graffiti-001-064-libre.pdf

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:58

StrÆnka 1

The Visitorsí Graffiti of Dynasties XVIII and XIX in Abusir and Northern Saqqara

1

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:58

StrÆnka 2

The Visitorsí Graffiti I

2

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:58

StrÆnka 3

The Visitorsí Graffiti of Dynasties XVIII and XIX in Abusir and Northern Saqqara Hana Navr·tilov·

Czech Institute of Egyptology Set Out 2007

3

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:58

StrÆnka 4

The research and especially the visits to the Griffith Institute Archives and preparation of the manuscript were enabled by the support of the Czech Science Foundation, research grant No. 404/05/2128, The Visitorsí Graffiti in Abusir. The printing costs were covered by the Czech Institute of Egyptology (Research plan Exploration of the civilisation of ancient Egypt, MSM 0021620826 ñ Ministry of Education of the Czech Republic).

© The Czech Institute of Egyptology Foreword © Ladislav Bareö Text © Hana Navr·tilov· Facsimiles, Gunn Mss, »ern˝ Mss and Gardiner Mss © The Griffith Institute Archives Photographs © Renata Landgr·fov·, Kamil VodÏra, Milan Zemina, JaromÌr KrejËÌ Line drawings © Jana Kurotikov·, Ing. Jolana Mal·tkov·, Ing. Marta ätrachov· The use of line drawings of the Userkaf graffiti was kindly allowed by the Schweizerisches Institut f¸r ƒgyptische Bauforschung und Altertumskunde, Cairo; the photograph of the Graffito M.1.5.S.18.1 (Plate 1) by the royal herald Amunedjeh, after H. Stock, Das Sonnenheiligtum von Abusir (Aegypten) is reproduced with the kind permission of the Deutsches Arch‰ologisches Institut, Cairo.

4

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:58

StrÆnka 5

CONTENTS

Foreword (L. Bareö)

7

Preface

9

Abbreviations

11

Acknowledgements

13

Introduction

15

Graffiti on the Memphite necropoleis

25

Graffiti in Abusir

29

Graffiti in Northern Saqqara

65

Interpretations

131

Conclusions

143

Annex A

145

Annex B

153

Annex C

155

Bibliography

159

Index

166

Plates

169

Tables

folded in the endpaper pocket

5

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:58

6

StrÆnka 6

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:58

StrÆnka 7

FOREWORD

Without any doubt, the ancient Egyptians belonged to the most prolific nations of the early stages of history concerning the amount of the written evidence they had produced. Certainly, the sources preserved until today are mostly administrative and, in view of the attitude expressed by the ancient Egyptians to the matters of this and the other world, also religious. Among the wide range of the types and genres of writings that have been left to us by ancient inhabitants of the Nile valley, some are quite familiar to us in spite of thousands of years that had elapsed since the times of that great civilisation. Not always are our attitudes to such writings identical, concerning the ancient and new items of its type. Graffiti, that is to say drawings of writings (usually rude, humorous or politic according to the dictionary but certainly often also commemorative, votive or magical) on a wall, etc. in a public place, are one of the best examples of such an ambiguous attitude. While those of the ancient origin are usually documented in detail as an important source for the study of ancient history, prosopography, etc., their modern counterparts (although in some cases almost identical in their nature) are usually much less welcomed, even if they might sometimes appear on one and the same monument. In spite of the fact that the graffiti are not always spontaneous, they represent one of the shortest and most important ways to study the thinking and feeling of their authors, ancient and modern. In the case of ancient Egyptians, this is sometimes biased by their rather specific predilection for the formalized and repetitive expressions. Even so, inscriptions left by ancient scribes, officials and priests on the monuments of their predecessors (or other places considered interesting or holy) are a unique source for the study of the attitude of the ancient Egyptians towards their own past. As such, they have aroused the interest of Hana Navr·tilov·, a young Czech Egyptologist and Historian, in her long-term study of the historical thought of ancient Egyptians and the aftermath of their great civilisation in later times. In a way, her work was connected also with the archaeological work done by the Czech (formerly Czechoslovak) Institute of Egyptology of the Charles University in Prague at the ancient Egyptian necropolis at Abusir since 1960. Some of the monuments at Abusir, especially the well preserved pyramid complex of Dynasty V King Sahura and the nearby tomb of his younger contemporary, the vizier Ptahshepses, are famous for the graffiti that have been left there by ancient visitors. In spite of the fact that graffiti left on the monuments by the ancient visitors were often either completely overlooked or poorly documented, the number of their examples known so far is certainly too large to be subsumed into a single volume. In the present volume, therefore, only the visitorís graffiti of Dynasties XVIII and XIX that come from the pyramid fields at Saqqara and Abusir are thoroughly studied. Let us hope that further volumes, dealing this time with graffiti coming from other places in Egypt and other epochs of Egyptian history, would follow in due time. The historical thought of each nation or culture, in other words their attitude towards their own past, is a part of the general self-reflection of the mankind. As such, it is quite relevant even to the present day situation as one of the basic structures of the collective identity. Because of that, the contribution of Hana Navr·tilov· to the elucidation of the much debated question of the ancient Egyptian historical thought should not be overlooked by not only Egyptologists, but general Historians and scholars dealing with the development of the human thought and culture as well. All of them, and people generally interested in ancient Egyptian culture, too, will certainly benefit from this detailed insight into the feelings and thoughts of the people who, more than three thousand years ago, have left their imprints on the pyramids, temples, tombs and other monuments built by their glorious predecessors and around roads, quarries and wells used by them. Prague, January 2008 Ladislav Bareö Director, Czech Inst. of Egyptology, Charles University, Prague

7

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:58

8

StrÆnka 8

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:58

StrÆnka 9

PREFACE

The Visitorsí Graffiti of Dynasties XVIII and XIX in Abusir and Northern Saqqara are the first part of an intended series devoted to the visitorsí graffiti at the Memphite necropoleis. The graffiti have been documented and studied in the past, but not always published in full. The visitorsí graffiti are mostly New Kingdom texts left on older, Old or Middle Kingdom monuments. The graffiti texts form a special genre, in between formal and informal texts. Their analysis has lacked a systematic approach and the texts might have been underestimated.1 Recently, however, the theme of visitorsí graffiti has been given a deserved attention.2 New discoveries are bringing new graffiti to light. However, long known graffiti are often not known in sufficient detail. The idea of the series of Visitorsí graffiti is to find and make accessible any older documentation pertaining to such epigraphic material. Volume I aims at the graffiti in Abusir and Northern Saqqara. It is based on unpublished archival documentation and on published sources as well. It is an attempt to systematise our knowledge of this type of text. The concept of making graffiti accessible and well-documented is based also on the idea of creating a graffiti database.3 These books are but one (though important) way of establishing an access to historical documents and archaeological and epigraphical material. The digitized version of a graffiti catalogue or database should also be also made accessible, hopefully, in the not too distant future. The database (or digital repository) may also serve as a source-base for hardcopy publications, which will pair each graffiti group (e.g. from one site or a monument) with interpretative essays and an extended commentary. This plan, of course, depends on the availability and extent of the material to be found. The corpus of visitorsí graffiti in its present form contains information about 150 graffiti from the Memphite area. Of these the Abusir and Northern Saqqara ones comprise 574 inscriptions, described in this volume. To provide an overview of other Memphite graffiti, a table providing basic data (site, dating, author, publication/documentation, if known) has been added (Table 1). The graffiti in this volume are divided into two groups according to site ñ Abusir and Northern Saqqara. The inscriptions are described as follows: ñ original text of the graffito, drawn; ñ hieroglyphic transcription; ñ transliteration; ñ translation; ñ brief analysis (i.e. text type, etc.); ñ relevant further data ñ dating, position, monument, author, king or personage referred to in the text and the like. It is necessary to start with a group of selected monuments, and subsequently to include them in a wider context. The first phase would be thus be orientated at Abusir and a selected group of Saqqara monuments ñ including in the first place the pyramid complex of Djoser. The choice of place is given by the requirements of the current state of research at these sites. Regarding Abusir, its

See also Thissen, H. J., Graffiti, Lƒ II, 880ñ882. Peden, A. J., The Graffiti of Pharaonic Egypt, Leiden 2001; Kahl, J., Ein Zeugnis alt‰gyptischer Schulausfl¸ge, GM 211, 2006, 25ñ29. 3 Navr·tilov·, H., Project of Visitorsí Graffiti Database, In: Goyon, J.-C., Cardin, C., eds., Proceedings of the 9th International Congress of Egyptologists, Leuven 2006, 65ñ72. 4 Or 69, if we count also the graffiti known in fragments from G. Mˆllerís Hieratische Pal‰ographie II, Leipzig 1909. 1

2

9

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:58

StrÆnka 10

New Kingdom history is still full of gaps. Graffiti can, for example, add to our knowledge of the cult of Sakhmet of Sahure and the position of the 5th dynasty kings in the tradition. The selected material from Saqqara can also provide useful parallels in this respect. The project requires also time limits ñ the 18th and 19th dynasties. The descriptive catalogue of Abusir and Northern Saqqara graffiti is followed with a chapter on interpretation. Mostly, the visitorsí graffiti bring us information about the personal representation of the Egyptian literate Èlite (or sub-Èlite). Their authors were mostly people who titled themselves as scribes, only exceptionally they used higher titles. They probably presented themselves purposefully in the visitorsí graffiti as knowledgeable and competent literate persons, administrators and pious people, fulfilling the Egyptian ideal of life. They also give us a clue to their historical awareness ñ since they often say which building they visited and even to what king it belonged. Information we gather from the visitorsí graffiti seems to be compatible with what we know about the education and cultural formation of the Egyptian Èlite social strata. In fact, the graffiti may bring a contribution to the study of the mentality of the literate Egyptians. Prague, September 2007

10

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:58

StrÆnka 11

ABBREVIATIONS

ƒAT ADAIK ACE AH ASAE BIE BIFAO CdE DE DFIFAO GM HWb IBAES JAOS JARCE JEA JNES JSSEA KRI Lƒ LEG MƒS MMA MDAIK OEAE OIP OLA PM III PM III2

PM VII PN PSBA RCT Rec. de Trav. RITA SAK Urk IV Wb ZƒS ZDMG

ƒgypten und Altes Testament, Wiesbaden Abhandlungen des Deutschen Arch‰ologischen Instituts, Kairo, Gl¸ckstadt, Mainz etc. Australian Centre for Egyptology Aegyptiaca Helvetica, Basel Les Annales du Service des AntiquitÈs …gyptiennes, Le Caire Bulletin de líInstitut dí…gypte, Le Caire Bulletin de líInstitut FranÁais díArchÈologie Orientale, Le Caire Chronique dí…gypte, Bruxelles Discussions in Egyptology, Oxford Documents de Fouilles de líInstitut FranÁais díArchÈologie Orientale, Le Caire Gˆttinger Miszellen, Gˆttingen Hannig, R., Die Sprache der Pharaonen. Grofles Handwˆrterbuch ƒgyptisch Deutsch. (2800 ñ 950 v. Chr.), Mainz 1995 Internet-Beitr‰ge zur ƒgyptologie und Sudanarch‰ologie Journal of the American Oriental Society, New Haven Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt, Boston Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, London Journal of the Near Eastern Studies, Chicago Journal of the Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities, Toronto Kitchen, K. A., Ramesside Inscriptions IñVIII, Oxford 1969ñ1990 Lexikon der ƒgyptologie, Wiesbaden 1972ñ1992 Lesko, L. H., A Dictionary of Late Egyptian IñIV, Berkeley 1982 M¸nchner ƒgyptologische Studien, Berlin Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York Mitteilungen des Deutschen Arch‰ologischen Instituts, Kairo Redford, D. B., ed., Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt IñIII, Oxford 2001 Oriental Institute Publications, Chicago Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta, Leuven Moss, R. ñ Porter, B., Topographical Bibliography of Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphic Texts, Reliefs and Paintings III, Oxford 1931 Moss, R. ñ Porter, B., Topographical Bibliography of Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphic Texts, Reliefs and Paintings III, second edition, revised and augmented by JaromÌr M·lek, Oxford 1978ñ1981 Moss, R. ñ Porter, B., Topographical Bibliography of Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphic Texts, Reliefs and Paintings VII, Oxford 1952 Ranke, H., Die ‰gyptischen Personennamen IñIII, Gl¸ckstadt 1935ñ1977 Proceedings of the Society of the Biblical Archaeology, London Gardiner, A. H., The Royal Canon of Turin, Oxford 1959 Recueil de Travaux relatifs a` la Philologie et a` líArchÈologie Ègyptiennes et assyriennes Kitchen, K. A., Ramesside Inscriptions Translated and Annotated IñIV, 1996ñ2003 Studien zur alt‰gyptischen Kultur, Hamburg Sethe, K., Urkunden der 18. Dynastie, Leipzig 1906ñ1914 Erman, A. ñ Grapow, H. N., Wˆrterbuch der ƒgyptischen Sprache, Bd. 1ñ5, Leipzig 1926ñ1955 Zeitschrift f¸r ƒgyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde, Leipzig, Berlin Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgel‰ndischen Gesellschaft, Leipzig, Wiesbaden

11

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:58

12

StrÆnka 12

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:58

StrÆnka 13

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This volume started as a dissertation. Its making and transformation into a manuscript which would be fit for publication was helped by numerous individuals and institutions. First of all, my parents merit a special recognition for their support. Particular thanks are due to my research supervisors, Prof. Ladislav Bareö and Prof. Miroslav Verner, who aided my work, and to the reviewers of the dissertation, Prof. John Baines and Prof. Antonio Loprieno, whose comments and suggestions brought many valuable contributions and corrections to the text. Special thanks are due for her help and assistance to Dr. Vivienne Gae Callender. I note with gratefulness and affection the support and encouragement shown by the members of the staff of the Griffith Institute archives, especially Dr. JaromÌr M·lek, Alison Hobby, Elisabeth Miles and Jenni Navratil. Without the generous decision of Dr. J. M·lek to support my publication by granting permission to publish the facsimiles of papers of J. »ern˝, A. H. Gardiner and B. G. Gunn there would be no book on the graffiti now. I am also indebted to Prof. J. P. Allen for allowing the use of his precious material on the newly discovered graffiti in the pyramid complex of Senusret III at Dahshur. The Schweizerisches Institut f¸r ƒgyptische Bauforschung und Altertumskunde, Cairo and Deutsches Arch‰ologisches Institut, Cairo, kindly allowed the use of illustrations from their publications. For varied help and advice I would like to express my sincere thanks to the following friends and colleagues: Dr. Dorothea Arnold (New York); Dr. Miroslav B·rta (Prague); Prof. ZdenÏk Beneö (Prague); Dr. Martin Bommas (Basel); Dr. Petr Charv·t (Prague and Pilsen); Dr. Vassil Dobrev (Cairo); Dr. Johanna Holaubek (Vienna); Dr. Ji¯Ì Jan·k (Prague); Dr. Renata Landgr·fov· (Prague) ñ with special thanks for the revision of transliterations; Dr. Michella Luiselli (Basel); Dr. Jana Myn·¯ov· (Prague); Dr. Frantiöek Ondr·ö (Prague); Dr. Adela Oppenheim (New York); Dr. Ji¯ina R˘ûov· (Prague); Mgr. Petra VlËkov· (Prague and Brno); Dr. Ludwig Morenz, Dr. Peter der Manuelian (Boston); Dr. Wolf B. Oerter (Prague); last, but not least, the indispensable technical support was kindly provided by Mrs. Alexandra Hejdukov·, Mr. ZdenÏk ätastn˝, and Ing. ZdenÏk VlËek. I feel a great debt of gratitude to the reviewers of the final manuscript, Prof. Hans-Werner FischerElfert and Prof. B¯etislav Vachala. An indispensable and much valued help was provided by Mr. Eric Reid, who revised the English of my manuscript. Finally, it is a pleasure to thank the staff of the publishing house Set Out, especially Mrs. Jana Kurotikov· and Dr. Roman MÌöek for their helpfulness and patience, and to Dr. Lucie Storchov· for the technical revision. Prague, October 2007

13

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:58

14

StrÆnka 14

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:58

StrÆnka 15

INTRODUCTION

The inscriptions called graffiti today are mostly self-presentations of various kinds more often connected with vandalism, than with art or socially respected self-expression. Graffiti are generally viewed as a principally illegal social activity; however, the graffiti writers do have an organisation and a subculture of their own, therefore their creations are not aimless and without a code of evaluation and audience; on the contrary, they have an evaluation system, defined objectives, and their own ìaudienceî.5 A contemporary definition by Norbert Siegl of the Institute for graffiti research (Institut f¸r Graffiti-Forschung, http://www.graffitieuropa.org/) says: ìGraffiti (Einzahl Graffito) ist ein Oberbegriff f¸r viele thematisch und gestalterisch unterschiedliche Erscheinungsformen. Die Gemeinsamkeit besteht darin, dass es sich um visuell wahrnehmbare Elemente handelt, welche ëungefragtí und meist anonym, von Einzelpersonen oder Gruppen auf fremden oder in ˆffentlicher Verwaltung befindlichen Oberfl‰chen angebracht werden. Besonders in der Variante des graffiti-writings der Sprayer bezieht der Begriff auch offiziell ausgef¸hrte Auftragsarbeiten und k¸nstlerische Produktionen mit ein.î The history of graffiti and related phenomena is rich, and reaches far back, even to rock paintings and prehistoric decorated caves. The graffiti of more ancient lineage were perhaps equally well ìunsolicitedî as are their modern heirs, but perhaps also more tolerated ñ at least in Classical Antiquity.6 The ancient Egyptian graffiti is a common term used for short inscriptions, scratched or written with ink or other media, on the rocks and walls; in this they are different from modern graffiti examples. Egyptian graffiti are also different in the rationale behind their making and the prestige of literacy too was incomparable to more recent periods. Egyptian graffiti are also usually signed, i.e. they are not anonymous. In Egypt, there are hieroglyphic, hieratic and demotic graffiti; in addition there are Coptic graffiti. Visitors of less ancient origin left Greek, Latin, and Arabic graffiti, often next to those from Pharaonic times. To these traces of human presence we must add modern tourist graffiti, starting with the 16th century onwards, and reaching the peak of their use (in obvious connection with number of visitors) in the 19th century. These are in a number of modern European languages, mainly English, German, Italian and French. The focus of the present work, however, is that of ancient Egyptian graffiti, although the modern travellersí graffiti have their own intrinsic importance.7 The graffiti are a specific phenomenon, given their role of ìinformalî writings, and also their importance when we try to study the Egyptian mental world. The essential definition of graffiti is for the time being their ìinformalityî which means that they are not composed inscriptions of official character.8 It is, however, necessary to clear a little the term ìinformalî within the typologies of Compare Lachmann, R., Graffiti as Career and Ideology, The American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 94, No. 2, 1988, 229ñ250, although Lachmann presents a sample only. The material on modern graffiti is published in various studies and a couple of monographs, including dissertations. See http://www.graffitiforschung.tk for an overview. The Prague and Czech graffiti have been recently mapped by Overstreet, M., In graffiti we trust. Velk· kniha o graffiti ñ Czech 1988ñ2005, Prague 2006, the volume has an informative English summary. 6 A case study is e.g. H. Taeuber, Graffiti, In: Th¸r, H., Das Hanghaus 2 in Ephesos. Die Wohneinheit 4. Baubefund, Ausstattung, Funde, Wien 2005, 132ñ143. An annotation at http://www.dieuniversitaet-online.at/beitraege/news/antike-graffiti-geritzt-nicht-gespruht/10.html. 7 Compare Goyon, G., Les inscriptions et graffiti des voyageurs sur la grande pyramide, Le Caire 1944, or de Keersmaecker, R., Travellersí Graffiti from Egypt and the Sudan, IñIII, see http://www.egypt-sudan-graffiti.be/Travellers.htm. 8 Desroches-Noblecourt, Ch., La Que^te des graffiti, In: Textes et langages de lí…gypte pharaonique, Hommage a` Champollion II, Le Caire 1972, 164; as inscription rupestre ñ rock inscription, she defines the pre-planned, composed texts subsequently noted on a rock surface, which is therefore different from a graffito, see further also Franke, D., Graffiti, OEAE II, 38ñ41. 5

15

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:58

StrÆnka 16

written evidence. They are informal in so far, as they do not represent ñ or a number of them do not represent ñ any inscription with more or less clearly defined form and function ñ stela, autobiography, offering formula, tomb inscription or temple text. Their use is most varied too. On the other hand they are not informal in so far, as they cannot be straightaway supposed to show an ìalternativeî cultural view, as they were often made by members of the scribal elite/sub-elite or at least by literate strata of the society, educated with the aim of representing sociocultural tradition. They are ìformalî as long as they were created by the elite/sub-elite for a certain purpose and within a given cultural framework. However, the sociocultural terms like formal and informal or even collective and individual have still an unsatisfactory sound in an ancient Egyptian setting.9 Still, what speaks in favour of considering them a separate and special sort of Egyptian written evidence, a sort, which stands apart from other testimonies, is the following: we can find graffiti in a certain sense literally everywhere. A. J. Peden remarked ìÖ But why should we study graffiti in the first instance? Because it is in practice the study of human beings using a form of written communication that is invariably free of social restraints Ö Besides the very pervasiveness of graffiti inscriptions throughout the Nile Valley surely entitles them to as much scrutiny as any other record of manís activities in this part of the world.î 10 Although we might doubt a complete absence of any kind of social restraint, it can be claimed that the graffiti presence is a mark to follow, when we would like to put over the physical map of Egypt a map of human presence in the landscape. Quarries, mines, desert roads and their stops, temples and necropoleis, every one of these places carries a trace of human presence left in the form of graffiti. There are military (given the supposed social stratum of their authors, not some strategic information) graffiti in the Nubian fortressesí neighbourhood, graffiti left by members of mining and quarrying expeditions, we can follow the outline of desert tracks with the help of the graffiti.11 The content is most varied ñ some are lenghty inscriptions noting an expedition, and thus they may be close to an official inscription.12 Others are just a short scratching noting a name and a date. One might perhaps add that a graffito is not a genre, but a manner of writing a text, which might include a wide range of inscriptions. Their probable spontaneity would be a very important characteristic, if they indeed were not always planned and composed beforehand. But we cannot determine whether they were or were not. There is a conspicuous group of graffiti ñ the visitorsí graffiti, known also under the German term, Besucherinschriften 13. The inscriptions are left on considerably older buildings and have varied contents. Visitorsí graffiti are dated mainly to the New Kingdom. Their geographical distribution covers, although not exclusively14, important necropoleis, such as the Theban and the Memphite ones. They are interwoven with the history of important archaeological sites.15

See Assmann, bifurcating culture of ancient Egypt in his Stein und Zeit, M¸nchen 1997 further compare Baines, J., Restricted Knowledge, Hierarchy, and Decorum: Modern Perceptions and Ancient Institutions, JARCE, Vol. XXVII, 1990, 1ñ25; Loprieno, A., Defining Egyptian Literature: Ancient Texts and Modern Theories, In: Loprieno, A., ed., Ancient Egyptian Literature, History and Forms, Leiden 1996, 39ñ58; esp. on pp. 46ñ47, ìÖ In Egypt, punctual ëinnovationí rarely became generalized ëinaugurationí, and the rules of decorum allowed for individual leeway only within the frame of a formal adherence to sociopolitical context Öî; questions of literacy and reception of various cultural traditions and by various social strata and various social units ñ compare Parkinson, R. B., Individual and Society in Middle Kingdom Literature, In: Loprieno, ed., Ancient Egyptian Literature, 137ñ155, esp. 137; Baines, J. ñ Eyre, Ch., Four notes on literacy, GM 61, 1983. These Egyptological analyses point at the problem of following different social strata and different variants any culture has, such as regional, social or individual, etc.; I have made this rather far-fetched overview of opinions and works with the aim of indicating that Egyptology registers fully the fact that Egyptian society cannot be treated as a seamless homogenous compact unit with cast attitudes and totally unified perceptions of their given Weltanschauung. 10 Peden, Graffiti, xxi. The wide presence of graffiti could have also indicated the level of literacy ñ Peden, Graffiti, Conclusions, 293. 11 Cf. Darnell and Darnell, Oriental Institute Annual Reports from 1994 to 1996, now Darnell, J. C., The Theban Desert Road Survey in the Egyptian Western Desert I., Chicago 2002. 12 Cf. Quarries and mines, like Wadi Hammamat, Lƒ VI, 1100ñ1113; Peden, Graffiti, passim. 13 Cf. Helck, W., Besucherinschriften, ZDMG, 102/27, 1952, 41f., and Wildung, D., Besucherinschriften, Lƒ I, 766ñ767. 14 Compare material from Beni Hasan, which presents parallels to known Memphite examples. Cf. Griffith, Inscriptions, In: Petrie, Medum, London 1892, 40ñ41; Peden, Graffiti, 102; following Champollion, Notices descriptives 9

16

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:58

StrÆnka 17

The Besucherinschriften are often viewed as something belonging to the sphere of personal impression, or personal piety. Other examples of known graffiti of similar character16, recently published, yielded interesting results ñ new information about their authors, and their cultural and historical milieu. The visitorsí graffiti are rousing constant interest in Egyptology ñ were they results of antiquarian or religious interest, or just leftovers of scribal presence at the necropolis, whose primary reasons were completely different and mostly practical?17 Their connection with official duties, and activities can be only presumed,18 in some cases it is more or less likely, e.g. in case a scribe visited a necropolis on behalf of an official duty, and left in addition a visitorsí graffito on a building close to the place of his work. The visitorsí graffiti are inviting similar questions as their ìcolleaguesî elsewhere ñ what do they contain, were they spontaneous or preplanned, are they a specific genre or just a mix of texts left in a certain manner in certain conditions? Their current interpretation is ambiguous.19 They can be seen as a source for confirming the religious sense of Egyptians, of their pious visits and pilgrimages, or they can be judged as testifying to the historical consciousness of New Kingdom Egyptians face to face with ancient monuments. The Memphite necropolis graffiti seem to be a special case. They were left on monuments, which were very old in the eyes of the graffiti writers. The gap between the builders of the monuments and the visitors was not that of decades or a couple of generations (as was sometimes the case in the Theban necropolis), but of a thousand years. The builders were usually royal (in Thebes we find visitors quite often in private, non-royal, tombs). Both aspects, the antiquity and the royalty, might also have mattered to the Egyptians themselves. These graffiti can be therefore considered as one of the sources for the study of Egyptian uses of the past, and the historical tradition of kings20. However, to verify this hypothesis, we should work with a feasible corpus of visitorsí graffiti, and evaluate their occurrence, contents and context. Why should we actually pay more attention to visitorsí graffiti? There is one practical and one methodological reason. The tomb visitorsí graffiti ñ a special category ñ Theban or Memphite or otherwise, are often published in books dealing with the respective tombs. Some of more recent publications in this respect comply with standards of epigraphic publications.21 Earlier publications, however, do not always do so. If it is possible and a documentation available, the inscriptions should be published anew. The graffiti are a rather fragile source and so is often their documentation. The methodological reason lies in that the study of the Egyptian uses of the past is undoubtedly an important part of Egyptian culture, which needs all possible sources. What has been and is being done in the field of graffiti study? The graffiti22 have been known to Egyptologists since the beginnings of Egyptology, although at first under no specific name. It seems

II, 430, and Lloyd, In: Lloyd, A. B., ed., Studies in Pharaonic Religion and Society in Honour of J. Gwyn Griffiths, London 1992, 32 ñ note 13. 15 See M·lek, J., A Meeting of the Old and New. Saqqara during the New Kingdom, In: Lloyd, A. B., (ed.), Studies in Pharaonic Religion and Society in honour of J. G. Griffiths, London 1992, 57ñ76. 16 In this case a templeís visitorsí graffiti, by Jacquet-Gordon, H., The Graffiti on the Khonsu Temple roof at Karnak. A manifestation of personal piety, OIP 123, Temple of Khonsu, Vol. 3, Chicago 2003, and further see section Interpretations. 17 Compare Franke, Graffiti; M·lek, A Meeting of the Old and New, 57ñ76; Fischer-Elfert, H., Representations of the Past in New Kingdom Literature, In: Tait, J., Never had the like occurred, 131ñ133. 18 It makes a difference in respect of e.g. graffiti in the temple of Khonsu, where the priests were on duty, compare Jacquet-Gordon, The Graffiti on the Khonsu Temple roof at Karnak. 19 Compare Wildung, Besucherinschriften, 766ñ767; Helck, Besucherinschriften, ZDMG, 1952, 41f.; Fischer-Elfert, Representations of the Past in New Kingdom Literature. 20 Compare Fischer-Elfert, Representations of the Past in New Kingdom Literature, 131ñ133, and Wildung, D., Die Rolle ‰gyptischer Kˆnige im Bewufltsein ihrer Nachwelt, MƒS 17, M¸nchen 1969. 21 Hornung, E., Zwei Ramessidische Kˆnigsgr‰ber: Ramses IV und Ramses VI. Theben XI., Mainz 1990, 132ñ133. See further also de Garis Davies, N. ñ Gardiner, A. H., Tomb of Antefoker, TT 60, or Dziobek, E. et al., Das Grab des User-amun, Mainz 1994, with contribution by E. Hornung on p. 100f. For Theban necropolis see also Kampp, F., Die Thebanische Nekropole IñII, Mainz 1996. 22 See Peden, Graffiti, ìIntroductionî and also Franke, Graffiti, 38ñ41.

17

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:58

StrÆnka 18

that Champollion during his voyage noted a number of graffiti, and noted that they cover most probably the activities of visitors, Egyptians, Greeks and even Coptic visitors.23 Champollion did not use the term graffiti, though, but described them aptly: ìÖ Je dois cependant ajouter que plusieurs de ces tombes royals portent sur leurs parois le tÈmoignage Ècrit quíelles Ètaient, il y a bien de siÈcles, abandonÈes et seulement visitÈes, comme de nos jours, par beaucoup de curieux dÈsoeuvrÈs, lesquels, comme ceux de nos jours encore, croyaient síillustrer · jamais en griffonant leurs noms sur les peintures et les bas-reliefs, quíil ont ainsi dÈfigurÈs. Les sots de tous les siÈcles y eurent de nombreux reprÈsentants Ö Egyptiens Ö qui se sont inscrits, les plus anciens en hiÈratique, les plus modernes en dÈmotique; Ö des Grecs de trÈs ancienne date Ö; de vieux Romains de la RÈpublique; Ö une foule díinconnus du Bas Empire Ö; des noms de Coptes Ö enfin, des noms de voyageurs europÈens Öî.24 He was also the first to make a still valid division ñ graffiti by Egyptians, in hieratic and demotic, Coptic graffiti, and later Greek, Latin and modern European languages graffiti. The graffiti as such were noted by visitors and researchers, and eventually were named by Auguste Mariette in 1850s. Mariette lived in a period, when visitorsí graffiti ñ but made by modern tourists ñ were immensely in vogue and he made some himself, on a special occasion.25 The history of beginnings and development of graffiti research and mapping (of all graffiti, not only visitorsí) has been undertaken by Christiane Desroches-Noblecourt26, who dedicated her study mainly to the Upper Egyptian and Nubian border sites ñ understandably, since the state of research in Lower Egypt had lagged behind in those years. Large groups of graffiti and rock inscriptions (these terms were not at first clearly defined27) ñ studied till World War II ñ were to be found in Middle and Upper Egypt and in Nubia and on Sinai. Later, graffiti in the oases were added and the research in wadis of the Eastern desert, especially when connected with mines and quarries, continued, as well as the survey of desert roads both in Eastern and Western desert. Special attention was turned to Nubia in the 1900s and again in the 1960s, as the Aswan dams were built and rescue archaeological operations were undertaken. Lower Egypt was represented chiefly by visitorsí graffiti in pyramid complexes of ancient rulers in the Memphite area, whose evidence was rich but their exploration, as can be seen further, left some unanswered questions. There are graffiti registered in a number of publications regarding singular sites or monuments, more recently, the registered graffiti have been often the quarry marks and masonsí inscriptions, which help in establishing the building history of a monument, and often add to our knowledge about its owner.28 The main attempt in research on the affluent Theban zone of graffiti is the Spiegelberg, Sadek and »ern˝ work, which resulted in the monumental opus of Graffiti de la Montagne thÈbaine.29 The study of the Theban region graffiti shows the range of uses, possible for the other graffiti material too. There are numerous New Kingdom graffiti to be found, in accordance with the history of the site. Their character varies from short notes left by the workers from Deir el Medina, to the inscriptions left by curious or pious visitors in tombs and temples. The Deir el Medina workers can be often portrayed with the help of these graffiti in a very lively way.30 The current overview of the graffiti exploration has been made by A. J. Peden31, which is a useful survey of graffiti in general.

Desroches ñ Noblecourt, La Que^te des graffiti, 152. Desroches ñ Noblecourt, op. cit., 151ñ152, quoting Lettres Ècrites díEgypte et de Nubie en 1828ñ29. 25 Desroches ñ Noblecourt, op. cit., 154 ñ footnote 2. 26 Desroches ñ Noblecourt, op. cit., 151ñ183. 27 See Desroches ñ Noblecourt, op. cit., 163ñ164. 28 Cf. the use of masonsí marks in studying some monuments on the Abusir royal necropolis ñ in Verner, M., Abusir II ñ Baugraffiti der Ptahschepses Mastaba, Prague 1992. 29 See also »ern˝, J., Graffiti hiÈroglyphiques et hiÈratiques de la nÈcropole thÈbaine. Nos 1060 a ` 1405, DFIFAO, Le Caire 1956 and of course »ern˝, J. ñ Sadek, A. A., and others, Graffiti de la montagne thÈbaine, Le Caire 1969ñ1974. 30 See »ern˝, J., Community of Workmen in Deir el-Medina, Cairo 1993, passim, or Valbelle, D., Les ouvriers de la Tombe, Le Caire 1985, passim. 31 Peden, Graffiti. 23

24

18

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:58

StrÆnka 19

Visitorsí graffiti in particular were often interpreted and commented on. The ambiguous interpretative views on the visitorsí graffiti were mentioned already in the introduction, and they show the necessity of integrating our knowledge on the graffiti and indeed foster the interest in them. An overview of works dealing with Besucherinschriften follows and it presents steps in documentation, methodology and systemisation of knowledge on the visitorsí graffiti. It cannot include all works mentioning this type of texts. As can be observed on the following pages, the authors often treated one or the other of two major groups ñ Theban and/or Memphite. Usually, they did not apply a time division, i.e. both the 18th dynasty and the Ramesside graffiti are included in one corpus. Methodologically speaking, a more structured and analytical approach has been adopted by those authors who focused on Besucherinschriften and did not cover the whole range of graffiti types, or who used the graffiti as a source within a specialised study. The graffiti of the Theban necropolis were treated by Wilhelm Spiegelberg, who included in his opus ƒgyptische und andere Graffiti (Inschriften und Zeichnungen) aus der thebanischen Nekropolis (IñII, 1921)32 the Besucherinschriften as well. His concept of Besucherinschriften is as follows: ìAndere Inschriften sind Besucherinschriften und melden Inspektionen der Nekropolis durch hˆhere Beamte wie den Vezier Öî 33 This is a verifiable description of a number Theban graffiti, and it might be considered as fitting for some of the visitorsí graffiti on other necropoleis as well. An already classical text on Besucherinschriften, this time chiefly the Memphite ones, is represented by Wolfgang Helckís ìDie Bedeutung der ‰gyptischen Besucherinschriftenî (published 1952).34 Helck provided an overview of the graffiti presence. His list of published graffiti included: the Step pyramid of Djoser, the pyramid of Snofru at Medum, The Sun temple of Niuserre, the funerary temple of Pepi II, the mastaba of Ptahshepses at Abusir, the complex of Senusret III at Dahshur, the tomb of Khnumhotep at Beni Hassan, the pyramid complex of Khendjer in South Saqqara, and the Theban tombs and the Osireion at Abydos. He apparently omitted the funerary temple of Sahure, published by Borchardt. Helck noticed also the precarious state of publication of the graffiti ñ ìÖ Wir finden diese Wandaufschriften in fast allen bedeutenderen Anlagen, wenn auch leider nur ein geringer Teil von ihnen verˆffentlicht ist.î 35 Helck himself published the graffiti in the temple of Userkaf accurately. Helck noted that the graffiti have repeated phrasing and that we should consider the presence of graffiti as an expression of interest and relationship of Egyptians toward the monuments, and not as an accidental fact. A necropolis was, remarked Helck, a place where tomb inscriptions invoked prayers, offerings and offering-prayers. One would therefore expect, unless some change in perception occurred, expressions of piety to dominate the necropolisí written material. For Helck, they are not present there, or at least not in the first place. Helck opined even, that the graffiti, if they note a prayer at all, make it only second in place, after paying attention to other things, such as characterizing the building as very nice etc.36 The corpus in this book (see also Tables 1 and 2) can corroborate some of the phrase sequences, but Helckís reasoning is not impeccable. His other notion supported with royal texts of the 18th dynasty, namely, that the Egyptians of that period showed other examples of interest in their past, is inspiring.37 Helck tried to prove the existence of historicism in the New Kingdom38; he supposed the presence of history taught in schools and supported by school excursions to the monuments of old.39 He hoped to find proofs for that in graffiti as well,40 but evidence of the graffiti is very fragmentary and much less certain than Helck would have liked it to be.

32 ƒgyptische und andere Graffiti (Inschriften und Zeichnungen) aus der Thebanischen Nekropolis, W., Spiegelberg, ed., mit einem Atlas von 123 Tafeln in Folio, Heidelberg 1921. 33 Spiegelberg, ƒgyptische und andere Graffiti, I, V. 34 Helck, W., Die Bedeutung der ‰gyptischen Besucherinschriften, ZDMG 102, 1952, 39ñ46. 35 Helck, op. cit., 39. 36 Helck, op. cit., 1952, 44. 37 He noted, Helck, op. cit., 1952, 45, certain expressions, and the fact that Thutmose IV released the Sphinx from its sandy cover. See also Vernus, P., Líessai sur la coscience de líHistoire dans líEgypte pharaonique, Paris 1995, part II.

19

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:58

StrÆnka 20

Jean Yoyotte, in his oeuvre on pilgrimages of the Egyptians (published in 1960) opined, in spite of his naming the chapter on Besucherinschriften ìVisites díintellectuels aux sites archÈologiquesî, mostly that the visitors were guided by piety.41 A very open-minded introduction to the theme of Besucherinschriften is more than 30 years old ñ it is the voice ìBesucherinschriftenî in Lexikon der ƒgyptologie by Dietrich Wildung (1972).42 Wildung detected differences in text types and separated a sort of ìclassicalî Besucherinschrift in a necropolis (on the grounds of phraseology as well) from other similar graffiti, even from graffiti in temples. He noted the Leitmotiv to be followed in the interpretation of these graffiti ñ funerary cult, personal piety, tradition and historical awareness. His theses can be questioned, but most of his notes and information gathered also in his volume on the role of Egyptian kings43, should be taken into consideration. A look on Table 2 can show that the graffiti indeed present a variety of phrases; and the noticeable appearance of kings, both past and contemporary in respect of the graffiti authors. Wildungís work on Die Rolle der ‰gyptischen Kˆnige (1969) can be also regarded as a methodological guide in the study of the visitorsí graffiti, since his view on the graffiti inserts them into wider context of study of traditions and eventually historical awareness. He considers kings to be key persons in the historical consciousness44, which can be taken as a plausible explanation.45 Therefore he concentrates on graffiti in royal tombs. We may presume that the graffiti can be included in the less official venue of historical consciousness.46 Wildung also pointed out that people tended to go to see the monument, because it belonged to a particular king, not because of the monument itself.47 The occurrence of the identification (see also Table 1) can corroborate this thesis, at least for the Memphite necropolis. Presence of Kings ñ Examples from the pyramid complex of Djoser identification code

king-owner

title/epithet

other kings

title/epithet

gods

dynasty

M.2.3.P.18.4

Y

N

Y

nswt bitj, anx Dt

Y

18

M.2.3.P.18.5

X

X

Y

nswt bitj, anx Dt

X

18

M.2.3.P.18.6

X

X

Y

nswt bitj, X

X

18

M.2.3.P.18.7

N

N

Y

nswt bitj, anx Dt

Y

18

M.2.3.P.18.8

Y

X

Y

nswt bitj, anx Dt

N

18

M.2.3.P.18.9

Y

nswt bitj, mAa xrw

Y

nswt bitj, anx Dt

Y

18

38 Later again reinterpreted by the Egyptians themselves, as he considered to be proved by the state to which is reduced prince Khaemwaset after his chase after old scrolls ñ it is, after all, only a chase after magic in the Demotic Setne Khaemwase texts, Helck, Die Bedeutung, 1952, 45ñ46. 39 Helck, op. cit., 1952, 46. 40 He later tried to prove the same theory on the graffiti in the Sun Temple of Userkaf. cf. Helck, Besucherinschriften, 115ff. 41 Cf. after Wildung, Die Rolle, 71, and 71, Anm. 3. The work of Yoyotte is unfortunately currently not accessible to me. 42 Wildung, D., Besucherinschiften, Lƒ I, 766ñ767. 43 Wildung, Die Rolle, on graffiti e.g. 65ñ74. His overview of kings ends with Shepseskaf, so kings of later dynasties and their graffiti are not included. 44 ìDie Kˆnige als Repr‰sentanten der Vergangenheit werden somit zum Kriterium einer Bewertung des Geschichtsbewufltseins des alten ƒgypters. Die Gegen¸berstellung der Rolle eines Kˆnigs in der Vorstellungswelt sp‰terer Epochen mit dem Bild, das wir uns aus zeitgenˆssischen Quellen von ihm machen m¸ssen, wird es gestatten festzustellen, ob f¸r den ƒgypter historische Taten ¸berhaupt relevant waren, wenn er sich seiner Ahnen erinnerte, und welche Leistungen einen alten Kˆnig des Andenkens ¸ber Jahrhunderte hinweg w¸rdigten...!î Wildung, Die Rolle, 1ñ2. 45 Cf. above. 46 See further. 47 Wildung, Die Rolle, 69ñ70.

20

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:58

StrÆnka 21

In addition, Wildung compared various graffiti and various information a visitorsí graffito can tell48 ñ like if the graffito is votive, contains a prayer, is just an en-passant notice, names correctly a tomb owner etc., but he made no statistics of how much graffiti do tell this or that fact, or whether and how often the functions merge within one graffito. In addition, he concentrated chiefly on the material in the complex of Djoser, therefore other groups, such as the graffiti in the temple of Sahure, or the Sun temple of Userkaf were not taken into consideration. Wildung considers the Djoser graffiti as evidence for the religious dimension of visits to this 3rd dynasty pyramid complex. The 19th dynasty, the majority of which are in the South chapel, as far as the publication is concerned,49 have text variants, some of which clearly point out the dimension mentioned by Wildung.50 An interesting ancient Egyptian text on Besucherinschriften was published by Klaus P. Kuhlmann in 1973.51 Although Kuhlmann did not discuss Besucherinschriften in detail, he noted a particular inscription in a Saite tomb, invoking the visitors to leave inscriptions on the blank parts of the tomb walls ñ lines 14ñ15 say ìÖ sS-tn Hr Sw rdi-s ra n sn.w-f ws Hr Sw gm.tw im.î (ìWrite on the blank (walls) so that it can be repeated to others what was found there writtenÖî )52 The Theban Besucherinschriften in the Deir el-Bahari temple of Thutmose III were mapped by Marek Marciniak, who edited his work in 1973ñ1974.53 Marciniak also included a palaeography of the graffiti.54 His work complies with publication standards of having together the photo documentation, drawings and explanation on the texts, including an analysis of their phraseology. This last point must be especially appreciated, because Marciniak tried to find the models for graffiti texts, systematically recurrent phrases etc. However, the Deir el-Bahari graffiti corpus is a corpus of ìpious graffitiî. Despite this, Marciniak considered the graffiti of Deir el-Bahri group as relatives of the Memphite necropoleis group. Some phrases might actually empower this hypothesis (see further). There was another article dealing with the Theban graffiti ñ Deir el-Bahri group ñ and an attempt to build a corpus of these graffiti.55 The author A. I. Sadek (1984) tried to map the authors in a short comment,56 and noted the religious character dominating these inscriptions,57 as well as some typical formulae. Allan K. Philips (1986) has noted a number of useful observations on the graffiti, and worked on the graffiti from the chapel of Horemheb. His analysis of the graffiti in Deir el-Bahri, which use the standardised formulae of the Besucherinschriften, and indeed the notion that Besucherinschriften have a standardised set of formulae, which is set broader than by Marciniak, is very valuable.58 The present writer is aware that A. K. Philips prepared a dissertation on this topic, unfortunately so far this has not been accessed. In addition, the same author published an article in 1998, where he discusses the supposed tourist purpose of the graffiti in the pyramid complex of Djoser.59 Compare Wildung, Besucherinschiften, Lƒ I, 766. See Firth, C. M., ñ Quibell, J. E., Excavations at Saqqara. The Step pyramid I, Le Caire 1935, 79. 50 Wildung, Die Rolle, 69f. 51 Kuhlmann, K. P., Eine Beschreibung der Grabdekoration mit der Aufforderung zu kopieren und zum Hinterlassen von Besucherinschriften aus saitischer Zeit, MDAIK 29, 2, 1973, 207ñ213. The article is recommended as an important reasoning behind the graffiti also by Darnell, J. C., The Graffiti of Pharaonic Egypt Scope and Roles of Informal Writings (c. 3100ñ332 B.C.) by Alexander J. Peden, JAOS 122, 4, 885ñ886. 52 The text that was intended here was probably not the graffito itself, but the surrounding original inscriptions of the tomb. Compare Kuhlmann, MDAIK 29, 2, 1973, 210ñ213. 53 Marciniak, Les inscriptions hiÈratiques. 54 Marciniak, op. cit., 171ñ266. 55 Sadek, A. I., An Attempt to Translate the Corpus of the Deir el-Bahari Hieratic Inscriptions, GM 71, 1984, 67ñ91, and Sadek, A. I., An Attempt to Translate the Corpus of the Deir el-Bahri Hieratic Inscriptions [Part Two], GM 72, 1984, 65ñ86. 56 Sadek, op. cit., GM 71, 67ñ69. 57 Sadek, op. cit., GM 71, 68ñ69. 58 Compare Philips, A. K., Observations on the Alleged New Kingdom Sanatorium at Deir el Bahri, GM 89, 1986, 78ñ80; particularly pp. 78 and 79ñ80. It must be especially noted that Philips distinguished the sets of formulae, which ìÖ can be dissected, and the rendering of their individual components substantiated by parallel examples.î (op. cit., 78). 59 Philips, A. K., Monuments of the past as a tourist attraction in the New Kingdom, Papyrus 17, 2, 1997/8 English abstract, published on http://www.daes.dk/pap/papyrus17-2.htm#11 says: ìBased on the physical positions of graffiti in 48

49

21

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:58

StrÆnka 22

Since then other opinions and syntheses on graffiti appeared. Maged Negm concentrated on the Ramesside graffiti (1998).60 Negm supported the tourist cause of the Besucherinschriften, however he opted for religious tourism, de facto pilgrimages. He also included Ramesside graffiti of Middle Egyptian location ñ those in Beni Hasan. His perspective included an overview of the 18th dynasty graffiti as well. As regards the 18th dynasty, the sites he commented on include: Thebes, Saqqara (Djoser only), Medum, Beni Hasan. He did not mention Abusir and Dahshur. Regarding the Ramesside graffiti, he included again Djoser61, Nashuyís graffito in the pyramid complex of Khendjer, and one graffito from the mastaba of Ptahshepses at Abusir (cf. M.1.5.M.19.1.1). Despite his limited corpus, Negm attempted a commentary, albeit brief, on the graffiti authors and formulae. He noted the classical formula of comparison of the temple to heaven, where Re is rising, and noted also the ir nfr formula in prayers as well as Marciniak did for his Deir el-Bahari corpus.62 As regards the authors, however, his statement that ìTourist graffiti are a New Kingdom phenomenon practised by middle and upper classesî63 is rather dubious, since the upper classes are so far in a minority ñ hitherto attested: vizier Paser in Thebes, royal herald Amunedjeh in Abu Ghurob (see p. 31f.). Negm concluded that these graffiti could be attributed to religious tourism; therefore, as said, he shifted the antiquarian emphasis to pilgrimage as well, albeit in different terms. His notion that visitors were expected in tombs ñ and were warned to prevent abuse and damage ñ by threat formulae64 seems logical, but would deserve further attention. Visitors were certainly expected later in some Saite tombs (cf. above, Kuhlmann). Visitorsís graffiti are also included in voice ìGraffitiî by Detlef Franke65 (2001). Franke claims their informality as essential ñ indeed any graffito could be primarily defined as ìÖ not intended for the eternity ñ it was just a certain momentary idea or inspiration. That basic intention changed in the course of time and, perhaps, ancient Egyptian elite culture was the first to leave graffiti for eternity, to perpetuate individual achievements and names, and to communicate with future generations.î Franke himself precised his definition of graffiti in general on the same page as he quoted a Middle Kingdom graffito at Kumma and other graffiti from Hatnub, which claimed for being read and left undamaged66. Franke does not pay any special attention to visitorsí graffiti, which is understandable in limits of his voice in an encyclopaedia. However, it is important that the visitorsí graffiti are mentioned at all. We might add that the visitorsí graffiti, since they contain information on their authorsí persons, prayers and invocations, might have contained a strive for eternity from the very beginning of existence of this peculiar inscription type; however, even in this case, many graffiti do not explicitly ask for being read and remembered67 (not to speak of the disputable character of M.1.5.S.18.3). More space has been devoted to the interpretation of visitorsí graffiti by Alexander Peden (in 2001), who names interpretative variants for visitorsí graffiti, especially at Saqqara. He opines that some of the graffiti authors in Saqqara may have been based there on various state building projects.68

the so-called Houses of the North and South in the pyramid complex of Djoser the author queries the previously accepted belief that the monument was continuously used as a setting for the cult of the king by subsequent generations.î In fact, the continuous cultic use would stand for the pious reasoning behind the graffiti and against the antiquarian one. In addition, the continuous use cannot be presumed for all locations with visitorsí graffiti. Therefore the idea of Philips to doubt or at least to revise continuity of cultic uses is both interesting for the graffiti debate and sound. 60 Negm, M., Tourist Graffiti from the Ramesside Period, DE 40, 1998, 115ñ123. 61 He mentioned graffito of the scribe Hednakhte (cf. M.2.3P.19.3), with the discussed translation of sDAj Hr after Philips, A. K., Observations on the Alleged New Kingdom at Deir el Bahri, GM 89, 1986, 79ñ80; Negm, op. cit., 119. 62 He added that this formula is often used in the Theban Deir el-Bahri graffiti ñ see above Sadek, An Attempt, GM 71, 1984, 67ñ91 and Sadek, An Attempt, GM 72, 1984, 65ñ86. 63 Negm, op. cit., 120. 64 Negm, op. cit., 123. 65 Franke, Graffiti, 38ñ41. 66 In fact, see Franke, Graffiti, 40, names a graffito in Hatnub, which threatens anyone who might damage it, with death. 67 That they were read ñ and commented upon ñ is a different fact, and mostly these commentaries might have been made in the same period as the texts they referred to. (Compare written ìdiscussionî on Djoserís chapel, see below).

22

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:58

StrÆnka 23

In addition ñ ìTo judge by the graffiti texts they left behind it seems that visitors came to Saqqara for several reasons: to inspect out of a sense of curiosity and piety, the great monuments of a distant past; to offer up prayers to the gods of Western Memphis on behalf of themselves and their families; to honour the memories of famed rulers of the Old Kingdom; and to ask the latter to intercede with the gods for the benefit of the petitioner.î69 This description, aimed at the 18th dynasty graffiti covers a wide range of purposes, which can be mixed in one text or expressed with separate text types, as we can see further. For Ramesside scribes he notes that they ìÖ made the effort to visit the Saqqara cemeteries for more or less the same reasons as their XVIIIth dynasty predecessors; to inspect the monuments of earlier ages; to offer up prayers ...and to honour the memory of long-dead monarchs, now ranked as deities, as to ask for their favour.î70 Peden thus preferred to speak about Saqqara on the whole as a place where graffiti were generated because of mixed religious and antiquarian reasons, which is then a compromise in respect of the stricter opinion of Wildung (or indeed Yoyotte), who preferred to see behind them a separate religious concept of piety towards a local saint or god (i.e. deified ruler)71 as a reason for some examples of the graffiti. These statements can be in part supported by the sources; however, the uniformity of reasons for 18th and 19th dynasty, as regards visiting the monuments and leaving the graffiti, cannot be taken for granted (cf. below). Hans Fischer-Elfert dedicated to Besucherinschriften a passage in his article on representations of the past in the New Kingdom literature.72 He noted some typical phraseology. The graffiti are viewed in context of: 1. other documents dealing with monuments, especially P. Chester Beatty IV, which mentions the ruinous state of other monuments; 2. other texts. The intertextuality indicated by Fischer-Elfert is an important point.73 However, Fischer-Elfert also opines that the sacred character of the spot where we find the graffiti influenced strongly their contents. He takes into account chiefly the graffiti in the complex of Djoser. However, other known graffiti (such as M.1.5.S.18.3) do not agree with this opinion. There might have been considerable divergences in perception. Another recent reassesment of the graffiti, which hinted their link to the scribal education and social background is a lecture given by Teresa Moore ìHistory Under the Microscope: What Egyptian Graffiti Tells Us About the Past.î 74 She noted the particular graffiti recording important regal events. Newly discovered graffiti in the neigbourhood of Assiut are being published by Jochem Kahl and already their text analysis has provided a rewarding result ñ confirming that the literate authors were applying their literary knowledge in the graffiti.75 To sum up, the visitorsí graffiti state of research and of interpretation, as indicated above, should not be considered as a closed and entirely solved Egyptological problem. The divergences in interpretation are noteworthy and in some cases are based on divergent sets of evidence, even though the sets of material for evidence are taken from the same set of graffiti. A single group of texts is capable of providing quotations for supporting a whole range of opinions. In the same moment, as each group of the graffiti is specific ñ some groups, the most often quoted one is Djoserís one ñ have specific composition, which favours one interpretation over another, whereas other group might favour a different interpretation. Therefore we cannot revise, verify or falsify the previous the-

Peden, Graffiti, 61. Peden, op. cit., 61. 70 Peden, op. cit., 96. 71 Cf. Wildung, Die Rolle, passim and Wildung, Besucherinschriften, Lƒ I, 766ñ767. See also further section ìInterpretationsî. 72 Fischer-Elfert, Representations of the Past, 131ñ133. 73 Fischer-Elfert, op. cit., 132ñ133. 74 See http://home.comcast.net/~hebsed/moore.htm. 75 Kahl, J., Zeugnis, GM 211, 25ñ29; Kahl, J., El-Khadragy, M., Verhoeven, U., The Asyut Project: fourth season of fieldwork (2006), Studien zur Alt‰gyptischen Kultur 36, 2007 (forthcoming). 68 69

23

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:58

StrÆnka 24

ories using the same repeatedly re-interpreted selective corpus of material as the previous authors, since the corpus tailored and used for different and various theories was always as different and various as the theories themselves. There emerges a necessity of making a larger corpus gathering systemised information on the graffiti. First of all, it is apparent that the visitorsí graffiti present themselves as a group of inscriptions, which is not unified in the sense of having one set of rules, more or less observed and immutable over a longer span of time; therefore there is not a unified code of interpretation. This is probably why graffiti incite varied and contradictory interpretations. The graffiti are a homogeneous group in so far as they appear under a defined set of circumstances: 1. the graffiti, which can be called visitorsí graffiti (Egyptological, not Egyptian, terminology), are usually considerably post-dating the building, in which we can find them; 2. they are inscriptions seeming much less formal than e.g. stelae, and even than a number of rock inscriptions; 3. they often, though not always, comment upon the visited site or monument. Neither ancient nor modern graffiti have been left purposelessly on the walls, especially if we take into consideration the fact, that for ancient Egypt writing was not such a widespread and automatic activity as we are prone to consider it now. While leaving an inscription behind, one must have felt a reason to do so.76 Any written material appeared under given circumstances, and no ìscribblingî was nor is purely accidental. The analysis should at first take a larger group of graffiti, a corpus, and try to map, along with a complex description of the graffiti in question, statistically describable features ñ dating, occurrence or absence of certain expressions, etc.77 However, many graffiti have not yet been accessible in a published form; this is the reason why the analysis in this volume is combined with the description of the corpus of the graffiti at Abusir and Northern Saqqara. Definitely, there are handy and exhaustive works on graffiti, both general (recently by A. J. Peden78) and also site-related corpora (classical Graffiti de la montagne thÈbaine), and the visitorsí graffiti are quoted in many contexts, but a complex attitude in respect of the visitorsí graffiti hasnít yet been taken. Nonetheless, these graffiti present a special and abundant sort79 of written evidence, and deserve to be treated separately from other graffiti and have to be studied in period and site relations, and eventually compared to other sorts of written material.

76 Compare Baines, J., Excursus: Decorum and emblematic representations, Fecundity figures, 277ñ286. ìI use the term decorum to describe the rules which I believe bar certain types of representations from associating freely and occurring freely in different contexts. These rules therefore govern distribution and compatibility, which are essentially large- and small-scale aspects of the same phenomenon, distribution relating to the totality of contexts as a system, and compatibility to subsystems within the major systemî. See also Baines, Literacy, 193, passim and now also Baines, J., Visual and Written Culture in Ancient Egypt, Oxford 2007. 77 The present writer has already attempted a statistics of graffiti phraseology. Navr·tilov·, H., The phraseology of the visitorsí graffiti. A preliminary report of the graffiti database, B·rta, M., Coppens, F., KrejËÌ, J., eds., Abusir and Saqqara 2005, Prague (forthcoming). 78 Peden, Graffiti. 79 As can be noted in the tables in this chapter, there are 97 graffiti in the Memphite necropoleis plus 45 graffiti newly discovered at Dahshur plus at least 9 more graffiti in the complex of Sahure ñ the number is based on the fact that Mˆller in his Pal‰ographie II had graffiti numbered up to 12, and three of them are known from A. H. Gardinerís manuscript 26 A and B.

24

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:58

StrÆnka 25

THE MEMPHITE CORPUS OF VISITORSí GRAFFITI

The Memphite corpus is currently covering Abusir, Saqqara, Dahshur and Medum. It includes published and publicly accessible archived graffiti chiefly of the 18th and 19th dynasty, with possible examples up to the 20th dynasty. These three dynasties appear to be the most prolific; Demotic graffiti are left aside for the time being and warrant a separate study devoted entirely to them. Visitorsí graffiti are not a series of stereotyped texts, they can have variations or different text types1. Which text types we encounter, and which text types are proper to which period? is an open question at this time. We can however inquire if there is a trace of a general cultural pattern behind the graffiti and if their occurrence resulted as a sociocultural phenomenon proper to a given period. This may well incite the comment that graffiti can be considered as one of the key groups of sources for the study of Egyptian uses of the past, and the historical tradition of kings. Indeed, but how did the historical tradition or a ìuse of the pastî actually work? Are we right in replacing ìcanî in the sentence with ìare to beî? Since the corpus is still in a preliminary form, answers cannot be provided to all of these questions and they cannot provide for all of them with the same degree of reliability. The chosen time and place relate to the hitherto known peaks of importance and building activity of the New Kingdom at Memphis and the development of Memphite necropoleis. Graffiti should also be seen in the context of monuments and archaeological situation of the site.

Time

The majority of all known visitorsí graffiti at the Memphite necropolis with all its extensions except Giza come from the New Kingdom. Two dynasties prevail, the 18th and the 19th or 19th/20th dynasty. The 18th dynasty produced the greater part of datable graffiti. Especially Dahshur shows a boom of 18th dynasty graffiti (compare Table 1). The corpus does not show any significant activity after the 20th dynasty and later, except for a slight revival under the 26th dynasty (compare Table 1). This is in accordance with hitherto known activities on the Memphite necropolis in the New Kingdom.

Place

The Memphite necropolis, whose graffiti are included, is a broad term ñ the ancient Egyptian necropolis of the New Kingdom Memphis represented with all likelihood a continuum from Abusir/Abu Ghurob through Saqqara, with extensions to Dahshur, and Giza. Although no royal burial of the New Kingdom is presently known to have taken place there, those of the members of the royal family did, and added a new chapter to the long and rich history of this burial ground. There are Thutmoside tombs in the Userkaf pyramid complex neighbourhood, and it is logical to expect more tombs to emerge. The 18th dynasty tombs are slowly emerging, with the main group being dated to the late 18th dynasty and even Amarna and post-Amarna.2 There are also new discoveries, such as the recently revealed tomb of Ptahemwia.3 The New Kingdom tombs are to be expected in far greater number than hitherto excavated because of archaeological reasons ñ there are also

1 2 3

Compare Wildung, D., Besucherinschriften, Lƒ I. Compare the overview by M·lek, J., Saqqara, Nekropolen, NR, Lƒ V, 410ñ412. Current (autumn 2007) information on http://www.let.leidenuniv.nl/saqqara/homepage.htm.

25

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:58

StrÆnka 26

a number of relief blocks of New Kingdom tombs in world museums, which still do not have their apposite tomb found, as was the case with Horemhebís tomb for example. As pointed out by Martin4, the 18th dynasty activities maybe first used the rock cut tombs ñ hypogea, and only after using substantially the whole escarpment, the ìtemple-tombsî entered into use more widely. The temple tombs seem to be better known due to the discoveries by G. T. Martin and Sayyed Tawfik.5 A. Zivieís discoveries in the area of Bubasteion brought new names to the map of the Memphite necropolis and proved the use of the Memphite necropolis deep into the pre-Amarna 18th dynasty. The line of the New Kingdom tombs may have been protracted from Bubasteion to Abusir, as the discovery of the tomb of Nakhtmin would suggest.6 The 18th dynasty necropolis activities are briefly mentioned also by the Japanese expedition working in North Saqqara, as being dated to the reign of Amenhotep II and/or Thutmose IV7. According to a structural overview by M. J. Raven8, the ìvast expansesî of Memphite New Kingdom necropolis cover an area from Giza to Dahshur. Saqqara itself is a place sprayed with New Kingdom tombs, ranging mostly from the mid 18th dynasty (earliest so far known) to the Ramesside period, mainly Ramesses II. Later tombs are known down to 20th dynasty (surrounding Teti pyramid cemeteries). So far, the pattern of tombsí distribution has little to do with chronological order, the groups of tombs seem to be organised according to a social key. The social stratification is remarkable in the tomb structure, of course, too. Malek9 and Raven tried to find a social grouping of the New Kingdom tombs as well, because some tombs of lesser officials were adjacent to the tombs of their superiors, such as in the case of Iurudef to Tia and Tia. Similarly there seems to be a group of officials around Horemheb, linked with him even in the position of their tombs. Thus, which tombs groupings can we find and where: there are groups of New Kingdom tombs near Bubasteion, in the escarpment (rock tombs), in the area between Djoser and the Monastery of Apa Jeremiah, also near the causeway of Unas (possible re-uses of older structures) and further around the Teti Pyramid cemeteries. The hub of the temple-tombs including those of Horemheb10, Maya, Tia and Tia and their dignitaries is located between Djoser and Apa Jeremiah. The temple tomb of Horemheb, built at the time of his military career at the court of the last monarchs of the 18th dynasty, was at the centre of a whole group of tombs. New Kingdom evidence goes, as far as to Dahshur, as regards tombs, and as far as Meidum, as regards graffiti. To the north, to North Saqqara and to its extension Abusir, also to Zawiyet el-Aryan and to Giza, as regards both tombs and graffiti. The disposition of tombs and graffiti does not always coincide. Caution, must however, be applied, as the bigger tombs are not the only New Kingdom occupants of the necropolis. The area of Saqqara is sprayed with lesser burials, re-using often older in Middle Kingdom and Old Kingdom structures in, contrast to the bigger tombs, which avoided previously built structures. These poorer burials are often just a pit, provided with simple burial equipment, such as a few pieces of pottery, simple personal adornments and utensils. These simple burials are well documented for example in Teti Pyramid Cemeteries, published by B. Gunn and C. Firth.11 These burials are dated from the period of Ahmose to Horemheb, or even later. The burials were either re-using older structures, such as storerooms of Old Kingdom mastabas, or they were built with a deep New Kingdom shaft cutting the dÈbris, accumulated between and

Martin, G. T., Corpus of Reliefs of the New Kingdom from the Memphite Necropolis and Lower Egypt I, London 1987, also Martin, G. T., Hidden tombs of Memphis, 39. 5 Tawfik, S., Recently Excavated Ramesside Tombs at Saqqara 1 ñ Architecture, MDAIK 47, 1991, 403ñ409. 6 Pinch Brock, L., Nile Current, KMT, Fall 1993. 7 Waseda University Excavations in North Saqqara, In: B·rta, M. ñ KrejËÌ, J., Abusir and Saqqara in the Year 2000, Prague 2001, 161ñ172, 162. There were stamped bricks, and small stelae of Thutmose IV, with offering scenes, and scene described as ìfamiliar motif of the king smiting a foreign enemyî (op. cit., 164), which would be similar to what Petrie found in Memphis city ñ see Petrie, Memphis I, pl. VIII, upper row. 8 Raven, M., Twenty-five years of work, 133ff., further Zivie, A. P., ed., Memphis et ses nÈcropoles au Nouvel Empire, Paris 1988. 9 M·lek, J., The Tomb-chapel of Hekamaetre at Northern Saqqara, SAK 12, 1985, 43 ff. 10 See Martin, G. T., The Memphite Tomb of Horemheb, commander-in-chief of Tutankhamun, London 1991. 11 Firth, C. M. ñ Gunn, B., Excavation at Saqqara. Teti Pyramid Cemeteries I., Le Caire 1926, 66ff., Burials of the New Empire.

4

26

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:58

StrÆnka 27

at the top of older structures. Other use of the necropolis is an extension of the burial itself ñ the offering cult. It seems that a veneration of the deceased, theoretically meant to endure forever, was extended at least a generation after the passing.12 In addition, there was another reason that led Egyptians to the fields of the Memphite necropolis ñ it was a handy source of stone to be recycled and re-used. Even monumental New Kingdom tombs seem to use stone from neighbouring older tombs.13 The hitherto known graffiti at Saqqara tend to concentrate in two places ñ the pyramid complex of Djoser at Saqqara central field and in the southern Saqqara complexes of Pepi II and Khendjer. Abusir has graffiti clusters in the pyramid complex of Sahure and also on the site of Abu Ghurob ñ in the complexes of Userkaf and Niuserre. There is a significant cluster of graffiti at Medum, in the pyramid complex of Snofru,14 and at Dashur in the pyramid complex of Senusret III. The graffiti in the Sun temple of Niuserre15 are a hitherto unidentified factor. The graffiti in the temple of Pepi II and in the complex of Khendjer are also not yet sufficiently explored. The presence of the graffiti in the complexes of Djoser and Snofru may be connected with the exceptional position of these sovereigns. This exceptional position is perceptible in some of the graffiti: it is also known from extra-graffiti sources.16 Djoser was called ìThe Opener of Stoneî (graffito M.2.13.P.19.1). Snofru is called especially ìHorusî (graffito M.4.4.P.18.1). The theory of the kings of old turned into deities seems to work best on these two kings.17 Although kings have an altogether pivotal position in the ancient Egyptian world in general, this theory may actually have worked easier with especially important kings. However, other places are not so easily connected to the deitiesí tradition. There are other kings whose character in Egyptian tradition is not so clear and well-documented or who have less extragraffiti sources confirming their importance. Sahure might have been connected to the goddess Sakhmet, but not all of the graffiti connected with Sahure are connected with Sakhmet (see graffiti M.1.5.P.18.1 and M.1.5.P.18.2). The position of Senusret III seems more complex as well.18 The boundary importance of a king of the past/deity must have been very vacillating or non-existent in the Egyptian mind. Generally speaking, except for Horemheb and Ptahshepses the hitherto mapped Memphite Besucherinschriften are in the royal complexes. However, Horemheb was subsequently a royal person too, and the graffiti in the mastaba of Ptahshepses do not relate to Ptahshepses directly.

Raven, Twenty-five years of work, 139. M·lek, A meeting of the old a new, passim. Further, cf. Bareö, L., The destruction of the monuments at the necropolis of Abusir, In: B·rta, M. ñ KrejËÌ, J., Abusir and Saqqara in the Year 2000, Praha 2000, 1ñ16, with a short bibliographical overview, focused on Abusir chiefly. 14 E., Die Gute Reputation des Kˆnigs ëSnofruí, In: Israelit-Groll, S., Studies in Egyptology Presented to Miriam Lichtheim, Vol. I, Jerusalem 1990, 257ñ263, and Wildung, Die Rolle, 104f. 15 A short note on them was published by L. Borchardt, cf. von Bissing, Das Re-Heiligtum des Kˆnigs Ne-Woser-Re, 74. 16 Compare Wildung, Die Rolle, passim, and further below. 17 Compare Peden, Graffiti, 61. 18 See e.g. Habachi, L., Features of Deification of Ramesses II, ADAIK 5, Gl¸ckstadt 1969, 47, and PM VII, 145ff., 152f. for the New Kingdom cultic reverence for Senusret III in Nubia. 12 13

27

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:58

StrÆnka 28

Abusir and Northern Saqqara All hitherto known Memphite necropoleis graffiti are mapped in Table 1. It is a summary of sites, monuments, dated graffiti and their phraseology. This volume, as said, concentrates on two sites: 1. Abusir, more precisely Abusir and Abu Ghurob, using evidence published by W. Helck (courtesy Schweizerisches Institut f¸r ƒgyptische Bauforschung und Altertumskunde), L. Borchardt and documented by G. Mˆller, J. »ern˝ and others. 2. Northern Saqqara ñ specifically one monument, using evidence by G. B. Gunn and J. »ern˝, partly published already by C. M. Firth and J. E. Quibell. The documentation made by G. B. Gunn and Jaroslav »ern˝ was made accessible by the courtesy of the Griffith Institute, the University of Oxford and constitutes the bulk of the material in this volume.

28

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:58

StrÆnka 29

GRAFFITI IN ABU GHUROB AND ABUSIR

Abu Ghurob contains no known New Kingdom monuments.1 The New Kingdom horizon at Abu Ghurob is present in the Sun Temples of Userkaf and Niuserre in the form of visitorsí graffiti and fragmentary other inscriptions (a cartouche of Horemheb in the temple of Userkaf2, and a restoration inscription of Prince Khaemwaset in the temple of Niuserre3). The Userkaf temple graffiti were documented and published by W. Helck4. The present location of their documentation is not publicly known. The personal papers of W. Helck are also not known to contain any material relevant to the visitorsí graffiti in the temple of Userkaf.5 There were visitorsí graffiti of uncertain age and origin in the Sun temple of Niuserre at Abu Ghurob as well, but the state and location of their documentation (if existing) is not known. They were only mentioned briefly by Ludwig Borchardt in his publication on the temple. The graffiti should have been near the New Kingdom restoration inscription.6 The neighbouring site of Abusir has a New Kingdom horizon. Finds of New Kingdom date have recently been increasing both in number and spread over the necropolis. The well-known New Kingdom presence, which has been recognized since Borchardtís excavations at the beginning of the 20th century, is the sanctuary of Sakhmet of Sahure in the southern part of the funerary temple of Sahure. The finds are discussed briefly below as they are in the direct context of a large group of visitorsí graffiti. Further New Kingdom discoveries include pottery in the mastaba of Ptahshepses7 (another building with a presence of visitorsí graffiti), a secondary cemetery in the complex of Queen Khentkaus8 and pieces of pottery datable to the Amarna period. In addition, Spring 2002 brought more extensive finds ñ on the eastern part of the site where shafts were uncovered with remnants of burials datable to the New Kingdom.9 The visitorsí graffiti at Abusir were found in the pyramid complex of Sahure, specifically in Sahureís funerary temple. The visitorsí graffiti from the temple of Sahure were documented by Georg Mˆller. His full documentation is currently not available. The single signs were published in the Hieratische Pal‰ographie II 10 and three inscriptions were found in the personal papers of Sir Alan H. Gardiner11 and published by Mounir Megally.

See PM III/12, 325f. PM III/12, 325. 3 PM III/12, 315; Gomaa`, F., Chaemwese. Sohn Ramsesí II. und Hohenpriester von Memphis, ƒA 27, Wiesbaden 1973, Abb. 1a. 4 Helck, Besucherinschriften, 115ñ121. Also brief notes Ricke, ASAE liv, 1957, 311, and Stock, H. Das Sonnenheiligtum von Abusir (Aegypten), In: Neue Deutsche Ausgrabungen im Mittelmeergebiet und im Vorderen Orient, Berlin 1959, 9, Abb 7. 5 Hardtwig Altenm¸ller, personal communication, 9th of January 2007. 6 Bissing, F. W. von, Das Re-Heiligtum des Kˆnigs Ne-Woser-Re (Rathures), Band I ñ Der Bau von L. Borchardt, Berlin 1905, 72ñ74. They were overlooked by Peden, Graffiti. 7 Charv·t, P., Czechoslovak Excavations at Abusir. Mastaba of Ptahshepses ñ The Pottery, Praha 1981, pls. 34ñ41; Myn·¯ov·, J. Abusir in the New Kingdom. Current Research by the Czech Institute of Egyptology, In: Dann, R. J., Current Research in Egyptology 2004. Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Symposium, University of Durham 2004, Oxford 2006, 114. 8 Myn·¯ov·, Abusir in the New Kingdom, 114ñ115. 9 Bareö, L., B·rta, M., Smol·rikov·, K., and Strouhal, E., Abusir ñ Spring 2002 (Preliminary Report), ZƒS 130, 2003, 147ñ160, esp. p. 159; Myn·¯ov·, Abusir in the New Kingdom, 112ñ117. 10 Mˆller, G., Hieratische Pal‰ographie II, Leipzig 1909. 11 A. H. Gardiner manuscripts 26, AñB, The Griffith Institute Archives. 1

2

29

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:59

StrÆnka 30

Further graffiti were found in the pyramid complexes of Neferirkare and Niuserre. The graffiti in the complexes of Neferirkare and Niuserre were very brief and were mentioned by Ludwig Borchardt in his publications on the pyramid complex.12 New Kingdom graffiti were also found in the mastaba of Ptahshepses. They were partly published by G. Daressy13 and S. Spiegelberg14 and their remnants were observed by J. »ern˝ and later M. Verner15. In this volume, we have included the graffiti from the temples of Userkaf and Sahure, and from the mastaba of Ptahshepses.

?

? ?

The presence of visitorsí graffiti in Abusir and Abu Ghurob

Borchardt, L., Das Grabdenkmal des Kˆnigs Nefer-ir-ke-re, Leipzig 1909, 58; Borchardt, Das Grabdenkmal des Kˆnigs Neuser-re, Leipzig 1907, 160ñ161, Abb. 136. 13 Daressy, G., Inscriptions hiÈratique díun Mastaba díAbousir, BIE 5, 1894. 14 Spiegelberg, S., Varia ñ LXXIX, Die hieratischen graffiti der Mastaba des Ptahschepses zu Abusir, Rec. de Trav., 26, 152ñ154 15 Verner, M., The Mastaba of Ptahshepses. Reliefs (Abusir I), Charles University, Prague 1977, 23 and 46. 16 See Helck, Besucherinschriften. 115ñ121. See also Helck, Die Bedeutung, 39ñ46. 17 Helck, Besucherinschriften, 115 and Ricke, H., Dritte Bauperiode, Das Sonnenheiligtum des Kˆnigs Userkaf, Band I., Kairo 1965, 19ñ28, esp. p. 20 and Tafel 12b. 18 Stock, H., Das Sonnenheiligtum von Abusir (Aegypten), In: Neue Deutsche Ausgrabungen im Mittelmeergebiet und im Vorderen Orient, Berlin 1959, 9, Abb 7. 12

30

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:59

StrÆnka 31

The Sun Temple of Userkaf There are 18th dynasty graffiti in the Sun-temple of Userkaf. Their publication was first made by W. Helck16 and the inscriptions quoted are from his publication. The graffiti were in the upper part of the temple, presumably on the inner walls of a part identified by excavators as the third building phase. The blocks with visitorsí graffiti were found scattered on the site of the pedestal for the temple obelisk. They might have belonged to the rooms within the structure of the pedestal.17 The inscriptions were made with ink. They were identified according to single fragments with the abbreviation ìUSî. Helck provided photographs of those blocks, and one is also reproduced by Hanns Stock in his expedition report18, but the quality of the published photographs does not always allow their further use as documentation. Drawings provided as an accompaniment to Helckís text are much clearer; however they already carry an interpretation. Texts are transcribed into hieroglyphs and translated. The graffiti of the Sun Temple of Userkaf belong to those with well done documentation. However, a plan or a sketch next to the relevant chapter would help in establishing which graffito belongs where. It is not easy to decide whether the blocks formed a compact wall or had already been scattered around the place at the time when the graffiti were written. The graffiti are as varied as their authors. They came first in the period of Thutmose III, and they were put there by officials and scribes who might have been active in Memphis at least temporarily.19 Moreover, one graffito is interpreted as being the testimony of a visit by a schoolmaster and his scribal class.20

GRAFFITI

M1.5.S.18.1 Place The Sun Temple of Userkaf, blocks probably in the area of the obelisk base, Fragment US 68. Dating Thutmose III, as indicated with the preserved date line and a name of dignitary known to live under this sovereign. Text

19 Peden, Graffiti, 58, footnote 2; Helck, W., Zur Verwaltung des Mittleren und Neuen Reichs, Leiden 1958; Badawi, A., Zweite Landeshauptstadt im Neuen Reich, Le Caire 1948. 20 Cf. Ricke, Das Sonnenheiligtum des Kˆnigs Userkaf II, fragment US 74, see below.

31

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:59

StrÆnka 32

Transcription

To the reading by W. Helck21 I would only add the reading of a -sign at the end of line 3, but since this may theoretically belong to another graffito22, it might not influence the reading and interpretation of this one. It also can be doubted, whether certain determinatives were read completely accurately, e.g. the woman giving birth in the determinative of Fnx.w in Helckís original transcription (a sign B1 would be certainly often used). On the other hand, the determinative of st resembles an O49 sign much more than O1. However, W. Helck had the advantage of observing freshly uncovered inscriptions, therefore his readings should be more accurate than any subsequent attempt. Transliteration 0. ??? a dating 1. ..swt] bitj mn-[xpr]-ra sA ra DHwtj-ms.w nfr-xpr.w anx D.t r nHH ist Hm-f Hr DAhi Ö 2. tA.w fn]x.w xbxb xA.w Hr st-sn Xr wD it-f imn-ra nswt nTr.w 3. iw.t pw ir.n wHm nswt iAmw-nDH r mAA mr23 pn pA atx.w Hna nA n Hrj.w n a.t Ö sS ? 4. ///// m-pt imn-Htp sS mntw-Htp sS DHwtj-m-HA.t HwmS 5. remnants of signs Ö sS Translation 0.ñ1. [dating] under the Majesty of the King of Upper and Lower Egypt, Menkheperre, Son of Re Thutmose ñ Neferkheperu, living for ever and ever. As His Majesty was in Syria 2. [he] trampled the lands of the Fenkhu and Hurrians in their place as was the command of his father, Amun-Re, King of gods (Amonrasonther). 3. [there came] the royal herald Amunedjeh to see this pyramid. The Brewer and those of beer [production] Ö scribe ? 4. Ö..m-pet, Amenhotep, Scribe Mentuhotep, Scribe Djehutiemhat, Humesh, 5. traces of names and a title [scribe?] Commentary There is no hint in this graffito, that the authors went to the place in order to perform a religious act, there are no explicit pious prayers and no one asks Userkaf or a deity for an intervention in the Netherworld.24

Helck, Besucherinschriften, 115. Helck, Besucherinschriften, 118, suggests that there was another graffito over this one and discerns more signs. 23 Or, according to J. Quack, mHr; see Quack, J. F., Zum Lautwert von Gardiner Sign-List U 23, Lingua Aegyptia 11, 2003, 113ñ116. 24 A question is, whether Wildung in his Egyptian Saints. Deification in Pharaonic Egypt, New York 1977, is not on the right path when doubting the automatic divinity of each king. Maybe only some gained the status of a person mighty in this and the other world, a person, to whom one could pray and ask for help. cf. Wildung, Egyptian Saints, first chapter. 21 22

32

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:59

StrÆnka 33

There is only a visible attention or devotion to the person of the king, Thutmose III. The phrase describing royal activity is similar to phrases of this period in official royal inscriptions on Thutmoside stelae.25 The officials might have been acquainted with such inscriptions. This graffito suggests a statement of a group of officials who came to see the monument, even as modern tourists do. The other New Kingdom finds in Abusir, however, might indicate other reasons as well (attendance to burials), but we have no evidence at our disposal to suggest that there were important activities precisely in the period of this graffito. This graffito26 in the Sun temple of Userkaf has the mistaken denomination of the monument as a pyramid ñ m[H]r pn. It has caused a discussion whether the royal herald Amunedjeh did not make a mistake, considering this monument to be Userkafís pyramid, which is in Saqqara.27 Personages Its chief nominal author is the royal herald Amunedjeh (Ranke, PN 1, 6.27). We know Amunedjeh from other period documents as ìLeiter des Zentralb¸ros der Scheunenî ñ Helck, Verwaltung, 496 (3), his monuments include the Theban tomb 84, Urk IV., 937. His titles include wHm.w nswt ñ royal herald28, wHm.w nswt tp.j, imj-ra Snw.tj (overseer of granaries of the Two Lands), overseer of all the royal works etc. According to Helck, Verwaltung, 384 ff. ñ ìZentralverwaltung der Scheunenî, he took his position under Hatshepsut ñ Thutmose III joint rule (in 15th year of Thutmose III); he accompanied, according to an inscription on his statue in the 33rd year his king to the Euphrates, and he also mentions the work on the obelisks in the year 33, 36 and 40 of Thutmose IIIís reign. After year 40 he is the wHm.w nswt tp.j ñ the first herald. The interesting connection is his holding both the title of a herald and of the overseer of granaries29. Helck considers him the first holder of the regularly established title of the overseer of granaries30. What was a royal herald ñ he was a herald of the royal guard, which regulated (Helck, Verwaltung, 65ff.) the movements between the court and the ìoutsideî, the herald of the guard existed already in Midle Kingdom, in the New Kingdom he is the ìHM Heraldî. The 18th dynasty biography of Intef describes (stele Louvre C26) his activities as controlling the day to day activities of the palace, introducing people at ceremonies, perhaps organising audiences, bringing information to the King; further, he organized the guard; and Amunedjeh himself introduces his work thus (Urk. IV , 940/1): ìI went with every embassy, ... I accompanied the good god in every northern country...î The office was later made into a first and a second herald. Amunedjeh was the overseer of the guard and was promoted after a successful erection of an obelisk, into a first herald in year 40 of Thutmose III. (The succession of heralds of 18th dynasty, Helck, Verwaltung, 69, note 8). Amunedjeh oversaw the granaries and many of his successors and followers were given other high offices, such as that of the treasurer or even a viceroy of Kush (herald NHj under Thutmose III). On Amunedjeh also Cline, E. H. ñ OíConnor, D., Thutmose III. A New Biography, Ann Arbor 2006, 89ñ93. Interestingly, Amunedjeh himself declared in his tomb that he would like to see visitors in his tomb to come and read his inscriptions and say offering formulae ñ Urk IV., 939ñ941.31 Mentuhotep Ranke, PN 1, 154.21. Djehutiemhat Ranke, PN 1, 408.1. Humesh ñ this name is not present in Ranke, PN 1. Documentation Present location not known.

Compare Klug, Kˆnigliche Stelen in der Zeit von Ahmose bis Amenophis III., Bruxelles 2002, passim, esp. stelae of Thutmose III. 26 See also Helck, Besucherinschriften, 115, translated anew and Peden, Graffiti, 59. 27 Helck, Besucherinschriften, 118 and Peden, Graffiti, 59. 28 HWb, 211 ñ Herald, Sprecher, etc. 29 Helck, Verwaltung, 154f. 30 Helck, Verwaltung, 154f. 31 See also M¸ller, Ch., Anruf an Lebende, Lƒ I, 293ñ299. 25

33

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:59

StrÆnka 34

References Graffito: Helck, W., Besucherinschriften, In: Ricke, Das Sonnenheiligtum des Kˆnigs Userkaf II, Wiesbaden 1965, 115ñ116 and 118. Stock, H., Das Sonnenheiligtum von Abusir (Aegypten), In: Neue Deutsche Ausgrabungen im Mittelmeergebiet und im Vorderen Orient, Berlin 1959, 9, Abb. 7. Context: Helck, W., Die Bedeutung der ‰gyptischen Besucherinschriften, ZDMG 102, 1952, 39ñ46. Helck, W., Zur Verwaltung des Mittleren und Neuen Reichs, Leiden 1958, 384, 496 (3), 65ñ69. Ricke, H., Dritte Bauperiode, Das Sonnenheiligtum des Kˆnigs Userkaf I, Kairo 1965, 19ñ28. Peden, A. J., Graffiti of Pharaonic Egypt, Leiden 2001, 58ñ59.

M.1.5.S.18.2 Place The Sun Temple of Userkaf, blocks probably in the area of the obelisk base, Fragment US 67. Dating Probably 18th dynasty, but the number of comparable signs is low. Text

Transcription

The scratched sign , sS , possibly belonging to another graffito? Transliteration 1. iw.t pw ir n sS ttj [r mAA] Hw.tj nTr.j n.t Ö 2. ///// qd.w gm-f s[t mi p.t] Translation 1. There came the scribe Teti to [see] the Two Temples of 2. the Creator and found th[em like heaven].32 32 Helck, Besucherinschriften, 119, discussed the reading qdw, it seems to have a divine determinative, however. And pointed out, too, that the temple was correctly understood, even in its having two parts.

34

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:59

StrÆnka 35

Commentary US 67 identifies the building. It is interesting, that this observer noted the two ñ upper and lower ñ parts of the temple. iw.t pw ir.n sS, ìthere came the scribeî is an often used formula (see Table 3). The scribe added no pious remark, but only commented on the building. The comparison of a building to heaven is repeated in a couple of graffiti on other monuments as well ñ e.g. in the pyramid complex of Djoser (see Table 3). Personages Teti Ranke, PN 1, 384.4 Documentation Present location not known. References Graffito: Helck, Besucherinschriften, 119. Context: Helck, Die Bedeutung, 39ñ46. Ricke, Dritte Bauperiode, 19ñ28. Peden, Graffiti, 58ñ59.

M.1.5.S.18.3 Place The Sun Temple of Userkaf, blocks probably in the area of the obelisk base, Fragment US 69. Dating 18th dynasty? There is no date line, and the sign shapes have both 18th and 19th dynasty parallels.33 Text

Transcription

Transliteration mk Hm [!] Translation See that bastard! 34

33 Compare Mˆller, Hieratische Pal‰ographie II, 8, 96 and 98. The determinative is probably D53, not D52, as Helck, Besucherinschriften, 119, opined. If there were a D52, it might have been closer to a 19th dynasty shape. Compare Wb III, 80, 7. 34 Helck, Besucherinschriften, 119, Helck originally translated acc. to a Late Period use, pederast. It is also translated ìweaklingî, or in German context ìSchwullerî; see also Stˆrk, L., Schimpfwˆrter, Lƒ V, 634ñ638. The word, also in the

35

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:59

StrÆnka 36

Commentary This ancient graffito reminds us strongly of modern graffiti. We can see a criticism on walls of the Djoser complex, as well, but there it is a more elaborate comment regarding the writing of other graffiti authors (graffito M.2.3.P.18.15). Userkafís temple yielded this example ñ a little surprisingly on the temple walls, which are covered with inscriptions with a usually solemn content. We might consider it as evidence for ancient Egyptians viewing that place as no more an ìactiveî temple, but a monument of the past, where certain things, such as commemorating personal opinions on the walls, were possible. On the other hand, it may be a case of an ancient literate rogue, to whom it mattered little as to where he left his opinion immortalized. Such graffito would actually fully correspond to Pedenís notion, namely, that graffiti were a written expression without social restraint.35 It was in any case a communication left on a monument, and it might have been a proof of its being visited with other than pilgrimage-oriented goals.36 Documentation Present location not known. References Graffito: Helck, Besucherinschriften, 117 and 119. M¸ller-Wollermann, R., Strafen und Vergehen, Leiden 2001, 155ñ157. Context: Helck, Die Bedeutung, 39ñ46. Ricke, Dritte Bauperiode, 19ñ28. Peden, Graffiti, 58ñ59.

M.5.5.S.18.4 Place The Sun Temple of Userkaf, blocks probably in the area of the obelisk base, Fragment US 69. Dating 18th dynasty? Text

Transcription

Transliteration s[S] HAt[iaj] Translation The Scribe Hatiay.

form Hm.tj, is known from the context of the Tale of Horus and Seth as well, and from other contexts connectible with homosexuality, nevertheless, this connection is not considered as completely clear and sure, cf. Griffiths, J. G., The Conflict of Horus and Seth, Liverpool 1960, 44, with translation ìpoltroonî and other occurences of this word ñ often in the context of spells or offering ritual texts. 35 Peden, Graffiti, 293. 36 I am indebted do Dr. Gae V. Callender for a fruitful and inspiring discussion regarding this graffito.

36

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:59

StrÆnka 37

Commentary It is not entirely clear whether this text forms a part with other texts on US 69, or whether each line is a fragment of a different text. Since a simple signature (title and name) is an often used form for visitorsí graffiti, known from other sites as well (e.g. the complex of Djoser), the signature of Hatiay might have even been an independent graffito. Personages Hatiay ñ Ranke, PN 1, 233.2. Compare also Zivie, A., Hatiay, scribe du Temple díAton a` Memphis, In: Knoppers, G. ñ Hirsch, A., Egypt, Israel and the Ancient Mediterranean World. Studies in Honor of Donald B. Redford, Leiden 2004, 223ñ231. Documentation Present location not known. References Graffito: Helck, Besucherinschriften, 119 and 120. Context: Helck, Die Bedeutung, 39ñ46. Ricke, Dritte Bauperiode, 19ñ28. Peden, Graffiti, 58ñ59.

M.1.5.S.18.5 The Sun Temple of Userkaf, blocks probably in the area of the obelisk base, Fragment US 69. Dating 18th dynasty? Text

Transcription

or (cf. Helck, Sonnenheiligtum, 120) Transliteration iw.j ir.n sS Ö (or Hm nTr)37///// Translation The scribe/priest Ö. Coming Ö Commentary Context There are neighbouring graffiti texts on US 69, the closest one is M.1.5.P.18.4, but any supposed relation between the texts must be considered hypothetical. The text is a fragment, with the often repeated graffiti formula ìthere came Öî An identification usually followed.

37 The title Hm nTr may indicate a higher hierarchy in the New Kingdom, where the most often used priestly title was wab. See Helck, W., Priester, Lƒ IV, 1982, 1083ñ1097 and Browarski, E., Tempelpersonal I, Lƒ VI, 1986, 387ñ401.

37

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:59

StrÆnka 38

Personages No name preserved. Documentation Present location not known. References Graffito: Helck, Besucherinschriften, 119 and 120. Context: Helck, Die Bedeutung, 39ñ46. Ricke, Dritte Bauperiode, 19ñ28. Peden, Graffiti, 58ñ59.

M.1.5.S.18.6 Place The Sun Temple of Userkaf, blocks probably in the area of the obelisk base, Fragment US 69. Dating 18th dynasty? Text

Transcription

Transliteration iw.t p[w] ir.n ///// ? Translation There came Ö Commentary This text represents a standard Besucherinschriften incipit (see Table 3). The text probably belonged to a longer graffito with the standard formula iw.t pw ir.n x r mAA, (model sDm pw ir.n-f)38; all except the incipit was lost. Personages No name preserved. Documentation Present location not known. References Graffito: Helck, Besucherinschriften, 119 and 120. Context: Helck, Die Bedeutung, 39ñ46. Ricke, Dritte Bauperiode, 19ñ28. Peden, Graffiti, 58ñ59.

38

38

Graefe, E., Mittel‰gyptisch, Wiesbaden 2001, 147f.

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:59

StrÆnka 39

M.1.5.S.18.7 Place The Sun Temple of Userkaf, blocks probably in the area of the obelisk base, Fragment US 74. Dating The signs may be attributed to the 18th dynasty39; however, the dateline is not sufficiently preserved. Text

Transcription

Transliteration 1. //////// Öiqr40 Hr Dd n Ö.. /////// (in addition Helck reads there swAj, past) 2. ../// iw.t r sDAj Hr Hr smi.t nw n.t mn-nfr 3. Ö /// pn gm.n-f sj mi p.t m Xnw/// Ö. [m] Xnw //// [i]Aw.t (?) 4. /// iw (?) mH.j[t] /// iqr /// 5. //// mr.t /// Hr Hr Axt ///////// 6. ////.w n a.t sbA.w /////// 7. ///// nfr (?)41 39 40

Compare Mˆller, Pal‰ographie II, in particular signs ìbî, or ìiî on p. 11, 25, sbA on p. 28, etc. Helck has a different reading, but equally fragmentary. The reading of iqr, however, would require here a follo-

wing writing: , compare HWb, 107. The reading of Helck ñ Nfr-nb-f, is not clear. It does not correspond to the usual shapes of these signs in Mˆller, Pal‰ographie II.

41

39

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:59

StrÆnka 40

Translation 1. Ö. excellent saying Ö 2. Ö. Came to amuse [themselves ?] in the desert of Memphis 3. Ö. Found its inside beautiful like heaven Ö. in ... old age (?) 4. Ö. northern wind? 5. Ö Loveliness Ö.. akhet periodÖ. 6. Ö of the school .. 7. Ö fragments Commentary As other graffiti in the complex of Userkaf, this text is preserved on two fragments grouped under the heading US 74. Other graffiti found in the region of Userkafís temple are equally fragmentary and reveal often just the beginning of a phrase, or a name. A longer inscription on US 74 is very lacunous, but it was this graffito that led Helck to express the opinion, that Egyptians of the 18th dynasty were keen on their past and that the Èlite schooling of the period could have included a sort of history teaching ñ as this graffito contains impressive phrases such as: Reconstructed line 3/ swAjj pn, which Helck translated as ? ìVergangene Denkmalî42; or reconstructed line 6/ nA n sbA.w n a.t sbA ñ ì[Die Lehrer] von der Schule.î43 This would make an impression of a considerable interest in and therefore also use of the past, but the fragmentary state of the inscription prevents a conclusive interpretation. Line 2 of the graffito is comparable to text of graffito M.2.3.P.19.3 (the scribe Hednakht in the complex of Djoser). Personages Nefernebef (?) Ranke, PN 1, 197.6 Documentation Present location not known. References Graffito: Helck, Besucherinschriften, 117 and 120. Helck, Die Bedeutung, 39ñ46. Peden, Graffiti, 58. Context: Ricke, Dritte Bauperiode, 19ñ28.

Helck, Die Besucherinschriften, 120. The word in question swAj, has connections in swA.t, ìpastî, swAj.t, ìpast (thing)î. See Wb IV, 62,1ñ2. 43 Helck, op. cit., 120.

42

40

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:59

StrÆnka 41

M.1.5.S.18.8 Place The Sun Temple of Userkaf, blocks probably in the area of the obelisk base, Fragment US 66. Dating Possibly 18th dynasty, it was found within the cluster of fragments with graffiti mostly dated to this period, unequivocal dateline or other such marker is not present. Text

Transliteration & Translation Only fragments of signs and words, a transcription attempted by Helck, Besucherinschriften, 121, of which these signs can be verified without substantial doubt:

Commentary Text is too fragmentary to allow further analysis. Documentation Present location not known. References Graffito: Helck, Besucherinschriften, 116 and 121. Context: Helck, Die Bedeutung, 39ñ46. Ricke, Dritte Bauperiode, 19ñ28. Peden, Graffiti, 58ñ59.

41

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:59

StrÆnka 42

M.1.5.S.18.9 Place The Sun Temple of Userkaf, blocks probably in the area of the obelisk base, Fragment US 65. Dating New Kingdom; because of its presence in a cluster of 18th dynasty graffiti, an 18th dynasty dating probable. The signs do not fully correspond to the palaeography of this period.44 Text

Transcription

Transliteration HA.t sp Ö Translation Regnal year? Commentary Fragment of a text, further analysis not possible. Documentation Present location not known. References Graffito: Helck, Besucherinschriften, 116 and 121. Context: Helck, Die Bedeutung, 39ñ46. Ricke, Dritte Bauperiode, 19ñ28. Peden, Graffiti, 58ñ59.

M.1.5.S.18.10 Place The Sun Temple of Userkaf, blocks probably in the area of the obelisk base, Fragment US 64. Dating New Kingdom, because of its presence in a cluster of 18th dynasty graffiti an 18th dynasty dating probable. Text

Transliteration xpr Ö pA Ö 44

42

Compare Mˆller, Pal‰ographie II, 24.

Transcription

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:59

StrÆnka 43

Translation Text is too fragmentary to allow for a translation. Commentary Fragment of a text, further analysis not possible. Documentation Present location not known. References Graffito: Helck, Besucherinschriften, 116 and 121. Context: Helck, Die Bedeutung, 39ñ46. Ricke, Dritte Bauperiode, 19ñ28. Peden, Graffiti, 58ñ59.

M.1.5.S.18.11 Place The Sun Temple of Userkaf, blocks probably in the area of the obelisk base, Fragment US 71. Dating 18th dynasty? Text

Transcription

Transliteration nfr Aa [?] r-f ?45//// ? Translation The fragmentary state does not allow for a consistent translation, perhaps ìbeauty greater than?î Commentary The text is too fragmentary for further analysis, but it may be a part of a laudatory sentence, like in M.1.5.P.18.2. Documentation Present location not known.

45

Compare Helck, Besucherinschriften, 121, the reading r-f is but one possible variant.

43

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:59

StrÆnka 44

References Graffito: Helck, Besucherinschriften, 117 and 121. Context: Helck, Die Bedeutung, 39ñ46. Ricke, Dritte Bauperiode, 19ñ28. Peden, Graffiti, 58ñ59.

M.1.5.S.18.12 Place The Sun Temple of Userkaf, blocks probably in the area of the obelisk base, Fragment US 75. Dating 18th dynasty? Text

Transliteration ///// ? /// A Translation Not possible, unidentifiable words46. Commentary The text is too fragmentary for further analysis. Documentation Present location not known. References Graffito: Helck, Besucherinschriften, 116 and 121. Context: Helck, Die Bedeutung, 39ñ46. Ricke, Dritte Bauperiode, 19ñ28. Peden, Graffiti, 58ñ59.

46

44

See also Helck, Besucherinschriften, 121.

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:59

StrÆnka 45

THE PYRAMID COMPLEX OF SAHURE A relatively large group of hieratic graffiti from the New Kingdom was found by Ludwig Borchardtís expedition in the pyramid complex of Sahure in Abusir. The graffiti are described in the publication as next to the sanctuary of Sakhmet of Sahure47, which was in the southern part of the funerary temple of Sahure. However, no exact plan of their disposition in the temple was provided. Ludwig Borchardt wrote: ìDie zahlreich vorhandenen, auf die W‰nde geschriebenen Besucherinschriften, die sp‰ter noch in einem besonderen Bande zu behandeln sind, kann man noch kaum wie die unn¸tzen Verewigungen moderner Touristen betrachten, sie werden nach ihrem Inhalt, der gewˆhnlich auf ein Lob der Gˆttin und ihres Tempels hinausl‰uft, vielmehr von Frommen herr¸hren, die hierher gepilgert sind, und zur Síechmet zu beten. Die Reicheren unter ihnen begn¸gten sich nicht mit fl¸chtig mit Tinte hingeworfenen Wandinschriften, sie verewigten ihren Besuch durch besondere kleine oder grˆflere Denksteine, die in die Tempelw‰nde eingelassen wurden.î 48 He further described the position of the stelae of Sakhmet, made of various materials. ìEs war ¸brigens nicht der ganze Totentempel zum Sechmet-Heiligtum umgewandelt worden, nur sein s¸dlicher Teil, in dem sich wohl jenes besonders heilige Bild der Gˆttin befunden hat. Namentlich der Gang mit dem Jagdbild (f, 6ñ9) war an seinen W‰nden wie gespickt mit Sechmet-Stelen aller Grˆflen, von kleinen blauen Fayencestelen ... bis zu recht umfangreichen steinernen Platten ...î. 49 There were several Thutmoside Besucherinschriften, but their state of research is not clear.50 They can be noted in the Hieratische Pal‰ographie by G. Mˆller51, where there are single signs taken from them, which allows us to confirm that these graffiti were written with ink and not scratched. The numbering of the graffiti by G. Mˆller also suggests that there were at least twelve ink inscriptions. The signs in the Hieratische Pal‰ographie II include: p. 14

p. 6

Gr. Abus. 3

Graff. Abus. N

p. 17

p. 16

Graff. Abus. 5

Graff. Abus. 2

p. 24

p. 23

Graff. 4

Graff. Abus. 1,1

p. 14

Graff. Abus. N

p. 18

Graff. Abus. 6,2

p. 24

Graff. Abus. 2

The cult of this goddess is treated in detail by Hoenes, S.-E., Untersuchungen zu Wesen und Kult der Gˆttin Sachmet, Bonn 1976, for the Memphite zone 113ñ115 and Sadek, A. I., Popular Religion in Egypt during the New Kingdom, Hildesheim 1987, 29ñ34. 48 Borchardt, Das Grabdenkmal des Kˆnigs S`a3-hu-rec, 120. 49 Borchardt, op. cit., 102ñ103. 50 Cf. Peden, Graffiti, 59; Borchardt, op. cit., 120f., PM III, 75. 51 Mˆller, Hieratische Pal‰ographie II, 1ñ2. Unpublished graffiti from the temple of Sahure mentioned as additional sources for the palaeography, and single signs can be found throughout the palaeography. 47

45

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:59

StrÆnka 46

p. 25

Graff. Ab. 6,3

p. 30

Graff. Abus. 4

p. 34

Graff. Abus. 4f

p. 41

Graff. Abus. 6,7

p. 45

Graff. Abus. 6,7

p. 64

Graff. Abus. N

p. 26

Graff. Abus. 6,3

p. 31

Graff. Abus. 6,5

p. 36

Graff. Abus. 1,2

p. 42

Graff. Abus. 6,2

p. 51

Graff. Abus. N

p. 67

Graff. Abus. N

p. 27

Graff. Abus. 5,1

p. 34

Graff. Abus. 6,4

p. 40

Graff. Abus. 3,3

p. 43

Graff. Abus. 1,1

p. 53

Graff. Abus. 6,4

p. 70

Graff. Abus. 12,3

It is not to be excluded ñ if we take as evidence the signs from Pal‰ographie ñ that there were graffiti containing the dating (rnpt sp), the name of King Thutmose III (Menkheperre), the name of King Sahure, the titles nswt bitj and Hm(.f), and the verbs gm and mAA. Also the name of goddess Sakhmet is likely to have been found in these inscriptions. The signs also allow us to say that there is a likely possibility that the graffiti near (or in) the sanctuary of Sakhmet of Sahure contained expressions known from other Thutmoside graffiti, including phrases like iw.t pw ir n X r mAA, the name of the owner of the pyramid (however, in which connection, if any, to the goddess Sakhmet, cannot be decided). A short annex at the end of this chapter attempts a reconstruction of what graffiti might have been providing the signs Mˆller eventually used. Apart from the signs known from the Hieratische Pal‰ographie II, only a small part of what might have been a large documentation of above mentioned graffiti has been preserved. Documentation

46

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:59

StrÆnka 47

on three of these 18th dynasty graffiti is kept in the Griffith Institute Archives. All three are published by Mounir Megally52 and two speak about scribal visits to the temple of Sahure. M. Megally published hieratic originals, hieroglyphic transcriptions and translations of these graffiti. Megally also tried to map Mˆllerís graffiti activities in the temple of Sahure, which was rather difficult. He also introduced an analysis of graffiti text types and noted specific formulae of the graffiti and pointed out a comparison with other period texts.53 Megally noted too that there was a third graffito sketched over the second but of this third hardly anything is left.54 The publication of the three graffiti in this volume is in debt to Megallyís, though original materials in the Gardiner papers were also consulted. None of the three graffiti mentions the cult of the Sakhmet of Sahure. Nonetheless, the worship of Sakhmet of Sahure was an important cultic activity in the place that covers the discussed period of 18th and 19th dynasty. Its presence in the zone could have been a reason for frequent visits, and thus could have fostered the appearance of the Besucherinschriften too, depriving them of a certain level of independent antiquarian interest, which might otherwise have been supposed to be their main raison díÈtre. Besides ink-written graffiti there was also an engraved inscription, dated to the 19th dynasty. Its author is the royal scribe Djehutiherhesef of the Ramesseum, and the short text ñ or its preserved parts; contains no direct information on the monument or the Sakhmet cult. Scribe Djehutiherhesef, differently from the texts of other stelae, which are in the neighbourhood and are dedicated to Sakhmet, is speaking to and about Thoth, like the scribes in Ramesside scribal miscellanies.55 The inscription of Djehutiherhesef was photographed and text published by Borchardt and its hieroglyphic transcription is available in Kitchenís Ramesside Inscriptions.56 The Ramesside officials were otherwise assiduous in their attentions to the Sakhmet cult, as the finds and smaller fragments indicate, which come from the area of the Sakhmet worship57 Material cultural evidence, known since Borchardtís excavation, is rich for both the 18th and 19th dynasty. The preservation of the cult of Sakhmet of Sahure is maybe the reason why Sahureís temple remained in a relatively well-preserved state.58 Sakhmet (originally Hathor or Bastet59) portrayed in the original temple decoration attracted pilgrims ñ or visitors ñ who then made the ancient royal temple a place of worship of a deity, who was at that time rooted within the cultic service in Memphis, for Sakhmet was the divine wife of Ptah, the tutelary god of Memphis. The goddess possessed thus in Abusir a place of worship, active at least from the times of Thutmose III onwards, throughout the 18th dynasty. The south part of the funerary temple of Sahure was, as said, lined with stelae dedicated to Sakhmet, and even rebuilding must have occurred, as Borchardt discovered e.g. parts of architectural elements dated under Horemheb60. This does pass well into the development of Memphis and its necropolis in that period. The cult of Sakhmet had further development during the 19th dynasty, as the Ramesside texts and stelae confirm.

Megally, Two Visitorsí Graffiti from Abusir, CdE 56, Fasc. 112, 1981, 218ñ240. They were mentioned as early as in 1973 by Baines, J., The destruction of the pyramid temple of Sahure, GM 4, 1973, 9ñ13, in particular on p. 12, coming from the Griffith Institute Archives, Gardiner MSS, AHG/29.60 AñB, where then Megally took them from. 53 His work deserves full attention as his ideas of comparing graffiti to other graffiti and to other period texts (school exercises, which would correspond very well to the apprentice scribes who signed some of the graffiti in Djoserís complex, and with presupposed ìschool excursionî in the Sun Temple of Userkaf, cf. above) are very fruitful (cf. p. 40). In addition, he tried to indicate possible varying views on kings of old, as expressed in various visitorsí graffiti. Compare Megally, M., Two Visitorsí Graffiti from Abusir, CdE 56, 1981, 218, 225, 234, 240. 54 Megally, op. cit., 234. 55 Papyrus Anastasi III, 4.9ñ4.11, Anastasi V, 8.4ñ9.3; Caminos, Late Egyptian Miscellanies, London 1954, 86 and 232ñ233. 56 Borchardt, Das Grabdenkmal des Kˆnigs S`a3-hu-rec, 124, and Abb. 170, plus KRI III, 378. 57 Borchardt, op. cit., 120, 124 etc. 58 Cf. discussion by Baines, The destruction of the pyramid temple of Sahure, GM 4, 1973, 9ff. 59 Borchardt supposed it might have been a picture of Bastet. Borchardt, 120. See also, Hoenes, Sachmet, 114ñ115. About Sahure veneration, ibid., and also Sadek, Popular Religion in Egypt, 29ñ34. 60 Borchardt, op. cit., I, 101. 52

47

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:59

StrÆnka 48

New Kingdom materials found on the spot include votive inscriptions, stelae, including the so-called Ohrenstelen, where Sachmet is being asked for various benefits including a nice old age, good burial61, mercy etc., similar wishes can be found at other places in the visitorsí graffiti too (see pp. 60, 114 or 119, and 78 and 128). There is also an inscription of Tutankhamun, and a stela of Ay.62 Further finds are the well-known bowl of Hui and rich finds of pottery and faience, scarabaeus from the era of Amenhotep III63, remains of a Hathoric frieze and new stairs to the roof of the temple, starting from the south court. Other mudbrick additions made in the temple might too have been possibly connected with the Sakhmet cult. The 19th dynasty monuments include also a restoration inscription of Sethi I and a fragment of a text by prince Khaemwaset from the era of Ramesses II.64 Another reason for visits to the area could have been equally well quarrying, or better the re-using of stone, as is known from the complex of Niuserre.65 The stoneworkers were probably active inside the nearby located mastaba of Ptahshepses as well.66 This could be in no contradiction to the pious reverence for some of the ancient royal monuments. In addition, the archaeological setting of the re-use of the temple of Sahure may be soon seen in new light of the discoveries of SCA in the area.67 Evidence for the cult of Sakhmet continues until the Greek period and the temple later included also a chapel built in the Coptic period.

Borchardt, Das Grabdenkmal des Kˆnigs S`a3-hu-rec, I, 122ñ123. Borchardt, op. cit., I, 121ñ122. 63 Borchardt, op. cit., I, 130ñ135. 64 See Borchardt, op. cit., I, 104. Further uses of the temple included copying its reliefs, as it is clear from the plaster models taken from reliefs, and a net over one scene. These things can be of a later date, Borchardt suggested Late Period. 65 Borchardt, Das Grabdenkmal des Kˆnigs Ne-user-re, 160ñ161. A 19th or 20th dynasty stone working group ñ or a small workshop seems to be active in the temple of this king. 66 Charv·t, P., Czechoslovak Excavations at Abusir. The mastaba of Ptahshepses. The pottery, Praha 1981. 67 The work of the SCA team is still in progress. I am very grateful to Mr Tarek el-Awadi for information on his work. 61

62

48

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:59

StrÆnka 49

The documented graffiti from the funerary temple of Sahure M.1.5.P.18.1 Place The funerary temple of Sahure, possibly blocks in the southern part of the temple most probably connected with the cult of Sakhmet. Context of New Kingdom stelae. No scale the original tracing. Dating This graffito has the advantage of a sufficiently preserved dateline, indicating Thutmose III, 18th dynasty. Text

Transcription

Transliteration 1. [HA.t sp ? Abd sw ? xr Hm n nswt bitj] mn-xpr-ra anx wDA snb, sA ra DHwtj-ms.w anx wDA snb, nfr-xpr.w anx wDA snb, anX D.t r nHH 2. [iw.t pw ir n sS X. sA sS [?]Y] r mAA tA Hw.t nTr n.t nswt bitj sAHw-ra mAa xrw gm.n-f st mi p.t ... 3. [aHa n Dd.n-f hwj p.t n an]ti.w wAD DfDf-s m sntr Hr tp n.t Hw.t nTr n.t sAHw-ra mAa xr[w] 4. [///////////////////////////////////] .w wD kA [?] wdn.tj sj n sAHw-ra mAa xrw [////////] 5. ÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ..

49

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:59

StrÆnka 50

Translation 1. [year Ö, month.., dayÖ under the Majesty of] King of Upper and Lower Egypt, Menkheperre, L.P.H., Son of Re, Thutmose, L.P.H., Neferkheperu, L.P.H., living forever and ever 2. [there came the scribeÖÖÖson of scribeÖ] to see the temple of the King of Upper and Lower Egypt, Sahure, justified. He found it like heavenÖ.. 3. [and thus he said: ìLet the heaven] drip fresh myrrh and pour incense onto the roof of the temple of Sahure, justifiedÖ 4. ÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖsuppose/see 68 (?) offering it to Sahure, justified 69 5. ÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ. Commentary The graffito may have been fitting into the cultic re-use of the funerary temple of Sahure for the cult of Sakhmet of Sahure. Sakhmet is, however, not mentioned in the preserved text. Sahure, in addition, is not reduced to an epithet as it is the case later with the 19th dynasty graffiti like M.1.5.M.19.1.1; Sahure is represented as a king with titles of nswt bitj, and a cartouche. The author probably completed his admiration of the temple by a prayer for the proprietor of the temple, King Sahure, but unfortunately we do not know whether he also wanted some reward ñ such as a good burial, from the king. If not, then it is very tempting to agree with Megally, that the real reason for the visit was r mAA tA Hw.t nTr n.t nswt bitj sAHw-ra mAa xrw, to see the temple of the king Sahure, the justified70. An offering formula which most probably might have been closing this graffito is known from examples of similar inscriptions in the complex of King Djoser, which include besides offering formulae for the owner also prayers for the authorís own benefit. The scribe, whose name is not preserved, used the popular formula of calling for the dripping myrrh and the raining incense for the temple of Sahure, which he most probably found impressive. This formula is found in a number of the 18th dynasty graffiti. Personages The name of the graffito author is not preserved. Documentation Tracings by G. Mˆller, Gardiner Mss, AHG 29.60/B ñ with a note ìprobably graffito Mˆller 6î on the backside. References Baines, The destruction of pyramid temple of Sahure, GM 4, 1973, 9ñ13 Megally, M., Graffiti from Abusir, CdE 56, 1981, Fasc. 112, 218ñ240 Peden, Graffiti, 59 PM III, part 1, 2nd ed., 333ñ334 Borchardt, L., Das Grabdenkmal des Kˆnigs S`a3-hu-rec I, Leipzig 1903, 120ñ121, finds on 131ñ135.

Either kAi, ìthinkî, or kA ìseeî. Megally, Two Visitorsí Graffiti, Fasc. 112, transliterated consulting also Megallyís transcription on p. 229. 70 Megally, op. cit., 227. As Megally himself pointed out, that there are later graffiti that say just iw.t pw ir.n N Ö.r wdn n NN, the sightseeing element is then absent. Megally, op. cit., 227. 68

69

50

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:59

StrÆnka 51

M.1.5.P.18.2 Place The funerary temple of Sahure, possibly blocks in the southern part of the temple most probably connected with the cult of Sakhmet. Context of New Kingdom stelae. According to the tracing, the inscription was spread over four pieces of stone. No scale (see also Plate 4). Dating The 18th dynasty dating can be considered plausible also because of strong similarities to the hieratic script of M.1.5.P.18.1, which is dated under Thutmose III. Megally suggested even Amenhotep II or Thutmose IV.71 Text

71

Megally, Two Visitorsí Graffiti, 224 and 230, Peden, Graffiti, 59.

51

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:59

StrÆnka 52

Transcription

Transliteration72 1. HA.t sp 2, Abd 3 Ax.t, [sw] 7, xr Hm [n] nswt bitj [/////////////////////////////] anx wDA snb 2. iw.t pw ir.n sS imn-m-[HAt sA sS an]ti-mnti73 3. r mAA tA Hw.t nTr n.t Hm n nswt bitj sAHw-ra mAa xrw 4. gm.n-f sj nfr Hr ib-f r aA.t wr sj m Hr-f 5. mi tA p.t sSp iaH aHa.n Dd.n-f nfr.wj 6. [tA hw.t nTr n.t kA] Hm n nswt bitj sAHw-ra mAa xrw 7. [///////] nA n ka.w Apd.w t.w ..... /////////////////////////// Translation 1. Year 2, month 3 of Akhet, day 7, under the Majesty of King of Upper and Lower Egypt, ÖÖ L. P H. 2. there came the Scribe Amenemhat, [son of Scribe Anat]-menti 3. to see the temple of the Majesty of the King of Lower and Upper Egypt, Sahure, justified 4. he found it beautiful in his heart, in his eyes [lit. face] [it] was great 5. as heaven lit in white by the Moon. Thus he said: This is beautiful 6. [the temple of ka of the Majesty ] of King of Upper and Lower Egypt, Sahure, justified 7. [////////] of bulls, fowl and bread loaves Commentary The graffito of the Scribe Amenemhat is of similar composition to another Sahureís graffito M.1.5.P.18.1.74 The name Amenemhat does appear in the context of the complex of Sahure twice: in this graffito and on a stela Berlin. Mus. 19807 (Borchardt, Das Grabdenkmal des Kˆnigs S`a3-hu-rec,

Transliteration reflects also the reading by M. Megally. See Peden, Graffiti, 60, note 12, and further Schneider, T., Asiatische Personennamen in ‰gyptischen Quellen des Neuen Reiches, Wiesbaden 1992, 72ñ73. 74 See Megally, Two Visitorsí Graffiti, hieroglyphic text on p. 229, his translation on p. 227ff., and Peden, Graffiti, 60. 72 73

52

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:59

StrÆnka 53

Abb. 167, 123). On the stela one Amenemhat adores Sakhmet of Sahure. However, the style of the stela is that of late 18th dynasty, and the name of Sahure is misspelled (Borchardt, op. cit., 122, visible on the stela, l.c.). These two Amenemhats therefore cannot be identified as one person. Graffito mentions the temple of the king; the king himself, except for being defined nswt bitj, Hm and mAa xrw, bears no special nominations or epitheta. The preserved text concentrates on Sahure, not on Sakhmet. The author of the graffito asks for an offering for Sahure, but there is no identifiable wish for some benefits for the author, which, however, might have been at the damaged end of the graffito. This graffito mentions specifically the offering, asking the usual composition of beef, fowl and bread for the deceased. The graffito is similar to graffiti in the complex of Djoser. It is noticeable that both Sahure temple graffiti (both M.1.5.P.18.1 and M.1.5.P.18.2) use the titles, and even the definition ìmajestyî(or ìIncarnation), the same Hm, as can be seen for a contemporary sovereign in the first line, for a king who had died long ago.75 Personages Amenemhat: Ranke, PN I, 28.8, ìsehr h‰ufigî for the New Kingdom. Other information on the scribe Amenemhat presently not known. The prosopography of dignitaries of the New Kingdom made by W. Helck includes several Amenemhats, but no one fits this period and scribal title exactly.76 Anat-menti = Anat-manata ñ West-Semitic name. It has been suggested that the scribes were part of the community of foreigners living in Memphis. Documentation Tracings by G. Mˆller, Gardiner Mss, AHG/29.60/A References Baines, The destruction, 9ñ13. Megally, Graffiti from Abusir, 227ñ229. Peden, Graffiti, 60 PM III, part 1, 2nd ed., 333ñ334 Borchardt, Das Grabdenkmal, 120ñ121.

75 See even Megally, The Visitorsí Graffiti, 225. No conclusion is drawn from it, only that the scribes were aware of correct writing of Sahureís name. Which they were not in some of the later materials of the cult of Sakhmet of Sahure, cf. Borchardt, Das Grabdenkmal des Kˆnigs S`a3-hu-rec, 121f. 76 Imn-m-HAt, a scribe, in Helck, Verwaltung, 523 ñ grandson of Seni, time of Amenhotep I to Thutmose II. His grandfather ñ tomb in Western Thebes No. 317, text from the tomb in Urk. IV, 135; another one is a priest, p. 435B (family of the vizier Tetinefer), another priest, p. 525 from a Theban family.

53

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:59

StrÆnka 54

M.1.5.P.18.3 Place The funerary temple of Sahure, possibly blocks in the southern part of the temple, probably connected with the cult of Sakhmet. No scale on the original tracing. Dating The 18th dynasty dating might have been defended also because of strong similarities to the hieratic script of M.1.5.P.18.1, which is dated under Thutmose III, unfortunately, the number of preserved signs is very small. Text

Transcription

Transliteration Fragments of inscriptions 1. ////////////////////////////////// sj mi ////// 2. Ö///// ? [sign A17] //////////////////// mAa ?Ö /////////////? [fragments of signs]/////////////////////// Translation 1. ///////////////////// it as //////////////////////////// 2. //////////////// see ? /////////////////////////////////// Commentary Remnants of the graffito of possible Besucherinschriften character, showing probably traces of phrase [gm.n-f] sj mi[t] and mAa [xrw]. The text is too fragmentary to allow further discussion. Personages Not identifiable. Documentation Tracings by G. Mˆller, Gardiner Mss, AHG 29.60/A References Megally, Graffiti from Abusir, 226ñ230. PM III, part 1, 2nd ed., 333ñ334 Borchardt, Das Grabdenkmal, 120ñ121.

54

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:59

StrÆnka 55

THE IDENTIFICATION OF GRAFFITI AND SIGNS IN THE PALƒOGRAPHIE Some signs in the Mˆllerís palaeography (cf. above) have been looked for in the graffito M.1.5.P.18.1, - AHG 29.60/B. The archival identification on the back of AHG 29.60 B, ìGraffito 6î, is nonetheless doubtful, because the sign is marked as ìAbusir 6,7î and there are only five visible lines in this graffito; in adition the ìAbusir 6,7î sign is a Hs-vase, which is not present in the inscription at all, moreover the sAH sign, also attributed to a graffito ìAbusir 6î in the Pal‰ographie, is not evoking strong similarities to signs in the graffito. However, the attempt on identification has raised a question ñ is any of the graffiti published by M. Megally present in the Pal‰ographie ? Which other signs are there, from how many graffiti may they come and which pieces of information about these apparently lost graffiti can we work out? As said, Mˆller numbered his graffiti 1 to 12 (and one named ìGraffito Nî), giving thus their number. Out of 12 (or even 13) graffiti we have 3 that are known. Comparing the signs in the three known graffiti and in the Pal‰ographie does not seem to bring unequivocal results ñ usually the sign and its presumed position in the graffito (the number of the line) does not fit, and very often the shape differs as well, albeit in minute details. It may have been the case that none of the three graffiti, which are preserved to us, was a significant supplier of signs to the palaeography. This might mean that there are 9 (or 10) more graffiti we can try to reconstruct with the help of the Pal‰ographie. Graffito 1 included signs

,

, and

as

. This might be a part of a Thutmoside royal name ñ such .

Graffito 2 apparently contained a royal title, as it contained the sign

. It also contained the sign

, which is, however, used very frequently. Graffito 3 included signs and and the name of goddess Sakhmet.

, which might also indicate the formula

Graffito 5 included the sign , which might have served in various contexts, as well as the falcon of Horus. If we exclude that graffito M.1.5.P.18.1 is ìGraffito 6î in the Pal‰ographie, it must be another graffito capable of containing signs , , , and , plus , and The first four signs fit into an almost standard visitorsí graffiti text:

.

etc The sign Hs and mr might have been part of a praise formula used by the scribe. Graffito 12 contained signs

, suggesting a presence of the name of a living sovereign.

The graffito named as ìAbusir Nî had signs like or the group various contexts and do not define clearly some particular text.

, which can be used in

55

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:59

StrÆnka 56

THE PYRAMID COMPLEX OF NEFERIRKARE The excavations by L. Borchardt noticed no visitorsí graffiti, nor are any known from other observations. The only New Kingdom written material found in the complex was ñ ìEin Bruchst¸ck eines sehr roh eingehauenen Ramessidennamens auf weiflem Kalkstein, das zwischen Zeiegeltempel und Ne-userreí-mauer gefunden wurde, hat f¸r die Geschichte unseres Tempels wohl keine Bedeutung, es sei denn, dafl man danach die absichtliche Zerstˆrung des Kalksteinbaus in die Zeit der Ramessiden setzen wolle.î 77 Borchardt also suggested that this fragment might have been connected with the quarrying in the complex, as was the case with the pyramid complex of Niuserre. The pyramid of Neferirkare is until today the best-preserved pyramid in Abusir, but its temple might have either been buried in dÈbris or otherwise uninteresting, so that it did not catch the attention of graffiti writers who were active in the nearby monuments. There is, however, also the possibility that some graffiti were overlooked or were destroyed before Egyptologists had an opportunity to observe them.

THE PYRAMID COMPLEX OF NIUSERRE A situation similar to that of the complex of Neferirkare is also in the complex of Niuserre. Evidence of New Kingdom re-use of stone is rather convincing ñ fragments of tools, and drawings. There is in particular a drawing of a New Kingdom (probably Ramesside) member of the royal family. An inscription, made in red ink, was also found, but in contained only a name and a military title of the head of archers, Merinebef.78

77 78

56

Borchardt, Das Grabdenkmal des Kˆnigs Nefer-ir-ke-re, 58. Borchardt, Das Grabdenkmal des Kˆnigs Ne-user-re, 160ñ161, Abb. 136.

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:59

StrÆnka 57

THE MASTABA OF PTAHSHEPSES The mastaba of Ptahshepses79 hosted a few New Kingdom graffiti. The first to deal with them was Georges Daressy, who noted ìdiverses inscriptions malheureusement en mauvais Ètatî.80 G. Daressy indicated that only one graffito was well-preserved. This graffito was found on the west wall of the second room discovered by de Morgan, which is the current ìroom 3î, and the graffito is on its west wall, on the part north of the doorway leading further to the room with three niches. Daressy published a hieroglyphic transcription of the graffito, author being the scribe Ptahemwia (Daressy mistook the reading of his name and of the name of the goddess Sakhmet of Sahure).81 Spiegelberg (1904) noted that ìIn der erw‰hnten Mastaba befindet sich eine Reihe hieratischer Graffiti, deren wichtigstes von Daressy vor l‰ngerer Zeit verˆffentlicht worden ist.î82 This indicates that some graffiti in the mastaba of Ptahshepses have not been properly registered and published. Spiegelberg noted in addition to the graffito of Ptahemwia, a cartouche of Ramesses II,83 and fragments of other Besucherinschriften, such as sS Hsyw m Hw.t nTr84; he made hieroglyphic transcriptions of these graffiti.

The mastaba of Ptahshepses with indicated graffiti position

Compare PM III/I2, 340ñ342. Daressy, M. G., Inscription hiÈratique díun Mastaba díAbousir, BIE 5, Annexe 5, 1894, 107ñ113, in particular p. 108. 81 Daressy, op. cit., 1894; 107ñ113. 82 Spiegelberg, W., Varia ñ LXXIX, Die hieratischen Graffiti der Mastaba des Ptahschepses zu Abusir, Rec. de Trav. XXVI, 1904, 152ñ154, 152. 83 Spiegelberg, op. cit., 154. 84 Spiegelberg, op. cit., this graffito could correspond to the scratched graffito in room 3, see further, »ern˝ notebook 118.15, schematic ink drawing of the graffito. 79

80

57

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:59

StrÆnka 58

Jaroslav »ern˝ visited the mastaba of Ptahshepses in end of the 1930s and beginning of the 1940s and recorded the graffito of scribe Ptahemwia and of the scribe Hesi (or ìscribe praised in the templeî). The more recent works in the mastaba of Ptahshepses noted other fragments of hieratic inscriptions, which can be found registered by ZbynÏk é·ba.85 This is confirmed also with later observations by Miroslav Verner86 and JaromÌr KrejËÌ. Some of them may be the remains of other visitorsí graffiti, but it is not always possible to detect the age and origin of these fragmentary inscriptions. Furthermore, in Room 4 ìgraffiti of later date have been discovered on its walls.î87 The graffiti in room 4 are not further specified ñ J. KrejËÌ88 observed that these were mainly if not exclusively figural graffiti (ships etc.); their parallels are known both from the complex of Djoser and from Medum in complex of Snofru.

M.1.5.M.19.1.1 The graffito was photographed and transcribed by Jaroslav »ern˝. Moreover, he compared the signs visible at the time of his visit with those registered previously by Spiegelberg.89 The graffito has been in a significantly precarious state. Even »ern˝ was able to contribute ìno significant new readingsî90, and many earlier readings of Spiegelberg were uncertain. This fact confirms again the vulnerability of the graffiti and the need for their documentation. Place The mastaba of Ptahshepses, room 3, southern part of the northern section of the the west wall. Dating The recorded regnal year is relatively high, and might have pointed to the Ramesside rulers. The length of rules as in indicated by J. Beckerath91 could point to Ramesses II. Ramesses IIís period activities on the necropolis are so far known as significant. Text Photo by J. »ern˝, Notebook 17.118, p. 20 verso and »ern˝ Mss 2.95 (black and white photograph) and 2. 96 (black and white photograph, inverted colours), see also Plate 2 and 3.

Notebooks of Z. é·ba, Ptahshepses, Archives of the Czech Institute of Egyptology, Prague. ìUnder the lower edge of this register, several visitorsí graffiti have been found. One of them has been published by Spiegelberg in RT 26, pp. 152ñ154. Other graffiti discovered on this wall as well as in other parts of the Mastaba will be published in a separate study.î Verner, M., The Mastaba of Ptahshepses, Reliefs (Abusir I), Charles University, Prague 1977, 23, note 1. 87 Verner, Abusir I, 46. 88 1. 6. 2007, personal communication. 89 »ern˝ Mss, 2.95ñ6, Mss 6.3 and »ern˝, notebook 118, 21, 20 (transcription), collated with original 1st of March 1942. 90 Baines, J., The destruction of the pyramid temple of Sahure, GM 4, 1973, 12. 91 Beckerath, J. von, Chronologie des pharaonischen ƒgypten, Mainz 1997, 104, 117ñ118. 85 86

58

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:59

StrÆnka 59

59

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:59

StrÆnka 60

There are three stages of decay in this graffito, which are expressed in the transcription as wellvisible signs (black signs in transcription), signs, whose outlines or traces are still visible, but much less clear (gray signs) and parts where only discolouring is visible (gray signs marked as destroyed). Eventually there are places where no signs or traces were discernible (marked as destroyed). Transcription

Transliteration 1. hA.t sp 50, Abd 1 pr.t, sw 16, ij in sS ptH-[m-wiA] Hna it jwpA r mAA Sw.t m[H]r.w m nx.t iwt.tw-sn Hna Dd Hs.j r wdn.t ////// [n sxm.t] n sAHw-ra m ra pn Hna sS nA[//////////] [det. A1] 2. ir nfr ir nfr sxm.t n sAHw-ra ir nfr ir nfr n sS [ptH-m]-wiA sS jwpA imm in.tw./// . ///-n iw.n aHa.w-n m-bAH-T (i.e. Sakhmet) an nri /////// 3. mtw-n Dd wAH sw ra tw.n m bAH tAj-n Hnw.t mtw-n //////// sSw an r wxA r ? sp sn mi-T r pH-n rnp.t 110 iw-n Hr dbH mi-T 4. iwi.ir-n Dd tAj-n spr.w iw-n txw-n m-[bAH ? 92] mi Hs.jw nt.j rf iw.n-n nA sS.w n ptH pAj.n it i.Dd-n st n-f iw-n Hr spr r [Hs.t] Hsj-f /// ptH ///// [////Lost] Translation 1. Regnal year 50, month 1 of Peret, day 16 93, coming of scribe Ptahemwia and (his) father Yupa to see all of the powerful pyramids 94, they came and said praises and offerings ÖÖ.. for Sakhmet of Sahure on this day, with scribe NaÖ.95 2. Do good, do good, Sakhmet of Sahure, do good, do good for the scribe Ptahemwia and scribe Yupa, let there be broughtÖ. ///// Ö./// we/for usÖ, as [?] we are in front of you again 96, Terrible One, /////// 3. May we say ìLet her endure like Re!î We are in front of our Lady, we will ////Ö. script/inscription again wishing reward once more, let us reach 110 years as we please you to give [?] 4. as we are speaking our petitions, as we are [as if] drunk [ in front ?], singing praises, those who are scribes of Ptah, our father, we are saying this to him, we came to sing praises ÖÖ Ptah (rest is lost).97

The sign might also be D 54, both options are presenting certain difficulties in the translation. This date was a feast day of Shu, cf. Daressy, Inscription hiÈratique, 10. 94 Spiegelberg, Varia ñ LXXIX, translated ìSchatten (?) der Pyramideî. Sw.t here means ìallî, ìGesamtheitî, see also HWb, 808. 95 Perhaps Nashuy, as filled in by Kitchen; one Nashuy left a graffito in the complex of Khendjer, see KRI III, 436. 96 So the visits seem to be regular? 97 Translated also by Peden, Graffiti, 96. 92 93

60

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:59

StrÆnka 61

Commentary This graffito confirms the visits, which in this case seem to be a sort of worship routine (ìwe are in front of you againî); it seems these were no exceptional tours to the zone but that they happened in the context of the cult of Sakhmet of Sahure. In addition, the visit occured on a feast day. However, the motive of ìseeingî the monuments is present as well. The graffito contains no hint or note on the owner of the tomb. ìDass sie sich in dem Grabe des Ptah-schepses befindet, ist wohl nur ein Zufall, f¸r den es viele Erkl‰rungen gibt.î98 The graffito combines the phraseology set iw.t (pw ir.n) X r mAA and the prayer formula, including ir nfr. It is furthermore interesting to compare phraseology, which these scribes used in the Ptahshepses graffito, which speaks chiefly about ñ and to ñ Sakhmet of Sahure. The goddess, the consort to Ptah, to whom the scribes speak to as well, is asked in the same phrases for ìdoing goodî, as is King Djoser (compare graffito M.2.13.P.NK.1, scribe Nashuy, Table 1). Her cult is attested further in the 19th dynasty by numerous finds, fragments of stelae and inscriptions, invocating her, or Ptah, in the neighbouring sanctuary within the precinct of Sahure.99 The later post-New Kingdom tradition of that cult has been discussed.100 For the period of the New Kingdom the Sakhmet of Sahure seems to be a fixed point in the map of Saqqara necropolis. However, the first lines of the graffito, namely the passage saying that the scribes went to see all of the powerful pyramids, indicates possible more reasons behind this visit: i.e. not only his reverence to Sakhmet, but also their interest in the monuments. Personages Yupa Name not listed in Ranke, PN. A person named Yupa, from a family with foreign roots, was a steward to Ramesse II and also a steward of the Ramesseum in Thebes (see Lƒ III, 275), but his inscriptions do not name a relative Ptahemwia (KRI III, 195ñ198). Ptahemwia Ranke, PN I, 139.18. A contemporary (era of Ramesse II) Ptahemwia attested on a stela (BM 167), provenance unknown, possibly Memphis (the high priest of Ptah among personages on stela). Published by T. G. H. James, The British Museum Hieroglyphic Texts, Part 9, p. 29ñ30 and KRI III, 206, 2. Identification of the two Ptahemwias is, however, hypothetical. Documentation The documented graffito of Ptahemwia refers to the pyramid of Sahure and to the cult of Sakhmet. To sum up its documentation history, the graffito has been published by Daressy101, then by Spiegelberg (hieroglyphic transcription), photographed by »ern˝102 and also transcribed again by »ern˝.103 The graffito has suffered much in the meantime and »ern˝ was able to confirm a sighting of a few signs only as his photograph proves also. »ern˝ Mss, 2.95-6 and »ern˝, notebook 118, 21, 15, 20 verso (transcription). Larger and more clear photos ñ »ern˝ Mss, 2.95, 2.96, a positive and an inverted (negative) photo of the graffito, the ìnegativeî shows some lines more clearly, best available photograph probably is »ern˝ Mss 6.3. References Daressy, M. G., Inscription hiÈratique díun Mastaba díAbousir, BIE 5, 1894, 107ñ113 Spiegelberg, W., Varia ñ LXXIX, Rec. de Trav. 26, 1904, 152ñ154. KRI III, 437. PM III2, 342/8, 9. Peden, Graffiti, 95ñ96.

Spiegelberg, Varia ñ LXXIX, 154. Cf. Borchardt, Das Grabdenkmal des Kˆnigs S`a3-hu-re, 126 ff. Including votive stelae and a lot of objects made of faience etc. 100 Baines, The destruction, 9ñ14, regarding also the extensive archaism inspiration taken from the reliefs of the funerary temple of Sahure. 101 Daressy, Inscription hiÈratique, 107ñ113. 102 Photographs are in his Mss in Griffith Institute archives, »ern˝ Mss, 2.95-6 and 6.3. 103 Hieroglyphic transposition in KRI III, 437. 98 99

61

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:59

StrÆnka 62

M.1.5.M.19.1.2 Place The mastaba of Ptahshepses, Entrance passage?104 ìAusser der grossen Inschrift ist noch der Name Ramses II in schwarzer Farbe in dem Grabe zu sehen Öî105 Transcription (after Spiegelberg, Varia ñ LXXIX, 154)

Transliteration nswt bitj wsr-mAa.t-ra stp-n-ra sA ra ÖÖÖÖ.. Translation King of Lower and Upper Egypt, Wesermaatre Setepenre Son of Re ÖÖÖÖ. Commentary The cartouche had been for Daressy a key to the dating of the longer graffito (our M.1.5.M.19.1.1). References Daressy, Inscription hiÈratique, 110 Spiegelberg, Varia ñ LXXIX, 152ñ154

M.1.5.M.19.1.3 AND M.1.5.M.19.1.4 These two graffiti are not included in the statistical overview yet. Their texts are mentioned in the publication by W. Spiegelberg and the graffito of ìHesiî also in material of Jaroslav »ern˝ ñ on p. 15 of notebook 17.118 and on photographs »ern˝ Mss 2.95 and 6.3 ñ there is this scratched graffito which we see photographed over the ink-written longer graffito of Ptahemwia. The wall is that with reliefs of men bringing furniture. Under those men is a scratched graffito sS (?) Hs.j (?) m Hwt nTr followed by the M.1.5.M.19.1.1. The scratched graffiti are visible till today (see Colour plates). Place The mastaba of Ptahshepses; The graffito of the scribe Hesi (or ìpraisedî) is above M.1.5.M.19.1.1, the other graffito position has not yet been identified. Transcription 3.

104 105

62

Daressy, Inscription hiÈratique, 110. Spiegelberg, Varia ñ LXXIX, 154.

4.

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:59

StrÆnka 63

Transliteration 3. sS Hs.jw m Hw.t nTr Ö 4. Sms Ö Translation 3. the scribe praised (or Hesi, the A2 might be an A1) in the temple 4. follow Ö. (or, hypothetically, ìa followerî) Commentary The inscriptions are fragmentary, and can only confirm a presence of literate people on the spot. If these were with or without a connection to the author(s) of longer inscriptions, cannot be presently established. References Spiegelberg, Varia ñ LXXIX, 152ñ154. Documentation »ern˝ Mss, 17ñ118, p. 15, 2.95, 2.96 and 6.3.

63

kn-uvod.qxd

22.2.2008 09:59

StrÆnka 64

ABUSIR GRAFFITI SUMMARY Abusir has yielded more New Kingdom material than just graffiti and the sources for the cult of Sakhmet. There were restoration inscriptions of Khaemwaset in monuments of Niuserre at Abu Ghurob and Sahure in Abusir106, and the portrait of New Kingdom Abusir may have included various other activities such as burials as well. However, our knowledge is still incomplete.107 The reasons for a visit of New Kingdom Memphite administrative staff, ranging from a royal steward to (seemingly) humble scribes might have been varied. Stone-cuttersí activities as well as both simple and more elaborate burials in Abusir might have brought administrative personnel. A powerful reason surely was the sanctuary of Sakhmet. The graffiti, however, do not necessarily have one motive. Professional motives apart (some visits, as we have seen, are dated to feast days), other reasons were mentioned by the graffiti authors ñ Sakhmet is clearly present, but the monuments an sich, the ìpowerful pyramidsî and temples, which are described in poetic terms, must have had an attraction on their own. The character of the Abusir graffiti includes both antiquarian and pious phraseology and reveals practical knowledge of the site, which seems to be variable ñ no one identified Userkaf in his monument, and yet, it was clear to some that it was a temple. Sahure was well-known in the 18th dynasty and seemingly overshadowed by Sakhmet in the Dynasty 19. Ptahshepses has a richly decorated tomb, where his name can be found (and if the walls were exposed to the extent of allowing the graffito of Room 3 to be made, it is probable that some parts with name and titles of Ptahshepses were exposed too), yet he is not named in the known inscriptions.

106 107

64

See overview in Goma` a, Chaemwase, 105ñ106. See Myn·¯ov·, Abusir in the New Kingdom, 112ñ117.