches, 10-14; Janssen, SAK 3 (1975), 143 and 146. See also C. Eyre, in Labor in the Ancient Near East, 206-207, and in Grund und Boden, 114 n. 32.

113 Seed was supplied by the individual who worked the land, whether as owner or lessee: Hughes, Land Leases, 5; Baer, "Land," 33. Heqanakht's dependence on basin irrigation (pp. 150-51) would have limited him to one crop a year, as seems to have been true for Egypt in general at least before the New Kingdom and probably until the Ptolemaic Period: Butzer, Early Hydraulic Civilization, 48; Schenkel, Bewasserungsrevolution, 67—68.James suggested the possibility ofa summer crop (HP, 15 and 18; see also Golovina, VDI 1995 no. 2, 17), but the Heqanakht papyri are concerned only with barley and emmer, which are winter crops: Butzer, Early Hydraulic Civilization, 49-50.

114 Baer, "Land," 31-33; Helck, lA I, 3-12; Janssen, SAK 3 (1975), 173-77. Taxes on leased land were normally paid by the landowner from his share of the crop: Hughes, Land Leases, 4—5 and 74—75; Eyre, in Grund und Boden, 129—32; Eyre, in Agriculture in Egypt, 51. For grain used to pay the cattle tax, see Helck, LA I, 9, and Materialien, 290.

115 Taxes seem usually to have been collected from the grain as it was being threshed after the harvest: Eyre, in Grund und Boden, 130; B. Porten and H.Z. Szubin, in Grund und Boden, 88. In the Saite Period, however, they were sometimes deferred until several months after the harvest: Hughes, Land Leases, 74.

116 Baer, "Land," 33; Baer, "Letters," 12 n. 82; Helck, LA I, 6; Janssen, SAK 3 (1975), 147. See also Eyre, in Grund und Boden, 127—28. For the interpretation of the figures in the Wilbour Papyrus as revenue rather than taxes, see Janssen, SAK 3 (1975), 141-47.

117 On modern dairy farms a single cow producing 11,000 pounds of milk a year will eat as much as 12,000 pounds of fodder, mostly grasses: Encyclopaedia Britannica, 14th ed. (Chicago, 1972), X, 703; The Encyclopedia Americana, International ed. (Danbury, i99i),VI, 76.The modern Egyptian cow, however, produces only 400-700 kg (882—1543 pounds) of milk a year, and therefore requires correspondingly less fodder: M.B. Aboul-Ela, in The Agriculture of Egypt, 66. Since ancient cattle were probably more like their modern Egyptian relatives, two thirds the modern Western maximum is perhaps a reasonable estimate for their fodder.

162 8. ECONOMICS

dietary supplement to animals kept in stalls." In Heqanakht's case, the grassland for his cattle may

have been the "1.4 dar. of land that is in pasturage, which lp Jr.'s son Khentekhtai gave" (II 33). " 9

With a yield of perhaps 9400 pounds per aroura, this could provide about half of the estimated an

nual fodder for all of Heqanakht's 35 head of cattle, with the remainder supplied from the stalks of

harvested grain.120 Since Heqanakht was able to order the conversion of his pasture land to grain

in Year 8, however, he evidently had other sources of fodder to draw on, if only the straw remain

ing in the fields after the ears of grain were harvested.

Since Heqanakht's cattle were probably fed from his existing fields, the "grain produce for the

cattle" in AccountV must have been intended for some purpose other than the purchase of feed. If

the grain was to be fed to the six "raised" cattle as a dietary supplement, it would presumably have

had to be enough for about six months until it could be replenished by the next harvest (see p.

134). At that rate it would have given each of the six animals about half a kilogram of grain a day,

far less than the seed cakes fed as a dietary supplement to modern Egyptian cattle.121 This indicates

that the grain was not intended for direct consumption. It is also unlikely to have been set aside

for the lease of land for pasturage or feed crops: at the rate of 5 sacks per aroura the 14.5 sacks

would represent 2.9 arouras, enough pasturage for only 3 animals, and other evidence suggests that

Heqanakht did not normally acquire land on lease (p. 159). If the grain was meant for seed it could

have produced perhaps 40 sacks of barley and 105 of emmer, which would provide a year's worth

of supplemental feed for each of the six "raised" cattle at about 2.4 kg a day, comparable to the ra

tion suggested by the Rhind Mathematical Papyrus (n. 121). It is not identified as prt "seed,"

however (cf. I 2 and 12), and there is no evident reason why the account would have included seed

for this purpose but not that for Heqanakht's other fields.

The grain listed in V 11 therefore seems not to have been intended for fodder, seed, or to pay

for land or feed for the cattle.The term used to refer to this grain, msw, usually means "(plant) pro

duce," but it also appears in connection with the payment of taxes in grain, although its meaning

in that context is uncertain.122 If the "grain-produce" was in fact set aside for the payment of taxes

on Heqanakht's cattle, the fact that it is specified in two different grains and amounts may reflect

separate rates of taxation on different animals; if the herd was assessed at a uniform rate, this would

likely have been reflected in a single quantity of either barley or emmer, since Heqanakht had plenty

of both kinds of grain on hand (V 4—6). In that case, a distinction may have been drawn between

the "team cattle" and the other animals: exactly such a distinction is attested in a later Middle

Kingdom account of cattle assessments from Illahun.123 If so, the grain amounts inV 11 could re-

118 For pasturage, see Helck, Materialien, 285—86. For the method of harvesting grain, see W Guglielmi, IA I, 12715 V. Tackholm, LA II, 271—72. The use of the unharvested stalks as feed may account for rental fees including a share of the grain and "all fodder" in some Saite leases, though Hughes suggests that the latter may refer to any additional crops grown in the same year (Land Leases, 45, 49 n. k, and 52). For grain as cattle feed, see Janssen, SAK 3 (:975)» !5 2 - Papyrus Sallier I 4, 8 (LEM 81, 3-5) indicates that both "feed" (wnmt, with "grain" determinative) and "grass" (smw) were fed to stalled cattle.

119 For the reading smt "pasturage," see the textual note on p. 43.This word is often specifically associated with cattle in later texts: Gardiner, Wilbour Papyrus II, 22 n. 4; Helck, Materialien, 481.

120 Clover (barsim), the major feed for cattle in Egypt today, yields an average of 6.5 metric tons of fodder per feddan with little or no cultivation or chemical fertilizer: P.N.Ward, in The Agriculture of Egypt, 245. This equates to about 9400 pounds per aroura (see Appendix E). At that rate Heqanakht's 14 arouras might have produced some 131,600 pounds of fodder, or 3760 pounds for each animal. Clover has been identified in a Middle Kingdom context at Illahun, but the date is questionable: RE. Newberry, inW.M.F. Petrie, Kahun, Gurob, and Hawara (London, 1890), 50; R. Germer, Flora des pharaonischen Agypten (SDAIK 14: Cairo, 1985), 72.

121 The 14.5 sacks would have weighed about 531 kg, or 88.5 kg for each of six animals (see Table A in Appendix E, p. 258). The Egyptian government allots 3 kg of seed cakes a day per head in winter:TJ. Barker, in The Agriculture of Egypt, 387; cf. also P.N.Ward, in The Agriculture of Egypt, 245. Problem 84 of the Rhind Papyrus appears to indicate that 10 cattle of various types were fed 9 heqat of emmer a day:T.E. Peet, The Rhind Mathematical Papyrus (London, 1923), 127 and pl. X.This amounts to 3.4 kg per animal a day, comparable to the modern ration.

122 RAD 30, 16; 31,12. See Gardiner, Wilbour Papyrus II, 206 and n. io;James, HP, 59; Helck, Materialien, 576. 123 Griffith, Kahun Papyri, 45 and pis. 16—17, 13—32-The account lists payments on five kinds of cattle. Of these, the

first (jdr wr "adult range animals": cf. Helck, LA IV, 594) and last (htr(j) "team cattle") are treated separately, and the others are totaled in a separate column before the "team cattle."

D. INCOME AND EXPENSES 163

fleet assessments of 0.7 sack of emmer for each of the 15 "team cattle" and 0.2 sack of barley for

each of the other 20 cattle. Since there is no other evidence for the rate of assessment on cattle,

however, this conclusion must remain tentative.124

Despite all these expenses, Heqanakht's crops seem to have been large enough to give him an

annual surplus of grain, at least before the poor harvest ofYear 8. Letter I makes reference to "old,

dried-up full barley that was in Djedsut" (I vo. 1), indicating that unused grain from earlier harvests

had been stored there, and the grain tallies ofYear 5 include not only 112 sacks of "new full barley,"

presumably from that year's crop, but also 10 sacks of "full barley" that apparently remained from

the previous harvest (V 4 and 6). The letters and accounts also record debts of grain that others

owed to Heqanakht. Most of those in Letter III and AccountVI may represent rental fees from the

lease of some of his land, since they are specified by place as well as debtor (p. 159), but other en

tries in Accounts V and VI, which are recorded only under the name of the debtor, may represent

loans of grain, and the account represented by Frag. A apparently dealt with such loans as well.

Earlier and contemporary evidence indicates that this kind of loan, known as t3bt (Frag. A 4), was

seen as a civic duty owed by those w h o were well off to their less fortunate neighbors.125 As such

they seem to have been made without interest, the only obligation on the part of the debtor being

repayment in full.12 The debts listed i n V 37-54 andVI 15-19 total 57 sacks of barley and 41.25 of

emmer. Most involve an amount between 1 and 7.5 sacks, with two larger debts of 18 and 30 sacks.

If these do not represent fees from the lease of Heqanakht's land, they may have been loans for

seed.127 If so, they would probably have been due for repayment when the accounts were writ ten,

following the harvest ofYear 8.

Heqanakht thus had a surplus of at least 108.25 sacks of grain after the harvest ofYear 7, of which

10 were stored in Memphis and the rest were advanced as loans. At the same time, he also had

enough extra grain to pay for the lease of 13 additional arouras and to feel secure advancing the loans

despite the impending low inundation, which had prompted the lease. His situation in Year 5 seems

to have been equally prosperous. In mid-September of that year, five months after the last grain had

been harvested and taxes on his fields had been paid, he entrusted 122 sacks of barley and 63 sacks of

emmer to Merisu before leaving for Thebes (V 4—6). This presumably was enough for seed as well as

for the household's food and salaries and the salary of Heqanakht, which would need to last for some

seven months until the next harvest (see p. 165, below). At the same time, Heqanakht made grants of

46 sacks of barley each to Sihathor and Sinebniut and another 50 sacks to Merisu (V 12 -15 )— a n ex

traordinarily generous amount, considering that their annual salaries in normal times were perhaps

only 12 sacks of barley each.12 The total of 142 sacks is more than that dispensed in loans in Year 7

124 In the account cited in the preceding note, the payments (lines 22-31) are all in whole numbers, but the initial amounts (lines 15—20) and the balance (line 32 = initial amounts less payments) are mostly in whole numbers plus fractions. This suggests a reckoning in grain rather than animals, despite the column headings. The ratio of total payment (line 31) to total initial amount (line 20) is approximately 0.86 for the "team cattle" (39 — 45'7/36) and 0.11 for the sum of "adult range animals" and the total of the other three kinds of cattle (325 -r 2954/45). For what it is worth, these are comparable to the ratios of 0.7 and 0.2 suggested for the data from AccountV.

125 Helck, LA I, 993; B. Menu, Recherches, 226-28; E. Bleiberg, in Debt and Economic Renewal in the Ancient Near East, ed. by M. Hudson and M.Van De Mieroop (Cambridge, forthcoming). For t3bt in texts of benevolence, see J. Vandier, La famine dans V Egypte ancienne (RAPH 7; Cairo, 1936), 107—108; Gardiner and Sethe, Letters to the Dead, 18; W C . Hayes, JEA 35 (1949), 48. Menu argued that such loans became the province of the state in the early Middle Kingdom, but the occurrence of t3bt in Frag. A indicates that they were still made by individuals as well: the evidence from the other papyri makes it improbable that this was a loan of grain to Heqanakht.

126 Menu, Recherches, 218. Repayment could also be made by others as an act of benevolence: Urk. I, 254, 17—255, 1.1 owe these references to E. Bleiberg.

127 Comparable loans of seed grain are recorded in Roman Egypt: M. Sharp, in Agriculture in Egypt, 170 (1—36.5 arta-bas: see Rowlandson, in Agriculture in Egypt, 152 and n. 60). At the rate of 1.5 sacks of seed grain per aroura, the plots cultivated by these debtors would vary from % aroura to 20 arouras in size.

128 James attempted to balance the grain totals inV 4—6 against those given inV 11/13—17 on the assumption that the latter section "seems to have been added later and to consist of a statement of what happened to some of the commodities listed in the first part" (HP 55—57). The arrangement ofV 2—16, however, suggests that this part of the account was conceived as a unit, headed by V 2 "Writing of the full barley of Heqanakht": see p. 11. Unlike the other sections in AccountV, the subdivisions ofV 2—16 have no independent heading (zh3 n) of their own;V 12,

164 8. ECONOMICS

but less than the total of 163.25 sacks expended in loans and lease fee in that year.There is no indica

tion that Heqanakht also made loans of grains in Year 5, but if he did so, his surplus of grain after the

harvest of that year would have been even higher.

The grants recorded in the first part of AccountV, and the loans listed in the second part of

that document and in AccountVI, thus seem to reflect fairly good harvests in Years 5 and 7.These

gave Heqanakht surpluses of at least 142 and 173.25 sacks of grain, respectively, which were avail

able for expenditures over and above the normal needs of his household. In that light, his shortage

of grain in Year 8 indicates that the harvest of that year must have been meager indeed.

E. Heqanakht 's Grain Budgets

The picture of Heqanakht's lands, crops, and economic activities that emerges from the papyri

is revealing in some respects but also unclear in others, as well as incomplete. The estimates de

tailed above are necessarily speculative, since they rely on a number of economic factors that are

poorly known for Heqanakht's time, if at all. They are also minimal, since they can include only

the data preserved in the papyri. For the most part these data involve only two crops, barley and

emmer, and therefore undoubtedly give only a partial picture of Heqanakht's holdings and agricul

tural activities. Apart from a single mention of zwt-emmer, there is no information on the other

kinds of food crops that his household must have cultivated, such as vegetables, nor on the contri

bution of those and other foods such as meat, fish, and beer to its diet. As a fairly prosperous

official Heqanakht probably owned animals other than the cattle listed in AccountV, but those too

are not reflected in the papyri. Some indication of the range of interests missing from the texts is

given by the stela of Mentuwoser, a contemporary of Heqanakht:

I am an owner of cattle, with many goats; an owner of donkeys, with many sheep. I am

rich in barley and emmer, fine in clothing: there is nothing missing from all my wealth. I

am well supplied with boats, and rich with vintage.129

Mentuwoser was a steward of Senwosret I and thus of higher rank and presumably greater wealth

than Heqanakht, but the diversity of his estate was probably mirrored on a smaller scale by that of

Heqanakht.

The grain crops recorded in the papyri were therefore probably only part of Heqanakht's over

all economic activity, and the uncertainty of basic factors such as yield and requirements for seed

and taxes make even this small part of the picture unclear. Nonetheless, the sum of evidence pre

sented in the preceding sections makes possible an estimate of at least its broad outlines, including

the amount of land Heqanakht devoted to grain, the size of his harvests, and the uses to which he

put these crops. Since grain was likely to have been the major portion of Heqanakht's economy

(see p. 142 and n. 39, above), this in turn can provide a fairly good indication of the extent of his

resources and how he managed them.130

The figures preserved in the papyri reflect Heqanakht's income and expenditures in grain for

Years 5—8 and his projected expenses in Year 8—9. His grain budgets for those years can be esti

mated from these data based on the following parameters, as established above:

moreover, contains a relative clause dependent onV 2, like V 3: see Baer, "Letters," 18 n. 100. Despite James's argument, the grain listed in V 11-15 is therefore most likely separate from that in V 4-6. The difference is also reflected in the two relative forms: the grain in V 4—6 was only "entrusted" (swd.n) to Merisu, as were the cattle to Sinebniut inV 18—19, while the grants inV 11—15 were "made" (jr.n) to the three individuals.The account gives no indication of the reason for these grants nor for the omission of Heti's son Nakht, who was paid as much as each of these men in Year 8.The latter is perhaps explicable by an increase in Nakht's responsibilities between Year 5 (when he is noted only in connection with the cattle) and Year 8 (when he seems to have been second in rank to Merisu in agricultural matters): see p. 112.The motive for the grants is less evident; one possible explanation is discussed at the end of Section E.

129 Sethe, Lesestucke, 79, 20-80, 1 (MMA 12.184, 15—16). 130 For a similar approach, see U. Luft, in Grund und Boden, 351—52.

E. HEQANAKHT'S GRAIN BUDGETS 165

workload 10-20 arouras per man, 5-10 arouras per boy

yield 15 sacks per aroura

lease fee in grain 5 sacks per aroura

grain tax 10% of the crop, normally 1.5 sacks per aroura

cattle tax 0.7 sacks of emmer per team bull, 0.2 sacks of barley for other

cattle (10.5 sacks of emmer and 4 sacks of barley in Year 5)

seed 1.5 sacks per aroura

household food 7 sacks of emmer and 2 sacks of barley per month

Heqanakht's food 0.5 sacks of emmer and 0.15 sacks of barley per month

household salaries 9.5 sacks of barley per month (in normal times), reduced to

6.95 sacks of barley per month for six months ofYear 8—9

Heqanakht's salary 1.85 sacks of barley per month.

The first part of AccountV provides a snapshot of Heqanakht's grain resources as of mid Septem

ber, five months after the end of the grain harvest. At that point he had a total of 341.5 sacks of grain

on hand: 185 in general stores (V 4—6), 14.5 for the cattle tax (V 11), and 142 given in grants to three

of his men (V 13—15). An additional amount of perhaps 6Vi sacks had been used to make the bread

he was to take with him to Thebes (V 30—33).131 In the five months since the harvest, Heqanakht and

his household had consumed about 48.25 sacks of grain in food and 68.1 sacks of barley in salaries.132

The total harvest after taxes would therefore have been around 464.2 sacks of grain.With taxes often

percent, this would bring Heqanakht's total crop of grain to 510.6 sacks, assuming no other major

expenses such as loans. Of this total, some 75%, or 382.6 sacks, was in barley, with the rest in emmer

and probably also zwt-emmer. With a yield of 15 sacks per aroura, the household would have culti

vated perhaps 25.5 arouras of barley and 8.5 of emmer(s) in Year 4-5.

In the seven months until the end of the harvest ofYear 6, Heqanakht's grain expenses were to

include seed, salaries, the household's food, and payment of the cattle tax.133 The last of these is re

corded inV 11; the rest was evidently to be expended from the 112 sacks of barley and 63 sacks of

emmer listed inV 4—6.With the parameters and estimates given above, these amounts are almost

exactly what seems to have been required (Table 2)—though perhaps only accidentally so.

Based on the figures suggested by AccountV, Heqanakht had at least 34 arouras of land under

grain in Year 5. This undoubtedly did not represent all of his farmland. Other fields were devoted to

flax (V 7—10, 13—15), and these were evidently extensive enough to permit the grant of one aroura of

them to one or more of his men (V 16). He may have owned the 14 arouras mentioned in II 33 as

well, although these could have been acquired after Year 5. The accounts ofYear 8 suggest that he had

leased 22.7 arouras of his land to neighbors in preceding years (p. 159). Since his household's food

and salaries alone would have required some 16.8 arouras, these leases are not likely to have come

from the 34 arouras of grain cultivated in Year 5. They may therefore represent additional holdings of

land, perhaps unfarmed or used for pasturage before being leased out.134

131 At 80% emmer and 20% barley (n. 39), the figures calculated on p. 148 work out to 5/4 sacks of emmer and 1 sack of barley.

132 These may be considered maximum amounts, assuming the same figures for the number of family members and their salaries as in Year 7—8 (detailed in Section B, above). The real amounts were probably lower, since Snefru and perhaps also Anubis would not yet have been of working age and would therefore have drawn less in salaries, and Heti's son Nakht may have had a lower position and salary as well. The salaries include six months rather than five: the account was drawn up in mid-September, but a new lunar month had probably begun earlier in September {psdntjw on September 1 in 1956 BC) and salaries were issued at the beginning of the lunar month (p. 136).

133 Not included are any grain supplements for the six "raised" cattle. At the rate suggested by the Rhind Mathematical Papyrus (n. 121), Heqanakht would have needed 197.6 sacks of emmer a year for this purpose, or 115.3 for seven months. Even assuming somewhat lower figures for the family's food and salaries (see the previous footnote), it does not seem possible to accommodate this amount in the grain figures of AccountV. Heqanakht's cattle may therefore have been fed only on grasses and grain stalks.

134 As such, they may not have been liable to taxation, which was calculated as a percentage of the crop (p. 161). In Roman Egypt little or no rent was charged on leased land used for pasturage or fodder: Rowlandson, in Agriculture in Egypt, 140 and 144.

166 8. ECONOMICS

INCOME AND EXPENSES, APRILTO SEPTEMBER,YEAR 5

O n hand, mid -Sep tember

Cattle tax set aside

Grants to m e n

Heqanakht 's bread for Thebes

5 m o n t h s ' food (Heqanakht and household)

6 m o n t h s ' salaries

TOTAL ON HAND AND EXPENDED

Grain tax @ 10% of crop

TOTAL INCOME

E X P E N S E S , S E P T E M B E R T O A P R I L , Y E A R S 5-6

7 mon ths ' food (household)

6 mon ths ' salaries

Seed @ 1.5 sacks/aroura (= 10% of crop)

TOTAL

O n hand, mid -Sep tember

Surplus

BARLEY

(SACKS)

122

4

I42

I

IO.75

68.1

347-85

34-79

382.64

14

68.1

38.26

120.36

122

1.64

EMMER

(SACKS)

63

10.5

5-33

37-5

" 6 - 3 3

11.63

127.97

49

12.8

61.8

63

1.2

TOTAL

(SACKS)

185

14.5

142

6-33

48.25

68.1

464.18

46.42

510.6

63

68.1

51.06

182.16

185

2.84

Table 2. Heqanakht's Grain Budget for Year 5—6.

These figures can be used as a base for estimating Heqanakht's grain budget in suceeding years.

With 34 arouras cultivated 75% in barley and 25% in emmer, Heqanakht would have had the fol

lowing regular annual income and expenses in sacks of grain:

INCOME

Harvest 15 sacks per aroura

BARLEY

382.5

38.25

38.25

4

25.8

1 3 6 . 2

2 4 2 . 5

1 4 0

E M M E R

1 2 7 . 5

1 2 . 7 5

1 2 . 7 5

IO.5

9 0

1 2 6

i - 5

TOTAL

5 1 0

5 1

51

H-5 1 1 5 . 8

368.5

H i - 5

EXPENSES

Grain tax @ 10% of crop

Seed @ 1.5 sacks per aroura

Cattle tax135

12 months' food

12 months' salaries

TOTAL

SURPLUS

This schedule suggests that Heqanakht normally planted enough barley to give him a substantial

yearly surplus after expenses but only enough emmer to meet his household's annual needs.13 'The

difference may reflect the use of barley rather than emmer for commercial transactions (p. 143),

such as the purchase of additional commodities. The total of 34 arouras, plus a further amount of

land in flax, was probably within the capacity of his workforce in Year 4—5, since the four men

named in the first part of AccountV could be expected to handle a minimum of 40 arouras.

The base budget was altered by additional income and expenditures in succeeding years.

Rental fees from 22.7 arouras of his land may have given Heqanakht more revenues of grain in

Years 6 and 7 (p. 159), less taxes that would have been due once the land was put into production.

If the fees were all paid in grain in the amounts recorded in Letter III and AccountVI, they would

have added 13.5 sacks of barley and 100 sacks of emmer to his income. In Year 7 he also dispensed

135 The size of Heqanakht's herd after Year 5 is unknown, but with yearly attrition and births it can be estimated as fairly stable.The 15 team bulls ofYear 5 were still enough for the maximum workforce of seven hands in Year 8.

136 The estimates for emmer may be too low, since the total of 41.25 sacks of emmer owed Heqanakht in Year 8 suggests that he had a surplus of at least that amount to dispense as loans (p. 163). That grain, however, could have come from rental fees for his land rather than from the surplus of his own crops: see below.

E. HEQANAKHT S GRAIN BUDGETS 167

57 sacks of barley and 41.25 sacks of emmer as loans, the former probably from his annual surplus,

the latter perhaps from his lease revenues. The same year he also acquired 13 arouras on lease for a

fee of 65 sacks of barley, and this land would have required an additional 19.5 sacks of barley in

seed. Heqanakht's budget in Year 7—8 can therefore be estimated as follows:

I N C O M E , Y E A R 7

Base harvest

Rental fees (if all paid in

TOTAL

E X P E N S E S , Y E A R 7-8

Base expenses

Grain tax on leased land

Loans

Lease of 13 arouras

Additional seed for 13 an

TOTAL

S U R P L U S

grain)

Duras

BARLEY

382.5

13-5

396

242.5

4.05

57

65

19-5

388.05

7-95

EMMER

127.5

1 0 0

227.5

126

30

41.25

197.25

30.25

TOTAL

510

II3-5

023.5

368.5

34-05

98.25

65

19-5

585.3

38.2

These figures suggest that Heqanakht's additional expenses in Year 7—8 would have effectively

erased his normal surplus of barley for that year. The need to replenish his supplies of that grain in

the harvest ofYear 8 thus became crucial.

The papyri do not record the actual size of Heqanakht's harvest in Year 8. The entries of Ac

countV for that year list 12.5 sacks of barley and 13 of emmer as "the balance of Heqanakht that is

with Merisu" (V 34—36). Baer suggested that this may have been "all that was available to his

household at the time,"137 but this is improbable, since it would equate to a yield of less than two

thirds of a sack per aroura, even assuming that taxes on it had already been paid; Heqanakht's dis

cussion of the rental fee of 65 sacks of barley for 13 arouras in Letter I indicates that this had yet to

be expensed as well. The word "balance" suggests that an amount had been deducted before the

account was drawn up. If the grain was earmarked for Heqanakht's own food and salary, the "bal

ance" could represent an original sum of 22.5 sacks of barley less the ten that Merisu sent to

Heqanakht along with AccountV (I vo. 1-2). This is close to the 24 sacks estimated above for

Heqanakht's annual consumption of barley in food and salary; the 13 sacks of emmer could also

include the estimated 6 sacks a year that would need to be set aside for his bread.

Although the papyri do not record figures for the harvest ofYear 8, its size can be estimated

from other data. By placing an additional 13 arouras under cultivation as a hedge against the low

inundation ofYear 7, Heqanakht could have expected a normal harvest even if the flood reached

only 62% of his other fields.13 His projected revenues and expenses for Year 8—9 can be estimated

on that basis as follows:

PROJECTED INCOME,YEAR 8

Harvest of 34 arouras at 62% of norm

Harvest of 13 arouras at norm

Loans ofYear 7 (if all repaid)

Rental fees (if all paid in grain)

TOTAL

BARLEY

237

195

57

13-5

EMMER

79

41.25

1 0 0

TOTAL

315

195

98.25

H3-5

502.5 220.25 721.75

137 "Letters," 12. 138 Assuming that the 13 leased arouras were all in land that would have been watered even by a low inundation and

would therefore have produced a normal crop. This is the kind of new land that Heqanakht instructed his men to lease in Year 8—9, and he would undoubtedly have sought similar fields in Year 7 as well. The negotiated lease of the 13 arouras "in full barley alone" may also reflect the value of their prime location.

i68 8. ECONOMICS

PROJECTED EXPENSES,YEAR 8-9 BARLEY EMMER TOTAL

Grain tax on harvest of 34 arouras 23.7 7.9 31.5

Grain tax on leased land (at normal yield) 4.05 30 34-05

Seed for 47 arouras (maximum) 57-75 12.75 70.5

Cattle tax 4 10.5 14.5

Lease of 13 arouras 65 65

12 months'food 25.8 90 115.8

12 month's salaries (normal rate) 136.2 136.2

TOTAL 316.5 I 5 I - I 5 4 6 7 . 6 5

SURPLUS 186.1 69.1 255.2

This budget would have given Heqanakht a good surplus of barley from the harvest ofYear 8, a

third larger than his normal annual surplus if all his loans and leases were paid in grain but close to

normal even if they were not.

Heqanakht's mention of "new" barley (I vo. 2/4) shows that his fields did in fact produce a

harvest in Year 8, and this may have been enough to provide at least a minimal surplus, judging

from his request for "whatever full barley you find, but only from the excess of your salaries until

you reach Harvest" (I vo. 8). Nonetheless, he was still faced with low resources of barley after the

harvest. The shortfall was severe enough for Merisu to dip into old stores of the grain (perhaps re

served for taxes) in order to resupply Heqanakht in Thebes and for Heqanakht himself to cut the

household's salaries by more than 25% overall for the latter half of the year in order to make ends

meet. Coupled with Heqanakht's references to the low inundation of the previous year and starva

tion in Upper Egypt (II 4, 27—28, 38), this indicates that the harvest had been even worse than he

had projected in the summer ofYear 7. His barley surplus was therefore lower than normal, or

necessary, for the second year in a row.

To make up the deficit, Heqanakht decided to place into grain production part of his existing

land that had been planted in flax, a further 20 arouras of newly leased land, and perhaps also 14

arouras to be converted from pasturage, though the latter could have been intended for flax rather

than grain. Added to the estimated 47 arouras worked in the preceding six months, this would

amount to more than 81 arouras that his men had to farm in Year 8-9, of which perhaps 70 were

to be planted in barley, 10 in emmer(s), and the rest in flax.'39 With the likely addition of Anubis to

the workforce, the workload in Year 7-8 would not have been much more than 10 arouras per

man, but in the coming year it would approach the maximum of 20 arouras each. This undoubt

edly explains Heqanakht's order that Snefru should join in the plowing (I vo. 6—7). With Snefru's

help the new workload would still amount to more than 13.5 arouras or more per man, and the

load on the other five men would have been even higher if Snefru contributed only a boy's labor,

as seems likely: hence Heqanakht's admission that the new lease might not be "easy" for his men to

handle (I 6-7).

In order to realize these plans, Heqanakht would have needed to budget additional barley for

two contingencies. As noted in the schedule of projected income for Year 8, above, a total of 70.5

sacks of his barley income for that year was in the form of loans and lease fees that had yet to be

paid. Heqanakht's letters indicate that he could not be sure of collecting these debts in barley

rather than some other commodity; as a result, he would have had to plan for a possible reduction

of his barley income by the same amount. He also needed to budget a further amount of barley

against the possibility that some of the fee for the new lease of 20 arouras would have to be paid in

139 Emmer was to be grown on 10 arouras leased in Year 8 (I 7) and on Heqanakht's converted flax fields if the inundation was unsuitable for barley (I 11-12). This would have been sufficient to cover Heqanakht's annual emmer requirement (pp. 166—67). Given his acute need for barley, the estimated 34 arouras normally cultivated in both grains would then probably have been used for barley alone. Added to these were 13 arouras leased in Year 7 (I 10-13), I 0

arouras to be leased in Year 8 (I 7), and an unknown amount of converted flax fields (I 11). If the 14 arouras of pasturage were also to be converted to grain, they would probably have been devoted to barley as well.

BARLEY

4

65

1 0 5

25.8

68.4

41 .7

11.1

3 2 1

EMMER

IO.5

15

9 0

115.5

TOTAL

14-5

65

1 2 0

115.8

68.4

41.7

I I . I

436.5


that grain, since he could not be certain that his men would be able to negotiate full payment in

other commodities. Heqanakht evidently expected that at least part of the fee would be accepted

in oil, copper, and cloth (p. 153); perhaps 50 sacks of barley—half of the total fee, at 5 sacks per

aroura—would need to be budgeted for the rest. In the worst case, these contingencies would add

an extra 120.5 sacks of barley to the expense side of his budget, but to the extent that they were

not needed they would provide a corresponding surplus of barley. Given the salary cuts instituted

in Letter II, it may have been this possibility rather than an actual surplus to which Heqanakht was

alluding in his request for "whatever full barley you find, but only from the excess of your salaries

until you reach Harvest" (I vo. 8).

Heqanakht's plans to add more grain fields in Year 8—9 would also have increased his normal

expenses in grain for that year. Since this decision was made after the harvest ofYear 8, the taxes on

those crops had probably already been paid. Assuming that a total of 80 arouras was to be put into

grain production, primarily for barley, his remaining expenses for the year can be estimated as fol

lows:

Cattle tax

Lease fee for 13 arouras

Seed for 80 arouras

12 months ' food

6 months ' normal salaries140

6 months ' reduced salaries for the household

6 months ' normal salary for Heqanakht

TOTAL

The need for salary cuts indicates that Heqanakht's total projected barley expenses for the year

exceeded his net after taxes by some 15 sacks, and by even more if he cut his own salary as well.

O n that basis his harvest in Year 8 can be estimated at about 52% of the n o r m on 34 arouras rather

than the 62% he had planned on, producing the following actual budget for the year:

A C T U A L A N D B U D G E T E D I N C O M E , Y E A R 8

Harvest of 34 arouras at 52% of n o r m

Harvest of 13 arouras at n o r m

Loans and rental fees (if all paid in grain)

TOTAL 464.5 207.25 671.75

A C T U A L A N D B U D G E T E D E X P E N S E S , Y E A R 8-9

Grain tax on harvest of 34 arouras

Grain tax on leased land (at 52%)U I

Contingencies '4 2

Other budgeted expenses (see above)

TOTAL

S U R P L U S

140 Adjusted by one month's supplement of 0.5 sack for the family of Heti's son Nakht's and one month's reduction of 0.2 sack for Nakht himself during his mission to Perhaa (I 16—17).

141 Assuming that Heqanakht's lessees had the same amount of unwatered fields that he did. Better harvests on their leased fields would have required Heqanakht, as the landowner, to pay even higher taxes, up to the maximum of 4.05 sacks of barley and 30 sacks of emmer (p. 168).

142 Contingencies are estimated for barley only, since that seems to have been the grain in short supply; the papyri offer less information about Heqanakht's emmer situation. With this budget he would apparently have had to collect some 72 of the 141.25 sacks of outstanding emmer debts to meet his emmer needs for the year. Since there is no indication that this grain needed to be conserved or reduced in usage, Heqanakht either seems to have anticipated less difficulty in collecting his emmer debts in emmer or to have had sufficient reserves to meet a possible deficit.

BARLEY

1 9 9

195

70.5

EMMER

66

141.25

TOTAL

2 6 5

1 9 5

211.75

19.9

2 . 1

120.5

3 2 1

463-5

I

6.6

15.6

115.5

137-7

69-55

26.5

17.7

120.5

436.5

601 .2

70 .55

170 8. ECONOMICS

The salary cuts incorporated in this budget would have given Heqanakht effectively no surplus of

of barley after expenses. The reduction that he first calculated, and later corrected, would have

saved 6 sacks less, resulting in a deficit of barley.'43 Although the figures in this budget are largely

approximate, his actual margin must have been comparably narrow.

Costly as they were, Heqanakht clearly expected that the extra measures he had ordered would

pay off in the harvest ofYear 9. If the coming flood ofYear 8 watered all of the 70 or so arouras of

barley he planned to have under cultivation, he would realize a crop of more than 1000 sacks; and

even if the inundation turned out to be as low as that ofYear 7, his fields would still produce nearly

800 sacks. He could then convert his pasture land and flax fields back to their original use and give

up both his leases, reducing his expenses for Year 9—10 to what they had been before Year 7. With

taxes of 10% on the harvest, this would give him a surplus of some 500—750 sacks of barley, more

than enough both for that year and to make up for the deficits of the preceding two years.

• • * •

This exercise in estimating Heqanakht's income and expenses in grain has been admittedly

speculative. Since it is based on the figures preserved in the papyri, however, the resulting picture

probably reflects at least the general parameters of his economic situation in the years represented

by those data. The figures are less important in themselves than for what they reveal about Heqa

nakht's economic circumstances and strategies.

From the preceding discussions it seems likely that Heqanakht owned more than 70 arouras of

land: some 34 arouras devoted to his annual crops of barley and emmer(s), 22.7 leased out to his

neighbors, 14 acquired from lp Jr.'s son Khentekhtai, and an unknown amount in his sp3t and sj.

The grain fields were cultivated at least as early as Year 4 and remained in use for the five years

represented by the papyri; the leased land was rented out in Year 6 at the latest, if not before. In

Year 7—8 the land acquired from Khentekhtai had been used for pasturage and the sp3t and sj had

been planted in flax; in Year 8—9 the former was to be converted to grain or flax and the latter to

barley or emmer. Under normal circumstances Heqanakht's household probably farmed fewer

than 50 arouras of his land, including approximately 34 arouras in grain and an unknown amount

in flax. These seem to have been enough to meet his annual needs and to have been within the

capacity of his usual workforce of four men, requiring a normal workload of not much more than

the standard 10 arouras per man.

Heqanakht's use of his fields seems to have been governed by two considerations: the annual

needs of his household and the production of disposable income. Emmer was grown primarily in

the amount that would be needed for the household's yearly consumption; the same may have

been true for flax, although this crop was large enough to permit occasional grants of the harvest

to some of his men (V 13—15) and the sale of cloth woven from it (I 4—6; II vo. 2). Barley, however,

was calculated to supply a substantial surplus after expenses, which could then be used for the pur

chase of commodities that the household itself did not produce. Heqanakht's fields evidently grew

enough emmer and barley not only to satisfy these considerations but also to allow him to dis

pense both grains on occasion as loans to his less prosperous neighbors.

The grants of barley and flax "that Heqanakht made to" (jr.n hq(3)-nht n:V 12) three of his

employees in Year 5 appear to be exceptions to the usual disposition of his assets. Nearly or over

four times the annual salary of each man, they amounted to the estimated total of Heqanakht's

barley surplus for the year, and included one aroura of his cropland as well. The idiom used to de

scribe the transfer, which is also used of the dedication of monuments, indicates that the property

was actually given to each employee, unlike the crops and cattle that Heqanakht "entrusted"

(swd.n) to his men at the same time (see the textual notes to V 3/18 and 12 on pp. 52 and 53).

These measures were undertaken prior to Heqanakht's departure for Thebes. Similar transfers of

property and responsibility could have been made under the same circumstances in Year 7 (see p.

143 I.e., a total of 7.95 rather than 6.95 sacks per month for six months: see the textual note to II 7—23 on pp. 39—40.


139), but the size of the grants in Year 5 suggests that they were unique.'44 If so, they may reflect

arrangements made in connection with Heqanakht's first extended absence from home. Heqa

nakht may therefore have begun his tenure as ka-servant of Ipi in Year 5, and if so, probably by

inheriting the position on the death of his father.'45 The grants may then have been part of Heqa

nakht's disposition of his recently inherited estate, perhaps intended to ensure the loyalty of his

father's employees to their new master.

Since Heqanakht had more than enough land for his annual needs, he probably did not rent

fields from others as part of his usual agricultural strategy. In that light, his acquisition of 13 arouras

on lease in Year 7 may have been prompted not only by the prospect ofa low inundation but also

by a strategic miscalculation: by renting out 22.7 arouras of his fields in previous years he had re

duced the land available for his own use, and his remaining fields were evidently located at least

partly in areas that would not be reached by a lower than normal flood. The barley needed to pay

for the lease and to sow the additional land reduced his annual surplus by 84.5 sacks. Added to the

the 57 sacks loaned (perhaps earlier in the year) to his neighbors, this eliminated his normal surplus

of some 140 sacks of barley for Year 7.

Heqanakht probably could have weathered this short-term deficit in his disposable income

with little difficulty if the harvest ofYear 8 had turned out as he had planned, or better. By coming

in worse than expected, however, it put him in an even more difficult situation. For the second

year in a row he faced twelve months with little or no disposable income, and this time he could

not necessarily count on collecting the rental fees and grain loans that were owed him in barley,

since his debtors were coping with the same poor return from their own fields. On top of this, he

also had to plan for the cultivation of additional land on lease in the coming season in order to

ensure a surplus in Year 9: this required more barley for seed and perhaps for part of the rental fee

as well, and would also increase the workload on his men to near the limit of what they could be

expected to handle. These demands on Heqanakht's resources prompted the measures reflected in

his letters and accounts: conservation of his existing stores of fresh barley, efforts to collect as much

as possible of the debts owed him in barley, and reduction of barley expenses by cutting the house

hold's salaries.

Heqanakht's economic situation in Year 8 thus seems to be a case of ample assets coupled with

a shortage of cash. Contrary to general opinion, there is no evidence in the papyri that Heqanakht

or his household were facing reduced rations or starvation, even if his comments about the situa

tion in Thebes might indicate that some of his countrymen were. The cuts detailed and argued in

Letter II were made in salaries, not rations, and during the six months they were to be in effect

Heqanakht could still expect to have Merisu send him "2 sacks of zwt-emmer along with what

ever full barley you find, but only from the excess of your salaries until you reach Harvest" (I vo.

8). There is also no evidence for low inundations other than that ofYear 7 during the five years

covered by the papyri: the harvests ofYears 5 and 7 had given Heqanakht extra grain to dispense as

grants and loans, and he seems to have anticipated at least the possibility of a "big inundation" in

Year 9 as well (I vo. I I ) - ' 4 The low flood ofYear 7 was therefore probably an isolated perturbation,

similar to others attested during the early Twelfth Dynasty.'47

144 Similar measures in Year 7 would probably also have been recorded on the papyrus used for AccountV, since half of its recto was still unused before the entries ofYear 8 were added.

145 It is less likely that Ipi himself had died in Year 5: see the discussion on pp. 127-30, above. For the possibility that Heqanakht inherited the position from his father, see p. 106, above.

146 The term "big inundation" (hcpj c3) may refer to a normal flood rather than an excessive one: see A. de Buck, Orientalia Neerlandica 1948, 1-22; Golovina, VDI 1995 no. 2, 16.

147 Vandier, La famine, 12-17; Schenkel, Bewasserungsrevolution, 50-51; H. Willems, JEOL 28 (1983—84), 99; Simpson, Papyrus Reisner I, 50 and n. 4. A low flood ofa single year is recorded by Mentuhotep, nomarch of Armant, who notes on his stela that "a little inundation (hcp /r) occurred in Year 25":Vandier, La famine, 15-16; H.M. Stewart, Egyptian Stelae, Reliefs and Paintings from the Petrie Collection II (Warminster, 1979), pl. 18, 8; Goedicke,J£L4 48 (1962), 25—35.The stela is undated, but the year in question most probably belongs to the reign of Senwosret I: Schenkel, Fruhmitteldgyptsiche Studien, § 42I1; O. Berlev, BiOr 38 (1981), 318-19; Simpson, LAV, 899 n. 5 8; Willems JEOL 28 (1983-84), 99 n. 138.

172 8. ECONOMICS

R The Thinite Enterprise

Besides his affairs in Sidder Grove and Perhaa, Heqanakht apparently also had an economic

interest in the Thinite nome, which is the subject of Accounts VII and P. Heqanakht's name does

not appear in these accounts nor in Letter IV, which is related to them, but his involvement is as

sured not only by the presence of these documents among his papyri but also by the fact that he

probably wrote the accounts himself (see pp. 84 and 127). The Thinite enterprise seems to have

been independent of the affairs reflected in the other papyri, and there is no indication that the

two spheres of activity were mingled. Judging from the accounts, it was managed from Thebes by

Heqanakht himself, undoubtedly with the help of a local representative. This was probably Nefer

abdu, who is charged with the responsibility of dispensing rations in Account VII. Merisu, who was

steward of Heqanakht's household in function if not also by title (pp. 111), had the same duty in

Sidder Grove. Neferabdu may therefore have been steward of the Thinite enterprise.

TheThinite accounts deal with flax, emmer, and a type of barley called u>3t. Flax is recorded by

both sheaves and bales, corresponding to the two units visible in scenes of the flax harvest (fig. 10).

The term for "sheaf," s3rw ( i ^ M ? ^ , # 9 ^ f ^ ) , appears in V 7-8 and 13, and is partly pre

served in VII 12 ( [ fMJ^P'- see the textual note on p. 63). It is evidently related to the later term

s3j, which seems to denote a single stalk.'48 The flax entries in Accounts VII and P, as well as Ac

countV, usually involve hundreds or thousands of s3rw. This might suggest that s3rw also denotes a

stalk of flax rather than a sheaf. The final w o€V 7—8 and 13 and the plural dots ofVII 12, however,

indicate a different word than the later s3jj49 and smaller amounts such as the grants of 100 and

110 s3rw inV 13-15 suggest a measure larger than a single plant.

The term for "bale," nwyt (VII 10 ? H | 9 0 ^11 12 ^f), appears as a unit of measure for flax in

AccountVII (see the textual notes on pp. 62—63):

What is with Sitnebsekhtu as the balance of 20 bales on the first [of] Emmer-Swell, loose: 1020 sh[eave]s [of] flax by bale of 60 (VII 9-12).

The same word probably exists in Papyrus Westcar: "she found her eldest half-brother on her

mother's side binding bales ( f SJ 11 ,) of flax on the threshing-floor" (Westcar 12, 13-14). James

understood both instances as the more well attested word nwt "yarn, thread," and read the figure in

Fig. 10. The flax harvest.

148 For the relationship between the two words, see the next footnote. For $3j, cf. S3j n djt msdmt "stalk for applying eyepaint," which must denote only a single stem: J. Cerny, Hieratic Inscriptions from the Tomb of Tutcankhamun (TTSO 2: Oxford, 1965), 27 (no. 59, 2).The term also appears in Westcar 12, 16-17 "Then he took one stalk (s3j) of flax to her, and he gave her a bad beating," apparently using the stalk as a whip: cf. Peas. R 11, 2-3 "Then he took a branch of green tamarisk to him, and he pummeled all his limbs with it."

149 The word s3rw may have originated as the plural of sir (> s3j), but in V 7—8/13 and VII 12 it is singular, since it is used as the measure in an account entry (Gardiner, EG, § 261); the dots in VII 12 probably reflect the ending w as a "false plural" (Gardiner, EG, § 77).The term I3j can only derive from s3r, with word-final r (*s'3'r > *f3j: see Edel, AdG, § 128), and not from S3rw, where the r introduces the final syllable {*s"3r"w, possibly preserved in Coptic qjox/qjA.x "bundle").

ETHE THINITE ENTERPRISE 173

VII 9 as the amount of the balance: "being the balance of the yarn, 20 (bundles)" (HP, 68). If the

first figure does represent the balance, however, the rest of the entry is unexplained; moreover, both

the initial m "as, being" in VII 10 and the following reference to time in VII 11 indicate that the

three lines of VII 9-11 are intended as a single heading, as translated above (see also the textual

note to VII 9—12 on p. 62).The phrase nwyt 20 thus denotes the principal against which the balance

is calculated, and not the amount of the balance itself. In that case, nwyt must be a unit of flax

measure, a use for which the word nwt "yarn, thread" is not attested.'50 The final equation indicates

that a nwyt consisted of 60 sheaves, with the 1020 sheaves constituting a balance of 17 bales.'5' The

term is therefore more likely to denote a bale of flax plants, such as those depicted in agricultural

scenes (fig. 10, middle).'52

Apart from this equation there is little evidence for the actual size of a s3rw "sheaf" or nwyt

"bale" of flax. Two ancient bales preserved in the Agricultural Museum in Doqqi (Cairo) measure

about 25 cm in diameter, roughly the same as those represented in Old and Middle Kingdom

tomb scenes.'53 A sheaf equivalent to Ao of such a bale would measure about 3.2 cm in diameter

and contain perhaps 100 stalks.'54 This corresponds to the size that can be held in a normal adult

male grasp, which would have been a good practical measure for the ancient s3rw. It is perhaps

three to four times larger than the number of plants harvested at one pull, but several such pulls

could have been combined into a single s3rw.155 This is perhaps what is being shown in the

righthand portion of fig. 10, where the man behind the four harvesters seems to be making a sin

gle sheaf as the step between harvesting and baling.

Account VII deals with "emmer that is in the lowland" (VII vo. 1 and VII 1—7), an amount of

flax given to Sitnebsekhtu (VII vo. 2 andVII 9—14), and the payment of salaries (VII 8 and 15). Al

though James saw no evident relation between the three sets of entries, Goedicke concluded that

the grain was to be disbursed as salaries for the production of linen from the flax, and this analysis

is supported by VII 8, which appears to link the grain and flax entries with the payment of salaries

150 Cf. Janssen, Commodity Prices, 436—38. 151 The arithmetic shows that the final figure in VII 12 must be "60" and not "6," since a bale of 6 $3rw would imply a

balance of 170 nwyt, far more than the 20 nwyt indicated in VII 10. This equation also argues against the meaning of nwyt as "yarn, thread," since the normal skein of flax used in weaving contains the fiber from only 12—24 plants (E. Barber, personal communication). Egyptian skeins may be represented by balls of linen thread such as the two from Lisht now in the collection of the Metropolitan Museum of Art (MMA 11.151.664 and 15.3.1122, unpublished). These measure 6.3 and 4.5 cm in diameter, respectively, and are therefore comparable in size to modern skeins, containing a few ounces of thread. Tomb models show the warp for weaving being set up from such balls or directly from thread on a spindle: G Vogelsang-Eastwood, The Production of Linen in Pharaonic Egypt (Leiden, 1992), 22.

152 See L. Klebs, Die Reliefs des Alten Reiches (AHAW 3: Heidelberg, 1915 — hereafter, Reliefs I), 54; Die Reliefs und Malereien des Mittleren Reiches (AHAW 6: Heidelberg, 1922 — hereafter, Reliefs II), 76; Die Reliefs und Malereien des Neuen Reiches (AHAW 9: Heidelberg, 1934 — hereafter, Reliefs III), 21. The passage from Papyrus Westcar cited above is more likely to refer to bales of flax rather than "flax yarn" (James, HP, 68) being bound on the threshing floor.This is probably a different process from that reflected in P 15 nch.w: see p. 176, below.

153 Nos. 1448 and 4073, bought from a dealer in Cairo in 1932 and said to come from a Theban tomb, so perhaps of New Kingdom or Ramesside date. One of the bales is illustrated in Brewer et al., Domestic Plants and Animals, 37 fig. 4.2. I am grateful to Hassan Khattab, consultant to the Agricultural Museum, for providing this information, and to Susan Allen and Salima Ikram for obtaining it.

154 Flax grown for fiber has stalks 2.5-4 m m m diameter: Encyclopaedia Britannica, 15th ed. (Chicago, 1985), IV, 825. The eqivalences can be calculated using the formula for the area of a circle (nd2) and assuming an average diameter of 3.2 mm per stalk. In a tightly bound bale—such as those in the Agricultural Museum—the area occupied by the space between stalks would be minimal.

155 Pliny describes flax as "plucked up and tied together in little bundles each about the size ofa handful": Natural History, translated by H. Rackham (London, i95o),V, 431 (19, 3). Flax for fiber is harvested by pulling the plant out of the ground (as shown in fig. 10), in order to preserve as much of the stem as possible: Encyclopaedia Britannica, 14th ed. (Chicago, 1972), IX, 430. See also A. Lucas and J.R. Harris, Ancient Egyptian Materials and Industries, 4th ed. (Oxford, 1962), 143; W Guglielmi, LA II, 256; E. Barber, Prehistoric Textiles (Princeton, 1991), 13;Vogelsang-Eastwood, The Production of Linen, 7. For further illustrations of the harvest, see Klebs, Reliefs I, 53-54; Reliefs II, 75; Reliefs III, 21. Practical experience suggests an average of 25—30 stalks per pull (V. Shaffer, Leffert's Homestead Children's Museum, NewYork, personal communication); root resistance makes it difficult to pull larger amounts (E. Barber, personal communication).

174 I. ECONOMICS

(see below).'5 'The account thus records a commission for the processing of flax, the grain available

to pay for it, and instructions for payment.

The emmer tallied at the beginning of Account VII is specified by location rather than indi

viduals: a storehouse (VII 3 mjhr),"in oipe(s)" (VII 4), a warehouse (VII 5 mjhryt), and the houses of

two individuals (VII 6—7). This suggests that the entries represent actual stores of grain that could

be drawn on for expenses rather than outstanding debts.'57 They seem to have amounted to 57.6

sacks of emmer both as originally entered and as emended, since the emendations seem to have

merely shifted some of the allocations (see the textual notes on pp. 61—61).

The entry in VII 9—12 indicates that Sitnebsekhtu had received 20 bales of flax, which would

have been equivalent to 1200 sheaves at the rate of 60 sheaves per bale. When the account was

drawn up she had 1020 sheaves left, amounting to 17 bales. These seem to have been counted as

sheaves rather than bales because they were "loose"—apparently having been unbundled in the

meantime—but the equivalence in bales is indicated by the notation "by bale of 60." The papyri

do not indicate what Sitnebsekhtu was expected to do with the flax, but her commission probably

involved at least the production of linen thread, and perhaps the weaving of cloth as well.

The creation of thread from harvested flax included some six steps, most of which are illus

trated in tomb scenes (figs. 10—n).'5 Small bundles of flax were leaned together vertically in

conical piles (known as "cocks") to dry in the fields for about six days.'59 Once the plants had

dried, their heads were drawn through a combing device in order to separate the flower and seeds

from the stem, a process known as rippling (fig. 10, left).The remaining stalks were then soaked in

water for one or two weeks; this rotted ("retted") and softened the material around the fibers,

making it easier to remove. After the plants had dried again, the individual fibers were separated,

first by drawing the stems one at a time through two small sticks to break up the retted material

(fig. 11, left), then by combing ("hackling") the fibers free (fig. 11, middle).1 ° Finally, the fibers

were spliced and twisted into linen thread (fig. 11, left and right).

Fig. 11. Processing flax fibers.

156 James, HP, 67; Goedicke, Studies, 102—103. Goedicke concluded that Sitnebsekhtu was the principal in the enterprise, who was to disburse the grain as payment for the processing of flax done on her behalf. The account, however, notes that the grain was "with" (m *) Sitnebsekhtu (VII 9, vo. 2). Since this prepositional phrase normally denotes an obligation (see the textual note to II 34 on p. 44), it is more likely that the flax was given to Sitnebsekhtu and that the salary was to be paid to her for processing it.

157 The house of an individual is listed as a debtor in VI 15, but in that case the nature of the entry is clearly specified by prepositional phrase m c (see the preceding note).

158 Klebs, Reliefs I, 53-54; Reliefs II, 75-76; Reliefs III, 21-22; Lucas and Harris, Ancient Egyptian Materials and Industries, I43;W. Guglielmi, LA II, 256—57; Barber, Prehistoric Textiles, 13—14 and 44—46; Vogelsang-Eastwood, The Production of Linen, 7-12; G.Vogelsang-Eastwood, in Ancient Egyptian Materials and Technology, ed. by P.T. Nicholson and I. Shaw (London and NewYork, 2000), 270-74.

159 Pliny describes flax as being put "in the sun to dry for one day with the roots turned upward, and then for five more days with the heads of the bundles turned inward towards each other": Natural HistoryV, 431 (19, 3). Such bundles may underlie the term nch.w"bundled" in P 15: see p. 176, below.

160 Vogelsang-Eastwood (The Production of Linen, 11; and in Ancient Egyptian Materials and Technology, 271) suggests that the flax was beaten to loosen the fibers, but there is no evidence for this. Wood mallets such as those she cites were used for striking chisels, as can be seen from the pattern of wear on the head.

ETHE THINITE ENTERPRISE 175

Since Sitnebsekhtu received her commission in bales, she was evidently expected to be respon

sible for processing the flax from the stage of rippling onward. The flax harvest lasted from mid-

March to mid-April, and the date recorded in VII 11 occurred about May 3 (see pp. 134 and 136).

By that time Sitnebsekhtu had apparently processed three bales of her commission; with some

three weeks needed for the initial stages of drying and retting, these must have been among the

first to be harvested.

The entries in VII 8 and 15 indicate that the grain tallied in the first part of the account was

intended to pay for Sitnebsekhtu s work in the form of a monthly salary. From its placement and

the flow of ink, the first of these is clearly part of the flax account rather than a total of the entries

in VII 1-7 (see the textual note on p. 64). As James realized, however (HP, 68), the "[Total] of salary

per month, 60 sacks, 3 additional" probably reflects the final total of the grain entries.'" The 3 ad

ditional sacks could represent the difference between VII 13 "[What she has completed], 7 [sacks]"

and VII 14 "[What is] in the upper (part of the) house, 10 sacks." If this analysis is correct, Sitneb

sekhtu evidently received an advance of 10 sacks of emmer along with her flax commission of 20

bales.' 2 By the time the account was drawn up she had processed 3 bales and was owed 7 sacks of

grain. The unearned balance of 3 sacks was then available for her salary in subsequent months,

along with the 57.6 sacks tallied in the first part of the account. The instruction in VII 15 author

izes payment of this salary beginning with the next lunar month (see p. 136).

Judging from these entries, Sitnebsekhtu was paid a monthly salary rather than a fee for each

bale she processed. Since she had probably done a month's work between the beginning of the flax

harvest and the date of the account, the figure of 7 sacks in VII 13 could well represent her

monthly wages. The size of the commission and monthly salary indicate that Sitnebsekhtu was not

the only laborer in this enterprise, though she was evidently responsible for it. From her 7 sacks

per month she presumably had to feed herself, pay for her workers and equipment, and perhaps

net a surplus for her own needs. Given these considerations and the normal monthly salary of one

sack (of barley) allotted to the senior members of Heqanakht's family, Sitnebsekhtu may have em

ployed a workshop (pr [n sncf) of three or four workers, whom she supervised as jmt-r "overseer"

(IV vo. 1). At the rate of 7 sacks per month, the 60 sacks of emmer recorded in VII 8 could have

lasted eight months, more than enough time for the remaining 17 bales to be processed at the rate

of 3 bales per month.'>3

Account P is related to Account VII by their common scribe, probably Heqanakht, by the

mention of Neferabdu (VII 15 and P 6), and by their mutual concern with items in the Thinite

nome. Both documents also deal with grain and flax, but Account P tallies barley (P 2 and 4/18)

rather than, or in addition to, emmer and records entries associated with the "highland" (P 4—5, 17)

as well as the "lowland" (P i).The significance of most of its entries, however, is unclear and their

relationship to one another and to the entries of Account VII, if any, uncertain.

161 For the reading, rather than James's "60.3" (HP, 68, followed by Goedicke, Studies, 108), see the textual note on pp. 64. Since the total ofVII 1-7 is 57.6 sacks, the figure in VII 8 (which includes "3 additional") ignores the extra 0.6 sack, perhaps because the monthly salary was paid only in whole sacks (see below).

162 The 10 sacks ofVII 14 are listed with the entries under VII 9 "What is with Sitnebsekhtu" and were therefore in her possession as well as separate from the grain tallied in the first part of the account. The pr-hrj "upper (part of the) house" may have been part of Sitnebsekhtu's workshop.

163 Goedicke reached a similar conclusion (Studies, 103), though on different grounds.This analysis is by no means the only one possible, but it seems best to account for the preserved data in VII 13-14 and 8. An alternative restoration ofVII 13, such as that suggested in the textual note on p. 63, leaves the origin of the 3 additional sacks in VII 8 unexplained. If the first figure in VII 8 is "6" rather than "60," it could represent the amount ofa month's salary, with the "3 additional" paid for the processing of 3 bales (at I sack per bale), but the payment ofa salary in addition then appears to be unmotivated. The notation of "3 additional" and the likelihood that this line recorded a total argue for the value "60," with the same numerical sign as in VII 12. The phrase [dmd] cqw njbd in VII 8 then refers most likely to the total amount available for Sitnebsekhtu's monthly salary rather than the total of one month's salary (see the textual note on p. 64). By comparison with Heqanakht's household of twelve salaried individuals who earned a total of perhaps 9.5 sacks of barley a month, sixty sacks per month is an improbable monthly wage, even for a workshop of several people. Moreover, the amount recorded in VII 3-7 would then last only one month, far less than the time Sitnebsekhtu apparently needed to process the remaining 17 bales.

176 8. ECONOMICS

The account begins with four general entries recording both barley and flax in (or from) the

"lowland" (P 1-3) and the "highland" (P 4/18-5). The "flax, 7000" in P 3 is probably counted by

sheaves, as is the case elsewhere in these papyri for large amounts of flax (V 7—10, 13—15VII 12), and

the entry in P 5 probably also refers to sheaves of flax, judging from the amount involved. The high

land barley is apparently identified as w3t, a variety unknown elsewhere. That from the lowland is

recorded as the more usual "full barley," but the entry atypically is introduced by the preposition m

"as." This feature and the fact that the entry is associated with the lowland suggest that the grain re

corded here was not barley per se but was only tallied as such (see the textual note on p. 66). It may

then represent the commercial value ("as full barley") of some other grain. Letter III indicates that

Heqanakht considered 1 sack of full barley to be worth 1V2 sacks of emmer (III 8—vo. i).At that rate,

if the grain in P 2 was in fact emmer, and if the amount tallied "as full barley" was 38.2 sacks,' 4 the

entry would represent 57.3 sacks of emmer. Adjusted by the "0.3 in oipe," this is equivalent to the

amount of emmer recorded in Account VII.' 5 The two accounts may therefore have recorded the

same stores of grain in different ways.

The middle section of Account P is devoted to nine entries that record amounts ranging from 5

to 35 in conjunction with individuals (P 6—10, 12, 14) or groups of individuals (P n "various

women"), and in one case with an activity (P 13 "shepherding").The commodity represented by the

figures is not indicated, but it was almost certainly sacks of grain rather than sheaves of flax, judging

from both the size of the amounts and the odd figure of 20.1 in P 11. "These entries seem to repre

sent payments rather than amounts received or outstanding, since one of them is evidently associated

with an activity rather than an individual. The introductory phrase of the first entry, jnt n "due to" (P

6), can then be understood with the following entries as well."7 The grain may have been emmer,

which is also used for the payment of salaries in Account VII.

The next line of the account records "2007 bundled" (P 15).The amount indicates that this entry

refers to sheaves of flax, and the qualification nch.w "bundled" implies that these had been grouped

into one or more units, perhaps equivalent to the nch "bundle" of Ramesside documents (see the

textual note on p. 68).The size ofa nch is unknown, but it probably did not comprise all of the 2007

sheaves. Scenes of the flax harvest show three kinds of flax bundles. One of these, depicted in fig. 10

and described on p. 173, above, is bound in the middle and probably represents the nwyt "bale" men

tioned in Account VII and Papyrus Westcar. The other two, each tied on one end, are a large bundle,

also depicted in the determinative of m/MtM'flax" (M38 Wk), and a smaller, longer one about the size

ofa sheaf ' Either of these could correspond to the Ramesside nch, but the latter is perhaps likelier;

if so, it may represent several sheaves of flax bound together, possibly so that they could be arranged

into cocks for drying.',9

164 Rather than 36.2: see the textual note on p. 66. 165 The equivalence is possibly also reflected by the fact that the scribe may have begun to write the first number as "50"

(see the textual note to P 2 on p. 66): i.e., mistakenly as 5(7) sacks of emmer rather than barley, despite the beginning of the entry. The amount of "0.3 in oipe" is clearly distinct, but it is not evident whether this also represents the barley value of emmer (equivalent to 0.45 sack of emmer) or 0.3 sack of emmer per se. Assuming the latter, two adjustments to the primary figure are possible. Added to the figure of 57.3, it would produce a total of 57.6 sacks of emmer, identical to the sum of the entries in the first part of Account VII; subtracted from 57.3, it would result in a total of 57 sacks, equivalent to the amount from the first part to be used for Sitnebsekhtu's monthly wages (see n. 161).The latter is perhaps likelier, since the amount of "0.3 in oipe" does not correspond to any of the entries in the first part of Account VII. Either analysis of the figures, however, is speculative.

166 The "dot" notation is not used for tallies of flax. The sign for "sack" is occasionally omitted in grain entries, although totals indicate that the amounts in question must refer to this unit of measure: cf.V 39-48 andV 49-54. Compared with the other entries, the figure of 20.1 (sacks) is an unusual amount. Since more than one individual is involved, it could represent allocations of 6.7 sacks to each of three women.

167 For the interpretation of jnt n, see the textual note on pp. 66—67. F° r the use of an introductory phrase in the first ofa series of entries, cf. Ill 6-7;VI 9—11,15-18.

168 For the first, see Newberry, Bersheh I, pl. 25 and p. 34; Davies, Deir el Gebrdwi I, pl. 12. For the second, see H.Wild, Le tombeau de Ti, fasc. Ill, La chapelle (2d part) (MIFAO 65: Cairo, 1966), pl. 151; N. de Garis Davies, The Rock Tombs of Sheikh Said (ASE 10: London, 1901), pl. 12.

169 The Ramesside measure is used for small quantities of flax—e.g., 5 and 20 (Cerny and Gardiner, Hieratic Ostraca I, pis. 24 no. 5 and 59 no. 1)—but also for much larger amounts, like Heqanakht's sheaf: W. Erichsen, Papyrus Harris I:

F. THE THINITE ENTERPRISE 177

The final entries, "balance, 4030" and "highland, 80" (P 16-17), are grouped together and sepa

rated from the rest of the account by the space of one line. The first of these almost certainly

records sheaves of flax, and the arrangement suggests that the second does so as well. Based on the

pattern in the first part of the account, the two entries can be understood as complementary, de

noting balances of 4030 and 80 sheaves of lowland and highland flax, respectively. The principal

sums on which these two figures are based are apparently not recorded.170

Account P ends with the notation "Another with ... Huni, without his having given it" (P 19:

see the textual notes on pp. 68—69). The first word, ky "another," and the subsequent pronoun sw

"it" both presuppose a masculine referent. This is probably zh3 "writing" (i.e., "account"), as sug

gested by James, rather than a measure of grain or flax.'7'

The account as a whole deals with sacks of grain (P 2, 4/18), sheaves of flax (P 3, 5, 15-17), and

payments made or owed in the form of sacks of grain (P 6—14). The fact that these are listed in a

single account suggests that they are somehow related to one another. In Account VII the same

three categories are associated with the processing of flax. The payments listed in Account P may

therefore have to do with flax as well—perhaps with its cultivation rather than the processing of

harvested plants.172 Since there is no evidence for the rate on which the payments were based, any

numerical analysis of their relationship to the flax figures must be considered speculative. A pay

ment of one sack per 70 sheaves, however, offers one possibility of reconciling the figures. At that

rate, the sum of 160.1 sacks paid to individuals (P 6—12 and 14) would represent a total production

of 11,207 sheaves of flax. If part of this total is the 2007 "bundled" sheaves listed in P 15, immedi

ately after the payment entries, the rest, amounting to 9200 sheaves, is equivalent to the sum of the

entries in P 3 (7000) and P 5 (1000) plus the 1200 sheaves recorded in Account VII.

The rate of 1 sack per 70 sheaves is, of course, purely hypothetical, and there is no certainty that

the figures are to be related in this way. In any case, Accounts VII and P seem to represent a total of at

least 15,317 sheaves of flax. Of these, 1200 were given to Sitnebsekhtu for processing. The remainder,

tallied in Account P, included 2007 bundled and perhaps still drying in the fields; 8000 removed to

storage, possibly after drying and awaiting processing; and at least 4110 others (P 16—17). The grain

listed in the two accounts totals at least 257.7 sacks (not counting the entry in P 2), of which 20 were

w3t-harley (P 4) and the rest emmer (VII 3-7, 14; P 6—14). Unlike the flax, there is no indication how

this grain was acquired. Since there is also no indication that the individuals mentioned in the ac

counts were involved in its production, it is perhaps best understood as income from lands leased to

others. If so, it would represent a gross of some 283.5 sacks before taxes, and the income from the

lease of perhaps 57 arouras at the rate of 5 sacks per aroura. The total balance of 4110 sheaves listed at

the end of the account may represent similar rental fees, paid in flax rather than grain.'73 The nota

tion in P 19 could then reflect another such fee still outstanding.

Together, Accounts VII and P seem to reflect an enterprise centered on flax. The men and

women listed in Account P may have been employed in its cultivation, and Sitnebsekhtu was paid

to process it, probably into linen thread and perhaps also into woven textiles. The entire operation

Hieroglyphische Transkription (BA 5: Brussels, 1933), 15, 18 (64,000) and 37, 8 (4000).The value of one-tenth ofa deben for a nch of flax (Janssen, Commodity Prices, 364—65) also indicates a fairly small quantity. For cocks, see p. 174 and n. 159, above.The figure in P 15 might reflect a nch of 3 sheaves: at that rate, the "2007 bundled" would correspond to 669 nchw. Cf. the photograph of hemp cocks in Barber, Prehistoric Textiles, 16.

170 None of the flax entries in Accounts P or VII can be added to or subtracted from these figures to produce a likely principal. A comparable entry ofa "balance" without mention of the principal occurs inV 34—36.

171 "Account," 53 and 55. Possible references to measures of grain or flax include h3r "sack," Brw "sheaf," and nch "bundle." These are less likely: the first because the account otherwise associates grain with individuals as payments rather than receipts or debts, and the others because the amount is probably too small to have merited recording.

172 Women were involved at least in the harvesting of flax (fig. 10): see also Klebs, Reliefs I, 52; Reliefs III, 21. The payment for "shepherding" (P 13) could reflect the use of rams during sowing to tread the seed into the ground: Davies, Sheikh Said, 20-21, pis. 8 and 16.

173 If the rate of 1 sack of grain per 70 sheaves is in fact correct, they are less likely to be flax for which payment had yet to be made: at that rate, another 58.7 sacks would be owed for them. This is more than seems to have been on hand, even if the grain recorded in P 2 was not identical with that listed in Account VII.

178 8. ECONOMICS

was evidently overseen by Neferabdu, who was undoubtedly paid for this service as well as for any

part he may have had in cultivating the flax. Payment was made in sacks of emmer, and perhaps

also in w3Fharley This grain, and perhaps also some of the flax, may represent rental fees from the

lease of land rather than crops produced by the individuals involved in the enterprise.

Since both accounts belong with the Heqanakht papyri and were probably written by Heqa

nakht himself, the Thinite enterprise was evidently part of Heqanakht's economic activity. The

land involved may therefore have belonged to him. If so, it was probably acquired in exchange for

his duties as Ipi's ka-servant, since it was clearly separate from the land farmed by his own house

hold. Alternatively, it may have been part of Ipi's funerary estate, which Heqanakht would have

managed in his capacity as ka-servant (p. 105).The latter is perhaps likelier, since there is no indica

tion that Heqanakht made use of the Thinite grain or flax for himself or his household. Some of

the linen produced by the Thinite enterprise could have been used in the statue-cult that Heqa

nakht served,'74 but the amount of flax recorded in Accounts VII and P is probably much larger

than what was necessary for that purpose. The balance may therefore have been used to purchase

other materials for the cult, such as oils and food offerings, as well as to pay for maintenance of the

funerary estate and its attendant expenses.

174 See, for example, the cloth used in the Mouth-Opening Ritual: E. Otto, Das Agyptische Mundqffnungsritual (AA 3: Wiesbaden, i960), II, 23-25.

9- Conclusion

THE HEQANAKHT PAPYRI contain a wealth of information about the language, history, society, and

economy of the early Middle Kingdom, as well as about Heqanakht himself and his contemporar

ies. The papyri themselves, however, were composed not to record this information but for the

more mundane and transient purposes of Heqanakht's personal and business affairs. Eliciting from

them the material that is of interest to us therefore requires both detailed analysis of the docu

ments themselves and comparison of their data with what is known from other sources. Previous

studies have shown that this process is both painstaking and, since the evidence is so meager, fraught

with uncertainties, leading more often to informed speculation than to firm conclusions.

The present study is no exception in this regard. Of necessity, its discussions have been discur

sive as well as detailed, and its conclusions presented piecemeal rather than whole. From them,

however, can be drawn a coherent picture of the background, circumstances, and history of the

Heqanakht papyri. The purpose of the present chapter is to present that picture in more sequential

fashion, both as a summary of this study and as an aid to those more interested in its results than in

the detailed argumentation behind them. *****

Sometime in the first or second decade of the reign of Amenemhat I, first ruler of the Twelfth

Dynasty (ca. 1981-1952 BC), the king's vizier, a man named Ipi, began to make arrangements for

his tomb and its attendant estate. As the site of his tomb he chose an unused portion of the north

ern cliff that bordered the bay of Deir el-Bahri in the Theban necropolis, an area made sacred by

the mortuary temple of Mentuhotep II, founder of the Middle Kingdom (ca. 2051-2000 BC), and

by the annual festival of the Theban god Amun, which Mentuhotep II had instituted.' Ipi modeled

his tomb after those of Mentuhotep s officials in the same cliff, with a deep forecourt, a long entrance

corridor ending in an antechamber, and a shorter corridor leading down from the antechamber to

the burial chamber that held his sarcophagus. The plan also incorporated three details that had be

come popular for nonroyal tombs only during the reign of Ipi's sovereign, Amenemhat I, and

exemplified in the tomb of Ipi's contemporary, the treasurer and chief steward Meketre: a cache for

his embalming materials, cut into the east wall of the forecourt; a chamber for wood models, exca

vated in the floor of the entrance corridor; and a canopic chest to house his embalmed internal

organs, beside his sarcophagus.

Like Meketre, Ipi employed a number of officials to serve his estate during life. One of these

was given the privilege of preparing his own tomb next to that of his master. Modeled in its inte

rior plan after that of Ipi, the tomb was excavated into the east wall of Ipi's forecourt, just south of

the embalming cache, a location analogous to that of the tomb of Wah, storekeeper of Meketre, in

the latter's tomb complex.

Ipi had his sarcophagus inscribed with his titles and name, as well as with spells from the

Pyramid Texts and Coffin Texts, but he died with the rest of his tomb still undecorated. Work on

the subsidiary tomb of his official seems to have stopped at the same time, possibly because of the

dissolution of Ipi's estate after his death. Before he died, however, Ipi had made arrangements for

the perpetuation of his mortuary cult, setting aside at least 57 arouras of land in the Thinite nome

to provide income for the cult and hiring a ka-servant to manage both this land and the cult itself

in exchange for a further endowment of land.

1 See Allen, in Studies in Honor of William Kelly Simpson I, 24 and n. 105.

179

180 9. CONCLUSION

The ka-servant hired by Ipi was not a resident of Thebes but lived instead in the north, in a

village called Sidder Grove, near the regional center known as Perhaa, somewhere in the area of

Memphis or the Fayum. There he had lands of his own amounting to at least 60 arouras, some of

which he may have received in return for his service to Ipi's cult. His family lived in Sidder Grove

as well, and consisted of his wife, also called Ipi; a sister or oldest child, known as Hetepet; and per

haps three sons, named Heqanakht, Merisu, and Anubis. His household also included the maid

servants of Ipi and Hetepet as well as his hired hands and their families.

After one or two decades of service to Ipi's cult, the ka-servant died in Amenemhat I's Year 24

or 25, corresponding to Years 4 and 5 of Amenemhat's coregent, Senwosret I. At his death his old

est son, Heqanakht, inherited both the bulk of his estate and his position as Ipi's ka-servant. Heqa

nakht had perhaps served earlier as the steward of the family's estate, but that responsibility now

fell to Merisu. By this time, both Heqanakht and Merisu were married, with families of their own.

Heqanakht was probably in his thirties. He had a son, named Mer-Snefru (usually called Snefru),

who was now about ten years old, and perhaps also a younger daughter, Sitinut, though the latter

may have been instead his youngest sister. He had lost his wife through death or divorce and had

taken a new spouse, May's daughter Hetepet, also known as Iutenhab, with whom he had pro

duced two daughters, Nefret and Sitwerut. Besides the individuals listed above, the household at

this time also included a maidservant named Senen, perhaps originally attached to Heqanakht's

former wife, and at least three male employees: Sihathor, the estate's scribe; Sinebniut, a fieldhand;

and Heti's son Nakht, another fieldhand, who had a family of his own.

Together with Merisu and perhaps also Heqanakht himself, these men had worked the house

hold's fields in Years 4—5, including 34 arouras planted 75% in barley (of the type known as "full

barley") and 25% in emmer, and another few devoted to flax. With a normal yield of 15 sacks per

aroura, the fields produced a harvest of 510 sacks of grain, enough for the household's annual

needs. These included some 116 sacks for food (90 of emmer and 26 of barley), 51 paid in grain tax

and 14.5 for tax on the household's cattle, 51 used as seed, and 11.35 sacks of barley disbursed as

salaries at the beginning of each lunar month. The barley crop left a surplus after expenses of some

140 sacks, which was used as disposable income.

At the height of the inundation in Year 5, Heqanakht prepared to leave Sidder Grove and take

up his new duties as Ipi's ka-servant in Thebes. His preparations are recorded in the first part of

AccountV, dated to 2 Harvest 9 of that year (about September 12, 1956 BC).This document, writ

ten by Sihathor, was meant to remain in Sidder Grove as a formal record of the responsibilities and

assets that Heqanakht, as new head of the household, had transferred to his top employees. In it,

Heqanakht entrusted the household's grain supplies to Merisu; these were enough to meet their

needs for the seven months until the next harvest, including food, salaries, seed, and payment of

the cattle tax. The cattle themselves were entrusted to the care of Sinebniut, with Merisu and

Heti's son Nakht responsible for oversight and any losses. The account also lists the bread supplies

that Heqanakht was to take with him to Thebes. These are recorded as given to him by Merisu,

who was now in charge of the household grain, and were enough to last for at least seven months,

until he could be resupplied from home with grain from the next harvest.

Heqanakht also made grants of barley to Sihathor, Merisu, and Sinebniut at this time, along

with gifts of flax and one aroura of his flax fields. These were unusually generous: the grain alone,

totalling 142 sacks, amounted to the household's estimated annual surplus of barley, and the indi

vidual grants were at least four times the annual salary of each man. The unusual nature of these

gifts may reflect not only the increased responsibility that these three top employees were to bear

in Heqanakht's absence but also Heqanakht's desire to reinforce their loyalty to him as new head

of the household.

Heqanakht reached Thebes at the end of September or the beginning of October in Year 5,

probably after a stop in the Thinite nome to visit Ipi's funerary estate and confer with its steward,

Neferabdu. Once in Thebes he was to remain there for some twenty months before returning

9. CONCLUSION l8l

home in the summer ofYear 7. During this time he was visited at least once, probably after the

harvest ofYear 6 and probably by Sihathor, so that he could be resupplied with grain. In the mean

time Heqanakht undoubtedly kept in touch by letter with both his home and the funerary estate

in the Thinite nome, for which he was responsible as Ipi's ka-servant.

The land that Ipi had set aside in the Thinite nome for the maintenance of his mortuary cult

was rented out, probably through the lease arrangement known as qdb, the only type known for

the Middle Kingdom. This was established by an advance payment negotiated between the land

owner and the lessee, with the rate of 5 sacks of grain per aroura (one third of a normal crop)

apparently the standard fee. The lease seems to have been renewable annually, at the discretion of

the lessee, by a further advance payment of the same fee. Unless otherwise specified, the means of

payment were apparently negotiable and the obligation could be settled in oil or some other

commodity with a value equivalent to that of the rental fee. The lessee had to provide his own

seed, but the landowner was responsible for the payment of taxes on the crop once the land had

been put into production. The lease of Ipi's land produced an annual income of some 260 sacks of

grain after taxes, mostly emmer and a type of barley known as w3t. These were used for the salary

of Neferabdu and to pay for the cultivation of flax and its processing into linen cloth by Sitneb

sekhtu and her workshop. Some of the linen may have been needed for the cult of Ipi's statue, but

the rest was probably sold for the food and oils that the cult also required.

Heqanakht also allowed 22.7 arouras of his own unused land in Perhaa to be leased out under

the same kind of arrangement, probably in the summer ofYear 6. The rental fees due him from

these leases, recorded in Letter III and AccountVI, gave him an extra annual income of 13.5 sacks

of barley and 100 sacks of emmer. After taxes often percent on the total crop, Heqanakht would

have netted 9.45 sacks of barley and 70 of emmer from these leases. As a prosperous landowner,

Heqanakht was also able to make loans of grain for seed and other purposes to some of his less for

tunate neighbors. These were viewed as a civic responsibility, and were repayable at harvest, without

interest. The debts listed in the second part of AccountV, dated to Year 8, and perhaps also in the ac

count to which Frag. A belonged, suggest that Heqanakht had made such loans during the preceding

year, probably after the harvest ofYear 7, amounting to at least 57 sacks of barley and 41.25 of emmer.

The barley undoubtedly came from his annual surplus of that grain. Since he normally cultivated

only enough emmer for the annual needs of his household, however, his loans of that grain were

probably made from the 70 sacks he had received as lease fees.

Heqanakht returned home in the summer ofYear 7. In his absence, antagonism toward his new

wife had escalated, with some of the household members abusing her verbally and denying outside

acquaintances and servants access to her, and Heqanakht ordered a stop to this mistreatment. He

also reset the household's salary schedule, based on the preceding harvest, and ordered that Snefru,

who was approaching his early teens, be treated as an adult. Heti's son Nakht seems to have been

advanced to agricultural foreman at some point after Year 5, and Heqanakht may have made the

promotion at this time as well.

Later the same summer, while Heqanakht was still in Sidder Grove, it became apparent that the

coming inundation was going to peak at a lower than normal height. This meant that some of

Heqanakht's fields, which were not directly adjacent to the river, would not be fully flooded and as

a result would produce fewer crops than normal. To make up for the poorer harvest from his own

land, he had his steward, Merisu, negotiate for the lease of fields in an area that was certain to be

watered. The lease was to total 13 arouras, an amount calculated to offset the approximately 38% of

his fields that Heqanakht projected would not be reached by the inundation. By this point, how

ever, the kind of land that could guarantee a normal crop was at a premium, and to secure the

lease Merisu had to agree to pay the entire advance rental fee in barley alone, a total of 65 sacks.

This put Heqanakht in a tight economic situation. With rental fees, his barley surplus after the

harvest a few months before had been some 150 sacks, but this had already been reduced to 93

sacks by the loans he had advanced. Of these, 65 were needed to pay for the lease Merisu had ne-

182 9. CONCLUSION

gotiated and another 19.5 to sow the 13 leased arouras, leaving Heqanakht with almost no surplus

of fresh barley to use as disposable income. Enough grain was still available for his usual annual

needs, however, and with the additional land he anticipated a surplus of barley about a third larger

than normal after the coming harvest, at which point the lease and its attendant expenses would

presumably no longer be needed.

With these arrangements in place, Heqanakht returned to Thebes in September or October of

Year 7, where he planned to remain for another twenty months or so. Perhaps before leaving, he

had ordered Merisu to send Sihathor to him immediately after the grain harvest with a report of

the harvest, an accounting of the lease fees and loans collected, a tally of the household's unused

wood, and ten sacks of new barley. On his way south, Sihathor was also to stop in the Thinite

nome to pick up accounts of Ipi's funerary estate there from Neferabdu.

Sihathor arrived in Thebes in May ofYear 8, carrying the requested accounts and grain as well

as verbal reports of the situation at home. One of the documents he brought was Account V, the

unused space of which he had used to record Merisu's account of Heqanakht's personal grain allo

cation (less the ten sacks of barley he was bringing to Heqanakht), a list of grain loans that had yet

to be repaid, and a tally of the household's unused wood. Other accounts brought by Sihathor may

be represented by Frags. B-E, including perhaps a report of the harvest and Neferabdu's reckoning

of the Thinite enterprise.

Even before Sihathor's arrival, Heqanakht was aware that the harvest had been poor enough to

face some of his neighbors in Thebes with the prospect of starvation. To his dismay, however, the

news from home was not much better. The harvest from his fields had proved to be worse than an

ticipated, with the inundation reaching only 52% of his fields instead of the expected 62%, effectively

canceling the benefit from the extra 13 arouras he had leased. Grain supplies were so tight that Meri

su had sent him ten sacks of old barley from a previous harvest that had been stored in Memphis

rather than the fresh barley he had expected. Heqanakht's neighbors in Sidder Grove and Perhaa had

apparently also experienced similarly poor yields, leaving his debtors unable to pay him in grain

rather than oil or some other commodity. Although his fields had produced enough grain to meet his

basic needs and those of his household, he now faced a second year in a row with almost no barley

surplus for disposable income. To make things worse, the household's mistreatment of his wife was

also continuing, despite his intervention on her behalf the previous summer.

Since the annual inundation had not yet begun, Heqanakht could not be certain that next

year's harvest would be any better than the one just completed. In order to ensure that it would

produce a barley surplus, he therefore needed to put even more land into grain production. Some

of this could come from his own fields: his basin-land in Sinwi, which had been planted in flax the

year before, and 14 arouras of pasturage that had been acquired from lp Jr.'s son Khentekhtai. Per

haps because of their location, however, these fields were not enough to ensure the kind of harvest

Heqanakht wanted. He therefore decided, no doubt reluctantly, that he needed to renew the 13-

aroura lease negotiated the year before and to acquire a further 10 or 20 arouras on lease in Khep

shyt, an area that was almost certain to be flooded no matter how low the inundation.

These measures were possible with the resources Heqanakht had at his disposal, but only mar

ginally so. To achieve them, he had to conserve as much of his existing barley as possible and to

recover as much as possible of the debts owed him in barley rather than some other commodity.

Cultivation of the additional grain fields would also tax his fieldhands—Merisu, Sihathor, Sineb

niut, Heti's son Nakht, and Anubis—well beyond the normal workload of 10 arouras per man and

close to the limit that could be expected of them. Despite his aversion to fieldwork and his prefer

ence for tending the household's cattle, Snefru would therefore need to lend a hand with sowing

and plowing as well.

Because he could not count on recovering the debts owed him in barley nor on the ability of

his men to negotiate payment for the new leases in some other commodity, Heqanakht had to re

serve a contingency of 120.5 sacks of barley: 70.5 to make up for the barley debts owed him and

9. CONCLUSION 183

an extra 50 sacks to be used if necessary to pay for the leases. Added to the barley needed for his

other expenses, including 65 sacks due at the renewal of the 13-aroura lease, this exceeded his ex

isting stores of new barley by some 27 sacks. To make up the difference, Heqanakht therefore had

to reduce expenses, and the only category that offered this possibility was the household's salaries,

which he himself set annually. Heqanakht thus faced the difficult situation of demanding more

work of his household at a lower salary.

Once these decisions had been reached, Heqanakht set about committing them to writing, so

that they could be conveyed by Sihathor without possibility of omission or misinterpretation. The

most urgent task was negotiation of the new lease, and Heqanakht addressed this first, in Letter I.

This document and the letters and accounts that followed were composed over the period of a

few days, so that Sihathor could return north with them as soon as possible. Some of them may

have been written at Heqanakht's residence in Thebes, but others could have been composed dur

ing his attendance at Ipi's tomb—in the latter case, perhaps just inside the entrance to the unused

tomb that had been prepared for Ipi's official, which offered a convenient and cool resting place

during the heat of the summer day.

Writing on an unused piece of papyrus in his own hand, Heqanakht began Letter I directly by

reminding Merisu of his responsibility for the household's land and grain. He then moved to the

subject of the new lease, ordering Merisu to dispatch Heti's son Nakht and Sinebniut to Perhaa to

negotiate for the land. The two men were to use a new linen sheet being woven at home to pay

for the lease of ten arouras in the prime area of Khepshyt, but they were also to attempt collection

of the debts owed Heqanakht in Perhaa and, to the extent that they were successful, to use the ad

ditional revenue along with the sheet to lease a total of twenty arouras.

The subject of this lease reminded Heqanakht of the existing one, and he devoted a few sen

tences to it, berating Merisu for agreeing to pay the lease fee in barley alone. Though the terms of

the lease itself were acceptable, this condition had now become particularly painful because of the

demands it made on Heqanakht's marginal supply of fresh barley. Merisu would therefore have to

be more than usually careful in disbursing this grain.

With the need for conserving as much of his barley as possible uppermost in his mind, Heqa

nakht then ordered a reduction in the salary that Nakht was to draw during his mission to Perhaa.

Either during his visit home in Year 7 or by mail after his return to Thebes, Heqanakht had ar

ranged for Nakht to travel to Perhaa for one month, probably to collect the grain debts owed him

there, and he had authorized Merisu to give half a sack of barley to Nakht's dependents for that

month, in addition to Nakht's usual monthly salary of one sack. Now, however, Nakht himself was

to draw only eight-tenths of a sack for the month, in line with the salary cuts that Heqanakht

would order in Letter II.

Continuing the subject of barley, Heqanakht began the reverse of the papyrus by complaining

about the fact that Merisu had sent him old grain with Sihathor instead of fresh barley from the

recent harvest. He realized that Merisu may have done so in order to conserve the newer grain, in

accordance with his own wishes, but warned Merisu that he would suffer the same treatment if

that were not the case.

Heqanakht then turned to the subject of the household's work in the fields. Because of the

increased workload attendant on the additional fields, Snefru would have to lend a hand with the

plowing, like the other men, drawing a comparable salary for his work. With Snefru's aversion to

fieldwork evidently in mind, Heqanakht softened this order by first greeting him in affectionate

terms. Once the plowing was finished, Merisu was to send Snefru to Thebes with more grain for

Heqanakht: two sacks of zwt-emmer and whatever barley might be left over after expenses.

The last bit of agricultural business Heqanakht addressed was the conversion of his flax fields

to grain for the coming season. These were to be planted preferably in barley, but in emmer if the

inundation turned out to be too high to support barley. He also ordered Merisu not to rent any of

his land to others, but to refer any requests for such leases to lp Jr.'s son Khentekhtai.

184 9- CONCLUSION

With agricultural matters out of the way, Heqanakht turned to domestic problems. After a re

minder of the special status of Anubis and Snefru in the household, he ordered the dismissal of the

housemaid Senen for mistreating his wife. He then ended the letter by sending greetings to his

mother, his aunt or older sister, and his daughter Nefret. Apparently still bothered by his wife's mis

treatment, however, he added a codicil on this subject, reminding Merisu of his responsibility in

the matter. Finally, he ordered Merisu to send an accounting of the debts collected in Perhaa, per

haps intending that it be brought by Snefru on his visit at the end of the year. After finishing the

letter, Heqanakht rolled it up with the recto inside, folded it three times, and addressed it to his

household.

Although he had touched on domestic matters in his first letter, Heqanakht still needed to set

the household's new, and reduced, salary schedule for the coming year. This was to be the main

topic of his second missive. Letter II reflects some of the same decisions Heqanakht had made be

fore composing his first letter, so it was probably written not long after Letter I, but it also shows

some development in his thinking and was therefore composed most likely a day or so later. Like

Letter I, it was written by Heqanakht himself on an unused sheet of papyrus. Near the end of the

first letter Heqanakht had found himself running out of space for what he wanted to say, and had

been forced to write with smaller signs and crowded columns for much of the verso. After finish

ing the letter, he apparently also decided that he had not been detailed or forceful enough in

denouncing his wife's mistreatment, and would need to return to this subject in his second letter.

These two factors prompted him to choose a sheet half again as wide as that used for Letter I.

Because both of its topics concerned the entire household, Heqanakht began Letter II by ad

dressing all of its members. In his first letter he had dispensed with the usual opening pleasantries,

but here he devoted a few columns to them, perhaps to soften the bad news he was about to give.

He then launched immediately into his main topic, the household's salary schedule, first reminding

his dependents how well off they were in comparison with others and how their salaries were de

pendent on the height of the previous year's inundation. The schedule was entered after this, in

account fashion, with a line for each member in general order of seniority and a final line for the

monthly total, 7.95 sacks. Judging from the instructions for Nakht's salary in Letter I, this repre

sented an overall reduction of some twenty percent from the previous schedule. At some later

point Heqanakht decided that he needed to cut one more sack a month from the salary expenses,

and he did so by altering the allocations for five of the members at the bottom of the list, though

he neglected to adjust the total as well.

After writing the schedule, Heqanakht added a note authorizing a salary for Sinebniut during

the month of his mission to Perhaa with Nakht, apparently because he had forgotten to do so in

Letter I; the note was appended to the final column of the letter's introduction and continued be

tween it and the salary account to the left. Beginning in the space below the account, Heqanakht

then added a few last words to justify the new schedule, reminding the household that he had the

authority to allocate all of its property and that the cuts did not represent real hardship in

comparison with the starvation faced by others. Finally, he indicated that he intended to remain in

Thebes for another year, until after the next harvest.

The remainder of the letter was to concern management of the household's affairs, and for that

reason Heqanakht addressed it specifically to his two senior employees, Merisu and Heti's son

Nakht. Reminding them that the salaries he had just authorized were conditional on the house

hold's work, he specified that the new schedule was to take effect on the first of the lunar month

Khentekhtai-perti. This date corresponded to the end of September, some four months in the fu

ture; it may have been chosen because it was the anniversary of the initial salary schedule set in

Year 5, before Heqanakht's first departure to Thebes. While on the subject of labor, he also re

minded Merisu and Nakht that their own salaries were just as dependent on their fieldwork, and

took the occasion to mention the 14 arouras acquired from lp Jr.'s son Khentekhtai, which were to

be converted from pasturage during the coming agricultural season.

9. CONCLUSION 185

Heqanakht then turned to ongoing problems concerning three members of the household. An

obligation owed by Merisu to Anubis had apparently been outstanding for some time. Although

Heqanakht had ordered the debt settled in a previous letter, Sihathor had apparently reported that

the matter was still open, so Heqanakht repeated his order in this dispatch.

During his last visit home, in the summer ofYear 7, Heqanakht had offered Snefru the oppor

tunity to accompany him back to Thebes, probably to begin induction as Heqanakht's eventual

successor in the office of Ipi's ka-servant. Snefru, however, had preferred to stay home, and while

there he was expected to assume responsibility for some of the household's labor. He apparently

preferred tending the cattle to working in the fields, so Heqanakht now ordered this duty trans

ferred to him from Sinebniut, who had been given it in Year 5—although, as Heqanakht had

indicated in Letter I, Snefru would still have to lend a hand with the plowing during the coming

year. Mindful of Snefru's previous reluctance to come to Thebes and of the fact that his salary had

now been cut, Heqanakht then added a note to remind him, and the rest of the household, of the

contrast between life in Sidder Grove and Thebes: "But as for anyone who will reject this salary,

women or men, he should come to me, here with me, and live like I live."

The household problem of most concern to Heqanakht, however, was the mistreatment of his

wife, and he devoted the rest of the letter's recto to this subject. Sihathor had apparently reported

complaints by some of the household against her, along with the news that she was still being kept

isolated from her hairdresser and other servants who came from outside the household. With a

formal oath taken on the name of the vizier Ipi, Heqanakht reiterated his condemnation of this

attitude, and emphasized that he considered any attack on his wife as tantamount to an attack on

him personally.

With the recto of Letter II filled, Heqanakht turned the sheet over to inscribe the rest of his

message. In writing Letter I, he had turned the page horizontally and had written the verso retro

grade, from left to right, but here he reversed it vertically and wrote from right to left, probably to

avoid the numerous physical flaws that he encountered in the lefthand portion of the recto. After

writing his instructions for the lease of new land in Letter I, Heqanakht had apparently become

determined to ensure that his men would rent twenty arouras rather than ten. Because he still

needed to conserve as much barley as possible, he therefore decided to send back with Sihathor 24

deben of copper for use in meeting the initial payment. Heqanakht noted this on the verso, and

took the opportunity to reiterate his preference for the mode of payment in order of priority: first

the oil or other commodities that his men managed to collect from the debts owed him in Perhaa,

then the copper he was sending, then the sheet that he had first mentioned, and finally barley as a

last resort. In any case, however, twenty arouras were to be rented, and only in the prime area of

Khepshyt, beside the fields of Hau Jr.

These instructions occupied only about fifteen percent of the verso, but they concluded what

Heqanakht had to say. He therefore turned the papyrus back to the recto, folded inward the por

tion that was inscribed on both sides, and then rolled up the papyrus, folded it three times, and

addressed it, like Letter I, to his household.

The last domestic matter that Heqanakht needed to deal with was collection of the debts owed

him from the grain loans he had made in Year 7 and the fields he had leased to his neighbors in

Perhaa. The loans were apparently the subject of the account to which Frag. A once belonged,

probably intended as a guide for Merisu. As with Letters I and II, Heqanakht wrote this account

himself, on an unused piece of papyrus. For the documents dealing with the rental fees owed him,

however, he turned to the services of two other scribes.

Because his own harvest had been so poor and his barley was in such short supply, Heqanakht

anticipated that the same would be true of the farmers who had leased his fields. To aid in the col

lection of these debts, he therefore decided to enlist the influence of Herunefer, an official of some

stature who lived in Perhaa. Herunefer's assistance was to be solicited in a letter dictated by Heqa

nakht to Sihathor, carried by Sihathor to Heti's son Nakht, and eventually delivered to Herunefer

186 9. CONCLUSION

by Nakht during his coming mission in Perhaa. Heqanakht was capable of writing this request

himself, but Herunefer's status demanded a formal letter written in accordance with the standards

of the literary language. This dialect of Egyptian was slightly different from Heqanakht's own, and

he apparently felt that Sihathor had a better command of it and perhaps also of the phraseology

required in such formal letters as well the calligraphy preferred in their opening salutations.

For this document, Letter III, Sihathor selected a piece of papyrus that had been used for an

other letter. After thoroughly erasing its text and address, he turned it upside down and inscribed

in elaborate hieratic a standard formal opening that he had memorized from model letters, such as

the one known as Kemit. The rest of the letter was written at Heqanakht's dictation. In it, Heqa

nakht introduced his men and their mission to Herunefer and requested Herunefer to aid them in

recovering the debts owed him and to store the collected grain separately in his own house until

they would come for it. He also identified the oipe that his men would use to measure the grain,

and specified some of the debts owed him, by location and debtor. Anticipating that some of his

debtors would ask to settle in oil rather than grain, he then dictated the rate acceptable to him.

Heqanakht closed by vouching for Nakht's authority to act on his behalf.

Because of the status of its addressee and the importance of its contents, Letter III was to be

delivered to Herunefer sealed. Before folding it, therefore, Sihathor placed a piece of string across

the recto, with its loose end projecting on the right. He then rolled the papyrus up, folded it three

times, and addressed it to Herunefer before tying the string across the bottom of the package and

sealing it with a lump of clay. Finally, Heqanakht impressed the clay with his personal seal.

In his letter to Herunefer, Heqanakht had dictated only some of the rental fees owed him. The

remainder he now recorded in Account VI, probably working in both cases from a list prepared

back in Sidder Grove. As he had done with Letter III, Heqanakht dictated the account—in this

case not to Sihathor but to a third scribe, perhaps one he regularly employed in Thebes. At Heqa

nakht's dictation, the scribe wrote on an unused piece of papyrus both the debts omitted from

Letter III and their totals, as well as the grand total of debts from both documents, using some of

the uninscribed areas of the account to figure these sums. When the document was finished, the

scribe erased his calculations, folded the papyrus twice vertically and horizontally, and wrote an

identifying docket on the outside. Heqanakht did not have the account sealed, probably because it

was intended for Heti's son Nakht to use as a reference in collecting the debts during his mission

to Perhaa.

With personal matters taken care of, Heqanakht next turned his attention to Neferabdu's re

ports from Ipi's funerary estate in the Thinite nome. These had been drawn up only a few days

earlier, at the end of April. They listed the emmer that had been collected from the lease of Ipi's

fields, together with the locations in which it was stored; a tally of the flax that had been cultivated

at Heqanakht's request, and the payments for this work; and a reckoning of the flax that had been

given to Sitnebsekhtu for processing at the end of the harvest, a few weeks earlier, as well as the

amount she had processed as of the beginning of the current lunar month, "Emmer-Swell" (about

May 3), and the grain that had been advanced her for this work.

Heqanakht consolidated these reports into two accounts, which Sihathor was to deliver to

Neferabdu on his way back to Sidder Grove. Since Heqanakht was responsible for managing the

estate, he decided to write the two accounts himself. Taking an unused sheet of papyrus, he first

addressed the question of Sitnebsekhtu's work and her salary, in Account VII. At the beginning of

the account he listed the emmer on hand, a total of 57.6 sacks. These entries, arranged by location,

may have been consolidated from several reports, because Heqanakht made slight adjustments in

the allocations after writing them, not affecting the overall total.

Next he recorded the status of Sitnebsekhtu's flax commission. Sitnebsekhtu was the head of a

workshop that processed harvested flax into linen cloth, and was regularly employed for this pur

pose by Heqanakht, with his steward, Neferabdu, supplying local oversight. From the flax that had

been produced for Ipi's estate, Sitnebsekhtu had received 1200 sheaves in 20 bales, and had processed

9. CONCLUSION 187

three of the bales during the previous lunar month. For this work she and her employees were

owed a month's salary, 7 sacks of emmer, which Heqanakht deducted from the amount of 10 sacks

that she had received on commission and stored in the upper rooms of her workshop. The balance,

added to the 57 whole sacks of emmer on hand, gave a total of 60 sacks of grain available for her

monthly salary, which Heqanakht recorded at the end of this portion of the account. At 7 sacks a

month, this was enough to process not only the rest of the commission but also 6 more bales,

which she might be given later. Payment of this monthly salary was apparently the purpose of Ac

count VII, and Heqanakht authorized it in a final instruction to Neferabdu. Apparently uncertain

that the account would reach him before the next payment was due, at the beginning of the fol

lowing lunar month, "Big Burning" (about June 2), Heqanakht ordered Neferabdu to dispense the

next installment of Sitnebsekhtu's salary on the local feast known as the Procession ofTepiner,

which probably took place in the first half of the month. After finishing the account, Heqanakht

rolled it tightly, folded it in half, and inscribed an identifying docket on one of its two outer faces. He

did not seal it, perhaps because it only confirmed existing arrangements for the payment of Sit

nebsekhtu s salary, except for the date specified in his final instruction.

For his second Thinite account Heqanakht selected a piece of papyrus already inscribed with a

letter, like that which Sihathor had chosen for Letter III.The original text, Letter P' , had been ad

dressed by a man named Intef to the steward Ineswisetekh, neither of whom seems to have been

involved with Heqanakht or his affairs. The document may have been acquired from a scribe who

worked for both Ineswisetekh and Heqanakht, perhaps the one to whom Heqanakht had earlier

dictated AccountVI. Before reusing the papyrus Heqanakht washed off the original text on both

sides, though superficially and with less care than Sihathor had employed in erasing the original

letter of the papyrus used for Letter III.

Heqanakht began the new text, Account P, with a tally of grain and 8000 sheaves of flax on hand

in the Thinite nome, as reported to him by Neferabdu.The grain included 38.2 sacks that Heqanakht

recorded "as full barley." At the rate of three sacks of emmer to two of barley, which he had set in

Letter III, these were equivalent in value to 57.3 sacks of emmer; together with another 0.3 sack re

corded as "in oipe," they may have been identical to the 57.6 sacks of emmer listed in the first part of

Account VII, tallied here in terms of their barley value. Heqanakht then entered a total of 160.1 sacks

of grain that had been paid, probably for cultivation of the flax, to Neferabdu himself, six men and

women, and a group of perhaps three women, as well as a further 10 sacks paid for the use of sheep

or goats to tread the flax seed into the ground during sowing of the crop. After these entries Heqa

nakht recorded another 2007 sheaves of flax as "bundled," perhaps representing harvested flax that

was still drying in the fields. Together with the 8000 sheaves listed at the beginning of the account

and the 1200 that had been given to Sitnebsekhtu for processing, the flax amounted to a total of

11,207 sheaves, and the total of 160.1 sacks of grain paid to individuals was perhaps disbursed for the

cultivation of these at the rate of one sack per 70 harvested sheaves. At the end of the account Heqa

nakht recorded a balance of 4 n o sheaves, which may have been received as rental fees from some of

Ipi's land that had been sown in flax rather than grain. Finally, he added a notation about an account

ing still outstanding, perhaps ofa further rental fee due from the lease of Ipi's land.

After finishing Account P, Heqanakht folded it three times with the recto inside and then in

thirds again, top over bottom, and wrote an identifying docket on one of its outer faces. Perhaps

because this document authorized payment of a substantial amount of grain, Heqanakht also

sealed it for delivery, in the same manner as Letter III.

The three letters (I-III) and two accounts (VI and Frag. A) that Heqanakht had prepared to

deal with his personal affairs were now ready for Sihathor to take back to Sidder Grove, together

with the account that Sihathor had brought with him (V) and the two accounts (VII and P) that

he was to deliver to Neferabdu on his way home. Perhaps a week had passed since Sihathor had

arrived in Thebes, and as he made ready for his return trip north, Heqanakht entrusted the eight

documents to his care, along with some of the accounts he had used in preparing them.

188 9. CONCLUSION

While in Thebes, Sihathor had also written another document that he was to deliver on his

way home, Letter IV Sitnebsekhtu's daughter, also named Sitnebsekhtu, lived in Thebes. Taking

advantage of Sihathor's projected stop in the Thinite nome, the younger Sitnebsekhtu had asked

him to write a letter on her behalf and deliver it personally to her mother. As he did with Heqa

nakht's Letter III, Sihathor erased an older letter and turned the papyrus upside down to inscribe

Sitnebsekhtu s message. What she had to say was fairly short, mostly reassurances that she was in

good health and wishes for the wellbeing of her mother and the rest of the household, including a

man named Gereg, and a note to remind Gereg of his promise or responsibility to do something.

After writing the letter, Sihathor folded it in thirds horizontally and vertically and addressed it on

one of its two outer faces. The address was to Gereg rather than Sitnebsekhtu, perhaps because the

latter was illiterate and Gereg would be reading the letter to her. A less competent scribe, possibly

the daughter herself, then wrote the mother's title and name on the second outer face. Sihathor

then put the letter with the other documents entrusted to him.

During his stay in Thebes, Sihathor usually accompanied Heqanakht to Ipi's tomb during the

day, along with the Theban scribe Heqanakht regularly employed. Besides his duties to Heqanakht,

and perhaps also to the steward Ineswisetekh, the latter was responsible for recording deliveries to

the storehouse associated with a local shrine of Hathor, and in this capacity he used a number of

reference sealings on bits of clay to verify the seals on those deliveries. The shrine and its store

house were probably near Ipi's tomb, perhaps in the mortuary complex of Mentuhotep II in the

valley just below it, and the scribe also worked for Heqanakht from time to time at the tomb, re

cording accounts of Ipi's cult that Heqanakht dictated to him in the shaded entrance of the unused

tomb nearby. For this reason, he was in the habit of storing some of his scribal equipment in the

antechamber of the unused tomb, including a box of ink, scraps of blank papyrus, a ball of papyrus

string used for sealing documents, and his reference sealings. Some of Heqanakht's letters and ac

counts may also have been written at the tomb, and once they had been entrusted to Sihathor he

stored them in the antechamber as well, along with the letter for Sitnebsekhtu, intending to re

trieve them on his last visit to the site before leaving Thebes.

Sometime earlier in Year 8, relatives ofa man named Meseh, who had recently died, had re

ceived permission to appropriate the unoccupied tomb for his burial. As Ipi's ka-servant, Heqa

nakht had been told of this impending use of his employer's complex, and had perhaps even

granted his own approval as well. Unfortunately, he had neglected to inform either of his two

scribes, and he was also unaware of their most recent deposits in the tomb's antechamber. The bur

ial took place a day or so before Sihathor's scheduled departure. Heqanakht may have been present

at the time, performing his duties at Ipi's tomb, but neither Sihathor nor the Theban scribe were

on hand, the former perhaps making arrangements for his trip and the latter occupied elsewhere

in Thebes.

Shortly before the burial, and probably while final rites were being conducted at the mouth of

the tomb, workers prepared the inner chambers for the introduction of Meseh's coffin. Carrying

rubble on old leather mats, they built a ramp over the rough stairway leading from the antecham

ber to the burial chamber. As the ramp neared completion, the workers threw in the leather

carrying mats and one of two wood beams that had been used to lever the sled bearing Meseh's

coffin up the hillside to the tomb. They also cleared out the tomb's antechamber, sweeping its con

tents down the stairway to form part of the ramp and including in the process most of Heqa

nakht's papyri and the materials left by his Theban scribe. After the funeral rites were completed,

the workers used the second beam to maneuver Meseh's coffin into the tomb, down the ramp, and

into position in the burial chamber, leaving the beam in a corner of the room. Once the coffin

was in place, two large stones were put on its lid (perhaps to deter vermin from disturbing the

body inside) and several pots with offerings were set beside it. The burial chamber was then sealed

by a mudbrick wall built over the top of the rubble ramp. Afterward, Meseh's relatives deposited

several pottery offering-tables in the tomb's outer chambers and departed.

9. CONCLUSION 189

Sihathor was no doubt dismayed to learn of the fate of the papyri that Heqanakht had en

trusted to him, and Heqanakht's reaction was probably a good deal stronger. The clearance of the

tomb's antechamber, however, had fortunately been less than thorough. Upon returning to this

room, one or both of the two men found at least three of Heqanakht's documents, though in dam

aged condition: these were the accounts represented by Frags. A—E, less those pieces, which had

become detached in the clearance and swept into the ramp with the rest of the papyri. The mate

rials deposited by Heqanakht's Theban scribe had almost totally disappeared, except for some

negligible strips of papyrus pith, part of his ink-box, and one of his reference seals. The last was

presumably still of use, but it may have been overlooked in the darkness of the antechamber when

the other objects were recovered.

The loss of Heqanakht's papyri did not put an end to the conditions that had prompted their

creation, nor undoubtedly to his plans for dealing with them. Presumably he was able to draw up a

second set of documents and continue with the procedures he had decided on, probably after only

a few days' delay. Whether his plans ultimately proved successful is unknown; there are no records

of the height of the inundation in Year 8 of Senwosret I nor of the harvest in the following year,

both of which were crucial to them. In any case, the loss of his papyri was probably only of passing

importance to Heqanakht himself, though of lasting value to posterity.

APPENDICES

Appendix A. Sign List

THE FOLLOWING THREE TABLES list representative examples of all the signs that occur in each of

the Heqanakht papyri. The first table, of individual signs, is arranged in the order of the sign-list in

Gardiner's Egyptian Grammar. An asterisk is used to identify alternate forms (e .g. ,Ai*) . Signs that

do not occur in Gardiner's list are inserted in the appropriate section and identified by the number

given them in the more comprehensive list of the C C E R ' s Hieroglyphica (for example, D211 &-Q,

listed after D40 n—<<).The second table, of ligatures, is arranged in the same manner, in the order of

the first sign of each ligature; cross-references to each of the ligatured elements are given in the

table of individual signs. The third table lists numerals, arranged in numerical order.

Within each table signs are listed by document, with the most typical form first; the accompa

nying numbers in parentheses refer to the column or line in which the sign depicted can be found.

Each sign is reproduced at 1:1, with the exception o f a few of the largest, which have been re

duced to 75% of the original. The forms have been taken directly from the facsimile drawings in

pis. 27-57, but have been reproduced here in outline so that the arrangement of overlapping

strokes can be seen; restored portions of individual signs are indicated in grey.

Individual Signs

Ai

II

III

IV

v 4tu,), VII J ^ f c ( i 5 )

See also Ligatures (N35).

(vo. 1)

(29),

(8), ^ ^ ( v o . 3), ^ j / ^ ( 3 ) ,

vo. 2)

(25), (46) — columnar text only

A i * I (ky (8) — as det. with B i *

II IfP (vo. 6) — as det. with B i * and in the account; inserted as is suffix in 29

V [ k j ^ (13), lp=^ (15), Oc^ (30), MS (45) — in accounts

VI [ k ^ (3), C ^ (7), 0 ^ ( T 5 )

VII CK(7)

P Cb^(9),0<^(6),/fc-(i9) Fr. /k> (B); fe (C)

A2 I

II

III

IV

V

(p. (vo. 7); pj (vo. 17, in restricted space)

(5)

(1, 75%) — calligraphic, for A17

(4)

(26)

A15

p ^ 2 L (1) A15*

VII

193

194 APPENDIX A. SIGN LIST

Al7a

A 2 0

(12)

A 2 4

I

II

V

(10)

(3i)

(27)

A25

(19)

A 2 8

C n

III

(vo. 15)

(1, calligraphic)

A30

II (3i), (44)

A47 I L H J Q ^ (13)

II (fippf (24)

vi Kf(n) B i I (JcM? (vo. 14), (L, (vo. 15) — always in group with Z i

II L & (9), ( £ (10), £ " (22), $L* (25), [jp (14), £ (20), ft, (21) — in group with Z i , except in the account or in group with another sign (1)

IV <ypf (1) — always in group with Zi

VII (Pfiy^ (vo. 2; in group with Zi) , [p (9)

P 5£(H),ML(H), (t(7) B i * I jM, (1) — only in group A I * - B I *

II pL, (28), MM, (11) — in group A I * - B I * , except in the account (11)

C n

SeeA28. D i I <&) (16)

II

VII

(vo. 3)

(15) D 2

® (11), Pr (vo. 2), ^ (14), p^ (9) I MS

II ^ ( 3 3 ) , ~ M J (36),^ ; (V0.4)

III ^ (8), M% (vo. 1), ^ T (vo. 1)

APPENDIX A. SIGN LIST 195

(D2)

$ IV T (4)

VII J2(5),€(8)

Fr. % (AS)

See also Ligatures (D2).

D 3

(IT II

V

30 (39)

^ ( 2 1 )

D 4 I c ^ ^ M > (12), « ^ 3 M ^ (14)

II < ^ 5 J > (42), e ^ ^ y (29)

III M ^ M ^ (1)

V ^ s S ^ - (12), < S ^ ^ (12)

D 5

m^-II

III

(vo. 3)

(6)

D21 I < = ^ ? (vo. 13), t ^ > (vo. 1), yyp? (vo. 16)

I I < 2 ^ (2), cpPP (26), C ^ s . (3), yyp (40), <^o (43), ^M? (vo. 3)

HI ^ (5), ^ n ? (vo. 2), ^ 0 (vo. 3), ^ k > (5), M ^ (8)

IV ^pD (2), <^p) (4), ^ 0 (4), ^ = 0 (vo. 1), d ^ ) (vo. 2)

V ^ (7), ^ ' ( 1 4 ) , ^Jjf> (30), ^ (33), ^ 3 (37), CSS^ (52)

VI c^p (2), <^S (7), <^f? (17); in groups: ^ 0 (14), <=> (17), « , (17)

VII < = ^ (3, reinked), ^ (5), = ^ 7 (15), ^ S J (15), ^ (15)

P ^ (19)

Fr. c ^ (A2), ^SQ (A3); c ^ > (B)

See also Ligatures (D21; also D2, G17, G36, M36, O i , T 2 8 , W i 2 , Aai*)

D28 I oM2),(Lf3(i:U36xD28)

II <Si (36)

in m (1) Fr. (fiS (Ai:U36xD2f

D2911

III (3) — calligraphic

D 32^

II (37) D34a

I

II

(3), < ^V) (vo. 7)

(30)

(8)

D35 I cP~yy? (vo. 12)

II ^ ^ (36) III <=^=7 (4)

V ^p (41)

vi M, (2) p ^ (19)

D36 I £L=? (4), Qy^ (13), ^ (vo. 8), [fiyy=3 (vo. 11)

I I 0=y> (7), Cl= ^ (28), [ j W (30), Q ^ (37), <JM- (38)

III ^ = ? (4), £ ^ (7)


(D36) Q = ~

D37 Q=_&

D40

Q — J

D211

D=Q

D218

o_m D46

c =

D52

C4=>

D53 Cr=P

D279

55 D54

£V

D54*

(A.

D56

I

IV

V

VI

VII

p

See

I

II

III

IV

V

VII

p

See

I

II

III

V

VI

VII

I

I

II

III

IV

V

VI

VII

ppp) (4), 9 = ? (4), £p? (3) C V 9 (16), %Z=3 (vo. 7), ^ M ? (28), P=^ (34)

^ (3), 2=3 (5)

j W ( 9 ) , ^ = ^ (15)

L J ? * ^ (15, left side reinked), Pfiyp (19)

also Ligatures (D36).

J i ^ j ( 5 ) , M ^ ( v o . 7 )

CP^ (25), [ V J ? (34), fet^ (42), ^ M ^ (vo. 1)

^ ^ (3), ^ (8)

^ = 4 (4), 0 = ^ (3), A ^ (2)

^ (30), & ^ J (46)

j l ^ b (3), 4 ? (5)

^ ( 1 9 ) also Ligatures (D37).

/ ^ (4), J ^ ^ 7 (4)

&PJ" (30), & * # (vo. 3), CP^ (30), CM=M (33)

puj (6), Z 5 (5) ^ M 7 (53), &^/ (44)

^ ( 1 2 )

^ ( 9 ) , ^ = ^ ) ( v o . 2 )

M P (6) c^Py^ (4) ? ^r^fM^ (vo. 10)

^ = (5), ^ £ = (34), J£=> (vo. 2)

^ ^ (4), ^ B ? (7), ^=Ms|> (8)

- = ^ ( D <=£= (36), <=^S> (54), ^ < ^ (48), <yyP^o (33), ^=MTJ (47),

c ^ (14), <=C% (20)

^ ^ ( 8 )

See also Ligatures (110).

II

V

II

(P'

I

II

III

V

VII

Fr.

Ill

IV

I

0^ (35) d s ^ (26), ( ^ ( 1 8 ) , ^ ( 2 4 )

4,3V, 1 and vo. 1 — see the textual note on pp. 69—70.)

(vo. 8)

(&=? (36), ( £ ( 3 5 , in group)

<J^M=> (5), ci :>r=3 (5) — as det. only

( J M ^ (27), ( ^ v J ^ o (27) — as det. only

C f ^ w (15)

{tS (A3) P?^^^ (4), ( J M J J ^ (vo. 1) — as phonogram jw only

G\zy^? (3) — as phonogram jw only

( ^ ( 1 7 )

d S (48)


D 5 8 1 \ry (6), fc (10)

II /L(3),(L(34),^.(34)

III ^ (8), i L (2, 75% — calligraphic)

V tU(vo.4)

VI ILo(4),2^(i3)

P & (12)

Fr. fifi^ (A4) See also Ligatures (D58, N35).

Ei II

V

P

(35)

(26),

(14)

(23), (24)

E 9

t& I %^t(vo.6) E 1 4

VI (11) E 1 6

I (vo. 7)

' (34) E 2 1

Ui (P' 1 and vo. 1 — see the textual note on p. 69.) E23

V (52), % ^ (vo. 6) E185

(13)

E34 I (vo. 1)

II ^ P (35) See also Ligatures (£34).

F12

V (43)

F13 I P4T ( I 6 : F I 3 X G 4 3 )

See also Ligatures (Fi3). F13XN5 II

VII

(32)

(11) F16

(14) F18

(8)

F22

II

(vo.

(5) F24

I

II

(8),

(vo. 4)

(9)

F26

III (6)


F27

III (6)

F30 I

II

III

V

9^(4) pfitPP (vo. 3)

9*% (5) ^ ^ ) ( 5 3 )

F3I

V

(vo. 15)

; n ) F32 II c=y^ (25)

III <=*3) (?)

V <=yfi) (50), c = ^ } (41)

VI «=<g,( i5) ,^*2S?(i8)

See also Ligatures (D58, N35).

F34

•o I ^ ^ ^ (vo. 13)

II C=W (2), ' W (2J

III Pf!) (vo. 1), "j? (2, 75% — calligraphic)

F35 I

II

(5)

(35), (3i), i t ) (18)

III <|) (5), <§ (vo. 3), <$ (3,75% — calligraphic)

V <S (42)

VI

VII

p

(17)

(15)

i (6)

F39 I I I (3, 75% — calligraphic)

F40 3^y

IV ^ (4) F42

I JM> (vo. 14)

F45

V (erasure in 26, partial examples in 21 and 22)

F46 II JfjP (vo. 1)

F51

M II (30)

G i

I

II

III

cj

(12), Pj) (2), Jg (vo. 17)

(32) , < J^M(34) ,^M-(32) ,^ C ^ (3)

(4), J^"J (8), J@=> (1, in group), J0=j (vo. 2), (vo. 2)


(Gi)

V

VI

VII

( v o . 2 ) , ^ ( 3 i ) , ^ ( v o . 7 ) ,

(10), i t (11) (vo. 8), J^t (7), ( 2 )

4 (15)

Fr. ^ j ( A 4 ) ; S^, (Di)

See also Ligatures (Gi) .

Gr II d ^ = - ( 3 i ) , &=*(39), ^ ( 6 )

VI c f ( i ) , ^ ( i )

VII < ? (7), ^ ( 1 5 )

G4

V (12)

G 5

(vo. 1)

G 7

II

III

IV

VII

(32), 0 (I)

(2, 75%), Ik? (3, 75%) — calligraphic

(2 )

(15)

G14 I ^ (vo. 15)

IV (gP3^)(i) See also Ligatures (Gi4) .

G17 I

II

III

IV

V

VII

( I ) ,

(3),

(7),

(1 ) ,

(27),

(3),

(2) ,<5M= (vo. 17)

(30), s l ip (38), J S

(2, 75% — calligraphic)

(vo. 2)

(3),

( 1 2 ) ,

(15),

(3)

(46)

(vo. 1) (10)

(2), MMM=J) (vo. 1)

See also Ligatures (Gi7).

G17* I

II

III

IV

(vo. 11) — only in groups: M17-G17*, G28-G17*

(5) — only in group M17-G17* and in the account (20)

(5), (r^ (6) — only in group M17-G17*

(1) — in group S29-G17*

2 0 0 APPENDIX A. SIGN LIST

(Gl7*) V £) (41), JjP ( v o . 7 ) , ^ (38)

VI 3 (1), 5 (6), 3 (8), 1) (9)

VII J ) (5), J (8), 3 (9)

P 3 (1), i> (2), J3 (19) G 2 1

I (vo. 5)

G27

III (8)

G 2 8

(7)

G 2 9 I

II

III

(14)

(3)

(8)

V (epy (vo. 4) See also Ligatures (G29).

G35

VII ^ ( 1 5 )

G36 See Ligatures (G36).

G37 I

II

III

VI

(8),

(3),

(7)

(5)

(13),

(34),

(vo. 16)

( 2 7 ) , ^ (3i),<

G39 I

II

III

IV

V

VI

Fr.

See also

(2) , (10), g ^ = ^ (2), ^ 4 ? (13), (vo. 14)

<=^ (3), ^ M (vo. 1), ^fifit (16), ^ (19)

(4)

(3)

; ( 2 5 ) , ^ ( i 5 ) , ^ ? ( v o . i o )

(10), J 5 ^ ( i 8 ) , ^ ( 1 6 ) , ^ (16)

(B) Ligatures (G39).

G39^ V

VII

(43), P (39) — only in filiations

(7) — only in filiations

G41

(5),^M (vo.16) I

11 S ^ (33), M<r? (2i

IV

VI

(3)

(6)

APPENDIX A. SIGN LIST 2 0 I

G43 I

II

III

IV

V

VII

P 4fi£y> (3), U M (I ) See also Ligatures (G43).

(3),

(5),

(vo. 3),

(1),

(37),

(2) ,

(27),

(6),

(3),

(33),

(15), ^ ( V O . 2 ) ,

(vo. 10),

(5), & (4),

(4)

(2)

(9), Jcy (24),

(8)

(2), ^ph (vo. 10)

(37)

(7)

G47 II

V

VII

(37)

> (vo. 7)

(7)

H6

(vo. 1)

H8 0

II

III

V

(3) ,<JJ^(I5)

P0? (29),yW (33)> ^ ( 2 0 )

^ S ^ J (7), c ^ (4)

^ (45), ^ £ (29), . J S ? (53), <s9 (45)

VI ( # (2), ^ (16), ^ (7) 15a in

V

VI

(7)

(42)

( 2 ) , , (9)

16

C i III (6)

19 I

II

III

IV

(12),

(36),

(8),

(4)

(16)

(34), ^0> (34),

(5),<M^(vo.3)

(12)

(32),

V <T ( 2 7 ) , ^ = * (11),

VI ^ (3), ^ ( 1 5 ) , ^ ^ ( 1 7 )

VII ^ ^ ( 1 1 )

P ^ ( 9 ) See also Ligatures (D2, D21, E34, G14, M36, N35, Q3, Xi)

V I ,/ J (vo. 2), ^M^ (vo. 16) — usually above D21, in nfr

II (^y^ (21), (^p^ (26), (^yyy^ (6) — usually above D21, in nfr

VII ,cgM^ (15) — above D2i , in nfr

h o I c = ^ (vo. \6),^ (vo. 15)

II ^ = ^ (vo. 1), ^J> (39)

III P=^ (1), ^ = ^ (2)

IV =S (1), c = e 0 (2), ^ ^ (2)


(110) V ^P (VO. 10),

VI ^ 3 (16)

See also Ligatures (Iio).

(18)

K i

c ^ I jj (vo. i o )

II (f^ (19)

M1XM3

XL ^

V (vo. 5), fip (vo. 9), Pff (vo. 10)

M2

1 py (vo. 1)

II i ^ (34)

v 3 ^ (13), (16), (8)

VII (12)

(3), (18)

M 3 11 CJP: (6)

V <^ (vo. 8), & (vo. c.

See also Ligatures (M3, N35' ^ (vo. 3), ^ ° (vo. 5), <*g (vo. 10)

M4 f (vo. 9)

V (34), 0 (37) M6

II C^ (43)

v n (32), . M8

II (27), (3 i ) GO,

V ^ ( i 3 ) , 4 S S ( 3 i ) ,

VII p^p (iS)

(vo. 7)

M 1 2 I

II

III

V

(vo. 15)

(5b)

(6)

(44)

V I (12)

See also N u m e r a l s (1000)

M 1 6 I (J (vo. 8)

V U (vo. 2)

VI I f (11) M 1 7

1 er (4) ,L/ (3),i/ (9), u (vo.7) II cf ( 2 ) 1 ( 3 2 ) , ^ (36)


(Ml 7)

III \) (s),J) (4), (J (4), 1 (2,75% — calligraphic),]/ (1, 75% — calligraphic)

iv \) (3)

v ? ( 2 5 ) J (44), y (45), ll (49)

vi lr( i2) ,^(5) ,D cn), D (18)

VII LJ (7), \) (4)

p ^(7)i(2)

tf if Fr. )/ (A3), I/ (A3) M I 8

I

II

(9)

(38)

M 2 I

II (33) M 2 3

I

II

III

V

f

(7)

(29), j r (vo. 3)

(7)

( 3 I ) , 4 T ( I 4 ) , U (3)

(19)

Fr. I (A2)

See also Ligatures (M23).

M24

III (2, 75%) — calligraphic

M29

III

IV

VI

(7)

(2, 75%) — calligraphic

(2),

(2)

(2)

M33 I QcQ (12), pfiyO (is), ^ (vo. 16), CPp) (vo. 19)

II O O (31), Qp*d (42), CJ^M (32), »? (14)

III Oo 0 (8), ^ (5), < ^ (vo. 2)

IV J=c^) (1), Q*=$ (4)

V tf<^C? (12), 6£p (42), <2^p (49)

VI c?o(j (15), 6 0 0 (11)

VII 0 ^ ( 1 5 ) , ( 3 ^ (12)

P t k b ( i 3 ) , c W ( i i )

Fr. «<*# (A2); ' * P (D2)

See also Numerals (3).


M33b (4)

M34

(5)

III (J (6, red), \) (7, red), \1 (8, red)

V U (37)

VII U (4), I (11)

M34*

V (i (11)

VII (vo . i ) , c i (1)

M36

See Ligatures (M36).

M38 I ( ^ ^ ( v o . i o )

V <M#A (16)

vo c*w (12) P < M S J (3)

M42

II

(vo. 2)

(28)

v HH> (28)

VI ^ (4) N i

V £F0 (37) N 5 I (Q) (vo. 14)

II (& (5)

III jjM) (vo. 3)

V <jW(i) See also F13XN5 and Ligatures (F13).

N5a I e ^ (15)

II 1 (29) See also Ligatures (N35a).

N5a* II (32: possibly N23)

N n y=\ V '1) — in date

N11XN14

I Jh (15)

VII JJ (8) N 1 4

IV J?(3)

VII I i5)


(N14) P ' (6)

See also N11XN14.

N16 I cipp (vo. 13)

II =*£=* (3)

III <=$fa!5 (vo. 3)

N17 III c==S) (I)

N l 8

HI <SS) (7) N23 I

II

III

V

VII

p

(7),:

(41),

(16)

(2)

( 1 ) , '

(7), ^rrL (7) ?= (33)

S7 (vo- 3)

(5) N 2 4

I (vo. 9)

N29

M I

II

III

V

VI

Fr.

( 2 ) , 6 \ l ( v o . i 8 ) , Q J ( i )

(32), 6 ^ (30), (fi) (7),

(1)

(12), A (34)

(17)

(Ai)

(24), ^ (30), ^ ( 3 3 ) , (vo. 3)

N31 I

II

III

(4)

(29),

(4)

(28)

N33 I C^fi (2)

HI <^> (5)

See also Ligatures (N34*) and Numerals (1).

N34*

A See Ligatures (N34*).

N35 I - (10), ^=P (4), ^ (6), *==" (11), ^ ^ (17)

II = (5), *= ==» (1), ^ ^ (40), ^=M? (30), ^MM (40)

III c= =3 (8), - = ? (4), c = ^ (7), < ^ 5 ? (8)

IV <= = ^ ( 2 ) , ^ = ^ ( 2 ) , c : = ^ ( i )

V =3 (2), <=^=J (30), c=> (30), <=o (41), £» (45)

VI <y^ (3), ^ (16), — (18), <=**> (vo. 1), < ^ y (15)

VII = ( 1 5 ) , — 0 ( 8 )

P ^ = ^ (15), < = : = 5 > (19),

Fr. ^=> (A2); c = ^ (Di)

See also Ligatures (N35; also D 2 1 , E34).

N 3 5 a I ? ( I ) , 1

II H § (29)

IV g=I> (3) V ^ ( 1 )

See also Ligatures (N35a).

(vo. 2), fypy (vo. 6)


N 3 6

(vo- 1)

N37 I (ppj) (9), Tfijd (5) — as phonogram / only

II PfifiSfi1 (29), Cpfjy0 (30) — as phonogram s only

III PSSP) (8) — as phonogram s only

V PPP) (39), t ^ ^ j (1), g i g j (31) — as phonogram $ only

VII JpP (11) — as phonogram / only

See also Ligatures (D2).

N37* 1 1

I Pfipjfi) (vo. 10) — as det. only

II 25=53 (5) — as det. only

VII ijfifiii) (15), yJrJy (vo. 1) — as det. only

N40 I

V

(9), f j (vo. 11)

=» (27)

N42

a 11 j ^ (42)

p ^ ( 1 1 )

See also Ligatures (N42).

O i I fUds) (32), CZL) (25) 11 \rv(vo.6),

HI 51(5)

IV ) (4), ffi (vo. 1)

(vo. 2)

(T5), D J (vo. 2, corrected from O4)

( 3 ) , t ^ ( 7 ) , @ ] ( 6 )

(5)

V

VI

VII

p

Fr. fi U (A3) See also Ligatures (Oi;also N35).

O4 01 I

II

III

v

VI

(3), i^V (3)

(34)

(6)

(vo. 5)

(1), dW (vo. 2)

0 6 II

III

IV

V

[15)

(6)

(2 )

( i 3 ) , i ^ ( 4 o )

VI (Pj (1)

See also Ligatures (06).


O29 I j j ? (4),JjV (vo.11)

II = 0 ( 2 9 ) , ^ ( 3 8 )

III <=Jp=y (4)

V czJ>= (vo. 5)

VI Jh (12)

VII - 4 * (is) 0 3 4 I = Q f o (10)

II ^P&P (35), c = ^ (24)

V - < = J ^ (33),crrO=5 (VO. 10)

VI «XM (10)

VII '=*xffiPs> (vo. 2), ^ s j ^ (9)

See also Ligatures (O34).

O35 (vo. 7)

0 3 6 X I 9


O39 I P? (12)

V *o (16)

O49

o I <$) (6),J)(vo.i7)

II (J(6),^) (vo.2),<J3?(i6)

HI (0 (vo. 3), yV (4)

V ^D (15)

VI <§) (8), <g? (vo. 3)

See also Ligatures (O49; also N35).

O50 11 cW (35) See also Ligatures (O34, Q3).

O50* O

I

II

(2), &) (17),

(30).

(vo. 6)

P i c I

II

P

(vo. 2)

(4)

(7)

P5

*? V

VII

(vo. 3)

(vo. 1)

(vo. 1)

P n

(vo. 3)

Q i

b I (vo. 1)

VI Mfi (8) See also Ligatures (Qi).

http://vo.11


Q3

• I ^J)(9),JJ(2)

II ^(33),S3J(8)

III M>{7),M,(7),4M,U) IV t^J (4) V £j (46), (45)

VI m (12), ^ (6)

P £4(7) Fr. £6(C) See also Ligatures (Q3; also O34).

R i e II (43)

R 4 I <SPJ (vo. 16)

II d § (20)

See also Ligatures (R4).

R8

r 11 li (31)

III ]) (1) — calligraphic

R n

vo . 1

R19

II (1)

S23

AA II (JJ (23) III cfMMCM? (8)

V ^ W ( 4 7 ) , ^ V > (33

VI J J (14), < M ^ (20)

in columnar text)

S28 I

II

( 6 ) , ^ (vo. 16)

(41), MM) (41), / 0 (vo. 2), J (44)

S29 (5), ,V (6), IS (10), U (vo.6),U(J (V0.9)

(30), Jj (39), 4) (vo. 2), i|J(39)

(5),^(vo.i),|(6)J(6)

I

II

III

IV

v "0 (43 ) / / / (28), u\) (3)

VI ^(fi)J(6)J (13)

(1), P (3), ^M (4), U (2)

Fr. (B)

S34

II

(vo. 12)

(38), J (38)


(S34)

III (4), JJ (3), 1/ (2,75% — calligraphic)

IV \) (1), \) (4), V (3)

v T (43), y (45), i (42)

VI (15)

S38 I D (1), U (vo. 18)

11 1) (1), U (V0.5)

in 5 (1)

V

Fr.

(18), JJ (30), \\ (40

(Ai) S42

(13)

S43

(vo. 10) T n

/ V (28)

T12

II (39) T13

II (vo. 3)

T14

IV

V

p

(3)

(46)

(13 —for S39)

T19

I ;i3) T21

I " % ( v o . 4 )

II <^J (26), (43) T22

1 U (14)

III 1 (8)

v y (39)

VI t (3) See also Numerals (30).

T24

3 V J W (12)

VI <§? (8) See also Numerals (2 dar.).

2IO APPENDIX A. SIGN LIST

T 2 5

I (5)

II W (34)

HI W (8) T27

i v §Sg=p, ( I ) , < S 3 J - 4 ( I )

T28 I Jjjy^fi (16), ^fi (vo. I)

II ® ( I 3 ) , ^ M ( 2 9 )

VII j ^ L f l ( 3 )

See also Ligatures (T28).

T35

II (39) U 2

I ' ( v o . 4 ) , d L ( v o . 2 ) ,

11 %L* (32)

III <JJ (vo. 2), cj^o (7),

V <Z^ (vo. 8), < § ^ (4)

VI <5L (6) See also Ligatures (U2).

(vo. 4)

(3, 75% — calligraphic)

U 7 1 <S^W II J ^ (35) III ^ J 7 (vo. 1)

V 5 ^ (14), ^ ^ (34), < S ^ (52)

Fr. ^ ( A 2 ) ; ^ ^ > ( B ) See also Ligatures (G29).

U 9 Lt>

(16)

(6), \) (vo. 2, in restricted space)

( 6 ) , ^ ^ (7, red), 6 \ ) (8) ,

I

II

III

V

VI

VII

Fr. ^ \ \ (A2), ]} (A4) See also Ligatures (Q3).

5 b (8, red)

(35), Nb (11), < ^ (37)

( i 2 ) , ^ V \ ( i 5 )

\ (vo. 1), tf ^ (1)

( 2 ) , ^ f ( 2 )

U 1 4 I

II

(7),

(vo- 2),

( 2 )

(36)

U l 5 JJ I = M ^ ( 8 )

III ^ ( v o . i )

V (27) U 1 7

^ IV (4), (3) .J/ (vo. 2)


U 2 0

II

VII

(30, as det.)

\) (10, as phonogram above W24) U 2 3

(11) U 2 6

V (vo. 3)

U 2 9 II

III

IV

V

VII

p

(2)

(3)

( i ) , ^ ( 3 ) , ^ ( 4 )

(34)

(10)

(16)

U33 II

V

VI

(32)

(46), also

(18)

(29, corrected out of Mi 7)

U36

I

II

III

(i:U36xD28), \j (vo. 18)

( i :U36xD28), \j (vo.5)

(1)

Fr. J (Ai) Ui09a

(vo. 3) V i

V (8), Vj> (7)

VII j M ^ ( i o ) , ^ ( i 2 ) See also Numerals (ioo).

V4 II

V

P

(3i)

1 (20)

(18)

v7 II A) (38)

V J) (vo. 9), tfb (vo. 10) V 1 2

VII ( I I )

V l 3 I

II

IV

V

(8),

(1),

(2), *" } (1)

(vo. 2), <5£j) (46)

' ( 8 ) , ^ f (vo. 5), < ^ b (3),

(1), c g ^ (39), i ^ J (3)

(vo. 13)


V l 5 I

V

(6)

(27) V19

I TP(IS), '

V Ppfi (47), Jrf (54)

VI V (20)

VII J (3),

P W " ( 2 )

Fr. ^ (A5)

(4)

V20 See Numerals (10).

V23

J I t f ^ (12),

II [f (6), J ' (vo. 2) — both in restricted space

(12), / / (14), / * ' (vo. 1)

III P^ (7)ff~ (8)

V / ^ (11), ^ ^ ( 1 2 ) , ^ ^ (35), J ^ (47)

VI J^(i),f^(i5)

P / ^ 7 (2)

Fr. ^ * * (A2); ^ (D2)

V24

II

V

(39)

(3), LJ (i i V28 4?

(16), XL (1), U (vo.4), U (vo.8), [j (vo. 13)

II

III

IV

v \j (28), jj (8), [j (16), D ( 2 9 ) , U (49)

VI U(7),I(3), Q(n)

(38), M (27), Q (vo. 3), [j (vo. 1, reinked), \) (42)

(4), IJ (7), Jj (8), c M (vo. 1, correction), J (2,75% — calligraphic)

(3), D (4)

VII I . 5)

(13) V28*

V \f (40) — only before R4*+Xi , in personal names

V30 (6), (1), I ^

II ^ J ^ (40), S ^ (34),

III c y ^ (4), ^ 0 > (1),

(2)

(i),C* (vo. 2)

(vo. 3)


(V3o) IV

V

VI

VII

( I ) ,

( 2 5 ) , (

(13)

(9)

V (1), <M2t^ (2)

(15)

V 3 1 ^ ) (16), I ^ J (16),

I I c ^ J ^ ( 4 o ) , C ^ ( 4 0

HI ^ J ( 7 ) , ^ \ ( 5 ) ,

IV ^ ^ ( 2 )

VI

VII

P M> (i9) See also Ligatures (D21, D36, G29, N35, Q3, Aai*)

(3), ' j ^ (vo. 17, in restricted space)

(42)

(3) J ^M> (vo. 1), \ \ (2, calligraphic

(4)

N(i5)

W 3

^ 2 7 II (40)

W9 V (40)

W i o II <J (34)

HI ^ ( 6 ) W 1 2 ^

>S> 1 ^ y (vo. 15)

II JJ (31), ^y(fi (41: see the textual note on p. 46)

in J H (5), m (6) IV <2S^ (3), Jj (4), 2 ^ 9 (VO. 2)

v J S (25) See also Ligatures (W12).

W14

I I (9)

II (vo.4), J (1) W18

II

V

VI

f ^ (10),

J (32),

J> (37),

(18)

(vo. 6)

(33)

(45)

W19

II

III

IV

V

VI

(10), < > (vo. 3)

(2), A (38)

(5), Q> (1, 75% — calligraphic)

(3)

(36), J (48)

(20)


W 2 3 II

III

(vo. 3)

(8)

W24 I

II

IV

V

VI

VII

(i)M

(26),

) (3) ,

(48),

(20)

(10)

(vo. 5), ,

(vo. 2)

(I)

(36)

(4)

See also Ligatures (N35). W 2 5

I

II

III

IV

P

(vo. 3)

(28)

(6)

(2)

(6)

X i I O (3), ^ (1), ==> (12), <=? (7), *? (vo. 15), — (2), 6 (5)

II <=Q> (9), P, (43), ^ ° (vo. 3), a (28), J) (42), J (vo. 1, reinked ^),

Pf, (vo. 3), JT (vo. 4)

III yp (4), ^ (6), <=> (vo. 1), ^ 3 (8), P=^ (3, calligraphic), £ , (5), O (7)

IV ^ b (1), a (1), c ^ (3), a (2), ^ (2), c 3 (4)

V M? (49), ^ (34), <$ (37), ^ P (5), O (15), 9 (29), c=> (34), o (45), <Jb (vo. 5)

VI ^> (13), O (15), ^ (12), ^ (15), ^ (1), — (17)

VII <Ji? (1), J 3 (vo. 2), =0 (4), J? (12), Q (vo. 1), « ? (vo. 1 — see p. 60)

P 0 ( 9 ) , £ J ( 4 ) , ^ ( i i ) , ' M 3 ( v o . 1)

Fr. y5 (A4)

See also Ligatures (Xi ; also D 2 i , D 3 7 , G i , G14, G17, G36, G39, G43, I io , M 3 , N35,

N42 , O i , 0 6 , O49, Q i , Q 3 , R 4 , R 4 * , U 2 , W i 2 , A a i , A a i * ) .

X 2

Q II

v (19)

W30)

x4 II

V

VII

(15)

(32),

(30),

(8),

(32)

r> (31),

(11)

(33)

Y 2 I

II

III

IV

V

VI

VII

p

(3),C

(26),

(8),

(4),

(34), -

(20),

(10),

(11)

(15), (vo. 16) (2),J5

(43) ( 8 ) , ^ 9 ( v o . 2 )

i<h),C^J (4, reinked)

(34), J=! (vo. 7), <^P? (2), cP^ (47), <£=0 (36)

( 2 0 ) , - = v ? ( i 4 ) , M S i ? ( v o . i )

(15)

Y 3

(vo. 17)


(Y3)

Y5

Y 5 *

Zi I

Z2

0 I I

Z 3 *

/

z4 / /

Z4*/Z49 11

.. fD(v)

... n<*n« V flll (vo. 1), l i \ (2)

VI « fs (vo. 1)

VII (TU (1), O (vo. 1)

r O w

I "cj) (4), ^§S) (6) — as ideogram in mn "sheet"

I Jy> (vo. 3) — as phonogram mn

VII yj (6) — as phonogram mn

See also Ligatures (Y5*).

1 9 (3), S (3), 0 (10), I (vo. 7)

II 0 (2), ft (29), 0(43), 11 (vo. 3)

in a (7), 0 (4), 0 (7), n (8)

IV ft (1), 0 (3) , 8 (vo. 1), & (1)

V 0 (43), 0 (vo. 3), CM (vo. 1)

VI 0( i5) ,J?(vo. 3)

VII 0(i5),Ll(vo.2) See also Numerals (1).

See M33. See also Numerals (3).

J II (7 (7) — in horizontal text

V ^ (39) — in horizontal text

4 VII V (12) — in horizontal text

P ^ (3), J (14) — in horizontal text


I # (16)

II <J (29)

V fy (29)

VI dt (7), M ^ (17)

VII // (14)


. 00 M 0 0 (7) — only as part of group under Xi

11 u u (37)

III J) (6, red), Mi (4), Jpx> (8, red) — only as part of group under Xi

2 l 6 APPENDIX A. SIGN LIST

(Z4VZ49) gg V l)yU6), ^)\)(vo.6)

0 0 (5), o> Q (37), J (52) — only as part of group under Xi or F32

VII yu (5) [}[) (vo. 1) — as part of group under Xi

p W (19) See also Numerals (2).

Z5 I

III

IV

V

(vo. 13)

(1)

(1)

(34) Z6 I V (vo. 12)

II ^ ( 3 ) , V 9 (26) Z 7

I

II

III

V

VI

VII

(vo. 13), j) (vo. 16) (1),

(7) J (33) J (vo. 3),

1 (7), 4 F ^ (VO- I)

(31), S (52), j ) (13),

( I I ) , S ( I 6 ) , S ( 4 ) , C

(10), J j (6)

{IS), J (19)

(29)

(vo. 10) ,

( I 6 ) , S ( I 8 )

(11)

(10)

Z i o

II

P

( 2 ) , ^

cvo. 3)

( I I )

^ (vo. 17)

^ ( 3 3 )

A a i (vo. 2)

(4)

I c ^ D (3), Cjfi) (5),

II # 9 ( 4 0 ) , M l 9 ( 3 5 )

HI (§£> (5), ^ (vo. 2;

IV ( ^ > ( i ) , ( & ) ( i U

V ( ^ > (44)

VI <^) (12)

VII ^ ) ( 9 ) , c J ^ ( v o . 2 ) , < ^ 7 ( 5 )

P 0 (15) See also Ligatures (D21, G43, N35).

Aai* O (3) — only in nht I (fi£>(vo.i8),

v i m (15)

See also Ligatures (Aai*; also D21).

Aa2 I

II

(vo. 4), J* (15)

' (vo. 3)

Aa8 HI JJ{7)

Aa9 I fp^y° (vo. 15)

II fiH" (43)


A a i 3 - i 6 I

II

V

P

vo. 2:jm)

J 5 (vo.2:gs),cyp^ (26:gs)

) (28:^5)

(7) (jm)

Aai7 I

II

III

IV

(vo. 7)

(36),

(5)

(2)

(35) J (2)

Aa27 I

IV

(vo. 5)

(1)

Aa28

I 0 (6),/7 (11)

II fj (5), It (vo. 1)

V (j (36), (j (48)

VI (J (20)

uncertain (10) — see the textual note on p. 67.

L iga tu re s

D 2 + D 2 1

<$ I

II

III

IV

V

VII

(vo. 7), Jp (vo. 10)

(32),

i (7),

?(2)

\ (13),

(14)

(39),

(vo. 1)

(28)

(vo. 1)

D 2 + D 2 I + N 3 7 + I 9

III ( I ) , (3) — calligraphic

D21+I9

Fr. (A5)

D 2 1 + N 3 5 V (23)

D 2 1 + N 3 5 + X 1

V 2 2

D 2 I + V 3 I

(3)

D21+X1 I

II

(vo. 5)

7 (36)


( D 2 I + X I ) III

IV

V

( 5 ) /

(3),

(43),

(8)

(4)

vo. 7) D21+X1+I9

II (37)

D 2 1 + X 1 + V 3 1


D2i+Aai

III (3)

D2i+Aai*+D2i

O III aj> (3, 75%) — calligraphic

D36+V31

III (6), (vo. 1) D37+X1

D=_A I

II

III

(vo. 13)

(31)

(4), %^? (vo. 1) D58XF32

V (3ij

E34+N35

III (3)

E34+N35+N35

II (43)

E34+N35+N35+I9

=^ II (6)

F13+N5

II (32)

G1+X1

II

III

V

VI

p

(36)

(6)

(16)

(12)

(18)

G14+I9

^^ II (1)

G17+X1+I9

=^ II (1)

G17+D21

(11)


(G17+D21) Q.

Ill (vo. 3)

GI7+XI II

III

IV

(3)

(6)

(vo. 1)

G29+U7

II (30)

G29+V31

I

II

III

(vo. 13)

(9),S^(ii)

( 1 ) , ^ ^ ( 3 )

G 3 6 + D 2 1 II

VII

(22)

(vo. 1, reinked)

(vo. 1)

G36+D21+X1

II

III

(4)

(2, 75%) — calligraphic

G39+X1 II

IV

VII

(22)

(1),

(9)

(1)

G43+X1 I

II

III

IV

(vo. 8)

(39), @8 (44), c )> ( 32 )

(4)

(3)

G43+Aai

I III (1) — calligraphic

I10+D46 I

II

III

V

(6)

(1)

(i),cj^(3)

(38)


M 3 4 - X I

V (vo. 1)

M 2 3 + X 1

4 III (1) — calligraphic

M36+D21 I

II

V

(vo. 16)

(2)

(42)

M 3 6 + D 2 1 + I 9

II (25)

N34*+N33

II (vo. 1), ^Pfi (vo. 2)

N35+A1

II

(14)

(4), (vo. 1)

N 3 5 + D 5 8

I in

IV

(5)

(2)

N35+I9

-*=*£ V

VI

(3),

(2)

(38)

N 3 5 + M 3 I

II

III

V

VII

( I ) , (3)

(29), U (vo. 5),

(vo. 1), ^Jfj (4)

(12), " H (34)

(6), I S (7)

P ^ ^ ( 8 )

Fr. t S (Ai)

(12)

N 3 5 + N 3 5 I

II ^

(vo. 13)

(36)

N 3 5 + N 3 5 + O 4 9

O III (3) — calligraphic

N 3 5 + O 1

III (1)

N 3 5 + O 4 9 + X 1

TT in (1) — calligraphic

N35+V31 I

II

III

(17),

(35),

(vo. 9)

(3i)

(vo. 1), \) (1, 75% — calligraphic)


N35+W24

M

II

V

VI

(34)

(39)

(18), (4)

N35+X1 I ^ ( v o . 3 ) , ^ ) ( 5 ) , < = ^ ( 9 )

II ^ (37), ^ 3 (32),(=J (39)

III ^ (6), <y^pfi (4), ^J (8), J^ (1

IV ^ (3)

V I f (26), ^ (37)

VI ^ ^ (8), *=M?? (6), <=-§> (1)

calligraphic)

VII

P

(9), ^ ( 1 0 ) , (vo. 1)

(vo. 1)

N35+XI+F32 I

II

V

(vo. 6)

(33)

(46)

N35+Aai I 1&) (vo. 12)

II c # (38)

HI J (5), JsP (1 — calligraphic)

N35+Aai*

V (45), J t (43)

N35a+N5a

(vo.

N 4 2 + X 1

U V (21)

O 1 + D 2 1 + X 1

n (2)

O6+X1

11

v

(vo. 1), J (vo. 14)

(vo. 1)

(13) O34+Q3+O50

D (vo. 15)

O34+Q3+O5011

D O III (1, 75%) — calligraphic

O49+X1

Q1+X1

O

h

V <fi (25), # (19)

vi 2? (1)

II (2*


Q3+I9

• , II (37)

Q3+O50 D

II (35)

Q3+V31 D

II (vo. 3)

Q3+X1 D III

P

(2) — calligraphic

(2 )

Q3+X1+U9 D CD--, VII (4)

R4+X1

II (39)

R4*+Xi V

C i , (39), £M3 (46), J (45)

T28+D21

M II (14)

U 2 + X 1

V (5) W 1 2 + D 2 1

II

(5),<3£ (vo. 17)

(37)

W 1 2 + D 2 1 + X 1

(9), (6)

11 (34), ^J (36) xi+19

(19)

x i + 0 5 0 *

o V (34), <p (37) Y 5 * + N 3 5

II (1)

Aai*+Xi O

II [p (12) — in nht

III jj (vo. 1) — in nht

V J (30), pfi (34), JJD (2) — in nht

VII ^ J (6), <6 (7) — in nht

Numerals

%Pll) 4:

I ( Z I )

I

II (C? (21), (fj (23) — 0.05 sack

V & (48), j 4 (43, red) — 0.05 sack

I fl (12)

HI 6(8)


(1 (Zi))

I

1 (N33) 0

2 ( Z 4 )

/ /

2 (Z4*)

II

2

0 0

3(Z2)

III

3 (M33,Z3*)

0 0 0 , /

4

I I I I

4 0 0 0 0

'l,'l, ' / , l l

V 0(23) , ( l ( 5 i )

VI ft(i7)

VII 0 (4) See also Z i .

P Q (11) — 0.1 sack

I Jy (vo. 7), p) (vo. 13) — only in group with O50*

II J (39) — only in group with O50* (zp 2) See also Z4.

I ^ / (vo .8)

II [10 (35)

HI tlft (8)

V Q[] (1), (10 (17)

VI te(i6),l\(i4),W(7)

VII BD(7)

P LU (6, overwritten)

See also Z4*.

(zip 2)

II Cji (22) — 0.2 sack

V 6 0 (48), 0(3 (43, red) — 0.2 sack

VII J (3),(0 (5) —0.2 sack

P v (2) — 0.2 sack

III M O (8, red)

V [10(1(35, red), fiQfl (20)

VI J i (10), M (19)

VII fflj (8)

I 6 ^ 0 (12), ^ (10) — 0 . 3 dar.

II Mj) (21) — 0.3 sack

VII 0 OD (6, reinked) — 0.3 sack

P OaQ (2) — 0.3 sack

See also M33.

11 (kj(vo.i)

V 0(ffl (48), i f f iL (11, partly reinked)

VI « d 5 )

II <=y=o (19: 0.4 sack), e = > (33: 0.4 dar.)

I ^ (12)

III [j (6, red)

V U (22), ^ (vo. 9)

v i ff (2) Offi

P Li (10)


ooo oo

I

II

III

V

VI

(16) — 0.5 sack

(J (20) — 0.5 sack

(7) — 0.5 sack

(51) , | i (52), [p (35) — 0 . 5 sack

(15), [/ (19) — 0 . 5 sack

v m(n) 0&\

VI (I*

g 1 1 n 1 0 1

II (JP (23)

V ^ (40)

vi &i) (20)

VII tm (13)

P t P [) (15, reinked)

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 II <3§ (16) — 0.7 sack

I I I I I I I I

III S j ( 8 , r e d )

cyQ 5 (39), J? (37), J) (34)

(2)

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

(17) — 0.8 sack

II yy^>

(15), (8) — 0 . 8 sack

VI Jt(5)

V (1) — in date

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

II

VII

(23) — 0.9 sack

PJ (4) — 0.9 sack

10 (V20) I

III

(vo. 2)

(6, red)

V P[] (14) JS) (s\),J (15),/AJ (35,red)

VI $j (19), A (20)

VII

P

(14)

(14) 20

n n 11

in

v

(vo. 1)

(7, red)

(14)


(20)

n n VI

VII

^ ( 7 ) , (14)

(6)JfifV (12)

U),^V (a) 30

V , f y (46, red)

VII J) (3)

(16), J) (9)

30 (T22)

III L red)

V 0 (14), & (47, red)

VI \ (14)

40

V (48, erased)

60

nnn

v VII

(12)

( v o . 7 ) , 0 U L ( 5 , r e d )

( 8 ) , @ ( i 2 )

70

V (48) 80 mo

O&J (17)

100 (Vi ) I

V

VI

(13)

(10),

(20)

(14); (6 (4 — like Vi , q.v.)

2 0 0 01 V (31)

300 J V (32)

400

V J„ 1000 ( M i 2 )

V

VII

(10), J (31)

(12)

P J ^ (5)

See also Mi2.


2000 M p P (15,

3000

V (33)

(3) 4000

(3), (16)

1 dar.

-fr I ^fiJ (12)

II (33)

2 dar. (T24)

3 1 (7)

11 y (vo. 2)

See p. 153.

Appendix B. Brush Usage

THE FOLLOWING LISTS show the pattern of brush usage in the Heqanakht papyri, as described in

Chapter 3. Each list displays the column or line of the document, the brush dips used to write the

text of the document, the number of strokes made with each dip,1 and the textual units and hiero

glyphic transcription of the text written with each dip. In the hieroglyphic transcription, lost or

partially preserved signs are not indicated as such but are reconstructed insofar as possible in order

to gauge the full text written with each dip of the brush.

Letter I

I DIP STROKES UNIT TEXT

I I 22 I " " ^ ^ " " " " t S j f a & •^-1 (»V&/1^" I '

2 25 1-2 ^ . ^ S n ^ A ;

p, 3 18

4 7 3

5 20 *?P^f7iS 6 20 4 • ,5M OT*^37!^^ (gr inserted after ^=^ was written)

=^3.43. I 1 1-2 7 22 5

8 37 6-7 4 ^ J ^ P U ^ M ^ O .

9 32 a ^ S T ^ i S 10 13 8

11 22 8 -9

12 17 1) •

• ! \

13 16 10 L e J l s = l O N X (over erased

14 15 <=£= W ^ (over erased

15 36 11 ^ ^ r a M ^ i C \ Q c n 16 17 A — o ^ ^ J S r

17 20 n i ^ J ^ J ^ 1 ( n over incomplete erased H)

18 27 12 PU~P~~SJ:+ 19 15 - & r a —

20 16 13 ^ " ^ P ^ , (^f over erasure)

33 \^JZJP^\^T 22 24 P f u J - J ^ ^ ^

23 26 14 1 i > /AAMWt S 1

5 24 15

25 16 "kJ\\k^ 26 37 _lk~~ fn^j\n,rajyk-' 27 25 15 tJPZH^ifi 28 25 16 l^\X*Z^

5-6 29 27 Jk^T^^^Pf1^ 30 22 16-17 4^ jBr** * T ^ ("""•» inserted after »«» was written)

31 26 = f c = & ~ j n ;

1 Strokes are more indicative of brush usage than signs, since the latter may vary in complexity. Although stroke count alone does not take into account the volume of ink expended with each stroke, most dips were used for a representative range of shorter and longer strokes, so a simple count gives a fairly good approximation of the scribe's use of ink.

227

228 APPENDIX B. BRUSH USAGE

I

(6)

10

II

12

13

DIP

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

4i

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

5i

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

7i

72

73

74

STROKES

22

15

12

21

13

13

15

20

19

10

26

24

16

13

13

25

23

24

17

31

15

24

29

10

12

23

9

3i

27

17

28

19

21

7

14

19

24

34

11

8

25

25

15

UNIT

18

18-19

2 0

21

22

23

24

25

2 5 - 2 6

2 6 - 2 7

28

29

30

TEXT

31

3 1 - 3 2

32-33

34

34-35

36

36-37

37-38

38-39

i O»»« (*"** inserted after —0 was written)

hi

M = C 1 ^ ( C over erasure)

i t*#f&A _CT-V A XE

1 r ,-CD

i

• • " m J M s = i r . I ^ c = ^ - ' < D (preceding ..-CD finished with

first stroke)

\\y^ .11 o

ra •©•i

(final j ^ erased)

erased)

M J ^ ( i i i l over erased

o \ v

^ J V ^ d ^ ^ (TV inserted above preceding

0 , ^ s> i

rv ,-CD^I:

I _ J

n

.-••CD

non,^ V ^ n n n *

IZJ^KJ^J (% reinked) Wis (\ over erased j ^ )

• B. i 0

i B —<1 ^ <J <S d ' i f ! '

=g= — ^ ,-CD ft

APPENDIX B. BRUSH USAGE 229

I

(13)

1 3 - 1 4

15

16

1 6 - 1 7

VO. I

VO. 2

vo. 3

vo. 3-4

DIP

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

9i

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

n o

I I I

112

113

114

115

I l 6

STROKES

30

19

39

23

22

26

17

38

3 i

22

n

15

23

43

48

16

12

15

20

30

n

15

25

17

19

21

21

27

22

14

16

32

23

21

28

23

4 i

n

34

10

5

14

UNIT TEXT

40 \m*

4 0 - 4 1

42

44

45-46

47

56-57

57-58

58-59

60

,o\\; M? 1

'J ><S> I -

t^. /$&&&&

'Kx* 42-43 J J

/ i V 3 0 0

A ir\«»-*=*-

CHITI

• _ _ J

,©

,-CD ft

—,| 1Q _0 <?\x_

=i *i ^ 0 0 0

,-CD 00 •=v )l W C D

J l " ^ (preceding J ^ reinked)

a

&&&& = ^ ,»°CD ft ^ ^ ^ 0000

48-49 * 0 0 *_a £ T i ^ r \ f<B 00O°

^ |cft= U l= \

r ( ^p emphasized by a stroke)

(ZZ over incomplete erased •&)

over erasec

= ^ ,-CD I

1 (—fj over erased P—fj)

«^ /CEL>o(

2 3 0 APPENDIX B. BRUSH USAGE

(vo. 4)

vo. 5

vo. 6

vo. 7

vo. 7-8

vo. 9

vo. 9 - 1 0

DIP

117

Il8

119

120

121

122

123

124

125

126

127

128

129

130

131

132

133

134

135

136

137

138

139

I40

HI

142

143

144

145

I46

147

I48

149

150

151

152

153

154

155

156

157

STROKES

14

13

12

23

13

19

27

21

IO

9

17

29

3 i

16

15

30

9

22

32

12

21

16

15

3 i

14

18

9

20

21

13

39

19

25

12

55

15

15

36

3 i

6

26

UNIT TEXT

(60) mi

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

7i

72

73

74

76

76-77

78

79

80

= ^ ,-CD S i

:mj)k

i 0

,,-CD

sO\ \

•

M«=^Oxv

raSd±A <H**>JESJ Pu^

*AJ D — J ft ,-CD CM-

^o\\.

7TJ J

J-CD MS

A—Jl

74-75 ^ T \ .-^M!

a o n ,-CD:

> D A ^ ^ M *» (preceding »«* reinked)

^ J S - I J ^ K ^ B I (Ias t i-5 groups erased)

4 1 J ^ k T ^ i k (preceding «c^ reinked; f

over erasure)

• raj^: •raJkV

i<^<jw

\r\\^ ^ A — n

mVMJM

<j j


I

VO. II

VO. 11-12

vo. 12-13

vo. 14

vo. 15

vo. 16

vo. 17

vo. 18

vo. 19

DIP

158

159

160

161

162

163

164

165

166

167

168

169

170

171

172

173

174

175

176

177

178

179

180

181

182

183

184

185

186

187

188

189

190

191

192

193

194

195

196

197

198

199

200

STROKES

22

30

38

12

18

32

28

33

23

36

16

24

30

26

37

29

22

34

26

27

10

6

18

22

16

17

59

34

4 i

30

26

14

29

22

18

16

44

22

61

27

n

24

33

UNIT TEXT

8l 82 S**VA ^_S ^

83 m^j'h

8. k^C-<D(n

85

85-86

87

89

90

8—J .

, A •

91

92

_JJkOxx/i*""~4.

$ ^ * = ^ O x x

\ • 1 I <i <i <i

(preceding j ^ reinked)

L J t JMM>«\ LA s L J

92-93 M f ? , 94 ^JfJZ

95

96-97

98

n i ^ B l § § l (3 groups erased)

;J, (over erasure)

4 in 1 , S * — " n W

K H ^ 1 ^ '

989 HITP-"^MP^# 1 0 0

1 0 1

. © S i _ „ o

1 0 2

103

104

105

106

1 0 7 - 8

" T J W " " " ' ! ^ " * 5 * ' (T over erased ?)

JUPfPM

, 4 — D l _ J

• "O- 1

109 k_a\

P l i

If^

I — f l ^ a . _ y g i D j

72*1. SOW

o<

: llx$

i C T I ra . 0

10


Letter II

II

i

1 - 2

3"4

5a

7

8-9

1 0 - 1 1

1 2 - 1 3

14

1 4 - 1 5

1 6 - 1 7

1 7 - 1 8

1 8 - 1 9

20

20—21

DIP

I

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1 1

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

3i

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

4i

STROKES

29

32

24

22

33

29

20

20

23

6

13

24

36

23

19

18

24

25

21

27

36

15

19

12

25

10

39

35

16

3i

26

24

28

32

26

22

29

13

22

19

15

UNIT TEXT

1-2 v*:

2-3

4

4-5

6

10

11

12

13

14

15

1 6 - 1 7

18

19

20

21

22

23

23-24

25-26

26-27

27-28

29

2 9 - 3 0

£^ JSu. d

i o n i ?

OXX-

4 _ J U » » 0

c ^ l '

4_J-

if! *ftMfta* f \ ffi im «*«W f \

£==/ ] je*M#\ A**M* K ^ D ft ft ft ft ft Ii _

ii^ J ^ ^ B . w (preceding «*=> reinked)

1 ft ft S L J ^=a-

2 A ^ . W ^

ij H #>M&f*K If « « * W l j ft ft ft M }

'II - s ^ T

AWVW .£=1. .ZJ -Z f f t ft ft '

«***» / l f \ (~g~)

»«» z) i r \ »«

( ^ $ erased)

over erasure)

jl"

ft ft ft D i^±^ n ^

111 , 0 1

fl r-B—1 «"««« \

L /**£#«* ZJ ft ft ft L

A_-J \?\ x j y , jyToooo

0000 ^ l l l l ^ j . j j l

S*o JF^SSi] D % (HZ later changed to SSS°)

ST °°° I i-=»-^ (°°° later changed to »»»»)

ooooJI^cJ 0 « 6 f °=»° ( ^ over erased

later changed to jfMO°)

' £> ©

/0000 O . . , oOO\

(0000 ^ later changed to 00 )


II

2 1 - 2 2

2 2 - 2 3

5b

5 b - 6

24

2 4 - 2 5

2 5 - 2 6

27

27 -2?

2 8 - 2 9

30

3 i

DIP

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

5i

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

7i

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

STROKES

20

15

5

22

36

24

27

37

15

24

28

13

27

20

19

16

17

10

33

26

35

33

50

25

13

21

43

32

28

15

18

15

25

25

21

14

20

28

4

23

16

2 4

13

UNIT

3 0 - 3 I

3 1 - 3 2

33

34

35

35-36

36-37

37-38

39

40

4 i

4 1 - 4 2

43

44

4 4 - 4 5

4 5 - 4 6

47

48

49

50

5 0 - 5 1

52

53

TEXT

<£^=> I 0 I 000 000 2> 0 0 0

( ^ later c h a n g e d to i>)

>_Mu=o Z) Jr" ( • erased a n d repos i t ioned) rs—i* 0 ts o '

.Ov&|JJJ, -CD

. n i M

, n i '

c 1

, u«y-0 ai

(M

&_=/]>

3 ft ft ft — yy

i W W W &&&A ^ Q S

i 0 r-r-1 r^ 8=3-s»- «S» W

O l

zi ; £ i j

__ f l_^ :M3 : (jg1 i n se r t ed as suffix o f preceding

M j ^ c j ' ^ y j f z ) ( - ^ ^ ( j « ~ » y | j over erasure)

^, J~*L -^^=* T M-L A W W t=z - S i

««S*- A—D ft ft ft

° % ^ ^ ^ ^ ZJ JT w w 5 •* -£-L L

Mil

f (ft ft ft

J

-^

i__o A

I^5»-BB-1^4__fl^P (_M over erased incomplete H M 1 I 1 m over erased ^M)

2 3 4 APPENDIX B. BRUSH USAGE

II

32

33

34

34-35

35-36

36-37

DIP

85

86

87

90

9 i

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

no I I I

112

113

114

115

Il6

117

Il8

119

120

121

122

123

124

125

126

127

STROKES UNIT TEXT

13

15

17

9 54

39

7

13

14

12

13

27

12

15

18

17

20

20

10

28

21

20

22

19

23

21

24

18

25

12

24

14

13

33

14

25

18

23

19

n

19

15

15

24

\\

(IHI^ erased) " ^ l e ; ® ( ¥ ~ over erased ffl©

•% (preceding \x reinked; % over unerased 0 )

55

V\'

^J?\M2±

56

57 A

| » C U J ]

5 8 - 5 9 "2»oxx_ ft ft ft n j a

tM^Wi. U -£—c ZJ

60 , 0

60-61 ^ U - ^ ^ J ^

61-62 M ? J ^ $ * 63 M J A S ^

D ©

64

JLP—ii [

65

66

A__fl MJ

—ill

67

68

69

70

71

72

^ UJ

A—fl__=4=

, D ^ I

a

TM^ fc "


II

(37)

38

39

40

4 i

4 1 - 4 2

42-43

DIP

128

129

130

131

132

133

134

135

136

137

138

139

140

HI

142

143

144

145

I46

147

148

149

150

151

152

153

154

155

156

157

158

159

160

l6l

162

163

164

165

166

167

168

169

170

STROKES

45

13

22

3 i

15

28

12

23

15

22

17

21

17

5

19

21

12

18

20

19

18

14

18

16

16

25

16

17

13

10

8

32

35

26

6

29

19

13

13

3 i

19

15

30

UNIT TEXT

(72)

73

74

75

76

76-77

78

79

80

9 i

92

J i ^ :

^

• a

JLP ^

n

iOXX

W

B X

81-82 P„

J37 j f l

83—84 *^e~TkMt'*=S'

T D i ^ j —©

• ^ 7 ^'j2 (B incomplete) m 1kJ!Li J P ^ T (preceding B finished with first

stroke)

84-85 &<\YZ$

86

87

87-8

88-8>

90

4_J,

Sfj\ oww It

Jjn-T^'

O v f k ^ '

JL:MI=


II DIP STROKES UNIT TEXT

44 171 19 93 £z«=»i

172 10 r H ^ ^ E r

173 18 DVT^< vo. 1 174 16 94

175 16

B

& a '

176 7 - , " n 177 20 "Ij^pll _ 178 22 95 ^f=^i=M= 179 32 95-96 O ' - ^ G h J L ^ 4 - ^ (preceding f "reinked)

180 30 ^ # p u r vo. 2 100 30

181 I

182 22 97 J^P i mJ^°

ft ft ft .

183 20 ^ ra^

184 25 98 M . T . M J « T ( M over erased ^ i 5 )

185 i 7 ^ j * r v s ft ft ft ,-CD

vo. 3 186 14

187 25 99 H ^ ! 2

188 11

189 14

ft ft ft — r - I )

o ft ft ft fip&&»!\ O ^ i ft ft ft /

190 27 S i o ^ .

191 55 100-2 [ M g ^ o ^ P I ©t 0"* 7 (^canceled by stroke)

V0.4 192 36 103 raW^-i^'M^

193 19 I^4H

194 25 mtm ^ • 11 O

V0.5 195 25 104 ^ S u f j f ! ^

vo. 6 196 21 C2\ txi^z^.

197 11 J P H = (J reinked)

198 2 ^ ^

Letter III

III DIP STROKES UNIT TEXT

1 17 1 > n T

uj_ -A ' O .

I tT* O lfl/1 " " ^

2 25

3 30 2 I i

4 23 2-3 —

5 4° -*»-«!=_'T':::AB$A**.

6 31 4 P H ^ ^ I * !

i n a ft ft ft f \ Mowwftf

7 29

8 21

O i • M ( ^ over erased f )

9 23 5 2 ^ ^

11 17

12 38

1Q.

4—0 #


III

4

5-6

6-7

vo. 1

VO. 1-2

vo. 3

DIP

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25 r.

26 r.

27

28

29

30

3i

32

33 r.

34

35 r.

36

37

38

39 r.

40

4i

42

43

44

45

46

STROKES UNIT TEXT

47

53

35

23

35

31

67

14

38

36

43

17

11 r.

5 r.

30

18

47

30

23

27

14 r.

50

8 r.

70

42

6

14 r.

35

25

15

49

34

44

35

8 -9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

1 7 - 1 !

19

20

20-21

22

23

24

o,

* S M

ft ft ft Jk '=> >

^ M D f , , , ^ l«__a

^ ^

> u *»»>*»* L2i

• ©" ft ft ft to /KKORfc (rl/S.

n

"fc -P A—fl H >, £&&&& <{\ ^Wf^feaft--

.i__D

,-CDUq

^P=^J^M-

fMMD (in red ink) n ^ (in red ink)

I J raj,

,-CD

>0, 1 (JK> over erased incomplete

C^nlffr^^S^ • 0 .

• o,

fn--mn(inredink)

l l ^ S ^ ^ 1 1 1 ^ ^ ! ' " ! 0 1 1 1 " 0 (first | erased and repositioned; HI and |]!!! in red ink)

kraj*^v>i^i^,-cDi[

fn--mNI (in red ink)

JWJ\i^.it ^J,-CD b \ ft ft ft

: _ j & = j ^ : ^ I O I ^ I _j*=n:J^^di J ^ over era

sure; Jyi corrected out of _p)

o A n •

" ^ o o O

Letter IV

IV

1

DIP

I

2

3

4

5

STROKES UNIT TEXT

25

3D

6

28

16

1

2 ^ P ! k f J '

i^p;^j' I G A^wftM


IV

(I)

3-4

VO. 2

VO. I

DIP

6

7

8

9

10

I I

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

[29]

STROKES UNIT TEXT

20

23

24

24

7

17

22

10

23

13

33

27

24

25

26

32

25

22+X

30

30

8

17

20

[19]

(3)

4

5

6

6-7

9

10

1 1

12

13

14

15

4«MP m^j\ Mi

PT~* A_fl'

4_J

— J

s

|MP JWSUWA _ZZ

A M

- J ! (.==. reinked)

IP

n i , C2

h*j%:

A c c o u n t V

V

2

3

4

5

9

10

11

DIP

I

2

3

4

5

6

7r.

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

STROKES UNIT TEXT

21

3

29

20

15

13

7 r.

8

2

34

6

25

9

15

6

10

2

3

4

5

A ^ ^ I V I

Oil I

k O ' 111 e #>&&*& \ Axt&xQ l| _Z±.\j *-"— ca >t-i.

PIS SIE^JI4

^ ^ . - C D ^ n l l (f over erasure)

I f M-M "™ (f over erased »,»)

n n n " B (in red; S«° changed to I with new dip)

»*»"=VCD

n

9 ^ A ^ D ^ > (^= over erased <=)

10

32


V DIP STROKES UNIT TEXT /CD SB

29 44

47

ft ft

(11) 17 14 (10)

18 14 =V<D||I

19 10 11 f 11 .-"CD (first I reinking last I of preceding 111)

20 r. 3 r. a n s r (in red; n erased and repositioned)

12 21 52 11 —&H<a>'Z1*Z? AjeXt 12-13 22 14 11-12 ! W^M-e>-.Sf

13-14 23 39 12-13 K ! ! ^ ] ^ « % ^ p ( K ! ! » l ^ « \ over

erased |nj][ (?) and f j.-"CD 111, with III in red ink)

24 10 \n^n

15 25 27 14 V^ '&K!!< 16-17 26 38 15-16 i # m i m L n | 1

is 27 38 17 W r a P f e T Z 2 : 19 28 15 ^ " ^ ' J I

20 29 18 18 i j+l*^ 1 1 1

21 30 23 19 2T^Z^$»n

21-22 31 19 19-20 1*^ ^ fi) I W$

22-23 32 18 20-21 * ^*~~* c =Q^j | I ([ over erased II)

24 33 24 22 i-«=»Jr":}Hl|n (-»=»-erased and repositioned)

25 34 15 23

35 13

B

J 36 14 s 26 37 11 S t

38 14 ^ ' L @

39 15 ==&>^H(I erased at end) A 26-27 4° 23 24

28 I2 226 25 E L : P + T \ ;

43 12

26 All Q v—=.Jff (J corrected over l\)

30 45 34 26 r r^ i r f *J^J L_l I /WIM^ O ft ft ft iWW>W * ^ ^ - I

30-31 46 38 26-27 ~»3A, •o«

25 27-28 2 d r 4 « ^ «

48 35 29 ^ . I - T " ^ i n ^ " w ( ^ erased and repositioned)

33 49 17 30 f&<=^'u\ »-»

50 30 ^ . i _ _ c ^ n n S (-o- over erasure) 1111

'If 34 51 16 31-32 I01111E

52 24 . L ^

53 27 L o J ft ft ft

35 54 19 33 ^VftnllSS0

5 5 r. 7 r. 34 n 11111 (in red, over erased f J^ ft 111 in black ink; final

in red reinked)

36 56 26 35 ^ £ S

n ^000

57 9 nn 0 0


V

37

38

39

39"

40-

4 1 -

42-

-40

-41

-42

"43

43-44

45

47

48

46

49

49-50

5i

52

53

54

vo. 1-2

vo. 3

vo. 4

vo. 5

vo. 6

vo. 7

vo. 8-10

DIP

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67 r.

68

69 r.

70 r.

71

72

73

74

75 r.

76

77

78

79 r.

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

9i

92

93

STROKES

32

21

21

37

6

30

37

39

13

5 r.

3i

6 r .

1 r.

20

11

12

27

7 r .

39

19

25

8 r.

32

15

24

26

29

18

45

37

22

29

22

32

35

66

UNIT

36

37

38

38-39

39-40

40-41

41-42

(4i)

42-43

(42)

(43)

44

45

46

47

48

48-49

50

5i

52

53

54-55

56

57

58

59

60

TEXT - 1111 n OimtV ^ f t m (f o over erased [Pf)

-*as*[

Si

n

I (^1 erased)

T O ^ ^ K I I o v e r erased &)

M J ^ U 0 IT, « (~ over erased p us

III o

fi (in red, after preceding j§J over erased ll", in red)

fJ^l\JJ)k * °°i> (in red, after first preceding ^ )

I (in red, after second preceding gf)

t-—M* llWI^Mxx

iJ°1km

n p o ^ (in red; nl later changed to | n l , in red)

^ ^ 1 0 ftnnmi ^ (nn later changed to n n n ) m A _ n JSKSWWA v ft ft ft

i \ « « U (* half inked) Q r l l H ] " ! ^ ^ ^ half inked)

n.PiPi /• ,\

fti n (in red)

III~H*I=-

- ^ ^ S ^ J r ^ u i a ' ° ° ° (•** erased and repositioned)

a V 2 ^ t l " ( 2 V 3 over erased gft];! ') • ftnsr

over

1 iu U~^ 1 L 1 over erasure)

N o l L w - l

— J . • nnn

61-63 4->]

AccountVI

V I DIP

1 1

2

STROKES UNIT TEXT

16 1 , ^ J ^

13 I M I M

m


VI DIP STROKES UNIT TEXT

2 3 11 2 j&l ' ^ l j&s . ( •^ over erased f)

Jl 2-3 4 29 2-3 J X

4 5 15 4 _ J d H h > «

I I I I 19 I I

I I / 1 4 12 19 11-12

4-5 6 28 4-5 P j ^ ^ ' • o ^ rJ [ ] D t J (o over erased § )

5-7 7 44 5-7 ^ ! ! i Z i ^ ¥ ^ 0 M ^ 8 18 H^in1 "

8-9 9 32 8-9 n^J-Co^^V]fr"" 10 10 16 10 J k l r f m

14/12 13 36 12-13 c = f l - I n ' " M ¥ ^ ^ (I nl" later erased and

changed to f "ll)

12-13 14 35 M I - C D — - Z L ^ J P 15 10 J°J

15 16 19 14 - J k - ^ ' T I I f

««M«\ ffl ft ft ft

JL^ilH-°.3 16 18 31 15 k Q i ^ « . l l

16-17 19 14 15-16 i'Pn(C\

20 17 ^ l ^ J ^ ^

18 21 27 17 ^ j f t J l l M T ' (« two-thirds inked)

22 7 ^ ST in ( one-third inked)

19 23 7 18 n | | | r 20 24 33 19 M £ | 2 f f f n ; ; ! « vo. 1-3 25 30 20 L p f E S I ^ B ^ r a l k l k ^ 1 ( n over partially erased 11)

Account VII

VII DIP STROKES UNIT TEXT

33 1 fflrtcM1^^ 2-3 2 24 1-2 ca

3 12 ^ n f t n °o (preceding -«s>- and ca reinked) D

4 4 27 3 f 11 •"'m"ft|°°°°.WJ,<E] (°°°° later changed to °°°)

5 5 15 4 J ^ 0 - H h ca ( n later changed to ca ft)

5-6 6 30 4-5 0°° J ^ ^ 1 *^?»^_^Jf (°oo later changed to HI00)

6-7 12 5-6 ft^HI ca (HI later reinked to 000, ca later reinked)

7 8 23 6 ^ > ^ f e _ 2 t f t »

9-io 9 38 7 ^^^—"¥^©1

40 7-8 aXwM^Bi 12 45 1? ^ ^ ^ ^ U A n ^ ^ M,nnn

13 13 23 9 ^ j ^ w p f t l " 1

14/8 14 38 10-11 Z i n l ^ f t n i ^ V ' «

15 27 —TSO'V 15 16 26 12 ^ \ J , l ^


VII

(15)

vo. I

VO. 1—2

DIP

17

18

19

20

21

22

STROl

28

31

6

36

33

43

STROKES UNIT TEXT

(12) *** J ^ V ^ : " ^ (\ and ,-CD partially reinked, with

same dip)

& B & * M ^ I ( M ^ ± H ^ erased)

K ^ | (over erasure)

-WIl lH^ (-• sure)

13 ^rfn^rM1^^

over era-

13-14

^ I b S l = = 1 reinked)

! , C - J ^ l (preceding

Account P

P

1

2-3

3-4

18

5

6

7

8

9

10

1 1

11—13

14-15

15-17

19

vo. 1

DIP

I

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

STROKES UNIT TEXT

24

50

33

12

15

21

26

22

13

12+x

18

35

3i

45

13

16+x

19

1

2-4

4-5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

13-15

16-17

17-19

20

2 1

,(lf fi\ ft ft ft rv^ftr::: ,-CD^

G 3 3 G G 3 S \sy ^ * ~ O

AAAAAAAi sE,-cDTTn

T \ J^M% (erased and repositioned)

^ W ^ f n (n written over || without erasing)

^nn^ . n 11

? I

HIM >«« nnvw^nnnn , ,• nii'*~~_.(-n I ^ n n n n (preceding ,„ _ j © ^ HI .

reinked)

M 1 « 3 » ! W T ^ (perhaps after erasure and correction of

preceding $)

Appendix C. Winlock MSS.

T H E TASK OF TRANSLATING THE HEQANAKHT PAPYRI, along with the other Middle Kingdom

documents discovered by the Metropolitan Museum in its Theban excavations, was originally en

trusted to Battiscombe Gunn.1 The Museum envisioned his study as the first in a series of reports

on its excavations in the Mentuhotep cemeteries. Gunn never completed his work on the docu

ments, but H.E. Winlock, director of the Metropolitan Museum's Theban Expedition, wrote a

preface and an unfinished introduction for the projected volume, the former in 1936, and the latter

perhaps as early as 1927 (n. 13, below). Typewritten manuscripts of both are preserved in the ar

chives of the Museum's Department of Egyptian Art.

Winlock's historical and archeological interpretation of the documents has been superseded by

James's eventual publication and by subsequent studies, but his viewpoint is still valuable both be

cause of his unique position as the discoverer of the Heqanakht papyri and for his appreciation of

the documents against the background of a contemporary Egypt much closer to that of Heqa

nakht than it is in our day. The text of Winlock's preface is presented in Section A, and that of his

unfinished introduction in Section B. The publication here preserves Winlock's footnote style and

spellings, with the exception of some diacritics in proper names. Additions to Winlock's MSS. are

indicated by pointed brackets.

A. Preface

It is proposed to publish the results of the Metropolitan Museum's excavations in the Mentu-

hotpe Cemeteries at Thebes from time to time, as separate phases of the work appear to have been

brought to a logical conclusion.

The documents which form the subject of this, the opening volume of the series, constitute

the first of such completed phases. The two papyri and the ostracon from the tomb of Meketrec

were found in the spring of 1920; the remaining ostracon from the Scankhkarec Cemetery in the

season of 1920—21, and the documents from the tomb of Horhotpe and from that of Ipy—these

last the Hekanakhte Papers—in the third season of the work, the winter of 1921-22. During three

further seasons excavations have been continued among the tombs of the Cemeteries without

producing any more papyri or ostraca of this class, and in the work projected for the immediate

future there is no reason to expect any better fortune. It seems advisable, therefore, to make the

collection of manuscripts as now constituted available for the use of students, even though such a

presentation touches upon questions concerning the dates, proprietors and plans of tombs which

must be reserved for later volumes of the series. Such questions it is not proposed to dwell upon

here and for the present the reader will be referred to the preliminary reports on the excavations

in the Museum's Bulletin.

The character of the Hekanakhte Papers was made known, shortly after their discovery, in two

popular articles written by Winlock using the preliminary translations which Gunn made in

Kurneh in 1922 with expansions and comments designed to give to the general reader some idea

of the human interest of the letters. The first of these articles appeared in the annual report on the

excavations published in the Bulletin of the Metropolitan Museum, Part II for December, 1922, pages

36 and following, and the second in Scribners Magazine for March, 1923, It is believed that these

articles accomplished their purpose of making an immediate announcement of the general nature

of the newly found documents, but now that this passing need has been served it seems scarcely

worth while to make any effort to call attention to the many points at which the joint authors of

the present volume differ from their own opinions of five years ago.

1 James, HP, v.

243

244 APPENDIX C. WINLOCK MSS.

More technical use of the Hekanakhte Papers has been made in the interval by Gunn, who has

quoted phrases from them in his Studies in Egyptian Syntax, and by Gauthier, who has introduced

certain of the place names in his Dictionnaire Geographique.

The writer of this Preface takes occasion to repeat his appreciation of the good fortune which

made Gunn's participation in this work possible. By chance the latter was visiting Luxor after the

close of the Egypt Exploration Society's excavations at Tell el Amarna in 1922. The Hekanakhte

Papers had just been found and had been unrolled and pieced together by the writer and A.C.

Mace, who was temporarily at the Kurneh camp during a lull in the Museum's work at Lisht.

Gunn was invited to examine the newly found manuscripts, and with them those from the previ

ous seasons, and in the short space of time left before the closing of the Kurneh camp—scarcely

more than a fortnight—he transcribed all of the texts and made a preliminary translation of them.

The documents were then taken to New York for final mounting, and Gunn's further study of

them has necessarily been made from his transcriptions and from a temporary set of photographs

made in the field by Harry Burton.

The reader will realize that Gunn has done all of the philological work in the present volume.

To Winlock fell only the task of stating the circumstances of the discovery of the documents, and

from these circumstances, such deductions as might be made on their authors, their dates, and—

perhaps less directly—on the localities involved in them. In his Introduction, however, he has been

throughout indebted for many acute observations, as well as for translations, to Gunn, who should

not only be absolved of responsibility for much which this Introduction proposes, but should be

credited with having mitigated many of its faults.

Both collaborators desire to thank Dr. Alan H. Gardiner for calling their attention to his con

temporary letter—since presented by him to the British Museum (HP XVIII)2—and for his

permission to publish it in the Appendix; and to Dr. H.H. Hall and Mr. Glanville, the latter of

whom found letter 19 (HP XVI) among the unpublished papyri in the British Museum and im

mediately offered it for publication here. Also they desire to express their appreciation of the

courtesy shown by the authorities of the Cairo Museum in facilitating the republication of the

writing board (HP XIX?) and in publishing for the first time the letter 17 (HP XVII), called to

their attention by Prof.W. Golenischeff.

H.E.W

October, 1936

Interpolated references consisting of" HP' and a Roman numeral or "Frag." refer to the Heqanakht papyri and other documents as numbered in James's publication. The footnotes in the following section are those ofWinlock.

WINLOCK S INTRODUCTION 245

B. Introduction

1. The Burial of the Documents and their Authors

Finding places of the documents

The documents which form the subject of this volume are of the following:

1—8 (HP I—VII and Frag. A). Eight papyri, apparently all dealing with the personal affairs of the Mor

tuary Priest Hekanakhte, found in the Nebhepetrec Mentuhotpe Cemetery in the tomb of Emsah,

which tomb was a dependency of the tomb of the Vizir Ipy.1

9—11 (HP IX—XI). Two papyri and an ostracon, found nearby in the mouth ofa small tomb which

was a dependency of the tomb of Horhotpe.2

12-14 (HPXII-XIV).Two papyri and an ostracon found in the Scankhkarec Mentuhotpe Ceme

tery behind Sheikh Abdel Kurneh hill, in the forecourt of the tomb of Meketrec.3

15 (HP XV). An ostracon found nearby, on the "Scankhkarec Temple Site."4

The tombs of Ipy and Emsah

The tomb of the Vizir Ipy, near which the Hekanakhte Papers were found, is typical of the more

imposing of the Eleventh Dynasty tombs at Thebes. A broad ramp ascended the steep hillside to

the tomb facade, which last was fashioned in the vertical cliff above. The entrance of the tomb, in

the center of the facade, gave into a long and lofty corridor tunneled back horizontally to the sub

terranean chapel, in the floor of which a sloping passage descended to the actual burial crypt. In

the tomb of Ipy the upper part of the ramp, on its eastern side, was quarried out of the rocky hill

side, and this quarried face provided a convenient location for the dependencies of the main

tomb—a chamber for Ipy's embalming materials and, just below, four small tombs. The uppermost

of these last had a brick doorway in the rock face and a straight corridor leading to a small square

chapel. As in the tomb of Ipy, a sloping passage descended from beneath the chapel floor to the

burial crypt (Figure (not present in the MS: see figs. 1—2, p. 4, above)). The upper corridor and

chapel of this tomb had long stood open, but when we discovered the lower passage this last was

still blocked with its original rubble masonry laid in mortar, and in the crypt below lay, absolutely

undisturbed, the mummy and coffin of Emsah,5 the owner of the little tomb.

Emsah was far from rich but his meager tomb furniture—a coffin, two pots and a headrest—

were typical of the Eleventh Dynasty, and every detail of the position, the plan, and even the bricks

of the entrance doorway of his tomb point to this tomb as having been contemporary with that of

the Vizir Ipy, of whom Emsah was doubtless a dependent of some sort. If this was actually the case,

it would probably follow that when his tomb was prepared Emsah was a subject of King

Nebhepetrec Mentuhotpe, but equally it would remain possible that he had survived the prepara

tion of his tomb for some little time.

The Hekanakhte Papers discarded in Emsah's tomb

In fact there was ample evidence that the tomb had stood open for a more or less prolonged pe

riod before Emsah's funeral. In the upper corridor and chapel in addition to fragments of funerary

1 The Tomb of Ipy is No. 315 of the official numbering in Engelbach, Supplement to Gardiner and Weigall, Topographical Catalogue of the Private Tombs of Thebes; the field number in the M.M.A. Excavations is 516, and that of Emsah 516 B. Ipy's title "Vizir" in Bull , / .£ .A 1924, p. 15. Plans and photographs in Bulletin of the M.M.A., Dec , 1922, II, Figs. 31,32,35.

2 The tomb of Horhotpe is Engelbach, he. at., No. 314; the field number in the M.M.A. Excavations is 513; of the chamber where the MSS were found 513 B. The crypt and sarcophagus of Horhotpe were discovered by Maspero (Trois Annees de Fouilles, p. 134) and republished by Lacau (Sarcophages anterieurs au Nouvel Empire, No. 28023).

3 Engelbach, loc. dt., No. 280; the field number in the M.M.A. Excavations is 1101. Plans and photographs in Bulletin of the M.M.A., Dec , 1920, II, pp. 13—15.The tomb has heretofore been known as that of"Mehenkwetrec."

4 The location, nature and probable date of the "Scankhkarec Temple Site" were described by Winlock in American Journal of Semitic Languages, 1915, pp. 29 ff. and in Bulletin of the M.M.A., Nov., 1921, II, pp. 29-34; D e c , 1922, II, pp. 19—20.

5 Written 1|'_|%(; here to be read _|^{ •**•-, Roxg, "crocodile." Cf. Lacau, Rec. Trav., XXV, p. 156. It is interesting to

note that the personal name ^LuilV'Temsah," is fairly common in the Theban district to this day.


offering tables and pots, we found some 76 stone quarry-mauls, 5 or 6 carrying-mats probably for

stone (squares of rawhide or basketry measuring about 54 cm. each way and provided with a stout

loop in each corner); a broken hoe and miscellaneous bits of wood; a filthy, crumpled-up, linen

bed-sheet; a mass of linen waste, probably used by sculptors for cleaning off their work; a quantity

of strips of papyrus pith; a bit of a small broken box which might have been used for lumps of ink;

and a pinch of clay on which a trial impression had been made from a seal. The passage down to

the crypt (inside of the intact masonry blocking) had been clumsily hacked through the rock, leav

ing its floor inconveniently steep, and when the coffin of Emsah was slid down, the descent was

eased by sweeping into the worst of the irregularities some of this rubbish from the chapel above.

Along with a lot of stones and dirt there was a much battered log of hard wood which the quar-

rymen had used for a fulcrum, to judge from the way it was worn; more bits of their leather

carrying-mats; more of the linen waste; more of the strips of papyrus pith; the rest of the small

wooden box; three more trials of the seal; a ball of thread; scraps of blank papyrus, and finally the

Hekanakhte Papers (1—8).

When buried these papyri were clearly considered as of no more value than the rubbish in

which they lay, being for the most part torn and crumpled, unquestionably waste paper. Such cir

cumstances clearly indicate that the Hekanakhte Papers were thrown away in the tomb of Emsah

at a time when a party of quarrymen and a scribe had been using it as a shelter, and, since they

were found inside of the intact masonry blocking to the crypt, the time when they were thrown

away was obviously before the funeral of Emsah.

Their condition, folding and seals

The Letters I and 2 and the Accounts 5, 6 and 7 had been partially refolded at the time when they

were discarded (Plates (HP, 7)) and Letter 3, which had never been delivered to its addressee, was

found still sealed and unopened (Plate (HP, 9)).

This last document shows clearly how all of the letters in this collection had been prepared for

transmission, for the creases and the disposition of texts and addresses in the others conform very

closely to it (Figure (5, p. 8)). The typical sheet of letter papyrus appears to have been torn to a

length to suit the requirements of the writer, from a roll which averaged about half a cubit wide

(26—27.5 cm.).The letter was started on the horizontal fiber side of the sheet at its right hand edge,

and continued toward the left. On the opposite side it proceeded from the left toward the right,

always leaving the right hand part of the reverse blank. The letter was now held first page upper

most and folded from top to bottom, beginning at the left7 and continuing, fold over fold, toward

the right, with the last and outermost fold some 4 cm. wide. A string—or tape—of papyrus fiber

had been laid inside of the folds about a third of the way down from the top, and the letter was

now folded across at this point, turned over and folded back an equal distance from the bottom,

tied around with the string, sealed and addressed.

The seal on Letter 3—presumably Hekanakhte s own—seems to have been a scarab 13 mm. long

with a simple device of seal ideograms 2 within scrolls (Figure (6, in part: p. 9)). The sealing material

was the usual fine hard dark gray clay. The trial impressions of seals, mentioned above as having been

found in the rubbish, were conical pinches of the same clay from 2 to 4 cm. long, on the bases of

which had been impressed parts of two circular seals which must have been at least 25 mm. in di

ameter (Figure (4, p. 5)). The inscriptions on them would appear to read JL^^*""""^*' a n ^

JL^P*""' , ' |j|Li.?-|. These impressions had never been attached to any sort of an object and seem to

have been either trials made in the course of cutting a seal, or merely the experiments of the idle

moments of some scribe.9

6 Another similar log stood in the corner of the crypt. 7 Letter I had to be folded from the right in order that the narrow blank margin on the reverse should come outside. 8 Thus XI Dyn. letters made a short wide packet, measuring about 4 x 7 cm. with the address written vertically.

XVIII Dyn. letters from Thebes were folded in a long narrow strip with the address written horizontally. 9 Seal from 3, M.M.A. 25.3.269; trial impressions, 25.3.267 A—C and 26.3.282.


Remaining documents discarded under similar circumstances

The circumstances of the finding of the Horhotpe documents (9—ll) were much the same. The

tomb of the Treasurer of the North, the Sole Companion, and Follower, Horhotpe, was situated in

the same row of important tombs, near that of Ipy, and was of a size comparable to that of the

Vizir's. Here the dependent tombs were sunk in the surface of the ramp and of the flat court in

front of the tomb entrance, and in the mouth of one of them were found the two fragments of

papyrus (9-10), the ostracon (11) broken in pieces with some scraps missing, small chips from two

other pottery ostraca, and two potsherds which a scribe had used as a pen-wiper. In the light of

the Hekanakhte find, everything would seem to indicate that the Horhotpe documents had been

discarded exactly as the Hekanakhte papyri had been.

In the tomb of Meketrec, the ostracon (14) together with some limestone sculptor's models,

had definitely been thrown away and buried in the filling of the upper part of the ramp. The two

papyri (12-13), a n d scraps ofa third, were found in rubbish nearby. Unfortunately this immediate

area had been disturbed by modern excavators, and while these papyri would seem to have been

buried just as the ostracon was, the circumstances of their finding were scarcely so satisfactory.

The ostracon from the Scankhkarec Temple Site (15) was found in rubbish in the neighbor

hood of the royal tomb, where it had evidently been discarded in antiquity.

Meketre" ostracon a builder's account

There should be no difficulty in estimating the nature of the Meketrec ostracon. From both its

finding place and its contents it was obviously part of the accounts of the tomb builders, thrown

away during the grading of the ramp with useless sculptor's models. In fact its association with

these sculptor's models even suggests that it was discarded after the completion of the tomb deco

ration, and this suggestion gains a certain amount of probability from the circumstance that the

ostracon was the account of a "Steward Intef" and that the name of a "Steward Intef" was added

to the tomb sculptures only after their completion. This ostracon thus can have had nothing to do

with the funeral equipment of Meketre c himself.

Remaining documents

In fact it is obvious that none of the documents in this collection were part of the funerary furni

ture of the tombs in which they were found. But it is equally clear that they had to do with

persons whose duties took them to those tombs frequently enough to give them many occasions

for leaving behind them considerable quantities of rubbish. Fortunately, internal evidence in some

of the documents makes the nature of these duties apparent.

Ka-servants' papers

Hekanakhte is designated in a number of his Papers (1, 2, 3, 8) as a |fj, "Ka-servant" or "Mortuary

Priest," and the papyrus Meketrec 13 bears as the caption on the reverse: "Statement of the land

which the Sovereign (l.s.h.) gave to the ||J Ipy." The tombs where these documents were found, as

well as that of Horhotpe, are among the largest in the Mentuhotpe Cemeteries, and each of them

must certainly have been in charge of their own specially appointed priests. Among the duties of

such priests we know that there was a daily service to the statue of the dead, and more elaborate ritu

als for the monthly and mid-monthly festivals. At the change of the year these latter ceremonies came

in rapid succession, with at least one on the First Intercalary Day, another on New Year's Eve, and a

third at dawn on New Year's Day, and again a fortnight later, on the Wag Feast Eve and on the Wag

Feast Day.10 Unless the Ka-servant lived nearby—and there is no evidence that there was a suburb at

the cemetery on the west of Thebes in the Eleventh Dynasty"—he would probably have found it

easiest to camp out at the tomb through such festival periods as entailed night and morning ser-

10 Contemporary services at Thebes are specified in the contracts of Intef, son of Mait (Peet, Liverpool Annals of Archaeology, VII, 1914-16, p. 82; Lange, Sitzungsberichte der konig. preuss. Akademie, 1914, p. 999); at Assiut in those of Hepzefi (B., A.R., I. par. 535; Reisner,J.E.A., 1918. p. 79); at Beni Hassan in the tomb of Khnumhotpe (B.,A.R., I, par. 630).

11 See below, par. 3, on the geography of the Hekanakhte Letters (apparently never written).


vices, occupying his spare time with his correspondence and leaving his waste papers behind him

when he left. Hence it should be perfectly reasonable to find documents of the priests at the

tombs and to see in the Ka-servant Hekanakhte the Mortuary Priest of the Vizir Ipy, and in the

Ka-servant Ipy the Mortuary Priest of Meketre c.

That the Horhotpe documents could belong to the same class is obvious. The accounts in 9

and 10 would be appropriate to a Ka-servant administering an endowment which paid taxes and

which had numerous serfs. The hastily scrawled note, written in charcoal on a potsherd, from a

certain Horhotpe to three other individuals (11), has the air of being merely a scribe's exercise to

be classed, perhaps, with the letter 13 (if it be merely an exercise) and with such things as the dis

carded trial seals found with the Hekanakhte Papers and the pen-wipers found here.

The remaining document of the collection—the ostracon from the Scankhkarec Temple Site

(15)—is a fragment from an account which could have dealt with any of the necropolis function

aries and their affairs.

2. The Dates of the Documents.

Hekanakhte Papers belong probably to the reign of Scankhkarec

Taking it as established that these documents belonged to the mortuary priests of the tombs in

which they were found, then it follows that they must have been written at a time when those

tombs were still properly cared for, and that time, presumably, would not have been more than a

few generations after the deaths of their proprietors and of Nebhepetrec Mentuhotpe. A more

definite dating may be arrived at by another line of reasoning which, though not susceptible of

absolutely rigid proof, is at least plausible and leads to a perfectly reasonable result.

Among the Hekanakhte Papers there are two accounts in 5 dated respectively to the 5th and

the 8th Years of an unnamed king. While the tomb of Ipy was certainly of the reign of Neb

hepetrec, that reign lasted 46 years at least and it is reasonably certain that Ipy's tomb was neither

completed nor in Hekanakhte's charge so early as Nebhepetrec's 5th or even his 8th Year.12 There

fore the date of these documents should be searched for under one of Nebhepetre c's successors,

and in this search the career of Emsah may be taken as a guide.

We have already seen that the Hekanakhte Papers must have been buried no later than the death

of Emsah and on anatomical grounds it has been established that Esmah was about forty years old

when he died.'3 We have also seen that Emsah was a dependent of the Vizir Ipy, and in default of evi

dence either that Ipy long survived Nebhepetrec or that Emsah long survived Ipy, it is justifiable to

call Emsah a contemporary of Nebhepetrec—and to assume that their lives overlapped to some ex

tent, at least. To satisfy this condition we must accept for the date of Hekanakhte 5 the 8th Year of

some king within less than forty years of Nebhepetrec's death. The 8th Year of Sesostris I does not

satisfactorily fulfill the assumed condition as it puts Emsah's birth at, or more probably after, the death

of Nebhepetre0.14 Carrying back the 8th Year in question to Amenemhat I, Emsah might have been

as much as 22 years old at the death of Nebhepetrec.'5 But even better still, pushing it back to the

12 Discussion of the date of the tomb of Ipy must be left for the eventual publication of the Cemeteries as a whole, but it may safely be taken as here stated.

13 By Dr. Douglas E. Derry, of the Kasr al cAini Medical School, Cairo, where the skeleton of Emsah is at present

(1927)-14 Calculating 8 years of Sesostris I, 20 years of Amenemhet I, 2 years of NebtawireJ and 8 years of Scankhkarec,

which total 38 years, and come as close to the age of Emsah as the latter can be judged on anatomical grounds. The order and length of the reigns of Scankhkarec and of Nebtawirec are still obscure. The highest known dates are respectively the 8th Year (B., A. R., I, par. 427) and the 2ndYear (ibid., par. 434), as here used. Doubtless both of these reigns were somewhat longer than these figures show. Furthermore, it is practically certain that 5 was still above ground in the 9th Year (see below, page (254)) and could hardly have been buried, with Emsah, before the 10th Year. Hence the above estimation is an absolute minimum, and in proportion as Emsah's death is changed to a 10th Year, and the reigns of Scankhkarec and Nebtawirec are increased, the reigns of Sesostris I and even Amenemhet I become less probable as the dates of the Hekanakhte Papers.

15 Deducting 8 years of Amenemhet I, 2 years of Nebtawirec, and 8 years of S<rankhkarec from the estimated 40 years of Emsah's life. But see last note.


8 th Year of S cankhkare c, Emsah would have been born about the 14th Year of Nebhepetre c and have

lived most of his life under him.1 ' Hence the most satisfactory date for the Hekanakhte Papers would

be the last few years of the Eleventh Dynasty—somewhat less satisfactory the eighth year of the

Twelfth Dynasty—with anything else, either earlier or later, less probable still.

Remaining documents of same date

This date happens to be equally acceptable for the remaining documents from the other tombs. No.

13 mentions a land grant from a king who could hardly have been other than Meketre c's sovereign,

Scankhkarec; 14 is, we have seen, a builder's account buried during the preparation of this same Mek

etre c's tomb, which was certainly constructed in the reign of Scankhkarec, and the ostracon from

the S cankhkarec Temple Site (15) is clearly contemporary. If we admit that the conditions obtain

ing at the tomb of Horhotpe were the same as those at the nearby and contemporary tomb of Ipy,

then the Horhotpe documents may well belong to the reign of S cankhkarec also.

A calendar for the Hekanakhte Papers

Accepting the end of the Eleventh Dynasty as the period of the Hekanakhte Papers, some additional

understanding of their contents and interrelations becomes possible with a reconstruction of the cal

endar of the time. The nearly contemporary Berlin-Kahun encyclical letter places the Rising of

Sothis in a "7th Year" on the 16th Day of the 4th Month of Proyet—i.e. to the 226th day of the cal

endar year. This "7th Year" was presumably that of Sesostris III'7 in whose time the Heliacal Rising of

Sothis took place about June 30th.1 From this it follows that New Year's Day, 226 days earlier, fell on

November 18th.19 Furthermore, it follows that in going back to the end of the Eleventh Dynasty, 120

years before,20 New Year's Day and the beginning of Akhet would be moved forward to December

17th;21 the first of Proyet to April 16th; the first of Shomu to August 14th, and the Intercalary Days

from December 12th to 16th. Within the very narrow margin either way from the end of the Elev

enth Dynasty during which the Hekanakhte Papers were presumably written, the calendar could

have varied no more than two or three days earlier or later than these dates.

16 Supposing that Scankhkarec followed immediately upon Nebhepetrec and that the latter reigned only 46 years. If Nebtawirec intervened, if Nebhepetrec reigned longer, or if Emsah died in the loth Year, the date of Emsah's birth is correspondingly altered.

17 Borchardt, A.Z., 1899, p. 99. 18 Knobel, British School of Archaeology, II, Historical Studies, p. 7, par. 17, Pl.V Dealing as we are here with seasons, the

Gregorian dates are required rather than the Julian in which the familiar calculations of Egyptian chronology are made. The date June 30th (Gregorian) for the Heliacal Rising of Sothis rests on two assumptions: 1) that the Kahun papyrus belongs to the reign of Sesostris III; 2) that the 7th Year of Sesostris III was 1880 B.C. However, since the rising of Sothis at that period changed by only one day in about 125 solar years, no probable error in either assumption would materially alter this date of June 30th.

19 Considering 1880 B.C. a leap year. 20 Always assuming that the Kahun Sothis Date corresponds with the 7th Year of Sesostris III. A flaw in Borchardt s

reasoning on this point would shift the calendar a week or more, depending on which king was substituted for Sesostris III.That an error, however, is improbable can be demonstrated with an interesting observation originating in Meyer, Nachtrage zur aegyptischen Chronologie, p. 18. The tomb of Tehutinakhte at El Bersheh dates the flax harvest to the 23rd Day of the 4th Month of Akhet, or the 113th day of the year. The career ofTehutinakhte appears to have covered the latter part of the reign of Sesostris I and most of the reign of Amenemhet II. Hence his tomb could have been decorated between 60 and 30 years before the 7th Year of Sesostris III. Thirty years before the Kahun Sothis Date, the 113th day of the year was March 16th, and sixty years before it, March 24th. Meyer quotes the Description de VEgypte as putting the flax harvest in the vicinity of El Bersheh two or three weeks later than this, in early April. But a still better case can be made out. Moret (Scenes de la Vie Privee, pp. 181, 192) shows that in the Old Kingdom flax was the first harvest of the year—particularly when it was gathered for fiber and not allowed to ripen for seed. Among the very ancient agricultural directions in R.L.N. Michell, An Egyptian Calendar for the KopticYear 1617 (Luzac, 1900), the flax harvest is placed on March 19th and 24th (Barmhat 10th— 15th); Makrizi (quoted by Michell) places it in Barmhat (March, approximately, in his day); Wilkinson, Ancient Egyptians, II, p. 398, states that flax is "sown middle of November, plucked in n o days," or early in March; Exodus, IX, 31-2, states that "the barley was in the ear and the flax was boiled, but the wheat and the rye were ... not grown up," which puts the flax as ripening with barley in the first part of April, but to be harvested for fiber in March. Thus there seems ample authority for a flax harvest in the middle of March at the season in which the Tehutinakhte date would fall if based on the equating of the Kahun Sothic Date with Year 7, Sesostris III, and it would appear that any error in the calendar based on this equation must be negligible.

21 Considering 1900 B.C. not to have been a leap year, 120 years would cause a difference of 29 days.


The shifting of their calendrical year led the ancient Egyptians into a use of the seasonal names

which, to us at least, must always be a source of confusion. The three divisions of the year—Akhet,

Proyet and Shomu—were primarily agricultural seasons and, perhaps especially among the farmers,

their names seem to have remained fixed to the periods of flood, of cultivation and of harvest which

followed the practically unvarying states of the Nile.22 Thus, while in the days of Hekanakhte the

calendar of the civil year started its Shomu on August 14th, the farmer might well consider that his

natural Shomu-Harvest-Season began with March, and whenever we lack a clear indication of

which reckoning is being used, the result must always be ambiguous. This ambiguity we shall find

existing in both of Hekanakhte's first two letters.

Date of Hekanakhte 5 (TIV), Sept. 21, Year 5

To turn now to the Hekanakhte Papers we find among them only one complete and definite date.

The first part of the Account 5 (I-IV) is an inventory of farm produce made over by Hekanakhte

to members of his household under the date "Year 5, 2nd Month of Shomu, 9th Day," which must

have been on or about September 21st. As this transfer was doubtless drawn up on the eve ofa de

parture of Hekanakhte from his family in Nebsoyet, we have him setting out on his journey at the

height of the flood. It is noticeable that by this season of the year there are none of the items of

grain outstanding which make up the greater part of the remaining accounts among these Papers.

A further point of interest is connected with entries of flax, which come to a total of 1410 bun

dles. While the harvest of flax takes place in March, the stalks must be dried before being rippled

in April or May; retting begins only in mid-July,23 and time must be allowed for the duration of

the soaking and then for another drying, before scutching and bundling. Finally, entry is made of

6000 loaves of bread which could not have been baked before the grain threshed about May had

been dried and milled. By September 21st, of course, ample time for the bundling of flax and the

milling of flour has elapsed and doubtless the summer season could be occupied as well in trans

ferring the stocks of produce outstanding at the end of harvest in the hands of tenants and others,

to the home granaries.

Hekanakhte 7, and perhaps 4, written after May 16th

While not itself dated, the Account 7 incidentally contains a fixed date which had already passed

when it was drawn up. Under the heading "What Sitnebsekhetu has" appears the entry "On the

First Day of the Month Shefboti" (line 11), which was the sixth month of the wandering year,24

and which, therefore, must have begun, in Hekanakhte's day, about May 16th. Thus this entry

would be dated at the end of the harvesting and threshing, as they normally occur in Upper and

Middle Egypt today. That the whole account belongs to about this season would seem probable

from the fact that it is a list of quantities of grain in the storehouses, reserves and granaries of a

number of different tenants or others in whose hands it would remain immediately after the har

vest but from whom, as we have seen, it would probably be collected before the end of September.

Unless the fragmentary Letter 4, from a certain Sitnebsekhetu to another Sitnebsekhetu, had some

bearing on this account it is hard to explain its presence among these Papers, all of the rest of

which appear to be interrelated.

22 This, to us, impractical, double use of the season names is commented upon by Meyer, Nachtrage zur aegyptischen Chronologie, p. 10. It is indicated by the frequent appearance of the seasons as deities (Gardiner, Personification, Egyptian, in Hastings, Encyclopaedia of Religion). Concrete cases of the use in the M.K.: Gardiner-Peet, Inscriptions of Sinai, Pl. 26, no. 90, where a visit to Sinai beginning III Proyet, Day 1, and lasting two months, is twice described as in the Shomu; Lebensmude, 88, "on the days of Shomu when the sky is hot." An example in the reign ofThut-mose IILTylor-Griffith, Paheri, Pl. Ill, where sowing and reaping are shown as the activities of Proyet and Shomu. In this case, however, the contemporary calendar was scarcely more than a month out of agreement with the fixed seasons (B., A.R., I, par. 43), and at least the greater part of the harvest actually took place in the calendrical Shomu.

23 The dates from Michell, Egyptian Calendar, and from Makrizi, there quoted, for the months of Barmudeh and Bashans (rippling) andAbib (retting).

24 Gardiner, A.Z., 1906, p. 141; Sethe, Nachrichten der K. Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Gottingen, 1919, p. 314; 1920, p. 71; Meyer, Nachtrage zur aegyptischen Chronologie, p. 8.


Hekanakhte 5 (V- VII) and 6 written late in May

The second part of Account 5 (V-VII) bears the date "Year 8" without mention of either month

or day, while Account 6 is totally undated. The former is largely, and the latter is entirely, made up

of items of grain outside of the homestead in the hands of others. Following the line of reasoning

suggested above, these two accounts should have been drawn up just after the harvest in May, and

since the second part of 5 appears to be another inventory prepared on the eve of a departure, it

would seem that Hekanakhte's second journey, in the Year 8, began about the end of May when

the Nile was at its lowest.

Letter 1 written in August

Hekanakhte was not in the habit of dating his letters, but nevertheless it is possible to arrive at a fairly

accurate idea of the seasons at which they were written from their contents. Thus Letter 1 touches

upon at least three circumstances which indicate August as its date. In the first place, an important

subject in the letter is an order immediately to lease land (11. 3 ff), and instructions as to the crops to

be sown upon it (ibid, and 11. 26 ff.).The principal season of sowing begins in October, and agricul

tural leases from time immemorial have been negotiated during the preceding month as soon as the

height of the flood and the probable return in crops can be estimated.25 This letter should, therefore,

have been written in good season to arrive at its destination by September.

Secondly, directions are given (1. 28) as to the procedure "if it turns out to be a high Nile"—a

condition which should be evident enough early in September, but which in August might not yet

be entirely certain.

Thirdly, the letter is clearly a reply to a warning written to Hekanakhte by Merisu to inform

him that his lands are threatened with flooding (11. 1 ff. and 23)—an event which would only be a

catastrophe so long as there were crops still upon it. Today the flood crops of Upper Egypt are pre

ponderantly dura, under which name are included sorghum and American maize, both of

comparatively recent introduction. In Graeco-Roman times they appear to have been principally

barley and wheat—the latter of a special "three months" variety—but the periods of cultivation

could not have differed much from the modern dura seasons when it is considered how dependent

such seasons must be upon the phases of the Nile.2 In modern practise dura is grown in Upper

Egypt in the second half of April as a summer (seifi or keidi) crop to ripen either in the latter part

of July or about the first of September, or it is sown in mid-August as an autumn (demiri—strictly

"flood") crop to ripen during November or December. The summer crop is planted on compara

tively low-lying land which can be conveniently irrigated by shddufi during the low Nile,27 and

there is naturally a danger, in years of unexpectedly High Nile, that as the flood rises late in July, it

will reach such land before the crop has been reaped. In this respect it is peculiarly interesting to

have learned from enquiries in the neighborhood, that today in the villages of Dabacieh, el Meris

and Ermont—possibly the very locality of Hekanakhte's estates in Nebsoyet—the land is so low

that this disaster is especially frequent even with the most rapidly maturing kinds of dura. On the

other hand the autumn crop is planted during the inundation on the river banks and islands and

such other lands as are too high to be covered by a normal flood, but so often is the height of the

rise miscalculated that this crop is always a gamble, and is frequently lost even though the farmer

spends his days and nights damming back the rising waters.2 Thus both of these crops are endan

gered by just such a high Nile as Hekanakhte anticipates.

25 Makrizi in Michell, loc. at., under the Month Tut—approximately September. Today, with controlled irrigation, it is not so important to await the flood before settling the terms of rental.

26 On "two crop agriculture" in Greek times see Michael Schnebel, Landwirtschaft im hellenistischen Agypten, pp. 145 ff. In connection with the remarks immediately following above, note especially sowing of barley, at Ermont in April (a keidi crop) and of an unnamed grain nearThebes during the last days of August (a demiri crop) ibid., pp. 155-6. My information on modern agricultural dates differs somewhat from that used by Schnebel. In the Oases and Nubia millet (Pennisetum typhoideum) is grown today in the dura season (Wilkinson, Ancient Egyptians, p. 402), and may have been a summer crop throughout Egypt in ancient times.

27 Only since Roman times by the sdkiyeh, or water wheel, in addition to the shddufi Winlock and Crum, Monastery of Epiphanius, I, p. 65.

28 A lively description is given by Wilkinson, Ancient Egyptians, II, p. 429 quoting Diodorus, i, 36 and Strabo, xv.


Either of these crops—but no other29—fits the conditions in Letter I, and then only within

the month of August. Hekanakhte could not have written after the beginning of September, or he

would know whether the Nile was actually going to be a high one. Nor could Merisu have writ

ten his warning before the middle of July when the Nile begins to rise most rapidly and danger to

a standing crop first becomes evident. If Merisu's warning had been sent with the first rise of the

flood in July he must have been referring to the summer crop; if in August, to either summer or

autumn crops; later than September first is eliminated. Taking Merisu's warning as referring to the

summer crop alone, and putting it as early as possible—about July 15th—still some time must be

allowed for its transmission to Hekanakhte, and the earliest possible date of Letter I is closely lim

ited to the first of August. Taking Merisu's warning as referring to a recently planted autumn crop,

still the latest possible date remains the first of September for Letter I, which therefore must be

placed somewhere in August, with any closer dating depending upon whether his endangered crop

was summer or autumn.

Introduces the Shomu

Hekanakhte makes a fourth reference to seasons in this letter which are more difficult to define.

Just after writing of the danger of the land being flooded he asks (11. 24-5) that Sneferu be sent to

him "directly after you have ploughed" with grain "out of the surplus of your victuals up to your

reaching the Shomu." The apparent association in his mind between the flooding and this plough

ing makes it possible that the two events may have come about the same time, in which case the

ploughing, itself interrupted by the flood, could have been in preparation for the sowing of an au

tumn crop about the middle of August,30 and the time set for Sneferu's departure no later than

early September. An alternative would be to consider that the crop endangered was an already

planted autumn crop which would be threatened continuously until the Nile began to subside late

in September (if the ploughing and flooding were really associated), and that Sneferu was to leave

only after the October-November sowing. The further reference to the Shomu must remain even

more ambiguous still. If the calendrical Shomu beginning on August 14th is meant, then Heka

nakhte is asking Merisu to send him a balance already existing at the time of the arrival of this

letter. If the fixed agricultural Shomu-Harvest-Season beginning about the first of March is the

sense in which Hekanakhte uses the term here, then, writing early in August, he asks that during

the current month there be sent to him whatever Merisu estimates will be in excess of his own

needs up to the first of the coming March.

Letter 2 written during the summer

In Letter 2 Hekanakhte's first thought is to describe the widespread suffering in the land due to

the badness of the Nile and to call attention to the fact that the supplies he is sending to the family

are only proportionate to the Nile's state (1. 5). We gather the impression that these supplies come

from a recent harvest which has failed with the river. The failure of either a summer or an autumn

crop could never have resulted in such acute distress as he pictures31 and therefore the spring har

vests must be those here involved. Since the last of the spring crops are normally in and threshed

ready for moving in May in Upper Egypt—or somewhat later in Lower Egypt where Hekanakhte

probably was—this letter could not have been written much before June first, and may have been

written even later.

The remaining indications of a date in the letter are open to such a diversity of interpretations

that any closer dating becomes very questionable.

29 Hence it would seem that this letter is the first record of summer or autumn cultivation before Ptolemaic times to be recognized.

30 To suppose an endangered summer crop, an autumn crop to be sown, and, of course the principal, winter crop— three crops for one farmer—is to accept a not impossible but a highly improbable organization of agriculture for the period.

31 Even with the modern controlled irrigation only a limited part of Egypt yields a summer or an autumn crop, while in Ptolemaic times (Schnebel, Landwirtschafit, p. 152) the double cropped area must have constituted a still smaller proportion, and in the Middle Kingdom was probably almost negligible.


Possibly about SeptemberfirsP2)

The only mention ofa calendrical date is at the point (1. 31) where Hekanakhte directs that "one

should begin to give out those victuals about which I wrote to you on the first of the month

Khentekhtay-perti for fresh First-day-of-the-month Festivals." As Khentekhtay-perti was the elev

enth month of the year,33 its first day was October 13th. If Hekanakhte is here directing that the

offerings be given out on the first of that month, then obviously October 13 th was in the not very

distant future when the letter was written. Turning now to the end of the letter, we find him giving

instructions for the leasing of land and for the paying of copper for its rental (1. 44), which, as we have

seen, was a transaction generally to be completed before the latter part of September. Finally, in an

earlier part (1. 28), he makes the statement that he is "spending the Shomu here." A message about his

plans for the calendrical Shomu beginning on August 14th would be quite appropriate at the time

that directions were being given about renting land in September and giving out offerings in Octo

ber, and we might tentatively place the date of the letter around September first.

Alternatively about fiune first

On the other hand it is equally possible to understand the message about the offerings as meaning

that Merisu is now to give out for the First-of-the-month Festivals, those offerings about which

Hekanakhte had already written on the first of Khentekhtay-perti. Thus October 13th would be

come merely a date in the indefinite past. Furthermore the Shomu in question may well be the

agricultural season from March to July—in which case the letter must have been written before

the latter month. In fact the supplies which accompanied the letter may, perhaps, suggest how long

before July it was that Hekanakhte wrote. After listing the rations for the family and explaining

their shortness, Hekanakhte goes on to say (11. 27-8) "You must keep yourselves going with a stout

heart until I reach you; see, I am spending the Shomu here." The allowance on which it would

seem that they are to keep their hearts stout amounts to 72.8 liters for families, and for individuals

various smaller quantities averaging from 30 to 40 liters. Since the modern Upper Egyptian fellah

considers that 33 liters of barley (1 midd, or 1/6 ardeb) is the absolute minimum on which a work

ing man can subsist for a month, we should not be far wrong in supposing that the rations sent the

household in this case would last about that long. Supposing that these allowances were actually to

suffice until Hekanakhte's return at the end of the Shomu, then they and their accompanying let

ter must have been sent around the first of June.

Letter 2 probably written in the summer following l

Whether written early or late in the summer, there appear to be sufficient grounds for concluding

that Letter 2 does not belong to the same summer as Letter I. In the first place, the state of the

Nile in the two letters appears to differ too much for one and the same season. In the one it

promises to be high and in the other it is extremely bad. Secondly, in the first letter Hekanakhte

has already received supplies from home before August and is requesting more, while in the second

it is he who is supplying the household—a reversal of conditions which would be hard to explain,

considering all of the circumstances, whether Letter 2 was written on June first or September first.

Finally, while one gets the impression from reading Letter 1 that it was written not long after

Hekanakhte's departure from his family, in Letter 2 there is ample evidence that he had been ab

sent for some time. In Letter 1 Hekanakhte makes no mention of having written before; he

apparently takes the first opportunity to rectify the matter of the allowance of Heti's son, Nakht,

perhaps forgotten at leaving (11. 14 ff); and finally he gives detailed instructions for leasing land at

Perha'a from Hau—or if impossible, from Hrunofre. On the other hand in Letter 2 it is now ad

mitted that land can only be rented next to Hau's (1. 44) and not from him; Nakht is now on a

regular allowance (1. 12); the domestic quarrels over Sneferu and "the bride" seem to have ad-

32 (Winlock's MS contains a penciled notation in this section, referring to the passage cited in its first sentence:

"which I just wrote to you: i.e., rations begin Oct. 13, letter just before Oct. 13.")

33 See above, page (250) note (24). The name in its full form, as here written, is given in the recently discovered

tomb of Senmut. See Winlock, Bulletin of the M.M.A., (Feb., 1928, Part II, figs. 40, 42-44).


vanced (11. 34 ff); and above all, Hekanakhte refers now to several previous letters (1. 34), including,

perhaps, one written on October 13th.

Probably in Year 9

These references to previous correspondence make it fairly obvious that Hekanakhte had been

absent for some time when Letter 2 was written. Therefore, if his departure took place just after

the harvest in the Year 8, it is improbable that Letter 2 could have been written on the first of that

June, or perhaps even on the first of that September, and it should therefore be assigned to the 9th

Year of the reign.

Letter J to be delivered in JulyYear 9

Apparently Letter 3 authorizes Sinebnut to close up a season at Perha'a during which the family

had transacted business with Hrunofre—probably the harvest season following Letter I, when

Hrunofre seems first to come into the family's affairs.34 The year would probably be the same as

that in which Letter 2 was written, for in the latter temporary rations are arranged for Sinebnut

until his departure for Perha'a, which was apparently to take place soon, and when such a letter to

Hrunofre as 3 would have been needed. The season for its delivery would appear to be as soon

after the harvest and threshing in May as it would be possible for Hekanakhte to receive and take

action on Merisu's data as to the amounts of grain outstanding in Perha'a. This could not well have

been before June and at the latest was probably before September when, apparently, all such out

standing produce had already been liquidated in the Year 5. Under such conditions a reasonable

date for the delivery of the latter to Hrunofre would be sometime in July.

Resume of Hekanakhte's correspondence

The reader will have readily realized that the dates above suggested for the Hekanakhte Papers are

highly problematical, and that in many cases the data on which they are based are susceptible of

widely divergent interpretations. Following the line of reasoning which the writer prefers person

ally, the history of the correspondence arranges itself somewhat as follows. In the 5th Year, probably

of King Scankhkarec, Hekanakhte had left his family at the height of the flood, shortly after Sep

tember 21st. In the 8th Year he leaves at the beginning of the summer, after drawing up the second

part of Account 5. Merisu sends him barley and writes to him either late in July or early in August

as the river rises, and Hekanakhte replies with Letter 1 during the latter month, directing that

there be sent to him any surplus of supplies above those needed until the next Shomu—by which

he probably meant the following March—until which season it would seem he expected to be

absent. It is possible that he writes again on October 13th, and certain that during the course of

the following winter several letters are exchanged, none of which are preserved. After the spring

crops are in, about the middle of May, Year 9, Merisu draws up Account 6 and also Account 7,

written after May 16th, possibly using the fragmentary Letter 4. At about the same time Hekanakhte

writes Letter 2, and on the receipt ofa version of Account 6, he writes Letter 3 to be delivered

about July first to Hrunofre by Sinebnut. In Letter 2 Hekanakhte announces that he expects to

remain at the place from which he is writing until the end of the Shomu—probably the agricul

tural season which ended in July—and the fact that Letter 3 was never delivered suggests that

Sinebnut's departure was postponed until after Hekanakhte's announced arrival when the old man

could have gone to Perha'a himself. So arranged, the correspondence covers just about twelve

months, from the middle of the 8th to the middle of the 9th Year.

That a family evidently of the small farmer class should have interests so widely dispersed need

not cause surprise. Tomb endowments were largely in lands, and such lands were often royal grants.

A case in point would be the land granted by the king to the Ka-servant of the tomb of Mek-

34 There is possibly an alternative: that the business being liquidated at Perha'a, after the beginning of the Hrunofre transaction, was actually initiated before he came into the family's affairs. In other words after renting land from Hrunofre, Hekanakhte sells through him stocks derived from previous seasons. In this case no date is obvious for 3 except later than September.

WINLOCK'S INTRODUCTION 255

etreJ35 In the reign of Nebhepetrec land must have been available in the recently conquered

North3 ' and may well have been given either directly to the Vizir Ipy or, for his benefit, to his Ka-

servant. It is true that nowhere in these Papers is property referred to as coming from such a

source. But then, being in return for services rather than to supply provision for offerings, such

tomb endowments would become to all intents and purposes the personal property of the priest as

long as he held the position. This was especially true when a large part of the consideration given

the priest was a payment outright in such expendable commodities as cloth or slaves.37 In the case

of lands, the produce was the priest's stipend, and he had the full use of the property, subject only

to his faithfully performing the services3 and to his holding the endowment intact for his succes

sor.39 Under such circumstances as these, there would probably be nothing unusual in Hekanakhte

failing to differentiate an endowment from his own property, any more than there is in his not

naming the tomb he served in his letters to his own son. Hence it becomes a very reasonable con

jecture that some of Hekanakhte's affairs dealt with Ipy's endowment, and that at least part of this

endowment was located in the North.

35 Meketrec 13. 36 After his conquest of the North, Ahmose granted lands there to his family. Winlock, Ancient Egypt, 1921, p. 14.

37 The contract of Intef, son of Mai't. See page (247), note (10). 38 The contract of Khnumhotpe, loc. dt. 39 The contracts of Hepzefi, loc. cit.

Appendix D. Chronology

THE TABLES BELOW are presented as an addendum to the discussions in Chapter 7. Table A lists

dates for the kings of the early Middle Kingdom according to the traditional or "high" chronology

as emended by recent discoveries, and the "middle" and "low" chronologies.1 Table B shows corre

spondences between the dates of the Egyptian civil calendar and those of the solar year in Year 8 of

Senwosret I, according to both the high and middle chronologies. Table C lists the beginnings of

lunar months in the same regnal year, according to the high chronology.

A. Regnal Years

Mentuhotep II (51 years)

Mentuhotep III (12 years)

Mentuhotep IV (7 years)2

Amenemhat I (29 years)

Senwosret I (45 years)

H I G H

C H R O N O L O G Y

2051-2000 BC

2000-1988 BC

1988-1981 BC

1981-1952 BC

1961-1917 BC

M I D D L E

C H R O N O L O G Y

2046-1995 BC

1995-1983 BC

1983-1976 BC

1976-1947 BC

1956-1911 BC

LOW

C H R O N O L O G Y

2010-1960 BC

1960-1948 BC

1948M1941) BC

1938-1908 BC

1819-1875 BC

B. Calendar for Year 8 of Senwosret I

E G Y P T I A N C A L E N D A R 3

A G R I C U L T U R A L Y E A R

barley harvest

barley and flax harvest

flax and emmer harvest

inundation begins

inundation crests

sowing

ClVILYEAR

1 Inundation

2 Inundation

3 Inundation

4 Inundation

1 Growing

2 Growing

3 Growing

4 Growing

1 Harvest

2 Harvest

3 Harvest

4 Harvest

5 Epagomenal days

G R E G O R I A N C A L E N D A R 4

1954-1953 BC

Dec 8 —Jan 6

Jan 7 - Feb 5

Feb 6 - Mar 6

Mar 7 - Apr 5

Apr 6 - May 5

May 6 - J u n 4

Jun 5 - J u l 4

Jul 5 - Aug 3

Aug 4 - Sep 2

Sep 3 - Oct 2

Oc t 3 - Nov 1

Nov 2 - Dec 1

Dec 2-6

1949-1948 BC

Dec 6 —Jan 4

Jan 5 - Feb 3

Feb 4 - Mar 5

Mar 6 - Apr 4

Apr 5 - May 4

May 5 - J u n 3

Jun 4 - J u l 3

Jul 4 - Aug 2

Aug 3 - Sep 1

Sep 2 - Oc t 1

Oct 2-31

Nov 1-30

Dec 1-5

For the traditional high chronology, see J. Baines and J. Malek, Atlas of Ancient Egypt (Oxford, 1982), 36; for the middle chronology, J. von Beckerath, Chronologie des pharaonischen Agypten: die Zeitbestimmung der agyptischen Geschichte von der Vorzeit bis 332 v. Chr. (MAS 46: Mainz, 1997), 134 and 142; for the low chronology, J. Baines and J. Malek, Cultural Atlas of Ancient Egypt, rev. ed. (Oxford, 2000), 36. Dates for the three chronologies vary in other publications by some two or three years both earlier and later than those given here: see, for example, W.C. Hayes, The Scepter of Egypt, rev. ed. (NewYork, 1990), I, 401; D. Franke, Das Heiligtum des Heqaib auf Elephantine (SAGA 9: Heidelberg, 1994), xiii.The emended high chronology is that currently in use by the Metropolitan Museum of Art, reflecting a reign of 38 years for Senwosret III, the last 19 as coregent with Amenemhat III. Corresponding to the 7 "missing" years of the Turin Canon: A.H. Gardiner, The Royal Canon of Turin (Oxford, :959), 16 (note b toV 18). Regnal year change on 1 Inundation 1. Dates on the left are according to the emended high chronology; those on the right, to the middle chronology. Julian dates are 17 days later. Dates in Year 5 are 1 day later in the Gregorian calendar, with the exception of 1-3 Inundation in the high chronology (December 8, 1957 lie-March 7, 1956 BC).

APPENDIX D. CHRONOLOGY 257

C Lunar Months in Year 8 of Senwosret I

N E W M O O N

1953 B C 5

18:44 Jan 5

8:49 Feb 4

23:29 Mar 4

14:36 Apr 3

05:53 May 3

20:47 Jun 1

10:44 Jul I

23:25 Jul 30

11:00 Aug 29

22:01 Sep 27

09:01 Oct 27

20:09 Nov 25

psdntjw

Jan 6

Feb 5

Mar 5

Apr 4

May 3 or 4

Jun 2

Jul 2

Jul 31

Aug 30

Sep 28

Oct 28

N o v 26

C I V I L D A T E

I Inundation 30

2 Inundation 30

3 Inundation 28

4 Inundation 28

1 Growing 27 or 28

2 Growing 27

3 Growing 27

4 Growing 26

1 Harvest 26

2 Harvest 25

3 Harvest 25

4 Harvest 24

L U N A R

M O N T H

(thy)

(mnht)

(hwt-hrw)

(k3-hr-k3)

sf-bdt

rkh-c3

(rkh-nds)

(rnnwtt)

(hnsw)

hnt-hty-prtj

jpt-hmt)

(wp-rnpt)

A G R I C U L T U R A L

Y E A R

barley harvest

flax harvest

flax and emmer harvest

inundation begins

inundation crests

sowing

For the area of Heliopolis in Year 8 of Senwosret I according to the emended high chronology; times in 24-hour format. Astronomical data have been taken from a commercially available computer program (SkyMap).Year 8 of Senwosret I began on Dec. 8, 1954 BC (1 Inundation 1). On the previous day a new moon had begun at 5:30 am, with sunrise at 6:37 am. Dec. 7, 1954 BC, was therefore psdntjw of the last lunar month ofYear 7, and the first lunar month ofYear 8 began in January of 1953 BC Dates in 1949—48 BC (middle chronology) are two weeks earlier in the civil calendar. Lunar month names not attested in the Heqanakht papyri are given in parentheses. First day on which the crescent of the waning moon is not visible at dawn. In 1953 BC the new moon began in the area of Heliopolis late enough in the day to place psdntjw most likely on the following day, with the possible exception of May 3 (new moon at 5:53 am, sunrise at 5:24 am).

Appendix E. Measures

THE TABLES BELOW are presented as an addendum to the discussions in Chapter 8.' Each shows

correspondences between various systems of measure. Table A displays measures of volume for

grain—ancient hq3t "heqat," jpyt "oipe," and h3r "sack"; metric liter; US quart and bushel; and the

modern Egyptian iL£ "kela" and ^J "ardab"—as well as weight and caloric values. Table B pre

sents measures for area in the ancient st3t "aroura," hectare, US acre, and modern Egyptian ^Iji

"feddan." Table C shows measures for weight according to the ancient dbn "deben,"2 metric gram,

and US ounce. Table D is a list of relative values and equivalences.

A. Grain

i heqat

i MK sack =

I NK oipe =

I NK sack =

i liter =

I quart =

i bushel =

i kela

i ardab =

i heqat barley

i heqat emme

heqat

i

10

4

16

0.21

0.20

6.31

3 4 5

41 .67

=

r =

MK sack

0.10

1

O.40

1.60

0.02

0.02

0.63

0-34

4-17

liter

4.80

4.80

NK oipe

0.25

2.50

1

4

0.05

0.05

1.58

0.86

10.42

m3

.0048

.0048

NK sack

0.06

0.63

0.25

1

0.01

0.01

0 .39

0.22

2 .60

lifer

4.80

48

19.20

76 .80

1

0.95

30.28

16.50

1 9 8

quart

5.07

50.72

20 .29

81.15

1.06

1

3 2

17.44

209 .22

weight in kilograms

3 .384® 705 kg /m 3

3 .768® 785 kg /m 3

bushel

0.16

1-59

0.63

2-54

0.03

0.03

1

0-54

6-54

kela

0.29

2.90

1.16

4 .64

0.06

0.06

1.84

1

12

ardab

0.02

0 .24

0.10

0.38

0.01

0.005

0.15

0.08

I

caloric value

12,182.4

13,338.2

cal @ 3. 60 cal/g

cal @ 3.54 cal/g

B. Land

1 aroura =

1 hectare =

1 acre

1 feddan =

aroura

1

3.6278

1.4681

1-5237

hectare

0.2757

1

0.4047

0 .4200

acre

0.6811

2 .4711

1

1.0378

feddan

0.6563

2 .3810

0.9635

1

C. Weights

1 MK dbn =

1 NK dbn =

1 gram =

1 ounce =

MK dbn

1

3-3333

0.0366

1.0384

NK dbn

0-3

1

0.0110

0.3115

gram

27-3

9 i

1

28.35

ounce

0.963

3 .2099

0.0353

1

1 Sources: Helck, LA III, 1200—1202; Gardiner, Wilbour Papyrus II, 71; Baer, "Land," 30 n. 40; B. Kemp, ZAS 113 (1986), 132; R.L.Miller JESHO 34 (i99i),258.

2 Of copper; a dbn of 13.6 gm was used for gold in the Middle Kingdom: Helck, LA III, 1202.

2S8

APPENDIX E. MEASURES 259

D. Values and Equivalences

The Heqanakht papyri establish, confirm, or suggest the relative value of certain commodities and

a number of equivalences other than the measures tabulated above. For convenient reference, these

are listed here:

1 aroura of land leased for 5 sacks of full barley annually (I 9—13: see pp. 154—57)

1 mn-sheet worth approximately 50 sacks of full barley (I 3-6: see p. 158 n. 100)

1 sack of full barley normally paid as a month's salary for an adult farmhand (I 14-17: see

pp. 146-47)

1 sack of full barley worth 1.5 sacks of emmer (III 8—vo. 1: see p. 143)

1 hbnt-jar of oil worth 2 sacks of full barley or 3 sacks of emmer (III 8—vo. 1)

team cattle taxed annually at 0.7 sack of emmer per head, other cattle at 0.2 sack of barley

per head (V 11: see pp. 161-63)

1 s3srtAoread = 0.8 tr-zzt (V 31-33: see p. 148)

1 bhswAryread = 3 tr-zzt (V 31-33: see p. 148)

1 silo of willow worth 60 ladder-uprights (V vo. 7: see p. 58)

1 big oipe = 1 sack (VI 1-14: see p. 144)

1 bale (nwyt) of flax = 60 sheaves (s3rw) (VII 10—12: see pp. 172-73)

1 bundle (nch) of flax = 3 sheaves (P 15: see pp. 176-77 n. 169)

7 sacks of emmer paid as monthly salary to a workshop of four or five individuals for pro

duction of linen thread or woven cloth from harvested flax, at the rate of 3 bales of flax

processed per month (VII 8-14: see p. 175)

1 sack of emmer paid for cultivation and harvesting of 70 sheaves of flax (P 6—12 and 14:

see p. 177).

Bibliography*

Abdalla,A.

Aboul-Ela, M.B.

Allam, S.

AllenJ.P.

Altenmiiller, H.

Altenmiiller, H., and A.M. Moussa

Anthes, R.

Arnold, Dieter

Arnold, Dorothea

Arnold, F.

Baer, K.

Baines, J., and J. Malek

Bakir,A. el-M.

Barber, E.

Barker, TJ.

Barns, J.W.B.

von Beckerath,J.

Bennett, C.J.C

"Two Monuments of Eleventh Dynasty Date from Dendera in the Cairo Mu-seumJ JEA 79 (1993), 248-54.

"Domesticated Livestock and Indigenous Animals in Egyptian Agriculture." In The Agriculture of Egypt, ed. by G.M. Craig (Centre for Agricultural Strategy Series, 3; Oxford, 1993), 63-79.

"Ehe."L/iI , 1162-81.

"Synthetic and Analytic Tenses in the Pyramid Texts." In L'egyptologie en 1979, axes pri-oritaires de recherches (Colloques internationaux du CNRS, 595: Paris, 1982), 19-27.

The Inflection of the Verb in the Pyramid Texts. Bibliotheca Aegyptia 2. Malibu, 1984.

Genesis in Egypt: The Philosophy of Ancient Egyptian Creation Accounts. YES 2. New Haven, 1988.

"The Cosmology of the Pyramid Texts." In Religion and Philosophy in Ancient Egypt, ed. by W.K. Simpson (YES 3: New Haven, 1989), 1-28.

"Form, Function, and Meaning in the Early Egyptian Verb." LingAeg 1 (1991), 1-32.

"Pronominal Rhematization." In For His Ka: Essays Offered in Memory of Klaus Baer, ed. by D. Silverman (SAOC 55: Chicago, 1994), I—13.

"Colloquial Middle Egyptian: Some Observations on the Language of Heqanakht." LingAeg 4 (1994), 1-12.

"Some Theban Officials of the Early Middle Kingdom." In Studies in Honor of William Kelly Simpson, ed. by P.D. Manuelian (Boston, 1996), I, 1-26.

"The High Officials of the Early Middle Kingdom." In The Theban Necropolis: Past, Present and Future (London, forthcoming).

"Aha." 1 4 1,94-98.

"Die Inschrift Amenemhets II. aus dem Ptah-Tempel von Memphis, ein Vor-bericht." SAK 18 (1991), 1-48.

Die Felsinschrifiten von Hatnub. UGAA 9. Leipzig, 1928.

"Das objektlose iri Mhandeln fiir'in den Pyramidentexten."J£L4 55 (1969), 49-50.

Der Tempel des Konigs Mentuhotep von Deir el-Bahari. AV 8. Cairo, 1974.

The Temple of Mentuhotep at Deir el-Bahari. PMMA 21: NewYork, 1979.

"Amenemhat I and the EarlyTwelfth Dynasty at Thebes." MMJ 26 (1991), 5-48.

The South Cemeteries of Lisht, II. The Control Notes and Team Marks. PMMA 23. NewYork, 1990.

"The Low Price of Land in Ancient Egypt." JARCE 1 (1962), 25—45.

"An Eleventh Dynasty Farmer's Letters to His Family."JAOS 83 (1963), 1-19.

"A Deed of Endowment in a Letter of the Time of Ppjj I?" ZAS 93 (1966), 1—9.

Atlas of Ancient Egypt. Oxford, 1982.

Cultural Atlas of Ancient Egypt, rev. ed. Oxford, 2000.

Egyptian Epistolography. BdE 48. Cairo, 1970.

Prehistoric Textiles. Princeton, 1991.

"Feedstuffs." In The Agriculture of Egypt, ed. by G.M. Craig (Centre for Agricultural Strategy Series, 3; Oxford, 1993), 383-94.

Five Ramesseum Papyri. Oxford, 1956.

"Mentuhotep II." LA IV, 66-68.

Chronologie des pharaonischen Agypten: die Zeitbestimmung der agyptischen Geschichte von der Vorzeit bis 332 v. Chr. MAS 46. Mainz, 1997.

"Growth of the htp-di-nsw Formula in the Middle Kingdom!' JEA 27 (1941), 77-82.

* Entries marked by an asterisk are or contain extensive studies or translations of the Heqanakht papyri. Multiple entries under a single author are arranged chronologically.

262 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Berlev, O.

Berlin, Konigliche Museen

Blackman, A.M.

Blackman, A.M., and M.R. Apted

Bleiberg, E.

Bolshakov, A.

Borghouts,J.F.

BreastedJ.H.

Brewer, DJ.,and R.F. Friedman

Brewer, D.J., et al.

Brovarski, E.

Brugsch, H.

Brunner, H.

de Buck, A.

Bull, L.S.

Butzer, K.

CallenderJ.B.

Caminos, R.A.

de Cenival,J.-L.

Cerny.J.

Cerny,J., and A.H. Gardiner

Cerny, J., and S.I. Groll

Clere,J.J., and J.Vandier

Darby,WJ., et al.

Davies, N. de G.

"Paffbi uapn" e Eeunme Snoxu Cpegnoeo napcmea. Leningrad, 1965.

Review of Simpson, Papyrus Reisner I. BiOr 22 (1965), 263—68.

"K coiiHaJibiiofi TepMHHOJioniH npeBHero ErwiTa (On the Social Terminology of Ancient Egypt)," in JJpeenuii F^anem u gpeenmi Acppuna (Moscow, 1967), 11-14.

Tpygoeoe Hacejienue Eeunma e dnoxy Cpegneeo Hapc.irwa. Moscow, 1972.

"TpeBHeerMtiTCKaH aeHeacHan eaiiHHiia (An Ancient Egyptian Monetary Unit)." PS 15 (1978), 21-24.

Review of Stewart, Egyptian Stelae II. BiOr 38 (1981), 317-20.

Hieratische Papyrus III. Schriftstucke der VI. Dynastie und Elephantine, Zauberspruch fur Mutter und Kind, Ostraka. Leipzig, 1911.

The Rock Tombs of Meir, I. The Tomb-Chapel of Ukh-hotp's Son Senbi. ASE 22. London, 1914.

Middle Egyptian Stories. BA 2. Brussels, 1932.

The Story of King Kheops and the Magicians Transcribed from Papyrus Westcar (Berlin Papyrus 3033), ed. by W.V Davies. Reading, 1988.

The Rock Tombs of Meir,,V. The Tomb-Chapels A, No. 1 (that of Ni-Cankh-Pepi the Black); A, No. 2 (that ofiPepFonkh with the "Good Name" of Heny the Black); A, No. 4 (that of Hepi the Black); D, No. 1 (that of Pepi); and E, Nos. 1-4 (those of Meniu, Nenki, PepFonkh andTjetu). ASE 28. London, 1953.

"Loans, Credit, and Interest in Ancient Egypt." In Debt and Economic Renewal in the Ancient Near East, ed. by M. Hudson and M.Van De Mieroop (Cambridge, forthcoming).

"The Moment of the Establishment of the Tomb-Cult in Ancient Egypt." AoF 18 (1991), 204-18.

The MagicalTexts of Papyrus Leiden 1348. O M R O 51. Leiden, 1970.

The Edwin Smith Surgical Papyrus, 2 vols. OIP 3—4. Chicago, 1930.

Fish and Fishing inAntient Egypt.The Natural History of Egypt, 2. Warminster, 1989.

Domestic Plants and Animals: the Egyptian Origins. Warminster, [1994].

"Sobek." LAV, 995-1031.

"Der Moris-See." ZAS 30 (1892), 65-78.

Die Texte aus den Grdbern der Herakleopolitenzeit von Siut. AF 5. Gliickstadt, 1937.

"Alltagswelt und heilige Welt." LA I, 138-44.

"Verspunkte," lA VI, 1017-18.

The Egyptian Coffin Texts, 7 vols. OIP 34,49, 64,67,73, 81, 87. Chicago, 1935-61.

"On the Meaning of the Name Hcpj!' Orientalia Neerlandica 1948, 1-22.

"A New Vizier of the Eleventh Dynasty." fEA 10 (1924), 15.

Early Hydraulic Civilization in Egypt. Chicago and London, 1976.

Middle Egyptian. Afroasiatic Dialects 2. Malibu, 1975.

Literary Fragments in the Hieratic Script. Oxford, 1956.

Review of James, The Hekanakhte Papers. RdE 15 (1963), 138-43.

Late Ramesside Letters. BA 9. Brussels, 1939.

Paper & Books in Ancient Egypt. London, 1947.

Hieratic Inscriptions from theTomb ofTuFankhamun.TTSO 2. Oxford, 1965.

Hieratic Ostraca I. Oxford, 1957.

A Late Egyptian Grammar. 3rd ed. Studia Pohl 4. Rome, 1984.

Textes de la Premiere Periode Intermediate et de la Xleme dynastie. BA 10. Brussels, 1948.

Food: the Gift of Osiris, 2 vols. London, 1977.

The RockTombs of Sheikh Said. ASE 10. London, 1901.

The Rock Tombs of Deir el Gebrdwi, Part I. The Tomb of Aba and SmallerTombs of the Southern Group. ASE 11. London, 1902.

The Rock Tombs of Deir el Gebrdwi, Part II. The Tomb of Zau and Tombs of the Northern Group. ASE 12. London, 1902.

Five Theban Tombs. ASE 21. London, 1913.

BIBLIOGRAPHY 263

Davies, N. de G., and A.H. Gardiner

von Deines, H., and W Westendorf

Depuydt, L.

Derchain, P.

Dunham, D.

Edel, E.

Edgerton.W.F.

Epigraphic Survey

Erichsen.W.

Erman, A.

Erman, A., and H. Grapow, eds.

Eyre, C.J.

Felber, H.

Feucht, E.

Firth, C , and B. Gunn

Fischer, H.G.

Frandsen, PJ.

Faulkner, R.O.

Frandsen, PJ.

Franke, D.

The Tomb of Antefoker, Vizier of Sesostris I, and his Wife, Senet (No. 60). TTS 2. London, 1920.

Grundriss der Medizin der Alten Agypter,VU. Worterbuch der medizinischen Texte, 2 vols. Berlin, 1961—62.

"The End of hrf sdm.f in the Heqanakhte Letters." RdE 39 (1988), 204-208.

"Late Egyptian inn 'if,' and the Conditional Clause in Egyptian."_/E/4 77 (1991), 69-78.

Conjunction, Contiguity, Contingency: on Relationships Between Events in the Egyptian and Coptic Verbal Systems. NewYork, 1993.

"Condition and Premise in Egyptian." RdE 46 (1995), 81-88.

Civil Calendar and Lunar Calendar in Ancient Egypt. OLA 77. Leuven, 1997.

Review of James, The Hekanakhte Papers. BiOr 20 (1963), 154-56.

Second Cataract Forts II: Uronarti, Shalfak, Mirgissa. Boston, 1967.

Altagyptische Grammatik, 2 vols. AnOr 34 and 39. Rome, 1955 and 1964.

"Early Egyptian Dialect Interrelationships." BASOR 122 ( i95 i ) ,o - i2 .

The Festival Procession of Opet in the Colonnade Hall. Reliefs and Inscriptions at LuxorTemple I, OIP 112. Chicago, 1994.

Papyrus Harris I: Hieroglyphische Transkription. BA 5. Brussels, 1933.

Gesprach eines Lebensmuden mit seiner Seele, aus dem Papyrus 3024 der Koniglichen Museen. APAW. Berlin, 1896.

Zauberspruche fur Mutter und Kind. APAW. Berlin, 1901.

Worterbuch der agyptischen Sprache im Auftrage der deutschen Akademien, 7 vols; Die Belegstellen, 3 vols. Berlin, 1971.

"Work and the Organisation of Work in the Old Kingdom." In Labor in the Andent Near East, ed. by M.A. Powell (American Oriental Series 68; New Haven, 1987), 5-47.

"Work and the Organisation ofWork in the New Kingdom." In Labor in the Ancient Near East, ed. by M.A. Powell (American Oriental Series 68; New Haven, 1987), 167-221.

"Feudal Tenure and Absentee Landlords." In Grund und Boden (rechtliche und sozio-okonomische Verhaltnisse): Akten des internationalen Symposions Tubingen, 18.-20. Juni iggo, ed. by S. Allam (URAA 2:Tiibingen, 1994), 107-33.

"The Water Regime for Orchards and Plantations in Pharaonic Egypt." JEA 80

(1994), 57-8o.

"Peasants and 'Modern' Leasing Strategies in Ancient Egypt." JESHO 40 (1997), 367-90.

"The Village Economy in Pharaonic Egypt." In Agriculture in Egypt from Pharaonic to Modern Times (Proceedings of the British Academy 96; Oxford, 1999), 33—60.

Demotische Ackerpachtvertrdge der Ptolemderzeit. AA 58. Wiesbaden, 1997.

Das Kind im Alten Agypten. Frankfurt and NewYork, 1995.

Teti Pyramid Cemeteries I. Cairo, 1926.

Dendera in the Third Millennium B.C., down to the Theban Domination of Upper Egypt. Locust Valley, 1968.

"Further Evidence for the Logic of Ancient Egyptian: Diminishing Progression."

JARCE 10 (1973), 5-9-

Egyptian Studies, I. Varia. NewYork, 1976.

"Hunde."L/l III, 77-81.

"A Fragmentary Letter of the Early Middle Kingdom." JARCE 15 (1978), 25-31 and pis. 5-8.

The Ancient Egyptian Coffin Texts, 3 vols. Warminster, 1973—78.

An Outline of the Late Egyptian Verbal System. Copenhagen, 1974.

Altagyptische Verwandtschaftsbezeichnungen im Mittleren Reich. Hamburg, 1983.

Personendaten aus dem Mittleren Reich. AA 41. Wiesbaden, 1984.

Das Heiligtum des Heqaib auf Elephantine: Geschichte eines Provinzheiligtums im Mittleren Reich. SAGA 9. Heidelberg, 1994.

264 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Gaballa, G.A.

Gardiner,A.H.

Gardiner, A.H., andT.E. Peet

Gardiner, A.H., and K. Sethe

GarstangJ.

Gasse, A.

Gauthier, H.

Gauthier,J.E., and G.Jequier

Germer, R.

Gilula, M.

Goedicke, Hans

Goldwasser, O.

Golovina,V

Gomaa, F.

Goyon,J.-C

The Memphite Tomb-Chapel of Mose. Warminster, 1977.

The Inscription of Mes. UGAA IV, 3. Leipzig, 1905.

The Admonitions of an Egyptian Sage from a Hieratic Papyrus in Leiden (Pap. Leiden 344 Recto). Leipzig, 1909.

"A Hitherto Unnoticed Negative in Middle Egyptian." RdT 40 (1923), 79-82.

"An Administrative Letter of Protest."JEA 13 (1927), 75-78.

Late-Egyptian Stories. BA 1. Brussels, 1932.

Late-Egyptian Miscellanies. BA 7. Brussels, 1937.

"The House of Life."JEJl 24 (1938), 157-79.

The Wilbour Papyrus, 3 vols. Oxford, 1941-48.

Ancient Egyptian Onomastica, 3 vols. Oxford, 1947.

Ramesside Administrative Documents. Oxford, 1948.

"A Protest Against Unjustified Tax-Demands." RdE 6 (1951), 115—33.

"Hymns to Sobk in a Ramesseum Papyrus." RdE 11 (1957), 43—56 and pis. 2-4.

The Royal Canon of Turin. Oxford, 1959.

Egyptian Grammar. 3rd ed. Oxford, 1964.

The Inscriptions of Sinai I, 2nd ed., ed. by J. Cerny. EES 45. London, 1952.

Egyptian Letters to the Dead, Mainly from the Old and Middle Kingdoms. London, 1928.

El Arabah: a Cemetery of the Middle Kingdom; Survey of the Old Kingdom Temenos; Graffiti from the Temple of Sety. EP^A 6. London, 1901.

Donnees nouvelles administratives et sacerdotalcs sur Vorganisation du domaine d'Amon, 2 vols. BdE 104. Cairo, 1988.

Dictionnairc des noms geographiques contenus dans les textes hieroglyphiques, 7 vols. Cairo,

1925-31-

Memoire sur les fouilles de Licht. MIFAO 6. Cairo, 1902.

Flora des pharaonischen Agypten. SDAIK 14. Cairo, 1985.

"Weizen." LA VI, 1209-10.

"An Adjectival Predicative Expression of Possession in Middle Egyptian." RdE 20

(1968), 55-61.

Review of Satzinger, Die negativen Konstruktionen.JEA 56 (1970), 205—14.

"The 'Emphatic' Form of the Verb iw 'to come'," in Form und Mass, Festschift fur Gerhard Fecht, ed. by J. Osing and G. Dreyer (AAT 12: Wiesbaden, 1987), 137-41.

"A Neglected Wisdom Text." JEA 48 (1962), 25-35.

"Ein Brief aus dem Alten Reich (Pap. Boulaq 8)." MDAIK 22 (1967), 1-8.

"Another Look at an Old Object." BES 4 (1982), 71-77.

Studies in the Hekanakhte Papers. Baltimore, 1984.

"Papyrus Boulaq 8 Reconsidered." ZAS 115 (1988), 136-46.

Old Hieratic Paleography. Baltimore, 1988.

"An Inventory from Coptos." RdE 46 (1995), 210-211.

"Hekanakhte and the 'Boat Metaphor' (Hekanakhte Papers, I, vs. 2—3)." GM 40 (1980), 21-22.

"K Bonpocy o coiwaJibHOfi crpyKType xosaiicnia 3aynoKOftHoro acpeua Hk>-nht (The Social Structure of the Farm of the Soul-Priest Hkl-nht)'.' VDI 1976 no. 2, 122-42.

"MiiCTMryT hmw-kl is Ermire :->noxn Cpeaiiero Uapcrna (The Institution of hmw-kl in Ancient Egypt of the Middle Kingdom)." VDI 1992 no. 1, 3-20.

"Kdb: 3eMeJibHan apeiua B Ermue pannero anoxn CpenHero Uapcrea (Kdb: a Special Type of the Lease of Land in Egypt of the Early Middle Kingdom)." VDI 1995 no. 2,4-27.

Die Besiedlung Agyptens wdhrend des Mittleren Reiches, 2 vols. TAVO Beiheft 66. Wiesbaden, 1986-87.

"Un phylactere tardif: le papyrus 3233 A et B du Musee du Louvre." BIFAO 77 (1977), 45-54 and pl. 15.

BIBLIOGRAPHY 265

Grapow, H.

Grdseloff, B.

Grieshammer, R.

Griffith, F. Ll.

Grimal, N., et al., eds.

Guglielmi,W.

Gunn, B.

Habachi, L.

Hayes, W.C.

Helck, W

Helck,W.,etal.,eds.

HochJ .E.

Hornung, E.

Hughes, G.R.

Jacquet-Gordon, H.

James, T.G.H.

Wie die Alten Agypter sich anredeten, wie sie sich grufiten und wie sie sich miteinander sprachen, 4 vols. APAW 1939 no. 11, 1940 no. 12, 1941 no. 11, 1942 no. 7. Berlin,

1939-43-

"Remarques concernant l'opposition a un rescrit du vizir." ASAE 48 (1948), 505—512.

Das fenseitsgericht in den Sargtexten. AA 20. Wiesbaden, 1970.

The Inscriptions of Siut and Der Rifeh. London, 1889.

The Petrie Papyri. Hieratic Papyri from Kahun and Gurob, 2 vols. London, 1898.

Hieroglyphica. PIREI 1: Utrecht and Paris, 1993.

Reden, Rufe und Lieder auf altagyptischen Darstellungen der Landwirtschaft, Viehzucht, des Fisch- und Vogelfangs vom Mittleren Reich bis zur Spatzeit.TAB 1. Bonn, 1973.

"Ernte." LA I, 1271-72.

"Flachs." LA II, 256-57.

Studies in Egyptian Syntax. Paris, 1924.

"A Sixth Dynasty Letter from Saqqara." ASAE 25 (1925), 242-55.

Review of Peet, The Rhind Mathematical Papyrus.JEA 12 (1926), 123-37.

Review of Gardiner and Sethe, Egyptian Letters to the Dead.JEA 16 (1930), 147—55.

Tavole d'ofiferta, are e bacili da libagione, n. 22001—22067. Catologo del Museo Egizio di Torino, Serie Secondo—Collezione, 2.Turin, 1977.

"A Much-Copied Letter of the Early Middle Kingdom."_/MJ5 7 (1948), 1-10.

"Career of the Great Steward Henenu Under Nebhepetre c Mentuhotpe." fEA

35 (1949). 43-49-

The Scepter of Egypt, Part I. From the Earliest Times to the End of the Middle Kingdom. Rev. ed. NewYork, 1990.

"Zur Reichseinigung der 11. Dynastie." ZAS 80 (1955), 75-76.

Zur Verwaltung des Mittleren und Neuen Reiches. PA 3. Leiden, 1958.

Materialien zur Wirtschajisgeschichte des Neuen Reiches, 6 vols. AAWLM i960, 10— 11; 1963,2-3; 1964,4; 1969, 4. Mainz, 1960-69.

Review ofjames, The Hekanakhte Papers. OLZ 59 (1964), 29—33.

Die Lehre des DwZ-Htjj, 2 vols. Wiesbaden, 1970.

Historisch-biographische Texte der 2. Zwischenzeit und neue Texte der 18. Dynastie. Wiesbaden, 1975.

Wirtschaftsgeschichte des Alten Agypten im 3. und 2. Jahrtausend vor Chr. H d O I, 1, 5. Leiden and Koln 1975.

"Abgaben und Steuern." LA I, 3-12.

"Ernahrung." lA I, 1267-71.

"Felderverwaltung." LA II, 152-55.

"Getreide," LA II, 586-89.

"Landesverwaltung." LA III, 918—22.

"MaBe und Gewichte (pharaonische Zeit)." LA III, 1199—1209.

Die Prophezeiung des Nfr.tj, 2d ed. Wiesbaden, 1992.

Lexikon der Agyptologie, 7 vols. Wiesbaden, 1972—92.

Semitic Words in Egyptian Texts of the New Kingdom and Third Intermediate Period. Princeton, 1994.

Der dgyptische Mythos von der Himmelskuh: eine Atiologie des Unvollkommenen. 3rd ed. O B O 46. Freiburg, 1997.

Saite Demotic Land Leases. SAOC 28. Chicago, 1952.

Les noms des domaines funeraires sous VAncien Empire egyptien. BdE 34. Cairo, 1962.

The Mastaba of Khentika Called Ikhekhi. ASE 30. London, 1953.

The Hekanakhte Papers and Other Early Middle Kingdom Documents. PMMA 19. NewYork, 1962.

"An Early Middle Kingdom Account." JEA 54 (1968), 51-56.

Pharaoh's People. Chicago, 1984.

266 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Janssen, JJ.

Jansen-Winklen, K.

Jequier, G.

Johnson,J.H.

Jones, D.

Junge, F.

Kamal,A.

Kaplony, P.

Kees, H.

Keimer, L.

Kemp, B.

Kessler, D.

Kitchen, K.A.

Klebs, L.

Krauss, R.

Kruchten,J.-M.

Lacau, P.

Lacau, P., and H. Chevrier

Lane, E.W.

Lange, H.O., and H. Schafer

Lefebvre, G.

Loprieno, A.

Commodity Prices from the Ramessid Period. Leiden, 1975.

"Prologomena to the Study of Egypt's Economic History During the New Kingdom." SAK 3 (1975), 127-85.

"A Curious Error (O. IFAO. 1254)." BIFAO 84 (1984), 303-306 and pis. 58-59.

"The Day the Inundation Began."JNES 46 (1987), 129-36.

"On Style in Egyptian Handwriting."JEA 73 (1987), 161—67.

"On Prices and Wages in Ancient Egypt." AoF 15 (1988), 10—23.

"Debts and Credit in the New Kingdom."JEA 80 (1994), 129-36.

"Zu den Koregenzen der 12. Dynastie." S^4K24 (1997), 115-35.

Lesfrises d'objets des sarcophages du Moyen Empire. MIFAO 47. Cairo, 1921.

"The Use of the Particle mk in Middle Kingdom Letters." In Studien zu Sprache und Religion Agyptens zu Ehren von Wolfhart Westendorf, uberreicht von seinen Freunden und Schulern, ed. by F. Junge, 2 vols. (Gottingen, 1984), I, 71-85.

A Glossary of Ancient Egyptian Nautical Titles andTerms. London, 1988.

"Sprache." LAV, I 176—121 I .

"Emphasis" and Sentential Meaning in Middle Egyptian. GOF 20. Wiesbaden, 1989.

Tables d'offrandes, 2 vols, in 1. CG 23001—23256. Cairo, 1909.

"Bemerkungen zu flinf Texten der Ersten Zwischenzeit und der spateren 11. Dynastie,V" MDAIK 25 (1969), 27-32.

"Ka-Diener." LA II, 282-84.

"Totenpriester." LA VI, 679-93.

Ancient Egypt: a Cultural Topography, ed. by T.G.H.James, translated by LED. Morrow. Chicago, 1961.

Die Gartenpflanzen im alten Agypten, 2 vols., vol. 2 ed. by R. Germer. SDAIK 13 (vol. 2). Hamburg, 1924, and Mainz, 1984.

"Large Middle Kingdom Granary Buildings." ZAS 113 (1986), 120-36.

"Eine Landschenkung Ramses III. zugunsten eines 'Grossen der thrw' aus mr-m^.fiJ SAK 2 (1975), 103-34.

"Die Gottes-Diener in den Nekropolen-Bezirken." In Grund und Boden (rechtliche und sozio-okonomische Verhdltnisse): Akten des internationalen Symposions Tubingen, 18.-20.Juni 1990, ed. by S. Allam (UIMAA 2:Tiibingen, 1994), 375-88.

Ramesside Inscriptions, Historical and Biographical I. (Oxford, 1968).

Die Reliefs des Alten Reiches. AHAW 3. Heidelberg, 1915.

Die Reliefs und Malereien des Mittleren Reiches. AHAW 6. Heidelberg, 1922.

Die Reliefs und Malereien des Neuen Reiches. AHAW 9. Heidelberg, 1934.

"Reisegeschwindigkeit." LAV, 222—23.

"ir wnn sdm.fi (sdm.n.f) et ir sdm.f (sdm.n.f): une approche structuraliste." JEA 80 (1994), 97-io8.

Une stele juridique de Karnak. ASAE Supplement 13. Cairo, 1949.

Une chapelle d'Hatshepsout a Karnak, 2 vols. Cairo, 1977.

Manners and Customs of the Modern Egyptians. London, 1895.

Grab- und Denksteine des Mittleren Reichs, 4 vols. CG 20001-20780. Berlin, 1902-25.

Grammaire de I'egyptien classique. 2nd ed. BdE 12. Cairo, 1955.

"The Form sdmt.fi. Verbal Predicate or'Transposition'?" GM 37 (1980), 17-29.

"Osservazioni sullo sviluppo dell'articulo prepositivo in egiziano e nelle lingue semitiche." Oriens Antiquus 19 (1980), 1-27.

Das Verbalsystem im Agyptischen und im Semitischen. GOF 17. Wiesbaden, 1986.

"Focus, Mood, and Negative Forms: Middle Egyptian Syntactic Paradigms and Diachrony." LingAeg 1 (1991), 201-206.

Ancient Egyptian, a Linguistic Introduction. Cambridge, 1995.

"Linguistic Variety and Egyptian Literature." In Ancient Egyptian Literature, History and Forms, ed. by A. Loprieno (PA 10: Leiden, 1996), 515-29.

http://18.-20.Juni

http://sdm.fi

http://sdmt.fi

BIBLIOGRAPHY 267

Lucas, A., and J.R. Harris

Luft, U.

Lyons, J.

Malaise, M.

Mariette.A.

Martin, G.T.

Meeks, D.

Megally, M.

Meltzer, E.

Menu, B.

Miller, R.L.

Moller, G.

Montet, P.

Moreno Garcia.J.C.

Morenz, L.D.

Muller, D.

Miiller-Wollermann, R.

Murnane,WJ.

Naville, E.

Newberry, P.E., and ELL Griffith

Ancient Egyptian Materials and Industries, 4th ed. Oxford, 1962.

"Illahunstudien, I. Zu der Chronologie und den Beamten in den Briefen aus Illahun." Oikumene 3 (1982), 101-56.

"Illahunstudien, II. Ein Verteidigungsbrief aus Illahun: Anmerkungen zu P Berol 10025." Oikumene 4 (1983), 121-79.

"Illahunstudien, III. Zur sozialen Stellung des Totenpriesters im Mittleren Reich." Oikumene 5 (1986), 177—53.

Die chronologische Fixierung des agyptischen Mittleren Reiches nach dem Tempelarchiv von Illahun. SOAW 598.Vienna, 1992.

Das Archiv von Illahun, Briefie I. Hieratische Papyri aus den Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin, I.Berlin, 1992.

"L'irrigation au Moyen Empire." In Les problemes institutionnels de I'eau en Egypte andenne et dans I'antiquite mediterraneenne, ed. by B. Menu (BdE n o : Cairo, 1994), 249-60.

"Angaben zum Boden-Besitz im Mittleren Reich." In Grund und Boden (rechtliche und sozio-okonomische Verhaltnisse): Akten des internationalen Symposions Tubingen, 18.-20.Juni 1990, ed. by S.Allam (URAA 2:Tiibingen, 1994), 351-54.

Introduction to Theoretical Linguistics. Cambridge, 1968.

"La conjugaison suffixale dans les propositions conditionnelles introduites par ir en ancien et moyen egyptien," CdE 60 (1985), 152—67.

Abydos I. Paris, 1869.

Egyptian and Administrative Private-Name Seals, Principally of the Middle Kingdom and Second Intermediate Period. Oxford, 1971.

"Ipet." LA III, 172-76.

Recherches sur Veconomie, Vadministration, et la comptabilite egyptiennes a la XVIIF dynastie d'apres le papyrus E. 3226 du Louvre. BdE 71. Cairo, 1977.

Notions de comptabilite a propos du Papyrus E. 3226 du Musee du Louvre. BdE 72. Cairo, 1977.

"Remarks on Bound Negative Constructions in Egyptian and Their Development" (Abstract). In L'egyptologie en 1979, axes prioritaires de recherches (Colloques internationaux du CNRS, 595: Paris, 1982), 49-51.

"La gestion du 'patrimoine' foncier d'Hekanakhte." RdE 22 (1970), n 1-29.

Le regime juridique des terres et du personnel attache a la terre dans le Papyrus Wilbour. Lille, 1970.

Recherches sur I'histoire juridique, economique et sodale de I'andenne Egypte.Versailles, 1982.

"Counting Calories in Egyptian Ration Texts '.'JESHO 34 (1991), 257—69.

Hieratische Paldographie: die aegyptische Buchschrifit in ihrer Entwicklung von der funfiten Dynastie bis zur romischen Kaiserzeit, 3 vols. 2nd ed. Osnabriick, 1965.

Les scenes de la vie privee dans les tombeaux egyptiens de VAncien Empire. Publications de la Faculte des Lettres de l'Universite de Strasbourg, 24. Strasbourg, 1925.

"Les tombeaux de Siout et de Deir Rifeh." Kemi 1 (1928), 53-68, pis. 1-6; Kemi 3 (1930), 45-111, pis. 2-10; Kemi 6 (1936), 131-63, pis. 6-10.

Hwt et le milieu rural egyptien du IIF millenaire: economie, administration et organisation territoriale. BEHE 337. Paris, 1999.

"Hungersnote in der Ersten Zwischenzeit zwischen Topos und Realitat." DE 42

(i998), 83-97.

"Eine ungewohnliche Konstruktion der Langenangabe in den Sargtexten." CdE 42 (1967), 259-65.

"Some Remarks on Wage Rates in the Middle Kingdom." JNES 34 (1975), 249-63.

"Die sogenannte ober- und unteragyptische Gerste." VA 3 (1987), 39—41.

The Road to Kadesh, 2d ed. SAOC 42. Chicago, 1990.

Das aegyptische Todtenbuch der XVIII. bis XX. Dynastie, 2 vols. Berlin, 1886.

Beni Hasan, 4 vols. ASE 1-2, 5, 7. London, 1893-1900.

El Bersheh, 2 vols. ASE 3—4. London, 1894.

http://18.-20.Juni

268 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Obsomer, C.

Osing.J.

Otto, E.

Parker, R.A.

Parkinson, R.

Parkinson, R., and S. Quirke

Peet,T.E.

Petrie, W.M.F.

Petrovskij, N.S.

Pitsch, H.

von Pilgrim, C.

Pliny the Elder

Polotsky, HJ .

Porten, B., and H.Z. Szubin

Posener, G.

Posener-Krieger, P., and J.L. de Cenival Quirke, S.

Ranke, H.

Reekmans,T.

Reisner, G.A.

Robins, G.

Roccati, A.

Rowlandson,J.

Ruf.T.

Satzinger, H.

Scharff, A.

Schenkel, W

Sesostris F: etude chronologique et historique du regne. Connaissance de l'Egypte An-cienne 5. Brussels, 1995.

Die Nominalbildung des Agyptischen, 2 vols. Mainz, 1976.

Das Agyptische Munddjfnungsritual, 2 vols. AA 3. Wiesbaden, i960.

The Calendars of Ancient Egypt. SAOC 26. Chicago, 1950.

TheTale of the Eloquent Peasant. Oxford, 1991.

Voices from Ancient Egypt, an Anthology of Middle Kingdom Writings. Oklahoma Series in Classical Culture 9. Norman, 1991.

Papyrus. Austin, 1995.

The Rhind Mathematical Papyrus, British Museum 10037 and 10058. London, 1923.

"Two Eighteenth Dynasty Letters: Papyrus Louvre 3230." fEA 12 (1926), 70-74 and pl. 17.

A Season in Egypt, 1887. London, 1888.

Kahun, Gurob, and Hawara. London, 1890.

ConemanuH Cnoe e EeunenicKO.u fl:ii,ihe. Moscow, 1970.

"Masten." IA III, 1128-32.

Elephantine XVIII: Untersuchungen in der Stadt des Mittleren Reiches und der Zweiten Zwischenzeit. AV 91. Cairo, 1996.

Natural History, translated by H. Rackham, 10 vols. London, 1938—62.

Zu den Inschriften der 11. Dynastie. UGAA 11. Leipzig, 1929.

Egyptian Tenses. The Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, Proceedings, II no. 5.Jerusalem, 1965.

"An Aramaic Joint Venture Agreement (A New Interpretation of the Bauer-Meissner Papyrus)." In Grund und Boden (rechtliche und sozio-okonomische Verhdltnisse): Akten des intemationalen Symposions Tubingen, 18.-20. Juni 1990, ed. by S. Allam (URAA 2: Tubingen, 1994), 65-95-

"Pap. Anastasi I. Resitutions d'apres les ostraca." In Melanges Maspero, 2 vols. (MI-FAO 66-67: Cairo, 1935-38), I, 327-36.

"Une stele d'Hatnoub." I£L4 54 (1968), 67-70 and pis. 8-9.

The Abu Sir Papyri. HPBM 5. London, 1968.

"The Regular Titles of the Late Middle Kingdom." RdE 37 (1986), 107-30.

Review of Goedicke, Studies in the Hekanakhte Papers. DE 12 (1988), 97-102.

Die agyptischen Personennamen, 3 vols. Gliickstadt, 1935-77.

La sitometrie dans les archives den Zenon. Brussels, 1966.

"Clay Sealings of Dynasty XIII from Uronarti Fort." Kush 3 (1955), 26-69.

Women in Ancient Egypt. Cambridge, 1993.

"Una lettera inedita dell'Antico Regno."JEA 54 (1968), 14-22.

Papiro ieratico N. 54003: estratti magici e rituali del Primo Medio Regno. Catalogo del Museo Egizio di Torino, serie prima: Monumenti eTesti 2.Turin, 1970.

"Agricultural Tenancy and Village Society in Roman Egypt." In Grund und Boden (rechtliche und sozio-okonomische Verhdltnisse): Akten des intemationalen Symposions Tubingen, 18.-20.Juni 1990, ed. by S. Allam (URAA 2:Tiibingen, 1994), 139-58.

"The History of Agricultural Development." In The Agriculture of Egypt, ed. by G.M. Craig (Centre for Agricultural Strategy Series, 3; Oxford, 1993), 188—208.

Die negativen Konstruktionen imAlt- und Mittelagyptischen. MAS 12. Berlin, 1968.

"Die Protasis jr sdm.f im alteren Agyptisch." LingAeg 3 (1993), 121-35.

" 'Die Protasis ir sdm.f...' — Some Afterthoughts." LingAeg 4 (1994), 271-74.

"Ein Rechnungsbuch des koniglichen Hofes aus der 13, Dynastie (Papyrus Boulaq Nr. 18)." ZAS 57 (1922), 51-68 and i**-24**.

Frtihmitteldgyptische Studien. Bonner Orientalistische Studien, N.S. 13. Bonn, 1962.

Memphis-Herakleopolis-Theben: die epigraphischc Zeugnisse der 7.-11. Dynastie Agyptens. AA 12.Wiesbaden, 1965.

BIBLIOGRAPHY 269

(Schenkel, W.)

Schoske, S. ed.

Schulman, A.

Sethe, K.

Sethe, K., and W. Helck

Sharp, M.

Shore, A.F.

Silverman, D.P.

Simpson, WK.

Smither, P.C.

Spalinger, A.J.

Spaull, C.H.S.

Spencer, P.

Stewart, H.M.

Tackholm,V

Theodorides,A.

"Be- und Entwasserung." LA I, 775—82.

Die Bewasserungsrevolution im Alten Agypten. Mainz, 1978.

"Uberschwemmung." LA VI, 831-33.

"Die Endungen des Prospektivs und des Subjunktivs." LingAeg 7 (2000), 27-112.

Staatliche Sammlung Agyptischer Kunst, Munchen. Mainz, 1995.

" l i d k ^ f* Ul (tJrt): Cabin, Forecastle, Enclosed Structure." BES 1 (1979), 29-40.

Urkunden des agyptischen Altertums I. Urkunden des Alten Reichs. 2nd ed. Leipzig, 1933.

Agyptische Lesestucke zum Gebrauch im akademischen Unterricht. 3rd ed. Hildesheim,

1959-

Die altagyptischen Pyramidentexte nach den Papierabdrucken und Photographien des Berliner Museums, 4 vols. 2nd ed. Hildesheim, i960 and 1969.

Urkunden der 18. Dynastie, 22 vols. Urkunden des Agyptischen Altertums. Leipzig and Berlin, 1906-1984.

"The Village of Theadelphia in the Fayyum: Land and Population in the Second Century." In Grund und Boden (rechtliche und sozio-okonomische Verhdltnisse): Akten des intemationalen Symposions Tubingen, 18.-20. Juni 1990, ed. by S. Allam (URAA 2: Tubingen, 1994), 159-92.

"Smash not sieve: Heqanakhte II, rt. jo."fEA 76 (1990), 164—66.

"An Emphasized Direct Object o fa Nominal Verb in Middle Egyptian." Or 49 (1980), 199-203.

Interrogative Constructions with jn and jn-jw in Old and Middle Egyptian. Bibliotheca Aegyptia i.Malibu, 1980.

"Plural Demonstrative Constructions in Ancient Egyptian." RdE 33 (1981), 147—

54-

"A Hatnub Stela of the Early Twelfth Dynasty." MDAIK 16 (1958), 298-309 and pis. 29-30.

"An Additional Fragment ofa 'Hatnub' Stela."JNES 20 (1961), 25—30.

Papyrus Reisner I: the Records of a Building Project in the Reign of Sesostris I. Boston, 1963.

Papyrus Reisner II: Accounts of the Dockyard Workshop at This in the Reign of Sesostris I. Boston, 1965.

"The Letter to the Dead from the Tomb of Meru (N 3737) at Nag c ed-Deir." JEA 52 (1966), 39-50.

Papyrus Reisner III: the Records ofa Building Project in the Early Twelfth Dynasty. Boston, 1969.

"Two Lexical Notes to the Reisner Papyri: whrt and trsst'.'fEA 59 (1973), 220—22.

"Pap. Reisner I-IV" LA IV, 728-30.

"Sesostris I." LAV, 890-99.

Papyrus Reisner IV: Personal Accounts of the Early Twelfth Dynasty. Boston, 1986.

The Terrace of the Great God at Abydos: the Offering Chapels of Dynasties 12 and 13. PPYE 5. New Haven and Philadelphia, 1974.

"An Old Kingdom Letter Concerning the Crimes of Count Sabni." JEA 28 (1942), 16-19.

"Calendrical Evidence and Hekanakhte." ZAS 123 (1996), 85—96.

"Praise God and Pay the Priests." A&L 7 (1998), 43-57.

Review ofjames, The Hekanakhte Papers.JEA 49 (1963), 184—86.

The Egyptian Temple, a Lexicographical Study. London, 1984.

Egyptian Stelae, Reliefs and Paintings from the Petrie Collection II. Archaic Period to Second Intermediate Period. Warminster, 1979.

"Flora." LA II, 267-75.

"Propriete, gerance et mandat dans le Papyrus Berlin 8523." RIDA 10 (1963), 91—114.

Review ofjames, The Hekanakhte Papers. CdE 41 (1966), 295-302.

"La propriete et ses demembrements en droit pharaonique." RIDA 24 (1977), 21-64.

2 7 0 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Thompson, D.J.

Tylor.JJ., and ELL Griffith

Vandier,J.

Vernus, P.

Vogelsang-Eastwood, G.

Ward, P.N.

Ward,W.A.

Wente, E.

WestendorfiW.

Wild, H.

WilkinsonJ.G.

Willems, H.

WilsonJ.A.

Winlock, H.E.

Yoyotte,J.

Zaba, Z.

Zivie, C M .

"New and Old in the Ptolemaic Fayyum." In Agriculture in Egypt from Pharaonic to Modern Times (Proceedings of the British Academy 96; Oxford, 1999), 123—38.

The Tomb ofPaheri. EEF 11. London, 1894.

La famine dans VEgypte ancienne. PvAPH 7. Cairo, 1936.

Mocalla: la tombe d'Ankhtifi et la tomb de Sebekhotep. BdE 18. Cairo, 1950.

Athribis: textes et documents relatifs d la geographie, aux cultes, et a Vhistoire d'une ville du Delta egyptien a Vepoque pharaonique. BdE 74. Cairo, 1978.

"Formes 'emphatiques' en fonction non 'emphatiques' dans la protase d'un sys-teme correlatif." GM 43 (1981), 73-88.

Le surnom au Moyen Empire: repertoire, procedes d'expression et structures de la double identite du debut de la Xlle dynastie a la fin de la XVIIe dynastie. Studia Pohl 13. Rome, 1986.

"La formule du bon comportement (bit nfirt)!' RdE 39 (1988), 147-54.

Future at Issue. Tense, Mood and Aspect in Middle Egyptian: Studies in Syntax and Semantics.YES 4. New Haven, 1990.

The Production of Linen in Pharaonic Egypt. Leiden, 1992.

"Textiles." In Ancient Egyptian Materials and Technology, ed. by P.T. Nicholson and I. Shaw (London and NewYork, 2000), 268-98.

"Systems of Agricultural Production in the Delta." In The Agriculture of Egypt, ed. by G.M. Craig (Centre for Agricultural Strategy Series, 3; Oxford, 1993), 229-64.

Index of Egyptian Administrative and Religious Titles of the Middle Kingdom. Beirut, 1982.

Essays on Feminine Titles of the Middle Kingdom and Related Subjects. Beirut, 1986.

"iwiw.fi sdm in Late Egyptian,"JNES 20 (1961), 120-23.

"A Note on 'The Eloquent Peasant,' B I, 13-15."fNES 24 (1965), 105-109.

Letters from Ancient Egypt. Society of Biblical Literature: Writings from the Ancient World I.Atlanta, 1990.

Der Gebrauch des Passivs in der klassischen Literatur der Agypter.VIO 11: Berlin, 1953.

Grundriss der Medizin der Alten Agypter, VIII. Grammatik der medizinischen Texte. Berlin, 1962.

"Hoden."L/i II, 1228-29.

Le tombeau de Ti, fasc. Ill, La chapelle (2d part). MIFAO 65. Cairo, 1966.

"Gerste." LA II, 553-55.

Topography ofiThebes and General View of Egypt. London, 1835.

"The Nomarchs of the Hare Nome and Early Middle Kingdom History." JEOL 28 (1983-84), 80-102.

"The Oath in Ancient Egypt."JNES 7 (1948), 129-56.

"Excavations at Thebes." BMMA 17, Part 2 (December 1922), 19-48.

Excavations at Deir el Bahri, 1911—1931. NewYork, 1942.

The Rise and Fall of the Middle Kingdom in Thebes. NewYork, 1947.

"Processions geographiques mentionnants le Fayoum et ses localites." BIFAO 61 (1962), 79-138.

Les maximes de Ptahhotep. Prague, 1956.

The Rock Inscriptions of Lower Nubia (Czechoslovak Concession) (Charles University of Prague, Czechoslovak Institute of Egyptology in Prague and Cairo, Publications 1: Prague, 1974.

"Memphis." LA IV, 24-41.

http://iwiw.fi

Abbreviations

> develops into.

< develops from.

~ varies with.

ipi first-person plural.

is first-person singular.

2fs second-person feminine singular.

2ms second-person masculine singular.

2pl second-person plural.

2s second-person singular.

3fs third-person feminine singular.

3ms third-person masculine singular.

3pl third-person plural.

A&L Agypten und Levante.Vienna, 1990-.

AA Agyptologische Abhandlungen. Wiesbaden, i960-.

AdG E. Edel, Altagyptische Grammatik, 2 vols. AnOr 34 and 39. Rome, 1955 and 1964.

AAT Agypten und Altes Testament. Bamberg and Wiesbaden, 1979—.

AAWLM Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur in Mainz, Abhandlungen der Geistes- und

Sozialwissenschaftlichen Klasse. Wiesbaden, 1950—.

adj. adjective (in the Indices, Section A).

Adm. A.H. Gardiner, The Admonitions of an Egyptian Sage from a Hieratic Papyrus in Leiden (Pap. Leiden 344

Recto). Leipzig, 1909.

adv. adverb (in the Indices, Section A).

AF Agyptologische Forschungen. Gliickstadt, Hamburg, NewYork, 1936—.

AHAW Abhandlungen der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-historische Klasse.

Heidelberg, 1913-95.

AnOr Analecta Orientalia. Rome, 1931—.

AoF Altorientalische Forschungen. Berlin, 1974—.

APAW (Konigliche) PreuBische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Abhandlungen der Philosophisch-histonschen

Klasse. Berlin, 1804-1907.

ar. aroura.

ASAE Annates du Service des Antiquites d'Egypte. Cairo, 1900—.

ASE Archaelogical Survey of Egypt. London, 1893—.

AV ArchaologischeVeroffentlichungen des Deutschen Archaologischen Instituts, Abteilung Kairo. Berlin

and Mainz, 1970—.

BA Bibliotheca Aegyptiaca. Brussels, 193 2- .

BES Bulletin of the Egyptological Seminar of NewYork. NewYork, 1979-.

BASOR Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research. New Haven, 1919—.

BD Book of the Dead: E. Naville, Das aegyptische Todtenbuch der XVIII. bis XX. Dynastie, 2 vols. Berlin,

1886.

BdE Bibliotheque d'Etude. Cairo, 1908-.

BEHE Bibliotheque de l'Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes, IVe section: Sciences philologiques et

historiques. Paris, 1869-.

BIFAO Bulletin de l'lnstitut francais d'archeologie orientale du Caire. Cairo, 1901-.

BiOr Bibliotheca Orientalis. Leiden, 1943-.

BM British Museum.

BMMA Bulletin of the Metropolitan Museum of Art. NewYork, 1905-.

CCER Center for Computer-Aided Egyptological Research: N. Grimal et al., eds., Hieroglyphica (PIRJEI 1: Utrecht and Paris, 1993).

2 7 1

272 ABBREVIATIONS

CdE

CG

conj.

C T

dar.

DE

dem.

dep.

DNG

d'Orbiney

Dyn.

EEF

EES

EG

ERA

FmdS

GEC

GM

GmT

GOF

HdO

HP

HPBM

imp.

indep.

interrog.

J .40S

JARCE

JEA

JEOL

JESHO

JNES

KRIl

LA

Leb.

LEG

LEM

LingAeg

lph

LRL

MAS

MDAIK

Chronique d'Egypte. Brussels, 1926—.

Catalogue general des antiquites egyptiennes du Musee du Caire. Cairo, Berlin, andVienna, 1901—.

CG 20001—20780: H.O. Lange and H. Schafer, Grab- und Denksteine des Mittleren Reichs, 4 vols. Berlin, 1902-25.

CG 23001-23256: A. Kamal, Tables d'offrandes, 2 vols, in 1. Cairo, 1909.

conjunction (in the Indices, Section A).

Coffin Texts: A. de Buck, The Egyptian Coffin Texts, 7 vols. OIP 34, 49, 64, 67, 73, 81, 87. Chicago, 1935-61.

dekaroura (see pp. 151-54).

Discussions in Egyptology. Oxford, 1985—.

demonstrative (in the Indices, Section A).

dependent (in the Indices, Section A).

H. Gauthier, Dictionnaire des nomsgeographiques contenus dans les textes hieroglyphiques, 7 vols. Cairo, 1925-31.

"TheTale of theTwo Brothers," in A.H. Gardiner, Late-Egyptian Stories (BA i: Brussels, 1932), 9—30.

Dynasty.

Egypt Exploration Fund Memoir. London, 1883-1917.

Egypt Exploration Society Memoir. London, 1920—.

A.H. Gardiner, Egyptian Grammar. 3rd ed. Oxford, 1964.

Egyptian Research Account. London, 1896—1905.

W. Schenkel, Fruhmitteldgyptische Studien. Bonner Orientalistische Studien, N.S. 13. Bonn, 1962.

G. Lefebvre, Grammaire de Vegyptien classique. 2nd ed. BdE 12. Cairo, 1955.

Gbttinger Miszellen. Gottingen, 1972-.

W. Westendorf, Grundriss der Medizin der Alten Agypter,V\\\. Grammatik der medizinischen Texte. Berlin, 1962.

Gottinger Orientforschungen, IV Reihe: Agypten. Wiesbaden, 1973-.

Handbuch der Orientalistik, I. Abteilung (Der Nahe und der Mittlere Osten). Leiden, 1952-.

T.G.H. James, The Hekanakhte Papers and Other Early Middle Kingdom Documents. PMMA 19. New York, 1962.

Hieratic Papyri in the British Museum. London, 1935—.

imperative (in the Indices, Section A).

independent (in the Indices, Section A).

interrogative (in the Indices, Section A).

Journal of the American Oriental Society. Baltimore, 1949-.

Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt. Boston and Winona Lake, 1962-.

Journal of Egyptian Archaeology. London, 1914-.

faarbericht van het Vooraziatisch-Egyptisch Gcnootschap (Gezelschap) "Ex Oriente Lux." Leiden, 1933—.

Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient. Leiden, 1957—.

Journal of Near Eastern Studies. Chicago, 1942-.

K.A. Kitchen, Ramesside Inscriptions, Historical and Biographical I. (Oxford, 1968).

Lcxikon der Agyptologie, ed. by W. Helck et al. 7 vols. Wiesbaden, 1972—92.

A. Erman, Gesprdch eines Lebensmuden mit seiner Seek, aus dem Papyrus 3024 der Koniglichen Museen. APAW. Berlin, 1896.

J. Cerny and S.I. Groll, A Late Egyptian Grammar. 3rd ed. Studia Pohl 4. Rome, 1984.

A.H. Gardiner, Late-Egyptian Miscellanies. BA 7. Brussels, 1937.

Lingua Aegyptia. Gottingen, 1991-.

"life, prosperity, and health": conventional translation of the Egyptian trigram ylP cnh.(w w)d1.(w)

s(nb.w) "may he be alive, sound, and healthy" and cnh (w)dl s(nb) "life, soundness, and health."

J. Cerny, Late Ramesside Letters. BA 9. Brussels, 1939.

Miinchner Agyptologische Studien. Berlin and Munich, 1962-.

Mittcilungen des Deutschen Archdologischen Instituts, Abteilung Kairo. Berlin, Wiesbaden, Mainz, 1930—.

ABBREVIATIONS 273

MFA

MIFAO

MK

MMA

MMJ

n.

Neferti

neg.

NK

num.

O B O

OHP

OIP

OK

OLA

OLZ

O M R O

Or

PA

Pal.

Peas.

PIREI

PMMA

PN

PPYE

prep.

prep. adj.

prep. adv.

pro.

PS

Pyr.

RAD

RAPH

RdE

RdT

rel.

RIDA

SAGA

SAK

SAOC

SDAIK

ShS

Sin.

Siut

Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.

Memoires publies par les membres de l'lnstitut francais d'archeologie orientale du Caire. Cairo, 1902—.

Middle Kingdom.

The Metropolitan Museum of Art, NewYork.

77ie Metropolitan Museum of Art Journal. NewYork, 1968-.

noun (in the Indices, Section A).

W. Helck, Die Prophezeiung des Nfir.tj, 2d ed. Wiesbaden, 1992.

negative (in the Indices, Section A).

New Kingdom.

number (in the Indices, Section A).

Orbis biblicus et orientalis. Freiburg and Gottingen, 1973—.

H. Goedicke, Old Hieratic Paleography. Baltimore, 1988.

Oriental Institute Publications. Chicago, 1924—.

Old Kingdom.

Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta. Louvain, 1975-.

Orientalistische Literaturzeitung. Berlin and Leipzig, 1898-.

Oudheidkundige Mededelingen uit het Rajksmuseum van Oudheden te Leiden, N.S. Leiden, 1920—.

Orientalia, Nova Series. Rome, 1932—.

Probleme der Agyptologie. Leiden, 1953—.

G. Moller, Hieratische Paldographie: die aegyptische Buchschrift in ihrer Entwicklung von derfunften Dynastie bis zur romischen Kaiserzeit, 3 vols. 2nd ed. Osnabriick, 1965.

R. Parkinson, TheTale of the Eloquent Peasant. Oxford, 1991.

Publications interuniversitaires de recherches egyptologiques informatisees. Utrecht and Paris, 1993-.

Publications of the Metropolitan Museum of Art Egyptian Expedition. NewYork, 1916—.

H. Ranke, Die agyptischen Personennamen, 3 vols. Gliickstadt, 1935-77.

Publications of the Pennsylvania-Yale Expedition to Egypt. New Haven and Philadelphia, 1963—.

preposition, prepositional (in the Indices, Section A).

prepositional adjective (in the Indices, Section A).

prepositional adverb (in the Indices, Section A).

pronoun (in the Indices, Section A).

najiecmuHcuuu Cfiopituh. Moscow and Leningrad, 1954—91.

K. Sethe, Die altagyptischen Pyramidentexte nach den Papierabdriicken und Photographien des Berliner Museums, 4 vols. 2nd ed. Hildesheim, i960 and 1969 (cited by paragraph number).

A.H. Gardiner, Ramesside Administrative Documents. Oxford, 1948.

Recherches d'archeologie, de philologie et d'histoire. Cairo, 1930—.

Revue d'Egyptologie. Paris and Cairo, 1933—.

Recueil des travaux relatifs a la philologie et a Varcheologie egyptiennes et assyriennes. Paris, 1870—1923.

relative (in the Indices, Section A).

Revue intemationale des droits de Vantiquite, 3eme serie. Brussels, 1954—.

Studien zur Archaologie und Geschichte Altagyptens. Heidelberg, 1990-.

Studien zur altagyptischen Kultur. Hamburg, 1974—.

Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization. Chicago, 1931—.

Sonderschrift des Deutschen Archaologischen Instituts, Abteilung Kairo. Mainz, 1975-.

"The Story of the Shipwrecked Sailor," in A.M. Blackman, Middle Egyptian Stories (BA 2: Brussels,

1932), 41-48.

"The Story of Sinuhe," in A.M. Blackman, Middle Egyptian Stories (BA 2: Brussels, 1932), 1-41.

F. Ll. Griffith, The Inscriptions of Siut and Dh Rifeh (London, 1889); P. Montet, "Les tombeaux de Siout et de Deir Rifeh" (Kemi 1 (1928), 53-68, pis. 1-6; Kemi 3 (1930), 45-111, pis. 2-10; Kemi 6 (1936), 131—63, pis. 6—10); H. Brunner, Die Texte aus den Grdbern der Hcrakleopolitenzeit von Siut (AF 5: Gliickstadt, 1937) (cited by tomb and column/line number).

274 ABBREVIATIONS

Smith J.H. Breasted, The Edwin Smith Surgical Papyrus, 2 vols. OIP 3—4. Chicago, 1930.

SOAW Sitzungsberichte der Osterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Vienna, 1950—.

TAB Tiibinger Agyptologische Beitrage. Bonn, 1973-.

TAVO Tiibinger Atlas desVorderen Orients, Beihefte, Reihe B (Geisteswissenschaften). Wiesbaden, 1972-.

TPPI JJ. Clere and J. Vandier, Textes de la Premiere Periode Intermediate et de la Xleme dynastie. BA 10. Brussels,

1948.

T T Theban Tomb.

TTS Theban Tombs Series. London, 1915—.

TTSO Tut cankhamun's Tomb Series. Oxford, 1963—.

UGAA Untersuchungen zur Geschichte und Altertumskunde Agyptens. Leipzig and Berlin, 1896—.

URAA Urkunden zum Rechtsleben im Alten Agypten.Tubingen, 1973-.

Urk. I K. Sethe, Urkunden des agyptischen Altertums I. Urkunden des Alten Reichs. 2nd ed. Leipzig, 1933.

Urk. IV K. Sethe and W. Helck, Urkunden der 18. Dynastie, 22 vols. Urkunden des Agyptischen Altertums.

Leipzig and Berlin, 1906—1984.

v. verb (in the Indices).

VA Varia Aegyptiaca. San Antonio, 1985—.

VDI BecmnuK JJpeeneu Ftcmopuu. Moscow, 1937—.

VIO Veroffentlichungen des Instituts fur Orientforschung. Berlin, 1950-.

Wb. Worterbuch der agyptischen Sprache im Aufirage der deutschen Akademien, ed. by A. Erman and H. Grapow. 7 vols; Die Belegstellen, 3 vols. Berlin, 1971.

Wb. med. H. von Deines and W. Westendorf, Grundriss der Medizin der Alten Agypter,Vl\. Worterbuch der medi-zinischen Texte, 2 vols. Berlin, 1961-62.

Westcar A.M. Blackman, The Story of King Kheops and the Magicians Transcribed from Papyrus Westcar (Berlin Pa

pyrus 3033), ed. by W.V Davies. Reading, 1988.

YES Yale Egyptological Studies, ed. by W. Kelly Simpson. New Haven, 1986—.

ZAS Zeitschrift fur Agyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde. Leipzig and Berlin, 1863—.

Indices

The following indices contain lists of all the words, names, numbers, and grammatical elements in

the Heqanakht papyri (A—D, cited by document and column or line), and a general index and list of

passages discussed (E-F, cited by page number). In the references, restorations are indicated by square

brackets [ ], probable omissions by pointed brackets ( ), and comments by parentheses ( ). The index

in Section A lists only the lexical form of each word; grammatical endings such as gender, number,

and those of verb forms are ignored. The English glosses in that section are given solely for pur

poses of identification and do not necessarily indicate the full range of meaning of each word as it

is used in the papyri.

A. Lexicon of the Heqanakht Papyri

? J

DW

3bd

Sht

h j?wt

JS

jZtw (jStw)

)j

jcnw

jw

jwl

jwj

jwh

Jb

jbd

)P

jpyt

jm

jm

jmj-r

jmt-r

jmy

jml (j?m)

jmlh

jmj

jmj

jmw

jn

jnj

jnb

jnk

jr

jj

jrt

(particle)

length (n.)

m o n t h (n.)

field, farmland (n.)

go missing (v.)

old age (n.)

complain (v.)

shortage (n.)

c o m e (v.)

woe (n.)

(particle)

ox (n.)

c o m e (v.)

get we t (v.)

heart (n.)

m o n t h (n.)

account (v.)

oipe (n.)

in, etc. (prep.)

there, etc. (prep, adv.)

overseer (n.)

overseer (n.)

per ta ining (prep, adj.)

(type of tree, n.)

h o n o r (n.)

give, cause (imp.)

no t be, no t do (v.)

barge (n.)

by (prep.); (particle)

get (v.)

wall (n.)

( is possessive pro.)

wi th respect to, if (prep.,

initial form)

thereof, etc. (prep, adv.)

eye (n.)

I 5;vo. 4. I I 31 .

I V 4.

See jbd.

I 1, 4, 6-10, 12-13; vo. 6. I I 30, 33; vo. 1—2, 4. V 16.

I I 34. V 26-27 .

I l l 2.

V 2 5 .

I 16—17.

I 9- I I 4, 38.

I 1; vo. 7.

I vo. 2, 5, 17. I I 1-2, 4, 30, 41 -42 . I l l 1, 6. I V 3. V 28. P ' 1, 4.

V [20].

I vo. 1, n . n 3 6 , 3 8 . I l l 4 - 5 ; vo. 1.IV 3.

I 1; vo. 6.

I 14; vo. 9, 13, 17. I I 2, 28, 32. I l l 2; vo. 1. I V 2, 4.

I 15, 17. V I I 8.

I 2 - 3 .

I 14. I l l 6. V I 12. V I I 4. P 2.

See m.

I 5, 7, 11, 14; vo. 11. I I vo. 3. I l l 3, 5.

I l l vo. 3 (tl-mhw). P ' 1; vo. 1 (pr).

I V vo. 1 (pr n $ncw).

I n .

V vo. 8.

H I 3

I 17; VO. 5, 7 - 8 . I I 34; VO. 1-2. P ' 4.

I 8; vo. [9 ] - i 1, 13, 17- I I 2, 32, 34, 38. I V 2 , 4 .

I vo. 2.

I 1, 14; vo. 1, 16, 17 (n). I I 4, 29, 42 (n); vo. 1. P ' 1, 4.

I vo. 3 ,8 , 17. I I 28 ,40 ; vo. 1 . I I I 6 . I V 2 - 3 . P 6 . P ' 3 - 5 .

I I I 2.

I I 26.

I 4, 6, 8, 12, 14, 16-17; vo. 1, 3 -4 , 6, 9—II, 14, 16. I I 24, 31,3

I I I 5, 8. I V 2. V 25. P ' 2 .

I 1 1 . I I 3 6 . I V 3 . V I 14.

I I 3

2 7 6 INDICES

jj

jh

p

jsj (js)

jkn

jtj (jt)

jtj

jtj-mh

jtj (Jtj)

jdt

c

C 0

C 0 J>

c% ccfi

cbj cm

cn

cnh

cnh wd? snb

ch?

chwtj

cqw

wit

wj

wjn

wc

wb3

wpw

wnm

wnn

wr

wrt

whd

wg

wdZ

wilt

bZ

blht

blq

blk

b3k

blkt

blgj

bjn

bw

bhsw

make, do (v.)

what (interrog. pro.); then (particle)

(particle)

old (adj.)

hoe (v.)

father (n.)

barley (n.)

full barley (n.)

take (v.)

cow (n.)

hand (n.)

here, there (adv.)

big (adj.)

grow (v.)

rate (n.)

amass (v.)

swallow (v.)

embellish (v.)

live (v.)

lph (interjection)

fight, exert (v.)

farmer (n.)

salary (n.)

(type of barley, n.)

(is dep. pro.)

reject (v.)

one (num.)

forecourt (n.)

first of the month (n

eat (v.)

exist, be (v.)

elder (adj.)

very (adv.)

bear (v.)

be distressful (v.)

procession (n.)

balance (n.)

hack (v.)

white of the eye (n.)

moringa (n.)

work (vb.)

servant (n.)

maidservant (n.)

be lax (v.)

bad (adj.)

place, thing (n.)

(type of bread, n.)

I 3,11-12,14,16; vo. 3,9-16.11 4,29-30,41-42.111 1,4. V 12. P ' 1,3.

I vo. 4 (hy), 15 (jh, h). II 1-2, 43. P ' 5.

I 14; vo. 3. II 38.

I vo. 1,3.

1130,33-

I I 4 - P 9 -

I 2 . P 4 .

I 7, 10-17; vo. 1-4, 8, 11. II 6; vo. 2. I l l 4, 7-8; vo. 1. V 2, 4, 6, n - 1 2 , 35, 37, 47. VI 15. P 2. Frag.A2,D2.

I 4, 6. V 27.

V 2I-[22].

18-9.1129,34. I l l 7. V 34. VI 5,9,15. VII 9; vo. 2. P 19.

I 4. II 28-29. I l l 4.

I vo. n . I I 38. V 41; vo. 5, 10. VI 12.

I v o . 5 . II [4].

I 13-

I 13, vo. 3.

I vo. [9], 13, 17. II 32. I l l vo. 1. IV 4.

I l l 6.

I VO. 12. II 2,26, 38,40.111 1-2, 5. P ' I.

II 1-2. I l l 3-5 IV 1,3-4

I 2-3, 10, 13, 17; vo. 5-7,12-13, 17-II 30, 39; vo. 3.

V 12.

I 15; vo. 5,8.114, 5b, 7, 28, 30, 32-33, 37- VII 8, 15.

P 18.

II 2. TV 2.

II 37

I [10]—11, 15; vo. 4, 14. II 26, 42—43. See also Section C.

V v o . 3.

I 16. II 32. VII 11.

I vo. 2. II 3,28, 33.

l 4 ;vo . i , 3 - I I 6 , 35-36, 43; vo. 3. I l l 3. P ' 3 .

P 12.

II [4]. I l l 2.

II 5a, 43-

I vo. 15. II 31.

VII 15.

V 34. VII 10. P 16.

II 30.

II 3

V vo. 4.

P ' 2 .

HI 1, 3

I vo. 13. II 9, n .

I 14.

I vo. 3, 16.

I vo. 14 (*>/«). P ' 3 (nfr),W

V 3 1 .

A. LEXICON OF THE HEQANAKHT PAPYRI 277

btj emmer (n.) I 5, 7; vo. 11-12. I l l 4, 6-8. V 5, n , 37. VII 1, 4; vo. 1.

pl,tl,nl this, etc. (dem. pro.) pl 14-5^0.1-3,11,13,15-16.113,53,28—29,31-33,37. tl I vo. 13.III6. P ' 2 . nl I 5, 10, 14, 16—17; vo. 9, 17. II 4, 24, 35—36, 38, 40, 42. I l l 4. Frag. D i .

pw (dem. pro.) I l l 4; vo. 1. V 9, 33.

pn this (adj.) I I40 .

pr house (n.) I vo. 13-14. I l l 1, 5. IV 4; vo. 1. VI 15. VII 6-7, 14. P 5. P ' 1; vo. 1.

pr hi back of the house (n.) V vo. 2.

pr hrj upper rooms (n.) VII 14.

prjw household (n.) I vo. 16, 19. II 2, 7, 25; vo. 6.

prt housemaid (n.) II 39.

prj go out, up (v.) II 36. Frag. A3.

prt seed (n.) 12 , 12.

prw excess (n.) I 15; vo. 12-13.

ph reach (v.) I vo. 8. II 5a, 28.

pziw co-beneficiary (n.) I vo. 17.

pgl battlefield (n.) II 41.

ptr what (interrog. pro.) II 43.

fh loosen (v.) VII 11.

m in, etc. (prep.) m 1 1 - 2 , 4 - 1 3 , 1 5 - 1 7 ^ 0 . 1 - 4 , 6 - 8 , 1 0 - 1 4 , 1 7 . 1 1 1 - 4 , 6 , 2 5 - 2 6 , 2 8 , 3 0 -37, 39-40, 43; vo. 2-[3], III 2, 5-8; vo. 1. IV 1-4. V 12, 34, 38; vo. 2-3, 7. VI 1-2, 4-9, 12-13, : 5 ; vo. 1. VII [ 1 ], 4—5, 8-12, 14-15; vo. 1-2. P 1-2, 19; vo. 1.

jm I vo. 14. II 5a, 42. I l l 6.

I 8, 9. II 34- V 34- VI (2), 5, (7), 9, 15- VII 9; vo. 2. P 19.

VII 5, 8.

112,35-36.

See jmj (v.)

I l l vo. 2.

I vo. 2, 4. I l l 7. V 4-5, 21. VI 6.

I I32 .

mj.k I 1-3,9,12-16; vo. 9,12,14-15. II 31, 35,42.111 5-6; vo. 1. P ' 3. mj.t IV 2-3. mj.tn II 2~5a, 24—25, 27—29, 33,41; vo. 1.

I 10. II 1-2,4-53,36,38,40.111 r, 5.V 36, 48. VI 20. P ' 1,3.

I 10. II 4, 36, 38,40.

V 36, 48. VI 20.

II 25, 42. IV 3.

Ivo . 15.II 1. IV 1.

I vo. 3.

V vo. 7.

I vo. 12. II 3, 26.

14 ,6 .

VI 11.

II 35-37,40. I l l vo. 1.

II vo. 3. I l l 8.

I vo. 16. See also jtj-mh.

VI 1.

Ivo . 10. V 7-8, 16. VII 12. P 3.

VII 5.

m c

m hrj

m si

m

mil

ml

mlwt

mj

with, from (prep.)

additional (prep, phrase^

after (prep.)

don't (neg. imp.)

see (v.)

new (adj.)

newness (n.)

look, etc. (particle)

mj

mj nl

mj qd

mjtt

mjwt

mjnj

mclc

mwt (mi)

mn

mnjw

mrj

mrht

mh

mhtj

mhcw

mhryt

like (prep.)

like this (prep, phrase)

total (prep, phrase)

likeness (n.)

mother (n.)

moor (v.)

upright ofa ladder (n.

die (v.)

sheet (n.)

custodian (n.)

want, prefer (v.)

oil (n.)

fill (v.)

northern (adj.)

flax (n.)

(type of building, n.)

278 INDICES

mhr

msw

msdj

mdwj

mdt

n

n

storehouse (n.

produce (n.)

hste (v.)

speak (v.)

matter (n.)

(particle)

to, etc. (prep.)

nj of (prep, adj.)

nj therefor (prep, adv.)

nl this, etc. (dem. pro.)

nj (neg.)

nch bundle (v.)

nwyt bale (n.)

nb all, every (adj.)

nb lord (n.)

nfr good, etc. (adj. & v.)

nfr (neg.)

nn (neg.)

nhj some (n.)

nht sycamore (n.)

nhh continuity (n.)

nlwt hairdresser (n.)

nqr till (v.)

ntj which, etc. (rel. adj.)

ntt that (conj.)

ntfi (3ms indep. pro.)

ntk (2ms indep. pro.)

ntr god (n.)

nd inquire (v.)

ndm easy, sweet (adj.)

r to, toward, etc. (prep/

r Iw whole (prep, phrase)

r si after (prep.)

r gs beside (prep.)

r dr whole (prep, phrase)

r dd namely, etc. (conj.)

r pw or (adv.)

rc day (n.)

rwj depart (v.)

rwyt board (n.)

rwd be firm (v.)

rmt person, people (n.)

VII 3

V 11.

I vo. 15.

I vo. i o - n .

V 2 6 .

Seej'n.

I i , 3 - 4 , 7 , 10-11, 13, 15-17; vo. 1-5,7-9, 11, 13, 15 II 1-2,4, 50,28-32, 34-35, 38, 40-44; vo. 1-2. I l l 1, 8; vo. 1. IV 1-4. V 3, 11-12, [19], 25, 30. P 6 . Frag.A2? P ' 1,3-5.

I 5, 8-10, 14; vo. I, 6, 9, 13, 15, 17, 19. II 1-2, 5a, 7, 26, 32, 34-35, 39, 42-43; vo. 1, 3-4, 6. I l l 1, 3-4. IV 1; [vo. 1]. V 2, 18, [22-23], 26, 28, 30, 33-34, 37; vo. 1, 4, 7. VII 1, 8, 10, [11-12], 15; vo. 1. P 1. Frag.A2?, D i . P ' 1 , 4 .

I 14. II 32. I l l 1. V 10.

See pl, tl, nl.

I 14-15; vo. 2, 5, 12. II 3,28, 36, 40, 44. P 19.

P 1 5 .

VII 10,12.

I 1-3, 8, 15; vo. 3, 9-11, 14. II 26, 28, 30, 34, 37, 40-42; vo. 3. I l l 1, 5; vo.

1-2. TV 2. P ' 2 - 3 .

I i4;vo.9.II 1. I l l 1,3. P ' [2].

I [8]; vo. 2, 4, 17. II 4, 26; vo. 4. I l l 3, 5. IV [2]. P ' 3.

I 5,vo. 4. II 31.

I 13; vo. 4. II 38,44.111 4.

III 5.

V vo. 5.

I vo. 5.

II 39-

II 30.

I 5. II 33-34. I l l 1,4, 7. V 34, 37. VI 1,4,6,8,13, 15; vo. 1. VII 1,9, [14]; vo. 1-2. P 1; vo. I.

I 11. I l l 4.

I 9. I l l vo. 2. P ' 5.

I 1; vo. 14.

II 31. I l l I. P ' 2 .

I vo. 5,15-16. IV 1, 3-4.

I 7. IV 2.

I 1-3, 5-6, n , 14, 16-17; vo. 2-3, 5, 7-8, 12, 14-16, 19. II 2-53, 6, 23, 2 5 -29, 38-42; vo. 1-2, 6. I l l 4-5; vo. 2. IV 4. V 37. P ' 1,4. See zho jr. r.f (enclitic): III 4.

I V 4.

I vo. 7. I l l 5.

II VO. 2 .

I VO. 16.

I 17; vo. 5. II 38.

I IIvo. I.

P ' 2 ?

116.

V vo. 6.

II 39-

I 1, 8; vo. 10. II 28, 30.

A. LEXICON OF THE HEQANAKHT PAPYRI 2 7 9

rn

rn

rnt

rnpt

rnpt-hsb

rh

rs

rswj

rdj

hSj

hlw

hlb

hbnt

hrww

hi

hlw

hjmt

hcpj

hwt

h(w)-cwt

hbsw

hbswt, hbsyt

hm

hm-kl

hmt

hmt

hnc

hnw

hr •

hrj

hh

hzt

hsb

hql-hwt

hqr

htp

htrw

h, hy

ht

hi

hi

by hnmst

hntj-ht

hntw

hntyt

name (n.)

raised animal (n.)

raised animal (n.)

year (n.)

Regnal Yesr (n.)

know (v.)

be awake (v.)

south (adj.)

give, csuse (v.)

go down (v.)

area (n.)

send (v.)

(type of jar, n.)

day (n.)

would thst (particle)

excess (n.)

woman (n.)

Inundation (n.)

enclosure (n.)

shepherding (n.)

cloth (n.)

wife (n.)

(part.)

ka-servant (n.)

servant (n.)

copper (n.)

with (prep.)

possession (n.)

on, etc. (prep.)

above, additional (adj.)

million (num.)

blessing (n.)

calculate (v.)

estate manager (n.)

hunger (v.)

be content (v.)

team (n.)

what (interrog. pro.)

thing (n.)

thoussnd (num.)

dekaroura (n.)

weigh (v.)

friend (n.)

eldest (n.)

outside, forward (n.)

upstream (n.)

II 5a. V 38.

V 2 3 .

V 2 2 .

I 14; vo. 9.

V i,34,37-

II 42. I l l 3

II vo. 3.

III 2.

I 3, 5,9, 17; vo. 1-3, 13-15, 17-18. II 2,28-29, 31, 33-35,37, 40; vo. 1, 5. I l l 3-6, 8; vo. 1. IV 2-4. V 30. P 19. P ' 3-4. See also jm/ (imp.).

I 3, 8; vo. 10. II 36, vo. [4].

I vo. 9—10.

Ivo . 6, 9. II 32,34-35.

I l l 8.

I vo. 14. II 53.

II 39.

I vo. 8.

I l 37 ,43 -P I I -

I vo. 11. II 4-53.

V 4 0 .

P i 3 -

II VO. 2.

I vo. 14, 16. II 41, 42 (hbsyt), 44 (hb(sjwt).

II 42.

I 1; vo. 18. II 1,29; vo. 5. I l l i .F rag .Ai .

P ' 2 .

II VO. 1-2. P ' 2.

I 1,3, I i ; vo. 5,7-8, 12-13, I5 - I7- I I i3 ,36,38,43-III 4, 7;vo. i.TV 3-4. V 28. VI 3.

II 34-

I 8—11, 14, 16; vo. 2, 9-11, 13, 15, 17. II 5a, 24, 30, 32-37, 39, 41; vo. 4. I l l 4,8;vo. 1. TV 4. V [26], 28. VII [12]. Frag. A5. P ' 3-4.

See pr-hrj, m hrj.

Ivo . 6, 15. I l l 1. P ' 1.

H i .

I 10, 15-16; vo. 4.

V 4 0 .

113,27.

II 37

V 2 4 .

See jh.

I 2-3. II 26, 4O; VO. 3. I l l VO. 1-2.

I vo. 6, 15. IV 1. See also Section C.

I 4.

II 5b. I l l 6. VI 12.

II 39-

I vo. 6.

V 3 7 .

I 10. II 4.

280 INDICES

hr

hrt

hrw

kt

ht tlw

htjw

ht

hlr

hnt

hr

hr<

hrjw

hrdw

zj

zl

zlt

-7° ZJ

zlw

zlw

zwt

zbj

zp

Zp 2

zhl

zhlw

sj (s)

st

st

si

sjlt (sjlt)

SJP

scb

scnh

sw

swt

swnt

swd

spit

spr

smt

smr

smdt

sn

snb

snnwj

sndm

by (prep.)

condition (n.)

lowland (n.)

wood (n.)

IT13St (n . )

disposal (n.)

belly, body (n.)

sack (n.)

hide (n.)

under (prep.)

subordinately (adv.)

dependents (n.)

child (n.)

man (n.)

son (n.)

dsughter (n.)

sstiety (n.)

watch, lest (v. & conj.)

beam (n.)

(a kind of emmer, n.)

send (v.)

time, occasion (n.)

twice (sdv.)

writing (n.)

scribe (n.)

(3fs dep. pro.)

(3fs dep. pro.)

phce (n.)

back (n.)

shorten (v.)

check (v.)

amass (v.)

keep alive (v.)

(3 ms dep. pro.)

but (psrticle)

price (n.)

entrust (v.)

bssined Land (n.)

srrive (v.)

pasture (n.)

make painful (v.)

phrase (n.)

brother (n.)

be healthy (v.)

second (num.)

sweeten (v.)

15,9;vo. 2.1135,40.1113.

I vo. 5, 15-16. I l l 1. IV 1, 3-4. P ' 1.

V I I 2 . P 1.

V vo. 1, 4-5.

V vo. 3.

116.

I vo. 6.

I 11-13, 15, 17; vo. 2, 8. V 35, 46-48, 54. VI 20. VII 3-8, [13]—14. P 2, 4. Frag.A5.

I l l 6.

Ivo . 1. II 29. P ' [4]?

II 29.

I 16. II 13-14.

I 8;[vo. n J . I l 25 ,33 ;vo . 2. I I I 7 . P 8. P ' 1,4.

I 14; vo. 9. II 40, 42. V 38.

I 3, 15; vo. 11. II 1, 12,29,33.111 4, 7. V 29, 39, 41-46, 49, 51-53. VI 2,7, 16-17. VII 7. P ' 1.

II 20. IV [1].

II 3

I 2, 10, 13. II 24.

V vo. 10.

I vo. 8.

I vo. 7.

I 2-3, 10, 13, 17; vo. 5-7, 12-13, 15, 17.112,26, 30, 33-35, 39,41; vo. 3. I l l I. P ' I.

I 2-3, 10, 13,17; vo. 5-7, 12-13,17- II 2, 30, 33, 35, 39; vo. 3.

I vo. 17. II 7. V 2, [18], 30, 34, 37; vo. 1. VI vo. 1. VII 1; vo. 1. P 1.

I l l 3-5 P ' 3 4

I 1, 13; vo. 4, 15. II 40.

I 2-3, 5, 16; vo. 4, 10, 17. I l l 5-6.

II 28.

IVO. 7. II 2, 35-36. I l l 5. IV 2.

I I I .

IV 4.

P ' 2

II 53.

I 6-7; vo. 7, 12. II 34-35. P 19.

I vo. 8. II vo. 3. I l l vo. I. P ' 3.

V 2 8 .

V-3,18.

I vo. 9.

I vo. 14. P ' 4.

II 33

I 11.

IV 1.

I 14. I l l 8. VI 3.

II 2. I l l 5 IV 2

I 16. See also zp 2 and Section C.

I l l 2 IV 2.

A. LEXICON OF THE HEQANAKHT PAPYRI 281

srh

shm

sht

ski

stjt

y

py

Bw

ilrw

Bht

swlyt

Sbnw

Smj

Imw

snj

/«c

Zncw,!;nct

incw

?nc

snd, Indt

srt

sdj

qlt

17

qb

<PV

qnd

qsn

qd

qdb

ky

kl

kl

kit

km

km

gmj

gr

gr

Srt

gs

gs

t

tl

tl

tpj

tpj m

tm

d e n o u n c e (v.)

control (v.)

weave (v.)

plow, cultivate (v.)

aroura (n.)

basin-lsnd (n.)

start, begin (v.)

value (n.)

sheaf (n.)

grilled bread (n.)

dessication (n.)

various (n.)

go (v.)

Hsrvest (n.)

hair (n.)

value (v.)

value (n.)

workhouse (n.)

keep from (v.)

acacis (n.)

nose (n.)

collect (v.)

highland (n.)

m a n n e r (n.)

W3ter (v.)

be diligent (v. & adj.)

get angry (v.)

difficult (adj.)

character, etc. (n.)

lease (n. & v.)

o ther (pro.)

ka (n.)

bull, cattle (n.)

work (n.)

black (adj.)

comple te (v.)

find (v.)

be still (v.)

also (adv.)

moreover (particle)

half(n.)

side (n.)

bread (n.)

this, etc. (dem. pro.)

land (n.)

head (n.)

before (prep.)

(neg. v.)

I I 43

I 13-

1 4 , 6 .

I I, 2, 4, 7; VO. 6 -7 . I I 36; VO. 2.

I 12. V 16.

I vo. 10—11.

I I 27, 31 . V I I 15.

V vo. 7.

V 7 -8 , 13. V I I [12].

V 3 1 .

I VO. I.

p I I .

I 9; vo. 11. V 27.

I vo. 8 . I I 2 9 . V 1.

V 2 1 .

1 6 .

I 5 (/ cf)-6. I I vo. 3.

I V [vo. 1].

I I 38.

V vo. 9 -10 .

I I 30.

I 4—5; vo. 17. I I vo. 3. I l l 4 - 5 .

P 4 - 5 , 17-

I I 43

I 9. I I vo. 4.

I 2. I I 28, 3 1 , 3 3 ; vo. 3.

I I 2 4 .

1 1 3 .

I I 5a. V 36, 48. V I 20.

I 4, 6, 10—11. I I vo. 1-2.

I 16. I I 3 4 . P 19.

I 1; vo. 18. I I 1, 29; vo. 5. I l l 1, 3. F r a g . A i

I I 3 5 . V 1 1 , 1 8 , 2 3 , 2 6 .

I I 30 -31 -

I I I 6.

V I I [i3J-

I 7 -8 , vo. 8.

I vo. 17.

I 5 I I 37

I 4, 6, 9, 12, 14, 17; vo. 1-2, 5-6, 9 - 1 1 , 13,

4. I l l 5-6, 8. V 25. P ' 2 .

I I 26. V 28.

I I VO. 2.

V 3 0 .

See pl, tl, nl.

I vo. 2, 13. I I 3.

I 9, 16. I I vo. 3.

I 9-

I 8. I l l vo. 1 . V 2 7 .

2 8 2

tr-zzt

trj (trj)

thl

thth

tt

tJy

tlbt

tlrt

tw

tms

tn

tnj nw r

trt

tzm

dwl

dbn (dbn)

dbh

dmj

dmd (dmd)

it

dbl (dbl)

dr

dd

(type of bread, n.)

respect (v.)

violate (v.)

get confused (v.)

commun i ty (n.)

male (n.)

loan (n.)

silo (n.)

(2ms dep. pro.)

ruddy (adj.)

(2pl dep. pro.)

m e m o r a n d u m (n.)

wil low (n.)

h o u n d (n.)

worship (v.)

deben (n.)

ask (v.)

harbor (n.)

total (n.)

eterni ty (n.)

exchange, replace (v.)

limit (n.)

say (v.)

INDICES

V 32-33-

II 44

I 16.

I l l 5.

II 43

II 37

F r a g . A 4 .

V vo. 7.

I 2 - 3 , 10 ,13 ,17 ; vo. 2, 5-7 , 12-14, 16-17.

V 5 0 .

I 9. II 3 , 2 8 -3 0 , 33 ,39 ; vo. 3.

I V 3.

V vo. 2, 7.

V I 11.

II 32. P ' 2 ?

II VO. I .

1 8 .

I vo. 3.

II 23. I l l 8. V 9, 33, 36, 47 -48 , 54. V I 14, 20. VII [8].

I l l 1.

I 5 II 34 H I 8.

I vo. 16. II 2 - 3 , 25.

I 1,6, i 7 ; v o . 4 - 6 . II 1 ,26-27 ,29 , 38,40.111 1, 3. TV 1. V 38. P ' 1,3

B. Proper Names

jwt-n-hlb I I40

jbw wr P 12

jpj,jp (hrd) Ivo. [11], 15.Hi, 8, 33,41.

HI7 .V 44-45. VI 5,7

jmw-n-jp P 7

jn-t.f P ' 1

jnpw I vo. 7, 12. II 17, 34

j(n)swj-sth

jiwt-n.(j)

cb-jhw

cnh.(w)

cnhf

P ' i;vo. 1

V 3 9 , 4 9

P 1 4

V 4 3

P ' 4

"She who comes for the festival" (fern, name) See James, HP, 12 and 36. The variant form j(j)t-n-hb is common in the MK: Ranke, PN 1,11,13.

"Ibu Sr." (masc. name) See the textual note on p. 68.

"Ipi (Jr.)" (masc. and fern, name) See Ranke, PN I, 22, 4-5/13/15/22-24; 23, 8. A form of the name of the hippopotamus-goddess jpt: Meeks, LA III, 173.

"Boat of Ipi" (fern, name) See the textual note on p. 67.

"He whom his father has gotten" (masc. name) Ranke, P N I , 34,1.

"Anubis" (masc. name, theophoric) Probably identical with Ranke, PN I, 37, 2—4 jnp(j). Perhaps a short form of a compound such as jnpw-m-hlt, more frequently used for men in the Middle Kingdom: Ranke, PN I, 37, 5—20.

"Seth's testicles" (masc. name, theophoric) See the textual note on pp. 69—70.

"Things for me" (masc. name) Cf. Ranke, P N I , 416, 5 jht-n-nb.(j) (OK).

"Horn of the cattle" (fern, name) Ranke, P N I , 59,22.

"Alive" (masc. name) Ranke, P N I , 62, 19; 68, 6.

"May he live" (masc. name)

Ranke, P N I , 67, 2.

B. PROPER NAMES 283

cnh-n.(j) V 4 5

chl-nht hrd

wist

wsrtij)

pr-hll

pth

mjy

P 8

II 1

V 4 3

I 3, 5, 15; vo. 17. II 6 vo. 2. VI vo. 2-3

III 2

II 20

mjtnwt(j)

mntw

mntw-nht

mr-snfrw, snfirw

mr. (j)-sw

mry-jnpw hrd

nw

nbsyt

nfirt

nn-rn.f

nnj-nswt

nnk-sw

nhrj

V 4 6

II 1

VII 6

II 35 I vo. 5-6, 12. II iS

I 1. II 14, 29. V 3, 14, [26], 30, 34. Frag. A2

P' 1

V 5 2

VI 18

I 6; vo. 19. II vo. 6. VI 13

nfr-jbdw

nfir-qrr

nfir-sdrwt

IV[2]-3.VII 15. P 6

VI 17

V 4 2

I VO. 16. I I 21

V l 2

HI I, 3; P ' 2

III 7

III 7. VI 7

'Alive for me" (masc. name) Not otherwise known. Possibly to be read cnh.n "Our life": cf. Ranke, PN I, 67, 12 tfnh.n-r-lw).

'Aha is forceful,Jr." (masc. name, probably theophoric) See the textual note. For the god, see Altenmiiller, LA I, 96-98.

'Thebes" (place name)

'He of the Strong One" (masc. name) Another example of the same name may be Martin, Seals, no. 438.

'Perhaa" (place name). Cf. also hwt-hll. Meaning uncertain: see the discussion on p. 124.

'Ptah" (divine name)

'May" (masc. name) Probably identical with the common NK nickname: Ranke, PN I, 146, 10 (NK); cf. Ranke, PN I, 143, 4 and 145, 23 (MK).

'Metjenuti" (masc. name, meaning unknown) Otherwise unattested, but cf. Ranke, PN I, 289, 17-18 zlt-mjtnw. The name is masculine, hence probably a nisbe.

'Montu" (divine name)

'Montu is forceful" (masc. name) Ranke, P N I , 154, 18.

'Whom Snefru loves / Snefru" (masc. name). The full form is otherwise unknown, but the pattern mrfyjKlNG is attested elsewhere in the MK without cartouche or honorific transposition, as here: Ranke, PN I, 160, 13 (mry-ppj); cf. also James, HP. pl. 10, 14 (snfrw-hc), and Ranke, PN I, 81, 23 (wr-snfr) and II, 275, 18 (snfrw-wsr). For the shortened form snfirw, see Ranke, PN I, 315, 18. For the relationship between the two names, see p. 113.

'I want him" (masc. name) Ranke, PN I, 157, i8;James, HP, 134; Simpson, Papyrus Reisner I, C 17, D 27, F 182.

'Whom Anubis loves, Jr." (masc. name, theophoric) See the textual note on p. 70.

'Meru" (masc. name, meaning uncertain) Ranke, P N I , 162, 8.

'This one" (masc. name) Ranke, P N I , 20-21.

'Sidder Grove" (place name) For nbs "sidder" (zizyphus spina christi) see Lucas and Harris, Materials and Industries, 446; L. Keimer, Die Gartenpflanzen im alten Agypten I (Hamburg, 1924) 64-70, 160-63. For the collective, see J. Osing, Nominalbildung, 291.

'The monthly festival is good" (masc. name) See the textual note on p. 64.

'The Frog is good" (masc. name) See the textual note on p. 59.

'The 5<frwt-festival is good" (masc. name) Cf. PN I, 194, 22 (nfr-lbd); 196, 9 (nfr-psdn); 199, 23 (nfr-smdnt) and 25 (nfr-sjsnt — NK); 324, 4 (sdrw[tj^. The reference is to an Aby-dene festival (Wb. IV, 392, 16—393, i)-

'Beautiful" (fern, name) Ranke, PN I, 201, 10.

'Nameless" (masc. name) Ranke, P N I , 204, 25.

'Herakleopolis" (place name)

'He's yours" (masc. name) Ranke, P N I , 172,22.

'Resembler" (masc. name) Ranke, PN I, 208, 22-24.

284 INDICES

nht I 3, 15. II 12, 29. I l l 4; vo. i. V 29, 51. VII 7.

mn-rhwt V 49

rkh-cl

hlw hrd

hrww-nfr

hly

h(w)-n.(j)

VII 15

I 8. II vo. 2

I 9. I l l vo. 3

VI 11

P 19

hwt-hll

hwt-hrw

hrj-sj.f

hql-nht

htj, hty

III 6-7. VI 1

I V 2

III i , 3 ; P ' 2

I 1; vo. 18. II 1, 29; vo. 5. I l l 1. V 2,12,18, 30, 34. Frag. A1

13,15. II 12, 29. I l l 4. V 29

htp-hnmw

htpt

hi

hpfyt

hnt(j)-h(tj)

V 4 0

I vo. 16. II 1,

V 4 4

I 8-9. II vo. 4

Ivo . 11. II 33

hntj-hty-prtj

hnt-htj-htp, hnt-hty-htp

htj

II 32

V 45-46

V 5 2

V 4 1

hty-cnh.f

htj tmsw

zl-mr.s

VI 15

V 5 0

Frag. B

"Forceful" (masc. name) Ranke, P N I , 209, 16.

"Whom the Companions rear" (masc. name) Otherwise attested only for a woman (Ranke, PN II, 302, 26), but cf. Ranke, PN I, 309, 10 sn-rh(w)t; its reference is evidently to the goddesses of birth (cf. Wb. II, 436, 5).

"Big Burning" (month name) See the textual note on p. 65 and the discussion on pp. 135—36.

"Hau Jr." (masc. name, meaning uncertain) Cf. Ranke, PN I, 228, 24-229, 1.

"Happy day" (masc. name) Ranke, PN I, 231, 4; for the reading see James, HP, 135.

"Hindmost" (masc. name) Ranke, PN I, 232, 7 (OK/NK).

"Struck for me"? (masc. name, possibly basilophoric) Perhaps identical with Ranke, PN I, 241, 20; cf. 234, 21-22, and 425, 27.The name may have had an initial element — i.e., X-h(w)-n.(j): see pp. 68-69.

"Hathaa" (place name).Variant(?) ofpr-hll (q.v.).

"Hathor" (divine name)

"Harsaphes" (divine name)

"The ruler is forceful" (masc. name) James, HP, 136 = Ranke, PN I, 256, 11. Cf. also Zaba, Rock Inscriptions of Lower Nubia, 230; Ranke, PN I, 212,6 nht.j-hql (MK).

"Heti" (masc. name, meaning uncertain) In this form attested in the MK only for women (James, HP, 136; Ranke, PN I, 257, 13), but probably identical with the masculine htw (Ranke, PN I, 257, 18). Perhaps related to the divine name srqt-htwIsrqt-htjt or the later divine name htyt (Wb. Ill 181, 3; 182, 1-2/4) .

"May Khnum be content" (masc. name) Cf. Ranke, PN 1,258,6; 259, 5/12; 276 n. 1.

"Content" (fern, name) Ranke, P N I, 260, 13/15—17.

"Kha" (masc. name, meaning uncertain) Ranke, P N I , 262, 1.

"Khepshyt" (place name) See the discussion on p. 123.

"Khentekhtai" (masc. name) Ranke, PN I, 272, 15. The name is theophoric: for the god, see Vernus, Athribis, 372-75, 381-90.

"Khentekhtai-perti" (month name) Meaning uncertain: see Vernus, Athribis, 384—85, and the discussion on pp. 135-36.

"Khentekhtai is content" (masc. name) Ranke, P N I , 273,1.

"Khety" (masc. name) Ranke, PN I, 277, 25—26. For a discussion of the name (meaning uncertain), see Vernus, Athribis, 375.

"Big Khety" or "Khety is great" (masc. name) For the first possibility, cf. Ranke, PN I, 277, 27 (hty clt, fern.); for the second, cf. Ranke, PN I, 278, 10 (hty-snb).

"Khety lives" (masc. name) Cf. Ranke, PN I, 278, 5 (hty-cnh).

"Khety the ruddy" (masc. name) See the textual note on p. 57.

"The son she wanted" (masc. name) Ranke, P N I , 282, 11.

B. PROPER NAMES 285

zl-nb-njwt I 3. II sb-6, 16.III4. V 15, 19,25

zl-mn-wtt VI 16

zl-hwt-hrw

zl-hntj-htj

zl-zt

zl(t)-jnwt

zlt-wrwt

zlt-nb-shtw

st-ch

sjnwj

scnh-sbkw

sbkw-ndm

splt-mlt

spwtj

I vo. 1,7, 14. II 15; vo. 1.

I V 3 - W . V 1 3

VI 18

VI 16

II 19

II 22

IV i;[vo. i ] .VI l9 ;vo . 2

VI 10

I vo. 13

V I S

I vo. 10

V 4 2

swnw-sbkww III 7; VI 4 swnw-n-sbkww

V I 2

III 7. VI 6

VI 17

smh.sn

snw-htp

snfirw

sfi-btj

sd

grg

V 4 1

V 3 9

I vo. 5-6, 12. II 1

VII 11

V 5 L 5 3

IV 3-4; vo. 2

"Son of the lord of the village" (masc. name) Otherwise attested in the MK only in the feminine zlt-nb-njwt: Ranke, PN II, 313, 5 (BM 579, cited by James, HP, 137). The masculine form occurs in Dyn. 20 (C 23096: Kamal, Tables d'offrandes I, 82—83, cited by James, HP, 137). The exact referent of nb-njwt, probably theophoric, is uncertain.

"Renenutet's son" (masc. name, theophoric) Ranke, P N I , 283, 14.

"Hathor's son" (masc. name, theophoric) Ranke, PN I, 283, 20.

"Khentekhtai s son" (masc. name, theophoric) Ranke, PN I, 284, 5. For the god, cf. hntj-ht(j) above.

"The woman's son" (masc. name) Ranke, P N I , 428,3.

"Inut's daughter" (fern, name, theophoric) Ranke, P N I , 281, 1/3,286, 13/17, II 383 (note); cf.James, HP, 137. For jnwt, cf. C T IV, 34e (variant of wrt); Wb. I 94, 9; Goyon, BIFAO 77 (1977), 54 n. 1. See the discussion on p. 40.

"Daughter of the Great Ones" (fern, name, theophoric) Ranke, PN I, 288, 1. For the theophoric element, cf. Ranke, PN I, 287,23 (zlt-wdlwt) and II, 313, 10 (zlt-sbkww).

"Daughter of the Lord of Weaving" (fern, name) Otherwise unattested, but like other MK names of the pattern zlt-nb-X (Ranke, PN I, 290, 3 and 5—6); for the element nb-shtw cf. Ranke, P N I , 186,15 and II, 367, and James, HP, 137.

"Guarded" (?, masc. name) Probably the same as Ranke, PN II, 313, 18.

"Senen" (fern, name, meaning uncertain) Probably identical with the similar feminine name znnw attested elsewhere in the MK: Ranke, PN I, 297, 11.

"Place of Netting" (place name) For the reading, see the textual note on pp. 58-59.

"Sinwi" (place name, meaning uncertain) See the discussion on pp. 33—34 and 124.

"May Sobek give life" (masc. name) Ranke, P N I , 301, 13.

"Pool of the Sobeks" (place name) See the discussion on p. 123.

"Sobek is sweet" (masc. name) Ranke, P N I , 304, 18.

"New District" (place name)

"Who is it?" (masc. name) The name, otherwise unattested, is perhaps a "phonetic" spelling of zy pw tj: for the expression, cf. CT IV, 277b, 287a, 301c (LiNY); for the spelling of zy, cf. CTV, 103a (TiC).

"The one they overlooked" (masc. name) Ranke, PN I, 307, 25.

"The brothers are content" (masc. name) Otherwise unattested: cf. Ranke, PN 1,311,7 (snw-cnh).

See mr-snfrw, above.

"Emmer-Swell" (month name) See the discussion on pp. 135—36.

"Saved" (masc. name) Ranke, PN I, 330, 10, also PN I, 331, 15-16, and II, 319, 15.

"Gereg" (masc. name, meaning uncertain) Otherwise attested only for women: Ranke, PN I, 352, 14 (OK/ NK).The determinative in some instances indicates the meaning "Liar," but "Founder" is also possible: cf. Ranke, PN I, 352, 16; II, 323,17 (NK).

286 INDICES

tl-mhw

tp-jnr

tJj

tlw-wr

III vo. 3

VII 15

VII 7

VII [i],vo. i . P vo. 1

dfr

dd-swt

[...-ht]p

?

I l l 8

I vo. 1

Frag. C

P 10

'The Delta" (place name)

'He who is on the stone" (divine name) See the textual note on p. 65.

; 'Male" (masc. name) Ranke, P N I , 388,11.

"Great Wind" (place name) See the discussion on p. 125.

"Red" (masc. name) Ranke, PN I, 400, 23-24 (OK).

"Stable of Places" (place name) A Memphite locality: see the discussion on p. 121.

"[ ... ] is content" (masc. name) See the textual note on p. 75.

"Reading uncertain. See the textual note on p. 67.

C. Numbers

0 .2

0.3

0.3*4

0.33/

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

o.83/4

1

1-5

1.8

1.9

2

II 22.

P 2 .

II 21.

II 21 .

II 17-19.

I l6. II 17', 20. V 42'.

VII 5

II 16.

I 17. II 8,11-12, 14-15, 16V18'.

II 20'.

I 12. I l l 8. V 16, 23,44; vo. 4-6,10. VI 17. _ See also wc in Section A, above.

V 50-52.

VII 4

VII 4

Ivo . 8. II 35. Il l 8. V I, 23 ' . V I 7,16. v n 7. P 6'. P ' 2. See also zp 2 in Section A, above.

3

3-2

4

4-5

5

5.2/2

6

7

7.2

7-5

7.9/2

8

9

10

10.5

11

III 8. V 13', 20, 45,49, 53; vo. 5. VI 10. VII 8.

VII 5.

V 11; vo. 8. VI 9.

V 4 1 . V I 15.

I 12. V 1, 22, 42; vo. 2, 9 .P 10.

V 4 3 -

VI 18.

VII 13.

V 4 0 ' .

V 4 0 .

I I 2 3 .

V 3 4 , 37-

V 1.

I vo. 2. V 6, 11' . VI 11. VII 14. P 12-14.

V I I , 5 4 -

V 2 1 .

11.2/2

12

12.5

13

13-5

15

18

20

20.1

20.3

21

23

24

25-5

30

30.2

33

35

38

38.2

41.2*4

4 4 . 2 /

46

50

52

53

60

62.5

63

65

74.2/2

80

100

no

V 4 7 ' .

V 17.

V 3 5 .

V 35-VI [24].

Ill 7-8. VI 19.

Ill 6. V 24. VI 2.

V 3 9 .

Ill 7. VII 10. P 4,6.

P n .

VII 6.

V 39'?. VI 7.

VII 6'.

II vo. 1.

V 3 6 .

V 4 6 . P 7 - 8 .

VII 3

V 4 7 .

P 9 .

III 8.

P 2 .

V 4 7 .

V 4 8 ' .

V 13,15.

V 1 4

VI 14.

VI 14', [23].

VVO.7.VII8 , 12.

V 5 ' .

v5-I 12.

V 4 8 .

p 17.

I 13.V 13,15.

V 14.

D. GRAMMATICAL FORMS AND CONSTRUCTIONS 287

112

117

500

600

1000

1020

1100

2007

3700

V 4 -

VI 20.

V 8 . 3 I .

v7-V 31. P 5. See also hi in Section A, above.

VII 12.

V 10.

P 1 5 .

V 3 2 .

4030

6000

7000

dar. (see

1

i-3

i-4

2

PP

P 16.

V 3 3 .

P 3 .

I5I-54):

17,13-

I 10, 12.

II 33

I 7. II vo. 2

D. Grammatical Forms and Constructions *

jrj (v.) plus infinitive

jh sdm.f

jh plus "participial statement"

wnn plus sdm.n.f

wnn plus "pseudoverbal" predicate

r plus infinitive

rdj plus infinitive

rdj plus sdm.f

hnc plus infinitive

hr plus infinitive

hr.fi sdm.f

srfm/imperfective ("circumstantial''

sJm.f imperfective, passive

5<im/passive

.sdm/perfective ("indicative")

sdm f prospective

sJm/prospective, passive

sdm /relative, attributive

sdm.f relative, non-attributive ("nominal/emphatic")

sim/subjunctive

sdm/subjunctive, passive

sdmt.fi

sdm.nfi

sdm.n.f relative, attributive

sdm. n.f relative, non-attributive

("nominal/emphatic")

adjectival predicate

adverbial predicate

balanced sentence ("Wechselsatz")

clause, circumstantial

clause, concessive

clause, final

clause, noun

complementary infinitive

concord

conditional/temporal protasis

direct genitive after nb

3;vo. 13.

I 43-

P ' 5 -4—5; vo. 3. II vo. 3.

I 3 5 - P ' 3 - 4 -1.1126,29,42-43. r v 4. P ' 1.

II 4?; vo. 1. IV 4.

3; vo. i, 3, 7-8, 10, 14-15, 17. II 31, 37, 40; vo. 1-2. Ill 3—6. TV 3. P '

-4-vo. 5,15-17. i n vo. 1. r v 3-4.

vo. 3. II 5a, 30, 33,35-36. P ' 4 -

9; vo. 2 (adj.pred.). II 35,40.

16, vo. 3. II 40? V 26-27.

IV 3. V 26.

14 ,27 ,42 . P ' 3.

15 II 3,36,40?

4,7-8, 16; vo. 3,6, n , 14. II 3i ,35;vo. 3 .V25 . P ' 2-3,5.

2, 12, 13? II 43.

14; vo. 4, 8,14-15,17-18. II 36-37. I l l 4; vo. 1. VII [13]. P ' 3.

2, 5, 8, 17; vo. 7, 9, 11-12, 15. II 5b-6, 27-29, 31, 37-38, 40-41, 43; V0.6.III 3, 5, 8. VII 15.

3 -4 ,6-7 ,9 , 11, 13, 16; vo. 1,4,7-8, I O - I I , 14-15. II 24,29, 31, 34-

5,37, 39-40, 43-44; vo. [4]. Ill 1-6; vo. 1. TV 2-3. P ' 1.

vo. 3, 17. II 31,40; vo. 1-2. Ill 4. P ' 3-4.

vo. 8. II 28-29. Ill 5.P 19.

4-5,10-11; vo. 3, 5-6. II 4, 35, 38; vo. 1, 3. Il l 4, 6.

6,17; vo. 9. II 32-33. V 3,12, 18, 30. P ' 3.

9; vo. 10. II 4~5a, 38.

7; vo. 2, 4, 17. II 26.

5, 13; vo. 2. II 1-3,25,30,33,41.111 i , 6 . V 2 8 . P ' 1.

vo. 12. II 5b—6, 41.

1,6,10, 16; vo. 2-3, 5. II 3-4, 30, 38; vo. 3. Il l 4-5. IV 2.

I 40.

4,6;vo.3 .II l3-IV4-I O - I I , 13-14; vo. 9. II 24, 35-36, 43; vo. 3. Ill 4; vo. 1. P ' 3-4. See

also rdj plus sdm.f.

I vo. 16 (or stative).

Singular after nl n: I 5; II 35; III 4.

Singular referring to dual antecedent: I vo. 13.

With numbers: I 4. II 33.

I 4-9, 12, 16; vo. 3-4,6, n , 14. II 31, 35. Ill 5. V 25. P ' 2, 4.

I vo. 9—10.

Attestations only; for discussions see Section E, below. Entries in transcription precede the list of English terms.

http://hr.fi

http://sdmt.fi

INDICES

dual (marked)

elliptical sentence

ending, dual (w)

ending, feminine, nonlexical (t)

ending, plural

ending, verbal (other than gender and number)

fronting

imperative

infinitive/verbal noun

negation

negatival complement

nominal predicate

parenthesis

"participial statement"

participle, active

participle, passive

participle, prospective (sdmtj.fj)

pronoun before its referent

question

quotation, direct

quotation, indirect stative

suffix, passive (t, tw)

suffix pronoun

suffix, stative

suffix, verbal

unexpressed object

unexpressed subject

"virtual" relative

vocative

II 3

II I, 44. IV i.

I vo. 4, 17.

I 1, 3, 8-9, 13-14; vo. I, 4, 8-9, 13, 15, 17. II 1, 28, 36-37, 39-40, 42-43; vo. 4. Il l 6-7; vo. 1-2. IV 1-2. V 5, [22], 26, 34; vo. 7. VI 1, 4, 6, 8, 12-13; vo. 1. VII [1], 9-10, [13-14]; vo. 1-2. P 1, 6; vo. 1. P ' 2-3. Omitted: I 2; vo. 9. II 26, 30; vo. 3.

w I vo. 3,16. II 5a, 14, 25, 37. Ill i. V n - 1 2 , i8;vo. 1. VI n . P' 2. wt II 32, 37. P 11, 13.

y I 3. II 38. Frag. A3. w I 2, 8, 13?. II 27,43. P ' 3 . t I 3; vo. 1-3, 8, 10, 13, 16-17. II 6,28, 30-31, 35-37,41-42.111 4 -

6, 8; vo. 1. IV 3-4. P 19. Duplicated: II 37 wjnt.tfifor wjntj.fi.

I 1,12,14—15,17; vo. 1,9—10,16-17. II 24, 34, 36—37, 42. Ill 8. IV 2.

I 2-3,6-8 10, 13, 17; vo. 5-11, 13-14, 16-17. II 2, 30, 32, 34, 38-39; vo. 1-3. IV 2, 4 P ' 4-

I 1-3, 5, 7, 14, 17; vo. 1-3, 5-7, I3-I7- II 4-5b, 26-31, 33, 35-36, 43; vo. 1-2. Ill 4-5; vo. 1. IV 1, 3-4. VTI 15. P ' 1,4.

I 5,8, 13, 14-15; vo. 2, 4-5, [9]-i3, 17 II 2-3,28,31-32,34,36,38,40,

44. Il l 4; vo. 1. IV 2,4. V 27; P 19.

I 8; vo. [9]—11, 13, 17. II 2, 32, 34, 38. Ill vo. 1. IV 2,4. V 27.

I 14; vo. 9. II 41-42. Il l 4. V 9-10, 33.

I 7; vo. 13. II 41.

I 1, 9; vo. 14. Ill vo. 2. P ' 5.

I 1,9, u ; vo. 1, 14-15. II 1, 3. Ill 1. IV 1. VI 12.

I 4, 9. II 5a, 28, 42; vo. 4. Ill 6. IV 2. V 12, 38. P 6. Frag. A3?

I vo. I O - I I . II 37, 41-42. Ill 8.

I 13; vo. 11. II 40.

I vo. 1,2, 4-5, 15-17. II 1-2, 4, 38, 42-43.

I 17; vo. 5. II 38-39-

16.

I 2, 6; vo. 3, 5, i6?-i7. II 2 -4 1 , 30, 33-34, 42; vo. 3. Ill 5-6. IV 2. VII n . P 15. Frag. A3? See also cnh wdl snb in Section A.

I v. 3, 17. II 5b, 27, 31,40; vo. 1-2. Ill 4-5. IV 3. V 27. P ' 3-4.

is I 1-3, 6, 9—II, 15-17; vo. 1-10, 13-17. II 2, 4~5a, 25, 29-36, 38, 40-44; vo. 1. Ill 3—4 (unwritten), 6, 8; vo. 1—2. IV 2—3 (unwritten). P ' 3, 5.

2fs IV 1-4. 2ms I 1-3, 5,9-i7;vo. 3-4,7-9, 11-15, I7-H 31, 34-37, 40,42; vo. 3.

Ill 1-6; vo. 1. P ' 1-4. 3ms I 4, 6, 9-12, 14-17; vo. 5-11, 13-14, 16, 19. II 1-3, 3 (Jj), 6, 13-

14, 25, 32-34, 36-38, 41-43; vo. 6. Ill 2, 4, 8; vo. 1. IV 4. V 3, 11-12, 27-28, 38. VI 3. P 9,19. Frag.A5. P ' 5.

3fs I vo. 9, 13-15. II 9, 11, 34-35, 39, 42. Ill 5-6; vo. 1. IV 1. VII

[I3l- P ' 3-ipl I I, 4. II 4; VO. 2. 2pl I 7-9; vo. 8, 15. II i-5a, 24-25, 27-29, 31-33, 38, 40-44; vo. 1,

3-4-3pl I 4-6; vo. 12. II 28,30-31.111 6.

is II 2 TV 2. 2S I 2; VO. l6?, 17. II 33; VO. 3. I l l 5.

3ms I 6 (w); vo. 3, 5 (y). II 3—[4], 30 (w) , 34; TV 2; P 15; Frag. A3?

( / ) •

3fs II 42. HI 6. VII 11.

3pl P 15-

n I 5-6, I O - I I ; VO. 3, 5, 9-10. II 4~5a, 32-33, 35, 38; vo. 1, 3. Ill 4, 6.

I V [ 3 ] . V H [ i 3 ] . P ' 3 -

I 17; vo. 14. P ' 5?

I 5,12; vo. 15. II 31. Ill 4-5. P ' 3-4.

V 26-27.

I vo. 15

http://wjntj.fi

E. GENERAL INDEX 2 8 9

E. General Index *

Abydos 124 n. 21, 125

Account P (see also Papyrus Purches) 13—14,20—21,

65-69,79,84, 125, 131, 139, 175-78, 187

AccountV 10-11,18-19,52-58,79, 134-35, 148-49,

163-64, 163-64 n. 128, 165-67, 180-82, 250-51

dates in 127, 130, 134, 250-51

written at Heqanakht's home 113, 132, 134-35

AccountVI 11-12,19-20,58-60,79,131, 139-40, 153,

158, 163, 186, 251

Account VII 13,20,60—65,79,84, 125, 131, 136, 139,

173-76, 250

address to someone other than addressee 50, 188

adjectival predicate 98

adulthood (age of) 114

adverb clause (negation of) 96—97

agricultural year 134, 138, 256

Amenemhat I 128, 128 nn. 7-8, 179

pyramid 85 n. 30

Amun 121, 179

Anubis (member of Heqanakht's household) n o , 113—

14, 116, 141, 168, 180, 184-85

anaphora 88—89

Armant 121 n. 5, 123 n. 16, 171 n. 147

aroura 151 n. 64, 151-52, 258

article (definite) 88

baboon 22

BahrYussef 124

barley 142, 142 n. 4, 143, 160, 168 n. 139, 180

caloric value 146 n. 31, 258

harvest 134, 161 n. 113

in diet 142, 147, 147 n. 39, 148-49, 160, 180

used for disposable income 143,166, 170, 180

used for salaries 145

value in terms of emmer 143, 176

water requirements 66, 150

barter (see also valuation) 61, 126, 155

beer 142

"Big Burning" 135-36, 187

bread 142, 148-49, 180

brush (writing) 76—77

usage 10 n. 30, 26, 30—31, 77, 81—83

calendar 134-36, 138

canopic chest 129, 179

cattle 161-63, 166 n. 135, 185

children as farmhands 114 n. 56

chronology 128 n. 7, 249, 256

circumstantial clauses 87, 93

Classical (Middle) Egyptian 86-87,91-92,96-97,99,

99 n. 80, 100—101

cloth 153-54, 158, 183

clover 162 n. 120

cocks (of flax) 174, 176

Coffin Texts 87,91,95, 123 n. 16, 179

colloquial language 91, 113 n. 51

common experience 88, 90

conditional clauses 91—93

"conversion" (syntactic) 92—93

copper 119, 153-55, 158, 185

coregency of Amenemhat I and Senwosret I 128 n. 8

crop — see harvest

Dahshur 121

debts and debtors 117-18, 134-35, : 53, r59, 163,168,

169 n. 142, 171, 182-83, 185-86

Deir el-Gebrawi 122 n. 10

deixis 88-89, 107

dekaroura 151-52, 151-52 n. 68, 153-54

demiri crop 251

demonstratives 88—91, 101, 101 n. 89

depalatalization 86

dialect 101, 107, 186

dictation and autographs 81—82, 186

diet 142, 145-47, 160, 164-65, 253

calories 146 n. 31, 147 n. 39, 148

direct genitive after nb 32, 88

dittography 43

Djedsut 121-22

Djefaihapi 105, 150 n. 59

dual 7 n. 22

dura 251

elliptical sentence 99

embalming cache 129, 179, 245

emmer 142, 142 n. 4, 143, 160, 166 n. 136, 168 n.

139, 180

caloric value 258

harvest 134, 161 n. 113

in diet 142, 147, 147 n. 39, 148-49, 160, 170, 180

red ink used for 77

used for salaries 145, 173—74, 176

value in terms of barley 143, 176, 187

water requirements 125

"Emmer-Swell" 135-36, 186, 250 ("Shefboti")

"emphatic" meaning/construction

conveyed by context 23

with imperfective relative sdm.f'94

with passive sdm.f 39

with perfective relative sdm.f 23, 94 n. 57

endowment 106, 149, 155, 179, 254-55

epigraphic features 76—77

black and red ink 76

dividing/ruling line 10-12, 49, 59

erasure and alteration 23, 25, 27—28, 30, 32, 36, 39—

40, 42, 48—50, 52-62, 65-67, 69, 75, 77, 8 1 -

84, 184, 186

insertion (secondary) 22, 25, 27, 40, 42, 46, 56-57,

81,83

marks 10, 16, 29-30, 38, 47-48, 50, 52-53, 56, 58-59

mistake 23, 28, 30, 32, 40, 60

order/orientation of text columns 76, 185

The list of English terms precedes those of Egyptian words (in transcription) and words from Coptic and other languages. Proper names in translation (e.g., "Big Burning"), transcription (e.g., BahrYussef), or conventional vocalization (e.g., Djedsut) are referenced in the list of English terms.

2 9 0 INDICES

(epigraphic features)

reinking 27-29, 35, 37~38, 47, 52~53, 60, 62, 64, 77,

83 use of columns and lines of text 76

epistolary formulae 8-9,73, 125, 130-31, 184, 186

existence (negation of) 96-97

famine 171, 182, 184

Fayum 121 n. 6, 124-25, 180

filiation n o , 119

first-person pronoun reflecting the scribe's sex 51, 82

flax 151, 160, 165, 168, 170, 172-78, 173 n. 154, 180

cultivation 177, 181, 187

enterprise in the Thinite nome 118, 131, 172—78,

181-82, 186-87

harvest 134, 172 fig. 10,173, 173 n. 155, 175, 249 n. 20

processing 174—75, 174 fig. 10, 250

thread 173 n. 151, 174

water requirements 125

fodder 161-62, 165 n. 133

food — see diet

Fragments 14, 21, 75, 118, 127 n. 1, 131, 141, 181-82,

185, 188

funerary estate 105

future (objective vs. subjective) 94

future perfect 92—93

Gebelein 121 n. 5, 124 n. 21

Gebel el-Silsila 124, 124 n. 21

Gereg 118, 188

grants (in AccountV) 163-64, 170-71, 180

"Great Wind" — see Thinite nome

Gunn, Battiscombe 243—44

hands and handwriting — see paleography

Harhotep ("Horhotpe") 245, 245 n. 2, 247

Harsaphes 125

harvest 134, 159, 161 n. 113, 164-65, 167-71, 180-82,

251-52

yield 156, 159-60, 160—61 n. 112

"Harvest" 138-39, 252-53 ("Shomu")

Hathaa 122-23

Hathor (cult of) 5, 188

Hatnub inscriptions 85

Hau Jr. 117

Henenu (steward of Mentuhotep II) 128-29 n- I 0 , 129

Heqanakht 105-107, 116, 180

age 114, 180

family 107—17

father 107, 171, 179-80

grain budgets 164—71

home 121—25

lands 149-51, 158-60, 165, 170, 180

schedule of travel 138-39, 148, 180-82, 184, 250-

5i, 254 scribe of Heqanakht papyri 82-84,97, : o 7 , : 7 2 ,

175, 183-86

Theban scribe of 133, 141, 186-88

wife 108-110, 180

Heqanakht papyri (see also the individual letters,

accounts, and fragments)

as found 132,132 n. 29, 244

as original compositions 81, 127

chronology 134-41, 184, 249-54

date 85, 127-30, 248-49

deposition 127, 130-33, 137, 188

dimensions 76

discovery 3,133

groups (family and Thinite) 127

never dispatched 132

place of composition 106, 121, 131-33, 183, 188

scribes — see paleography

sealing 3, 8-9, 9 fig. 6,105, 127, 131-32, 186-87, 246

sequence 139-41

heqat 143—44, 144 n. 21

Herakleopolis 121, 122 n. 10, 125

Herunefer 117, 123, 185

Hetepet (sister or aunt of Heqanakht) 109,115-16, 180

Hetepet/Iutenhab (wife of Heqanakht) 108-110, 115-

16, 180

mistreatment n o , 181—82, 184-85

Heti's son Nakht 110-12, 116, 146—47, 164 n. 128,

180-81, 184, 186

Illahun papyri 85,91, 124, 132 n. 31, 162, 163 n. 124

imperative 95,96 (negation)

Ineswisetekh 119, 187

infinitive (negation of) 96—97

inheritance 116, 171

injunctive 94

ink box — see scribal equipment

Intef 119, 187

Intefiqer (vizier) 85 n. 30

interest 163

inundation 35,39, 123, 125, I34~35, I49~5I, 159,

167—68, 170-71, 181-84, 189, 251

lp Jr.'s son Khentekhtai 107 n. 15, 117, 182-84

Ipi (mother of Heqanakht) 107, 115-16, 180

Ipi (vizier) 105-106, 129-30, 179

funerary estate 178-80, 182, 254-55

sarcophagus 106 n. 12, 129 n. 11, 179

tomb 3, 128 fig. 8, 129-30, 179, 245, 245 n. 1

irony 30

irrigation 150-51, 151 n. 62, 159, 181, 251, 251 n. 27

Iutenhab — see Hetepet/Iutenhab

ka-servant 105-106, 106 fig. 7, 133, 133 n. 33, 171,

179-81, 185, 188, 247, 255

Karnak Juridical Stela 23 n. 1, 145 n. 29

keidi crop 251

Kemit 186

Khepshyt 123, 123 n. 17, 182-83

Khentekhtai 124, 124 n. 23, 125

Khentekhtai-perti 135-36, 138, 184, 253'

Khety (name) 125

Khety (treasurer of Mentuhotep II) 129

Kom el-Ahmar Sawaris 124 n. 21

Kynopolis 124 n. 21

land 149-59

leases 134, 136, 140, 151-60, 165-67, 170-71, 177,

181, 183, 185

reclamation 124

language of the Heqanakht papyri 86—101

Letter I 6, 15-16, 21-37, 79, 82-84, 131, 141-42, 147,

151-54, 183-84, 251-52

E. G E N E R A L I N D E X 2 9 1

Letter II 7, 16-17, 37 _ 48 , 79, 82-84 , 131, 141-42, 151-

54, 184-85, 252-54

salary list 107, 115, 137 n. 47, 146—47

Letter III 8-9 , 8 fig. 5, 12, 1 8 , 4 8 - 5 0 , 7 9 , 8 2 , 131, 136,

153, 158, 185-86, 254

Letter IV 9 ,18 , 50-52 , 79 -82 , 125, 131, 141, 188

Letter P ' 14,21,79,69—75, 119, 141

Lisht 125

literacy 111-13, 188

loans 163, 163 n. 127, 167, 170, 181, 185

lunar calendar 135—36, 257

LuxorTemple 123, 123 n. 17

marr iage (age at) i n n. 43, 115

measurements

flax 151, 172-73, 176

grain H 3 ~ 4 5

land 151-54

wr i t ing conventions 143, 145, 151—52, 176 n. 166

Medine t Madi 124 n. 23

M e i d u m 121

Meke t re ( tomb of) 128 fig. 8, 129, 179, 245, 245 n. 3,

247

Memphi s 121, 134, 180

M e n t u h o t e p (nomarch of Armant) 171 n. 147

M e n t u h o t e p II, mor tua ry temple 5, 179, 188

M e n t u h o t e p III 128, 128 n. 7, 248

Men tuwose r (steward of Senwosret I) 164

Mer isu 110-12, 115—16, 131, 134, 163, 180, 184-85

Mer-Snefru — see Snefru

Meseh 129, 129 n. 17, 130, 248

Meseh ( tomb of) 3, 4 figs. 1-2, 4 - 6 , 127, 128 fig. 8,

179, 188, 245-46

burial equ ipmen t 3, 129—30, 245

coffin 4 fig. 3, 128, 128-29 ri. 10, 133 n. 33, 188

construct ion material 3—6, 246

date of burial 128-30, 137, 188

date of const ruct ion 129, 129 n. 17, 130

offering tables 3, 6, 188

mudbr i ck wall 3, 130, 188, 245

pot tery 3, 5-6 , 128, 188

rubble ramp 3-6 , 130, 188, 246

scribal equ ipment — see separate ent ry be low

M M A T h e b a n Expedi t ion 3, 133, 243

model chamber 129, 179

m o n t h names 43 , 135

M o n t u 121

morpho logy of the Heqanakh t papyri 87

M o u t h - O p e n i n g Ri tual 178 n. 174

names 121, 124 n. 23, 125

doub le /n icknames 109, 113, 113 n. 51

Neferabdu 118, 127, 131, 172, 178, 180, 182, 186

Neferu (queen of M e n t u h o t e p II) 128-29 n. 10

Nefret n o , 115—16, 180, 184

negations 96—100

o f a word 98, 98 n. 74, 99 -100

" N e w Distr ic t" 122-24

nonne questions (Latin) 97 n. 69

numbers (writ ing of) 76, 143, 143 nn. 6 - 7 , 145, 151—

52, 154 n. 81

oath 45-46 , 106-107, 185

oil 153, 186

oipe 144-45

O l d Egyptian 87-88,95—96, 100

omission of feminine t 86

order (progression/rank) 60, 107, 115, 122 n. 14, 123 n.

18, 146-47, 184

paleography 130

alternate forms 7 7 - 7 8 , 152

handwr i t ing style 84—85

hands and scribes 78—84, 127

ligatures 77

order of composi t ion 77

size and strokes 77

palatalization 86 n. 4

papyrus

copies 81

dimensions 76

palimpsests 76, 119, 127 n. 4, 130-31 , 186-88

sealing 132,132 n. 31

Papyrus Purches xiii, 3, 5, 14 n. 42, 132 n. 28

Papyrus R a m e s s e u m VI 123 n. 16, 124 n. 21

Papyrus Westcar 9 1 , 172, 172 n. 148, 173 n. 152

"participial s ta tement" 75

future counterpar t 95

pasturage 158 n. 101, 162, 168, 170, 182, 184

Perhaa 122-23 , 180, 183

mission to 136-40, 146-47, 147 n. 37, 152-54, 159

n. 106, 183-86

phonology 29—30, 86

I ~ n 100 n. 85

w >/~ y/j 86, 94 n. 58, 124, 124 n. 26

z and s distinct 86

"Place of N e t t i n g " 122, 124

polygamy 108 n. 22

"Pool o f the Sobeks" 122-24

prefixed verb forms 87

"Procession ofTepiner" 136, 187

p ronoun used before its referent 27, 108—109

proto-Late Egyptian 88

proverb 30, 38

Ptah 125

Pyramid Texts 9 1 , 179

quota t ion (direct and indirect) 24—25, 87

rations — see diet and salaries

reference sealings — see scribal equ ipmen t

Re i sner papyri 85, 85 n. 30, 91 nn. 35-36 , 101 n. 89,

130

R e n e n u t e t 124 n. 23

retrograde inscriptions 76

rhetorical quest ion 37, 39, 97—98

R h i n d Mathematical Papyrus 143, 144 n. 15

el-Rizeiqat 121 n. 5

sack (grain measure) 143—45

Saft e l -Hinna 122 n. 10

sdkiyeh 251 n. 27

salaries 138, 143, 145-49, 163, 165, 169-71 , 175, 175

n. 163, 180, 183-87

payment schedule 138, 146, 175, 183—84

sanction for burial 133 n. 33

" S c a n k h k a r e c Temple Si te" 245, 245 n. 4, 247

2 9 2 INDICES

Saqqara 121

scribal equ ipmen t from Meseh's t o m b 3—5, 127, 1 8 8 -

89, 246

ink box 3, 5

reference sealings 5, 5 fig. 4, 133, 188, 246

seasons 134, 250

seed 160-61 , 163, 163 n. 127, 165, 180-81

seifi crop 251

Senen 109—10, 117, 180, 184

Senwosret I 128, 128 n. 8, 134

change in handwr i t ing style dur ing his reign 85

servants

in Heqanakht 's household 109-10, 117, 180, 185

sale or employment of 119

shdduf251

sharecropping 154, 157

"Shefboti" — see " E m m e r - S w e l l "

" S h o m u " — see "Harves t"

Sidder Grove 122-23 , 180

Sihathor 110-13 , 116, 127, 163, 180

and deposit ion of Heqanakh t papyri 133, 188

as messenger 112-13 , : 2 5 , 131-33, 136, 139, 1 8 2 -

83, 185-86

scribe of Heqanakh t papyri 84, 113, 134, 141, 180,

186

Sinebniut 110-11 , 113, 114 n. 57 ,116, 141 n. 61 , 163,

180, 184-85

Sinwi 182

Si(t)inut 115-16, 180

Sitnebsekhtu 118, 126-27, 131, : 7 3 ~ 7 5 , 181, 186—88

Sitwerut 115, 117, 180

Snefru /Mer-Snefru n o , 113-16, 138, 140-41 , 146,

168, 180-85

Sobek 65, 123 n. 16, 124, 124 n. 23, 125

statue cult 105-106, 178, 181

taxes 161-63 , 165, 165 n. 134, 180

text units 77, 81

Thebes 106, 121-22, 125

non-residents employed at 106 n. 11

Thin i te n o m e 118, 121, 125-26, 131

thread — see flax

travel t ime 135-36

Uronar t i 148

valuation 122, 155

of barley to e m m e r 143

of cloth 158 n. 100

o f copper 158 n. 99

of grain 158 n. 99

verse points 81

vocative 88, 90

wages — see salaries

Wah 129, 129 n. 16

Wi lbou r Papyrus 156 n. 94, 161 nn . 112 and 116

Winlock , H .E . 128-29, 243

w o m e n

accompanied on journeys 114 n. 56

as scribes 82, 188

in fieldwork 177 n. 172

workload 152 n. 73, 153, 158-59, 165-66, 166 n. 135,

168, 170-71 , 182-83

wr i t ing from the recipient's point of v iew 138 n. 51,

140 n. 59

yield — see harvest

zagharid 22

Iht " fa rmland" 149-50

Iht qdbyt "leased land" 155, 155 n. 86

jlt-nbs " M o u n d of the Sidder" 122 n. 10

jltw > j3tw " shor tage" 86

jj /zr"come d o w n from" 34

_/ ' cnw"woe" 22

jw (particle) 87

jw.f r sdm 91

jwyf as relative sdm.f 94, 94 n. 58

jw-nll (site in Middle Egypt) 124 n. 21

jw-swtj "Isle o f the Dangerous (Crocodi le)" 123 n. 16

jwh "get w e t " 32

jp "recognize, no t i ce" 45 -46

j p y j ' o i p e " 144-45, 258

jm (adverb) in ter rupt ing a direct genitive 28

jmj-r Ihwt "overseer of fields" 112 n. 45

jmj-r jhw "overseer of catt le" 112

jmj-r pr "s teward" 111

jmj-r tl-mhw"Delta-overseer" 48, 117

jmj-r tlzt "foreman" 112 n . 45

jmt-rpr n $ncw "workshop-oversee r" 51, 175

jmlh " h o n o r " 49

jmj "give, cause" (imperative) 29, 87

jmj (negative verb) 96

jn (particle) in questions 97

jnt n "due t o " 176

jnswj "testicles" 69—70

j 'nfe"mine" 41

jr (preposition) w i thou t initial reed-leaf 87

jr (conditional) 91 -93

jrjw.fi hr sdm 74

jr sdm.f 91

jrt-hrw "Eye of H o r u s " (name) 70

jrj m "deal wi th , make i n t o " 27, 53

jrj n "act for" 28, 46, 110

jrj n "make t o " 164 n. 128, 170

jrj hr "charge u p o n " 29, 55

jrj zp "make a case" 46

jh/hy/h (interrogative p ronoun) 88 ,91 n. 37

jh (particle) wi th "participial s ta tement" 75

js (particle) in negations 98

js "sack" 70

j t ; "father" 115-16

j t / "ba r l ey" 142

jtj-mh "full barley" 52, 142

jtj > jf; " t ake" 86

" " h e r e , t h e r e " 26-27 cwt "sheep and goats" 68 cbj n "associate t o " 28 cmjb "neglect" 43, 52 cn "embel l ish" 50 cnh-(w)dl-s(nb) omi t ted 73 crq " t i e " and " c o m p l e t e " 62 crqy "last day of the m o n t h " 63 chl tw " m i n d y o u " 95

http://jrjw.fi

E. GENERAL INDEX 293

cht "farmland" 153, 159 n. 105 chwtj"farmer" i n , 159, 159 n. 105 c<jtM'salary" 145

wit (type of barley) 126, 142-43

wbl "forecourt" 57

wnm nj sfc/n.n.f"indivisible" 106 n. 8

wnmt"feed" 162 n. 118

wnn (future) 91—93

wnn sdm.n.f 92-gi

whc (a fish, Synodontis schall) 67

iW'Mbalance" 56

fo'/xJ'white of the eye" 38

blkjm "your humble servant" 9

blk n pr-dt "worker of the funerary estate" 8, 49, 105

blkt "maidservant" 72

blkt nt pr "housemaid" 109

bhsw (kind of bread) 148

btj "emmer," gender 52, 60, 142 n. 4

pl/tl/nl (demonstrative) 88-91

pl-mw-hl "The Descending Water" 124, 124 n. 21

pw (copula) 49

pn/tn/nn (demonstrative) 88—91, 107

pr "estate" 123 n. 15

pr n ?nc "workshop" 175

pr-hll "Perhaa" 122

pr hi "back of the house" 57

pr hrj "upper rooms" 64, 175 n. 162

prjw "household" 107 n. 16

prj/wdl /iMemerge from" 34

pzlw/pzsy "co-beneficiary" 37, 111, 116

psdntjw "new-moon day" 136

pgl "battlefield" 46

ptr (interrogative pronoun) 87

fh "loosen" 62—63

mjpt "by oipe" 61

m c "owed by" 44

m-bjl "no" 47

m /ir; "additional" 61

mlcwj/mlctj (name) 33

mj nI "like this" 26—27

mj nfr.k snb.t cnh.t"ifyou please" 9, 49

mj.k wMthough" 73-74

m c ' c "upright (ofa ladder)" 58

mn "sheet" 24

mnjw temuJ'custodian of hounds" 117

mhrj "buyer" 61

mhryt "warehouse" 61

msw "grain-produce" 161—62

n mlwt "new" 42—43

tt/-JJ'personnel" i n n. 36

nj (negation) 87-88,96-100

nch "bundle" 68, 176, 176-77 n. 169

nwt "ball, yarn, roll" 62, 172

nwyt"ba\e" 62, 172-73

nb (quantifier)

interrupting direct genitive 88

omission of feminine ending with 86

nbs "sidder (ziziphus spina-christi)" 122

nbs-SNFRW"Snefru's Sidder" 122 n. 10

nbsyt "Sidder Grove" 122

nfr "be at an end" 100

nfr "final" 49

nfr I (negation) 24, 88, 100

nfr n (negation) 100

nn (negation) 87—88,96—100

nn"or not" 47

ntk and ntf (independent pronouns) 87

ntt (clause marker) 87

ndm "easy" 158 n. 102

r dd 21,24, 42, 87

r-wlh (unknown site) 124 n. 21

r-mw-h I "Mouth of Descending Water" 124, 124 n. 21

rwd "be firm" 44

rmn "side" 33

rmJ'people" 107 n. 16, 146 n. 35

rn, rnJ'raised animal" 54

rkh-c3"Big Burning" 135-36

rdj m hr "assign" 29 n. 2

rdj hlj/jwt "send" 114 n. 56

hlj"go down" 123 n. 19, 124

hlj lir"come down from" 34

hlj /M'farm" 25, 159

hcpj c?"big inundation" referring to a normal

inundation 35, 171 n. 146

hcp /r"little inundation" 171 n. 147

WJ'enclosure" 123 n. 15

hwt-nbs "Enclosure of the Sidder" 122 n. 10

hwt-h31 "Hathaa" 122-23

hwj "drive (animals)" 68

hbswt /hbsyt"'wife" 108

hjmt "woman" 108

hm-kl "ka-servant" 105

/zmMservant" 72

hsw n hpsyt "singers of Khepshyt" 123 n. 17

hsw n £/mW "singers of Libya" 123 n. 17

hq3-hwt "enclosure ruler" 118

hqlt"heqat" 143, 258

htp-dj-nswt formula 133 n. 33

htrw"team" 55

h3 "dekaroura" 151-52 n. 68

hlj "weigh, measure" 50, 144

hy/h — see jh

hpsyt "Khepshyt" 123

hnmst "friend" 44

hnt-hty-prtj "Khentekhtai-perti" 135—36

hntj-ht "eldest" 32, 114

hntw "outside, forward" 56

/^/Jdm./construction 87, 109 n. 26

hrw "lowland" 60, 125

htjw "disposal" 40-41

/?'r"sack" 143, 258

hrjw "dependents" 29

hrdw "child" 74, 116 n. 63

z/"man" 107 n. 14

zj pn "this man" 46, 46 n. 5, 107

zl n ht "bodily son" 114

z 'u/ ' lest" 23, 41, 95

zjn"r\ib, erase" 33

zwt (kind of emmer) 142, 143

zwnw "physician" 124 n. 26

294 INDICES

zbj"send" 114 n. 56

zp 2 "twice" 15

zh3.k "Your Excellency" 9, 9 n. 25

st (dependent pronoun) 87

st-ch "Place of Netting" 122

sjlt > sjlt "shorten" 86

s/'n "clay" 33

sjnwj "Sinwi" 124

scb "amass" 72

sj3t "shorten" 157

sjnm ~ snm "feed" 124 n. 26

wmM'pool" 124 n. 26

swnw-n-sbkww "Pool of the Sobeks" 122-24

swnwj "The One of the Pool" 124

swnwwj "Two Pools" 124

swd "entrust" 52, 164 n. 128, 170

spit "basined land" 32, 150-51, 150 n. 59

splt-mlt "New District" 122-23

smt "pasturage" 43,162 n. 119

smw "grass" 162 n. 118

sn "brother" 115—16

shm jb "take liberties" 157

sk3 "cultivate" 21

st3t "aroura" 152 n. 73, 154

sdm/imperfective, negated by tm 96

.siim/passive 92, 96

sim/perfective, negation of 99

.«/m./"prospective 88,91-96, 96 (negation)

5dm /relative, nonattributive 92

sdm /subjunctive 91-93, 95

sdmm.fi 91-192

sdmt.fi69 (semantic value), 99 (negation)

Bj (< Br) "stalk" 172, 172 nn. 148-49

Brw "sheaf" 172-73, 172 n. 149

^ " g r i l l e d (bread)" 148

tj "basin" 150-51

$j-(n)-sbkw "Lake of Sobek" 124, 124 n. 22

Btj (unit of measure) 155 n. 87

iw/yMdessication" 30

$bnw "various" 67—68

if-MMEmmer-SweU" 135-36

imj hr "go about" 34

imw "Harvest" 138-39

$nc and $ncw/$nct/Bt "value" 155

in^w n wrt "Storehouse of the Great (Goddess)" 5

$ncw n hwt-[hr] "Storehouse of Hathor" 5

S (site near Herakleopolis) 124 n. 21

idj inct "collect value" 155

q3J'highland" 66, 125

qjsj"He of Qus" 68 n. 9

qbt "watered" 149—50

qn.tj"be diligent" 22—23

qdb "lease" 154-55, 155 n. 86, 181

kM'bull"54

ky snwj"a second one" 147

kw (is stative suffix) 87

km "complete" 63

gr"be still" 37, n o

grt (particle) 87, 98-99

t3-wr"Great Land" 125

t3-mhw "Delta" 121

t3-tnn "Rising Land" 124 n. 20

tw (passive suffix) 87

tm (negative verb) 96

tp-jnr"He who is on the Stone" 125

tpj "first day" 29

tr-zzt (bread unit) 148

tt "community, staff" 47

tlw-wr "Great Wind" 121, 125

tlbt"grain loan" 163, 163 n. 125

tlrt"silo" s& trj for trj "respect" 86

dwl ntr n "praise god for" 71

dbn "deben" 258

dmd > dmd "total" 86

dd in address 21

d3tt 32

db3 > db3 "exchange" 86

dbn for dbn "deben" 86

dd-swt-(TTJ) "Djedsut" 121

spelling of 130,130 n. 20

ddw "Busiris," spelling of 128,128—29 n. 10

xcoyi "sack" 70

Moyoyi "new" 86 n. 6

fic\.j> "crocodile" 245 n. 5

o i n e "oipe" 86 n. 5

nppe ~ ne ipe "emerge" 86 n. 4

cxeiN "physician" 124 n. 26

Tppe "be afraid" 86 n. 4

q)o\/<i)\\ "bundle" 172 n. 149

t j j j l "ardab" 258

^1 m.nj "Temsah" (name) 245 n. 5

tj'•** "feddan" 258

3-LS "kela" 258

F. Passages Discussed *

1 1

1 2

13

13-9

14

I I I - I 2 , I38, 151

95, 160

122, 123

138, 139, 152-54

26, 89, 156

I 4-5

15 I 5-6

16

I 6-7

9 2 - 9 3 , HO, 155

89, 122 n. 14

89, 100, 155

155 ,156

158, 168

Passages in the Heqanakht papyri, cited by document and column or line, precede those from other sources. References include only those passages discussed or translated at length and, for the Heqanakht papyri, generally do not include the translations and textual notes of Chapter 2.

http://sdmm.fi

http://sdmt.fi

F. PASSAGES DISCUSSED 295

1 7 - 8

1 8

1 9

I 9 -10

I 0-13

I 9 -14

I 10

I I O - I I

I 10-13

I 11

I 11—12

I 12

I 12-13

1 1 3

1 1 3 - 1 4

1 1 4

1 1 4 - 1 7

1 1 6

1 1 7

I VO. I

I VO. 1-2

I VO. 2

I vo. 3-4

I vo. 4

I vo. 4 - 5

I vo. 5

I vo. 5-6

I vo. 6

I vo. 6 -7

I vo. 6-8

I vo. 7 -8

I v o . 8

I vo. 9

I vo. 9 -10

I vo. 9—12

I vo. 10

I VO. I I

I VO. I I—12

I vo. 12-13

I v o . 13

I v o . 13-14

I vo. 14

I vo. 15

I vo. 16

I vo. 17

I I I

I I 1-27

II 3

II 3-4

II 4

II 4 -53

II 5a

II 5 b - 6

116

II 7-23

II 24

II 25

II 26

I I 26 -28

II 27-28

123

150

117

26, 121, 137

151 -52 ,155

155-58

156

95

160

145 n. 23, 156

22, 160

95

95

95

H 4 - 4 5

90, 115-16

138, 139, 140, 147

89

89

90, 121, 130, 163

97, 148, 167

8 9 , 9 0 , 9 7 - 9 8 , 143

89, 92-93

143, 145 n. 23

100

9 7 - 9 8 , 114, 137, 146

114

138, 149

138, 168

140-41

138-39, 148

168, 169, 171

90, 115-16, 138 n. 51

88, 149

150-51

159

89, 171

92, 126 n. 35, 135

9 0 , 9 7 , " 3

90

109

n o 90, n o

90, n o

89, i n , 116, 122 n. 14, 1;

121 n. 2

7

89 ,90 , 135

26, 121, 137

149

135, 138

90, 146 n. 32

138, 139

122

146-47

89

116

146 n. 32, 149

135

26, 96

8, 139-40

II 28

II 28 -29

I I 29

I I 2 9 - 3 0

I I 29-31

II 30

I I 31

I I 31-32

I I 32

I I 32-33

I I 33

I I 34-35

I I 35

I I 35 -36

I I 36

I I 36 -37

I I 37

I I 37-38

I I 38

I I 38 -39

I I 38-40

I I 39-40

I I 40

I I 40-41

I I 41 -42

I I 42-43

I I 4 3 - 4 4

I I vo. 1-3

I I vo. 1—4

II VO. 2

II vo. 2 -3

I I I I

I I I 2

H I 3

H I 3-4

I I I 4

H I 4 - 5

I I I 5

I I I 5 6

I I I 6

H I 6 -7

I I I 7

I I I 7 -8

I I I 8-vo. 1

I I I VO. I

I I I VO. 2

I V 2-3

rv3-4 I V vo. 1

V 1

V 1-17

V 2 - I 6

V 2 -10

V 4 - 6

V 7 - 8

V 7-10

V n V 12

V 12-15

V 12-16

8 9 , 9 7

138

26, I I I - I 2 , 138-39

89, 146

138

149

100

8 9 , 1 3 6

135

151-52, 158 n. 101

89, 145, 149, 160, 162

138

90

9 2 , 9 9 , 137, 140-41

26

114

89

26, 94

26

97 -98 , 137

108-110

26 ,89

98 -99

106-107

89

95

99, n o

93, HO

138, 152-54

123

155

125

125

125

139

26, 89, 140

97

139

144

89

123

123

117

94, 155, 159 n. 107, 176

157

112

131

132

175

134

11

163—64 n. 128

134

135, 163, 165-66

172

151

134, 161-63, 165-66

170

163-64

134

296 INDICES

V 1 3

V 13-15

V 16

V 18-29

V 18-20

V 20 -24

V 30-33

V 34-36

V 3 7

v 37-54

v 3 9 - 5 2

V vo. 1—10

V I 1

V I 2 - 1 8

V I 4

V I 6

V I 7

V I 8

V I 1 2 - 1 4

V I 15-19

V I 20

V I [21-26]

VT vo. 1-3

VII 1-7

VII 3 -7

VII 4

VII 8

VII 9-11

VII 9 -12

V I I 9 -14

VII 11

VII 12

VII 15

VII vo. 1

VII vo. 2

P i - 3

P i - 5

P 2

P 4 - 5

P 6

P 6 - 1 4

P i 5

P 15-17

P 16-17

P 18

P 19

P VO. I

p ' 2 - 3

P ' 3

P ' 4

P ' 4 - 5

Frag. A 4

172

151, 165-66, 170—71

151

11

134

161

11, 134, 148, 165-66

11, 134, 135, 167

135

11, 134, 163

118

134

122

117

122

122

12-13

122

144

163

12, 139

12

117 , 122

13, 173-74

177

144

13, 173-75

136

172-73

13, 173-75

135

172

13, 125, 135-36, 173-75

131, 173

173

176

14

144, 176

176

134

14, 176, 177

176

14

177

14, 176

14, 177

131

89, 94, 119

9 n. 26

92 n. 45

95

163

A d m . 6, 10

Anthes , Hatnub, no. 49

Baer, ZAS 93 (1966), 2 col. 7

Barns, Ramesseum Papyri, pl. 3

B D 7 2

B D 9 9

C e r n y , T T S O 2, 27 (no. 59, 2)

56

45

46 n. 4

46 n. 5

152, 152 n. 73

152 n. 73

172 n. 148

C G 20518,1

C G 20543 a 16

C T I, I74i

C T I, I99f

C T IV, 143 a

C T IV, 186-873

CTV, i99d

CTV, 209f

C T V I , 3703/t

Gardiner, RAD, 73, 4 - 9

Gardiner, P^4D, 83, 2 -3

Gsrd iner snd Sethe, Letters to

the Dead, pl. 6, 2 -3 3nd 7

Gsrd iner snd Sethe, Letters to

the Dead, pl. 6, 3

Gsrdiner snd Sethe, Letters to

the Dead, pl. 6, 4 -5

Gsrstsng, ElArdbeh, pl. 5 c 4 -5

Gsuth ie r snd Jequier, Licht, 85

fig. 102

Griffith, Kahun Papyri, pis. 1 6 -

i 7 , U - 3 2

Griffith, Kahun Papyri, pl. 17, 6

Helck, Dw3-Htjj I, 26

Jsmes , HP, pl. 22

James, HP, pl. 26, 6 -7

James, Khentika, 61

Karnak Juridical Stela

Lacau and Chevrier , Chapelle,

137, 13-14

Leb. 82 and 131

Mes N 2

Mes N 3 5

Neferti 4

Newber ry , Bersheh I, pl. 33

Papyrus d 'Orb iney 1, 1—3

Papyrus Prisse 9, 7

Papyrus Prisse 10, 8-9

Papyrus Prisse 11 ,9 -10

Papyrus Prisse 19, 4

Papyrus Reisner II, D 3 / 5

Papyrus Reisner II, E4

Papyrus Re i sne r II, G 2 / 3 / 6

Papyrus Smith 1, 25 -26

Papyrus Smith 15,15

Papyrus Westcsr 8, 16

Papyrus Westcar 11, 15-16



Peas. R 9, 3

Peas. R 11, 2 -3

Peas. B 1 , 6 7 - 6 8

Peas. B i , 126-27

Peas. B i , 135-36

P e a s . B i , 196

Peas. B i , 283 = B2, 5-6

Peas. B 1 , 352-53 = B2, 86 -87

Sethe, Lesestucke, 7 9 , 1 7 - 1 8

Sethe, Lesestucke, 79, 20—80, 1

Sethe, Lesestiicke, 84, 16—18

39

36

2 2

95 n . 6 3

94 n. 58

93 n. 50

152 n . 7 3

152 n. 73

94 n. 58

160

29

91 n. 35

97 n. 69

9 i n. 37

45

133 n-33

162 n. 123,

124

64

97 n. 68

106 n. 9

24

54

23 n. 1, 145

44

56

37

57

90

98 n . 7 2

116

98 n. 73

108 n. 20

37

32

91 n. 35

91 n. 35

91 n. 35

158 n. 102

98 n . 7 4

99 n. 80

49

172, 173 n.

172 n. 148

97 n. 69

172 n. 148

94 n. 57

98 n. 71

157 n. 96

98 n. 71

91 n. 42

91 n. 41

101

164

44

163 n.

n. 29

152

F. PASSAGES DISCUSSED 297

ShS 66

ShS 70-72

ShS 109-10

ShS 119-20

ShS 150

ShS 154-55

ShS 175

Simpson,JEA 59 (1973), 221

fig. 1 B-C

S in .B 23

S in .B 82

S in .B 142-43

Sin. B 202

S in .B 212-13

Siut I, 269

56

91 n . 4 2

90

89 98

89 89

148

90 n. 33

98 n. 74

90 n. 32

94 n. 57

92 n. 44

133 n. 33

Siut I, 269-272

Siut I, 279

Siut I, 295

Siut I, 301

Siut I, 310

Siut L313

Siut III, 5

Stewart, Stelae II, pl. 18, 8

Urk. I, 39 ,6

Urk. I, 84, 3

Urk. I 195, 12

Urk. 1 ,218 ,9 /17

Urk. L 2 2 3 , 17

Urk. IV, 892, 9

L/rfe. VI I , 4 6 , 1 8

105-106

143 n. 9

98

98 n. 74

98 n. 70

152 n. 68

46 171 n . 1 4 7

46 n. 4

49

36

49

46 n. 4

69

98 n . 7 2

PLATES

MAP OF THE THEBAN NECROPOLIS AT DEIR EL-BAHRI

IN THE EARLY MIDDLE KINGDOM

PLATE 1

PLATE 2 MMA EXCAVATION OF THE TOMB OF IPI

Entrance to the Tomb of Ipi at Left, Entrance to the Tomb of Meseh in the Center (first entrance right of Ipi's)

THE TOMB OF MESEH AS DISCOVERED PLATE 3

A. Antechamber, Stairway, and Blocked Corridor

B. Burial Chamber and Coffin

PLATE 4 OBJECTS FROM THE TOMB OF MESEH

A. Grass Carrying Mat from the Corridor or Antechamber (MMA 26.3.280)

B. Leather Carrying Mat

C. Stone Mauls from the Corridor or Antechamber

.-» ; •*"*¥

D. Pottery Offering Tables from the Corridor or Antechamber

SCRIBAL MATERIALS FROM THE TOMB OF MESEH PLATE 5

A. Blank Papyri from the Rubble Ramp (MMA 22.3.523G)

B. Clay Cones with Reference Sealings, from the Antechamber and the Rubble Ramp (MMA 25.3.267A-C, 26.3.282)

C. Pieces ofWood Ink-Box from the Antechamber and Rubble Ramp (ex-MMA 25.3.263)

D. Ball of Papyrus String from the Rubble Ramp (MMA 25.3.268)

PLATE 6 THE HEQANAKHT PAPYRI AS ORIGINALLY FOLDED

1

•u *

B. AccountVI (MMA 25.3.521)

A. Letter II (MMA 25.3.517)

C. Letter III Sealed (MMA 25.3.518 and 25.3.269)

SEAL OF HEQANAKHT, FROM PAPYRUS PURCHES PLATE 7

* » • » ' '

-«.

PLATE 8 LETTER I (MMA 22.3.516), RECTO

-1 ^ '4bfc&.

,, ...^^- —. ^ M V - T T '-Mrr»v

w JL &* % 2* <#l'S

•ft ? A 4 wT *LF

3 ^s~ •Zf

2L.Q? " J^ ^C ?r ~

•••• ^ l ^ j y' ^-1 ~z*-AL w

1*

<C Art

mm- jfe? <^^^ "-* * V V..- _ r -<

^*- r ^ ^ P

f > -5 J S

^ " : ^ M ^ 4 l . ^ 3M i y 5 O KS=/

.»,-» if

^ J f c u ^ * • >

, / '

LETTER I (MMA 22.3.516),VERSO PLATE 9

s , ' p ""*•-.

I t \J5* 5 r £&

' \ *

1

- ,

if > *

:?

!

1 —.

•

•

i

%

»

i

I

PLATE 10 LETTER II (MMA 22.3.517), RECTO

...aft; ..**•» W2"

s ^ ip X

<ik** ir' ••/if *^ ^ "n

1 *

W%M I f 0

*P4

n^^^^^

*7\ ' &*^f .pr?4 ' 5 - *^ 'V*M . J ^ o > 3 " *^> -TTS • 2St

*?2. t » >o- <2 * ^ ^ "3? i& *? & * g,. ffr

i a - gk f«qf J!

4-5 is? "tr • I f i , i 1 i - | -

w is is r .rt tr x ^

^7f- /* * ^ JF--<r * # If. <<£ ^ 2

*pj <s%. --ss ;.-rs>i . ^ / I y - - £ *C.£z > |> I • * « • - * ^

73; i^ ^ ^ .1 f- iw^'£ykkJ*t 2 <£

' -^ -!T & i2 ii^ CI ^ 52 M -^l*ferc^ ^^y

I ^!^ 2t - -f ^ ^ r^^^« K .*?F IV

•LP

**r"fj$p . A •

*V* i S

& L

*%ss&

rf3

i IT

t*T jf. /k iiT. ^ ,J=^ « ? IP s 4 ^ ' 4

.nw—-, \-i^F

t. aim

«

^

1 1 • • • . : • >

mm*

fe. 5^

LETTER II (MMA 22.3.517),VERSO PLATE 11

tt*Li i

-H

1

yy0

u4 ~ *

* . . • i »"

PLATE 12 LETTER III (MMA 22.3.518), RECTO

LETTER III (MMA 22.3.5i8),VERSO PLATE 13

I J

[M-^:.-3|, %J*-

.ai

• •

PLATE 14 LETTER IV (MMA 22.3.519), R E C T O

LETTER IV (MMA 22.3.519),VERSO PLATE 15

f :

PLATE 16 A C C O U N T V (MMA 22.3.520), RECTO

^MgoB

* * ! ^*^. ^C Hsr u &iz%(\zt

J' —I l l ' l f l

tm

lit

A. 4*

i t **~ •ILL i*-

1 1 «A

£ 1 1

j-t&Q.

2

r

fi>tyf**fcX t&Afa-* * »

f i

I

II 1 I * * i^

* '

T

m^*0*.

«6^3

4 *

>»|iJ^

* * * <

ACCOUNT V (MMA 22.3.52o),VERSO PLATE 17

n

" f i i i^ ^»^ l l^* Hf**^

3L5is*«lr

3MA *

'.w^1 * id .-ferv o

/ ^

i,

i »

f

I

i- " ' • • *

<v * ^ s *

IB

PLATE 18 ACCOUNT VI (MMA 22.3.521), RECTO

- » • — . . • » «

M . .

* 7 /fie ^ J a ^ - H P J>

^Rj^^j

\

2 &&&&*&&& •

v

*11$

- j -«JL .••• kl

-v_ -•—

ACCOUNT VI AS ORIGINALLY UNFOLDED PLATE 19

.-«#«W*WJ''*:

5 -*?" ~1 r«'

I ^P 44** | \

*

S23' -#i

* M-—*•- i £.*%4il —• H r Q i t : : ..._r

I

J' * * •

, I 1

PLATE 20 A C C O U N T V I (MMA 22.3.52i),VERSO

ACCOUNT VII (MMA 22.3.522), RECTO PLATE 21

PLATE 22 ACCOUNT VII (MMA 22.3.522),VERSO

(^v

V i

i it

; *

J/" "w»i '"^M/*:

il L >-J

ACCOUNT P (PAPYRUS PURCHES), RECTO PLATE 23

£€».- gt

*3L J: S * >

|-rg

PLATE 24 ACCOUNT P (PAPYRUS PURCHES),VERSO

FRAGMENTS A-E (MMA 22.3.523A-E) PLATE 25

% « 4 y .' *»w "*•*

j * " ^ i " N

4*

f

4

D

1 " ^ w « -

A. Recto

A. Verso of Frags. A-B

PLATE 26 LETTER I (MMA 22.3.516),RECTO

17 16 15 14 13 I 2 11 10

tf

0 CD", 1 ^

CD'< 1 n

0 0 0

LJ

0=4

0 A

CD", 0 0 0

0 0

n A

. ^ J W

O 0 = 4

o 4

0 = 4

T_/^J / * **m

r3 ax

CD-

C D - ,

O E D

M T M /yf' w*<m L^-J

0 A CD-

0 4

0 = 4

LJ

_ <Z2± _

£&&£$& |" °" ""n " j

0ft ^p D a i / 1

D i / 1

0 0 0

C D - ,

^ o 0_

OOO

n

CD", 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 4

OOO

M=TJ

=> _ = * 2

CD"

'O '4 / /

PT\

cy&jD

•

0/9 CD-

CD-.. 0 A

0 = 4

OOO

1 I •§•

LJ OOO n

CD",

L a

i / 1

'O O

O ko &-W

CD",

0=A

0 = 4

'O

1 7 "

i n

" A

O

0=4 • ^ _ ^ B

o 0 4

OOO

«

I I

CD- E

0—LU

Q = i

r3

CD"

a

o

i n

o

o=-/

L\

'O

'O

0 R o

0 0 0

C D - ,

LJ

0 = 4

r

0 = 4

LETTER I (MMA 22.3.516),RECTO PLATE 27

17 16 15 H 13 12

1 *J £ f-* i *i2 ii5 x* *

°s?

< * - * m A 4~v

I JL a* ^s /f 2L 25 ^

^P crr^ .

PLATE 28 LETTER I (MMA 22.3.516),VERSO

5 6 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

•

0=4

QL

CD-,

1 / 1

1 / 1

O OOO

h

^=&=*.

0 = 4 CD",

O

I f (S ^^w

CD-

CD-

• O

_=^

^ ^ _=*£

. ^ w 1 E J n /s*ss*;m J i

«=^T 0 A

^ W « ^

CD-

CD-CD

'O

0=4

0 0 0 r\ &

C D - , < ^ _ ^ LJ

^ w

CD",

0 ^ -w I

If

0=4

&=_« «=M5

I , .

D tt

1 s

r M . ^ <? ^ 1 ^ = ^

" r f

CD-

if n

0=_4 u | ^

> , ^ j M c

W HI < ^ = ^ = =

B _ _ (

^ n [_J?J

'O

CD-D

GJ 1 n

CD 0 A

rj D

• If

"0- &=_

0 4 0 o o I •

2-i

n %

1 7 I

'O OOO

0=4 B = _

- ^ 0=4 f^3 u_«

— ^ m m

CL> 1§^

if n

1 e

A, OOO

D

Ct

CD-, n ^ 0 0 0

L _ 0 = 4 0=4

^ £ \ 1 / 1 ~ ft$$$$:$:&i. O O O

n

D f

o

r33, 'O

0 = 4

&=—8 0 = 4

* J W

D 'O

rr o

LOOT ' i ^

o

n r = j ] u

LETTER I (MMA 22.3.516),VERSO PLATE 29

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 19

PLATE 30 LETTER II (MMA 22.3.517), RECTO

44 43 42 41 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 3i 30 29 28 7—23 HORIZONTAL 5 (A-B)

^y^^

o ^ W

r~n

U

•

LJ

0=4

u

OOO 0 = 4

•

_ = M 5

•

•

0=4

OOO

*^w

I

D

D

~> i -

n

•o

0 A

^ L

D

^

n

LJ

CJEJ OOO

Cr=\

^

55^

_ = ^ 5

tP

u

0=A

a

3 ^ < * = ^

0 A

J7

a

1 0=4

0 4

LJ

I ^ o = ^

a

^

0=4

•

0

0 = ^

LJ

'O

0=4

LJ ryy~) OOO

LJ CJEJ OOO

®

£E3

1 n

C2LD

i tt

0 A

0=4 0=4

0 A

D

LJ

O E D OOO

OOO

'O

0 = ^

LJ

0 = ^

LJ

D = ^

~7 I

0=4

11 r

LJ

=s%-r

0

0 = 4 0 4

OOO

u

/

0=4

0=4 0 A

OOO

u

LJ

C3E3 OOO

n

tt

LJ

D

n (J

D

B—8

a a

. 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 OOO

I ^ = !V M A

'I * T y ^ m

, 0

0 A

OOO 0 0

* 2 OOO

OOO y[_ OOO I

OOO 1

U^O 11 n-A,

OOO

u

D

[L—4

i -n

0=4

OOO

LJ

C3ED OOO

0 A

D

LJ

O

M

0 — A

i tt

OOO

L>] o 1 1 ^

B—i a

LJI i

0 . ._.i 0 A

[ o o o ]

LJ 0 = 4

0 A

ftZ^

I

QMJj •

LJ

a

| Q = _

LJ [X

CHEJ OOO

C3EJ OOO

0=4

LJ

a

•

o

44 43 42 41 40 39 38 37 36

LETTER II (MMA 22.3.517), RECTO

35 34 33 32

PLATE 31

31 30 29 28 7—23 HORIZONTAL 5 ( A - B ) 4

-<> -*4 Jt ^ » * ^ ^£> ° ^ -gf ^ £-^ ^ *

*&

83 fc * *^S? *f^1T

S »zs

Lf^FltS'

^^10

?£.£ % . & " nQ MtnU

r ' ^^ ~yy^ « B r f « ^ ^ f ^ ^ ^

.~ v1 <? ^ £ r t** sf r 3 v -^,* —-» — s ZL vst

# » f f i ' i # S z #2*%*9&&VL.

* d U>\ ** I -^ s f L off 27 26 25 24

PLATE 32 LETTER II (MMA 22.3.5i7),VERSO

4 3

J^s=

J] W&&M

n r=M v^Vl o

0=4

0=4

0=4

0 = J

1 r

0 0 0

tt 11

o D

1 / 1

O

' /O LJ

/ / O

OOO

L-L- J ' , 0 0 0

0 A

LETTER II (MMA 22.3.517),VERSO PLATE 33

D if a

0C3

* <JL*^L

PB ^ ^

ffrl 10

II i n FT^L

™ = k j C3

PLATE 34 LETTER III (MMA 22.3.518), RECTO

o I I

1111

0 0 0

OOO n

0 0 ^

OOO

0 0

CD 1

0=4

OOO

0 = 4 Q=A

OOO

CD

•

OOO

1 o

M&m& B=s=a

o

tt 0 (Pb i

CD-, n

M=4

£fi&%*&\

fifiOXVA

CD".

V7

L j e j

0 = ^

L2i

CD

O l

o 0 0 0

I

^

0 = J

Q=_4

0 = 4

o 69

O

, # ^ m

<? ^ 0

CD-

CD",

D

%

0 4

n ;

0 = ^

< -

&&&#&

12

0=A

,*«^»

i n it Cj 8

o

I O

fiMVWA

o

O O O

m$4>&\

LETTER III (MMA 22.3.518), RECTO PLATE 35

3« 5v J « * A

f fl 4- a ff

PLATE 36 LETTER III (MMA 22.3.5i8),VERSO

•

J

0 4

OOO

OOO

OOO r CD-.. OOO

i(isw^«A

0 4

I t t 1 ^

O

O

0=A

LETTER III (MMA 22.3-5i8),VERSO PLATE 37

PLATE 38 LETTER IV (MMA 22.3.519)

VO. 2

n ZZ-

LD n

B=JJI

D

0 = 4

I t t

^

Q —

n

OOO

^L

0=4

0 4

tt

^ ^ ^ » 1

0 A

J t t ;

1 ^

L

n 4

^ 5

#»&&?&

®

OOO

i ij 1

OOO

LETTER IV (MMA 22.3.519) PLATE 39

Verso Recto

PLATE 40 ACCOUNTV (MMA 22.3.520), RECTO

1 e±i <#>»w«\

OOO OO

o OOO

' /ax OOO

OO

^ <=gzs> O X

J',

/ UJ''., &&&&& Q D D D O

a A 9

y 1 ' - 1 1 /

46 000 y o n

a=A OOO

0 0 6?

J L _ §

O UJ

(7

O OOO

<j£ 00.

D J l 00

J ^ 00

-fi-^t

o a

6?

r£ D

L7 O

OOO

/crx

OOO )\£<=± I ^ ^ ^

OOO OO

OOO

OO

OOO

0 0

o 6?

1 L o = ^

67

OOO OO

34

35

36

OOO

37

38

39

40

4 i

42

43

44

45

47

49

50

51

52

53

54

OOO

OO CD-

OOO

16

30

31

32

CD- tt & CD

o ) ^ S W & n ii •-y &&#&&

^ S ^ m II 1 ii o

O O O M>S>X&\

O LJ CD-, OOO

O OOO p)

C D " , F = = MM -fflS^- 12

^»^m

D I D

ODD O,

13

14

15

17

o &WW&

CM

„ : C 3 E J

OOO

gr -s=ss> O E J

0 = 4 « w « OOO

y^^y (ZJTD

O E D

ft£^

33

a

CZIEJ

CD-

CD-

CD-

OOO

r=-J ;

OOO

V ©

JO ^ S ^ ^ i

6!

O A^»sss\

frf OOO M®mv\

24

' l / 11

Cs=$

u Tt ^!I**m .

^ S # S m

LJ

^ J = = r > ifc SSWA '

fidfm&t.

0 ' =* Q AW** ^ * ^

/

I / I

&&XV&

TC O

29 28 27 26 25

ACCOUNTV (MMA 22.3.520), RECTO PLATE 41

16 11-15

Vii til

&2*'3i%)&e*ns#t

/%^iPP — " i i

- * •

5* I <*•

•P3^ ^

p,

^ J}

-6

l i t «* —: 1£S

It ^ «?

1/14

* m

24

19

2 0

2 1

2 2

23

46 30-32 29 28 27 26 25 33

PLATE 42 A C C O U N T V (MMA 22.3.52o),VERSO

^ = 8 = § a f c

. i^Ssm

n

n

= s ^ ^

= 3 ^ f

I

mjir** ^*^^,

X

= S ^ f ( 10

ACCOUNT V (MMA 22.3.52o),VERSO PLATE 43

1-10

PLATE 44 ACCOUNT VI (MMA 22.3.521), RECTO

0

14

19

111 111 111

I I

o ^ " fjp~ l LC £.

0

O 000

O

O

CD",

O

OOO m,

• Q ^

D

D[l L?//«

3~LL

D

i Inf

D = ^

lL~ O i n i

0

LJ 0// 9 •

in in

1 0

11

13

15

16

17

A C C O U N T VI (MMA 22.3.521), RECTO PLATE 45

[21]

[22]

[23]

19

[24]

[25]

[26]

J --

pc^yj

r r ^ =

'3 t^&fUb*&**

13

15

16

17

18

Q;

PLATE 46 ACCOUNT VI (MMA 22.3.52i),VERSO

Ul n 2 i o

ACCOUNT VI (MMA 22.3.52i),VERSO PLATE 47

<jpy

n if\

& 1 s

ia

PLATE 48 ACCOUNT VII (MMA 22.3.522), RECTO

[-> rj>. fiwxMi,

• ay*.

0 o

n 7) o o o

O O O O O O

0 0 1 fll

0=4 CD",

0 0 0 o

0 A

' O

lift O'

0=jQ Ctt

^^^jj AVsVsSA

10

\®

(TIED II I $

ax

iiiirVi

00 o\^ J*m 1;

1 1 I Pk

fit&w&

13

14

CD-

^ *

C~<EJ

15

ft£^

OOO

CD-, OOO

I I

ACCOUNT VII (MMA 22.3.522), RECTO PLATE 49

1-7 15

PLATE 50 ACCOUNT VII (MMA 22.3.522),VERSO

M&&&&

CD-.

plpP

2

ACCOUNT VII (MMA 22.3.522),VERSO PLATE 51

PLATE 52 ACCOUNT P (PAPYRUS PURCHES)

VO. I

^MMMJxJ

D C

OOO

Jrj Jtf^^A

JL D

CD-, o o o oo

18

19

nun CD-,

OOO

n " CD

o

OOO mtv^O O 0 .O

OOO

y

\\\

1 0

13

14

15

16

n A

17

ACCOUNT P (PAPYRUS PURCHES) PLATE 53

18

> n ^

J*

19

7 r jpiir 16

17

Verso Recto

PLATE 54 LETTER P' (PAPYRUS PURCHES)

vo. I

n

D i i

tt==tt fiMXm.

0 A

/?#&>&&

0=4

<«wsm

0=4

n A

o

V 0

l>***l

n

a

L=4

£ •

&&*&&.

LETTER P' (PAPYRUS PURCHES, PALIMPSEST) PLATE 55

PLATE 56 FRAGMENTS A-D (MMA 22.3.523A-D)

A Recto

o L\ = 3 ^

r r n , , 000

p CD".

UJ CD"

B

C

•

D

000

FRAGMENTS A-E (MMA 22.3.523A-E) PLATE 57

B

< * * Recto

D

Odf I

Verso

THE METROPOLITAN MUSEUM OF ART

Thomas J. Watson Library

^ @ 3 6 0 2 B Y T H E M i r r * ° * ° '

The Heqanakht Papyri

Documents

Transcript of The Heqanakht Papyri