- srḫ: occurs once in this text, twice in the texts on the Munich statue, and in the parallel passage on the base of the naophorous statue of Bakenkhons’ predecessor, Paser: jnk tr nṯr=f sꜥꜣ srḫ=f (CGC 42156; KRI III 293, 6). In the later transmission of this formula, on the block statue of Roma-Roy and in Amenhotep’s inscription on a jamb in Karnak, the word is normalised to sḫr(w), ‘plan(s), counsel’ (Roma-Roy: KRI IV, 131, 14; Amenhotep: KRI V, 541, 15). Plantikow-Münster cites the Wörterbuch’s rendering ‘Ruhm’ (IV, 200, 1) but the only references given are the two statues of Bakenkhons. She concludes (Plantikoq-Münster, in: ZÄS 95, 1969, 124) that srḫ is a miswriting for sḫr and renders ‘Ratschluß’. However, the salience of the different orthographies is indicated by Assmann (Egyptian solar religion in the New Kingdom: Re, Amun and the crisis of polytheism [Translated by A. Alcock], London / New York 1995, 131, n. 180) in his discussion of the hymns in the tomb of the High Priest Nebwenenef. In an unpublished text from this tomb Nebwenenef refers to himself as ‘a knowledgeable one, who respects god, a leader in magnifying his renown (srḫw)’. Assmann translates srḫw as ‘commands’, a causative of rḫ, ‘to know’ and interprets the formula as part of Nebwenenef’s claim to theological knowledge. I am in agreement with Assmann that the word srḫ must have an alternative nuance and I have acknowledged this in my translation. As noted by Elsa Rickal (Les épithètes dans les autobiographies du Nouvel Empire, PhD Thesis, Paris IV-Sorbonne, 2005, I, 64), these phrases are modelled on ancient forms.

كاتب التعليق: Elizabeth Frood

nṯr=f: Lesung nach DZA 50.138.170 (Sethe). Legrain und Kitchen notieren nur das Determinativ von nṯr und lassen das Suffixpronomen weg. Kitchen, KRI III, 296, Anm. 16a schlägt die Ergänzung von nṯr vor, die also durch die Abschrift von Sethe bestätigt wird.

كاتب التعليق: Peter Dils؛ مع مساهمات من قبل: Elizabeth Frood ؛ تم إنشاء ملف البيانات: ٢٠٢٢/١١/١٦، آخر مراجعة: ٢٠٢٢/١١/١٦

- mtj mꜣꜥ: Legrain (S. 23) und Kitchen (KRI III, 296.16) haben 3 x D50 oder T14 bei mtj, bei Sethe (DZA 50.138.170) sind es 2 x D50 oder T14. Auf dem Foto bei M. Saleh (1999) hat man den Eindruck, dass es tatsächlich drei senkrechte Elemente gibt. Das dritte müsste dann eigentlich für eine senkrecht gestellte Buchrolle Y1 stehen.

كاتب التعليق: Peter Dils