The Original Meaning of Maa Kheru Anthes 54

The Original Meaning of Mʿ ḫrw Author(s): Rudolf Anthes Source: Journal of Near Eastern Studies, Vol. 13, No. 1 (Jan., 1954), pp. 21-51 Published by: The University of Chicago Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/543004 Accessed: 05/05/2010 12:13 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucpress. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Near Eastern Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

THE ORIGINAL MEANING OF M3c HRW RUDOLF ANTHES

fertigt, er triumphiert," but the nouns and T IHE- expression m3 hrw occurs as a the adjective are translated "Rechtfertiverb "to be justified," a noun "justi- gung, Triumph" and "gerechtfertigt, Gefication," and an adjective "justi- rechtfertigter"-the editors have avoided fied." The latter is one of the most com- literal translation of these nominal forms mon words in Egyptian, since it is added and assumed a secondary fixed meaning to the name of every deceased person from which latter in general seems indisputably the Middle Kingdom on. It has been dis- right. On the other hand, Gardiner, Egypcussed at length by Maspero.1 He quotes tian Grammar2,? 55, literally translates the earlier explanations, the translations and explains the adjective as follows. of the adjective being "justifi6" (Cham- "M'c-hrw 'true of voice,'6 an epithet added pollion), "v&ridique,persuasif" (D6evria), to the names of dead persons and hence and "vrai de parole" (Gr6baut). Maspero often practically equivalent to our 'dein opposition to them stresses that brwis ceased.' Originally applied to Osiris with not "parole," "discours," but "voix"; m3C reference to the occasion when his regal hrw would be "'homme qui a la voix rights, being disputed by Seth, were vindijuste" with the magical meaning of cated before the tribunal in Heliopolis. "voice" which would also be found in pr The same epithet is also used in connechrw.2 Griffith3 has rejected Maspero's tion with Horus as the 'triumphant' translation in favor of, as he says, "the avenger of the wrongs done to Osiris." This explanation avoids a clear decision in old rendering 'triumphant,' 'justified'the words m3chrw literally expressing that regard to the exact meaning of "voice." Two basic questions have to be raised. the person named is proved 'true of state" ment,' 'true of claim.' He continues: "It First, are we sure that the use of m'c irw is quite possible that in this ancient for- in connection with Osiris indicates its mula zrwshould have had a special mean- origin? Breasted's answer to this question ing not found elsewhere."4 As for the seems to express the view which is acmodern standard works of Egyptian phi- cepted in general-m3c hrw is "the verdict lology, WB, II, 15-18, translates the rendered in favor of Osiris,"7 and, "like verbal expression m3c hrw "die Stimme Osiris, the dead king receives the predijmds. ist richtig, seine Aussage ist richtig cate 'righteous of voice.' "8 This view will befunden (vor Gericht)5 = er ist gerecht- be discussed below.9 Further, Breasted assumes that m3c hrw "must have been a I. QUESTION

AND PROPOSAL

1 Studes de mythologie et d'archeologie, I (Paris, 1893), 93-114, "Sur 1'expression ma-khrou." 2 WB, I, 528, "auf den Ruf hervorkommen; Totenopfer." 3 PSBA, XVIII (1896), 200 f. 4 Reference to some more discussions of m3^ hrw is given by Drioton and Vandier, L'Egypte (1st ed.), p. 126. The studies of Stern (1877) and Bleeker (1929) which are mentioned in n. 18 include also rather exhaustive discussions of mn3 brw.

6 Erman, Religion3, p. 224, expresses his opinion in the following words: "dass die Gotter sein (des Osiris) Wort wahr machten, d.h. ihn unschuldig befanden, ihn rechtfertigten." 6 Cf. Breasted, Development of Religion and Thought in Ancient Egypt, p. 35, "true, right, just, or righteous of voice." 7 Ibid., p. 35. 8 Ibid., p. 147. 9 Sec. III and Postscript.

21

22

JOURNAL OF NEAR EASTERN STUDIES

legal term already in use when this episode (scil. the verdict concerning Osiris) took form."'? This conclusion will also be referred to later. The way in which we interpret it has undergone, however, some change in the forty years that have elapsed since its appearance. Now it has been seen that the Egyptian mythology was the product of the early Old Kingdom;" Breasted's assumption would mean therefore that m3chrw was a legal term in this period and not in the predynastic period, when, according to the myth, the contest of Osiris and Seth took place. The second basic question must be answered first, however: What could possibly be the meaning of "the voice is true" or, as we should prefer to translate, "the voice is right in accordance with Maat"? Only Maspero has answered this question clearly and without compromise when he explained it by the magic value of the voice. But even if we think of the meaning of hrw as "outcry,"12 we could hardly find any evidence in the myths of Osiris which would point to his voice or outcry having justified him by means of magic or even without magic at all. On the other hand, if we think that, in m3c hrw, hrw, "voice," means an apologetic speech13of Osiris before the divine tribunal, a meaning "speech" in hrw would be involved which seems to be otherwise unknown. Herewith we have reached the very point stated by Griffith and quoted above, namely, the assumption that the hrw of m3chrw would have a special meaning not found elsewhere. Therefore, whether we 10 Breasted,

op. cit., p. 35.

11 S. Schott in Handbuch der Orientalistik, I, 2, p. 71; cf. the same author's Mythe und Mythenbildung im alten Aegypten (1945). 12 WB, III, 324 gives hrw under the heading, "Stimme, Gerausch" but the translation "Ausruf, Ruf," "exclamation," apparently is justified at least in ibid., A I, d and f. 13 WB, II, 15 "seine Aussage-bei Gericht"; Lefebvre. Grammaire, ? 52, "declaration."

prefer the idea of the magic value of voice or the special meaning of hrw as "statement," "Aussage," "declaration," either choice would not be much more than mere guess. A third interpretation of m3c hrw was offered, however, by Drioton and Vandier in 1938:14"Le sens complet de l'expression m3Chrw est 'justifie par sentence,' le mot hrw 'voix' se referant A la promulgation, peut-etre par crieur public, de cette sentence." The basically new idea of this interpretation is that, in a case of lawsuit for instance, the hrw in m3Chrw is not the voice of the defendant but that of another person who pronounces the sentence. The same interpretation is proposed also in the present study, which was prepared before I knew of this earlier statement. I may feel free, however, to publish this paper even though the idea is not new. I am very glad to be supported by those who first proposed it, but I do not think it is useless to deliver a thorough examination. The proposal is based upon the understanding of the genitive or the suffix in m3 hrw (n), "the hrw of someone is right in accordance with Maat," as a genitivus objectivus rather than genitivus subjectivus. Hrw.f in this phrase would be "the outcry (salute, acclaim) given to him," or we might even think of the German word "Ruf," which means "outcry" as well as "reputation." Therefore we might literally translate "the acclaim given to him is Maat" or "the reputation given to him is Maat." When we use the word "right," we should translate "the acclaim (reputation) given to him is 'right' "-the quotation marks with "right" would eliminate 14 L'Egypte (1st ed.), p. 126. Professor Drioton, who is the author of the paragraph in question, kindly wrote to me: "C'est une idee que j'ai depuis longtemps, sans avoir l'impression, qu'elle me soit personnelle. II me semble bien que Moret l'enseignait a ses cours a la fin de sa carriere." He explains his interm3~' hru pretation by referring to the expression (below, n. 35), to which I refer likewise below.

THE ORIGINAL MEANING OF

the meaning of this word as "well deserved"; "right" is the term applied to the person acclaimed.15As long as we are not able to decide whether "acclaim" or "reputation" is the better translation, I prefer to paraphrase both with "he is called right." There seems to exist no objection in regard to grammar. The genitivus objectivus is often used in Egyptian, e.g., mrwt.f, "his love," meaning the love tendered him; cbw.f,"his purification," meaning the purification given to him; wpwt.f (ipwt.f) in certain cases means the commission given by him and the commission ordered to him.16The meaning of the suffix as either subject or object is clearly recognizable with the verb.17 Moreover, the conception of genitivus objectivus in m3chrw n closely corresponds to the same in mdw n WnjS, "word of Unas," and mdw.f, "his word," in Pyr. 462 a and c, respectively-Sethe understands them as genitivus objectivus with the meaning "word against Unas (against him)," and I do not see any other satisfactory explanation. The conception of m3 hrw.f as "he is called right" has been caused by my working hypothesis concerning the development of the idea of individual Maat. Thus it has come the wrong way, i.e., not out of the texts, which indeed are somewhat ambiguous in this matter, but out of a theory. I am going to defend it the same wrong way-first explaining the general considerations and only thereafter showing that the contexts of the few earliest decisive occurrences of m3c hrw do not disprove the proposed translation but to my understanding support it most valuably. The theory might be roughly sketched Is Cf. below n. 35. 16Cf. WB, I, 303, wpwt nsw, "the king's commission," and (late Egyptian) wpwt n w'w, "the office as a wcw officer." 17See Sethe, Verbum, II, ? 581.

M3CHRW

23

as follows.l8 The idea of Maat primarily means the divine order of the world including the political, theological, and social order of Egypt.19 Therefore, from the beginning the rightness of man, his being m3C,depends upon the question whether or not he fits this order. This is a social question and therefore not answered by 18 As for the Old Kingdom it is based upon the Instructions of Ptahhotep, which in my understanding reflect the highly developed society of the Old Kingdom. This understanding had arisen out of my early discussion (1933) in "Lebensregeln und Lebensweisheit der alten Aegypter." In 1950 I was called upon to re-examine it when I prepared lectures to be delivered in the Interconnection Seminar of the Department of Oriental Studies at the University of Pennsylvania. The clearly Middle Egyptian language of Ptahhotep had led me to doubt the early date of this literary work. The opinion that it originates in the Middle Kingdom, however, apparently is wrong. There is no allusion in Ptahhotep to the problems which had arisen and were discussed during the period of the nomarchs, nor is there any evidence for assuming that he declines to discuss them. On the other hand, we do have good reason for dating Ptahhotep in the Old Kingdom-the language, after all, may have changed in the process of transmission. A reexamination of my conception concerning the Old Kingdom was also made necessary by the reading of H. Junker, Pyramidenzeit (Zurich-Koln, 1949). This book has contributed much to my understanding, though I am not able to follow Junker in some decisive conclusions concerning Maat. Since I shall not give an over-all proof of my conception in this paper, I must discuss Junker's proofs in these cases in which we have a different understanding. This will be done in some of the succeeding notes. My working hypothesis concerning the development of an individual Maat after the Old Kingdom was worked out for the aforementioned lectures and has, I think, stood the test up to now. To present exact proof, however, is hardly possible. 19In Maat des Echnaton, p. 2 with n. 3, I wrongly stated that there did not exist a comprehensive study about Maat. Unfortunately I did not think then of the dissertation of C. J. Bleeker, De Beteekenis van de Egyptische Godin Maat (Leiden, 1929). I have had the opportunity of reading it only after this manuscript was out of my hands. The primary merit of Bleeker's study is, in my opinion, that he has stressed the cosmic meaning of Maat and the fact that Maat in its cosmic, liturgical, and ethical or social aspects is one inseparable concept. I have the impression that Bleeker has led to the present interpretation of Maat as it is explained here above and in Maat des Echnaton, p. 2 with n. 4 (in which the clear and concise definition of H. Frankfort, Ancient Egyptian Religion, pp. 53 if., 62 if. should be added to my quotations). I should like to mention also what is probably the earliest monograph on Maat, which was delivered by L. Stern in ZAS (1877), pp. 72-88, 113-24, with the title "Hieroglyphisch-Koptisches."

24

JOURNAL OF NEAR EASTERN STUDIES

what he thinks of himself or by his own conscience directing him but by his reputation with his king and fellow-citizens. On the other hand, only rightness enabled man to live after death. Any accusation brought forth against his life on earth was to be examined and judged in the court of the Great God.20Further it has to be men20 The tomb inscriptions apparently evidence no activity of the judge in the beyond other than in cases of lawsuit; this has been rightly stated by Kees, Totenglauben (1926), pp. 152-53. I am not ready to follow Junker's further conclusion that a blanket acquittal of the deceased was demanded, as it was according to the conception transmitted mainly in the 125th chapter of the Book of the Dead. While my unwillingness to acknowledge Junker's conclusion does not have to be proved in regard to the wellknown tomb inscriptions of the Old Kingdom, I am obliged to defend it in regard to the Pyramid Texts. We are indebted to Junker for the grouping and interpreting which he has made (op. cit., pp. 81-85) of those spells of the Pyramid Texts which would show the idea of "Totengericht" in the understanding of the 125th chapter of the Book of the Dead. In so doing, he has followed the translations published by Sethe. The of some of these translations and interpretations spells which are offered in Sec. II of this paper, however, differ in respect to this question from those of Sethe and Junker. Therefore, I should like to examine briefly also the remainder of the group in support of my conception. First I list the references to those spells which are dealt with by Junker and also discussed here in the different parts of Sec. II as follows: Junker, op. cit., p. 81, Pyr. 309, see II, Part 3 digression; p. 84, Pyr. 316, see II, Part 2; p. 85, Pyr. 361, see II, Part 1; pp. 83, 93, Pyr. 2029, is discussed below, n. 24 of this section. There remain four spells which Junker deals with on pp. 81-83. Pyr. 461-462 and 383-386 include the statements that there is neither "word" nor accuser, respectively, against the deceased. This denial of any accusation clearly corresponds to the conception of lawsuits in the beyond which is known from the tomb inscriptions; we might understand it in either of two ways, that in this special case there is no accuser or (which after all seems more probable) that in general the rightness of the king cannot be debated-he is not subjected to lawsuit. Pyr. 891-892 and 2082-2083, according to Junker, represent the statement of the deceased that he did not commit certain transgressions during his lifetime. We may assume that this interpretation is correct, though I am not certain in regard to Pyr. 2082-83. In either case, however, the context certainly cannot lead us with any certainty to the conclusion that these statements of guiltlessness were to be spoken by the defendant before a divine trial-the acknowledgment of rightness is a matter of public consensus but not necessarily the verdict of a court. The same holds good for Pyr. 1450 and Pyr. 1238, which latter is discussed below, Sec. III with n. 165; they have not been quoted by Junker. I do not wish to be misunderstood-Junker's opinion may be right, but the evidence of both the Pyramid Texts and the tomb in-

tioned that living by Maat apparently was no matter of education: "Maat lies as a path even in front of him who knows nothing."2' This means it is individual conscience and not knowledge which has to fit the rules of social order. But when, after the breakdown of the Old Kingdom, the social order in Egypt had vanished, man was limited to his conscience; this was to fit the divine order, which was no longer mirrored on earth. As a poor defendant everybody had to answer for his deeds before the trial of the Great God. The idea of individual Maat had been ordered by god from the beginning; therefore, it had always been a religious one. But now the social value of this religious idea became a very ethical one,22though in practice right and wrong behavior were the same as before-the custom was retained that tomb inscriptions addressed the survivors and protested the rightness of the deceased. The merciless and unbearable idea, however, of man answering for his earthly deeds before the highest god without any advocate called for some kind of support. First of all, it was backed by the myth. The ideas that the deceased king was acknowledged by the gods; that he was called Osiris; that Osiris was justified in a case which was disputed before a divine trial23-these ideas gradually, in scriptions points only to lawsuits resulting from accusations and not to a divine trial to which everybody would have been subjected even when there was no accuser. 21 Literally "(Maat) is the path before him who knows nothing" (Wilson): Ptahhotep, ed. D6vaud, 1. 91 (Pap. Brit. Mus. 10509). 22 The conception of this change is rejected by Junker, op. cit. I may refer to my review in Deutsche LXXII In 98. the Literaturzeitung, course of (1951), my discussions I try to point out this change by adopting the following difference of translation. "Rightness" is Maat including the individual Maat of the Old Kingdom conception; "righteousness" is the individual Maat from the end of the Old Kingdom on. 23 Cf. the last paragraph of this paper and the final rectification of the latter assumption in the Postscript.

THE ORIGINALMEANING OF M?' HRW

the process of "sinkendes Kulturgut," were applied to everybody. Further, the ideas of individual Maat and divine trial joined the popular magical conceptions of life after death;24 eventually the magic value of the protestation of guiltlessness, the 125th chapter of the Book of the Dead, permitted even the worst sinner to be justified in the god's trial. Third, in the Eighteenth Dynasty the individual Maat would again be backed by the order of state and king-this conception culminated in the terrible equation of righteousness with following the leadership of Akhenaten.25 In the midst of these most popular branches of conception, however, existed the securing of individual righteousness in piety-naturally examples of this are not often forthcoming.26 If the theory is right that in the earlier period the individual Maat primarily has a social value, it is the acknowledgment of Maat by the public which matters first of all. Therefore the declaration of rightness in the tomb inscriptions of the Old Kingdom would be addressed to one's fellowmen in order that they might concede approval; the expression m3c hrwwould mean "acknowledged as right" rather than "being right in one's own declaration." The question must now be asked whether or not the earliest occurrences of m3chrw harmonize with this conclusion. This will be discussed in Sections II and III. The 24Instruction Merika-Re, 11. 53 if. does not have recourse to magic when it considers the trial of the god. Junker, op. cit., pp. 91-93, wishes to show that the idea of a trial and that of magic in the beyond were mixed together in the Pyramid Texts, i.e., in the Old Kingdom, as they were later in the Book of the Dead, chap. 125. The sole and decisive proof, as he calls it, for this thesis, however, is his translation of Pyr. 20292030, which I am sorry to say I cannot acknowledge at all. This evidently is a magic spell addressed to two beings of a lower class that act as ferrymen according to Pyr. 1382 (see Sethe's commentary of Pyr. 1102a), and no accusation is mentioned. 26 Maat des Echnaton, e.g., pp. 28, 31. 28 One of the finest prayers in regard to righteousness, from the decades after Amarna, has been translated loc. cit., p. 36.

25

different directions of the idea of individual Maat during the Middle and New Kingdom, however, were included in the summary which I gave above not only for the sake of completeness. In these periods two special expressions appear which I wish to discuss first. The causative verb sm3c hrw is known from the periods of the nomarchs on, perhaps, first in the coffin text equivalent of the 20th chapter of the Book of the Dead:27zw dhwtj sm3c.f hrw Wsjr r hftjw.f and in r.f dhwtj (sm3c)28 hrw.j r hftjw.j, "Thoth causes that Osiris is (var. I am) justified against his (var. my) enemies."29 In examining the literal meaning of this expression, we refer to the noncausative phrase "Osiris (NN.) is justified against his male and female enemies, the men and women that act against him, (irtj.sn wdC mdw hft.f=) them that are going to fight him in trial:30 the variant hrw.f m3c r instead of m3c rw.f shows that 6hftjw.f31 the preposition depends upon m3cbut not (which after all hardly could be expected from the grammatical point of view) upon hrw. As for the explanation of r we should not translate "his hrw is more righteous than (that of) his enemies," because different degrees of rightness would hardly be suited, either to the sentence of a court or to the idea of Maat.32 Probably the meaning of "triumphant," "justified," here involved had influenced the construction: "his irw is right (in triumph) over 27 Grapow,

Religiose Urkunden, pp. 100 f.; 107. Sm3c, omitted in this MS, has to be inserted according to chap. 18 (Grapow, op. cit., p. 134). 29 The succeeding line in Grapow, 100 28

ibid., p. substitutes the deceased in place of Thoth "NN. justifies him(self?) against his enemies"-this secondary idea does not have to be considered here. a0 De Buck, Coffin Texts, I, 9, 10 and more often in different variations; cf. additional "him who hates you" in I, 13d. 31Ibid., I, 25c, 37b, etc. 32 See, however, of Horus and Seth in n. 37.

m3c.f r.j in the late Egyptian tale 14.1 and its explanation as given

26

JOURNAL

OF NEAR

his enemies." These phrases clearly refer to the triumph of the defendant before the divine trial. While, however, on the one hand, the trial -concerning any enemies and accusers against the dead is referred to, in accordance with the conception of the Old Kingdom, on the other hand, the trial against Osiris is alluded to which, according to the myth, concerned only one case and was looked on as prototype of the trial against the dead in the Middle Kingdom.33 In this trial, according to the 20th chapter of the Book of the Dead, Thoth caused the hrw of Osiris to be right. Let us assume that hrw means the voice or an outcry or even a declaration or statement of Osiris, which would be in accordance with Maat by means of its magic value or its content. In this case the action of Thoth (i.e., his causing the voice, etc., of Osiris to be right) would be a supplementary idea and hardly compatible with the first one though possibly so.34 On the other hand, if we accept my proposal for translating m3c hrw,the sentence in the 20th chapter of the Book of the Dead would mean "Thoth causes that Osiris is called righteous (in triumph) over his enemies" and would refer to the effect which is attributed to Thoth concerning the sentence of the divine trial "Seth is wrong, Osiris is right."35 In the Eighteenth and Nineteenth dynasties we find a few36 cases of m3chrw as an apposition with officials, in which 33 This incongruity seems to be cleared by the conclusion which is dealt with in the Postscript; the idea of the trial against Osiris apparently is secondary. 84 We might think of a phrase like "Thoth, give it my Maat unto me and readiness (?) of mouth-open for Maat in my behalf" (Theban Tomb 157, Ramesses II, from the files of the Worterbuch) or the apposition of Thoth, "he that gives Maat to him that has done Maat" (Berlin 6910 G b 3 in Inschr. Berl. II, 65; Dyn. 19). This idea of giving Maat has been discussed in my paper Die Maat des Echnaton, p. 10. I am not sure, however, whether or not it is already found as early as the Middle Kingdom, and, after all, "giving Maat" is not the same as gm3' hrw.

EASTERN

STUDIES

reference to the divine trial hardly could be understood: "m3c hrw in the house of the king" and "in the house of his lord." We might be inclined to assume that the meaning of m3c hrw was worn out in this period-in some expressions it apparently has the same meaning as m3c.37 But though expressions like "m3cto the king" occur often enough in the Eighteenth Dynasty and make good sense,38phrases such as "m'c in the house of the king" or "in the house of his lord" are unknown39 to me, as is "m3c hrw to the king." Therefore "m3chrw in the house of the king," etc., probably has some special meaning, which would emerge from the translation 35 Drioton in relating hrw to the sentence of the judge as proclaimed by the "crieur public" discusses it in his letter (see n. 14) as follows: "Ce serait dans ce sens que Thoth, qui jouait ce r61e (scil. du crieur public) aupres du tribunal divin serait sm3c hrw pour Osiris et Horus: le Afactitif aurait ici le sens d6claratif, qu'il a quelquefois en 6gyptien, comme le Hiphil s6mitique." I wish to add this precisely stated explanation to mine, though I hesitate to accept it entirely I am not sure if m3' in this connection really has the meaning "it is 'right' "-I think it has the usual meaning "it is right," though I put "right" in quotation marks for the purpose of facilitating the translation. 861 was not able to augment the quotations given in WB, II, 18, Belegst. 10. Bleeker, Beteekenis, p. 70 (cf. above, n. 18) however, quotes Urk. IV, 77, 1. 6, "I traveled unto the north with the tributes of the Wawat-land to the king, every year, (prr.j im m m3' hrw =) and I came forth from there as one that had been called right; there has been found nothing for which I did not account ( =d3wt.j)." 37Compare "m:' in heaven and on earth" (Sandman, Texts from the Time of Akhenaton, p. 159, 3, coffin of a king) with " m3 hrw, in heaven and on earth " (Naville, Totb., 134,15, Osiris); ink mn3 tp t3, "I was a righteous one upon earth" (Sandman, op. cit., p. 99, 3) with ink is m3' hrw tp t3 (Urk. IV, 67); in "Horus and Seth," 14, 1, mc3 seems to be used instead of m3' hrw (m3'.f r.j and m3'[kwj?] r.f). Further, cf. m3' br ntr "righteous with the god (i.e., the king)" (Urk. IV, 1198, 17) to the well-known phrase "m3c hrw with ( =br) the Great God (or some other god)." Supplementary note: The close relation between m3' and m3' hrw which is exemplified above was not only developed in the New Kingdom; apparently it is genuine. 88 Die Maat des Echnaton, p. 28. 89 M3Cm ht Pth, "righteous in the temple of Ptah" 169f., after Gardiner in JEA, (PSBA, XXXV, XXXII [19461, 52 [p]) might have some different meaning; cf. m3' nb n ht ntr, "every righteous one in the house of the god" (Instruction Amenemope, VII, 7).

I THE ORIGINALMEANING OF M' HRW "he that is called 'right' in the house of the king." If we accept this, we are not yet able to decide whether it refers to some acclamation, to a statement of the king, or more generally to the reputation of this official with his king and his fellow-officials. Certainly, however, it does not refer to any divine trial in the world beyond. These quotations from the Middle Kingdom and the New Kingdom would be characteristic of the respective conceptions of individual Maat which developed in these periods according to the theory which I have explained above. Anyway they point to three different conceptions of m3c hrw. The first though latest one most probably does not refer to any trial at all. The second and third one, from the Coffin Texts, do refer to the divine trial-for the sake of clearness let us distinguish them as referring to the trial against Osiris and that in which the accusations against any dead person are judged; though these two trials have become mixed up and in most cases cannot be separated from each other, we should rather assume that they originated from different sources. These three conceptions perhaps had been involved in m3c hrw from the beginning; therefore we must consider them when we now start examining the earliest quotations of this expression. In one case it might refer to the trial for the two contestants in the myth; in another case, to the trial for the dead; further it might refer to governmental trial in this world, or it even refers to no trial at all. We have to examine the quotations without any prejudice. II. M3c hrw IN THE PYRAMID TEXTS

This section deals with those eleven quotations of the Pyramid Texts in which the word m'c hrw occurs. They are translated and commented on in six parts of this section which are quoted as "Part 1"

27

or "Quotation 1," "Quot. 1" for instance. These parts are the following. Part 1 contains Pyr. 354 a; 356 c, 357 c, 361 c,40 929 a, 935 a-the various utterances (Spriiche) to which these sections belong are listed in the cross-index on page 32; Part 2: Pyr. 316 d in Utt. 260; Part 3: Pyr. 1042 d in Utt. 486; Part 4: Pyr. 1462d in Utt. 570; Part 5: Pyr. 2089 a in Utt. 689; Part 6: Pyr. 1327 c in Utt. 539. It is only with some hesitation that I publish my translations and notes. In general, I have restricted the notes to those phrases and words which, to my understanding, are likely to influence our conception of m"chrw and which are commented upon by Sethe41either differently or, Parts 4-6, not at all. And I must impose another limitation. I am fully aware that the many spells of the Pyramid Texts which concern the ascension to heaven and transfiguration of the deceased are closely correlated to each other; their full understanding can be reached therefore only on a much larger basis than that which is afforded by the few spells which, more or less by chance, include the word m3c hrw. I do think, however, that, in starting a discussion like this, it is useful to limit one's self to one special question, supposing one avoids hasty generalizations. I need not say how much this limited discussion was assisted by Sethe's commentary, in which the various correlations are extensively noted. In spite of these restrictions, however, the notes in this paper are still fairly extensive. This is due to the fact that Sethe's understanding of the spells in question is based on the 40 Speleers,

Les Textes des Pyramides,

Vocabulaire,

40, erroneously mentions also Pyr. 360 as an occurrence of m" hrw. I do not think he has quoted it in place of some other section which I have overlooked. 41

Sethe,

Uebersetzung

und

Kommentar

zu

den

Pyramidentexten, Vols. I-IV covering Utterances 213506 (Pyr. 134-1101).

JOURNAL OF NEAR EASTERN STUDIES

very presupposition which I am going to debate; in view of his superior knowledge, I have questioned my objections again and again and in a few cases have felt compelled to revise them. I certainly do not feel happy in proposing so many more alterations of Sethe's translation than I had expected at first; I do not think, however, that the number of my objections will be interpreted as lack of respect to the great scholar who has made such important and decisive steps toward our understanding of the Pyramid Texts. I may express my hope that my attempts to go a little further in some particularities will not be considered as a step backward. PART 1. Pyr. 354 a, 356 c, 357 c, 361 c, 929 a, 935 a in Utterances 265 and variants (see cross-index on p. 32) These occurrences are found in a series of utterances which are characterized by mention of the shnw rafts which ferry the deceased king to heaven, his being reborn as a star, and the four messengers that announce his worthiness to Re and Nhbk3w. Sethe has gathered these "Spriiche vom Hinlegen der Schilfbiindel" in his commentary of Utterance 263. Each of them in some degree contributes to our understanding; therefore they must be commented upon as a unit. In Utt. 265 the phrase in which m3c hrw occurs seems unwantedly repeated, but it is the most complete version and reasonably arranged. This spell is translated here and discussed with reference to the other versions. The cross-index shows the degree of completeness and the arrangement of the spells in question and their relation to each other in respect to their sections; the designation of sections as paragraphs A-H has been introduced only for the purpose of this study.

TRANSLATION OF UTTERANCE 265 (PYR. 351-357)

(A = 351-352; the content of this paragraph is the following: by means of the s6nw-rafts the deceased king (NN) crosses the mnc and nh3 waters and the i3rw fields toward the horizon unto Re and Harakhty.) B (353a-c)"NN crosses toward the eastern side of heaven to that place in which the gods are born. NN is born there with them, as Horus, as Akhty. C (354a-b) "NN is called right (= m3c Frw NN). Acclamation (is made) unto NN (= hn n NN), acclamation unto the Ka of NN. D (355a-c) "They are summoned for NN, they are brought to him (namely) the four guards bearing the curl (of youth) that stand on their dcmw staffs at the eastern side of heaven. E (356a-b) "They say the name of NN (as) of one that is good to Re and raise the name of NN (as) of one that is good to Nhb-k3w. F (356c-d) "NN is called right. Acclamation (is made) unto NN, acclamation unto the Ka of NN. G (357a-b) "Sothis is the sister of NN, the morning star is the mstw relative of NN. He who is below the body of heaven is NN. H (357c-d) "NN is called right. Acclamation (is made) unto NN, acclamation unto the Ka of NN." NOTES

ad A. This paragraphwith its different versions does not concernus. It is preceded by the call to the ferrymanin Utt. 481 and 507;42 similar calls are separated from para-

graphA in Utt. 519 and 556.43 ad B. In Utt. 26644Akhty is replacedby Dat, the phrasebeingassimilatedto paragraph G, which succeedsB immediately-cf. Dat in paragraphG of Utt 26345--i (in Fr is 3tj is; 42

Pyr. 999a and 1102a. 43Pyr. 1201a and 1382b.c.

44 Pyr. 362b'.

46Pyr. 341c.

THE ORIGINAL MEANING OF M3CHRW

also in Utt. 266; 473.1, 2) implies a statement of identity ("as," German "als") rather than a simile ("as though he was'; "als ware er").46 Utt. 26447and Utt. 55648add an enumeration of days to the statement concerning the birth; this subject will not be discussed here. ad C. This paragraph occurs three times in Utt. 265 (paragraphs C, F, and H) in almost the same wording but only once in each of three other utterances (paragraph C in Utt. 473.1 and Utt. 473.2; paragraph F in Utt. 266). Sethe regards it as a parenthetical challenge unto those who hear the recitals: "Gerechtfertigt is NN; jauchzet zu NN, jauchzet zu dem Ka des NN." The idea of taking hn as an imperative was prompted by the imperative hnjj in Utt. 266;49 this is taken below as an exceptional case and is explained by its context (ad paragraph F). I should prefer to understand hn (935b N hnw) as a noun, as usual. Sethe's further idea that these lines represent an interjected address to the bystanders certainly was influenced by the consideration that as a whole these utterances do not show any connection with the justification of Osiris; on the other hand, the justification of Osiris seemed doubtless to be alluded to in m3cbrw. I do not feel able to accept this view. Further objections against Sethe's understanding of C may be stated here. Pyr. 316d,50 which evidently is related to this paragraph C, fits its context and cannot be separated from it as a digression. Further in rejecting the conception of challenge to the hearers I am supported by Schott; according to him Utterances 263-266 were recited in the "Verehrungstempel" to which the public was not admitted.51 Utterances 473.1 and 473.252introduce the Ka of the king into the phrase of m3chrw "NN is called right, the Ka of NN is called right," in assimilation to the following "acclamation 46This holds good also for Pyr. 1348b. 47Pyr. 345a-b; 346c. 48 Pyr. 1382f; 1383b. 49

Pyr. 361b. 60In Utt. 260; see below, Part 2. 61 Schott, Bemerkungen zum Pyramidenkult, 196 and 181. 62

Pyr. 929 a and 935 a.

pp.

29

unto the Ka of NN" (which, however, is omitted in Utt. 473.1); likewise in paragraph F, Utt. 266,53the Ka is called right with the addition "with (=hr) the god."54 I do not think that the idea of the Ka being justified (=m3c Jbrw)is involved in the idea of the divine trial.55It would fit Sethe's conception of these verses as an appeal to the bystanders (which, however, has been refuted above) supposing we could assume that m3c hrw already was worn-out and apt to be transferred from Osiris to his Ka in certain circumstances,56but there does not seem to exist any evidence for this assumption. There seems, however, to be no difficulty in assuming that the Ka of the king is hailed as being right when he becomes god and star. On the contrary, the idea of the Ka called right excellently fits paragraph C in Utt. 263:57"NN (finally?) has been pleased58 together with his Ka; NN lives together with his Ka. His leopard skin is upon him, his staff is in his arm, his scepter in his hand. He causes that he who has gone away acclaims him (?)."59The last phrase probably refers to the 63Pyr. 361c. 54 As to this addition see below, Part 6, note b. 55Cf. Sethe, Uebersetzung und Kommentar, II, 38 to Pyr. 338a "(der Ka,) zu dem er ja erst im Tode geht, wie so viele Stellen zeigen"; the Ka ascends to heaven with him, however (cf. Pyr. 2081a). Breasted, Development, p. 174, to my understanding quotes this passage which introduces the Ka as a confirmation of his conclusion that this justification is established by the sun-god and not by Osiris. 56Cf. Sethe's commentary of Pyr. 354a-b. 57Pyr. 338a-339a. - = nfrn nf n NN; Sethe "wohl gefalen hat es dem NN (zu sein) mit seinem Ka." My insertion of "finally?" is prompted by Sethe's remarks and the suggestion concerning the meaning of nfr as given by H. Stock, "Ntr nfr =der Gute Gott?" p. 5; it might be misleading, however-my point is only to stress that nfr(n) n is certainly not simply "(he) is pleased" -just as little as nfr tw, Sinuhe B 31 quoted by Sethe, is "you feel well." The parallel phrase Pyr. 908a-b as quoted by Sethe is interesting: "NN (finally?) is pleased together with his name; NN lives together with his Ka." 59The questionable translation of this last phrase (nhnj.f n.f sj r.i) is based upon Sethe's assumption that nhnj is related to the hn, "acclaiming," used in the other versions. For the translation of sj r.i in the singular (though it is possibly the plural) and without relation to the horizon, cf. Pyr. 1555b and 662e. This expression, according to Sethe, might indicate the dead; cf., however, sj ij in Part 2, n. 94. 58

30

JOURNAL OF NEAR EASTERN STUDIES

acclamation, the preceding to the appearance as a king; this proves the rightness of the deceased and his Ka as does the acclamation in the other versions. ad D. The four are introduced with different names in the different versions. The translation in the passive of njs, "call," and in, "bring," (njs(w).sn n NN, in(w).?n n NN.), seems to be inevitable, as Sethe points out; once assumed, this point of view should be retained also in Utt. 263.60 Utt. 26461 has "NN has called them; he has brought them (namely) those four gods." Utt. 266 and 60962 present the imperative without njs, "call"; "bring to me those four .... ," in Utt. 609 apparently addressed to the deceased63 but in Utt. 266 without indication of the person addressed. Other versions include "he (i.e., the moon or the morning star?) assigns (wd) NN unto the four hc3w", Utt. 507,64 and the going of (?), and being greeted among (?), the Four, Utt. 519.65 More remote versions are Utt. 481,66 wherein the circumpolar stars are mentioned with NN accounted as one of them, and Utt. 556,67 which introduces the statement that NN does not die. Another version is represented by the four gods in Utterance 26068 which is discussed below in Part 2. ad E. Utterance 60969 clearly indicates that "they" (which there succeeds an imperative construction in paragraph D) means the Four. Utt. 26670 keeps the force of the imperative introduced in D, though, in contrast to D, it is addressed to the Four, "say ye the good name of NN to Nhb-k'w." "The good name" instead of "the name of NN (as) of one that is good"71 is also found in Utt. 263,72 which

otherwise differs from Utt. 265 in using "announce" (=sjw) instead of "raise." Utt. 26473 runs "they say the name [sic] of NN to Re and raise his name to Harakhty [sic]"; it mentions Re together with Nhb-k3win a different context.74 An interesting and unique version is transmitted

Pyr. 339b.

61Pyr. 348a. 62 Pyr. 360b and 1708a. 63 So apparently in Pyr. 1708a if we read m n.j; in Pyr. 360b possibly another pronomen suffixum was namely, n.f. Pyr. 1104c if. 65 Pyr. 1206a. 1207b. 66 Pyr. lOOOd-1001a; this has to be understood

used,

64

in accordance with Pyr. 1457-1458, which introduces the number "four." 67 68

Pyr. 1385. Pyr. 316b.

69

Pyr.

70

Pyr. 361a.

1708c.

they raise

71 This translation of rn n NN n(?) nfr has been proposed by Sethe, though doubtfully. 72 Pyr.

340a-b.

73 Pyr. 348c. 74 Pyr.

346a. 75 Pyr. 1708c-f. 76

60

in Utt. 609:75 "(That)

this your good ij76 to Nhb-k'w, which77 your daughter, the woman,78 has said to you; Nhb-k'w has (?) raised this your good ij to the two enneads." In assuming some meaning like "praise given to you" for "this your good Zj" (see n. 76), we find it very similar to "the good name" and hrw "acclamation" in m3chrw -all of them referring to a statement brought forth by other persons. ad F. This paragraph occurs only in Utt. 265 and 266 and equals paragraphs C and H; as for details see above notes to C. Its repetition79 at this point reinforces the ideas expressed in E-the announcement of the rightness of his name and the statement that he is verily a god. Utt. 26680 accommodates these phrases to their context; it changes the arrangement of the two verses, and, by means of this alteration, it is enabled to continue using the imperative which it introduced in paragraphs D and E: "Acclaim ye NN, acclaim ye his Ka; NN is called right, NN's Ka is called right with the god." Thus it is understandable that the imperative of hn is peculiar to this

q

)Ij.k pn nfr with

:J1

(Pyr. 1708c)

and

['1

Az (Pyr. 1708e). The context points to reading "your

ij" rather than "the ijk." I cannot find this noun specified in the Worterbuch; presumably it is related to the vocative interjections i and ij and its meaning is "the acclamation (or praise) given to you," similar to Ow, "praise."

Sethe,

Uebersetzung

und Kommentar,

II, 32,

paraphrases wts.sn ij.k pn nfr as "sie melden dich." 77 The context apparently points to the conception of ddn n.k s3t.k as relative form rather than sdmn.f form. 78 I cannot provide any explanation of s3t.k hmt. 79The question which paragraph this sentence originally belongs to cannot be answered; see, however, Sec. III with n. 159 80

Pyr. 361b-c.

THE ORIGINAL MEANINGOFM3c HRW

31

version-its writinghnjj does not occurin any introduced as a god to Re and Nhb-k3w other versionof paragraphsC, F, and H.81 (paragraph F). The spell evidently is what ad G. The firstphraseof this sectionis found we might call a Heliopolitan one; once also in Utterances 473.1; 473.2; 609; 263.82 is mentioned in a This latter, however,names "Dat" instead of (Utt. 266)88 Heliopolis final phrase. There is no allusion to the "morningstar" and thereforerepresentsthe divine trial, however, the less so as this originaltext, accordingto Sethe. Sothis as the idea would hardly fit the expression "the sister is substitutedby the moonas brotheror of NN is m3chrw" (see note to paraKa father of NN in Utt. 481 and, with different On the other hand, it is undercontext, in Utt. 507.83 The second phrase of graph C). this sectionis a little different,"NN standsas stood that Sethe's conception of parathis star which is below the body of heaven," graphs C, F, and H as parenthetical canin Utt. 264 and Utt. 556.84 The version "as not be maintained. Dat, as the star whichilluminatesthe heaven" In spite of this evidence we might well in Utt. 26685is influencedby the preceding;see try to understand hrw.f in m3c Erw.f as above the note to paragraphB concerningthe "his statement" (rather than "voice"). context. that the word of the the idea ad H. This paragraph,which in this utter- Certainly deceased king opens the way to him in ance repeats paragraphsC and F, is further the beyond is well known in the Pyramid representedby two quite different versions: Utt. 264,86"he judges the case as a god after Texts, e.g., the word addressed by him to he has heardthe case as a ?rofficial,"and Utt. various gods when he is newly born as a 609,87"you sit betweenthem (i.e., Sothis and god,89or discussions like those with "they the morningstar) on the great seat which is that have become equipped spirits by besidethe two enneads."These three versions means of their mouth."90 or with Horus in differentways supplementthe indicationof and Seth.91 No less certainly, however, the finalstatus of the deceasedas a godandstar would we be misled if we assumed that which was given in paragraphG. m]c hrw referred to whatever magical word might save the deceased in the beCONCLUSION In these utterances the phrase contain- yond. Therefore we should prefer to uning m3chrw.f and the hnw acclaim of the derstand m3c hrw.f with genitivus objecking occurs three times in Utt. 265 but tivus as given in the translation. If we only once in three other versions, respec- accept it, we should not think of translattively. It refers to the fact that the de- ing "his reputation is 'right' " but "the ceased king is newly born in heaven and acclamation given to him is 'right."' 88 Pyr. 363 f. Sethe suggests has become a god together with stars and the possibility of sun (paragraphs C and H) and that he is assuming that in the lacuna of Pyr. 363d a new, short On the other 81

Cf. note to paragraph C for writing hn and hnw. 82 Pyr. 929b, 935c, 1707a, 341c. 83 Pyr. 1001b and 1104a-b. 84 Pyr. 347a and Pyr. 1384a. 85

Pyr.

86

Pyr. 347b.

87

Pyr.

362b. 1707b-c.

"Fahrmannsspruch" begins. hand, he shows that there are similarities between Pyr. 363 and Utt. 570, in which latter the phrases Pyr. 1455c, 1458e, and 1457a (1458a) correspond to Pyr. 363c, d, and f, respectively; this should deter us from dividing Pyr. 363 into two sections. 89 Utt. 570 (Pyr. 1443-1448; 1461). 90Utt. 473 (Pyr. 930-931). 91 Pyr. 473.

CROSS INDEX PYRAMID

TO PART

TEXTS UTTERANCEs

1

265 AND VARIANTS

Utterances

265 P

263 W

264 T

266 P

473.1 PMN

473.2 PMN

481 P MN

507PMN

Paragraph A

Pyr. 351352

Pyr. 337; 340 c-d

Pyr. 342343

Pyr. 358360 a

Pyr. 926927

Pyr. 932933

Pyr. 999-1 000 b

Pyr. 11021103

Paragraph B

Pyr. 353

Pyr. 341 a-b

Pyr. 344346 c

Pyr. 362 a-b'

Pyr. 928

Pyr. 934

Pyr. lOOOc

Paragraph C

Pyr. 354

Cf. Pyr. 338-339 a

Pyr. 929 a

Pyr. 935 a-b

Paragraph D

Pyr. 355

Pyr. 339 b-c

Pyr. 348 a-b

Pyr. 360 b-d

Paragraph E

Pyr. 356 a-b

Pyr. 340 a-b

Pyr. 348 c; cf. Pyr. 346 a

Pyr. 361a

Paragraph F

Pyr. 356 c-d

Paragraph G

Pyr. 357 a-b

Paragraph H

Pyr. 357 c-d

--

Pyr. 361

-------

Cf. Pyr. 1000 dlOOla -

--

__-

--

Pyr. 1104 c1105

_----

--

b-c

Pyr. 341c

Pyr. 347a Cf. Pyr. 347 b

Pyr. 362 b"363 a

Pyr. 929 b

Pyr. 935 c ----

Pyr. lOOlb

Pyr. 1104 a-b -

THE ORIGINALMEANING OF Mc PART 2. Pyr. 316 d in Utterance 260 (W)

According to Sethe, Utterance 260 seems to be composed of two sections (Pyr. 316-319 and 320-323). Whatever the connection between these sections may be, only the first one concerns the present question. This must be translated and discussed in extenso. The first few phrases (316 a-c) are transmitted also in Coffin Texts, Spell 1, ed. De Buck. After I had prepared the translation of and the notes to this spell, I received two valuable remarks concerning the text in a letter from S. Schott which I am very glad to add to the present notes. They enable us to answer two questions which had hitherto remained unsolved.9 Furthermore, to my understanding they elucidate the arrangement of this spell; apparently Pyr. 316 alludes to the funeral rites, Pyr. 317 deals with the past, and Pyr. 318-319 with the new eternal life.

HRW

33

Heliopolisk (318 c) while he has come forth' today in the right form (= m irw m3c)of a living spirit. (319 a) NN breaks (up) fighting and cuts (off) insurrection; (319 b) NN comes forth (as he) who is related to Maat,m he brings her with him;" (319 c) the wrathful run about for his sake, they tfat are in the Nunu turn life unto him." NOTES

a (316b) T-q 9L ; Sethe "der gegangen und gekommenist"; I do think that the interpretation of both the perfect and imperfect active participlecan be defended.This phrase is discussedin the followingnote b. b (316b)Setherefersto differentquadruples of gods and other groups to which the deceased belongs. He accepts as possible the connectionbetweenthe four gods of this text, and both the corporationof Heliopolisin Pyr. 104193and the four gods of the Nunu, the circumpolarstars that go through the Libyan land and are dsr on their dcmwstaffs in Pyr. 1457-1458. Above in Part 1, notes to paraTRANSLATION graph D, I have pointed to the close relation (316 a) "O Geb, the bull of Nut, NN is between Pyr. 1457-1458 and lOOOd-1001a, Horus, the heir of his father. (316 b) He while the context of the latter, on the other that goes and comesa is NN, the fourth hand, indicatesthat it belongsto the phrases of those four godsb (316 c) that have concerningthe four youths. Thus there apbrought water and have caused purifica- parentlydoes exist a relationbetweenthe four tion(?),c they that make acclamation with gods mentionedin this spell Pyr. 316band the the foreleg(s) of their fathers.d (316 d) four youths in Quotation 1, paragraphD. This assumptionmight be corroborated by the He wishes to be called right by means of two followingfacts. Sj ij, "one who goes and what he has done.e (317 a) Indeed, NN comes" (see above, note a), seems well to fit judgedf between male and female or- the characterof the fouryouths as messengers phan(?);g indeed, he who is in accord (and perhapsno less the restless circumpolar with Maat (= m3tj)h held hearing; stars in Pyr. 1000d and 1457-5894).Further (317 b) indeed, there was no witness; in93See below, Part 3, digression. 94 Sj ij occurs in a similar context Pyr. 1193b and deed, he who is in accord with Maat gave order (scil. that the sentence be carried itmight be compared with Pyr. 541c; on the other hand, should be connected with sj-Ajn (Pyr. 1532a and out). (317 c) He passed throughi the 1539c) and sj-phr (Pyr. 1991a), which indicate the of the messengers that announce the deceased seats of Geb (but now?) he raises himself running to Re. The same running is indicated by sj-bt in Pyr. unto what he has wished. (318 a) His 1861a; it should be noticed that, in the same context 1861b), the messengers (4wwtjw according to limbs, which are in the secret place, are (Pyr. WB, III, 44) carry the ostrich feather with them, united;j (318 b) he joins them that are in which otherwise indicates Maat (though first of all as the Nunu; he terminates the dispute in a headdress in the Old Kingdom and Pyr. 1768-1775 92

See notes

d and i.

[N]); I wonder whether or not this might have some significance in respect to the announcement of the

34

JOURNAL OF NEAR EASTERN STUDIES

the sequence of the four gods, the acclamation, and m3cbrw in Pyr. 316b-d corresponds to the same sequence of paragraphs D(-E)-F in Utt. 265 and variants. c (316c) inw mw wdw cbcbt;Sethe understands the perfect active participle in the past tense, referring to the creation of the world. The Coffin Texts, however, have the imperfect active participle (De Buck, op. cit., I, 4-5, b.c). For the relation of this phrase to the funeral rites cf. Schott's remark below in note d. d (316c) irrw hjj m bps n itw.sn; Sethe, "die einen Jubel machen fiber die Kraft ihrer Vater." The meaning of hjj (hjj hnw and hjj hnjj in Cofin Texts, I, 4-5, d) to my understanding points to "hail," "acclaim," rather than to "jubilate about something," as does hnw also. I should prefer to translate hps "foreleg," "arm," literally,95 all the more as, to begin with, the meaning of this phrase certainly is not clear; further, the Coffin Texts demand a literal translation, as indicated by the determinative A of hps. In addition some Coffin Text versions write the plural hpsw nw itw.sn, "the forelegs of their fathers," therefore the understanding of n as genitival adjective must be preferred to the preposition n. While I was not ready to accept Sethe's conception of this phrase, I was not able to explain the exact meaning of mine. The following short remark in Schott's letter, however, leads, I think, to a very sensible explanation: "Zu 316c 'Jubel machen mit dem Schenkel' gibt es Bilder, so in Grab 55 (Ramose) eine Gruppe im Klagezug. Dort sind es kleine Modelle von Schenkeln, im A.R. noch die rightness of the deceased king; see Sec. III with n. 165. (Supplementary note: Cf. the feather which appeared in the land of the god and was put by Osiris at the head of Horus as a certification of triumph: Coffin Texts, I, 29 a-c). If sj ij does refer to the celestial messengers we might assume the same for sj r.A in Pyr. 339a (see Part 1, paragraph C with n. 59). 95Likewise I prefer a literal translation in Urk. I, 151, 3 quoted by Sethe "having acted with my own arm"; the more extended meaning of hps as "strength, however, might be somewhat involved in these later phrases. The same holds good for the similar phrases in other texts of the period of the nomarchs. I should like to quote the stela Philadelphia 40-19-1 line 3 (Ranke in The University Museum Bulletin, XII, No. 3, p. 24): "I was (ndis i.r ir m 6ps.f=) an excellent commoner that acted with his (own) arm."

Schenkel selbst, die bei der Bestattung von Priestern (in der Rolle der Horuskinder, so hier) dargebracht werden. Dazu wird Wasser geschiittet wie auch sonst beim Schlachten.' I am very glad to see that Schott's understanding of the Pyramid Texts and of the connection between mythological allusions and actual rites confirms and decisively complements my mere philological considerations. Furthermore, this explanation given by Schott is elucidated by a striking parallel in New Britain. In one tribe living in the northern section of this Melanesian island "until recently, the upper arm bones of a dead man were taken from his body and kept as family fetishes," and in another one "the upper arm bone of an important man no longer is used in his funeral rites, but a cassowary thigh bone has been substituted."96 e (316d) imr.f m3chrw.f m irtn.f; Sethe "er will, dass er gerechtfertigt werde in Bezug auf das, was er (selbst) getan hat." He explains this conception as follows: "Rechtfertigung in dem, was er selbst im Leben getan hat, steht der Freude fiber die Leistungen der Vorfahren (as expressed in the preceding phrase Pyr. 316c) gegenfiber." This explanation depends upon Sethe's interpretation of 316c, which has been refuted above. Some contrast between the "fathers" and the king's (own?) deeds might be involved, however; perhaps imr.f, "he wishes," points to this. On the other hand, the parallel between hjj and m3Chrw reminds us of that between hn and m3chrw in Part 1, paragraphs C, F, and H as discussed above: acclaim from the gods means rightness, justification of the deceased king.97 For the exact meaning of m3c hrw this phrase seems to be instructive. In literal translation (which must always be tried) m irtn.f does not depend upon hrw but upon m3c.If we apply Sethe's translation of m, "in Bezug auf," neither "his voice (or statement)" nor "the acclamation given to 96 W.

H. Goodenough

in University

Museum

Bulle-

tin (Philadelphia), XVII, No. 1 (September, 1952), 15, 16. 97Supplementary note: Cf. the discussion of the form imr.j in the Old Kingdom inscriptions by Edel in

"Untersuchungen"

(Mitteilungen

des

Deutschen

Instituts, XIII), ? 27E. I wonder whether or not the meaning "since (or: while) he wishes" may be applied to this imr.f.

THE ORIGINAL MEANING OF M3c

him" could possibly be understood as "right in regard to what he has done"; this restriction of rightness can hardly be accepted. If we understand m as instrumentalis, the phrase, "his voice (statement) corresponds to Maat (=is right) by means of what he has done," does not seem to make good sense either; it would mean that the magical power of the voice is effected by the deeds of the deceased, or that the power of his statement is effected not by its content, which after all might well refer to his deeds, but by the deeds themselves. There seems, however, to be no question that the following translation is most convincing, "the acclamation given to him (or his reputation) corresponds to Maat by means of what he has done." We might paraphrase the sentence as follows: "He wishes that it be his good deeds which bring about that the acclaim given to him is (not crime98but) 'rightness.' " f (317a) iw wdcn NN tfn hnc tfnt; iw introduces each of the four phrases in 317 a and b and is indicated by my translation "indeed." The question if these phrases should be understood as present or past tense is discussed below in note h. g (317a) The Egyptian text is quoted in note f. Sethe translates "NN hat als kleines Waisenkind (or, according to his commentary, possibly "Tfn") mit der Schwester (or "Tfnt") gerechtet." His understanding of wdc as "litigate" instead of the usual "judge" is based mainly on Pyr. 317c; this, according to him, would point to the result of the trial, in which therefore the dead king would be considered as one of the parties. As will be shown in note h, however, I want to propose a different interpretation of 317c; therefore I am not able to accept his conclusion. In support of his translation of wdc he refers to the formulas expressing threat in the Old Kingdom tomb inscriptions. Lately E. Edel99has shown, however, that in these formulas wdc is evidently passive, e.g., "I shall be judged with him," not "I shall litigate with him." The translation of tfn and tfnt as "orphan" is not much more than a guess: for its meaning cf. further note h below. 98 Cf. hbn hrw and 99 In Mitteilungen 9-10.

m3' hrw below, des Deutschen

Part

3.

Instituts,

XIII,

HRW

35

h (317a) m3ctj; Sethe, "die beiden Wahrheiten." For some time I have rejected the idea of a dual in favor of that of a singular "he who belongs to Maat."100Later studies of this text, however, have led me to the conclusion that both translations would be acceptable: m3tj meaning either the double Maat or the king himelf as Maaty;ll in either case this phrase would mean that the king NN has acted as judge, examiner, and he who orders the sentence to be carried out, all without any interference of witnesses and officials, depending upon nothing other than Maat. This conclusion seems to be corroborated by Pyr. 347b:102"NN judges the case as a god, after he made the hearing of the case as a sr official." In view of this statement we should prefer to translate mctj as a singular designating the king. If we accept the interpretation of section 317a-b as an allusion to a kind of totalitarian court procedure, we might ask ourselves whether this refers to kingship on earth or to that in the beyond, to the king's role as a judge in the necropolis, for example. The ?dmn.f-form with preceding iw in this context points to the past, i.e., to his kingship on earth; on the day of the king's transfiguration (Pyr. 318c) the judging he does in the beyond could hardly be referred to by means of this grammatical form. The fact that the aforementioned similar allusion in Pyr. 347b evidently points to the beyond would not affect this conclusion.'03 Whatever the exact mean100Maat des Echnaton, II, n. 207; I thought of Maaty as a designation for the highest god as the one who directed the trial. As for the writing cf. hntj with j q eg., in Pyr. 481d (W); 800d. 101Supplementary note: Neither double Maat nor Maaty are known to me elsewhere in the Old Kingdom inscriptions. The orthography of this m3'tj is the same in W, Si-ese, and Sen-wosret. 102 This phrase appears as one of the versions of Utt. 265, paragraph H; see above, Part 1. Cf. further the reference to Pyr. 1189e-f in Sec. III n. 189. 103 The further question might be asked if possibly iw wd'n, etc., refers to the earlier status of the deceased king as Osiris before his transfiguration in heaven; cf. the reference to the contrast between these two conditions of the deceased, which follow each other, below in Part 4, digression, and Part 6, conclusion. The meaning would be that the dead king already, i.e., before his transfiguration, has been acting as judge in the necropolis, which activity, of

36

JOURNAL OF NEAR EASTERN STUDIES

ing of tfn and tfnt might be, these designations apparently refer to human society therefore and not to a myth. i (317c) phrn.f nswt Gb tsj.f kw n mrtn.f; Sethe understands this phrase as depending upon the preceding iw wdn m3ctj:"Die beiden Wahrheiten haben befohlen, dass ihm die Throne des Geb zufallen sollten (=phr n.f); und dass er sich erheben diirfte zu dem was er wollte." According to my understanding of the preceding, this phrase must not be understood as the order resulting from the trial. The new interpretation also carries with it the advantage that apparently it dismisses once and for all the meaning of phr n as "jmdm. zuteil werden lassen,"104which in any case seems hardly satisfactory. Though I was going to propose the translation, "he passed through the seats of Geb" (with the alternative "the seats of Geb serve him"), I was completely in the dark about the exact meaning. My question about this particular point was very kindly answered by Schott: "'Throne des Geb' ware dann eine Bezeichnung der 'Residenzen' des Landes und stande etwa fur 'die Gaue.' "105

j (318a) dmd cwt.f imt st3w; Sethe, "vereinige seine Glieder, die im Verborgenen sein sollen"; the imperative would refer to Geb who is invoked in Pyr. 316a. k (318b) rdj.f phw mdww m 'Iwnw is translated in accordance with Schott;106 Sethe's course, would not have to cease with his ascension to heaven. Presumably, however, this opinion cannot be accepted. Apparently the idea of Osiris as a judge did not exist in this early period; and the deceased king's activity as a judge in the necropolis is certainly nothing else than that in heaven, which is established only by his transfiguration. See Sec. III on this latter question. 104 WB, I, 547, Belegst. 5 quotes two occurrences of this meaning in addition to the present text Pyr. 317c. One of them, Pyr. 408, however, has been differently understood by Sethe later in his commentary; as for the other one, Siut I 289, it would not be difficult to find a translation which better fits the usual meaning of pbr. 106Supplementary note: The chronological order of the facts mentioned in 316d-318c which is proposed above is corroboratedby CoffinTexts, I, 37a ff.: "Look (ye gods) at him when he has come forth (pr) in peace while he is triumphant ( =hrw.f m3')over his enemies after he seized the wrrt crown and sailed north (through?) the seats of Geb (=hntn.f nswt Gb) and took away bld.fkj."

translation in the present, "er lasst das Ende der Worte (d.h. seinen letzten Willen) in Heliopolis," would not fit my translation of the following old perfective clause in the perfect (see below, note 1). The complete section Pyr. 318 evidently refers to the time after the king's death. 1 (318c) sk NN pr; Sethe, "wenn er herausgeht." m (319b) prj NN irj (?) mct; I follow Sethe's interpretation of 0 as the adjective irj because to my understanding it fits the context very well. On the other hand, I fail to understand the reasoning which leads him to reject the possible interpretation of ir as a preposition; "he comes forth to Maat" would correspond to " (m prt.f ir pt =) when he comes forth (i.e., goes up) to heaven" in Pyr. 464c; cf. Pyr. 1378b, etc. n (319b) int.f sj iw.s hr.f; the reading iw.s of p in this phrase and in Pyr. 323c (see below in this note) is proposed by De Buck and accepted by Sethe; Sethe translates "er bringt sie, indem sie bei ihm (d.h. in seinem Besitze) ist." We are compelled to wonder what the exact meaning of iw.s hr.f can be; it is certainly more significant than Polonius' "have while she is mine." On the other hand, the translation by means of two independent sentences (e.g., "he fetches her, she stays with him") would wrongly disregard the idea of a parenthetical clause which according to Gardiner's analysis107is involved in iw.s hr.f. In my translation I have followed Henry G. Fischer's suggestion that perhaps this construction provides that meaning which in hr ("bring to") alone could not have: "he brings her with him."'08 Formerly'10 I had read and trans106

Bemerkungen

zum

dgyptischen

Pyramidenkult,

p. 195. Grammar, ? 117, obs. Gardiner, The addition of "with him," "mit sich," "iw.? hr.f," to "bringing," "bringen," "int," anyway seems is the difference between these strange to me-what expressions and the simple verbs? Supplementary note: "He takes (something) with him" perhaps is expressed by in.f hn'.fin Urk. I, 137, 2. 109 Before I knew Sethe's reading and commentary of this spell, which had not been accessible to me for some time. I am very glad to have this good opportunity to correct an earlier wrong statement of mine. In Maat des Echnaton, IV, n. 1, I have quoted this phrase Pyr. 319b as possible evidence of an otherwise 107

108

THE ORIGINAL MEANING OF M'c HRW

lated intj.fj sj is ir.f "as he who is going to bring her with him." This conception,however, is not satisfactory,first, because int ir apparently means "to bring something to someone"and neither "to fetch somethingfor one's self" nor "to take somethingwith one's self'; 10 second, the position of is behind intj.fj sj (in Pyr. 323c intj.fj m3ct s) to my

understandingwould point to the conclusion that int m3ctis a fixedconceptionwhichis consideredas a grammaticalunit; for this, however, there does not exist any evidence.l1 For the meaning of int m3ct,"to bring Maat," a short discussion seems to be necessary. This phrase is known to me in only four occurrences."2 In the present context, Pyr. 319, it apparently does not refer to the quality of the king as a judge but is contrasted to fighting and insurrection."13 Maat here seems to have the more comprehensive meaning of "order," "peace." I am inclined to think of the creator god who "put Maat in place of isft" (Pyr. 265 c; cf. 1775 b); rightly, to my present understanding, Frankfortl14 here translates tsft as "Chaos." The same unknown myth in which Geb was the one who was to bring Maat with him (I wrongly translated "sich holte," "fetched," instead of "brachte mit sich," "brought with him"). This statement was based, I am very sorry to say, upon careless interpretation. Certainly this spell does not offer any evidence for the idea that the deceased king was regarded as Geb. Therefore this phrase does not refer to Geb. "OWB, III, 315, s.v. hr C III. 111Supplementary note: Kees in Handbuch der Orientalistik, I, 2, p. 60, translates "als einer der sie

37

meaning of Maat is found in the Abydos Stela of Ramesses IV, line 13 :15 "Since I rose as a king on the throne of Horus I have brought Maat to Egypt there having been none (before)," referring to the well-known idea that the new king newly creates Maat as did the first of the gods. On the other hand, the phrase in question, Pyr. 319 b, is repeated in the second section of the same Utterance 260, Pyr. 323 "(a) Walking in darkness is that which NN abhors; (b) he does not see those who are (living) upside down; (c) NN comes forth today, he brings Maat with him; (d) NN is not delivered to your flame, ye gods." In Sethe's opinion this points to the deceased as being "ein bedrangtes Wesen, das seine Schuldlosigkeit beteuern muss" and thus characterizes the difference between the first and the second section of Utterance 260. I question whether we can assume so different a meaning for the same phrase in Pyr. 319 b and 323 c. Perhaps Sethe's understanding of Pyr. 323 c was influenced by the Book of the Dead, chapter 125, introduction (Pap. Nu, line 7), where the helpless deceased appeals to the divine judge: "Behold, I have come to you, I have brought Maat for (= n) you, I have driven away the wrong (= isft) for you." To my understanding, however, this quotation is one of those examples which show that the original concept of Maat centered in cosmology and kingship was later transferred to that of individual Maat;16 in the Pyramid Texts the same expression would refer to the king, who is right and establishes Maat.

mit sich bringt" (with wrong quotation Pyr. 527 instead of 319, 323). Frankly, I still wonder which interpretation is right. 112Supplementary note: I may quote two other occurrences of In m3ct without discussion, namely, Horus brings Maat to Osiris (Naville, Todtenbuch, 173.5, as quoted by Bleeker, Beteekenis, p. 79) and Thoth brings Maat to Re (N. K.: Christophe in BIFAO, XLIX, 150). CONCLUSION 113The meaning of &nnwis not restricted to "insurOnly through so complete a discussion rection"; WB, III, 383, translates "Storung, Unordnung, Aufruhr, innerer Krieg." Sethe's "Streit" of the first section of Utterance 260 have seems to be somewhat indefinite; it would be assisted, 16Mariette, Abydos, II, 54-55, quoted in WB, II. however, by Pyr. 1144c-d, where, in the very same situation, the gods and spirits "break their quarrels 19, Belegst. 5. ( =mdww)" and "smash their weapons ( =Ch3w)." 116I am, of course, not prepared to discuss this 114 Ancient Egyptian Religion, p. 54. matter here.

38

JOURNAL OF NEAR EASTERN STUDIES

we been enabled to understand the meaning of m]c 6rw.f in Pyr. 316 b with some certainty. Geb, the king of earliest times, is summoned (Pyr. 316 a). The deceased king is accounted one of the four gods; he is acclaimed by them and, in consequence of his deeds, called one who is right (Pyr. 316 b-d), just as he is acclaimed and called right in Utt. 265 and varr. He has proved his rightness on earth as a just judge and as the occupant of the seats of Geb (Pyr. 317). He has come forth (gone up to heaven?) and has been transfigured so that he assumes the right appearance of a living spirit; he ends the troubles and brings peace to, the world (Pyr. 318-319). M3c Ihrwin this text apparently does not refer to any justification in trial. It does refer to the acclamation of the deceased king and his rightness as do Utt. 265 and its variants, though in this spell the legality of his kingship on earth and in heaven117seems to be stressed rather than his reception among the gods. On the other hand, nothing suggests that the voice or any statement of the king himself is to be expected at this occasion.l8 Furthermore, grammatical analysis (see above note e) has led us to the conclusion that the interpretation of m3c Brw.f as "he is called right" is the best if not the only possible in this utterance; this would hold good likewise for Utt. 265 and its variants. PART 3. Pyr. 1042 d in Utterance 486

(P N) This utterance addresses the water which, apparently, was used in the course of the funeral rites (Pyr. 1039), and re117 Sethe in his commentary of Pyr. 316a rightly points to the fact that the heaven is not mentioned in this utterance. Perhaps "he raises himself" and "he comes forth (=goes up)," however, refer to the ascension to heaven. 18

This is discussed above in Part 1, conclusion.

fers to the fact that the deceased king was born in the Nunu ocean before the creation of the world (Pyr. 1040). There follows another version of the earliest origin of the deceased; this is translated and discussed below (Pyr. 1041-1043). The concluding sentences state that the king descends into the water and the earth but that he is raised out of them and takes his seat of a god (Pyr. 1044-1045; this spell is dealt with below in the digression). The section Pyr. 1041-1043 is as follows. TRANSLATION

(1041 a) "The(?) ones is NN, who belongs to that great corporation which was born in primeval age in Heliopolis, (b) (the one of) those that are not seized in behalf of the king (c) nor taken away in behalf of the sr officials, (d) that are not punished,b and that are not called criminals.c (1042 a) This (kind of being) is NN. He is not punished, (b) he is not seized in behalf of the king, (c) he is not taken away in behalf of the sr officials, (d) and the enemies of NN are not called right (m3c Frw; var. N, "and his enemy is not called right [in triumph]d over him); (1043 a) NN is not made poor,e his fingernails are not drawn up(?), (b) no bone is broken in NN." NOTES

a (1041a) NN pw wc n(j) ht tw c3t;Sethe, "einer von jener grossen Korperschaft";in his commentary, however, he stresses the point that wcn (insteadof wcm) probablyhas some specialmeaning.If we acceptthe opinion that a corporationof men is referredto and not a corporationof gods (see digressionand conclusion below), we might translate "the one" stressing the prominenceof the king amongthe other members. b (1041d) itmjw njk; Sethe, "die nicht hingerichtet werden." The more indefinite meaning "bestraft werden" is adopted in WB, II, 205, Belegst. 13. The idea of "killing" might be involved,but there does not seem to

THE ORIGINAL MEANINGOF M3cHRW be any evidence for assuming "executing," "hinrichten." c (1041d) itmjw hbn brw.sn. Sethe in his commentaryto Pyr. 462b (s.v. ibnt,"crime") refers to D6vaud's reading of bbn and his translation, "ceux qui ne sont pas damn6s," in contrastto m3Chrw;consequently,he translates "die nicht schuldig gesprochenwerden" or "die nicht unterliegen im Rechtsstreit" alternatively. Neither D6vaud nor Sethe has proposedany grammaticalexplanationof hbn brw.f. The translation "his voice (or statement) is criminal" would not seem to be plausible.ll9On the otherhand,the translation, "the salute given to him is 'crime,' " he is called criminal," does not present any difficulty either of explanationor of understanding. d (1042d)m3chrw fftj.f ir.f. The meaning of the prepositionr, "(in triumph) over," is treated above in Section I in the discussionof Sm3chrwwith n. 32. e (1043a) sw3 NN. The translationin the passive rather than intransitive (Sethe and WB, "verarmen")is arbitrary;the sentence Pyr. 1043 is thereby understoodto indicate some form of injury. DIGRESSION CONCERNING THE "CORPORATION" MENTIONED IN PYR. 1041a IN UTT. 486

This digression may be justified in that it sheds light on the understanding of m3c hrw. If we presume that Utt. 486 is the product of conscious composition, its arrangement seems to be fairly clear. The rites concern purification with water (Pyr. 1039). This leads to a reference to the conception that the deceased king was born in the Nunu ocean in the primeval age (Pyr. 1040). This theme is taken up once more in the first sentence of the final section: "(Pyr. 1044 a) When NN descends into the water (b) Osiris raises him, the two enneads carry him, (c) Re stretches his arm towards NN (with the purpose of leading him) unto the 119 WB, III, 251, ,bj, VI a reads hbj n brw.f, "wegen seiner Stimme geschmalert werden"; this explaiation was given before Sethe's commentary was written.

39

place where the god is." This descent into the water means purification and at the same time seems to refer to the death of him who is born in the Nunu and vanishes in it like the rising and setting stars. The statement of Pyr. 1040 and its continuation in Pyr. 1044 are paralleled by the statement in Pyr. 1041-1043, which is translated and discussed above, and its continuation in Pyr. 1045, which employs the same wording as Pyr. 1044 with only two alterations: "When NN descends into the earth" (instead of "into the water") and "Geb" (instead of "Osiris"). We would then have in Pyr. 1040-1045 an arrangement which follows the scheme "a-b-a-b," with "a" as the conception of the king being born in the primeval age in the Nunu ocean and thereafter submerged into, and raised out of, the water unto Re, and with "b" as the conception of the king being born in primeval age as the most prominent member of the oldest corporation in Heliopolis and thereafter buried and raised out of the earth unto Re. In this light Pyr. 1045 would mean that the deceased king has left his seat in the corporation and after burial and transfiguration shares the seat of, or is united with, Re. This seems to make good sense. The king, as the god, is the most prominent member of the corporation of Heliopolis throughout eternity from the mythical period on, in a world which knows neither past nor present nor future. Now his temporary body has left the corporation which is an earthly institution, and is reunited with Re as the most promiennt member of the corporation which is the timeless aspect of the earthly one. The conception that the deceased king leaves the corporation seems to be corroborated by Pyr. 1462 c in Utt. 570, "the runner runs out from among you," which is discussed in Part 4.

40

JOURNAL OF NEAR EASTERN STUDIES

It might be considered whether the early status of the deceased in the corporation of Heliopolis and his subsequent departure from it by means of the burial and his ultimate union with the sun-god is likewise alluded to in Pyr. 309 d = 313 f. The context, Utt. 258, 259,120 deals with the fact that the deceased king is saved, as Osiris, from the destruction of his body and promptly ascends to heaven, where he joins (and is united with) Re. The linking passage between the description of his status as Osiris and as Re (with the phrases which join its beginning and its end) runs as follows: "(309 a) His sister the mistress of Buto has bewept him. (b) NN is going to heaven, NN is going to heaven, with the wind, with the wind; (c) he is not hindered, there is none that would hinder him. (d) (n hms(w).f m d3d3t ntr =) he is not (any longer?) seated in the council of the god (e) (but) the hrj-w.f (= he that is upon his 'one'?)121is NN, the eldest of the gods. (310 a) His p3d cake is above with Re, his c3btfood is in the Nunu." The second version Utt. 259 includes the only remarkable change of two lines (Pyr. 313 ef), "the hrj-rd.f (= he that is upon his foot)'22is NN, the eldest of the gods, and NN is not (any longer?) seated in the council of the god." The phrase in question (Pyr. 309 d = 313 f) has been translated by Sethe, though hesitantly and with a question mark in his notes: "Nicht wird eine Sitzung sein um seinetwillen im Gericht des Gottes"; he prefers this translation to the normal one, "er sitzt nicht im Gericht des Gottes," because he takes the meaning as "klar, der Tote braucht nicht das Totengericht zu passieren" and emphasizes that the defendant would not 120

Pyr. 308-311 and 312-315. 121 Sethe suggests some such meaning as "der eine Sonderstellung einnimrnt." 122 Sethe suggests "der auf eignen Flissen steht" or the like.

be seated in a trial. In comparing Sethe's conception, "nicht wird eine Sitzung abgehalten um seinetwillen im Gericht des Gottes," and mine, "he is not (any longer?) seated (as a member) in the council of the god," we may say, first of all, that in either case the introduction of "the d3d3tcouncil (i.e., court) of the god" in the context seems to be surprising. If we accept Sethe's conception, it would be explained, however, as contrasting the newly acquired position of the deceased to that of Osiris, with whom he was identified only in his former status.'23 To my mind, however, the transition from the earthly status into the heavenly one would involve leaving the corporation in Heliopolis, as I understand Utt. 486. This conception may receive some slight support from the circumstance that the two decisive lines in Utt. 258 and 259 possibly contrast the numerousness of the members of the council with the sole "he who is upon his 'one'(?)124 and, still more questionably, "being seated" with "him that stands on his foot."125 The comparison of the "corporation" mentioned in Pyr. 1041 a and Pyr. 1462 d, on the one hand, and "the council of the god" in Pyr. 309d (= 313f), on the other, has shown some similarities. To begin with, there is a transition from earthly to heavenly conditions in both Pyr. 309 (= 313) and 1041; further, there seems to be the mutual idea that the deceased is no longer(?) seated in the council of the god (Pyr. 309 = 313), that his membership in the corporation is terminated with his burial (Pyr. 1041), and that he runs out of the corporation (Pyr. 1462). The question whether or not we may 123 Though Sethe does not speak of the trial to which Osiris was subdued but of the "Totengericht." 124 Pyr. 309d,e; cf., however, Pyr. 1041a (see above, note a) where the "one" belongs to the corporation before he leaves it. 126 Pyr. 313e.f.

THE ORIGINAL MEANINGOFM3c HRW

41

legitimately identify the conceptions of these three passages, however, is not answered with certainty here.126The point of this long digression is to make the following warning. We need not assume that the introduction of the corporation of Heliopolis in Pyr. 1041 a and 1462 d refers to the divine trial, nor can Pyr. 309 d any longer be taken as proof that the idea of judgment of the dead is alluded to in the Pyramid texts.

origin in myth, we are therefore permitted or rather compelled to assume that it is an expression of civilian life in the governmental and social order of earliest Egypt. The parallel of m3c trw with hbn hrw almost certainly excludes the meaning of hrw either as "voice" or as "statement" (see above, note c). The meaning "acclamation" seems more probable than "reputation."

CONCLUSION

(P' P" M) The long Utt. 570 is introduced by reference to the birth of the new god (Pyr. 1443 b) and concluded by that to his appearance in the eastern heaven (Pyr. 1465 d). To my understanding its main sections include an appeal by the king to various gods (Pyr. 1444-1448), his being acknowledged by gods and men, with an allusion to Heliopolis (Pyr. 1449-1452), and his immortality (Pyr. 1453-1458). The succeeding section Pyr. 1459-1464 is introduced by the statement that the king takes the white and the red crown and concluded by the assertion that he is occupant of the seat (stj) of Re. Its middle and main part is translated here and discussed in respect to m3c hrw.

"The great corporation born in primeval age in Heliopolis" is an actual institution of ancient origin, though it is considered as identical with the corporation of Heliopolis which exists in the world of the myths and the gods. The members of this earthly (and mythical) corporation are exempted from the governmental duties and restrictions to which everybody else is bound. In this understanding Ibn hrw and m3chrw point to a procedure in lawsuits in the social order of the Old Kingdom; concerning a member of this corporation the sentence of the judge would always be "he is right, his enemy is criminal." The context, however, might equally well be understood to mean that the members of the corporation were not subjected to trial at all.'27The phrases in question would then mean: whatever happens, they are acknowledged by everybody as right, their enemies as criminals. In this case hrw might mean either the "salute" or "reputation" given a man; if, however, the phrases refer to a trial the meaning "salute" has to be assumed. Though the expression m3c hrw in this utterance refers to the deceased king and to a corporation which had its 126 Pyr. 1462d valuably supports the identification of the "council of the god" and the "corporation"; see below, Part 4, conclusion. 127 Below in Part 4, conclusion, it is shown that this corporation was probably itself the court.

PART 4. Pyr. 1462 d in Utterance 570

TRANSLATION

"(1460 b) The eye of Horus is NN, it has not chewed, it spits out,a (c) he has not chewed, he spits out. (1461 a) Listen to it (namely) the word, 0 Re, which NN says to you; (b) your body (= dt) is in NN, O Re, (you) cause your body to live on NN, 0 Re. (1462 a) The baboons are killed by the knmt beast, (b) the knmt beast is killed by the baboons. (c) O that shtt(j), 0 this man (tj),b the runner runs out from among you twoc (d) that belongd to that first corporation of idrwte (and?) of the acclamation being 'right,'f (1463 a) (the corporation) which was born before there was wrath, (b) which

42

JOURNAL OF NEAR EASTERN STUDIES

was born before there was outcry (= hrw), (c) which was born before there was affront, (d) which was born before there was disturbance, (e) which was born before the eye of Horus was hurt, before the testicles of Seth were damaged." NOTES

a (1460b) The translationfollows P'; both the varr.are: "Theeye of Horusis NN, which chews and spits out; he chews and spits out." Translating in the passive ("it is chewed, etc.") wouldseem to make better sense, but I do not see any way out grammatically. b (1462c) The ideogramsof shtt(j) in P M are listed s.v. shtj, "eunuch(?),"in WB, IV, 264;the spelling[s]httas given in P" erroneously is omitted, however.As for the meaningof shtt(j), we shouldconsiderthe ideogramof the Upper Egyptian itrt first of all, which is common to all three versions; 1j, "man," accordingly might have some specialmeaning.Cf. below, Section III, n. 168. c (1462c)sjn sjn im.tnj n(j)w ht tw tpt nt idrwtnt m3chrw. The first three wordsmight be understooddifferently:"the runnerruns in amongyou," "the runnerruns in the midst of you"; presumablynot "he that is the (quickest) runneramongyou runs." d (1462d) The context is quoted in note c. Var. M. reads n(j) ht tw tpt NN, "NN is one who belongs to that first corporation";this version evidently indicates that the runner mentionedbeforeis NN. e (1462d) idrwt is unintelligiblein every respect.Probablyit is a noun (so WB, I, 155). f (Pyr. 1462d) The context is quoted in note c. m3c hrw depends as a genitive (nt) eitherupon idrwtor, parallelto idrwt,upon ht. Since m3c hrw occurs in the Pyramid Texts neither as the noun and adjective "justified" nor as the noun"justification,"it is preferable to understandit as sdm.f-formin the present context. This grammaticalconclusionvaluably supportsthe ideathat hrwis a pronouncement made by this corporationandnot by the defendantin a trial which is held by the corporation.

CONCLUSION

"That first corporation of idrwt (and?) of the acclamation being right" apparently is the same as "that corporation born in primeval age in Heliopolis" mentioned in Pyr. 1041 a128 and discussed above in Part 3, digression. Such an identification is indicated, first, by the mention of Heliopolis and of Re with the baboons; second, by the birth of the corporation in earliest times and the designation of it as "first"; finally, by the fact that, to my understanding, the deceased king leaves the corporation in both cases.129Though it is not possible to present a clear translation of 1462 d, this phrase evidently shows that the corporation in question is concerned with m3c hrw. This hardly refers to the statement of Pyr. 1041 d and 1042 d that "they are not called criminals and their enemies are not called right." Grammatical analysis, on the other hand, has shown that hrw here is their voice or the acclamation given by them (see above note f). When all is said and done, we are left with the conclusion that it was this corporation which was empowered to give an acclamation that was m3c.Therefore it was the court of trial. This significant feature does not emerge in Pyr. 1041-43. It affords valuable support for the proposed identification of this corporation with "the council (or court) of the god" in Pyr. 309 d = 313 f which is discussed above in Part 3, digression. The verb m3c hrw, "the acclaim is right," in Pyr. 1462 d means the sentence which confirms the rightness of someone in trial; it is proffered by the oldest cor128

Utt.

486.

Further relationship might be found also as follows. Sethe, in introducing his commentary of Utt. refers to Utt. 571 as being closely related to Utt. 486, 468; and Utt. 571 is in tarn closely related to the present Utt. 570, though the relation does not apply to this section Pyr. 1459-1464 in particular. 129

THE ORIGINAL MEANINGOFMc HRW poration of Heliopolis, which is not a mere mythical conception. PART 5. Pyr. 2089 a in Utterance 689 (N)

The initial section of Utt. 689, Pyr. 2087-2089, is clearly understandable in itself as far as m3chrw is concerned; we do not have to bother about the succeeding. TRANSLATION

"(2087 a) Geb has raised the eye of Horus, which is k3, (b) which is on the arms of his great Kas and upon his many Kas; (2088 a) hea gives your head (to you, i.e., the eye) that you may behold Horus. He (i.e., Geb)b has taken his seat .... (b) a lawsuit takes place. (2089 a) Isis comes after she has seized for herself her breasts in behalf of her divine son,c and (thus) he is right by acclaim.d (b) NN has found the eye of Horus." NOTES

a (2088a) A to my understandingis either sdm.f-formwith the suffixomitted,whichcontinues stsnGbin Pyr. 2087a,or part. perf. act. likewisereferringto Geb. b (2088a) irn.f hms (there follows a short lacuna); Schott"30understands"nachdem er mit Seth im Gerichtgesessenhat," with "mit Seth" supplementedin the lacuna and "er" pointing to Horus. The conceptionof being seated in the court, however, points to the judge or the assistants ratherthan to the defendant.131 c (2089a) ndrn.s n.s mndwj.s n s3.s mc

43

originatesfrom the old perfectiveformthough certainly it was consideredas adjective.The translation "right by acclaim" rather than "right in respect to acclaim" probably will not be objectedto. CONCLUSION

In this spell m3chrw means the justification of Horus in the divine trial. If we attempt to picture the situation, it is clear that Isis gives her breast to Horus and by this means effects his justification; and this justification was certainly not the voice or any statement of the child, but it was an acclamation either given in the presence of Gebl33 or perhaps as the sentence pronounced by Geb. PART 6. Pyr. 1327 c in Utterance 539 (P)

Utt. 539 (Pyr. 1303-1327) includes the following sections. Each of the limbs of the deceased king is in order identified with some god or divine being (Pyr. 13031315); it is emphasized that he is a god who is associated with Re in every respect (Pyr. 1316-1321); a threat is pronounced against the gods if they will not help him, and offerings are assured if they will do so (Pyr. 1322-1326). Again and again the phrase "he ascends, NN rises unto heaven" occurs as a refrain throughout the whole length of the utterance. Particularly in the last section this repeated insertion lends a feeling of urgency to the appeal to the gods. This culminates in the concluding sentence of the utterance, which is translated here.

hrw. s8.A, "her divine son" accordingto the determinative. TRANSLATION d (2089a) The wording is given above in note c. Only the interpretationof m3cas old "(1327 a) Every god that will take the perfectivefits the context well;132 moreover,it arm of NN (in order to lead him) unto explainsclearlywhy hrwand not hrw.fis used. heaven, (b) go to him, to the house of I wonder whether or not the apposi'ion m"c 132Only later have I seen that WB, II, 17, Belegst. hrw used so often in later periods likewise 11 understands m'Chrw in this phrase as an adjective 130

Bemerkungen

zum Pyramidenkult,

p. 188.

131 See Pyr. 309d with Sethe's commentary and my discussion above, ad 3) Pyr. 1042d, conclusion; see

further

WB, III,

97, s.v. hmij A V.

-"to her justified son." I should not like to agree with this interpretation, which after all would make the statement quite pointless. In support of my translation I refer to the quotations given in Erman, Grammatik, ? 332.

44

JOURNAL

OF NEAR

Horus which is in the kbhw heaven. The acclamation given to his Ka is right with Geb."a NOTE

a (1327c)m3c1rwk3.fhrGb;hrGbapparently means"in the presenceof Geb." In view of such a context as that of Pyr. 2089,134however, accordingto which Geb himself is perhaps the one who gives the acclamation,we must considerif the same idea could possibly be applied to this phrase. I do not think so. Grammaticallyhr Gb cannot be connected with brw.f (in the sense of an acclamation given by Geb) but only with m3c. M3c is no passive, after which hr would express the agent, but an intransitiveverb. The interpretation of hr Gb as "says Geb" with preceding speechwould not be acceptable. CONCLUSION

Utt. 539 deals with the transfiguration of the deceased king in heaven similarly as do Utt. 265 and its variants.l35Heliopolis is mentioned as in the texts dealt with in Parts 1-4. The contrast is stressed between the deceased's recent connection with Re (Pyr. 1316-1319) and the refuted identification with Osiris: the very existence of the offspring of Nut and Geb is denied (Pyr. 1321); we have met this contrast in Utt. 258 = 259.136The phrase Pyr. 1327 c has almost (with "Geb" in place of "the god") the same wording as Pyr. 361 c;137in both cases the Ka of the deceased is called right, not only the deceased himself. The context of the phrase 1327 c does not mention any trial. In general it pictures the same situation as the texts discussed in Parts 1 and 2. III.

CONCLUSION REGARDING m3c hrw IN THE PYRAMID TEXTS

M"bhrw occurs in the Pyramid Texts only with m3c as a verb: "his hrw is 133

See below, Part 6, conclusion.

134

See above, Part 5. 136 See Part 3, digression.

138See Part 1, notes c and f.

135See Part

1.

EASTERN

STUDIES

right,"138 "the hrw is right,"'39 "he is right by hrw." 40 The question whether the suffix of 6rw in m3c hrw.f or the genitive (which is not used with the genitival adjective) represents the genitivus subjectivus in the sense of "his voice," "his statement," or the genitivus objectivus in the sense of "the acclamation given to him," "his reputation," has been answered as follows. The context more or less certainly points to genitivus objectivus in four quotations141out of six. Grammatical analysis points to the same conclusion in two quotations.142 In two cases143 hrw is used without suffix or genitive; this omission is well understood grammatically. The meaning is the judgment given in a trial, the acclamation given by the court or the judge. On the other hand, none of the quotations indicates that the suffix in hrw.f represents a genitivus subjectivus. The resulting question whether 6Frw.f has to be understood as "the acclamation given to him" or "his reputation" has been answered as follows. Each quotation is better understood by translating "acclamation"; moreover, the meaning "reputation" is excluded when hrw without suffix means acclamation given in a trial.44

Therefore I think we have to accept the meaning of m3chrw.f as "the acclamation given to him is 'right,'" "he is called right," "he is acknowledged as right by means of acclamation"; certainly, however, the translation used hitherto "he is justified" should be retained, though in certain cases "he is acknowledged as 138

Parts

139

Part 4.

140

Part

1, 2, 3, and 6. 5.

1, Utt. 265 and varr. =Part 2, Pyr. 316d = Part 6, Pyr. 1327c, and Part 5, Pyr. 2089a. 142 Part 2, Pyr. 316d, and Part 3, Pyr. 1042d. 143 Part 4, Pyr. 1462d, and Part 5, Pyr. 2089a. 144 Pyr. 1462d and Pyr. 2089a. 141

Part

THE ORIGINAL MEANINGOFM'c HRW right(eous)" might be preferable. On the other hand, it must be conceded that my interpretation of the sections of the Pyramid Texts which have been discussed here certainly does not represent a final explan'ation. Furthermore, I have stressed that the evidence of the meaning of hrw in m]c hrw as "acclamation" even in my understanding is only almost certain, though evidently there is a very high degree of certainty. In spite of these reservations, I do think that if someone insists that the earlier view of "voice" or "statement" is preferable, this would call for a more decisive proof than that which is delivered here. There remain some questions which were raised in earlier discussions ;14 not all

of them shall be fully discussed here. The first would be whether or not hrw with genitivus objectivus is found elsewhere; I will restrict myself to referring to Griffith, who was inclined to assume a special meaning for hrw in mc tFrw.f. Another question would be in what manner the words mc hrw, "justified" and "justification," have to be explained. "Justification" might be assumed in one quotation146where m3Chrw (without suffix) is well understood as sdm.f-form, however. As for "justified," one might wish to find it in one quotation147where, however, the interpretation of m"Chrw (without suffix) as an old perfective. is demanded by the context. Occurrences of m3c trw without genitive or suffix such as these, which are the first ones known to us, perhaps have prompted the development of this expression as a noun and an adjective. This proposal need not be accepted, however; hrw qualifying the preceding old perfective m"c does occur in Pyr. 2089 a and '45 See the references to Griffith, WB, Gardiner, and Breasted in the first and second paragraphs of Sec. I. of this study. 146

Part

4, Pyr.

1462d.

147

Part

5, Pyr.

2089a.

45

might equally well be expected with the infinitive and the adjective. The third question is a double one and important. Are we right in assuming that the expression m3c hrw originated as a legal term and was, as far as the evidence indicates, first applied to Osiris? We have stated it as a legal term in two quotations,148 while no reference to the trial concerning Osiris has been found. A comprehensive examination of these questions, however, is required. The association of m"icJrw with a trial has been found in three out of six quotations in the Pyramid Texts. They have been understood as follows. Quotation 4149 probably refers to the fact that the corporation of Heliopolis which was founded in mythical ages has the quality of a court which is empowered to give an acclamation to him who has proved himself right. In quotation 3150 it is said that the enemies of the members of this corporation are never acclaimed as right while the members themselves are never called criminals. Though this corporation or court of Heliopolis must be regarded as identical with that in which the contests of the gods were decided in the mythical ages, it is evident that these two quotations do not refer to the quarrels of the gods but to the actual institution. On the other hand, however, Quotation 5151does refer to divine trial; the divine court, with Geb as its president, acknowledges Horus by acclamation as the offspring of the gods because Isis has disclosed herself as his mother. This tale of the acknowledgment of a divine child might have originated independently, but it has come down to us only in association with the myth of Osiris and the contest of Horus and Seth. The passage in question 148In Sec. II, Part 3, Pyr. 1042d, and Part 4, Pyr. 1462d. 149

Pyr.

1462d.

150 Pyr.

1042d.

151Pyr.

2089a.

46

JOURNAL

OF NEAR

EASTERN

is, to my knowledge, the earliest evidence for justification by m"chrw in this myth, though Osiris is not mentioned; and it is the sole evidence thereof which is found in the Pyramid Texts. The remaining three Quotations 1, 2, and 6 refer to the deceased king, who is called right (m3chrw.f) when he is transfigured as a god united with Re; in some versions additionally his Ka is called right.152These spells belong to the large group of utterances which concern the transition of the deceased into heaven. I need not go into the fact that they are based on ideas of a celestial world beyond, which are opposed to the complementary conception that the deceased is Osiris. Though they are intermixed with Osirian ideas, these latter are, in general, well distinguished from the original solar version.'53 This intrusion of later ideas has occurred also in our three quotations. In examining it, I may add some occasional154 observations which, I hope, may contribute to a rather certain answer to the question whether or not m3' hrw in these texts refers to Osiris. As for Part 1, to begin with, one observation points to a negative answer. The four most complete versionsl55 among those which are collected here are transmitted in the pyramids of Wenis, Teti, and Pepi I; these are the earliest and show comparatively less Osirian influence than the later ones. Among these four utterances only one alludes to Osiris and that by dismissing him expressly.l56Apparently even the latest versions of the text which are collected in Part 1 are influenced by Osirian ideas to no greater 152See Part 1, note to paragraph C; Part 6. 153 For these questions see Breasted, Development of Religion and Thought in Ancient Egypt, pp. 153 ff. 164 A thorough study of this group of texts is far beyond the limits of the present paper. 155Utt. 263-266 (Pyr. 337-363). 156 Pyr.

350

(T).

STUDIES

degree. Aside from this group there are some ascension texts, however, which are much altered by Osirian influence, but, to my knowledge, even in these cases no allusion to any lawsuit concerning Osiris or the king is apparent, as will be shown below. Among the normal ascension texts of solar character, there is, for instance, a shortened version'57which has a rather human and not celestial tenor-it does not allude to any lawsuit; and in the long narration of Utt. 273158even the question of the spirits, "How has it come to pass for you that you have reached this place?" is not answered by any reference to a trial. The phrase m"chrw.f occurs in Part 159 in Paragraphs C, F, and H: in three versions of C, which concludes the ferry passage; in two versions of F, which concludes the appeal to the Four and the announcement to Re and Nhb-k'w; and in one version of H, which concludes the final act of being seated among the stars. In other texts, the ferryman is assured that "NN is right in heaven and on earth and on this island of the earth";160 or "Those four gods that are upon the Knst lake prepare The-being-right-of-NN for(?) his father Geb, prepare The-being-rightof-NN for (?) Re, and there are neither limits nor boundaries of him" ;161 or "The followers of Horus purify NN, they wipe him dry (? Asw), they recite the spell of 'being right' in behalf of NN, they recite the spell of 'ascending' in behalf of NN."162 157 Pyr. 1092-1093. 158 Pyr. 926-938; it includes

two of the versions discussed in Part 1. 159See the cross-index on p. 32. 160 Pyr. 1188c-d. The preposition hr is translated here variously "in" and "on." Supplementary note: I should now translate "(as) the one who is right with heaven and with earth is NN, (so) the one who is right with this island of the earth is NN." 161 ~Ir.gn

m3'w NN

n it.f Gb, etc.,

Pyr.

1142;

as for

m3'w see the following note. 162

'Ir.n

r3 n m"?w (and prw) n NN,

Pyr. 921. The

word m3'w, which is translated here as "being right," has been interpreted by Sethe as "being on the right

47

THE ORIGINAL MEANING OF M3' HRW

"Being right" as expressed in these three phrases refers to the rightness (Maat) of the king as does m3chrw according to our translation as "he is called right." These occurrences as well as those of Part 1 therefore point to the conclusion that the rightness of the king has been stated'63 before he is announced to Re and even before he starts his voyage to heaven. Consequently, the announcement of the deceased which is made to Re by the messengers'64 might well include a message concerning his rightness, which was presumably stated on earth; the following passage perhaps represents this communication: "'The son of Khnum (i.e., the purified one?) is NN; there is no wrong which NN has done'-this word has been passed before you (? dr hr.k), 0 Re; the bull of the Ennead hears it."165 This virtually excludes the conception that a divine trial presided over by Re or Geb would judge the deceased either after his arrival in heaven or even before he leaves earth. In conclusion, we do not have any reason to assume that, in the texts of Part 1, the expression m3chrw refers to a statement given after the king's death, to the sentence of a divine trial, for instance, to which the deceased king would be subjected. It now remains to be considered whether or not Osirian influence later applied the idea of the divine trial to m3c

hrw; I said earlier that, to my knowledge, this is not apparent in the texts, but possibly there might be some allusion. The goal of the king's ascension to heaven166is indicated as the transformation into one of the immortal stars. In two versions of Part 1 are added, however, supplementary indications: "He judges the case as a god after he has heard the case as a sr official'167and: "You sit between them (scil. Sothis and the morning star) on the great seat which is beside the two Enneads.""16 These ideas are expressed in similar terms in another spell concerning the ascension: "There come to him the gods bowing down; the two great gods are wakeful on their sides; they find him among the two Enneads while he judges a case; 'this sr official, every sr official,' so they call him."'69The idea of the deceased king's final activity as the supreme judge is expressly stated also in Part 2: "He terminates the case in Heliopolis"'70and in another short description of his crossing to the tirw field accompanied by the four spirits: "He finds the two Enneads; they stretch out their arms to him; he is seated between them in order to judge a case.""' This human mode of the king's entering the world of the stars is further expressed in a number of spells concerning the ascension, which are some166 167

way (unto)"; likewise in Pyr. 1142, as quoted in the preceding note. This may be the special meaning in this context; anyhow I prefer to consider the verb m3', including its nominal form m3'w, as one word with the dual meaning "being right" and "being on the right way" and do not wish to single out either one of these meanings here. 163 The activities of the four gods on the Knst lake and of the Followers of Horus, which were quoted above in nn. 161 and 162, certainly are of some inferior character. 164 In addition to paragraph E in Part 1 may also be quoted Pyr. 1532, 1540, 1991b, and 1862. 165 Pyr. 1238; cf. further the ostrich feather in the hands of the messengers in Pyr. 1861b, as discussed in Sec. II, n. 94.

Part

1, paragraphs Pyr. 347b.

G, H.

168 Pyr. 1707 b-c. Supplementary note: As for the two Enneads between whom the judge is seated (see also nn. 169, 171, 172, e.g.) and the two itrt houses (see nn. 174, 175, e.g.), I should like to refer to ihtt(j) and t3j (Pyr. 1462 c; see Sec. II, Part 4, b) according to the conclusions which are made in Sec. II, Parts 4 and 5; these latter designations perhaps allude to the earthly counterpart of the two Enneads and the earthly itrtj. 169

Pyr.

1126-1127.

Pyr. 318b. The examination of Pyr. 317 has not permitted us to assume that the judgment which is dealt with in this section refers likewise to the judgment after death, though the preceding salutation and the succeeding mention of the seats of Geb would easily lead us to that conclusion. 170

171

Pyr.

1093.

48

JOURNALOF NEAR EASTERNSTUDIES

times172mixed with Osirian ideas. When the voyage to heaven is ended, the deceased is seated on the great seat173or in the two itrt houses of the horizon;'74 he stands in the two itrt houses of the horizon either, perhaps, as a god listening to the fraternizing of Re175or as one who is going to be "seated on the throne of your father Geb in the (Upper Egyptian) Ztrt house."'76 According to another version the deceased when announced to Re is at (or goes to) "that remote palace of the lord of the Kas," with a variant in the latest copy (N) which perhaps means "that palace of Horus of the lords of the Kas."177 Both of the latter quotations, "the seat of Geb" and "the palace of Horus(?)," must be discussed in regard to Parts 2 and 6. Geb has been named twice in the preceding discussion, in both cases as the deceased's father.178 These random quotations seem to show that he was introduced only later-with Osirian influence 172 Osirian influence is easily recognizable in the context of Pyr. 1541, 1862, 1992, 598, which are quoted below in notes 174-177. 173 Pyr. 1101d with the addition "among the gods"; Pyr. 391c "beside the great god." 174 Pyr. 1541b; Pyr. 938 "in (? m bnt) the great (Upper Egyptian) itrt house," and without addition of the horizon. As to the two itrt houses cf. Supplementary note 168. 175 Pyr. 1862b-1863a; to my understanding, the appeal to the deceased is interrupted by the communication of the messengers which is addressed to Re, and is continued as follows "'he (the deceased) stands in the two itrt houses of the horizon.' You (the deceased) shall listen to the word of Re as a god, as Horus m mit: 'I am your brother as Sopdu.' " We need not conclude, however, that this listening takes place when he stands in the itrt houses. 176 Pyr.

1992a-c; "your father Geb" indicates the king as Osiris; the parallel phrase 1996b replaces "the seat of Geb" by "the seat of Khentamenty." 177 Pyr. 598 T iw i r T. ir 'C pf] hr(j) n nbw k3w; PN begin with iw.f (="he is") ir Ch;P omits hr(j). 2N perhaps determines "that remote palace" rather than hr meaning Horus. The text is continued "(dw3w

RC im =) in which

Re is served

by

in the morn-

ing" without allusion to any activity of the deceased as a judge. 178 Pyr. 1142, see n. 161; Pyr. 1992, see n. 176.

-into the description of the deceased's ascension to heaven and his being seated among the gods. The same conclusion is borne out in Quot. 2 and 6.179Quotation 2 is an announcement to Geb, made by the priests, concerning the king as Horus, son of Osiris; it refers to the eye of the transfigured king, making use of the phrase which otherwise is applied to the eye of Horus;s80and the idea of the underworld, i.e., the kingdom of Osiris, is rejected.l8' Osiris is still more sharply rejected in Quot. 6,182and there the word "the god"

is replaced by "Geb" in the expression "his Ka is called right with Geb."183 Although in both quotations the status of the deceased in heaven is contrasted to that of Osiris,184Geb is introduced; and the deceased's status as Horus the son of Osiris is acknowledged in Quot. 2.'85 In spite of such acknowledgment, no attempt is made to introduce the conception of Osiris in the ascension texts by means of a slight change of the phrases concerning mc: hrw. I should be inclined to conclude that the idea of m3chrw was more closely connected with the transfiguration of the king than with Osiris. There is, however, another parallel, that between the acknowledgment before Geb of the rightness of the youthful god (which does not have to be regarded as primarily connected with the case of Osiris) and the same acknowledgment concerning the new god who has entered the heaven.'86 179 Utt. 260 (Pyr. 316-323) 1303-1327). 180 Pyr. 181

and Utt. 539 (Pyr.

320; cf. Pyr. 301c.

Pyr. 323, which is dealt with in Part 2, note n. 182 Pyr. 1321; see Part 6, conclusion. 183 Pyr. 1327c in contrast to Pyr. 361c. The placing of Re and Geb side by side in Pyr. 1142 (see n. 161) is the result of the same development. 184 This is more expressly contrasted in Utt. 258 =259; see Sec. II, Part 3, digression. 185Acknowledgment of Osiris might also be found in the listing of the members of the deceased in Quot. 6, Pyr. 1303-1315. 186 See Sec. II, Parts 5 and 6.

49

MEANINGOFM3c HRW THE ORIGINAL This comparison might be slightly alluded to by the expression "the house of Horus." "The house of Horus" (ht Hr) is introduced in Quotation 6, where the gods are summoned as follows: "Go to him (scil. the deceased), to the house of Horus which is in the kbhwheaven; the acclamation given to his Ka is 'right' with Geb."187 In another spell the gods are summoned to take the deceased with them, very similarly to the promises and threats which are found in Quot. 6; the gods who take him with them shall receive their offerings and "go forth to the house of Horus which is in heaven (pt)"; and they who will not do so shall not receive offerings and "will not go forth to the house of Horus which is in heaven on the day when one hears the case..." (very unfortunately, the succeeding words are destroyed).'88 This "house of Horus" therefore is the goal of the gods and, at the same time, of the deceased. Being the goal of the deceased king, it cannot be connected with a trial concerning him as a defendant but is the place where he presides over the court and hears and gives orders;189probably the house of Horus is the same as "the remote palace" or "palace of Horus"'90and almost certainly the same as 187 188

Pyr.

1327 b-c.

Pyr. 1026-1027 in Utt. 485. 189 Cf. too Pyr. 1189 e-f (M N, with interesting variants of 1189 e in P), "on the day when they call you to the hearing and the commanding of a case" in an appeal to the ferryman(?). "Hearing" and "commanding" a case similarly also in Pyr. 317a-b; see Sec. II, Part 2. 190Pyr. 598a; see above, n. 177. It may be mentioned that in a similar context the desire of the gods is not to go forth to the house of Horus but to sail to the morning and evening meal at Heliopolis (Pyr. 978d-e). In Utt. 303, which is closely connected with the ascension texts in question, the deceased as the son of Osiris is called "the eldest son of Hathor" (Pyr. 466a). The idea seems attractive to trace the lineage back from this goddess Hathor via the house of Horus, the itrtj houses, and the two Enneads to the sycamore as the meeting place of the Ennead (Pyr. 916b; cf. 1433b, the mention of the two sycamores), and, on the other hand, the corresponding institutions of Heliopolis and Memphis,

the itrtj houses of the horizon.191The introduction of the "house of Horus" in the conception of the deceased king's ascension to heaven certainly does not refer to the trial imposed on Osiris; if it represents any mythological idea which does not genuinely belong to heaven, it would lead us to Horus rather than to Osiris. When the king ascends to heaven in order to take his seat among the gods, he is "acclaimed as 'right.' "This is not done in consequence of his assimilation to Osiris but on his own account. He is "acclaimed as 'right'" at the very beginning of his voyage, and there is no opportunity between his setting out and his arrival for a formal pronouncement such as might be given in a divine court. If we understand m3c hrw as a formal pronouncement,l92 therefore, we must conclude that it was made in his lifetime on earth and is only reported or repeated by the celestial beings or the reciting priest or the deceased himself.93 In conclusion we may summarize the result of this study as follows. First, the Pyramid Texts do not evidence the conception that a blanket acquital of the deceased king was called for in a divine trial; it is stressed that there is none who accuses him; this statement presumably means that he is not subjected to any 191See above, n. 174, the reference to the Upper Egyptian itrt. 192 This interpretation seems necessary in view of its character as a legal term in Heliopolis, which is referred to in the following paragraph. 193 I think it is useful to say that, in preparing this paragraph, I first felt unable to accept this conclusion because

of the

phrase

"(imr.f

m3c hrw.f

m irtn.f=)

he wishes to be called right by means of what he has done" (Part 2, Pyr. 316d); this seemed to express the desire to be called right and thereby to contradict the above conclusion. I did not then think of the exact interpretation of this phrase, which I had prepared from the lexicographical point of view weeks before, the paraphrase in Part 2, note e: "He wishes that it be his good deeds which bring about that the acclaim given to him does (not) mean (crime but) rightness"; the wish is not for the acclaim as such but is directed to the grounds for his being acknowledged right.

50

OFNEAREASTERNSTUDIES JOURNAL

lawsuit instigated by adversaries but possesses an immunity which his subordinates do not enjoy.194 Second, the expression mc hrw.f in the Pyramid Texts almost certainly'95 means "the acclaim given to him is 'right' "; this interpretation supports the assumption that the religious idea of individual Maat in the Old Kingdom primarily involves social values. Third, the expression m3chrw.f, according to the Pyramid Texts, is connected with the corporation of Heliopolis in a twofold respect: probably this corporation as a court is empowered to pronounce the acclaim of rightness (m"Chrw.f) and its opposite, the verdict of crime (hbn hrw.f); certainly the enemies of the members of this court are never called "right." Fourth, to our understanding'96this court of Heliopolis belongs to the world of men as well as to the timeless world of the gods; this latter characteristic is expressed by the reference to its origin in mythical times; the king as god is its most prominent member from the very beginning, though in bodily form he leaves it as an earthly institution when he dies and is united either with Re or takes the seat of Geb. Finally, the expression m]c hrw.f in the Pyramid Texts, on the one hand, is applied to the deceased king when he is transfigured; they who praise him relate the fact that he is acclaimed as right or (in their quality of the celestial counterpart of the court of Heliopolis) repeat this acclamation; this idea is certainly not influenced by a reminiscence of the justified Osiris. On the other hand, this expression is applied to the youthful god Horus when his mother Isis has testified to his divine descent before the court of the gods, which 194 This is shown in Sec. I, n. 11; cf. Sec. II, Quot. 3, according to which all the members of the court of Heliopolis would enjoy this immunity. 195Supposing my interpretation of the texts is right. 196See Sec. II, Part 3, digression.

is nothing else than the court of Heliopolis. These results may lead us to the following further conclusions. Presumably the court of Heliopolis alone was empowered to affirm the rightness (Maat) of an individual by acclaim (hrw). This sentence would be pronounced, on the one hand, in a lawsuit, in contrast to the verdict of crime, and, on the other hand, as the statement of the divine rightness of the earthly king. The case of Horus, son of Isis, would exemplify both: the sentence given in a lawsuit and the acknowledgment of divinity . .'. . The evidence of the Pyramid Texts suggests that it was the acclaim given to the king rather than that to Osiris which initiated the later custom of applying the adjective m3chrw to every deceased person, though presumably'98 it was now felt to be first applied to Osiris. POSTSCRIPT Sincefinishingthe manuscriptof this paper I have studied m3ct,mc, and m3chrw in the OldKingdomforoneyear.I maysay that, in my understanding,none of the conclusionswhich are made above have been contradicted,while some of them have been corroborated;Some minorpointsnow have beenaddedin the form of supplementarynotes to the manuscript, which has not been changed except in the wordingof two small comments.Two major pointsshouldbe madeherebecausethey altera certain preassumptionwhich is expressedin SectionI and at the end of Section III. 197 Supplementary note: Two statements concerning Osiris have here been omitted from the original text of this article; see the Postscript. 198 Bleeker, Beteekenis, p. 75 (cf. above, n. 19), stresses that in m3' hrw the idea of the trial is by no means always paramount; he says that, in many cases, there is "de verbinding met het gericht op den achtergrond getreden en duidt m3' hrw den bezitter van overwinningskracht aan." If this statement is generally supported by the later mortuary texts, we may conclude that even then the Egyptian theologians well knew that m3' brw primarily did not refer only to the sentence given in the court but no less to the king's entering heaven as a right, powerful, and triumphant god,

51

THE ORIGINALMEANING OF M3' HRW There is, to my knowledge, no primary connection between Osiris and m3ct, mC hrw recognizable, though very much so between m3ct and the king, Horus, certain gods, and justice. This statement can hardly be refuted by reference to Pyr. 1520a, 1556a, and Capart, Rue de Tombeaux, P1. XI. The few occurrences of mz3chrw in the Old Kingdom which are known to me are as follows: Borchardt, Sahu-Re, II, Bl. 11 (the fragment of an inscription concerning the salute given the king by his followers); Urk. I, 46. 10 (a salute given the dead by a justice);Brit. Mus. Hierogl. Texts, I, 30=VI, 1 (inscription of a justice, in which the dead are called m3hwj m3cw irw); Urk. I, 293.16; 294.11 (a statue of Pepi II is called m3c hrw); ASAE XL (1940), 682, Fig. 73; 691, Fig. 77 (mc hrw

hr ntr c' refers to the tomb owner); the personal names (m.) Pth-mc-hrw; (m.) m3c-hrw; (f.) m3c(t)-hrw-j.This enumeration may be a useful addition to this paper; on the other hand, I should appreciate any communication of other occurrences, which certainly exist. We should, as I think, conclude that the apposition mc hrw was applied to Osiris only secondarily; this was perhaps in consequence of the identification of the deceased with Osiris after the Old Kingdom. This opinion seems to be corroborated by the Coffin Texts;199 according to them, it is apparently first Horus, second the deceased, and only third Osiris, who is m3c irw. UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA 199I am speaking of those which are published in De Buck, Coffin Texts, Vol. I.

A NOTE ON THE BAR KOKEBA LETTER FROM MURABBAcAT

THE early dating of the letter presumably written by Simeon bar Kokeba (ben Koseba), published by Pere Milik in Revue biblique, April 1953, has been challenged by Professor Solomon Zeitlin in the Jewish Quarterly Review, XLIV (October 1953), 85-115. The point on which Zeitlin lays most stress is the beginning of the letter, "From Simeon ben Koseba" (mis-simecon ben koseba). Zeitlin argues that there is no instance of a letter written in Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, or Latin during the last three centuries B.C. or the first two centuries A.D. beginning with the preposition "from" and the writer's name. He insists that this fact shows the letter of Simeon ben Koseba to be medieval. Here are a few examples of Greek letters written before the end of the second century A.D. and using the formula "from N.," if not at the very beginning, at least after the name of the recipient. They are taken from the collec-

tion of papyri edited by Hunt and Edgar in the "Loeb Classics." Pap. Tebt. 776, early second century B.c.: IIToXeAalcIt OIKOKVO'bICL 7rappa evy7o'aws.

Pap. Amherst 35, 132 B.C.: TA TrpCwTroV 'ATrokXXov Lrv pl\ov .. 7r.apa 7Tcv

lepe(w

KTX.

Pap. Tebt. 39, 114 B.C.: MeYXEZ KwLuo'ypa,juiare KEpKEoo'lpcw -rap' 'A 7roXXow&pov. Pap. Rein. 18, 108 B.C.: 'ATKXrT7rLadelL

o-vyyeve

Kal

oarparr^yyw

7rap&ALOVpoolov.

Pap. Grau 2, 55-59 A.D.: TtLepLwL KXavCiwt BaX3IXXC. w 7rapa NE/ea?lwoos.

One could multiply this list at least ten times. RALPH MARCUS UNIVERSITYOF CHICAGO