475 a New Edition of the “Book of Nut” 476

475 A NEW EDITION OF THE “BOOK OF NUT” 476

HOOFDARTIKELEN

A NEW EDITION OF THE “BOOK OF NUT”

DAVID KLOTZ, Yale University

Abstract

Review of the most recent edition of the cosmographic composition “the Book of Nut,”*) a detailed outline of the movements of the sun, decan stars, and other celestial bodies, recounted within a mythological framework. First attested in the Osireion of Sety I at Abydos, this important text is attested in Pharaonic tombs as well as on Hieratic and Demotic papyri of the Roman Period, several of which are published for the first time. While the new parallels greatly advance our understanding of the Book of Nut, the difficult hieroglyphic texts, partially composed in enigmatic writing, still invite further study.

*) Review article of: LIEVEN, A. von – The Carlsberg Papyri 8. Grundriss des Laufes der Sterne. Das sogenannte Nutbuch. Vol. I: Text; Vol. II: Tafeln. (CNI Publications 31). Museum Tusculanum Press, Copen- hagen, 2007. (Vol. I: 30,5 cm, 463; Vol. II: 40 cm, 25 Tafeln). ISBN 978-87-635-0406-5. ISSN 0907-8118; 0902-5499. / 121,-.

995014_Bior_2011_5-6_01.indd5014_Bior_2011_5-6_01.indd 469469 116/02/126/02/12 12:4112:41 477 BIBLIOTHECA ORIENTALIS LXVIII N° 5-6, september-december 2011 478

The so-called “Book of Nut” is an important cosmographic (2) The synoptic edition has a confusing layout. All hiero- composition first attested in the Osireion of Sety I at Abydos, glyphic and Hieratic examples are reproduced in typeset with fragmentary versions in the tombs of Ramesses IV and hieroglyphs, without transliteration. Since PC1 employs both Mutirdis in Western Thebes. Over a large representation of the hieratic and demotic, the A. presents a transliteration of the sky goddess, Nut, are extensive hieroglyphic texts describing demotic and a transcription of the hieratic into hieroglyphs. the nocturnal voyage of Re and the thirty-six decan stars through This approach has its advantages, as it allows one to distin- the body of this celestial divinity. The Roman Period Papyrus guish between the original text and the demotic annotations. Carlsberg 1 (PC1), first published in 1940 by Helmut Lange and However, the resulting reading experience is awkward: to Otto Neugebauer, comes from Tebtunis and preserves copies of read a section of PC 1 one must first consult the demotic text these earlier inscriptions in hieratic, interspersed with lengthier in vol. 2, find the corresponding transliteration in the synop- commentary in both hieratic and demotic. tic edition, move backwards to the translation (where the The Author has identified additional hieratic papyri with transliteration is not repeated), and then skip forward to the copies of this fascinating text in the vast holdings of the separate commentary section. Carlsberg Institute (PC228, 496-497), along with additional Moreover, the lack of transliteration for the non-Demotic fragments in Oxford, London, Berlin, and Florence. Previ- sections leaves readers wondering how precisely the A. inter- ously, similar parallels have been published in short miscel- prets difficult passages. This omission is vexing for unusual lany articles.1) In this instance, the A. took the opportunity orthographies peculiar to late hieratic texts, none of which to create an updated synoptic edition of all relevant texts,2) are discussed in the section on transcribing late hieratic (pp. with translation, commentary, and detailed discussions of 35-36). Since no transliteration is provided, brief explanatory textual transmission and other related topics. notes could have been useful for non-specialists. As one expects from the series, this is an impressively produced book, featuring a meticulous description of the §13: papyri, extensive bibliography, and an excellent volume of The A. translates this group as “Rebellen” without further plates; the 1:1 photographs of all the papyri vastly improves comment; apparently this is to be transliterated sbí.w upon the small plates included in the PC1, editio princeps of (< ), a rarely attested value for the first sign.5) and one finds reproductions of the hieroglyphic copies from the Osireion and two tombs. Without a doubt, this volume §§14, 25, etc.: will remain the standard edition of these difficult texts, and This abbreviation for , “to say” is not uncommon in Late the A. is to be commended for collecting the various frag- ∂d Hieratic and Demotic,6) but it is still rare enough to merit a ments and producing this valuable work. footnote. Given the extraordinary relevance of the Carlsberg Papyri for both Egyptological and interdisciplinary studies, previous §§20, 25, 55: = or , “to look.” Based on the authors have taken pains to create lucid translations and well- nw m glossary, the A. would transliterate this group as organized commentary to render the material accessible to a m (p. 359), which is definitely possible.7) However, this verb wider intellectual community. The A. of the present volume rarely employs the preposition ( . II, 9, 7-8: “selten”), has unfortunately made several editorial decisions which r Wb whereas ( ) is the normal construction ( . II, 218, have rendered the text even more obscure and uninviting to nw  r Wb 6-9), and continues this way into Demotic and Coptic. non-Egyptologists than necessary: Furthermore, m hardly occurs in Demotic outside of (1) In contrast to previous volumes of the series, the A. archaizing texts. insisted on using the Tübingen transliteration system (e.g. † for d, c for †, etc.), even for the demotic texts. While not really §§44 bis, 144: a problem for Egyptologists, this idiosyncrasy will undoubt- The A. reads these examples as a book entitled “die edly frustrate interdisciplinary scholars, since there are still no Auflösung (bnr/bl),” but the transliteration and explanation demotic grammars or dictionaries which employ this sys- only appears in a later chapter (p. 285). Since the pustule tem.3) Since the Tübingen system only approximates the pro- hieroglyph does not elsewhere have the value bnn or bnr/bl, nunciation of Egyptian until the early Middle Kingdom, its some discussion is necessary.8) Furthermore, other examples appropriateness for transcribing the present text — not of this book (according to the A.) are spelled (§§39, attested until the Nineteenth Dynasty and preserved primarily 47, 48, 143; also not explained on p. 49, n. 179), is an on papyri of the Roman Period — is unclear.4)

1) E.g. K. Ryholt, “A Parallel to the Inaros Story of P. Krall (P. Carls- 5) D. Kurth, Einführung ins Ptolemäische. Eine Grammatik mit Zeichen- berg 456 + P. CtYBR 4513): Demotic Narratives from the Tebtunis Tem- liste und Übungsstücken, I (Hützel, 2007), p. 400, n. 89, cites one example. ple Library (I),” JEA 84 (1998), pp. 151-169; J.F. Quack, “Ein neuer 6) Wb. V, 621, 16; 624, 9; G. Möller, Hieratische Päläographie III, p. Zeuge für den Text zum neunköpfigen Bes: (P.Carlsberg 475),” in K. 58; W. Erichsen, DG, p. 691 Ryholt (ed.), Hieratic Texts from the Collection. The Carlsberg Papyri 7, 7) The pupils have this value in the New Kingdom cryptography; J.C. CNIP 30 (2006), pp. 53-64. Darnell, The Enigmatic Netherworld Books of the Solar-Osirian Unity, 2) The A. decided not to translate or discuss the famous portion of the OBO 198 (Fribourg; Göttingen, 2004), p. 590; D.A. Werning, “Aenigma- Book of Nut (only preserved in the Osireion exemplar) detailing the con- tische Schreibungen in Unterweltsbüchern des Neuen Reiches: gesicherte struction and use of a shadow-clock, apparently because it was not recopied Entsprechungen und Ersetzungsprinzipien,” in C. Peust (ed.), Miscellanea in the later papyri (see briefly pp. 12-13). in honorem Wolfhart Westendorf, GM Beihefte 3 (Göttingen, 2008), p. 138. 3) This editorial decision also ignores previous attempts by Demotists 8) The A. cites a previous article by J.F. Quack, but that reference does to employ a standardized transliteration system; cf. the various essays in not explain the sign-value either. One could suggest confusion or inten- Enchoria 10 (1980). tional substitution with the “egg” sign, based on bnn(.t), both “egg” and 4) E.g. the relative form í††.t, “that which is seized,” is spelled pho- “seed” (P. Wilson, A Ptolemaic Lexikon, p. 318; Cl. Traunecker, Coptos, netically as ítt (p. 439, §x+54 [S]), yet the A. transliterated ícc (p. 33). p. 152, n. e).

995014_Bior_2011_5-6_01.indd5014_Bior_2011_5-6_01.indd 470470 116/02/126/02/12 12:4112:41 479 A NEW EDITION OF THE “BOOK OF NUT” 480

attested orthography for bnr/bl, “to release.”9) The A.’s commentary, and since J.F. Quack already published a short interpretation is plausible, but sound philological arguments article full of improved readings for the Demotic text,13) the are not advanced in the present book. A. has little to add to earlier sections; the commentary in the “Mondkapitel” and so-called “Planetenkapitel,” however, (3) In general, the A. omits to include basic citations to dic- are more substantive. Unfortunately, the A. rarely summa- tionaries, not to mention more recent lexical studies.10) This rizes the discussions and readings of previous commentators, causes some minor problems: but only provides brief references.14) In short, it is often quite difficult to read this book, under- p. 53, n. 215: stand obscure passages, or follow the general commentary The A. proposed reading the oddly specific translation for tít without constant recourse to the previous edition (EAT III) (“Standarte, die wie das tít-Zeichen aussieht”) without pro- and to the collected works of J.F. Quack and the A. As a viding any references. result, this very important text will have a harder time reach- ing scholars of Egyptian religion, Greek and Babylonian p. 147, n. 859: astrology, the history of science, and other related fields. The A. claims that terms such as r-¨-Ì¨w, (“Ascendant”, lit. “place of rising”) cannot exist in earlier texts, “da die Bil- Cryptography dung mit r-¨- erst demotisch möglich ist.” The A. provides no The early hieroglyphic copies of the Nut Book frequently references, but in fact a quick look at Erichsen, Demotisches employ enigmatic or cryptographic values, and thus the Glossar, p. 242 (s.v. r¨-Ì¨, r¨-Ìtp) sends one to Wb. II, 394- related papyri indicate how later scribes interpreted these dif- 395 (“end; limit; place” etc.”), which notes that this con- ficult texts.15) Unfortunately, the A.’s treatment of enigmatic struction is attested as early as the New Kingdom. signs is disorganized and appears to have been added as an Incidentally, the same construction elucidates a problem- afterthought. Arguably the most comprehensive treatment of atic passage in §32: New Kingdom cryptography is the recent book by John Dar- nell.16) The A. mentions this work only a handful of times, (S, R, PC1): nn rÌ ∂r.w=f, “its limits are unknown” mainly to point out scholarly quibbles,17) and never refers to (PC1): bn íw py=w rÌ py=f r-¨[…], “its limit (r-¨) cannot it again when discussing specific cryptographic values. be known,” rather than “Unbekannt ist ihr (?)-Tun” (p. 59, The former book employs a reasonable philological n. 267). methodology — in order to justify new readings, one should propose a rational phonetic or graphic derivation, without (4) Least helpful are the frequent references to unpublished resorting to acrophony — and quotes textual parallels to works, especially the thesis of J.F. Quack, Beiträge zu den supports its interpretations. The present work, however, fol- ägyptischen Dekanen (Berlin, 2002),11) still unpublished and lows no methodology, but proposes ad hoc interpretations thus not available to other scholars, either through UMI or devoid of philological rigor, recalling the works of Étienne otherwise online. Since many important issues of translation, Drioton. interpretation, and dating of the text relate directly to the One looks in vain for a table of all attested cryptographic unpublished thesis, a brief summary of the results, argu- or sportive values;18) instead there is only a smattering ments, or sources would have been useful. Given that the of examples (“einige der wichtigsten Charakteristika,” bulk of the “Nut Book” discusses the Decan stars,12) the pp. 31-33), often presented without textual references; reader may be surprised to read: when the A. condescends to provide such citations, they “Zu dieser Familie [der Dekane] s. in extenso die Behandlung apply to the separate Osireion publication, not to the syn- EAT III, S. 118-128 und bei QUACK, Beiträge zu den ägyptischen optic edition in the present book. The A.’s interpretations Dekanen, (iVb). Da v.a. letzteres Werk eine umfassende Aufar- of these examples are often unreliable, or at least insuffi- beitung des gesamten Materials zu den Dekanen bringen wird, ciently argued, as some of the following examples may wird hier auf weitergehende Bemerkungen verzichtet” (p. 143). demonstrate: In other words, scholars interested in what the Nut Book says about Decan stars, and how this compares to other 13) J.F. Quack, “Kollationen und Korrekturvorschläge zum Papyrus Egyptian astronomical texts and cosmographic representa- Carlsberg 1,” in A Miscellany of Demotic Texts and Studies, CNIP 22 tions, will have to wait until the long-awaited study by J.F. (Copenhgaen, 2000), pp. 165-171. Quack appears. In the work under review, the A. only dis- 14) E.g. notes 165; 166; 206; 208; 228; 234; 236; 240; 246; 251; 259; cusses a number of minor details in the general commentary. 276; 302; 310; 311; 312; 317; 323; 328; 348; 387; 396-397; 418; 430; 442; 445; 450; 455; 457; 459; 466; 472-473; 475; 478; 481; 490-491; This situation is unfortunate — although the A. cannot solely 496; 498; 511; 512; 516; 524. be to blame — as it significantly diminishes the usefulness 15) A similar case exists with Thirtieth Dynasty copies of the Book of of this book. Gates, which shed precious light on a difficult cryptographic section: C. A similar problem plagues the textual notes. Since the Manassa, “The Judgement Hall of Osiris in the Book of Gates,” RdE 57 (2006), pp. 109-150. main texts have already been published several times with 16) J.C. Darnell, The Enigmatic Netherworld Books. 17) For example: p. 28, n. 91; p. 30, n. 105. 18) Contrast with J.C. Darnell, The Enigmatic Netherworld Books, pp. 9) At least according to Wb. I, 461; W. Erichsen, DG, p. 118; CDD (b), 588-617; C. Manassa, RdE 57 (2006), pp. 112-113; J.A. Roberson, “An p. 54. Enigmatic Wall from the Cenotaph of Seti I at Abydos,” JARCE 43 (2007), 10) E.g. notes 164; 230; 417; 466; 565. p. 112; M. Müller-Roth, Das Buch vom Tage, OBO 198 (Fribourg; Göt- 11) E.g. notes 128; 139-140; 147; 297; 299; 417; 747; 758; 768; 771; tingen, 2008), pp. 455-459; D.A. Werning, in C. Peust (ed.), Miscellanea 774; 834-835; 837; 847; 851; 852-853; 858; 958. in honorem Wolfhart Westendorf, pp. 124-152. For the book of Nut, see 12) See p. 144: “Es handelt sich hierbei um die umfänglichste wissen- alteady V. Vikentiev, ASAE 43 (1943), pp. 115-131, an article which the schaftliche Behandlung der Dekanzyklus aus Ägypten.” A. dismisses without further discussion (p. 9, n. 5).

995014_Bior_2011_5-6_01.indd5014_Bior_2011_5-6_01.indd 471471 116/02/126/02/12 12:4112:41 481 BIBLIOTHECA ORIENTALIS LXVIII N° 5-6, september-december 2011 482

present context.24) Moreover, the three rams could just as §0: and for bík, “falcon.” siou esoou The A. makes the reasonable case that these orthographies easily write “stars” (s(bA).w [ ] < sr.w [ ]), using an enigmatic value which the A. discussed elsewhere were influenced by standard Late Period substitutions of (cf. p. 61, n. 279). and (p. 47, n. 167). However, the examples from P. Leiden T 32 and variants which the A. mentions can hardly §118: result from the same confusion, as they omit the r completely The A. claims this section “ist stark korrompiert, vermutlich , and they only make sense if the first sign has the wurde aus verlesen, aus ” (p. 89, n. 484). Neither phonetic value bí < bí. of these signs need be “corrupt,” as they both are attested in other cryptographic texts.25) The same observation applies to §6: §50, where = ¨nÌ (cf. p. 31, n. 111). The A. read this phrase as py=s Ì¨y.t, “Ihr Aufgang” (p. 50, n. 193) but noted elsewhere that the resulting grammatical §138: form is peculiar (pp. 32, 271). The A. does not remark upon The A. claims: “S hat irrig im statt is” (p. 93, n. 517). Sim- the use of the eye-sign to write y (< ír.t). While that value is ple interchange of birds (e.g. for a goose, s < s) is an equally rarely attested in the Ptolemaic Period,19) it does not occur plausible explanation.26) elsewhere in the corpus of New Kingdom cryptography. The unproblematic reading proposed by Erik Hornung, but hast- Further enigmatic values occur throughout the text, without ily dismissed by the A., is thus to be retained: pí=s, Ì¨ ír.t, any comment in the chapter on cryptography or in the textual “when she flies up, the eye appears.” commentary:

§30: §§49, 131 (possibly §110): = ¨nÌ Based on PC1, the A. suggests substituting the chick for The A. does not discuss this remarkable orthography of ¨nÌ which implies the phonetic equivalence íw ~ ¨. Even if one a similar sign to obtain , †, “Küken” or “Nestlinge” wn wn# (p. 58, n. 257). This proposal is reasonable,20) although not compares Coptic (ˆIwnw) and (¨nÌ), the present supported by other examples.21) Similarly based on PC1, examples demonstrate that the ‘ayin may have weakened one might read this entire section as: † m dw.t, sw R¨ pr=f, already by the New Kingdom, so that both íw and ¨ could “(…) the child in the Morning. Re comes forth,”22) rather represent a similar vowel. Since Egyptian ‘ayin is believed than “Ein Küken(?), wenn Re sich zeigte(?), indem er by some scholars to represent /d/ until the early Middle herauskommt” (TA, m di.n sw a, pr=f). Kingdom, this particular orthography may provide yet another terminus post quem for the composition. §69: (S) (R) The A. reads: “Er tritt ein in sie (¨q=f r=s),” without explain- §§116, 120, x+76, etc.: = r ing the arm in the Sety I version. One might translate instead: This cryptographic value is peculiar to the Book of Nut. The “he enters into her (Nut’s) mouth (¨q=f m r=s)” (cf. §55), A. suggests it might reflect a hypothetical Old Kingdom pro- with the arm = m.23) nunciation, when Egyptian ‘ayin actually represented conso- nantal /d/, which in the Middle Kingdom may have been §135: equivalent to a trilled /r/ (p. 32). This ingenious interpretation In both examples the A. reads: pr b.w, “the Ba’s come ignores a simpler proposal suggested by J.C. Darnell, The forth” (discussed briefly on p. 31). This translation is clearly Enigmatic Netherworld Books, pp. 235-236, n. 270 (‘ayin based on PC1, but the A. does not mention that the value pr and r both similar to Semitic ghayin). Alternatively, there might be a general equivalence: r ~íw ~ ¨ (all sounding like is not attested for the goose or any other birds. The verb in e the hieroglyphic versions is most likely pí, “to fly up” ), as in íwnÌ = ¨nÌ (cf. supra). (with substitution of birds) a translation appropriate for the §§139, 142: (írr sm.t=f) (sm sb) This orthography for sm, which appears to write “pig- 19) This value is not popular, and possibly limited to foreign names: J. mother,” alludes to the theme of Nut devouring her children. Quaegebeur, “Documents Concerning a Cult of Arsinoe Philadelphos at Memphis,” JNES 30 (1971), p. 248, n. f. The A. comments on the obvious thematic cryptography in 20) The A. claims the two signs are interchangeable, but provides no this section (pp. 32-33, 94, n. 518), but does not bother to references. One example of this substitution (G 47 for G 43) may occur in explain its derivation: s (< sí, “pig”) + m (mw.t).27) É. Drioton, “Inscription énigmatique du tombeau de Chéchanq III à Tanis,” Kêmi 12 (1952), pp. 28, 30, but the reading there is far from certain. 21) The A. claims that this designation “ist ja auch sonst belegt” 24) The same verb occurs in a similar text (Chr. Leitz, Tagewählerei I, and refers to the Commentary (p. 58, n. 257), but the relevant section ÄgAb 55 [Wiesbaden, 1994], pp. 38, 40), but the A. dismisses any apparent provides no parallels or references (p. 141). The examples of †, “chick,” connections between the two passages as “problematisch” (p. 170). recorded in LGG VII, 447-448, have little in common with the present 25) For ¨nÌ = Ì, see Chr. Zivie-Coche, “Miscellanea Ptolemaica,” in P. context. Der Manuelian (ed.), Studies in Honor of William Kelly Simpson, II (Bos- 22) Reading: dí + n > dwí.t, “morning.” The first sign (X8) has the ton, 1996), pp. 869-870; D. Kurth, Einführung ins Ptolemäische, I, p. 422, value dw in “Duat” (Wb. V, 415, 3); the water sign (N35) is securely n. 121; Dendara XV, 14, 11 and 12. For the second value (probably attested as t < t (J.C. Darnell, The Enigmatic Netherworld Books, p. 54, derived from D41, which writes níw/nw) see J.C. Darnell, The Enigmatic n. 90; M. Müller-Roth, Das Buch vom Tage, p. 458). Netherworld Books, p. 118, n. 374. 23) J.C. Darnell, The Enigmatic Netherworld Books, p. 190, n. 111; 26) The converse value (goose = m) is attested in the New Kingdom: D.A. Werning, in C. Peust (ed.), Miscellanea in honorem Wolfhart M. Müller-Roth, Das Buch vom Tage, p. 457. Westendorf, p. 139; D. Kurth, Einführung ins Ptolemäische, I, p. 188, 27) The writing is discussed by J.C. Darnell, The Enigmatic Netherworld n. 281. Books, p. 32.

995014_Bior_2011_5-6_01.indd5014_Bior_2011_5-6_01.indd 472472 116/02/126/02/12 12:4112:41 483 A NEW EDITION OF THE “BOOK OF NUT” 484

§130: = ΔÌwty might preferably read sb, “enemy,” since “teaching” is The reading is self-explanatory, but the alternation between usually spelled sb¨.t or sb¨.t in Demotic (Erichsen, DG, p. and is noteworthy.28) 421). One would thus translate: “lest any enemy reach her (the female vulture (t nr.t),” a reference to the relevant depiction of Nekhbet (as one might expect), watching over §140: the southern boundary of Egypt. Based on the parallel in PC1 (Ìnw t p.t r nfr), the A. translated the first group as “den Himmel befahren bis zum Auf- §4: hören” (p. 94), without commenting on the second sign. This The A. Suggests reading the bird plus road as , Ìr.t, probably reads Ìnw m p.t, “sailing within heaven,” with the “Weg,” noting this would derive “von Ìrí “fliegen” (speziell dí-arm writing m (< mí, “give”).29) zum Himmel),” without providing any references to this spe- cialized use of the verb Ìrí, “to become distant” (cf. Wb. III, §x+75: 146, 19). In Ptolemaic texts, the bird can write Ìn¨/Ìr, “and” The new parallel in PC 228 confirms that this group should (Wb. III, 110, 12), but this is not attested earlier. Instead, one read zp-tpy, “first moment,” as indeed the A. already recog- might simply translate p w.t, “the road,” since the latter nized (p. 107). The exceptional use of ídb > tpy, “first,” word is already treated as masculine in P. Ebers (noted by merits a brief mention.30) Wb. I, 246, 17).

Translation and Commentary §§5-6: The preceding comments aside, the translation is generally The Nut Book depicts the vulture goddess Nekhbet at the reliable and the commentary can be incisive and original; the edge of the sky, and PC1 elaborates: “[…] Punt, she (Nekh- Reviewer genuinely learned much from the perceptive dis- bet) returns from God’s Land.” The A. argues that since cussions. Nonetheless, the Nut Book remains a difficult text, Nekhbet is a crown goddess, she automatically embodies the and the translation of numerous passages could be improved. goddess of the Eye of the Sun, which according to the A. can Since Christian Leitz recently discussed many of the astro- only represent Sothis, and thus the entire passage relates to nomical interpretations at length,31) the following comments the heliacal rising of Sothis at the New Year (pp. 128-130). are restricted to philological problems. This approach to the Egyptian religion is overly simplistic, as it reduces all goddesses to manifestations of Sothis. In §0: certain contexts, the Eye of Re could indeed represent Sothis The term khr.t (“eine Vornübergebeugte(?)”, p. 47, n. 160) at the New Year,34) but elsewhere these goddesses represent actually occurs in a number of Roman Period hieroglyphic the feminine light energy of the transcendent solar deity.35) texts from Thebes, and apparently designates the northern Incidentally there is evidence for Nekhbet as the Wander- sky.32) ing Goddess at Elkab, bringing incense from Punt via the Wadi Hellal in her form of a vulture.36) Nonetheless, other §2, 4, 77a: aspects of Nekhbet can be considered in the present context. The text locates two obscure regions at the edges of the sky The Nut Book juxtaposes the flight of the vulture with the in total darkness, rtÌ-qb.t (South), and srq-Ìty.t (North?; appearance of the sun, and this might relate to the use of the discussed on pp. 126-128). These might be the Egyptian vulture to write wnm.t, “right-eye” = “the sun during the names for the mysterious symbols which appear behind the daytime.”37) Since the vulture is also homophonous for the 33 word year (nr.t), Nekhbet might also represent the New Year king in running scenes: and . ) Such scenes usually 38 have a cosmic significance (e.g. the king running around the watching the arrival of the Inundation from the south. ) entire world), and these emblems occur in conjunction with Finally, Nekhbet’s position at the edge of the Nut figure might explain her common epithet: wp.t-Nw.t, “(She who is the signs depicting the two halves of the sky ( ). at) the Edge of Nut” or “she who opens Nut” (LGG II, 360). §3: In the Demotic text (PC1, 1, 18), the A. reads: […r] tm dí.t 34) In addition to the references noted by the A. (p. 129, n. 755), one sm sb.t r=s, “[… um] nicht zuzulassen, daß die Lehre zu ihr should consult J.C. Darnell, “The Apotropaic Goddess in the Eye,” SAK gelangt” (pp. 49-50, n. 188). Rather than sb.t, “Lehre,” one 24 (1997), pp. 44-48 (with references to earlier discussions). 35) See J.C. Darnell, The Enigmatic Netherworld Books, pp. 219-223; D. Klotz, Adoration of the Ram, pp. 178-182. Furthermore, if ítny.t or R¨.t (“feminine solar disk”) only denote Sothis, how does one explain Rattawy 28) J.C. Darnell, The Enigmatic Netherworld Books, pp. 259-260; D. (lit. “Female sun of the two lands”), a solar goddess with few connections Werning, in C. Peust (ed.), Miscellanea in honorem Wolfhart Westendorf, to Sothis? p. 139. 36) Ph. Derchain, Elkab I (Brussels, 1971), pp. 12-13 (not mentioned by 29) Also suggested by D. Kurth, Einführung ins Ptolemäische, I, p. 190, the A.); see now B.A Richter, “On the Heels of the Wandering Goddess: n. 336. The Myth and the Festival at the Temples of the Wadi el-Hallel and Den- 30) See recently D. Werning, “The Sound Values of the Signs Gardiner dera,” in M. Dolinska, H. Beinlich (eds.), 8. Ägyptologische Tempelta- D1 (Head) and T8 (Dagger),” LingAeg 12 (2004), pp. 198-199. gung: Interconnections between Temples, KSG 3,3, (Wiesbaden, 2010), 31) Chr. Leitz, “Zu einigen astronomischen Aspekten im sogennanten pp. 162-167. For Nekhbet, incense, and Punt, see also A. Gutbub, Textes Nutbuch oder Grundriß des Laufes der Sterne,” Enchoria 31 (2008/9), fondamentaux de la théologie de Kom Ombo, pp. 344–346, n. (r); R. Preys, pp. 1-21. Les complexes de la Demeure du Sistre et du Trône de Rê, OLA 106 32) Chr. Thiers, “Le ciel septentrional ghr.t et le ciel méridional gb.t,” (Leiden, 2002), p. 305. ENIM 2 (2009), pp. 53-58. 37) Wb. I, 321-322; R. Preys, “Nekhbet, l’œil droit du dieu solaire,” 33) For these symbols, see Cl. Traunecker, et al., La chapelle d’Achôris RdE 61 (2010), pp. 159-177. à Karnak, II (Paris, 1981), pp. 53-54; Chr. Favard-Meeks, Le temple de 38) Suggested by D. Meeks, “Les oiseaux marqueurs du temps,” BCLE Behbeit el-Hagar (Hamburg, 1991), pp. 218-219, n. 935. 4 (1990), pp. 50-51 (not mentioned by the A.).

995014_Bior_2011_5-6_01.indd5014_Bior_2011_5-6_01.indd 473473 116/02/126/02/12 12:4212:42 485 BIBLIOTHECA ORIENTALIS LXVIII N° 5-6, september-december 2011 486

§§9, 104: Book along with many iconographic and textual parallels Contrary to the A.’s critique (p. 252, n. 1377), the phrase z overlooked by the A. r t, “descend to the ground,” finds a direct parallel in the autobiography of Harchebi of Buto, col. 3, which can be §19: translated: “One who knows about all things, whether it be The A. reads: sw ¨nÌ=f ít=f Ì=f, as “So lebt sein Vater(?) visible in heaven, or descended to the earth (z.n=f r t; i.e. und ist wirksam” (p. 54, with n. 221). This section makes the invisible, deceased decan stars); expert in their illumina- more sense as two parallel clauses (sw + s∂m=f, Noun + tion and their extinguishing (ssA nfí=sn Ìn¨ ¨sm=sn).”39) The s∂m=f): “he (Re) lives again, and his father (Osiris) becomes verb zí r, “to wait for (something),” would make little sense an Akh-spirit,” referring to the aftermath of the Solar-Osirian in Harchebi statue, as it is followed by the word t, “earth.” unity. In the commentary to this section, the A. notes the close §10: parallels to the Pyramid Texts (Spell 216): “Man möchte fast den Eindruck gewinnen, als spiele der Pyramidenspruch auf S. das Nutbuch an,” noting this might support the thesis that parts of the Nut Book go back to the Old Kingdom (p. 136). M. However, since the early date is far from convincing (cf. infra), it is far more likely that the converse is true, espe- The A. read: “So (?) er sich auf (?),” rejecting any connec- cially since 216 remained popular after the Old Kingdom tion with the verb í¨r, “to ascend” (p. 51, n. 196). Alterna- (e.g. CT VIII, 113-121, includes twenty examples of this tively, this group word might write ¨r¨r, “to achieve, accom- spell from the Middle Kingdom alone). plish; to supply.”40) Since the term first occurs in Late Egyptian, the phonetic group writing orthography is not §§23-24: unexpected; the determinative would derive from ¨r, The A. dismisses a possible iconographic parallel (P. BM “horned animal.”41) This passage could refer to the newborn 10018), asserting “allerdings ist diese Vignette ingesamt so Re being “supplied” with a new physical body, as in other außergwöhnlich daß sie Kaum zum Vergleich herangezogen solar texts.42) werden kann” (p. 137); yet immediately after the A. cites yet a similar example (p. 137, n. 807). Since all of the cosmo- §17: graphic representations under discussion exhibit significant The A. translates the idiomatic phrase wb=f nÌp=f as “Er differences, it is unclear how the A. determined this particu- öffnet seine Fruchtblase,” citing only a suggestion by J.F. lar image — the only one with a preserved hieroglyphic label Quack (p. 53, n. 210). This interpretation is pure conjecture, — to be more unusual than the others. as there is absolutely no evidence that nÌp means “amniotic Furthermore, the entire discussion of Osiris and his sac.” This idiomatic phrase literally means “to open up the upraised arm (pp. 137-139) would benefit from consulting potter’s wheel,” and thus “to begin work on a piece of clay,” J.C. Darnell, The Enigmatic Netherworld Books, pp. 390-412 suitable for the beginning of creation.43) At the same time, (discussing this passage as well). the combination of wb and nÌp evokes two solar terms, wbn, “to rise,” and nhp, “early morning.” §29: The A. is confused by the reference to solar rays entering §18: into the earth (Ìn p t), since the sun has already risen and The A. discusses the connections between Osiris and water, “können seine Strahlen wohl kaum noch in der Erde verbor- but assumes it is only a late phenomenon (p. 135). In fact, gen sein” (p. 57, n. 252). The underlying concept here is that this theme occurs already in the Pyramid Texts.44) the solar rays penetrate everywhere, even underground, and this idea finds expression in many solar hymns.45) §§18-19, 23-24 (pp. 135-139): For Re’s purification in the arms of his father, Osiris, see §§31-33 (p. 141, n. 831): also J.C. Darnell, The Enigmatic Netherworld Books, For the relatively common image of Re sitting on the heav- pp. 391-392, who already discussed this section of the Nut enly cow’s horns, see now: U. Verhoeven, “Das Kind im Gehörn der Himmelskuh und vergleichbare Rindermotive,” 39) For the final phrase, see K. Jansen-Winkeln, “Beiträge zu den Pri- in J.-C. Goyon, C. Cardin (eds), Proceedings of the Ninth vatinschriften der Spätzeit,” ZÄS 125 (1998), p. 10. International Congress of Egyptologists Grenoble, 6-12 40) Wb. I, 205, 15-18; R. Caminos, Late-Egyptian Miscellanies, p. Septembre 2004, II, OLA 150 (Leuven, 2007), pp. 1899- 452[1]; L.H. Lesko, A Dictionary of Late Egyptian, I, p. 72. This verb may 1910. be related to Coptic lale / loole, “to cover; overlay (with silver or gold),” and Demotic ¨r¨r, “to work (copper)”; cf. W. Westendorf, Kop- tisches Handwörterbuch (Heidelberg, 1965-1977), p. 78; CDD ‘, p. 97. §§37-38: 41) D. Meeks, AL I, 77.0692; D. Klotz, “Two Studies on the Late Period The A. reads: ír gr.t bw nb sw n p.t sw n t dw.t pw r ∂r=s, Temples at Abydos,” BIFAO 110 (2010), p. 148, n. c. “Was nun jeden Ort angeht, leer(?) von Himmel und leer 42) In Urk. VIII, 142 (4), Amun “smelted his physical body as an august child (w∂Ì.n=f ∂.t=f m Ìy sps).” Similarly, Osorkon is said to be “supplied von Erde, das ist die gesamte Duat” (p. 60, with n. 274). A with a body (Ìn(.w)=f m Ì.t)” at his birth; K. Jansen-Winkeln, Inschriften more idiomatic translation might be: “As for any place der Spätzeit, II, 188, 8 (col. 4); R. Caminos, The Chronicle of Prince which is neither heaven nor earth, it is all (part of) the Duat.” Osorkon, §126, n. (ff). 43) C. Manassa, The Late Egyptian Netherworld, I, pp. 177-180. 44) J. Assmann, “Das Leichensekret des Osiris: zur kultischen Bedeu- tung des Wassers im alten Ägypten,” in N.-Chr. Grimal, et al. (eds.), Hom- 45) J. Assmann, Egyptian Solar Religion in the New Kingdom: Re, mages à Fayza Haikal, BdE 138 (Cairo, 2003), pp. 8-10. Amun and the crisis of polytheism (New York, 1995), pp. 72-74.

995014_Bior_2011_5-6_01.indd5014_Bior_2011_5-6_01.indd 474474 116/02/126/02/12 12:4212:42 487 A NEW EDITION OF THE “BOOK OF NUT” 488

§46: deutig” (n. 504), clearly influenced by PC1. However, the The New Kingdom versions state that the stars rest “in orthography is identical in both passages of the Osireion ver- the Duat” (S) and “in Heliopolis” (R). The A. wonders: “Sollte hier Heliopolis (bzw. genauer ein dort befindliches sion ( ), and the mythological account only makes sense Heiligtum) als nächtlicher Aufenthalt der Sonne intendiert if one translates “bones” in both places, as the A. appears to sein?” (p. 145). A number of texts locate the entrance to recognize in the commentary (pp. 169, 172). the Duat in Heliopolis,46) and Heliopolitan toponyms fea- In the second example of the Osireion version (§132), this ture prominently in the Amduat and other underworld word is followed by . The A. did not comment on the books.47) latter sign (perhaps assuming it was a determinative or phonetic complement for qsn), but parallelism with the §56, 69: wb m-Ìt sqdd=f (var. preceding clause (¨nÌ tp.w=sn, “their heads come alive”; §131) suggests reading the nose sn (< sní, “to kiss; to smell”): qs.w=sn Ìpr(.w) m rm†.w, “their bones transform The A. read the first example: “Danach geht (er) hervor und into people.” See already V. Vikentiev, ASAE 43, p. 16. fährt dahin in ihrem Inneren” (p. 72), but the grammar is not as problematic as n. 340 suggests. Understand: narrative §148: infinitive (wb) + compound preposition (m-Ìt) + nominal Perhaps restore , Ìpr, rather than as the A. sug- s∂m=f (sqdd=f); essentially an adverbial sentence (A + prep- gests (p. 96, n. 532). osition + B). Literally, one can read: “the opening up (of the potter’s wheel) is after his sailing”; or more naturally: “(he) §x+9: opens up (the potter’s wheel) after sailing.” This translation Since ∂r-Ìwí is a compound meaning “night” (Wb. III, 226, is not only grammatically preferable, but it accurately cor- 2), one could simply translate: “(until) night arrives” (spr responds to the sequence of the solar cycle: Re enters the ∂r-Ìwí). The general sense of §x+7-9 is: “Sailing in the day Duat through Nut’s mouth (§55), and then exits the womb bark (m¨n∂.t), which is visible (m ím=s) from dawn, when (“opens the potter’s wheel”) after sailing through her Re appears, (until) evening arrives.” body.48) Here as in other places, the A. appears to be unfamiliar In both examples, the A. assumes that m in the prepostion with the narrative use of the infinitive (cf. Gardiner, EG m-Ìnw is written twice, “zunächst im „Klartext“, danach §306, 2), preferring to break the section into terse discon- kryptographisch” (p. 72, n. 342). Instead, the first m should nected statements or captions: “In der Mandjetbarke Dahin- represent the adverb ím, “thence,” referring back to Nut’s fahren. In ihr Sehen bei Sonnenaufgang, wenn Re sich zeigt. mouth (§§55; 69); m-Ìnw=s refers to the Duat, as in §55. Die Nacht über Ankommen(?)” (p. 98). §89: ní Ì¨=n ní m.tw=n Grammar The A. suggests: “Emendiere zu m.tw=sn” (p. 80, n. 404). Translating the Middle Egyptian versions of the text, the No correction is necessary, as both phrases are examples of A. pays surprisingly little attention to grammar, particu- the s∂m.n(w) passive identified by E. Edel, “Die Herkunt des larly regarding verbal morphology and syntax.49) For neuägyptisch-koptischen Personalsuffixes der 3. Person Plu- example, most nominal s∂m=f (mrr=f) forms are translated ral –w,” ZÄS 84 (1959), p. 33, who already discussed this as simple indicative present tenses, whether emphasizing passage (not mentioned by the A.). an adverbial adjunct or forming a Wechselsatz.50) This disregard for verbal nuances is inexcusable for the present §96: text, since the scribe of PC1 accurately transposed the grammar accurately into Demotic, a feature which Richard The A. corrects the last group to the third person plural suf- 51 fix-pronoun: “(So stritt Geb mit Nut), weil er zornig war Parker discussed in detail over half a century ago! ) While wegen des sie Fressens (Ìr wnm=sn),” arguing that this the A. briefly acknowledges the latter article (p. 262), it emendation is necessary (p. 81, n. 410). Alternatively, one is only to retort that the later scribes might not have can simply read this as a relative: “he was angry because of always understood the earlier verbal forms properly — those whom she ate (wnm.w=s). without providing any examples of such confusion in PC1 or elsewhere. It is as if the A. assumed even the New King- §§116, 132: dom scribes were incapable of understanding the original Both passages discuss the bones (qs.w) of the decan stars grammar, and thus did not pay close attention to the verbal which fall to the earth (§116) and transform into people system. (§132), just as their tears become fish (§117). The A. translates the first instance as “Knochen,” (p. 89), but the latter as “Übel (qsn)” (p. 92), and states that this reading is “Ein- 49) This might be explained by the A.’s decision to translate the New Kingdom and Roman Period versions together as a single ideal text, except when there are major variants (pp. 45-46); the A. appears to prefer the 46) E.g. G. Posener, Le Papyrus Vandier (Cairo, 1985), pp. 54-55; note grammar of the late papyri, although one would expect the oldest Middle also that the Ogdoad enter the underworld in Heliopolis before travelling to Egyptian copies to take precedence in a critical edition. Medinet Habu: Opet I, 27; Urk. VIII, 95c; 145i; Deir Chelouit I, 31, 10. 50) For ignored examples of the Nominal s∂m=f, see §§55, 56, 57, 68, 47) C. Manassa, The Late Egyptian Netherworld, I, pp. 424-440. 69, 85, 90. In addition, the A. curiously translates most examples of the 48) Since the translation jumbles the sequence of events, the A. is perfective s∂m.n=f in the present indicative tense; e.g. §§111, 118, 133, “erstaunt” that the verb wb would be used to describe the entrance into 136. the Netherworld (p. 150). Instead, the entrance occurs in §55 with the 51) R.A. Parker, “The Function of the Imperfective s∂m.f in Middle expected verb (¨q Ìm n n†r pn), the exit in §56. Egyptian,” RdE 10 (1955), pp. 49-59.

995014_Bior_2011_5-6_01.indd5014_Bior_2011_5-6_01.indd 475475 116/02/126/02/12 12:4212:42 489 BIBLIOTHECA ORIENTALIS LXVIII N° 5-6, september-december 2011 490

Conclusions “Das Leben von Kenmet zusammen mit Ab-Schetui ist The present review has dwelt largely upon the difficult hier- das Leben des Horus”, p. 52) oglyphic text of the Osireion and the various problems in the • The particle ísk and the phrase nn n sb.w, “these stars,” A.’s translation, particularly regarding grammar and cryptogra- are supposedly “typisch für die Sprache des AR” (p. 251, no supporting references); but these features are phy. This emphasis is largely because the A. spends much time 54 in the concluding chapters discussing the original date of the perfectly correct in Middle Egyptian. ) The same text. After a long and well-researched methodological introduc- remark applies to the example of ∂r s∂m.t=f. tion about the Egyptian language and archaizing texts (pp. • Although the prothetic yod is more common in Old and 223ff), the A. concludes that Egyptians of the Late Period were Late Egyptian, the deverbal noun íqd, “builder” appears in incapable of correctly understanding earlier texts, much less all stages of the language, including Coptic (Wb. V, 74). producing new compositions in older stages of the language. • The A. wisely demurs from employing the sw s∂m=f form as evidence of earlier dating — because it is never For the A., “archaisms” do not exist in Egypt; when relics of 55 Old or Middle Egyptian occur in later texts, they must be direct actually attested in the Old Kingdom ) — but neverthe- quotations, pieced together via a “patchwork” technique. less notes it as a faint possibility (pp. 251-252). A detailed discussion of this polemic on textual transmis- Furthermore, the A. quotes a handful of words which sup- sion and archaisms would far exceed the present review.52) posedly only occur in the Pyramid Texts “oder in Texten It is ironic, however, that the A. does not distinguish between (…) die vollständig oder in ihrer Inspiration auf das AR Middle Egyptian verbal forms, yet repeatedly questions the zurückgehen” (p. 252). Since all words in question continued ability of Late Period scribes to do the same. The negative to be carved through the Graeco-Roman Period, even if in estimation of scribal competence is difficult to accept, given archaizing texts, how can one argue that their meaning was the A’s previous attempts to translate Roman Period inscrip- forgotten after the Old Kingdom? For example, the word tions,53) not to mention the philological problems in the pre- dnÌnÌ, “to protect,” occurs elsewhere at Abydos under Sety sent book. The A. compares these priests and scribes to mod- I (i.e. contemporaneous with the Osireion texts), 56) and ern Germans reading Hochdeutsch with only passive apparently survived into Coptic as tonj.57) “Lesekompetenz” (p. 258). Yet Egyptians of the Late Period These several debatable observations do not amount to immersed themselves in Old and Middle Egyptian hiero- “eine Reihe von Belegen” proving that “sämtliche Kapitel glyphic and hieratic texts; they recited them in daily liturgies des Basistextes ins AR zu datieren sind” (p. 253). Instead, and rituals, they actively copied ancient monuments on most indices point to an origin in the Middle Kingdom, papyri, recarved earlier inscriptions during renovations, and including the verbal system which the A. largely overlooks. imitated biographical, historical, literary, funerary, and tem- Moreover, if the work originated in a Middle Kingdom royal ple texts in their private monuments. pyramid complex or temple in the Fayyum (e.g. the Laby- It is absurd to argue that scribes of the Graeco-Roman rinth),58) this might explain the inscription’s popularity at Period, many of whom mastered Demotic, Greek, hieratic and Tebtunis in the Graeco-Roman Period. hieroglyphs, were incapable of distinguishing between s∂m=f and s∂m.n=f in the earlier inscriptions, or of realizing that Late The A. advocates such an early date in part to aggrandize Egyptian texts (i.e. Ramesside and Third Intermediate Period) the importance and popularity of the Nut Book, deeming it were not as old as the Old and Middle Kingdoms — especially “ein Referenzwerk” that was still copied and annotated when the Demotic grammar of PC1 demonstrates the opposite. “mehr als 25 Jahrhunderte nach seiner mutmaßlichen Entste- hung.” (p. 296). In the concluding chapter, the A. decides The A. devotes considerable attention to establishing the that the Egyptians must have valued the text primarily as a textual history of the Nut Book (pp. 37-44, 223-254). Since scientific treatise, not as a religious composition. Yet Egyp- numerous indications point towards the Middle Kingdom tian astronomical conceptions had changed greatly over the (e.g. the repeated use of í†-t.wy to write Ìnw [p. 33]; the centuries, particularly under Assyrian, Persian, Ptolemaic position of the decan stars [p. 42]), the A. assumes the book and Roman rule and cultural influence, and Greek and was first compiled out of disparate sources in the Twelfth Dynasty, with certain portions going back to the Old King- 54) Cf. also the frequent use of nn n n†r.w/n†r.yt in other Underworld dom (pp. 42-44, 251-254). The latter assertion is intention- Books; J.C. Darnell, The Enigmatic Netherworld Books, pp. 454-464. ally provocative, but the textual evidence is quite flimsy: 55) See most recently J.A. Roberson, “Observations on the So-Called ‘sw s∂m=f,’ or Middle Egyptian Proclitic Pronoun Construction,” in Z. • Apparent examples of the Nominal sentence AB pw are Hawass, J.H. Wegner (eds.), Millions of Jubilees, Studies in Honor of “typisch altägyptische” (p. 251, no supporting refer- David P. Silverman (Cairo, 2010), pp. 185-205. ences). Both examples actually appear to be parenthetic 56) A.M. Calverley, The Temple of King Sethos I at Abydos, II (Chicago, glosses introduced by pw (e.g. §15: “Kenmet and Ab- 1935), Pl. 19 (lower right), Briefly noted by the A., who dismissed it as a variant of a Pyramid Text (p. 253, n. 1382). Shetwy live (that means: Horus lives),” rather than: 57) W. Westendorf, Koptisches Handwörterbuch, p. 238; for this verb, see also L.V. Zabkar, “Adaptation of Egyptian Texts to the Temple Ritual at Philae,” JEA 66 (1980), p. 133, n. 35. 52) Nonetheless, see D. Kurth, “Zur Definition des Ptolemäischen,” GM 58) For connections between the Amduat and Middle Kingdom royal 229 (2011), pp. 65-79, for a rebuttal against recent arguments that that all tombs, see U. Rössler-Köhler, “Königliche Vorstellungen zu Grab und Jen- Graeco-Roman temple inscriptions are mere copies, and that Ptolemaic seits im Mittleren Reich. 1: Ein ‘Gottesbegräbnis’ des Mittleren Reiches in scribes were incapable of producing original texts in good Middle Egyp- königlichem Kontext: Amduat, 4. und 5. Stunde,” in R. Gundlach (ed.), tian; cf. also S. Cauville, Dendara XV, pp. 6-7. Das frühe ägyptische Königtum, ÄAT 36 (Wiesbaden, 1999), pp. 73-96; 53) A. von Lieven, Der Himmel über Esna: eine Fallstudie zur J.F. Wegner, “The Tomb of Senwosret III at Abydos: Considerations on religiösen Astronomie in Ägypten am Beispiel der kosmologischen Decken- the Origins and Development of the Royal Amduat Tomb,” in D. Silver- und Architravinschriften im Tempel von Esna, ÄgAb 64 (Wiesbaden, man, et al. (eds.), Archaism and Innovation: Studies in the Culture of Mid- 2000); see the very critical review by D. Kurth, OLZ 99 (2004), pp. 25-34. dle Kingdom Egypt (New Haven, 2009), pp. 103-169.

995014_Bior_2011_5-6_01.indd5014_Bior_2011_5-6_01.indd 476476 116/02/126/02/12 12:4212:42 491 THE SEPTUAGINT AND ALEXANDRIAN SCHOLARSHIP 492

Demotic astrological papyri have little in common with the cosmographic view of the Nut Book. Nonetheless, the A. argues that the text provided an important theoretical basis for Egyptian astronomers,59) and even suggests that hôroskopoi would consult this book during religious festivals of the Graeco-Roman Period (pp. 297-298). However, the A. does not explain what practical information a hôroskopos might find in PC1 or the hieratic papyri. The later copies of the Nut Book hardly support the A.’s thesis that this text was a fundamental study of astronomy in ancient Egypt. Rather, they appear to be copies (or copies of copies) of the New Kingdom composition as it appeared at Abydos or in the Theban tombs, two popular tourist destina- tions in the Graeco-Roman Period, similar to other Tebtunis papyri which preserve tomb inscriptions of the First Interme- diate Period from Asyut. Yet PC1 is more than just a translation of the earlier text, since it also contains numerous references to more recent astronomical treatises (pp. 284-290) and to a text apparently called “the Solution (bl),” a separate volume of commentary to the Nut Book.60) These annotations suggest that the Nut Book was copied for antiquarian interest, to assist curious Egyptians or foreign visitors in reading the monumental versions and understanding how the ancient cosmographic ideas correspond to more recent theories.

The numerous criticisms notwithstanding, this book is a useful work written by a gifted and well-read Egyptologist. The A. is to be congratulated for identifying and publishing the new parallels from scattered papyrus collections, not to mention the thought-provoking concluding essays. If the A. had published these items alone, perhaps as separate articles, there would be little reason for complaint — but then we would not have the useful synoptic text, which has already become the standard edition. The Nut Book is a challenging text, and any potential translator must understand Egyptian astronomy and religion, Late Hieratic, New Kingdom cryptography, Middle Egyptian, and Demotic. The A. is undoubt- edly an expert in Graeco-Roman papyri and astronomy, but the book pays little regard to the earliest hieroglyphic versions — and suffers as a result. Yet although future research- ers will still need to pay careful attention to the translations and grammar, all will benefit considerably from this updated, convenient, and more complete edition of a difficult but end- lessly fascinating text.

September 2011

59) Notable is the A.’s translation of the composition: “Grundriß des Laufes der Sterne (t sn† sm.t nt sb.w)” (pp. 125-126). The Egyptian phrase literally translates to “Blueprint of the Movement of the Stars” and refers to the actual Nut Book, a two-dimensional representation of the celestial circuit. However, the A. understands the term sn† in an extended sense, just like Ger- man Grundriß (cf. A. von Lieven, “Translating the Fundamentals of the Course of the Stars,” in A. Imhausen, T. Pommerening (eds.), Writings of Early Scholars in the Ancient Near East, Egypt, Rome, and Greece [Berlin, 2010], pp. 139-150), noting only one example for such a meaning, namely the “Book of the Fayyum,” another artistic rendering of a physical space (p. 125). 60) One might compare the similar practice of keeping commentary tab- lets alongside copies of older omen texts in Babylonian archives of the first millennium BCE; e.g. E. Frahm, “Royal Hermeneutics: Observations on the Commentaries from Assurbanipal’s Libraries at Nineveh,” Iraq 66 (1994), pp. 46-50.

995014_Bior_2011_5-6_01.indd5014_Bior_2011_5-6_01.indd 477477 116/02/126/02/12 12:4212:42