DOCSLIB.ORG

DIALECT P (OR PROTO-THEBAN). the Siglum for This Dialect, P, Comes from a Coptic Biblical Book of Proverbs in the Form of a Late-Third-Century Parchment Codex, P

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
DIALECT P (OR PROTO-THEBAN). the Siglum for This Dialect, P, Comes from a Coptic Biblical Book of Proverbs in the Form of a Late-Third-Century Parchment Codex, P (CE:A82a-A87b) DIALECT P (OR PROTO-THEBAN). The siglum for this dialect, P, comes from a Coptic biblical book of Proverbs in the form of a late-third-century parchment codex, P. Bodmer VI, the only existing document written in the dialect (Kasser, 1960). Its orthography exhibits phonological characteristics that allow one to consider it a PROTODIALECT. In brief though more precise terms, one could think of it as a proto-Theban that often resembles what can be known about a hypothetical proto-Sahidic, tentatively reconstructed (possibly a proto-Sahidic immigrant in the Theban region; cf. DIALECT, IMMIGRANT). Alphabet of P Even if it is of secondary importance to the study of dialects, it is worthwhile to examine the rather original alphabet used in P, which looks like the Old Coptic alphabets (see ALPHABETS, OLD COPTIC) and is incontestably the richest among the various Coptic alphabetic systems (many of the Coptic dialects and subdialects having their own varieties of the Coptic alphabet; see ALPHABETS, COPTIC and Kasser, 1980, pp. 280—81). Its thirty- five graphemes include three kinds of signs: (1) all twenty-four letters of the Greek alphabet, as in all Coptic dialects except H; (2) a ligature of Greek origin, /c /, in autochthonous Coptic words such as P n = S n[i,the proleptic particle, and P = S [e, therefore; this interesting grapheme perhaps possesses the same phonological value in the Copto-Greek vocabulary, where it how- ever may be also /kai/, /kaj/, or possibly even /ke/ or /k / (apparently the case also in various Greek and Coptic documentary texts where it occasionally appears, always optionally); and (3) no less than ten graphemes that originated in demotic. (In contrast, Bohairic has but seven demotic characters and Sahidic only six.) The simplest way to describe the alphabet of P is to compare it with the alphabet of Sahidic (S). Many graphemes of demotic origin that belong properly to P obviously represent phonemes that S also possesses but expresses by other combined or single characters. For instance, /k/ in S is k, whereas for P it is , a grapheme observed in two Old Coptic texts (Kasser, 1980, p. 259). However, /c/ in S is [, while in P /c/ is k, for, as with virtually all Old Coptic texts, P refrains from using [ (Kasser, 1980, p. 258). Further, the two following signs of P no longer appear in P. Bodmer VI, except vestigially, being progressively forced out of usage by newer graphemic usages, in particular those of S. First, in a primitive state of evolution, P writes the sonant / / as -‘ like some Old Coptic texts (Kasser, 1963). Then it starts to write it as n, as in classical S later on. Also, in its primitive mode P appears to render graphically the tonic vowel as geminate (Kasser, 1985) and writes the voiceless laryngeal occlusive, aleph /’/, as . It probably derives from a combination of both similar demotic signs for 3 and i (du Bourguet, 1976, p. 3). Next, adopting the newer graphemic usages that will be those of S etc., P no longer geminates stressed vowels as such, but rather the tonic vowel is geminated when followed by aleph. For instance, for /tapr /, meaning “mouth,” the primitive P has taproo, while the logically secondary P and S have tapro; for / ’f/, meaning “to say it,” the primitive P has jo f, whereas the secondary P and S have joof. Other graphemes peculiar to P, however, constitute the written form of phonemes no longer in more evolved Coptic (S and most Coptic dialects). Therefore, in its usage of q /x/, P comes into line with B etc., so P and B are graphemically opposed to A and where /x/ is |, but P, B, A, and (and the small subdialects J with |, and B7 and G with ,) are phonologically opposed to all the rest of the Coptic languages, dialects, and subdialects, where /x/ disappeared previously and no longer exists at all. But above all, in still using /ç/ (a sign found inverted in many Old Coptic texts; Kasser, 1980, pp. 258—60), P is phonologically opposed to all Coptic dialects and subdialects (except = pL, also a protodialect, where however /ç/ is ). As for , the graphemic combination j is still seen in the final position after the tonic vowel: mouj , mix; nouj , sprinkle; pwj , beat flat. This combination j could render a palatalized affricate / 2/ or / / corresponding to /tç/ as / / corresponds to /t /, rather than / ç/. In those three lexemes, the other Coptic dialects have, as the case arises (see below), -j[ in S and sometimes A; -jk in S; -jt in S, L, and sometimes A and B; -j| in A; -jq in B; or simply -j in S. This forms a range of possible phonemic combinations so open and diverse that the interpretation of P -j is scarcely made any easier. Phonological and Morphological Peculiarities As far as dialectology is concerned, the alphabet is d decisive indicator only insofar as its graphemes are able to reveal the nature of its phonemes. Thus, it is the phonology of P that enables one to see it as a type of protodialect often identical with a reconstructed proto-Sahidic. On this subject, it should be noted that nothing in the consonant system of P is incompatible with that of S (which is common, moreover, to many Coptic dialects, namely, those most neutralized in this respect, basically L, M, W, and V). A comparison of the consonant system of P with that of S is given below. As regards vocalization, it is undoubtedly advisable assign a preeminent importance to stressed vowels, which manifest most of the characteristics that allow one to distinguish between Coptic dialects or subdialects. One discovers that the vocabulary of P agrees thus in 97 percent of the cases with that of S. Nearly half of the remaining cases (P nak, large; rin, name; ou@, one (masc.); oua@, rush; a m=, quench; qrau, voice; and eban, wrath; cf. B mbon, in Vycichl, 1983, p. 108b) can eventually be explained by etymology and the archaic state of the language rather than by the influence of other Coptic dialects, particularly from the south, such as L or A. (It will also be noted that the stressed-vowel agreement of P with A and L, when they are completely in accord, or with any special variety of L is only between 59 percent and 63 percent.) In the remaining 1.5 percent of cases, the orthography of P, while distant from that of S, coincides with some other Coptic dialect (from Lower or Middle Egypt as well as Upper Egypt and thus having no particularly marked affinity with L or A). In class i, P always writes the stressed / / before final /j/ (first person singular pronoun suffix or any other element). Thus, P nmm/@, with me, corresponds to nmm/ei in L5 and L6; nem/@ in L4, F5, F56, and B; nemeei in A; neme@ in M and F4; and nmma@ in S. n/@, to me, in P, L4, W, V, F5, F56, F4, (F7), and B corresponds to n/ei in L5, L6, and F7; ne@ in M, F4, and F46; neei in A; and na@ in S. Also /j/ (not always final): for example, a@/(/)@te in P; a@e@ and a(e)ieu(te), etc., in A; a@eute in A and L4; aeieu in L6; a@eei in M; a@e@ in F, a@a@ in S and B all mean “to grow.” as/(e)ite in P; aseeite in A; ase@(te) in A and L4; aseei(te) in L6; aseei in L5; ase@ in M, V, and F; and ase@ in S and B all mean “to multiply.” m/ein in P; m/@n in W and F; m/@ni in B; me(e)ine in A; me@ne in L4; meein in M; and maein in L5, L6, and S all mean “sign.” c/ein in P; c/@n in F; c/@ni in B; ce(e)ine in A; ce@ne in L4; and ceein in M caein in L6 and S all mean “doctor, physician.” ouj/(e)ite in P; oujeei in A, L6, and L5; ouje@(te) in A and L4; oujeei(te) in L6; ouje@ in M and F; ouja@ in S and B all mean “to be healed, saved.” hr/@ in P, A, L, M, W, V, and B; hl/@ in F; and hra@ in S all mean “upper part.” qr/@ in P and B; |r/@ in A; hr/@ in L, M, W, and V; hl/@ F; and hra@ in S all mean “lower part.” In this category alone, one finds that P reaffirms its originality. If one summarizes its points of contact with other Coptic dialects in the previous narrow category, one finds that its most pronounced affinities are with B, then with F, then with L, then with A and M, with S definitely coming last. Some interesting observations can be made with unstressed vowels. -e is generally the unstressed vowel in P, as it is in S, but sometimes it is -a where the corresponding Egyptian word has a final ‘ayin: for example, P m/sa, S m//se, crowd; P masta, S maaje, ear; P t/ba, S t//be, finger; and P kooma†, S [oome†, twisted, crooked, perverse, vicious. On the one hand, it would be permissible to consider this differentiated vocalization as an archaism typical of P when compared to the more neutralized S. On the other hand, one finds that the dialectal regions of Egypt where this phenomenon is manifest are precisely Lower Middle Egypt and Lower Egypt.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Jssea 42 (2015-2016) 71
    Demotic and Hieratic Scholia in Funerary Papyri and their Implications for the Manufacturing Process1 Foy Scalf Abstract: Many ancient Egyptian papyrus manuscripts inscribed with funerary compositions contain annotations within the text and margins. Some of these annotations relate directly to the production process for illustrating and inscribing the manuscripts by providing instructions for scribes and artists. Two overlooked examples, pKhaemhor (MMA 25.3.212) and pRyerson (OIM E9787), allow for new interpretations of parallel texts previously considered as labels or captions. An analysis of the corpus of scholia and marginalia demonstrates specific manufacturing proclivities for selective groups of texts, while simultaneously revealing a wide variety of possible construction sequences and techniques in others. Résumé: Plusieurs manuscrits anciens de papyrus égyptiens sur lesquels sont inscrites des compositions funéraires contiennent des annotations dans le texte et dans les marges. Certaines de ces annotations sont directement liées au processus de production relatif à l’illustration et à l’inscription des manuscrits en donnant des instructions destinées aux scribes et aux artistes. Deux exemples négligés, le pKhaemhor (MMA 25.3.212) et le pRyerson (OIM E9787), permettent de nouvelles interprétations de textes parallèles précédemment considérés comme des étiquettes ou des légendes. Une analyse du corpus des scholia et marginalia démontre des tendances de fabrication spécifiques pour des groupes particuliers de textes, tout en révélant simultanément une grande variété de séquences et de techniques de construction dans d'autres cas. Keywords: Book of the Dead – Funerary Papyri – Scholia – Marginalia – Hieratic – Demotic Mots-clés: Livre des Morts – Papyrus funéraire – Scholia – Marginalia – hiératique – démotique The production of illustrated funerary papyri in ancient Egypt was a complex and expensive process that often involved the efforts of a team of skilled scribes and artisans.
    [Show full text]
  • A Very Brief Introduction to Hieratic
    A Very Brief Introduction to Hieratic Joshua Aaron ROBERSON rev 1.0 (Spring 2018) Contents About this document .................................................................................................. 3 General references ..................................................................................................... 4 §1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 5 §2 Basic Strategies: Context. Mono-literals, Determinatives, and Logograms. Gestalt ... 6 §3 Abbreviated signs. Common bi- and tri-literal signs ................................................ 9 §4 Dissimilar Hieroglyphic signs with similar Hieratic forms ........................................ 12 §5 Similar Hieroglyphic signs with dissimilar Hieratic forms ........................................ 13 §6 Signs with reduced iconicity .................................................................................. 13 §7 Ligatures ............................................................................................................... 14 §8 Regnal dates ......................................................................................................... 15 §9 Numbers ............................................................................................................... 16 ROBERSON, Introduction to Hieratic. - 2 - About this document The present, short Introduction was designed as an overview of the basic principles of the Hieratic script, in conjunction with a representative
    [Show full text]
  • The Rosetta Stone, British Museum, London Hieroglyphic, [From the Greek=Priestly Carving], Type of Writing Used in Ancient Egypt
    T h e R o s e t t a S t o n e Languages: Egyptian and Greek, Using three scripts -- Hieroglyphic, Demotic Egyptian, and Greek. Found 1799 by the French in Egypt Originally from 196 B.C. The Rosetta Stone, British Museum, London Hieroglyphic, [from the Greek=priestly carving], type of writing used in ancient Egypt. Similar pictographic styles of Crete, Asia Minor, and Central America and Mexico are also called hieroglyphics. Interpretation of Egyptian hieroglyphics, begun by Thomas Young and J. F. Champollion and others, is virtually complete. The meanings of hieroglyphics often seem arbitrary and are seldom obvious. Egyptian hieroglyphics were already perfected in the first dynasty (3110-2884 B.C.), but they began to go out of use in the Middle Kingdom and after 500 B.C. were virtually unused. There were basically 604 symbols that might be put to three types of uses (although few were used for all three purposes). 1) They could be used as ideograms, as when a sign resembling a snake meant "snake." [See chart above.] 2) They could be used as a phonogram (or a phonetic letter similar to our alphabet), as when the pictogram of an owl represented the sign or letter “m,” because the word for owl had “m” as its principal consonant sound. [It would be like us using a picture of a snake for the letter “s.”] 3) They could be used as a determinative, an unpronounced symbol placed after an ambiguous sign to indicate its classification (e.g., an eye to indicate that the preceding word has to do with looking or seeing).
    [Show full text]
  • Reformed Egyptian
    Review of Books on the Book of Mormon 1989–2011 Volume 19 Number 1 Article 7 2007 Reformed Egyptian William J. Hamblin Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/msr BYU ScholarsArchive Citation Hamblin, William J. (2007) "Reformed Egyptian," Review of Books on the Book of Mormon 1989–2011: Vol. 19 : No. 1 , Article 7. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/msr/vol19/iss1/7 This Book of Mormon is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Review of Books on the Book of Mormon 1989–2011 by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Title Reformed Egyptian Author(s) William J. Hamblin Reference FARMS Review 19/1 (2007): 31–35. ISSN 1550-3194 (print), 2156-8049 (online) Abstract This article discusses the term reformed Egyptian as used in the Book of Mormon. Many critics claim that reformed Egyptian does not exist; however, languages and writing systems inevitably change over time, making the Nephites’ language a reformed version of Egyptian. Reformed Egyptian William J. Hamblin What Is “Reformed Egyptian”? ritics of the Book of Mormon maintain that there is no language Cknown as “reformed Egyptian.” Those who raise this objec- tion seem to be operating under the false impression that reformed Egyptian is used in the Book of Mormon as a proper name. In fact, the word reformed is used in the Book of Mormon in this context as an adjective, meaning “altered, modified, or changed.” This is made clear by Mormon, who tells us that “the characters which are called among us the reformed Egyptian, [were] handed down and altered by us” and that “none other people knoweth our language” (Mormon 9:32, 34).
    [Show full text]
  • Ancient Writing
    Ancient Writing As early civilizations developed, societies became more complicated. Record keeping and communication demanded something beyond symbols and pictures to represent the spoken word. This resource explores the early writing systems of four ancient civilizations: Mesopotamia, Egypt, China, and Mesoamerica. You'll also learn about the Rosetta Stone, the 19th-century discovery that gave scholars the key that unlocked the language of ancient Egypt. Grade Level: Grades 3-5 Collection: Ancient Art, East Asian Art, Egyptian Art, Pre-Columbian Art Culture/Region: America, China, Egypt Subject Area: History and Social Science, Science, Visual Arts Activity Type: Art in Depth HOW ANCIENT WRITING BEGAN… AND ENDED As early civilizations developed, societies became more complicated. Record keeping and communication demanded something beyond symbols and pictures to represent the spoken word. This gallery explores the early writing systems of four ancient civilizations: Mesopotamia, Egypt, China, and Mesoamerica. Here you’ll also learn about the Rosetta Stone, the 19th-century discovery that gave scholars the key that unlocked the language of ancient Egypt. Why were writing systems developed? Communication – Sounds and speech needed to be visually represented. Correspondence – There was a desire to send notes, letters, and instructions. Recording – Bookkeeping tasks became important for counting crops, paying workers’ rations, and collecting taxes. Preservation – Personal stories, rituals, religious texts, hymns, literature, and history all needed to be recorded. Why did some writing systems disappear? Change – Corresponding cultures died out or were absorbed by others. Innovation – Newer, simpler systems replaced older systems. Conquest – Invaders or new rulers imposed their own writing systems. New Beginnings – New ways of writing developed with new belief systems.
    [Show full text]
  • A STUDY of WRITING Oi.Uchicago.Edu Oi.Uchicago.Edu /MAAM^MA
    oi.uchicago.edu A STUDY OF WRITING oi.uchicago.edu oi.uchicago.edu /MAAM^MA. A STUDY OF "*?• ,fii WRITING REVISED EDITION I. J. GELB Phoenix Books THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS oi.uchicago.edu This book is also available in a clothbound edition from THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS TO THE MOKSTADS THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS, CHICAGO & LONDON The University of Toronto Press, Toronto 5, Canada Copyright 1952 in the International Copyright Union. All rights reserved. Published 1952. Second Edition 1963. First Phoenix Impression 1963. Printed in the United States of America oi.uchicago.edu PREFACE HE book contains twelve chapters, but it can be broken up structurally into five parts. First, the place of writing among the various systems of human inter­ communication is discussed. This is followed by four Tchapters devoted to the descriptive and comparative treatment of the various types of writing in the world. The sixth chapter deals with the evolution of writing from the earliest stages of picture writing to a full alphabet. The next four chapters deal with general problems, such as the future of writing and the relationship of writing to speech, art, and religion. Of the two final chapters, one contains the first attempt to establish a full terminology of writing, the other an extensive bibliography. The aim of this study is to lay a foundation for a new science of writing which might be called grammatology. While the general histories of writing treat individual writings mainly from a descriptive-historical point of view, the new science attempts to establish general principles governing the use and evolution of writing on a comparative-typological basis.
    [Show full text]
  • Grapheme. Case Also with 6 in Old Coptic; See Libovc)
    Aziz S. Atiya EDITOR IN CHIEF Volume 8 Macmillan Publishing Company NEW 'lOR/( Collier Macmillan Canada TORONTO .Maxwell Macmillan International NEW 'IORK· OXFORD· SINGAPORE· SYDNEY ALPHABETS, OLD COPTIC 41 subdialeelale IYl,;opolitainc des tClItcs gnostiqllCs traces, but two of whleh are nevenheless attested hy copt~ dc Nag Hammadi:' Musiull 97 {I984):261­ Coptic documents lh.'lt have sunrived the vicil;situdes 312. of the tormented history of the Copts: I)[AI.ECT I ___ "I'si en ti et ti pointe dans Ie P. Biling. I de (pml:QoLyeopo1itan) and OlAUCT P (an alphabetically HambOllrg," Billie/iII tie lu Societe d'egyplolo/:ie, and phonologically an:haic idiom that often looks Gtll~ve 9-10 (1984-1985):135-40. like what can be known about a proto-Sahidic, tenta· Kasser, R., and H. Sat;dnger. "L'ldiome du P. Mich. tively reconstructed and considered immigrant into 5421 (Irouve a Karanis, nOI"d·eo;t du Fayoum)." lhe TI1cb.'ln region). Witntr Ztilschrill liir die Kmrde ties MQ~tmfufldes 74 (1982):15-32. In the$C cin:umstanecs. it is scarcely surprising leXL~ :utesL~ Krall, J, "Reste koplischer SchulbueherliterJ.tur." that each of the Old Coptic a panicular Mil/hei/IIllgt" Q'/$ der Sammltmg dcr PapynlS En· Coptic alphabet (or if onj,' prefers, a panicular varie· htr<.og Raintr 4 (1888):126-3S. ty of Coptic alphabet). It is reasonablj,' to suppose Mallon. A, Grammaire cople, uvec bibliograplrie, that all these alphabets included all the Coptic let· chreMomarhie et vocabulairt. 2nd cd. Heinl!, 1907. ters of Greek origin-a supposition and not a cer­ Plumley, J.
    [Show full text]
  • Names from Demotic Egyptian Sources
    Names from Demotic Egyptian Sources 2nd Edition by Daniel L Lind (Sneferu sa Djedi mewetif Merit) Introduction Registration of ancient Egyptian names is a relatively new thing in the SCA. As of July 2015 names recorded in either demotic script or Coptic became registerable with the SCA College of Arms. The full decision on the subject can be read at the following link: http://heraldry.sca.org/loar/2015/07/15-07lar.html#57 This article only attempts to address names and name patterns recorded in demotic script. Names and name patterns recorded in Coptic are found elsewhere. Names and name patterns found in the first edition of this article were taken from the book Oriental Institute Hawara Papyri Demotic and Greek Texts from an Egyptian Family Archive in the Fayum (Fourth to Third Century BC) by George R Hughes and Richard Jasnow with a contribution by James G. Keenan. This second edition adds names from the Catalog of the Demotic Texts in the Brooklyn Museum by George R Hughes. This edition adds two hundred and eighty three additional names for a total of three hundred and seventy five along with sections on unisex names. There are also corrections to several translation errors found in the previous edition. The data on frequency of names has been expanded to include citations in hieroglyphs, hieratic, Greek, Coptic, and Latin. This intended to more accurately show the popularity of the various names in their period context . Data for this change comes from the Trismegistos database. A few names included herein are taken directly from Trismegistos without reference to the aforementioned books.
    [Show full text]
  • Two Notes on Egyptian Script
    Two Notes on Egyptian Script “We have written this record according to our knowledge, in the characters which are called among us the reformed Egyptian.” (Mormon 9:32) Moroni, at the end of his father’s record, states, “we have written this record according to our knowledge, in the characters which are called among us the reformed Egyptian” (Mormon 9:32). Since the publication of this statement many suggestions have been made concerning the identication of the script.1 This note is intended to broaden the base of possibilities thus far considered by adding two hitherto unconsidered options. Abnormal Hieratic Most discussions of reformed Egyptian deal with demotic. Yet demotic is just one of two writing styles used in Egypt that developed from hieratic. This other style of hieratic script, abnormal hieratic, has not received attention and ought at least to be considered in discussions of reformed Egyptian. Michel Malinine, who did the most work toward deciphering and publishing abnormal hieratic documents, did not like the term himself and preferred to call it cursive thébaine tardive (late Theban cursive),2 while Georg Möller preferred the term späthieratische Kursive (late hieratic cursive),3 but Griffith’s term, abnormal hieratic, is the one that has stuck. “‘Abnormal hieratic’ represents the final stage of the development of cursive writing in the New Kingdom, which was elaborated and used in the southern half of Egypt and, in particular, at Thebes, and whose progressive changes can actually be followed, almost without interruption,
    [Show full text]
  • CHICAGO DEMOTIC DICTIONARY Janet H
    oi.uchicago.edu/oi/AR/03-04/03-04_AR_TOC.html RESEARCH CHICAGO DEMOTIC DICTIONARY Janet H. Johnson The staff of the Chicago Demotic Dictionary Project, François Gaudard and myself, have contin- ued the time-consuming job of checking and double-checking every entry, every scan, and every reference included in the dictionary. We have been joined this year by Jackie Jay, a graduate stu- dent in Egyptology who will write a dissertation on Egyptian literature and who is completing and checking all references in the bibliography and in the list of texts we cite. We have been ably assisted this year by several college student volunteers. Anne Nelson and Amelia Karraker verified and corrected bibliographic entries for us; David Berger began checking to ensure that every text cited in the dictionary is included in our list of texts. Michael Beetley, a graduate stu- dent in Northwest Semitics, has generously agreed to serve as our resource on interconnections between Demotic and various Northwest Semitic languages. As noted in previous Annual Reports, discussions with Gene Gragg, then Director of the Ori- ental Institute, and with Thomas Urban, of the Oriental Institute Publications Office, led us to decide to post completed files on the Internet, to make them available around the world without waiting for the completion of the rest of the dictionary. At present fourteen letter-files are posted on the Web, each containing the full entry for one letter of the Demotic “alphabet.” Three such files were published electronically this year, ªayin (164 pages) in September, Q (105 pages) in February, and G (82 pages) in May.
    [Show full text]
  • 11 Cuneiform and Hieroglyphs 11
    The Unicode® Standard Version 12.0 – Core Specification To learn about the latest version of the Unicode Standard, see http://www.unicode.org/versions/latest/. Many of the designations used by manufacturers and sellers to distinguish their products are claimed as trademarks. Where those designations appear in this book, and the publisher was aware of a trade- mark claim, the designations have been printed with initial capital letters or in all capitals. Unicode and the Unicode Logo are registered trademarks of Unicode, Inc., in the United States and other countries. The authors and publisher have taken care in the preparation of this specification, but make no expressed or implied warranty of any kind and assume no responsibility for errors or omissions. No liability is assumed for incidental or consequential damages in connection with or arising out of the use of the information or programs contained herein. The Unicode Character Database and other files are provided as-is by Unicode, Inc. No claims are made as to fitness for any particular purpose. No warranties of any kind are expressed or implied. The recipient agrees to determine applicability of information provided. © 2019 Unicode, Inc. All rights reserved. This publication is protected by copyright, and permission must be obtained from the publisher prior to any prohibited reproduction. For information regarding permissions, inquire at http://www.unicode.org/reporting.html. For information about the Unicode terms of use, please see http://www.unicode.org/copyright.html. The Unicode Standard / the Unicode Consortium; edited by the Unicode Consortium. — Version 12.0. Includes index. ISBN 978-1-936213-22-1 (http://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode12.0.0/) 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Iain Gardner an Old Coptic Ostracon from Ismant El-Kharab?
    IAIN GARDNER AN OLD COPTIC OSTRACON FROM ISMANT EL-KHARAB? aus: Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 125 (1999) 195–200 © Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn 195 AN OLD COPTIC OSTRACON FROM ISMANT EL-KHARAB? The on-going excavations at Ismant el-Kharab (ancient Kellis) continue to recover substantial amounts of textual material1, principally dating from the second to fourth-century CE. As the principal editor for the Coptic finds, working on site each season, I have been ‘on watch’ for any discoveries of Old Coptic, anything that might help to illuminate that curious transition or void between Demotic (also present at Ismant el-Kharab) and the fluid Coptic2 that has been found in some abundance. On 22nd January 1997 Colin Hope, excavating in the north-west corner of the inner temenos, recovered an ostracon from a barrel-vault3; and this piece I publish here as first evidence of Old Coptic from the site. Dr. Hope has kindly provided the following details and description of the ostracon. The decorated side is illustrated in Fig. 1, and a photograph of the text itself provided on Pl. X. The ostracon was found lying vertically in mud-brick rubble (deposit 12) underlying the collapse (deposit 8) of the badly eroded, barrel vault of a brick chamber which is one of two lying to the south of the remains of a circular, mud-brick well in the north-west corner of the inner temenos of the Temple of Tutu. The brick rubble probably also derives from the vault of the room. Although eroded and badly weakened by the effects of salts and moisture, the majority of the vault was in place.
    [Show full text]