Ancient Records Of Egypt The Eighteenth Dynasty

Annotated Edition James Henry Breasted download

https://ebookbell.com/product/ancient-records-of-egypt-the-
eighteenth-dynasty-annotated-edition-james-henry-breasted-1228634

Explore and download more ebooks at ebookbell.com

Here are some recommended products that we believe you will be
interested in. You can click the link to download.

Ancient Records Of Egypt The Nineteenth Dynasty Annotated Edition

James Henry Breasted

https://ebookbell.com/product/ancient-records-of-egypt-the-nineteenth-
dynasty-annotated-edition-james-henry-breasted-1228638

Ancient Records Of Egypt The Twentieth To The Twentysixth Dynasties

Annotated Edition James Henry Breasted

https://ebookbell.com/product/ancient-records-of-egypt-the-twentieth-
to-the-twentysixth-dynasties-annotated-edition-james-henry-
breasted-1228640

Ancient Records Of Egypt The First Through The Seventeenth Dynasties

James Henry Breasted Breasted

https://ebookbell.com/product/ancient-records-of-egypt-the-first-
through-the-seventeenth-dynasties-james-henry-breasted-
breasted-26999238

Ancient Records Of Egypt Volume I The First Through The Seventeenth

Dynasties James Henry Breasted

https://ebookbell.com/product/ancient-records-of-egypt-volume-i-the-
first-through-the-seventeenth-dynasties-james-henry-breasted-26999136
Ancient Records Of Egypt Volume Iii The Nineteenth Dynasty Volume 3
James Henry Breasted

https://ebookbell.com/product/ancient-records-of-egypt-volume-iii-the-
nineteenth-dynasty-volume-3-james-henry-breasted-26999140

Ancient Records Of Egypt Supplementary Bibliographies And Indices

Annotated Edition James Henry Breasted

https://ebookbell.com/product/ancient-records-of-egypt-supplementary-
bibliographies-and-indices-annotated-edition-james-henry-
breasted-1228632

The Kojiki Records Of Ancient Matters Translated By Basil Hall

Chamberlain Unknown

https://ebookbell.com/product/the-kojiki-records-of-ancient-matters-
translated-by-basil-hall-chamberlain-unknown-58154012

The Kojiki Records Of Ancient Matters Chamberlain Basil Hall

https://ebookbell.com/product/the-kojiki-records-of-ancient-matters-
chamberlain-basil-hall-11368210

The Martyrs Of The Coliseum Or Historical Records Of The Great

Amphitheater Of Ancient Rome A J Oreilly

https://ebookbell.com/product/the-martyrs-of-the-coliseum-or-
historical-records-of-the-great-amphitheater-of-ancient-rome-a-j-
oreilly-33558962
class9 31
Library of Adelbert College u.1
o f Western Reserve University, Cleveland. 0.
ANCIENT RECORDS OF EGYPT
 ANCIENT RECORDS
UNDER T H E GENERAL EDITORSHIP OF
WILLIAM EAINEY HARPER

ANCIENT BECORDS O F ASSYRIA AND BABYLONIA

EDITED BY BOBEBT PBANCIB HAXPEE

ANCIENT RECOFUM OF EGYPT

EDITED BY JAMES BENBT BBEABTED

ANCIENT RECORDS OF PALESTINE.Pnamcu

AND SYRIA
EDITED BY WILLIAM XAINET HAPPEB
 ANCIENT RECORDS OF EGYPT '

HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS
FROM TEE EARLIEST TIMES 30 THE PERSIAN CONQUEST. COLLECTED
EDITED AND TRANSLATED WITH COMMENTARY

JAMES HENRY BREASTED, PH.D.

PBOFESSOB OF EGYPMLOOY AND O B E N T A L HISTORP
I N T E E UNIVEBEITY OF CHICAQO

VOLUME I1
THE EIGHTEENTH DYNASTY

-2 -
!2 +- C
CHICAGO
THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS
:L
j.-'ij7 1906
LONDON: LUZAC & CO. LEIPZIG : OTTO HABRASSOWITZ
 COPYBIGHT1908, BY
T CHICAGO
TEE U N ~ ~ B IOF Y
Published Mamh 1906

Compared snd Printad BY

The University of Chicago Prws
Chimp, Illinoie, U.S. A.
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

VOLUME I
THEDOCUMENTARY
SOURCES HISTORY
OF EGYPTIAN .
CHRONOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . .
CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE . . . . . . . .
THEPALERMO STONE:THEFIRSTTO THE FIFTH DYNASTIES
I. Predynastic Kings . . . . . . . .
.
I1 First Dynasty . . . . . . . . .
I11. Second Dynasty . . . . . . . .
.
IV Third Dynasty . . . . . . . . .
.
V Fourth Dynasty . . . . . . . .
V I . Fifth Dynasty . . . . . . . . .
THETHIRD DYNASTY . . . . . . . .
Reign of Snefru . . . . . . . . .
. .
Sinai Inscriptions . . . . . . .
.
Biography of Methen . . . . . . .
TEE FOURTHDYNASTY . . . . . . . .
Reign of Khufu . . . . . . . . .
Sinai Inscriptions . . . . . . . . .
Inventory Stela . . . . . . . . .
Examples of Dedication Inscriptions by Sons . .
Reign of Khafre . . . . . . . . .
Stela of Mertitybtes . . . . . . . .
Will of Prince Nekure. Son of King Khafre . . .
Testamentary Enactment of an Unknown Official.
Establishing the Endowment of His Tomb by the
Pyramid of Khafre . . . . . . . .
Reign of Menkure . . . . . . . . .
Debhen's Inscription. Recounting King Menkure's Erec-
tion of a Tomb for Him . . . . . . .
THEFIFTH DYNASTY. . . . . . . . .
Reign of Userkaf . . . . . . . . .
v

5 3 \ \2
vi TABLE OF CONTENTS

Testamentary Enactment of Nekonekh . . . .

.
I The Priesthood of Hathor . . . . .
I1. The Mortuary Priesthood of Khenuka- . .
I11. Nekonekh's Will . . . . . . .
.
IV Nekonekh's Mortuary Priesthood . . .
.
V Nekonekh's Mortuary Statue . . . . .
Testamentary Enactment of Senuonekh. Regulating
His Mortuary Priesthood . . . . . . .
Reign of Sahure . . . . . . . . .
Sinai Inscriptions . . . . . . . . .
Tomb Stela of Nenekhsekhmet . . . . . .
Tomb Inscription of Persen . . . . . . .
Reign of Neferirkere . . . . . . . .
Tomb Inscriptions of the Vizier. Chief Judge. and Chief
Architect Weshptah . . . . . . . .
Reign of Nuserre . . . . . . . . .
Sinai Inscription . . . . . . . . .
Tomb Inscriptions of Hotephiryakhet . . . .
Inscription of Ptahshepses . . . . . . .
Reign of Menkuhor . . . . . . . . .
Sinai Inscription . . . . . . . . .
Reign of Dedkere-Isesi . . . . . . . .
Sinai Inscriptions . . . . . . . . .
Tomb Inscriptions of Senezemib. Chief Judge. Vizier.
and Chief Architect . . . . . . . .
Mortuary Inscription of Nezemib . . . . .
Tomb Inscription of the Nomarch Henku . . .
THE SIXTH DYNASTY . . . . . . . . .
Reign of Teti . . . . . . . . . .
Inscriptions of Sabu. Also Called Ibebi . . . .
Inscription of Sabu. Also Called Thety . . . .
Inscription of an Unknown Builder . . . . .
Inscription of Uni . . . . . . . . . .
.
I Career under Teti (1. I) . . . . .
.
I1 Career under Pepi I (11. 2-32) . . . .
.
I11 Career under Mernere (11. 32-50) . . . .
Reign of Pepi I . . . . . . . . . .
Hammamat Inscriptions . . . . . . .
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. The King's Inscriptions . . . . .

I1. The Expedition's Inscription . . . .
I11. Chief Architect's Inscription . . . . .
IV. Inscription of the Treasurer of the God Ikhi .
Sinai Inscription . . . . . . . . .
Inscription in the Hatnub Quarry . . . . .
Inscription of Uni: I1 Career under Pepi I . . .
Reign of Mernere . . . . . . . . .
InscriptionsattheFirstCataract . . . . .
I. Northern Inscription . . . . . .
I1. Southern Inscription . . . . . .
Inscription of Uni: I11 Career under Mernere . .
Inscriptions of Harkhuf . . . . . . .
Inscriptions of Harkhuf (continued) . . . . .
Reign of Pepi I1 . . . . . . . . .
Conveyance of Land by Idu, Called Also Seneni . .
Sinai Inscription . . . . . . . . .
Stela of the Two Queens. Enekhnes-Merire . . .
Inscriptions of Harkhuf (continued from 8 336) . .
Letter of Pepi I1 . . . . . . . .
I. Dates and Introduction . . . . .
II . Acknowledgment of Harkhuf's Letter. .
I11. Harkhuf's Rewards . . . . . .
IV . Ki.ng's Instructions . . . . . .
InscriptionsofPepi-Nakht . . . . . .
Inscriptions of Khui . . . . . . . .
Inscriptions of Sebni . . . . . . . .
Inscriptions of Ibi . . . . . . . . .
Inscription of Zau . . . . . . . . .
Reign of Ity . . . . . . . . . .
Hammamat Inscription . . . . . . .
Reign of Imhotep . . . . . . . . . .
THENINTH AND TENTH
DYNASTIES . . . . .
Inscriptions of Siut . . . . . . . . .
I. Inscription of Tefibi . . . . . . .
I1. Inscription of Kheti I . . . . . .
I11. Inscription of Kheti I1 . . . . . .
viii TABLE OF CONTENTS

THEELEVENTH .
DYNASTY . . . . . .
The Nomarch. Intef . . . . . . .
Mortuary Stela . . . . . . . .
Reign of Horus-Wahenekh-Intef I . . . .
Royal Tomb Stela . . . . . . . .
Reign of Horus-Nakhtneb-Tepnefer-Intef I1 . .
Stela of Thethi . . . . . . . .
Reign of Nibhotep-Mentuhotep I . . . . .
Temple Fragments from Gebelen . . . .
Reigns of Intef I11 and Nibkhrure-Mentuhotep I1 .
Relief near Assuan . . . . . . .
Reign of Senekhkere-MentuhotepI11 . . . .
Hammamat Inscription of Henu . . . .
Reign of Nibtowere-Mentuhotep IV . . . .
HammamatInscriptions . . . . . .
I. The First Wonder . . . . . .
.
I1 The Official Tablet . . . . .
I11. The Commander's Tablet . . . .
.
IV The Second Wonder . . . . .
V. Completion of the Work . . . .
Stela of Eti . . . . . . . . .
DYNASTY.
THETWELFTH . . . . . . .
Chronology of Twelfth Dynasty . . . . . .
Reign of Amenemhet I . . . . . . . .
Inscription of Khnumhotep I . . . . . .
Hammamat Inscription of Intef . . . . . .
Inscription of Nessumontu . . . . . . .
Inscription of Korusko . . . . . . . .
The Teaching of Amenemhet . . . . . .
Dedication Inscription . . . . . . . .
The Tale of Sinuhe . . . . . . . .
Reign of Sesostris I . . . . . . . . .
The Building Inscription of the Temple of Heliopolis .
Inscription of Meri . . . . . . . .
Wadi Halfa Inscription of Mentuhotep . . . .
Inscription of Amenemhet (Ameni) . . . . .
Stela of Ikudidi . . . . . . . . .
Inscription of Intefyoker . . . . . . .
 TABLE OF CONTENTS ix
-~
50
Inscriptions of Mentuhotep . . . . . . 530-534
TheContractsofHepzefi . . . . . . 535-538
I. First Contract . . . . . . . . 539-543
I1. Second Contract . . . . . . . . 544-548
I11. Third Contract . . . . . . 549-553
IV . Fourth Contract . . . . . . + 554-558
V . Fifth Contract . . . . . . . 559-567
.
VI Sixth Contract . . . . . . . . 568-571
VII . Seventh Contract . . . . . . 572-575
VIII . Eighth Contract . . . . . . 576-581
I X . Ninth Contract . . . . . . . 582-588
X . Tenth Contract . . . . . . . 589-593
Reign of Amenemhet I1 . 594-613
Inscription of Simontu . . . . . . . . 594-598
Inscription of Sihathor . . . . . . . . 599-605
Sinai Inscription . . . . . . . . . 606
Stela of Khentemsemeti . 607-613
Reign of Sesostris I1 . . . . . . . . . 614-639
Inscription of Hapu . . . . . . . . 614-618
Inscription of Khnumhotep I1 . . . . . 619-639
Reign of Sesostris I11 . . . . . . . . 640-748
The Conquest of Nubia . 640-672
I. The Canal Inscriptions . 642-649
I. First Inscription . . . . . . . 643-645
I1. Second Inscription . . . . . . 646-645
I1. The Elephantine Inscription . . . . . 649-650
I11. The First Semneh Stela . . . . . . 651-652
.
IV The Second Semneh Stela . . . . . . 653-660
V . Inscription of Ikhernofret . . 661-670
.
VI Inscription of Sisatet . . . . . . . 671-673
See also . . .676 ff . and 687
HammamatInscription . . . . . . . 674-675
Stela of Sebek-Khu, called Zaa . 676-687
Inscriptions of Thuthotep . . . . . . . 688-706
Hammamat Inscriptions . 707-7 I 2
Inscriptions of Sinai . . . . . . . 713-738
I. Wadi Maghara . . . . . . . 713-723
I. Inscriptions of Khenemsu . . . . . 714-716
x TABLE OF CONTENTS

.
I1 Inscription of Harnakht . . .
.
I11 Inscription of Sebekdidi . . .
IV. Inscription of Ameni . . . .
I1. Sarbiitel-Khadem . . . . .
I. Inscription of Sebek-hir-hab . .
I1. Inscription of Ptahwer . . .
I11. Inscription of Amenemhet . . .
IV. Inscription of Harurre . . . .
Turra Inscription . . . . . . .
Inscription of Sehetepibre . . . . .
Reign of Amenemhet IV . . . . . .
KummehInscription . . . . . .
Sinai Inscriptions . . . . . . .
FROMTHE THIRTEENTH DYNASTY TO THE HYKSOS
Reign of Sekhemre-Khutowe . . . . .
Records of Nile-Levels . . . . . .
Reign of Neferhotep . . . . . . .
Great Abydos Stela . . . . . .
Boundary Stela . . . . . . .
Reign of Nubkheprure-Intef . . . . . .
Coptos Decree . . . . . . .
Reign of Khenzer . . . . . . .
Inscriptions of Ameniseneb . . . . .

VOLUME I1
THEEIGHTEENTH DYNASTY . . . . .
Reign of Ahmose I . .
Biography of Ahmose. Son of Ebana . .
I. Career under Ahmose I (11.1-24) . .
I1. Career under Amenhotep I (11. 24-29) .
I11. Career under Thutmose I (11. 29-39) .
Biography of Ahmose-Pen-Nekhbet . . .
I. Ahmose's Campaigns [Continued 8 401 .
.
I1 Ahmose's Rewards . . . . .
I11. Ahmose's Summary . . . . .
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Quarry Inscription . . . . . . .
Karnak Stela . . . . . . . . .
Building Inscription . . . . . . .
Reign of Amenhotep I . . . . . . .
Biography of Ahmose. Son of Ebana . . .
I1. Career under Amenhotep I (11. 24-29) . .
Biography of Ahmose-Pen-Nekhbet . . . .
Career under Amenhotep I . . . . .
Biography of Ineni . . . . . . .
I. Career under Amenhotep I . : . .
I1. Career under Thutmose I . . . .
111. Career under Thutmose I1 . . . .
IV . Career under Thutmose 111and Hatshepsut
Stela of Harmini . . . . . . . .
Stela of Keres . . . . . . . .
Reign of Thutmose I . . . . . . .
Coronation Decree . . . . . . .
Biographical Inscription of Thure . . . .
Tombos Stela . . . . . . . . .
Inscriptions at the First Cataract . . . .
I. Sehel Inscription . . . . . .
I1. Sehel Inscription . . . . . .
I11. Assuan Inscription . . . . . .
Inscription of Ahmose. Son of Ebana . . .
I11. Career under Thutmose I (11. 29-39) . .
Biography of Ahmose-Pen-Nekhbet . . . .
Career under Thutmose I . . . . .
Karnak Obelisks . . . . . . . .
Abydos Stela . . . . . . . . .
Biography of Ineni . . . . . . .
I1. Career under Thutmose I (11. 4-14) . .
Stela of Yuf . . . . . . . . .
Reign of Thutmose I1 . . . . . . .
Biography of Ineni . . . . . . .
111. Career under Thutmose I1 . . . .
Assuan Inscription . . . . . . .
Biography of Ahmose-Pen-Nekbet . . . .
IV. Career under Thutmose I1 . . . .
xii TABLE OF CONTENTS

Campaign in Syria . . . . . . . .
The Ebony Shrine of Der el-Bahri . . . . .
Reign of Thutmose I11 and Hatshepsut . . . .
Introduction . . . . . . . . . .
Inscription of the Coronation; Buildings and Offerings
Semneh Temple Inscriptions . . . . . .
I. Renewal of Sesostris 111's List of Offerings .
I1. Dedication to Dedun and Sesostris I11 . .
Biography of Nebwawi . . . . . . .
I. The Statue Inscription . . . . . .
I1. Abydos Stela . . . . . . . .
The Birth of Queen Hatshepsut . . . . .
I. The Council of the Gods . . . . .
I1. Inteniews Between Amon and Thoth . . .
I11. Amon with Queen Ahmose . . . . .
IV. Interview Between Amon and Khnum . .
V. Khnum Fashions the Child . . . . .
VI . Interview Between Thoth and Queen Ahmose
VII . Queen Ahmose is Led to Confinement . .
VIII . The Birth . . . . . . . . .
IX . Presentation of the Child to Amon . . .
X . Council of Amon and Hathor . . . .
X I . The Nursing of the Child . . . . .
XI1. Second Interview of Amon and Thoth . .
XI11. The Final Scene . . . . . . .
Statue of Enebni . . . . . . . . .
Vase Inscription . . . . . . . . .
The Coronation of Queen Hatshepsut . . . .
I. The Purification . . . . . . .
I1. Amon presents the Child to All the Gods . .
I11. The Northern Journey . . . . . .
IV. Coronation by Atum . . . . . .
V. Reception of the Crowns and the Names . .
. VI . Proclamation as King before Amon . . .
VII . Coronation before the Court . . . . .
VIII . Second Purification . . . . . . .
IX . Concluding Ceremonies . . . . . .
Southern Pylon Inscription at Karnak . . . .
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

The Punt Reliefs . . . . . . . . .

I. Departure of the Fleet . . . . . .
.
I1 Reception in Punt . . . . . . .
I11. The Traffic . . . . . . . .
IV. Loading the Vessels . . . . . . .
V. The Return Voyage . . . . . . .
VI . Presentation of the Tribute to the Queen by the
Chiefs of Punt, Irem and Nemyew . . .
VII . The Queen Oflers the Gifts to Arnon . . .
VIII . Weighing and Measuring the Gifts to Amon .
IX . Formal Announcement of the Success of the
Expedition before Amon . . . . . .
.
X Formal Announcement of the Success of the
Expedition to the Court . . . . . .
Inscription of the Speos Artemidos . . . . .
The Karnak Obelisks . . . . . . . .
I. Shaft Inscriptions; Middle Columns . . .
I1. Shaft Inscriptions; Side Columns . . . .
I11. Base Inscription . . . . . . .
Reliefs of Transportation of Obelisks . . . .
I. Transport . . . . . . . . .
I1. Reception in Thebes . . . . . .
I11. Dedication of the Obelisks . . . . .
Rock Inscription in Wadi Maghara . . . . .
Building Inscription of Western Thebes . . . .
Biography of Ineni . . . . . . . .
.
IV Career under Thutmose 111and Hatshepsut .
BiographyofAhmose-Pen-Nekhbet . . . . .
Conclusion of Summary . . . . . . .
Inscriptions of Senmut . . . . . . . .
I. Inscriptions on the Karnak Statue . . .
I1. Assuan Inscription . . . . . . .
I11. Inscriptions on the Berlin Statue . . . .
Inscription of Thutiy . . . . . . . .
Inscriptions of Puemre . . . . . . . .
I. Statue of Inscription . . . . . .
I1. Tomb Inscriptions . . . . . . .
Inscriptions of Hapuseneb . . . . . . .
xiv TABLE OF CONTENTS

Reign of Thutmose I11 . . . . . . . .

The Annals . . . . . . . . . .
TheAnnals: ConspectusofCampaigns . . . .
I. Introduction . . . . . . . .
.
I1 First Campaign (Year 23) . . . . .
Wadi Halfa Inscription . . . . . .
Fragment on the Siege of Megiddo . . . .
.
I11 Second Campaign (Year 24) . . . . .
IV . Third Campaign (Year 25) . . . . .
.
V Fourth Campaign . . . . . . .
VI . Fifth Campaign (Year 29) . . . . .
VII. Sixth Campaign (Year 30) . . . . .
.
VIII Seventh Campaign (Year 31) . . . . .
.
IX Eighth Campaign (Year 33) . . . . .
.
X Ninth Campaign (Year 34) . . . . .
.
XI TenthCampaign(Yearg5) . . . . .
XI1. Eleventh Campaign (Year 36) . . . .
.
XI11 Twelfth Campaign (Year 37) . . . .
.
XIV Thirteenth Campaign (Year 38) . . . .
.
XV Fourteenth Campaign (Year 39) . . . .
XVI. Fifteenth Campaign . . . . . . .
XVII . Sixteenth Campaign . . . . . . .
.
XVIII Seventeenth Campaign . . . . . .
.
XIX Conclusion . . . . . . . . .
Feasts and Offerings from the Conquests . . .
Biography of Amenemhab . . . . . . .
Fragments of Karnak Pylon VII . . . . .
Great Karnak Building Inscription . . . . .
Building Inscription of the Karnak Ptah-Temple . .
Obelisks . . . . . . . . . . .
I. Karnak Obelisks . . . . . . .
.
I1 Lateran Obelisks . . . . . . .
.
I11 Constantinople Obelisk . . . . . .
.
IV London Obelisk . . . . . . .
.
V New York Obelisk . . . . . . .
Medinet Habu Building Inscriptions . . . .
Heliopolis Building Inscriptions . . . . .
Nubian Wars . . . . . . . . . .
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

.I Canal Inscription . . . . . . .
I1. Inscriptions of Nehi. Viceroy of Kush . . .
.
I11 Offerings from the South Countries . . .
Hymn of Victory . . . . . . . .
Tomb of Rekhmire . . . . . . . .
I. Appointment of Rekhmire as Vizier . . .
I1. Duties of the Vizier . . . . . . .
I11. The Sitting of the Vizier . . . . .
.
IV Reception of Petitions . . . . . .
V . Inspection of Taxes of Upper Egypt . . .
.
A Above Thebes . . . . . . .
.
B Below Thebes . . . . . . .
.
VI Reception of Dues to the Amon-Temple . .
.
VII Inspection of Daily Offerings and of Monuments
VIII . Inspection of Craftsmen . . . . . .
.
IX Inspection of Sculptors and Builders . . .
.
X Reception of Foreign Tribute . . . .
X I . Accession of Amenhotep I1 . . . . .
Stela of Intef the Herald . . . . . . .
Tomb of Menkheperreseneb . . . . . .
Stela of Nibamon . . . . . . . . .
Reign of Amenhotep I1 . . . . . . . .
Asiatic Campaign . . . . . . . . .
.
I Karnak Stela . . . . . . . .
I1. Amiida and Elephantine Stelc . . . .
I11. Karnak Chapel . . . . . . . .
Turra Inscription . . . . . . . . .
Tomb of Amenken . . . . . . . .
KarnakBuildingInscription . . . . . .
Biography of Amenemhab . . . . . . .
Reign of Thutmose IV . . . . . . . .
Sphinx Stela . . . . . . . . . .
Asiatic Campaign . . . . . . . . .
Konosso Inscription . . . . . . . .
Lateran Obelisk . . . . . . . . .
Stela of Pe'aoke . . . . . . . . .
Reign of Amenhotep I11 . . . . . . . .
Birth and Coronation . . . . . . . .
xvi TABLE OF CONTENTS
I0
Nubian War . . . . . . . . . 842-855
I. Stela at First Cataract . . . . . . 843-844
I1. Stela of Konosso . . . . . . . 845
I11. Bubastis Inscription . . . . . . . 846-850
IV. Semneh Inscription . . . . . . . 851-855
Tablet of Victory . . . . . . . 856-859
The Commemorative Scarabs . 860-869
I. Marriage with Tiy . . . . . . . 861-862
I1. Wild Cattle Hunt . . . . . . . 863-864
I11. Ten Years Lion-Hunting . . . . . 865
IV. Marriage with Kirgipa . . . . . . 866-867
V. Construction of a Pleasure Lake . . 868-869
Jubilee Celebrations . . . . . . . . 870-874
Quarry and Mine Inscriptions . . . . . 875-877
Building Inscription . . . . . . . . 878-892
I. Introduction (11. 1-2) . . . . . . 882
I1. Temple of the (Memnon) Colossi (11. 2-10) . . 883-885
111. Luxor Temple and Connected Buildings . . 886-887
IV. Sacred Barge of Amon (11.16-20) . . . . 888
.
V Third Pylon of Karnak (11. 2-23) . . . 889
VI . Temple of Soleb (11. 23-26) . . . . . 890
VII. Hymn of Amon to the King (11. 26-31) . . 891-892
Building Inscriptions of the Soleb Temple . . . 893-898
Great Inscription of the Third Karnak Pylon . . . 899-903
Dedication Stela . . . . . . . . . 904-910
I. Speech of the King (11. 1-13) . . . . . 905-908
I1. Speech of Amon (11. 14-20) . . . . . 909
I11. Speech of the Divine Ennead (11. 20-24) . . 910
Inscriptions of Amenhotep, Son of Hapi . . . 911-927
I. Statue Inscription . . . . . . 913-920
11. Mortuary Temple Edict . . . . . 921-927
Statue of Nebnefer . . . . . . . 928-931
Reign of Ikhnaton . . . . . . . . . 932-1018
Quarry Inscription at Silsileh . . . . . 932-935
Tomb of the Vizier Ramose . . . . . . 936-948
The Tell El-Amarna Landmarks . . . . . 949-972
Assuan Tablet of the Architect Bek . . . . . 973-976
The Tell El-Arnarna Tombs . . . . . . 977-1018
 TABLE OF CONTENTS xvii
.
05
Tomb of Merire I1 . . . . . . . 981
Tomb of Merire I . . . . . . . . 982-988
Tomb of Eye . . . . . . . .
Tomb of Mai . . . . . . . .
Tomb of Ahmose . . . . . . .
Tomb of Tutu . . . . . . . .
Tomb of Huy . . . . . . . .
Reign of Tutenkhamon . . . . . . .
Tomb of Huy . . . . . . . . .
I. Investiture of the Viceroy of Kush . .
I1. Tribute of the North . . . . .
I11. Tribute of the South . . . . .
Reign of Eye . . . . . . . . .
LIST OF FIGURES
PAGE
Plan of Punt Reliefs . . . . . . . . . 1 0 5

VOLUME I11
THENINETEENTH DYNASTY . . .
Reign of Harmhab . . . . .
Tomb of Harmhab . . . .
I. Leyden Fragments . . .
.
I Stela with Adoration Scene
I1. Reward of Gold . . .
I1. Vienna Fragment . . .
I11. Alexandria Fragments . .
IV. British Museum Fragments .
.
I Doorposts . . . .
I1. Stela with Three Hymns .
V. Cairo Fragments . . .
Coronation Inscription . . . .
Graffiti in the Theban Necropolis .
The Wars of Harmhab . . . .
I. In the North . . . .
I1. In the South . . .
Edict of Harmhab . . . . .
vviii TABLE O F CONTENTS

I. Introduction (11. 1-10) . . . . . .

11. Introduction: The King's Zeal for the Relief of
the People (11. 10-14) . . . . . .
111. Enactment Against Robbing the Poor of Dues
for the Royal Breweries and Kitchens (ll. 14-17)
IV. Enactment Against Robbing the Poor of Wood
Due the Pharaoh (11. 17-18) . . . . .
V. Enactment Against Exacting Dues from a Poor
Man Thus Robbed (11. 18-20) . . . .
VI. Against Robbing the Poor of Dues for the Harem
or the Gods by the Soldiers (11. 20-24) . .
VII. Enactments Against Unlawful Appropriation of
Slave Service (11. 22-24) . . . . . .
VIII. Enactment Against Stealing of Hides by the
Soldiers (11. 25-28) . . . . . . .
IX. Against Connivance of Dishonest Inspectors with
Thievish Tax-Collectors, for a Share of the Booty
(11. 28-32) . . . . . . . . .
X. Enactment Against Stealing Vegetables Under
Pretense of Collecting Taxes (11. 32-35) . .
XI. Enactments too Fragmentary for Analysis (11. 35-
39) and Right Side (11. I , 2) . . . . .
XII. Narrative of the King's Reforms, Containing
Also an Enactment Against Corrupt Judges
(11. 3-7) . . . . . . . . .
XIII. Narrative of the King's Monthly Audiences and
Largesses (11. 7-10) . . . . . . .
XIV. Laudation of the King, and Conclusion (Left
Side) . . . . . . . . . .
Tomb of Neferhotep . . . . . . . .
Reign of Ramses I . . . . . . . . .
Wadi Halfa Stela . . . . . . . . .
Reign of Seti I . . . . . . . . . .
Karnak Reliefs . . . . . . . . .
Scene I. March through Southern Palestine . .
Scene 2. Battle with the Shasu . . . . .
Scene 3. Capture of Pekanan. . . . . .
Scene 4. Capture of Yenoam. . . . . .
 TABLE O F CONTENTS xix

Scene 5 . Submission of the Chiefs of Lebanon . .

Scenes 6 and 7. Binding and Carrying Away Prisoners
Scene 8. Reception in Egypt . . . . . .
Scene g . Presentation of Shasu Prisoners and Precious
Vessels to Amon . . . . . . . .
Scene 10. Presentation of Syrian Prisoners and
Precious Vessels to Amon . . . . . .
Scene 11. Slaying Prisoners Before Amon . . .
Scene 1 2. First Battle with the Libyans . . .
Scene 13 . Second Battle with the Libyans . . .
Scene 14. Return from Libyan War . . . .
Scene 15. Presentation of Libyan Prisoners and Spoil
to Amon . . . . . . . . . .
Scene 16. Capture of Kadesh . . . . .
Scene 17. Battle with the Hittites . . . . . .
.
Scene 18 Carrying off Hittite Prisoners . . .
Scene 19. Presentation of Hittite Spoil and Prisoners
to Amon . . . . . . . . . .
Scene 2 0. Slaying Prisoners before Amon . . .
Wadi Halfa Stela . . . . . . .
Inscriptions of Redesiyeh . . . . .
I. First Inscription . . . . . . .
I1. Second Inscription . . . . . . .
I11. Third Inscription . . . . . . .
Building Inscriptions . . . . . . . .
I. FirstCataractInscription . . . . .
I . Assuan Inscription . . . . . .
2 . Elephantine Stela . . . . . .
I1. Silsileh Quarry Stela . . . . . .
111. Gebelh Quarry Inscription . . . . .
IV . Mortuary Temple at Thebes (Kurna) . . .
V. Temple of Karnak . . . . . . .
VI. Mortuary Temple at Abydos . . . . .
VII . Temple Model of Heliopolis . . . . .
W I. Miscellaneous . . . . . . . .
Reign of Rarnses I1 . . . . . . . . .
Great Abydos Inscription . . . . . . .
Kubban Stela . . . . . . . . . .
xx TABLE OF CONTENTS
-- ---

PI
The Asiatic War . . . . . . . . . 294-391
I. Beginning of the Hittite War . . . 296-351
.
I First Campaign . . . . . . . 297
.
I1 Second Campaign: The Battle of Kadesh . 298-351
a . Poem of the Battle of M e s h . . . 305-315
b . Official Record of the Battle of Kadesh 316-327
c. The Reliefs of the Battle of Kadesh . . 328
.I The Council of War . . . 329-330
11. The Camp . . . . . . 331-332
I11. Ramses'Messengers . . . . 333-334
IV. The Battle . . . . . . 335-338
.
V The Defense of the Camp . . . 339-340
VI . After the Battle . . . . . 341-347
VII . Presentation of Captives to Amon . 348-351
I11. Palestinian Revolt . . . . . . . 352-362
.
I Reconquest of Southern Palestine . . . 353-355
.
I1 Reconquest of Northern Palestine . . . 356-362
IV . Campaign in Naharin . . . . . 363-391
I. Conquest of Naharin . . . . . 364-366
.
I1 Treaty with the Hittites . . . . 367-391
Relations of Egypt with the Hittites after the War . 392-491
I. The Blessing of Ptah . . . . . . 394-414
I1. Marriage Stela . . . . . . . . 415-424
I11. Message of the Chief of Kheta to the Chief of
Kode . . . . . . . . . . 425-426
.
IV Coptos Stela . . . . . . . . 427-428
V. Bentresh Stela . . . . . . . . 429-447
Nubian Wars and References to Northern Wars . . 448-491
I. Abu Simbel Temple . . . . . . 449-457
I1. Bet el-Walli Temple . . . . . . 458-477
I11. Assuan Stela . . . . . . . . 478-479
IV. Luxor Temple . . . . . . . . 480-484
V. Abydos Temple . . 485-486
VI. Tanis Stelae . . . . . . . . 487-491
Building Inscriptions . . . . . . . . 492-537
I. Great Temple of Abu Simbel. . . . . 495-499
I1. Small Temple of Abu Simbel . . . . . 500-501
I11. Temple of Serreh . . . . . . . 502
 TABLE OF CONTENTS xxi
It
TV. Temple of Derr . . . . . . . 503
V. Temple of SebQCa . . . . . . . 504
VI . Temple of el Kab . . . . . . . 505
VII . Temple of Luxor . . . . . . . 506-508
VIII . Temple of Karnak . . . . . . . 509-5'3
IX . The Ramesseum . . . . . . . 514-515
X. Temple of Kurna . . . . . . . 516-522
XI . Seti 1's Temple at Abydos and Great Abydos
Inscription . . . . . . . . .
XI1. Ramses 11's Temple at Abydos . . . .
XI11. Memphis Temples . . . . . . .
I . Great Abydos Inscription (1. 22) . . .
2 . Blessing of Ptah (11. 32, 35) . . . .
XIV . City of Tanis (Blessing of Ptah (11. 16-18) .
Stela of the Year 400 . . . . . . . .
Royal Jubilee Inscriptions . . . . . . .
I. First Gebel Silsileh Inscription . . . .
I1. Bigeh Inscription . . . . . . .
I11. Second Gebel Silsileh Inscription . . . .
IV . Third Gebel Silsileh Inscription . . . .
V. Fourth Gebel Silsileh Inscription . . . .
VI . Sehel Inscription . . . . . . .
VII . El Kab Inscription . . . . . . .
VIII . Fifth Gebel Silsileh Inscription . . . .
IX. Sixth Gebel Silsileh Inscription . . . .
Inscription of Beknekhonsu . . . . . . .
Reign of Merneptah . . . . . . . . .
The Invasion of Libyans and Mediterranean Peoples .
I. The Great Karnak Inscription . . . .
I1. The Cairo Column . . . . . . .
I11. The Athribis Stela . . . . . . .
IV. The Hymn of Victory . . . . . .
Inscriptions of the High Priest of Amon, Roy . .
Daybook of a Frontier Official . . . . . .
Letter of a Frontier Official . . . . . .
Reign of Siptah . . . . . . . . . .
Nubian Graffiti . . . . . . . . .
xxii TABLE O F CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES
PAGE
Fig . r . Plan of the Reliefs of Seti I. on the North Wall of the
Great Hall of Karnak . . . . . . . .
Fig . 2 . Seti I on the Route through Southern Palestine
(Scene I) . . . . . . . . . . .
Fig . 3 . Showing Two Superimposed Figures . . . . .
Fig. 4. Inserted Figure of "First King's-Son" . . . .
Fig . 5 . An Unknown Prince Following the Chariot of Seti I
(Scene 14) . . . . . . . . . .
Fig . 6. Figure of an Unknown Prince Inserted in a ~ r a ~ m e n -
tary Scene (5 130) . . . . . . . .
Fig . 7 . Map of the Orontes Valley in the Vicinity of
Kadesh . . . . . . . . . . .
Fig . 8. March to Kadesh: First Positions . . . . .
Fig. g . Battle of Kadesh: Second Positions . . . . .
Fig . 10. Battle of Kadesh: Third Positions . . . . .
Fig. 11. Battle of Kadesh: Fourth Positions . . . .
Fig . 12. Battle of Kadesh: Fifth Positions . . . . .
Fig . 13. The Modem Mound of Kadesh . . . . .

VOLUME I V
THETWENTIETH DYNASTY . . . . . . .
Reign of Ramses I11 . . . . . . . .
Medinet Habu Temple . . . . . . . .
Building and Dedication Inscriptions . . . .
Historical Inscriptions . . . . . . .
I. Treasury of Medinet Habu Temple . . .
I1. First Libyan War. Year 5 . . . . .
I . Great Inscription in the Second Court
(Year 5) . . . . . . . .
I11. Northern War. Year 8 . . . . . .
I . Great Inscription on the Second Pylon.
Year 8 . . . . . . . . .
2 . Relief Scenes Outside North Wall and in
Second Court. Year 8 . . . . .
N . Second Libyan War . . . . . .
 TABLE O F CONTENTS

I . Great Inscription on the First Pylon (Medi-

net Habu) . . . . . . .
2. Poem on Second Libyan War . . .
3. Relief Scenes on First Pylon and Outside
North Wall (Medinet Habu) . . .
4. Papyrus Harris . . . . . .
V. The Syrian War . . . . . . .
VI . The Nubian War . . . . . .
Medinet Habu Temple Calendar . . . . .
Act of Endowment of the Temples of Khnum . .
Papyrus Harris . . . . . . . . .
Discussion of . . . . . . . . .
Content :
I. Introduction . . . . . . . .
I1. Theban Section . . . . . . .
I11. Heliopolitan Section . . . . . .
IV. Memphite Section . . . . . . .
V. General Section (Small Temples) . . .
VI . Summary . . . . . . . .
VII . Historical Section . . . . . . .
Record of the Royal Jubilee . . . . . .
Records of the Harem Conspiracy . . . . .
I . Appointment of the Court . . . . .
I1. The Condemned of the First Prosecution . .
I11. The Condemned of the Second Prosecution .
IV. The Condemned of the Third Prosecution . .
V. The Condemned of the Fourth Prosecution .
VI . The Acquitted . . . . . . . .
VII . The Practicers of Magic . . . . .
Reign of Ramses IV . . . . . . . .
Hammamat Stela . . . . . . . . .
I. The First Stela . . . . . . . .
I1. The Second Stela . . . . . . .
Abydos Stela . . . . . . . . . .
Building Inscription of the Khonsu Temple . . .
Reign of Ramses V . . . . . . . . .
Tomb Dedication . . . . . . . . .
Reign of Ramses VI . . . . . . . . .
xxiv TABLE O F CONTENTS

Tomb of Penno . . . . . . . . .
Reign of Ramses VII . . . . . . . .
Stela of Hori . . . . . . . . . .
Reign of Ramses IX . . . . . . . . .
Inscriptions of the High Priest of Amon. Amenhotep
I. Building Inscriptions . . . . . .
I1. Records of Rewards . . . . . .
* The Records of the Royal Tomb-Robberies . . .
I. Papyrus Abbott . . . . . . . .
I1. Papyrus Amherst . . . . . . .
I11. Turin Fragment . . . . . . .
IV . Mayer Papyri . . . . . . . .
Reign of Ramses XI1 . . . . . . . .
The Report of Wenamon . . . . . . .
Records of the Restoration of the Royal Mummies .
Letter to the Viceroy of Kush . . . . . .
Building Inscriptions in the Temple of Khonsu . .
THE TWENTY-FIRST DYNASTY . . . . . . .
The Twenty-First Dynasty . . . . . . .
Reign of Hrihor . . . . . . . . .
Inscriptions of the Temple of Khonsu . . . .
Reign of Nesubenebded . . . . . . .
GebelCn Inscription . . . . . . . .
Reign of the High Priest and King Paynozem I . .
I. Paynozem I as High Priest . . . . .
BuildingInscriptions . . . . . .
Records on the Royal Mummies . . . .
I1. Paynozem I as King . . . . . .
Records on the Royal Mumpies . . . .
BuildingInscriptions . . . . . .
High Priesthood of Menkheperre . . . . .
Stela of the Banishment . . . . . . .
Record of Restoration . . . . . . .
Karnak Graffito . . . . . . . . .
Records on the Royal Mummies . . . . .
High Priesthood of Paynozem I1 . . . . .
Records on the Priestly Mummies . . . . .
Records on the Royal Mummies . . . . .
 TABLE O F CONTENTS xxv

Record of Paynozem 11's Burial . . . . .

Stela of the "Great Chief of Me. " Sheshonk . .
High Priesthood of Pesibkhenno . . . . .
Records on Mummy-Wrappings . . . . .
Burial of Nesikhonsu . . . . . . .
Records on the Royal Mummies . . . . .
THETWENTY-SECONDDYNASTY . . . . . .
Records of Nile-Levels at Karnak . . . . .
Reign of Sheshonk I . . . . . . . .
Records on Mummy-Bandages of Zeptahefonekh . .
Building Inscription . . . . . . . .
Great Karnak Relief . . . . . . . .
Presentation of Tribute . . . . . . .
Karnak Stela . . . . . . . . . .
Dakhel Stela . . . . . . . . . .
Reign of Osorkon I . . . . . . . . .
Record of Temple Gifts . . . . . . .
Reign of Takelot I . . . . . . . . .
Statue of the Nile-God Dedicated by the High Priest.
Sheshonk . . . . . . . . . .
Reign of Osorkon I1. . . . . . . . .
Flood Inscription . . . . . . . . .
* Statue Inscription . . . . . . . . .
Jubilee Inscriptions . . . . . . . .
Reign of Takelot I1 . . . . . . . . .
Graffito of Harsiese . . . . . . . .
Stela of Kerome . . . . . . . . .
Reign of Sheshonk 111 . . . . . . . .
Annals of the High Priest of Amon. Osorkon . . .
I. East of Door . . . . . . . .
I1. West of Door . . . . . . . .
FirstSerapeumStelaofPediese . . . . . .
Record of Installation . . . . . . . .
Reign of Pemou . . . . . . . . . .
Second Serapeum Stela of Pediese . . . . .
Reign of Sheshonk IV . . . . . . . .
Stela of Weshtehet . . . . . . . .
xxvi TABLE O F CONTENTS
00
Serapeurn Stela of Harpeson . . . . . 785-792
THETWENTY.THIRDDYNASTY . . . . . . 793-883
Records of Nile-Levels at Karnak . . . . 793-794
Reign of Osorkon I11 . . . . . . . . 795
Will of Yewelot . . . . . . . . . 795
Reign of Piankhi . . . . . . . . . 796-883
The Piankhi Stela . . . 796-883
THETWENTY-FOURTH
DYNASTY . . . . . . 884
Reign of Bocchoris . . . . . . . . . 884
Serapeurn Stela: . . . . . . . . . 884
THETWENTY-FIFTH
DYNASTY . . . . . .
Records of the Nile-Levels at Karnak . . . .
Reign of Shabaka . . . . . . . . .
Building Inscription . . . . . . . .
Reign of Taharka . . . . . . . . .
Tanis Stela . . . . . . . . . .
Building Inscription in Large Cliff-Temple of Napata
Inscription of Menternhet . . . . . . .
Serapeurn Stela . . . . . . . . .
Reign of Tanutamon . . . . . . . .
Stela of Tanutarnon . . . . . . . .
THETWENTY-SIXTH DYNASTY . . . .
Reign of Psarntik I . . . . . . .
Adoption Stela of Nitocris . . . . .
Statue Inscription of the Chief Steward. Ibe .
First Serapeurn Stela . . . . . .
Second Serapeurn Stela . . . . .
Statue Inscription of Hor . . . . .
Reign of Necho . . . . . . . .
Serapeum Stela . . . . . . .
BuildingInscription . . . . . .
Reign of Psamtik I1 . . . . . . .
Statue Inscription of Neferibre-Nofer . .
Reign of Apries . . . . . . . .
'Serapeum Stela . . . . . . .
Stela of the Divine Consort Enekhnesneferibre
Inscription of Nesuhor . . . . .
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Reign of Arnasis (Ahmose 11). . . . .

Elephantine Stela . . . . . . .
Serapeum Stela . . . . . . .
Statue Inscription of the General Ahmose .
.
Statue Inscription of Pefnefdineit . .
Mortuary Stelre of the Priest Psamtik . .
LIST OF FIGURES
PAFIE
Plan of Scenes and Inscriptions in Medinet Habu Temple . . 5
EXPLANATION O F TYPOGRAPHICAL SIGNS AND
SPECIAL CHARACTERS
I. The introductions to the documents are in twelve-
point type, like these lines.
2. All of the translations are in ten-point type, like this line.
3. In the footnotes and introductions all quotations from
the documents in the original words of the translation are
in italics, inclosed in quotation marks. Italics are not
employed in the text of the volumes for any other purpose
except for titles.
4. The lines of the original document are indicated in
the translation by superior numbers.
5. The loss of a word in the original is indicated by
-, two words by - -, three words by - - -, four
words by - - - -, five words by - - - - --, and
more than five by . A word in the original is
estimated at a "square7' as known to Egyptologists, and
the estimate can be but a very rough one.
6. When any of the dashes, like those of No. 5 , are in-
closed in half-brackets, the dashes so inclosed indicate not
lost, but uncertain words. Thus r-1 represents one un-
certain word, r- -1 two uncertain words, and r 1
more than five uncertain words.
7. When a word or group of words are inclosed in half-
brackets, the words so inclosed are uncertain in meaning;
that is, the translation is not above question.
8. Roman numerals I, 11, 111, and IV, not preceded by
the title of any book or journal, refer to these four volumes
of Historical Documents. The Arabic numerals following
such Romans refer to the numbered paragraphs of these
volumes. All paragraph marks (Q and $0, without a
oma an) refer to paragraphs of the same volume.
g. For signs used in transliteration, see Vol. I, p. xv.
xxviii
THE EIGHTEENTH DYNASTY
 REIGN OF AHMOSE I
BIOGRAPHY OF AHMOSE, SON OF EBANAa
I. This inscription" contains the biography of a naval
officer, Ahmose, a nobleman of El Kab, who served with
distinction under three successive kings: Ahmose I, Amen-
hotep I, and Thutmose I, his father having served under
the predecessor of Ahmose I, Sekenenre. It is especially
important, because it is our only contemp3rary source for
the expulsion of the Hyksos, and forms, with the biography
of Ahmose-Pen-Nekhbet (Q B I 7 ff.), our only source for the
warsof the early Eighteenth Dynasty; for the royal records
of this critical period have totally perished. The family of
nomarchs at El Kabb were strong supporters of the rising
dynasty, and it is clear that such loyalty was liberally re-
warded with the gifts of slaves and land,' of which both
the El Kab Ahmoses boast. I t was by thus cementing a
firm friendship with such local nobility that the first kings
-

aOn the wall of Ahmose's cliff-tomb at El Kab; in two parts: the first,
of 31 lines on the right-hand wall, and the second, of 8 lines, on the door-wall at
the left of door. Text: Champollion, Notices descriptives, I, 655-57, only 26
lines, and very inaccurate; first completely published by Lepsius, Denkmaler, 111, 1 2 ,
a and d; thence inaccurately copied by Rheinisch, Chrestomathie, P1. 6, omitting
d; and equally incorrectly, Lemm, Lesestucke, 67; Bunsen, Egypt's Place, zd ed.,
V, 732, 733 (beginning only). I have collated the excellent Berlin squeezc (Nc.
172), which mostly sustains Lepsius, Denkmaler, but furnishes some important
corrections. Valuable discussion of difficult passages by Piehl, Proceedings of the
Socieby of Biblical Archeology, XV, 256-58, and Sphinx, 111, 7-12.
bThe family is far older than the Empire, and already under the Thirteenth
Dynasty enjoyed the favor of the king (Lepsius, Denkmder, 111, 14, b ) ; but it is
impossible to trace the line back of Ahmose, son of Ebana's grandmother.
cA boundary stone marking one limit of such a gift by Thutmose I was acquired
hy the Berlin Museum in 1899. I t reads: "Southern boundary of the fields given
as a favor of the royal presence, to the orderly (snn) of his majesty, Nekri ( N k r y ) ;
150 stat," See a similar tablet in Mariette, Monuments divers, 47A, under Thut-
mose N.
3
4 EIGHTEENTH DYNASTY: AHMOSE I [B 2

of the Eighteenth Dynasty maintained themselves during

their long and exhausting wars. The royal children were
even intrusted to these El Kab princes, to be reared under
their chargeja and they finally ruled from El Kab to
Esneh.
2. The ten campaigns in which Ahmose took part are
treated in the respective reigns under which they fall, as
follows:
I. Career under Ahmose I, 11. 1-24 (19 4 ff.).
11. Career under Amenhotep I, 11. 24-29 (Q 1 38 f.).
111. Career under Thutmose I, 11. 29-39 ($1 78 ff.).
3. The immediate authorship of the inscription is estab-
lished by the neighboring relief. Ahmose is represented as
standing at the left, and before him is his grandson, Pahri
(P '-Fry), accompanied by the following words:
By the son of his daughter the conductor of the works in this tomb,
perpetuating the name of the father of his mother, the draughtsmanC
of Amon, Pahri,d triumphant.

The long inscription was therefore executed by Ahmose's

grandson, Pahri, who was a draughtsman.

I. CAREER UNDER AHMOSE I

[Ll. 1-24; continued f $ 3 8 ff.]

After an introduction and a few .words about his

4.
youth and parentage, Ahmose plunges directly into his first

aSee Tomb of Pahri, "Eleventh Memoir," Egyptian Exploration Fund, and

Lepsius, Denkmder, 111, 10, b and 11, b.
bPahri, grandson of Ahmose, son of Ebana, was "prince of Esneh ( Y n y . t ) ,
governor of the soulhern lands h't), satisfying the excellent heart of his lord from
the House of Hathor to El Kab." Tylor, Tomb of Pahri, P1. 111.
cSee Goodwin, Zeitschrift far iigyptische Sprache, 1872, 2 1 .
dHis tomb is the most interesting one at El Kab; see The Tomb of Pahri ef
Kab, b y Griffith and Tylor, "Eleventh Memoir," of Egyptian Exploration Fund.
8 51 BIOGRAPHY OF AHMOSE; SON OF EBANA 5

campaign, with an account of a siege of the city of Hatwaret

(ht-w r't). This can be no other than the city called
Avaris by Manetho (Josephus, Contra Apion, I, ~ q ) where,
,
according to him, the Hyksos make their last stand in
Egypt. a I t is also mentioned as the residence of the Asiatics
(C 'mw, 8 303,l. 37) by Hatshepsut, and by a papyrus of the
late Nineteenth D ~ n a s t yas
, ~ the residence of an Apophis;
so that there is no doubt about the identification with
Avaris. The siege, which must have lasted many years, was
interrupted by the rebellion of some disaffected noble in
Upper Egypt; but the city was finally captured, and the
Hyksos, fleeing into Asia, were pursued to the city of Sharuhen
(Josh. 19:6). Here they were besieged for six years by
Ahmose I, and this stronghold was also captured. I t was
probably at the conclusion of this siege that Ahmose I
pushed northward and invaded Syria, as narrated by
Ahmose-Pen-Nekhbet (5 zo), probably still in pursuit of the
last remnants of the Hyksos.
5 . The king now returned, and carried his army to the
other extreme of his domain, invading Nubia. He was
recalled from a successful campaign there, to quell two
successive rebellions, the last of the internal dissensions
which had distracted the country since the fall of the Middle
Kingdom. At this point the wars, and probably the reign,
of Ahmose I closed, Ahmose, son of Ebana, having gained
distinction in all his campaigns.

aAccording to Egypt Exploration F u d Archreo2ogical Report (~goc-1901,IS),

there is in Cairo a stela containing a reference to this war with the Hyksos, but I
have been unable to gain any information concerning it. I t is probably $30.
bSallier I, 1-3; it contains a folk-tale narrating the cause of the war between
a Hyksos king, Apophis in Avaris, and a Sekenenre, who was ruler (hk 3 in Thebes.
Unfortunately, only the beginning is preserved. Most of the current translations
and interpretations of this document are largely the products of a vivid irnagina-
tion.
6 EIGHTEENTH DYNASTY: AHMOSE I [i 6

Introductory Address
6 . 'Chief of the sailors, Ahmose ( Y h-ms), son of Ebana C- b3-n'),
triumphant; =he says: "I will tell you, 0 all ye people; I will cause
you to know the honors which came to me. I was presented with gold
seven timesa in the presence 30f the whole land; male and female slaves
likewise. I was endowed with very many fields." The fame of one
valiant in his achievements shall not perish 4in this land f0rever.b

H i s Youth
7. He speaks as follows: "I spent my youth in the city of NekhebC
(Nbb), my father being an officer of the king of Upper and Lower
Egypt, Sekenenre (Sknyn R -), triumphant, Baba (B 'b '), %on of
Royenet, (R3-yn't), was his name. Then I served as an officer in his
stead, in the ship 'The Offering' in the time of the Lord of the Two
Lands, Nebpehtire (Nb-phty-R C, Ahmose I), triumphant, 6while I was
(still) young, not having taken a wife,d and while I was still sleeping in
the r-1 garment.e Then after I set up a household, I was trans-
ferred 'to the northern fleet, because of my valor. I followed the king
on footf when he rode abroad in his %hariot.

Campaign against the Hyksos; Siege of Avaris

8. One besieged the city of Avaris (Ht-w r' t) ; I showed valor on
footf before his majesty; then I was appointed sto (the ship) 'Shining-
in-Memphis.'g

aAhmose has recorded elsewhere in his tomb (Lepsius, Denkmiiler, 111, 12, c)
a list of the gifts he received, making a total of 9 men and 10women; the total of
land is lost. This does not agree with 'his narrative, which does not summarize,
but in different gifts mentions in all 9 men and 7 women received from the king,
and 8 men and 7 women captured.
bThis last statement is probably a proverbial phrase; see Spiegelberg, Recueil,
XXVI, 41, 42.
cEl Kab. dSee Miiller, Liebespoesie, 3.
eThis is, of course, some garment worn by a youth; cf. the girdle of Uni's
youth (I, 294, 1. I ) .
fLit., "on my two feet;" this is emphasized as land service, Ahmose being a
naval officer.
gReward after the first battle at Avaris.
$121 BIOGRAPHY OF AHMOSE, SON OF EBANA 7

Second Battle of Avaris

g. One fought on the water in the canal: Pezedku (P3-@kw) of
Avaris. Then I fought hand to hand, I0I brought away a hand.a I t
was reported to the royal herald. One gave to me the gold of valor.b

Third Battle of Avaris

10. Then there was again fighting in this place; I again fought
hand to hand "there; I brought away a hand. One gave to me the
gold of braverv in the second place.

First Rebellion, Interrupting Siege of Avaris

I I. One fought in this south of this city; lathen I brought
away a living captive, a man; I descended into the water; behold, he
was broughte as a seizure upon the road of this I S ~ i t y ('although')
,~ I
crossed with him over the water. I t was announced to the royal herald.
Then one presentedf me with gold in double measure.g

Capture of Avaris
12. One '4captured Avaris; I took captive there one man and three
women, total four heads, his majesty gave them to me for s l a ~ e s . ~

aCut off as a trophy, from a slain enemy.

bReward after the second battle. CReward after the third battle.
dThere can be no doubt that the word (km't) means here, as always elsewhere,
"Egypt;" "this city" is then El Kab, for the word "south" is an adjective femi-
nine agreeing with "Egypt." The phrase can only be translated into a language
like Greek or German, thus: "in diesem siidlich von dieser Stadt befindlichen
Aegypten." The siege of Avaris is therefore interrupted by a rebellion in upper
Egypt, similar to the two later ones (85 IS, 16), and for this reason the narrative
particularly specifies "this Egypt, sozllh,'etc." See also $ 13, 1. IS.
eContrast with this the two men "captured as a seizure upon the ship of the
enemy" (1. 2 1 ) . There is no ground for the fanciful rendering, indicating that he
lost his way! Ahmose means that, although obliged to descend to and cross over
the water (of some canal) with his prisoner, he brought him away as safely as one
seized upon the road of the city.
*Read hr for myk (confusion from hieratic ?), as in 1. 28.
gReward after the fourth battle.
hReward after the fifth battle; apparently Avaris was captured on the fourth
assault; but these brief references to fighting may each one indicate a whole season
of the siege, which would then have lasted four years, as that of Sharuhen lasted
six. See 3 13.
8 EIGHTEENTH DYNASTY: AHMOSE I 15 13

Siege of Shuruhen
13. ISOne besieged Sharuhena (S>-r>-h>-n') for 6 years,b (and)
his majesty took it. Then I took captive there two women and one
hand. 'bone gave me the gold of bravery, 'besides1 giving me the
captives for slaves.
Campaign against Nub&
14. Now, after his majesty had slain the Asiatics (Mntyw SB), 17he
ascended the river to Khenthennofer (gnt-hn-nfr), to destroy the
Nubian Troglod~tes;~ his majesty made a great slaughter among them.
then I took captive there, two living men, and three hands. One
presented me with gold in double measure, rbesidesl giving to me two
female slavesd '9His majesty sailed down-stream, his heart joyous
with the might of victory, (for) he had seized Southerners and North-
erners.
Second Rebellion
15. '"There came an enemy of the South; his fate, his destruction
approached; the gods of the South seized him, and his majesty found
him in Tintto-emu (Tynt-t J-C m ~ ) .His ~ majesty camed him off "a
living prisoner, and all his people carried captive. I carried away two

aCf. Josh. 1g:6.

blepsius, Denkmiiler, has "5," which has been generally accepted; Cham-
pollion's text and Brugsch's translation have "6." I repeatedly examined the
squeeze for this point with especial care; it has a clear "6." The correctness of
the rendering "for 6 years" rather than " i n the year 6" has been clearly demon-
strated by Piehl (Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archeology, XV, 258).
Another proof is that m,the preposition here, is used all through the Beknekhonsu
inscription (Munich) for "during" or "for" a period of years. This throws a new
light on the whole Asiatic campaign, for the stubbornness of the besieged and the
persistence of Ahmose are almost certainly an indication that the siege is an exten-
sion of the campaign against the Hyksos, who, having retreated to Shamhen, are
here making their last stand. We may suppose, therefore, that the siege of Avaris
itself also lasted many years, allowing opportunity for a rebellion in Upper Egypt.
See 5 11, 1. 11.
cCf. Miiller, Asien und Europa, 2 1 .
dThese slaves being women, are not the two captives just taken, as the trans-
lations of Renouf and Petrie indicate.
eLit., "She of the land of the water-suppb" (Cmw, "water-supply," occurs
at Siut, I, 407, 1. 6, and in Rekhmire, $698, 1. 25); possibly the district of the
first cataract is meant, as the rebellion was in the South. The name is elsewhere
unknown.
H 171 BIOGRAPHY OF AHMOSE-PEN-NEKHBET 9

archersa as a seizure in the ship of the enemy;b one 22gaveto me five

heads besides pieces of land (amounting to) five stat (st in my city.d
It was done to all the sailors likewise.

Third Rebellion
16. Then came that fallen one,e "whose name was Teti-en ( T ~ Yrc)- ~$
he had gathered to himself rebe1s.g His majesty slew him and his
servants: annihilatingi them. There were given %o me three heads,
and fields (amounting to) five statj in my city.
[Continued §§ 38 ff.]

BIOGRAPHY OF AHMOSE-PEN-NEKHBET
17. This El Kab nobleman, like Ahmose, son of Ebana
(09 1-16), served under the first kings of the Eighteenth
Dynasty, but he lived to a greater age. Beginning his
career under Ahmose I, he continued under Amenhotep I,
Thutmose I , 11, and 111, and died enjoying the favor of
Thutmose I11 and Hatshepsut. He has separated his

aThis hitherto uncertain word ( m y g 3 is rendered tolerably certain by a

scene in the tomb of Harmhab (Mimires de la mission fran~aiseau Caire, V , P1.
111, foll. p. 434; see also 420)~where it bears the determinative of shooting, and
stands over a man with a bow, with the title "chief archer (myg >) of his majesty."
bThe determinative indicates an enemy, not a proper name, but the meaning
of the word p > t >)is unknown. The rendering "Mvreux" from Chabas is based
on an impossible etymology. See Piehl, Sphinx, 111, 11.
cA land measure containing about seven-tenths acres, here in apposition with
"pieces of land."
dEl Kab. eTerm of contempt for a foe.
f There is no reason for supposing that this is not the rebel's real name. On
the contrary, this very name was especially common at this period; see the ushebtis
published by Borchardt (Zeitschrift far agyptische Sprache, 32, pp. 1 1 3 f.).
&it., "the wicked of heart."
hWritten feminine(!) in the text.
iLit., "as that which exists not."
iA land measure containing about seven-tenths of an acre, here in apposition
with "pieces of land."
10 EIGHTEENTH DYNASTY: AHMOSE I [Q18

biography into three parts: his campaigns,a his rewards,

and a summary.

[Continued 5 401
18. He enumerates his campaigns and his captures under
Ahmose I, Amenhotep I, Thutmose I and 11.
I. Career under Ahmose I
19. His meager reference to a campaign of Ahmose I in
Zahi is our sole source of knowledge for that event. It
probably followed the capture of Sharuhen.
Campaign in Syria
20. 'Hereditary prince, count, wearer of the royal seal,e chief
treasurer, herald 'of his Lord: -1, a gAhmose, called Pen-Nekhbet
(Pn-Nw't), triumphant; he says: "I followed King Nebpehtire (Nb-
phty-R C, Ahmose I), triumphant. 31 captured for him in Zahi (D '-hy)
a living prisoner and a hand."
[Continued Q 401

Campaigns, three originals: (I) statue-base belonging to Mr. Finlay, Zed-

s c h r t fiir agyptische Spruche, 1883, 77, 78; (2) statue-base in the Louvre, Lepsius,
Auswahl & wichtigsten Urkun&n, XIV A; Prisse, Monuments igyptiens, IV;
(3)' Ahmose's tomb-wall at El Kab, Lepsius, D e n k d e r , 111, 43, a (lower left-
hand corner), and Sethe, Utz&rszuhungen, I, 85. All sources have been collated.
bRewards, two originals: (I) statue-base belonging to Mr. Finlay, Zeitschrift
fiir dgyptische Sprache, 1883, 78; (2) statue-bas: in the Louvre, Lepsius, Auswahl
& wichtigsten U r k u h , XIV B ; Prisse, Monumeds igyptiens, IV.
CSummary, Ahmose's tomb-wall in El Kab, Lepsius, Denkmder, 111, 43, a ,
11. 10-20; Sethe, Unterszuhungen, I, 85, corrected and revised; and partially,
Lepsius, Denkmiiler, Text, IV, 46.
dThe translation of the campaigns is distributed under the different reigns,
under which he lived, because they furnish very important historical events, but
his rewards and the summary, being more purely personal, are given in this reign.
eAll except the Finlay text insert other titles here, but, except the first, "sole
companion," they are illegible.
f All the other texts have whm kf c, which would mean "repeating captures."

This unusual title was also in the rewards (1. 4).

gLines numbered from the Finlay statue text.
8 251 BIOGRAPHY O F AHMOSE-PEN-NEKHBET II

.
2 I . I. . . . . a. . . . . . 3 . . . . . . 4. . .a Ahmose, called Pen-Nekhbet ;
he says: "By the ssovereign, who lives forever! I was not separated
from the king upon the battlefield, from (the time of) 6King Neb-
pehtire (Ahmose I), triumphant, to King Okhepernere (Thutmose II),
triumphant; I was in the favor 7of the king's presence, until King
Menkheperre (Thutmose 111), living f ~ r e v e r . ~
22. King Zeserkere (Amenhotep I), triumphant, gave to me, S ~ f
gold: two bracelets, two necklaces, an armlet, a dagger, a headdress,
a fan, and a mekhtebet.
23. 9King Okheperkere (Thutmose I), triumphant, gave to me,
of gold: two bracelets, four necklaces, one armlet, six flies,c ~othree
lions ;d two golden axes.
24. King Okhepernere (Thutmose II),e triumphant, gave to me
of gold: three bracelets, six necklaces, three armlets, a mekhtebet;
a silver axe."

25. I0gHe says, "I followed the Kings I1of Upper and Lower
agypt, the gods; I was with '*their majesties when they went to the
South and North country, in every place where they went; [from] IsKing
Nebpehtire (Ahmose I), triumphant, King Zeserkere (Amenhotep I)
[triumphant], King '40kheperkere (Thutmose I), triumphant, King

aunimportant titles of Ahmose (see 5 20, 1. I) very fragmentary; lines are

numbered according to text in Lepsius, Aumahl der wichtigsten Urkunden.
bThis phrase shows that Thutmose I11 is still alive at this time, but Ahmose
is now too old to be "upon the battlejkld," under him.
CThese are golden flies, like those among Ahhotep's jewelry at Cairo. They
were a decoration of honor. The word has been mistranslated "helmets." See
Breasted, Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archaology, 1900, pp. 94, 95.
dCf. inscription of Amenemhab, $585.
eFinlay text, according to Maspero's copy, has Thutmose I; corrected by Mas-
pero, Struggle of the Nations, 239, n. I , as above.
fAhmosels tomb-wall in El Kab; published by Lepsius, Denkmiiler, 111,
43, a, 11. 10-20; ibid., Text, IV, 46; Sethe, Untersuchungen, I, 85, corrected and
revised, most of the lacunae restored from Lepsius' papers and his squeeze.
gThe summary does not begin until 1. 10; 11. I and 2 contain an adoration of
Re by Ahmose, and his titles occupy 11. 3-9. These 9 lines lack half their
length.
12 EIGHTEENTH DYNASTY: AHMOSE I [9 26

Okhepernere (Thutmose 11), triumphant, until this Good God, King

Menkheperre (Thutmose 111) 'swho is given life forever.=
I have attained a good old age, having had a lifeb of royal favor,
having hadb honor under their majesties and the love of me having
been in the court."
[Concluded in 5 3441

QUARRY INSCRIPTIONC
26. The inscription records the work of Neferperet, an
official of Ahmose I, who, in the latter's twenty-second year,
took out stone from the Ma Sara quarry, for the temples of
Ptah and of Amon. The inscription is important, because
it is the last dated document of Ahmose I, because it records
the first resumption of building after the expulsion of the
Hyksos, and for its reference to the Fenkhu, whose cattle
were captured on some Asiatic campaign.
Above, in a position of significant prominence in the
queen's case, are the names and titles of Ahmose I, and
his queen, Ahmose-Nefretiri (Y h-mS, nfr .t-yry).
27. 'Year 22under the majesty of the king, Son of Re, Ahmose,
who is given life. 'The quarry-chambers were opened a[ne]w; good
limestone 30f Ayan (C nw) was taken out for his temples of myriads of
year^],^ the temple of Ptah, the temple of Amon in southern Opet
( Y p.t, Luxor), and all the monuments which his majesty made rfor himl.

aThis phrase after Thutmose 111's name shows that he was living at the time
of this inscription; all the others were at this time "trimphant" (deceased).
Hence Ahmose, now an old man, died under Thutrnose 111.
- bLit., "having been i n a life," and "having been i n h o w . "
con the wall of the limestone quarry of Mac Sara, just southeast of Cairo.
Published by Vyse, Operations, 111, 99; Young, Hieroglyphics, 88; Lepsius,
Denkmder, 111, 3, a = Champollion, Notices descriptives, 11, 488 =Rosellini, Monu-
menfi Stmici, I, IS; and Lepsius, Denkmiiler, 111, 3, b; the text of the last is the
same as the preceding, but it represents a second inscription. Both are badly
broken, but they supplement each other, so that practically nothing is lost.
dA conventional phrase applied to all temples, and refemng, of course, to
their durability.
H 311 KARXAK STELA I3

The stone was dragged with oxena which his m[ajesty] captured
[in his] victories [amonglb the Fenkhu (Fnbw).
28. The assistant, the hereditary prince , rvigilantlc one
of the Lord of the Two Lands in restoring the monuments of e[rternityl,
greatly [satisfying] the heart of the Good God; the wearer of the royal
seal, sole companion, chief treasurer, Neferperet (Nfr-pr .t).

KARNAK STELAd
29. Among Ahmose's pious works for the temples was
the restoration of the furniture, utensils, and the like, be-
longing to the ritual of the Karnak temple of Amon. He
recorded this work upon a splendid stela, containing thirty-
two lines of inscription, of which only the last six are devoted
to the record of his benefactions, while the other twenty-six
contain only conventional eulogy of himself. I n the course
of this tedious succession of phrases, there is a vague refer-
ence to his wars:
30. The Asiatics approach with fearful step together, standing at
his judgment-hall; his sword is in Khenthennofer, his terror is in the
Fenkhu-lands, the fear of his majesty is in this land like Min (1. 12).

31. He was thus as much feared in Egypt as in Nubia or

Asia. The introduction closes with the names of Ahmose I
and the queen Ahhotep, after which follows the record of
the work in Karnak (U. 27-32):

aIt is not the Fenkhu themselves who are employed in the quarry (as some-
times stated, e. g., Maspero, Struggle of the Nations, 93; also Petrie, History of
Egypt, 11, 36), but only the oxen captured.
bThe horizontal lines in Lepsius, Denkmdler, 111, a, 1. 5, indicate an m =
. or "among;" indeed, the entire phrase, "whuh his majesty captured in his
6' zn,"

victories i n -," is so common that the restorations are probable.

~ [ R q d ~ lit.,
d : "of watchfd head."
dA white limestone stela over 73 feet high and nearly 34 feet wide; found by
Legrain by Pylon VII at Karnak. It was below the pavement of Thutmose 111,
and had been buried before Ikhnaton's time. Published in Annuks, IV, 27-29.
I4 EIGHTEENTH DYNASTY: AHMOSE I [B 32

32. Now, his majesty commanded to make monuments for his

father Amon-Re, being: great chaplets of gold with rosettes of genuine
lapis lazuli; sealsa of gold; large vases (hs.t) of gold; jars (fims.t)
and vases (hs .t) of silver; tables (wdh .w) of gold, offering-tables (dbh .t
htp) of gold and silver; necklaces of gold and silver combined with
lapis lazuli and malachite; a drinking-vessel for the ka, of gold, its
standard of silver; a drinking-vessel for the ka, of silver rimmed with
gold, its standard of silver; a flat dish (tnyw) of gold; jars (nms .t) of
pink granite, filed with ointment; great pails ( ~ S m wof) silver
~ rimmed
with gold, the [rhandlesl] thereon of silver; a harp of ebony,c of gold
and silver; sphinxes of silver; a '-Id with gold; a barge of the "Begin-
ning-of-the-River" called "U~erhetamon,"~ of new cedar of the best of
the terraces, in order to make his voyage [rthereinl. I erected columns
of rcedar - -1 likewise; I gave

33. This document discloses to us the name of the mother

of Ahmose 1's father and mother. She was a queen Teti-
sheri, and although she is called a " kitzg's-mother atzd great
king's-wife," she is not designated as king's daughter.
She was doubtless the wife of the last Sekenenre, and her
daughter Ahmose 1's mother, was, of course, the famous
Queen Ahhotep. The latter's brother-husband, the father
of Ahmose I, was probably Kemose.

aOr: "seal rings."

bThese are the ceremonial pails with bucket handles, swelling or bulbous
below, with more or less pointed bottom. Schaefer calls my attention to the
example on the Ethiopian stela in the Louvre, 1. I I (Zeitschrift fur agyptische
Spmche, 1895, P1. V ) . There are many examples in bronze in the museums.
cI suspect that a word has been omitted at this point, as the repetition of the
preposition indicates.
d$t, Schaefer suggests the spd which appears in the Mentuhotep coffinat Berlin.
eMeaning "mighty i s the front of Amon." This is the usual name of the
sacred barge of Amon.
f Stela about 64 feet high and 3 feet wide, found by Petrie at Abydos; pub-

lished by him in Abydos, 111, P1. LII.

0 361 BUILDING INSCRIPTION I5

The inscription is so picturesque, and unconventional in

form, as to be unique. In content it records the king's
determination to erect further mortuary buildings for his
grandmother, Queen Tetisheri.

Introduction
34. 'Now, it came to pass that his majesty sat in the audience-hall,
(even) the King of Upper and Lower Egypt, Nebpehtire, Son of Re,
Ahmose (I), given life; Zwhile the hereditary princess, great in favor,
great in amiability, king's-daughter, king's-sister, divine consort, great
king's-wife, Ahmose-Nefretiri, who liveth, was with his majesty.

Tlze Conversation
35. One spoke 3with the other, seeking benefactions fora the departed
(dead), to present libations of water, to offer upon the altar, YO enrich
the offering-tablet at the first of every season, at the monthly feast of
the first of the month, the feast of the coming forth of the sem, sthe
feast of the night-offerings on the fifth of the month, the feast of the sixth
of the month, the feast of Hakrob (H 'k-r '), the feast of Wag (W 'g),
the feast of Thoth, and at the first 6of every season of heaven, and of
earth. His sister spake and answered him: "Wherefore has this been
remembered? 7And why has this word been spoken? What has
come into thy heart ?"
A hmose's Purpose
36. The king himself spake to her: "I, is, who have remembered
the mother of my mother, and the mother of my father, great king's-
wife and king's-mother, Tetisheri (Tty-Sry), triumphant. p(A1though)
she already has a tomb (yS) and a mortuary chapelC (m h C ' t )on the
soil of Thebes and Abydos, I have said this to thee, in that I%y majesty
has desired to have made for her (also) a pyramid and a house (h.t) in

=The negative n is to be read as the preposition n; see the converse confusion

in 1. 14.
bThe r has been overlooked in the publication ?
lit., "Her tomb and her chapel are at this moment ( m t y (sic!) D t) on the soil,
etc." I can only understand this clause as concessive, and that the new buildings
planned by Ahmose are in addition to the ones in 1. g.
16 EIGHTEENTH DYNASTY: AHMOSE I [B 37

Tazeser, as a monumental donation of my majesty. Its lake shall be

dug, its trees shall be planted, "its offerings shall be founded, equipped
with people, endowed with lands, presented Iswith herds, mortuary
priests and ritual priests having their duties, every man knowing his
stipulation."
37. '3Lo, his majesty spake this word, while this was in process of
construction. His majesty did '4this because he so greatly loved her,
beyond everything. Never did former kings the like of it for Istheir
mothers. Lo, his majesty extended his arm, and bent his hand;a he
pronounced for her a mortuary prayer. ... ...
. b

aA posture of prayer.
bHere follow three fragmentary lines, giving the names of the gods appealed
to, and the usual objects in such an offering.
 REIGN OF AMENHOTEP I
BIOGRAPHY O F AHMOSE, SON OF EBANAa
[Ll. 24-29, continued from 5 16; concluded $5 78 ff.]
11. CAREER UNDER AMENHOTEP I

38. Under this king Ahmose commands the royal trans-

ports in a campaign against Kush. The enemy is defeated,
Ahmose fighting at the head of the Egyptian troops. He
brings the king back to Egypt in two days, and is given
"the gold," and a title of honor: "TVarrior of the Ruler."
The campaign extended to the Middle Kingdom frontier,
for a rock inscription of Amenhotep's eighth year has been
found on the island of Uronarti, just below Semneh.
39. I sailed the King Zeserkere (Pfr-k3-RC, Amenhotep I), tri-
umphant, when he ascended the river to Kush (KS),in order to extend
asthe borders of Egypt. His majesty captured that Nubian Troglodyte
in the midst of his army, who were brought
away as prisoners, none of them missing. r- -1 thrust 26aside~
like those who are annihilated. Meanwhile I was at the head of ourd
army; I fought incredibly;" his majesty beheld my bravery. I
brought off two hands, ''and took (them) to his majesty. One
pursued his people and his cattle. Then I brought off a living prisoner,
and took (him) to his majesty. I brought his majesty in two days to

aBibliography, etc., p. 3, n. a.
bsteindorff, Berichte &r PhiZoZogisch-historischen Classe der Koniglichen
S4chsischen Gesellsch.a]t akr Wissenschaft, Leipzig, Sitzung vom 18. Juni, 1900,
P- 233.
Game phrase, Tombos Inscription ( $ 7 1 , 1. 7).
dThis and 5 81 are the only places in all the historical texts of Egypt, where
"our troops" are spoken of. It is a real touch of patriotism.
eLit., ' $ If0ugh.t more than what is true."
17
 I8 EIGHTEENTH DYNASTY: AMENHOTEP I [g 40

Egypt 18from the upper well;a one presented me with gold. Then I
brought away two female slaves, in addition to those which I had taken
. l9to his majesty. One appointed me 'Warrior of the Ruler.'

BIOGRAPHY OF AHMOSE-PEN-NEKHBET~
[Continued from 5 2 0 ; continued $5 83 ff., and 3441

11. CAREER UNDER AMENHOTEP I

40. Ahmose-Pen-Nekhbet accompanied the king on two

campaigns: one against the Nubians, of which we have a
fuller account in the biography of Ahmose, son of Ebana
(5 39); and the other against the Libyans; this biography
being our only source for this war of Amenhotep I in Libya.
For his valor on these occasions he was rewarded by the
king.
Campaign in Kush
41. I
4followed King Zeserkere (DSr-k '-RC, Amenhotep I), tri-
umphant; I captured for him sin Kush, a living prisoner.

Campaign in Libya
42. Again I served for King Zeserkere, triumphant; 61 captured
for him on the north of Imukehek ( Y ' mw-khk), three hands.
[Continued 55 83 ff., and 344]

BIOGRAPHY OF INENIC
43. This official served under four kings: Amenhotep I ,
Thutmose I, ~ h u t m o s c11, and Thutmose 111,reigning with
aIn view of Amenhotep 1's inscription at the second cataract, we are probably
correct in concluding that the second cataract is meant here.
bBibliography on p. 10, n. a.
CFrom a Theban tomb at Abd el-Kurna, first noted by Champollion (Notices
descriptives, I, 49294), and then by Bmgsch, who published some fragments
(Recueil de monuments, I , 36, 1-3, tree list, etc., and Pi. 65, 4-5); also Piehl.
Inscriptions, I, Pls. 129 Q-130 and pp. 105, 106. The long text is found in Recueil,
$441 BIOGRAPHY O F INENI I9

Hatshepsut. He evidently died under this joint reign; his

biography was composed at this time, and is the most impor-
tant of all sources for the history of the succession of the
Thutmosids. Ineni was:
Hereditary prince, count, chief of all works in Karnak; the double
silver-house was under his charge; the double gold-house was on his
seal; sealer of all contracts in the House of Amon; excellency, over-
seer of the double granary of A m ~ n . ~
These offices brought him the superintendence of many of
the most important works executed in Thebes by the kings
whom he served. His career is divided as follows:
I. Career under Amenhotep I (0 0 44-46).
11. Career under Thutmose I ($0 99-108).
111. Career under Thutmose I1 (0 0 I I 5-18).
IV. Career under Thutmose TI1 and Hatshepsut (QQ 340-
43)-
I. CAREER UNDER AMENHOTEP I
4.The beginning, containing the name of the king, is
lost, and the narrative begins in the middle of the account
of a building probably Amenhotep 1's gate on the south of
the Karnak temple, found below the later pavement, of which
the two dedications read :
I. "Amenhotep I ; he made (it) as his monument for his father Amon,
lord of Thebes (ns'wt-t ' wy), erecting for him a great gate of 20 cubits
(in height) at the double f a ~ a d eof the temple, of fine limestone of Ayan,
which the Son of Re, Amenhotep, living forever, made for him."

XII, 106, 107, where it is inaccurately published by Bouriant. (See also, ibid.,
XIV, 73, 74.) The first " 7 or 8 lines" are wanting, according to Bouriant, and
also the ends of the first 14 remaining lines; following these are 6 complete lines.
The wall scenes and plans of the tomb (also the long inscription) have been pub-
lished by an architect, H. Boussac (MBmoires & la mission fran~aiseau Caire,
XVIII). T o the Egyptologist the publication is little more than worthless, and the
work must be done again. But the long inscription has now disappeared.
aOne of Boussac's plates; he has not numbered them!
blegrain, Annules, IV, 15 ff.
 20 EIGHTEENTH DYNASTY: AMENHOTEP I [g 45

2. [Amenhotep I]; . . . . . . .a bqilding his house, establishing his

temple, erecting the southern gate, made high, even 20 cubits, of fine
white limestone
I t is important to note that this gate was erected in cele-
bration of the king's first Sed Jubilee. Turning again to
Ineni, his inscription begins :

45. 'Hatnub (Ht-nb), its doors were erected of copper

made in one sheet; the parts thereof were of electrum. I inspected
that which his majesty made =bronze, Asiatic copper, collars,
vessels, necklaces. I was foreman of every work, all offices were
under my command. sat the feasts of the beginning of the
seasons; likewise for his father Amon, lord of Thebes; they were
under my control. Inspection was made for me, I was the reckoner.
4r-1.
Death of Amenhotep I
46. His majesty having spent life in happiness and the years in
peace, went forth to heaven; he joined the sun, he associated (with
him) and went forth
[Continued $5 99-1083

STELA O F HARMINIC
47. Harmini (hr-myny) prefixes no other title to his
name "than "scribe," but he was no less a man than the
chief magistrate of Nekhen-Hieraconpolis. This impor-

aAs in the first, as far as "Thebes."

bPossibly also the mortuary temple of Amenhotep I, found by Spiegelberg in
1896 at Drah abu-'n-Neggah on the west side at Thebes (see Spiegelberg, Zwei
Beitriige zur Geschichie und Topographk der thebanischew Nekropolis im Neuen
Reich (Strassburg, 1898; and Sethe, Gotting'sche Gelehrte Anzeigen, 1902, No. I,
z9-31). The temple is referred to as ''House of Zeserkere (Awzenhotep I ) on the
west of Thebes" (Lepsius, Denkmaler, Text, 111, 238). See also Sethe, loc. cit., 30.
mortuary stela of unknown provenience (probably Abydos), now in the
Florence Museum, No. 1567; published in Catalogue, 288-90; Piehl, Recueil, 11,
122-24. I had also my own photograph of the original.
 5 491 STELA OF KERES 2I

tant post on the original Nubian frontier either resulted in

his promotion to the governorship of Wawat in lower Nubia,
or his Nekhen appointment involved-jurisdiction in Wawat,
in view of the fact that earlier Nubia began in the vicinity of
Nekhen. In any case, he had charge of the "tribute" from
Wawat, which was later in the hands of the " king's-son of
Kush" (Q Q 1034 ff.). Although the inscription mentions no
king, it clearly belongs to the Eighteenth Dynasty before the
first appointment of a "governor of the south countries, and
king's-son of Kush," by Thutmose I (0 Q 61 ff.). Hence we
are not far wrong in placing it under Amenhotep I, though
Harmini must of course have served under Ahmose I, also.
48. After the usual mortuary prayer, the inscription
continues, in Harmini's own words:
I passed many years as mayor (h'ty-? of Nekhen (Hieraconpolis).
I brought in its tribute to the Lord of the Two Lands; I was praised,
and no occasion was found against me. I attained old age in Wawat,
being a favorite of my lord. I went north with its tribute for t h e z n g ,
each year; I came forth thence justified; there was not found a balance
against me.

STELA OF KERESa
49. Keres, like his contemporary, Yuf (80 109 ff.), was in
the service of one of the queen-mothers. The question arises
here whether the " king's-mother Ahhotep," whom Keres
served, was Ahhotep (II), wife of Amenhotep I, in whose
tenth year her command was issued, or Ahhotep (I), mother
of King Ahmose. As Ahhotep I1 was never the mother of
a king, it must have been -4hhotep I, who had a tomb

"Limestone stela, 0.82 m. high, from Drah abu-'n-Neggah, now in Cairo, without
a number. Published by Bouriant, Recueil, IX, 94 f., No. 74 (his text is excessively
incorrect); much better by Piehl, Zeitschrift far agyptische Sprache, 1888, 1 1 7 f.
I am also indebted to Schaefer for a carefully collated copy made from the original.
22 EIGHTEENTH DYNASTY: AMENHOTEP I [g 50

erected at Abydos for Keres. We thus see this queen, from

whom the Eighteenth Dynasty sprang, still living in the
tenth year of the second king of the dynasty.
50. Keres, who was her herald, has not only preserved
for us the old queen's command, honoring him with a tomb
and a statue at Abpdos, but has also added a loose enumera-
tion of his duties as her herald, which resembles that of the
herald, Intef (0 0 763-71).
51. 'Year 10,first month of the third season (ninth month), first
day, under the majesty of the King of Upper and Lower Egypt: Zeser-
kere, Son of Re, of his body: Amenhotep (I), beloved of Oxns, given
life.
52. Tommand of the king's-mother to the hereditary prince, count,
wearer of the royal seal, sole companion, overseer of the gold-house,
overseer of the silver-house, chief steward of the king's-mother,
SAhhotep, who liveth ; the herald (whm. w), Keres (K > rs). The king's-
mother has commanded to have made for thee a tomb 4at the stairway
of the great god, lord of Abydos, confirming thy every office and every
favor. There shall be made for thee thy sstatues, abiding in the temple,
among the followers of a their virtues in writing 6in - - -.a
There shall be made for thee mortuary offerings (htp dy Stny), as the
king's-wife does for the one whom she has loved, for the hereditary
prince, count, wearer of the royal seal, the steward, the herald, Keres
(Krs), only favorite united 7with the limbs of Sekhmet, following his
-<
queen (hnw.t) at her going. He r-1 before the people, the real rconfi-
dantl of his queen, to whom secret things are told, "experiencedl in the
plans of his queen, transmitting affairs to the palace, finding %elutions,
making agreeable unpleasant matters, one upon whose word his queen
depends, approaching the truth, knowing the affairs of the mind,
profitable in speech to his queen, '"great in respect in the house of the
king's-mother, weighty in affairs, excellent in speech, secretive in mind,
administering the palace, "sealing (his) mouth concerning that which he
hears, official who solves knotty problems, chief steward, Keres (Krs),
vigilant administrator for the king's-mother, lanot more laxb by night
than by day, the herald, Keres (Krs).

aCut out. bRead wsf.

Random documents with unrelated
content Scribd suggests to you:
modified by analogical changes. The Oscan and Umbrian
syncope of short vowels before final s seems to be an
independent change, at all events in its detailed working. The
outbreak of the unconscious affection of slurring final syllables
may have been contemporaneous.

13. In post-Plautine Latin words accented on the ante-

antepenult:—

(i.) suffered syncope in the short syllable following the

accented syllable (bálineae became bálneae, puéritia became
puértia (Horace), cólumine, tégimine, &c., became cúlmine,
tégmine, &c., beside the trisyllabic cólumen, tégimen) unless

(ii.) that short vowel was e or i, followed by another vowel (as

in párietem, múlierem, Púteoli), when, instead of contraction,
the accent shifted to the penult, which at a later stage of the
language became lengthened, pariétem giving Ital. paréếte, Fr.
paroi, Puteóli giving Ital. Pozzuốli.

The restriction of the accent to the last three syllables was

completed by these changes, which did away with all the cases
in which it had stood on the fourth syllable.

14. The Law of the Brevis Brevians.—Next must be mentioned

another great phonetic change, also dependent upon accent,
which had come about before the time of Plautus, the law long
known to students as the Brevis Brevians, which may be stated
as follows (Exon, Hermathena (1903), xii. 491, following Skutsch
in, e.g., Vollmöller’s Jahresbericht für romanische
Sprachwissenschaft, i. 33): a syllable long by nature or position,
and preceded by a short syllable, was itself shortened if the
word-accent fell immediately before or immediately after it—that
is, on the preceding short syllable or on the next following
syllable. The sequence of syllables need not be in the same
word, but must be as closely connected in utterance as if it
were. Thus mốdō became módŏ, vŏlūptấtēm became
vŏlŭ(p)tấtem, quḯd ēst? became quid ĕst? either the s or the t or
both being but faintly pronounced.

It is clear that a great number of flexional syllables so

shortened would have their quantity immediately restored by the
analogy of the same inflexion occurring in words not of this
particular shape; thus, for instance, the long vowel of ấmā and
the like is due to that in other verbs (pulsā, agitā) not of iambic
shape. So ablatives like modö, sonō get back their -ō, while in
particles like modo, “only,” quōmodo, “how,” the shortened form
remains. Conversely, the shortening of the final -a in the nom.
sing. fem. of the a-declension (contrast lūnă with Gr. χωρᾷ) was
probably partly due to the influence of common forms like eă,
bonă, mală, which had come under the law.

15. Effect on Verb Inflexion.—These processes had far-

reaching effects on Latin inflexion. The chief of these was the
creation of the type of conjugation known as the capio-class. All
these verbs were originally inflected like audio, but the accident
of their short root-syllable, (in such early forms as *fúgīs,
*fugītṹrus, *fugīsếtis, &c., becoming later fúgĭs, fugĭtṹrus,
fugĕrếtis) brought great parts of their paradigm under this law,
and the rest followed suit; but true forms like fugīre, cupīre,
morīri, never altogether died out of the spoken language. St
Augustine, for instance, confessed in 387 a.d. (Epist. iii. 5,
quoted by Exon, Hermathena (1901), xi. 383,) that he does not
know whether cupi or cupiri is the pass. inf. of cupio. Hence we
have Ital. fuggīre, morīre, Fr. fuir, mourir. (See further on this
conjugation, C. Exon, l.c., and F. Skutsch, Archiv für lat.
Lexicographie, xii. 210, two papers which were written
independently.)

16. The question has been raised how far the true phonetic
shortening appears in Plautus, produced not by word-accent but
by metrical ictus—e.g. whether the reading is to be trusted in
such lines as Amph. 761, which gives us dedisse as the first foot
(tribrach) of a trochaic line “because the metrical ictus fell on
the syllable ded-”—but this remarkable theory cannot be
discussed here. See the articles cited and also F. Skutsch,
Forschungen zu Latein. Grammatik und Metrik, i. (1892); C.
Exon, Hermathena (1903) xii. p. 492, W. M. Lindsay, Captivi
(1900), appendix.

In the history of the vowels and diphthongs in Latin we must

distinguish the changes which came about independently of
accent and those produced by the preponderance of accent in
another syllable.

17. Vowel Changes independent of Accent.—In the former

category the following are those of chief importance:—

(i.) ĭ became ĕ (a) when final, as in ant-e beside Gr. ἀντί,

trīste besides trīsti-s, contrasted with e.g., the Greek neuter ἴδρι
(the final -e of the infinitive—regere, &c.—is the -ĭ of the
locative, just as in the so-called ablatives genere, &c.); (b)
before -r- which has arisen from -s-, as in cineris beside cinis,
cinisculus; serō beside Gr. ἴ(σ)ημι (Ind.-Eur. *si-sēmi, a
reduplicated non-thematic present).
 (ii.) Final ŏ became ĕ; imperative sequere = Gr. ἔπε(σ)ο; Lat.
ille may contain the old pronoun *so, “he,” Gr. ὁ, Sans. sa
(otherwise Skutsch, Glotta, i. Hefte 2-3).

(iii.) el became ol when followed by any sound save e, i or l,

as in volō, volt beside velle; colō beside Gr. τέλλομαι, πολεῖν,
Att. τέλος; colōnus for *quelōnus, beside inquilīnus for *en-
quēlenus.

(iv.) e became i (i.) before a nasal followed by a palatal or

velar consonant (tingo, Gr. τέγγω; in-cipio from *en-capio); (ii.)
under certain conditions not yet precisely defined, one of which
was i in a following syllable (nihil, nisi, initium). From these
forms in- spread and banished en-, the earlier form.

(v.) The “neutral vowel” (“schwa Indo-Germanicum”) which

arose in pro-ethnic Indo-European from the reduction of long ā,
ē or ō in unaccented syllables (as in the -tós participles of such
roots as stā-, dhē-, dō-, *stƏtós, *dhƏtós, *dƏtós) became a in
Latin (status con-ditus [from *con-dhatos], datus), and it is the
same sound which is represented by a in most of the forms of
dō (damus, dabō, &c.).

(vi.) When a long vowel came to stand before another vowel

in the same word through loss of ḭ or ṷ, it was always shortened;
thus the -eō of intransitive verbs like candeō, caleō is for -ēḭō
(where the ē is identical with the η in Gr. ἐφάνην, ἐμάνμν) and
was thus confused with the causative -eiō (as in moneō, “I make
to think,” &c.), where the short e is original. So audīuī became
audīī and thence audiī (the form audīvī would have disappeared
altogether but for being restored from audīveram, &c.;
conversely audieram is formed from audiī). In certain cases the
vowels contracted, as in trēs, partēs, &c. with -ēs from eḭes,
*amō from amā(ḭ)ō.

18. Of the Diphthongs.

(vii.) eu became ou in pro-ethnic Italic, Lat. novus: Gr. νέος,

Lat. novem, Umb. nuviper (i.e. noviper), “usque ad noviens”: Gr.
(ἐν-)νέα; in unaccented syllables this -ov-
Changes of the sank to -u(v)- as in dếnuō from dế novō, suus
diphthongs (which is rarely anything but an enclitic
independent of word), Old Lat. sovos: Gr. ἑ(ϝ)ός.
accent.
(viii.) ou, whether original or from eu, when
in one syllable became -ū-, probably about 200 b.c., as in dūcō,
Old Lat. doucō, Goth, tiuhan, Eng. tow, Ind.-Eur. *deṷcō.

(ix.) ei became ī (as in dīcō, Old Lat. deico: Gr. δείκ-νυμι,

fīdo: Gr. πείθομαι, Ind.-Eur. *bheidhō) just before the time of
Lucilius, who prescribes the spellings puerei (nom. plur.) but
puerī (gen. sing.), which indicates that the two forms were
pronounced alike in his time, but that the traditional distinction
in spelling had been more or less preserved. But after his time,
since the sound of ei was merely that of ī, ei is continually used
merely to denote a long ī, even where, as in faxeis for faxīs,
there never had been any diphthongal sound at all.

(x.) In rustic Latin (Volscian and Sabine) au became ō as in

the vulgar terms explōdere, plōstrum. Hence arose interesting
doublets of meaning;—lautus (the Roman form), “elegant,” but
lōtus, “washed”; haustus, “draught,” but hōstus (Cato), “the
season’s yield of fruit.”
 (xi.) oi became oe and thence ū some time after Plautus, as in
ūnus, Old Lat. oenus: Gr. οἰνή “ace.” In Plautus the forms have
nearly all been modernized, save in special cases, e.g. in Trin. i.
1, 2, immoene facinus, “a thankless task,” has not been changed
to immune because that meaning had died out of the adjective
so that immune facinus would have made nonsense; but at the
end of the same line utile has replaced oetile. Similarly in a small
group of words the old form was preserved through their
frequent use in legal or religious documents where tradition was
strictly preserved—poena, foedus (neut.), foedus (adj.), “ill-
omened.” So the archaic and poetical moenia, “ramparts,” beside
the true classical form mūnia, “duties”; the historic Poeni beside
the living and frequently used Pūnicum (bellum)—an example
which demonstrates conclusively (pace Sommer) that the
variation between ū and oe is not due to any difference in the
surrounding sounds.

(xii.) ai became ae and this in rustic and later Latin (2nd or

3rd century a.d.) simple ē, though of an open quality—Gr. αἴθος,
αἴθω, Lat. aedēs (originally “the place for the fire”); the country
forms of haedus, praetor were edus, pretor (Varro, Ling. Lat. v.
97, Lindsay, Lat. Lang. p. 44).

19. Vowels and Diphthongs in unaccented Syllables.—The

changes of the short vowels and of the diphthongs in
unaccented syllables are too numerous and complex to be set
forth here. Some took place under the first-syllable system of
accent, some later (§§ 9, 10). Typical examples are pepErci from
*péparcai and ónustus from *ónostos (before two consonants);
concIno from *cóncano and hospItIs from *hóstipotes, legImus
beside Gr. λέγομεν (before one consonant); SicUli from *Siceloi
(before a thick l, see § 17, 3); dilIgIt from *dísleget (contrast,
however, the preservation of the second e in neglEgIt); occUpat
from *opcapat (contrast accipit with i in the following syllable);
the varying spelling in monumentum and monimentum,
maxumus and maximus, points to an intermediate sound (ü)
between u and i (cf. Quint. i. 4. 8, reading optumum and
optimum [not opimum] with W. M. Lindsay, Latin Language §§
14, 16, seq.), which could not be correctly represented in
spelling; this difference may, however, be due merely to the
effect of differences in the neighbouring sounds, an effect
greatly obscured by analogical influences.

Inscriptions of the 4th or 3rd century, b.c. which show original

-es and -os in final syllables (e.g. Venerĕs, gen. sing., nāvebos
abl. pl.) compared with the usual forms in -is, -us a century later,
give us roughly the date of these changes. But final -os, -om,
remained after -u- (and v) down to 50 b.c. as in servos.

20. Special mention should be made of the change of -rĭ- and

-ro- to -er- (incertus from *encritos; ager, ācer from *agros,
*ācris; the feminine ācris was restored in Latin (though not in
North Oscan) by the analogy of other adjectives, like tristis,
while the masculine ācer was protected by the parallel masculine
forms of the -o- declension, like tener, niger [from *teneros,
*nigros]).

21. Long vowels generally remained unchanged, as in

compāgo, condōno.

22. Of the diphthongs, ai and oi both sank to ei, and with

original ei further to ī, in unaccented syllables, as in Achivi from
Gr. Ἀχαιϝοί, olīivom, earlier *oleivom (borrowed into Gothic and
there becoming alēv) from Gr. ἔλαιϝον. This gives us interesting
chronological data, since the el- must have changed to ol- (§ 16.
3) before the change of -ai- to -ei-, and that before the change
of the accent from the first syllable to the penultimate (§ 9); and
the borrowing took place after -ai- had become -ei-, but before -
eivom had become -eum, as it regularly did before the time of
Plautus.

But cases of ai, ae, which arose later than the change to ei, ī,
were unaffected by it; thus the nom. plur. of the first declension
originally ended in -ās (as in Oscan), but was changed at some
period before Plautus to -ae by the influence of the pronominal
nom. plur. ending -ae in quae? hae, &c., which was accented in
these monosyllables and had therefore been preserved. The
history of the -ae of the dative, genitive and locative is hardly
yet clear (see Exon, Hermathena (1905), xiii. 555; K. Brugmann,
Grundriss, 1st ed. ii. 571, 601).

The diphthongs au, ou in unaccented syllables sank to -u-, as

in inclūdō beside claudō; the form clūdō, taken from the
compounds, superseded claudo altogether after Cicero’s time. So
cūdō, taken from incūdō, excūdō, banished the older *caudō, “I
cut, strike,” with which is probably connected cauda, “the
striking member, tail,” and from which comes caussa, “a cutting,
decision, legal case,” whose -ss- shows that it is derived from a
root ending in a dental (see §25 (b) below and Conway, Verner’s
Law in Italy, p. 72).

Consonants.—Passing now to the chief changes of the

consonants we may notice the following points:—
 23. Consonant i (wrongly written j; there is no g-sound in the
letter), conveniently written ḭ by phoneticians,

(i.) was lost between vowels, as in trēs for *treḭes, &c. (§ 17.
6);

(ii.) in combination: -mḭ- became -ni-, as in veniö, from Ind.-

Eur. *Ƨṷ mḭo, “I come,” Sans. gam-, Eng. come; -nḭ- probably
(under certain conditions at least) became -nd-, as in tendō
beside Gr. τείνω, fendō = Gr. θείνω, and in the gerundive stem
-endus, -undus, probably for -enḭos, -onḭos; cf. the Sanskrit
gerundive in -an-īya-s; -gḭ-, -dḭ- became -ḭ- as in māior from
*mag-ior, pēior from *ped-ior;

(iii.) otherwise -ḭ- after a consonant became generally syllabic

(-iḭ-), as in capiō (trisyllabic) beside Goth. hafya.

24. Consonant u (formerly represented by English v),

conveniently written ṷ,

(i.) was lost between similar vowels when the first was
accented, as in audīui, which became audiī (§ 17 [6]), but not in
amāuī, nor in avārus.

(ii.) in combination: dṷ became b, as in bonus, bellum, O. Lat.

dṷonus, *dṷellum (though the poets finding this written form in
old literary sources treated it as trisyllabic); pṷ-, fṷ-, bṷ-, lost the
ṷ, as in ap-erio, op-erio beside Lith. -veriu, “I open,” Osc. veru,
“gate,” and in the verbal endings -bam, -bō, from -bhṷ-ām, -
bhṷō (with the root of Lat. fui), and fīo, du-bius, super-bus,
vasta-bundus, &c., from the same; -sṷ- between vowels (at least
when the second was accented) disappeared (see below § 25
(a), iv.), as in pruīna for prusuīna, cf. Eng. fros-t, Sans, pruṣvā,
“hoar-frost.” Contrast Minérva from an earlier *menes-ṷā, sṷe-,
sṷo-, both became so-, as in sorōor(em) beside Sans. svasār-am,
Ger. schwes-t-er, Eng. sister, sordēs, beside O. Ger. swart-s,
mod. schwarz. -ṷo- in final syllables became -u-, as in cum from
quom, parum from parṷom; but in the declensional forms -ṷu-
was commonly restored by the analogy of the other cases, thus
(a) serṷos, serṷom, serṷī became (b) *serus, *serum, *serṷi, but
finally (c) serṷus, serṷum, serṷi.

(iii.) In the 2nd century a.d., Lat. v (i.e. ṷ) had become a

voiced labio-dental fricative, like Eng. v; and the voiced labial
plosive b had broken down (at least in certain positions) into the
same sound; hence they are frequently confused as in spellings
like vene for bene, Bictorinus for Victorinus.

25. (a) Latin s

(i.) became r between vowels between 450 and 350 b.c. (for
the date see R. S. Conway, Verner’s Law in Italy, pp. 61-64), as
āra, beside O. Lat. āsa, generis from *geneses, Gr. γένεος;
eram, erō for *esām, *esō, and so in the verbal endings -erām, -
erō, -erim. But a considerable number of words came into Latin,
partly from neighbouring dialects, with -s- between vowels, after
350 b.c., when the change ceased, and so show -s-, as rosa
(probably from S. Oscan for *rodḭa “rose-bush” cf. Gr. ῥόδον),
cāseus, “cheese,” miser, a term of abuse, beside Gr. μυσαρός
(probably also borrowed from south Italy), and many more,
especially the participles in -sus (fūsus), where the -s- was -ss-
at the time of the change of -s- to -r- (so in causa, see above).
All attempts to explain the retention of the -s- otherwise must
be said to have failed (e.g. the theory of accentual difference in
Verner’s Law in Italy, or that of dissimilation, given by
Brugmann, Kurze vergl. Gram. p. 242).

(ii.) sr became þr (= Eng. thr in throw) in pro-ethnic Italic,

and this became initially fr- as in frīgus, Gr. ῥῖγος (Ind.-Eur.
*srīgos), but medially -br-, as in funebris, from funus, stem
funes-.

(iii.) -rs-, ls- became -rr-, -ll-, as in ferre, velle, for *fer-se,
*vel-se (cf. es-se).

(iv.) Before m, n, l, and v, -s- vanished, having previously

caused the loss of any preceding plosive or -n-, and the
preceding vowel, if short, was lengthened as in

prīmus from *prismos, Paelig. prismu, “prima,” beside pris-

cus.

iūmentum from O. Lat. iouxmentum, older *ieugsmentom;

cf. Gr. ζεῦγμα, ζύγον, Lat. iugum, iungo.

lūna from *leucsnā-, Praenest, losna, Zend raoχsna-; cf. Gr.

λεῦκος, “white-ness” neut. e.g. λευκός, “white,” Lat.
lūceō.

tēlum from *tēns-lom or *tends-lom, trānāre from *trāns-

nāre.

sēvirī from *sex-virī, ēvehō from *ex-vehō, and so ē-mittō,

ē-līdō, ē-numerō, and from these forms arose the
proposition ē instead of ex.

(v.) Similarly -sd- became -d-, as in īdem from is-dem.

 (vi.) Before n-, m-, l-, initially s- disappeared, as in nūbo
beside Old Church Slavonic snubiti, “to love, pay court to”; mīror
beside Sans, smáyatē, “laughs,” Eng. smi-le; lūbricus beside
Goth, sliupan, Eng. slip.

(b) Latin -ss- arose from an original -t + t-, -d + t-, -dh + t-

(except before -r), as in missus, earlier *mit-tos; tōnsus, earlier
*tond-tos, but tonstrīx from *tond-trīx. After long vowels this -
ss- became a single -s- some time before Cicero (who wrote
caussa [see above], divissio, &c., but probably only pronounced
them with -s-, since the -ss- came to be written single directly
after his time).

26. Of the Indo-European velars the breathed q was usually

preserved in Latin with a labial addition of -ṷ- (as in sequor, Gr.
ἕπομαι, Goth, saihvan, Eng. see; quod, Gr. ποδ-(απός), Eng.
what); but the voiced Ƨṷ remained (as -gu-) only after -n-
(unguo beside Ir. imb, “butter”) and (as g) before r, l, and u (as
in gravis, Gr. βαρύς; glans, Gr. βάλανος; legūmen, Gr. λοβός,
λεβίνθος). Elsewhere it became v, as in veniō (see § 23, ii.),
nūdus from *novedos, Eng. naked. Hence bōs (Sans. gāus, Eng.
cow) must be regarded as a farmer’s word borrowed from one
of the country dialects (e.g. Sabine); the pure Latin would be
*vōs, and its oblique cases, e.g. acc. *vovem, would be
inconveniently close in sound to the word for sheep ovem.

27. The treatment of the Indo-European voiced aspirates (bh,

dh, ḡh Ƨh) in Latin is one of the most marked characteristics of
the language, which separates it from all the other Italic
dialects, since the fricative sounds, which represented the Indo-
European aspirates in pro-ethnic Italic, remained fricatives
medially if they remained at all in that position in Oscan and
Umbrian, whereas in Latin they were nearly always changed into
voiced explosives. Thus—

Ind.-Eur. bh: initially Lat. f- (ferō; Gr. φέρω).

medially Lat. -b- (tibi; Umb. tefe; Sans, tubhy-

(am), “to thee”; the same suffix in Gr. βίη-φι,
&c.).

Ind.-Eur. dh: initially Lat. f- (fa-c-ere, fē-c-ī; Gr. θετός

(instead of *θατός), ἔθη-κα).

medially -d- (medius; Osc. mefio-; Gr. μέσσος,

μέσος from *μεθιος); except after u (iubēre
beside iussus for *ḭudh-tos; Sans. yốdhati,
“rouses to battle”); before l (stabulum, but
Umb. staflo-, with the suffix of Gr.
οτέργηθρον, &c.); before or after r (verbum:
Umb. verfale: Eng. word. Lat. glaber [v. inf].:
Ger. glatt: Eng. glad).

Ind.-Eur. ḡh: initially h- (humī: Gr. χαμαί); except before -u-

(fundo: Gr. χέ(ϝ)ω, χύτρα).

medially -h- (veho: Gr. ἔχω, ὄχος; cf. Eng.

wagon); except after -n- (fingere: Osc. feiho-,
“wall”: Gr. θιγγάνω: Ind.-Eur. dheiĝh-,
dhinĝh-); and before l (fīg(u)lus, from the
same root).

Ind.-Eur gṷh: initially f- (formus and furnus, “oven”, Gr.

θερμός, θέρμη, cf. Ligurian Bormiō, “a place with hot
 springs,” Bormanus, “a god of hot springs”; fendō: Gr.
θείνω, φόνος, πρόσ-φατος).

medially v, -gu- or -g- just as Ind.-Eur. Ƨṷ

(ninguere, nivem beside Gr. νίφα, νείφει;
frāgrāre beside Gr. ὀσφραίνομαι [ὀσ- for
ods-, cf. Lat. odor], a reduplicated verb from a
root Ƨṷhra-).

For the “non-labializing velars” (Hostis, conGius, Glaber)

reference must be made to the fuller accounts in the handbooks.

28. Authorities.—This summary account of the chief points in

Latin phonology may serve as an introduction to its principles,
and give some insight into the phonetic character of the
language. For systematic study reference must be made to the
standard books, Karl Brugmann, Grundriss der vergleichenden
Grammatik der Indo-Germanischen Sprachen (vol. i., Lautlehre,
2nd ed. Strassburg, 1897; Eng. trans. of ed. 1 by Joseph Wright,
Strassburg, 1888) and his Kurze vergleichende Grammatik
(Strassburg, 1902); these contain still by far the best accounts
of Latin; Max Niederman, Précis de phonétique du Latin (Paris,
1906), a very convenient handbook, excellently planned; F.
Sommer, Lateinische Laut- und Flexionslehre (Heidelberg, 1902),
containing many new conjectures; W. M. Lindsay, The Latin
Language (Oxford, 1894), translated into German (with
corrections) by Nohl (Leipzig, 1897), a most valuable collection
of material, especially from the ancient grammarians, but not
always accurate in phonology; F. Stolz, vol. i. of a joint
Historische Grammatik d. lat. Sprache by Blase, Landgraf, Stolz
and others (Leipzig, 1894); Neue-Wagener, Formenlehre d. lat.
Sprache (3 vols., 3rd ed. Leipzig, 1888, foll.); H. J. Roby’s Latin
Grammar (from Plautus to Suetonius; London, 7th ed., 1896)
contains a masterly collection of material, especially in
morphology, which is still of great value. W. G. Hale and C. D.
Buck’s Latin Grammar (Boston, 1903), though on a smaller
scale, is of very great importance, as it contains the fruit of
much independent research on the part of both authors; in the
difficult questions of orthography it was, as late as 1907, the
only safe guide.

II. Morphology

In morphology the following are the most characteristic Latin

innovations:—

29. In nouns.

(i.) The complete loss of the dual number, save for a survival
in the dialect of Praeneste (C.I.L. xiv. 2891, = Conway, Ital. Dial.
p. 285, where Q. k. Cestio Q. f. seems to be nom. dual); so
C.I.L. xi. 67065, T. C. Vomanio, see W. Schulze, Lat.
Eigennamen, p. 117.

(ii.) The introduction of new forms in the gen. sing, of the -o-
stems (dominī), of the -ā- stems (mēnsae) and in the nom.
plural of the same two declensions; innovations mostly derived
from the pronominal declension.

(iii.) The development of an adverbial formation out of what

was either an instrumental or a locative of the -o- stems, as in
longē. And here may be added the other adverbial
developments, in -m (palam, sensim) probably accusative, and -
iter, which is simply the accusative of iter, “way,” crystallized, as
is shown especially by the fact that though in the end it attached
itself particularly to adjectives of the third declension (molliter),
it appears also from adjectives of the second declension whose
meaning made their combination with iter especially natural,
such as longiter, firmiter, largiter (cf. English straightway,
longways). The only objections to this derivation which had any
real weight (see F. Skutsch, De nominibus no- suffixi ope
formatis, 1890, pp. 4-7) have been removed by Exon’s Law (§
11), which supplies a clear reason why the contracted type
constanter arose in and was felt to be proper to Participial
adverbs, while firmiter and the like set the type for those formed
from adjectives.

(iv.) The development of the so-called fifth declension by a re-

adjustment of the declension of the nouns formed with the suffix
-iē-: ia- (which appears, for instance, in all the Greek feminine
participles, and in a more abstract sense in words like māteriēs)
to match the inflexion of two old root-nouns rēs and diēs, the
stems of which were originally rēḭ- (Sans. rās, rāyas, cf. Lat.
reor) and diēṷ-.

(v.) The disuse of the -ti- suffix in an abstract sense. The great
number of nouns which Latin inherited formed with this suffix
were either (1) marked as abstract by the addition of the further
suffix -ōn- (as in natio beside the Gr. γνὴσι-ος, &c.) or else (2)
confined to a concrete sense; thus vectis, properly “a carrying,
lifting,” came to mean “pole, lever”; ratis, properly a “reckoning,
devising,” came to mean “an (improvised) raft” (contrast ratiō);
postis, a “placing,” came to mean “post.”

(vi.) The confusion of the consonantal stems with stems

ending in -ĭ-. This was probably due very largely to the forms
assumed through phonetic changes by the gen. sing. and the
nom. and acc. plural. Thus at say 300 b.c. the inflexions probably
were:

conson. stem -ĭ- stem

Nom. plur. *rēg-ĕs host-ēs
Acc. plur. rĕg-ēs host-īs

The confusing difference of signification of the long -ēs ending

led to a levelling of these and other forms in the two paradigms.

(vii.) The disuse of the u declension (Gr. ἡδύς, στάχυς) in

adjectives; this group in Latin, thanks to its feminine form (Sans.
fem. svādvī, “sweet”), was transferred to the i declension
(suavis, gravis, levis, dulcis).

30. In verbs.

(i.) The disuse of the distinction between the personal endings

of primary and secondary tenses, the -t and -nt, for instance,
being used for the third person singular and plural respectively
in all tenses and moods of the active. This change was
completed after the archaic period, since we find in the oldest
inscriptions -d regularly used in the third person singular of past
tenses, e.g. deded, feced in place of the later dedit, fecit; and
since in Oscan the distinction was preserved to the end, both in
singular and plural, e.g. faamat (perhaps meaning
“auctionatur”), but deded (“dedit”). It is commonly assumed
from the evidence of Greek and Sanskrit (Gr. ἕστι, Sans. asti
beside Lat. est) that the primary endings in Latin have lost a
final -i, partly or wholly by some phonetic change.
 (ii.) The non-thematic conjugation is almost wholly lost,
surviving only in a few forms of very common use, est, “is”; ēst,
“eats”; volt, “wills,” &c.

(iii.) The complete fusion of the aorist and perfect forms, and
in the same tense the fusion of active and middle endings; thus
tutudī, earlier *tutudai, is a true middle perfect; dīxī is an s
aorist with the same ending attached; dīxit is an aorist active;
tutudisti is a conflation of perfect and aorist with a middle
personal ending.

(iv.) The development of perfects in -uī and -vī, derived partly

from true perfects of roots ending in v or u, e.g. mōvī ruī. For
the origin of monuī see Exon, Hermathena (1901), xi. 396 sq.

(v.) The complete fusion of conjunctive and optative into a

single mood, the subjunctive; regam, &c., are conjunctive forms,
whereas rexerim, rexissem are certainly and regerem most
probably optative; the origin of amem and the like is still
doubtful. Notice, however, that true conjunctive forms were
often used as futures, regēs, reget, &c., and also the simple
thematic conjunctive in forms like erō, rexerō, &c.

(vi.) The development of the future in -bo and imperfect in -

bam by compounding some form of the verb, possibly the
Present Participle with forms from the root of fuī, *amans-fuo
becoming amabō, *amans-fṷām becoming amābam at a very
early period of Latin; see F. Skutsch, Atti d. Congresso Storico
Intern. (1903), vol. ii. p. 191.

(vii.) We have already noticed the rise of the passive in -r (§ 5

(d)). Observe, however, that several middle forms have been
pressed into the service, partly because the -r- in them which
had come from -s- seemed to give them a passive colour (legere
= Gr. λέγε(σ)ο, Attic λέγου). The interesting forms in -minī are
a confusion of two distinct inflexions, namely, an old infinitive in
-menai, used for the imperative, and the participial -menoi,
masculine, -menai, feminine, used with the verb “to be” in place
of the ordinary inflexions. Since these forms had all come to
have the same shape, through phonetic change, their meanings
were fused; the imperative forms being restricted to the plural,
and the participial forms being restricted to the second person.

31. Past Participle Passive.—Next should be mentioned the

great development in the use of the participle in -tos (factus,
fusus, &c.). This participle was taken with sum to form the
perfect tenses of the passive, in which, thanks partly to the
fusion of perfect and aorist active, a past aorist sense was also
evolved. This reacted on the participle itself giving it a
prevailingly past colour, but its originally timeless use survives in
many places, e.g. in the participle ratus, which has as a rule no
past sense, and more definitely still in such passages as Vergil,
Georg. i. 206 (vectis), Aen. vi. 22 (ductis), both of which
passages demand a present sense. It is to be noticed also that
in the earliest Latin, as in Greek and Sanskrit, the passive
meaning, though the commonest, is not universal. Many traces
of this survive in classical Latin, of which the chief are

1. The active meaning of deponent participles, in spite

of the fact that some of them (e.g. adeptus,
ēmēnsus, expertus) have also a passive sense, and

2. The familiar use of these participles by the Augustan

poets with an accusative attached (galeam
indutus, traiectus lora). Here no doubt the use of
 the Greek middle influenced the Latin poets, but
no doubt they thought also that they were reviving
an old Latin idiom.

32. Future Participle.—Finally may be mentioned together (a)

the development of the future participle active (in -ūrus, never
so freely used as the other participles, being rare in the ablative
absolute even in Tacitus) from an old infinitive in -ūrum (“scio
inimicos meos hoc dicturum,” C. Gracchus (and others) apud
Gell. 1. 7, and Priscian ix. 864 (p. 475 Keil), which arose from
combining the dative or locative of the verbal noun in -tu with
an old infinitive esom “esse” which survives in Oscan, *dictu
esom becoming dicturum. This was discovered by J. P. Postgate
(Class. Review, v. 301, and Idg. Forschungen iv. 252). (b) From
the same infinitival accusative with the post-position -dō,
meaning “to,” “for,” “in” (cf. quandō for *quam-do, and Eng. to,
Germ, zu) was formed the so-called gerund agen-dō, “for
doing,” “in doing,” which was taken for a Case, and so gave rise
to the accusative and genitive in -dum and -dī. The form in -dō
still lives in Italian as an indeclinable present participle. The
modal and purposive meanings of -dō appear in the uses of the
gerund.

The authorities giving a fuller account of Latin morphology are

the same as those cited in § 28 above, save that the reader
must consult the second volume of Brugmann’s Grundriss, which
in the English translation (by Conway and Rouse, Strassburg,
1890-1896) is divided into volumes ii, iii. and iv.; and that
Niedermann does not deal with morphology.
 III. Syntax

The chief innovations of syntax developed in Latin may now

be briefly noted.

33. In nouns.

(i.) Latin restricted the various Cases to more sharply defined

uses than either Greek or Sanskrit; the free use of the internal
accusative in Greek (e.g. ἁβρὸν βαίνειν, τυφλὸς τὰ ὦτα) is
strange to Latin, save in poetical imitations of Greek; and so is
the freedom of the Sanskrit instrumental, which often covers
meanings expressed in Latin by cum, ab, inter.

(ii.) The syncretism of the so-called ablative case, which

combines the uses of (a) the true ablative which ended in -d (O.
Lat. praidād); (b) the instrumental sociative (plural forms like
dominīs, the ending being that of Sans. çivāiş); and (c) the
locative (noct-e, “at night”; itiner-e, “on the road,” with the
ending of Greek ἐλπίδ-ι). The so-called absolute construction is
mainly derived from the second of these, since it is regularly
attached fairly closely to the subject of the clause in which it
stands, and when accompanied by a passive participle most
commonly denotes an action performed by that subject. But the
other two sources cannot be altogether excluded (orto sole,
“starting from sunrise”; campo patente, “on, in sight of, the
open plain”).

34. In verbs.

(i.) The rich development and fine discrimination of the uses

of the subjunctive mood, especially (a) in indirect questions
(based on direct deliberative questions and not fully developed
by the time of Plautus, who constantly writes such phrases as
dic quis es for the Ciceronian dic quis sis); (b) after the relative
of essential definition (non is sum qui negem) and the
circumstantial cum (“at such a time as that”). The two uses (a)
and (b) with (c) the common Purpose and Consequence-clauses
spring from the “prospective” or “anticipatory” meaning of the
mood. (d) Observe further its use in subordinate oblique clauses
(irascitur quod abierim, “he is angry because, as he asserts, I
went away”). This and all the uses of the mood in oratio obliqua
are derived partly from (a) and (b) and partly from the (e)
Unreal Jussive of past time (Non illi argentum redderem? Non
redderes, “Ought I not to have returned the money to him?”
“You certainly ought not to have,” or, more literally, “You were
not to”).

On this interesting chapter of Latin syntax see W. G. Hale’s

“Cum-constructions” (Cornell University Studies in Classical
Philology, No. 1, 1887-1889), and The Anticipatory Subjunctive
(Chicago, 1894).

(ii.) The complex system of oratio obliqua with the sequence

of tenses (on the growth of the latter see Conway, Livy II.,
Appendix ii., Cambridge, 1901).

(iii.) The curious construction of the gerundive (ad capiendam

urbem), originally a present (and future?) passive participle, but
restricted in its use by being linked with the so-called gerund
(see § 32, b). The use, but probably not the restriction, appears
in Oscan and Umbrian.
 (iv.) The favourite use of the impersonal passive has already
been mentioned (§ 5, iv.).

35. The chief authorities for the study of Latin syntax are:
Brugmann’s Kurze vergl. Grammatik, vol. ii. (see § 28);
Landgraf’s Historische lat. Syntax (vol. ii. of the joint Hist.
Gram., see § 28); Hale and Buck’s Latin Grammar (see § 28);
Draeger’s Historische lat. Syntax, 2 vols. (2nd ed., Leipzig, 1878-
1881), useful but not always trustworthy; the Latin sections in
Delbrück’s Vergleichende Syntax, being the third volume of
Brugmann’s Grundriss (§ 28).

IV. Importation of Greek Words

36. It is convenient, before proceeding to describe the

development of the language in its various epochs, to notice briefly
the debt of its vocabulary to Greek, since it affords an indication of
the steadily increasing influence of Greek life and literature upon the
growth of the younger idiom. Corssen (Lat. Aussprache, ii. 814)
pointed out four different stages in the process, and though they are
by no means sharply divided in time, they do correspond to different
degrees and kinds of intercourse.

(a) The first represents the period of the early intercourse of

Rome with the Greek states, especially with the colonies in the
south of Italy and Sicily. To this stage belong many names of
nations, countries and towns, as Siculi, Tarentum, Graeci, Achivi,
Poenus; and also names of weights and measures, articles of
industry and terms connected with navigation, as mina,
talentum, purpura, patina, ancora, aplustre, nausea. Words like
amurca, scutula, pessulus, balineum, tarpessita represent
familiarity with Greek customs and bear equally the mark of
naturalization. To these may be added names of gods or heroes,
like Apollo, Pollux and perhaps Hercules. These all became
naturalized Latin words and were modified by the phonetic
changes which took place in the Latin language after they had
come into it (cf. §§ 9-27 supra). (b) The second stage was
probably the result of the closer intercourse resulting from the
conquest of southern Italy, and the wars in Sicily, and of the
contemporary introduction of imitations of Greek literature into
Rome, with its numerous references to Greek life and culture. It
is marked by the free use of hybrid forms, whether made by the
addition of Latin suffixes to Greek stems as ballistārius,
hēpatārius, subbasilicānus, sycophantiōsus, cōmissārī or of
Greek suffixes to Latin stems as plāgipatidas, pernōnides; or by
derivation, as thermopōtāre, supparasītāri; or by composition as
ineuschēmē, thyrsigerae, flagritribae, scrophipascī. The
character of many of these words shows that the comic poets
who coined them must have been able to calculate upon a fair
knowledge of colloquial Greek on the part of a considerable
portion of their audience. The most remarkable instance of this
is supplied by the burlesque lines in Plautus (Pers. 702 seq.),
where Sagaristio describes himself as

Vaniloquidorus, Virginisvendonides,
Nugipiloquides, Argentumexterebronides,
Tedigniloquides, Nummosexpalponides,
Quodsemelarripides, Nunquameripides.

During this period Greek words are still generally inflected

according to the Latin usage.
 (c) But with Accius (see below) begins a third stage, in which
the Greek inflexion is frequently preserved, e.g. Hectora,
Oresten, Cithaeron; and from this time forward the practice
wavers. Cicero generally prefers the Latin case-endings,
defending, e.g., Piraeeum as against Piraeea (ad Att. vii. 3, 7),
but not without some fluctuation, while Varro takes the opposite
side, and prefers poëmasin to the Ciceronian poëmatis. By this
time also y and z were introduced, and the representation of the
Greek aspirates by th, ph, ch, so that words newly borrowed
from the Greek could be more faithfully reproduced. This is
equally true whatever was the precise nature of the sound which
at that period the Greek aspirates had reached in their secular
process of change from pure aspirates (as in Eng. ant-hill, &c.)
to fricatives (like Eng. th in thin). (See Arnold and Conway, The
Restored Pronunciation of Greek and Latin, 4th ed., Cambridge,
1908, p. 21.)

(d) A fourth stage is marked by the practice of the Augustan

poets, who, especially when writing in imitation of Greek
originals, freely use the Greek inflexions, such as Arcaděs, Tethŷ,
Aegida, Echūs, &c. Horace probably always used the Latin form
in his Satires and Epistles, the Greek in his Odes. Later prose
writers for the most part followed the example of his Odes. It
must be added, however, in regard to these literary borrowings
that it is not quite clear whether in this fourth class, and even in
the unmodified forms in the preceding class, the words had
really any living use in spoken Latin.

V. Pronunciation
 This appears the proper place for a rapid survey of the
pronunciation1 of the Latin language, as spoken in its best days.

37. Consonants.—(i.) Back palatal. Breathed plosive c,

pronounced always as k (except that in some early inscriptions—
probably none much later, if at all later, than 300 b.c.—the
character is used also for g) until about the 7th century after
Christ. K went out of use at an early period, except in a few old
abbreviations for words in which it had stood before a, e.g., kal.
for kalendae. Q, always followed by the consonantal u, except in
a few old inscriptions, in which it is used for c before the vowel
u, e.g. pequnia. X, an abbreviation for cs; xs is, however,
sometimes found. Voiced plosive g, pronounced as in English
gone, but never as in English gem before about the 6th century
after Christ. Aspirate h, the rough breathing as in English.

(ii.) Palatal.—The consonantal i, like the English y; it is only in

late inscriptions that we find, in spellings like Zanuario, Giove,
any definite indication of a pronunciation like the English j. The
precise date of the change is difficult to determine (see Lindsay’s
Latin Lang. p. 49), especially as we may, in isolated cases, have
before us merely a dialectic variation; see Paeligni.

(iii.) Lingual.—r as in English, but probably produced more

with the point of the tongue. l similarly more dental than in
English. s always breathed (as Eng. ce in ice). z, which is only
found in the transcription of Greek words in and after the time
of Cicero, as dz or zz.

(iv.) Dental.—Breathed, t as in English. Voiced, d as in English;

but by the end of the 4th century di before a vowel was
pronounced like our j (cf. diurnal and journal). Nasal, n as in
English; but also (like the English n) a guttural nasal (ng) before
a guttural. Apparently it was very lightly pronounced, and easily
fell away before s.

(v.) Labial.—Breathed, p as in English. Voiced, b as in English;

but occasionally in inscriptions of the later empire v is written for
b, showing that in some cases b had already acquired the
fricative sound of the contemporary β (see § 24, iii.). b before a
sharp s was pronounced p, e.g. in urbs. Nasal, m as in English,
but very slightly pronounced at the end of a word. Spirant, v like
the ou in French oui, but later approximating to the w heard in
some parts of Germany, Ed. Sievers, Grundzüge d. Phonetik, ed.
4, p. 117, i.e. a labial v, not (like the English v) a labio-dental v.

(vi.) Labio-dental.—Breathed fricative, f as in English.

38. Vowels.—ā, ū, ī, as the English ah, oo, ee; ō, a sound

coming nearer to Eng. aw than to Eng. ō; ē a close Italian ē,
nearly as the a of Eng. mate, ée of Fr. passée. The short sound
of the vowels was not always identical in quality with the long
sound. ă was pronounced as in the French chatte, ŭ nearly as in
Eng. pull, ĭ nearly as in pit, ŏ as in dot, ĕ nearly as in pet. The
diphthongs were produced by pronouncing in rapid succession
the vowels of which they were composed, according to the
above scheme. This gives, au somewhat broader than ou in
house; eu like ow in the “Yankee” pronunciation of town; ae like
the vowel in hat lengthened, with perhaps somewhat more
approximation to the i in wine; oe, a diphthongal sound
approximating to Eng. oi; ui, as the French oui.

To this it should be added that the Classical Association, acting

on the advice of a committee of Latin scholars, has
 recommended for the diphthongs ae and oe the pronunciation of
English i (really ai) in wine and oi in boil, sounds which they
undoubtedly had in the time of Plautus and probably much later,
and which for practical use in teaching have been proved far the
best.

VI. The Language As Recorded

39. Passing now to a survey of the condition of the language at

various epochs and in the different authors, we find the earliest
monument of it yet discovered in a donative inscription on a fibula or
brooch found in a tomb of the 7th century b.c. at Praeneste. It runs
“Manios med fhefhaked Numasioi,” i.e. “Manios made me for
Numasios.” The use of f (fh) to denote the sound of Latin f supplied
the explanation of the change of the symbol f from its Greek value
(= Eng. w) to its Latin value f, and shows the Chalcidian Greek
alphabet in process of adaptation to the needs of Latin (see
Writing). The reduplicated perfect, its 3rd sing. ending -ed, the
dative masculine in -oi (this is one of the only two recorded
examples in Latin), the -s- between vowels (§ 25, 1), and the -a- in
what was then (see §§ 9, 10) certainly an unaccented syllable and
the accusative med, are all interesting marks of antiquity.2
 40. The next oldest fragment of continuous Latin is furnished by a
vessel dug up in the valley between the Quirinal and the Viminal
early in 1880. The vessel is of a dark brown clay, and consists of
three small round pots, the sides of which are connected together.
All round this vessel runs an inscription, in three clauses, two nearly
continuous, the third written below; the writing is from right to left,
and is still clearly legible; the characters include one sign not
belonging to the later Latin alphabet, namely for R, while the M
has five strokes and the Q has the form of a Koppa.

The inscription is as follows:—

“iovesat deivos qoi med mitat, nei ted endo cosmis virco sied,
asted noisi opetoitesiai pacari vois.

dvenos med feced en manom einom duenoi ne med malo

statod.”

The general style of the writing and the phonetic peculiarities

make it fairly certain that this work must have been produced not
later than 300 b.c. Some points in its interpretation are still open to
doubt,3 but the probable interpretation is—

“Deos iurat ille (or iurant illi) qui me mittat (or mittant) ne in
te Virgo (i.e. Proserpina) comis sit, nisi quidem optimo (?)
Theseae (?) pacari vis. Duenos me fecit contra Manum, Dueno
autem ne per me malum stato (= imputetur, imponatur).”

“He (or they) who dispatch me binds the gods (by his offering)
that Proserpine shall not be kind to thee unless thou wilt make terms
with (or “for”) Opetos Thesias (?). Duenos made me against Manus,
but let no evil fall to Duenos on my account.”
 41. Between these two inscriptions lies in point of date the famous
stele discovered in the Forum in 1899 (G. Boni, Notiz. d. scavi, May
1899). The upper half had been cut off in order to make way for a
new pavement or black stone blocks (known to archaeologists as the
niger lapis) on the site of the comitium, just to the north-east of the
Forum in front of the Senate House. The inscription was written
lengthwise along the (pyramidal) stele from foot to apex, but with
the alternate lines in reverse directions, and one line not on the full
face of any one of the four sides, but up a roughly-flattened fifth
side made by slightly broadening one of the angles. No single
sentence is complete and the mutilated fragments have given rise to
a whole literature of conjectural “restorations.”

R. S. Conway examined it in situ in company with F. Skutsch in

1903 (cf. his article in Vollmöller’s Jahresbericht, vi. 453), and
the only words that can be regarded as reasonably certain are
regei (regi) on face 2, kalatorem and iouxmenta on face 3, and
iouestod (iusto) on face 4.4 The date may be said to be fixed by
the variation of the sign for m between and (with for r)
and other alphabetic indications which suggest the 5th century
b.c. It has been suggested also that the reason for the

destruction of the stele and the repavement may have been

either (1) the pollution of the comitium by the Gallic invasion of
390 b.c., all traces of which, on their departure, could be best
removed by a repaving; or (2) perhaps more probably, the
Augustan restorations (Studniczka, Jahresheft d. Österr. Institut,
1903, vi. 129 ff.).
(R. S. C.)

42. Of the earlier long inscriptions the most important would

be the Columna Rostrata, or column of Gaius Duilius (q.v.),
erected to commemorate his victory over the Carthaginians in
260 b.c., but for the extent to which it has suffered from the
hands of restorers. The shape of the letters plainly shows that
the inscription, as we have it, was cut in the time of the empire.
Hence Ritschl and Mommsen pointed out that the language was
modified at the same time, and that, although many archaisms
have been retained, some were falsely introduced, and others
replaced by more modern forms. The most noteworthy features
in it are—C always written for G (Ceset = gessit), single for
double consonants (clases-classes), d retained in the ablative
(e.g., in altod marid), o for u in inflexions (primos, exfociont =
exfugiunt), e for i (navebos = navibus, exemet = exemit); of
these the first is probably an affected archaism, G having been
introduced some time before the assumed date of the
inscription. On the other hand, we have praeda where we should
have expected praida; no final consonants are dropped; and the
forms -es, -eis and -is for the accusative plural are interchanged
capriciously. The doubts hence arising preclude the possibility of
using it with confidence as evidence for the state of the
language in the 3rd century b.c.

43. Of unquestionable genuineness and the greatest value are

the Scipionum Elogia, inscribed on stone coffins, found in the
monument of the Scipios outside the Capene gate (C.I.L.1 i. 32).
The earliest of the family whose epitaph has been preserved is
L. Cornelius Scipio Barbatus (consul 298 b.c.), the latest C.
Cornelius Scipio Hispanus (praetor in 139 b.c.); but there are
good reasons for believing with Ritschl that the epitaph of the
first was not contemporary, but was somewhat later than that of
his son (consul 259 b.c.). This last may therefore be taken as the
earliest specimen of any length of Latin and it was written at
Rome; it runs as follows:—

honcoino . ploirume . cosentiont . r[omai]

duonoro . optumo . fuise . uiro [virorum]
luciom . scipione . filios . barbati
co]nsol . censor . aidilis . hic . fuet a [pud vos]
he]c . cepit . corsica . aleriaque . urbe[m]
de]det . tempestatebus . aide . mereto[d votam].

The archaisms in this inscription are—(1) the retention of o for u

in the inflexion of both nouns and verbs; (2) the diphthongs oi
(= later u) and ai (= later ae); (3) -et for -it, hec for hic, and -
ebus for -ibus; (4) duon- for bon; and (5) the dropping of a final
m in every case except in Luciom, a variation which is a marked
characteristic of the language of this period.

44. The oldest specimen of the Latin language preserved to us

in any literary source is to be found in two fragments of the
Carmina Saliaria (Varro, De ling. Lat. vii. 26, 27), and one in
Terentianus Scaurus, but they are unfortunately so corrupt as to
give us little real information (see B. Maurenbrecher, Carminum
Saliarium reliquiae, Leipzig, 1894; G. Hempl, American Philol.
Assoc. Transactions, xxxi., 1900, 184). Rather better evidence is
supplied in the Carmen Fratrum Arvalium, which was found in
1778 engraved on one of the numerous tablets recording the
transactions of the college of the Arval brothers, dug up on the
site of their grove by the Tiber, 5 m. from the city of Rome; but
this also has been so corrupted in its oral tradition that even its
 general meaning is by no means clear (C.I.L.1 i. 28; Jordan, Krit.
Beiträge, pp. 203-211).

45. The text of the Twelve Tables (451-450 b.c.), if preserved in its
integrity, would have been invaluable as a record of antique Latin;
but it is known to us only in quotations. R. Schoell, whose edition
and commentary (Leipzig, 1866) is the most complete, notes the
following traces, among others, of an archaic syntax: (1) both the
subject and the object of the verb are often left to be understood
from the context, e.g. ni it antestamino, igitur, em capito; (2) the
imperative is used even for permissions, “si volet, plus dato,” “if he
choose, he may give him more”; (3) the subjunctive is apparently
never used in conditional, only in final sentences, but the future
perfect is common; (4) the connexion between sentences is of the
simplest kind, and conjunctions are rare. There are, of course,
numerous isolated archaisms of form and meaning, such as calvitur,
pacunt, endo, escit. Later and less elaborate editions are contained
in Fontes Iuris Romani, by Bruns-Mommsen-Gradenwitz (1892); and
P. Girard, Textes de droit romain (1895).

46. Turning now to the language of literature we may group the

Latin authors as follows:—5

I. Ante-Classical (240-80 b.c.).—Naevius (? 269-204), Plautus

(254-184), Ennius (239-169), Cato the Elder (234-149), Terentius (?
195-159), Pacuvius (220-132), Accius (170-94), Lucilius (? 168-103).

II. Classical—Golden Age (80 b.c.-a.d. 14).—Varro (116-28), Cicero

(106-44), Lucretius (99-55), Caesar (102-44), Catullus (87-? 47),
Sallust (86-34), Virgil (70-19), Horace (65-8), Propertius (? 50- ?),
Tibullus (? 54-? 18), Ovid (43 b.c.-a.d. 18), Livy (59 b.c.-a.d. 18).
 III. Classical—Silver Age (a.d. 14-180).—Velleius (? 19 b.c.-? a.d.
31), M. Seneca (d. c. a.d. 30), Persius (34-62), Petronius (d. 66),
Lucan (39-65), L. Seneca (d. a.d. 65), Plinius major (23-a.d. 79),
Martial (40-101), Quintilian (42-118), Pliny the Younger (61-? 113),
Tacitus (? 60-? 118), Juvenal (? 47-? 138), Suetonius (75-160),
Fronto (c. 90-170).

47. Naevius and Plautus.—In Naevius we find archaisms

proportionally much more numerous than in Plautus, especially in
the retention of the original length of vowels, and early forms of
inflexion, such as the genitive in -as and the ablative in -d. The
number of archaic words preserved is perhaps due to the fact that
so large a proportion of his fragments have been preserved only by
the grammarians, who cited them for the express purpose of
explaining these.

Of the language of Plautus important features have already been

mentioned (§§ 10-16); for its more general characteristics see
Plautus.

48. Ennius.—The language of Ennius deserves especial study

because of the immense influence which he exerted in fixing the
literary style. He first established the rule that in hexameter verse all
vowels followed by two consonants (except in the case of a mute
and a liquid), or a double consonant, must be treated as lengthened
by position. The number of varying quantities is also much
diminished, and the elision of final -m becomes the rule, though not
without exceptions. On the other hand he very commonly retains the
original length of verbal terminations (essēt, faciēt) and of
nominatives in or and a, and elides final s before an initial
consonant. In declension he never uses -ae as the genitive, but -ai
or -as; the older and shorter form of the gen. plur. is -um in
common; obsolete forms of pronouns are used, as mis, olli, sum (=
eum), sas, sos, sapsa; and in verbal inflexion there are old forms like
morīmur (§ 15), fūimus (§ 17, vi.), potestur (cf. § 5, iv.). Some
experiments in the way of tmesis (saxo cere comminuit-brum) and
apocope (divum domus altisonum cael, replet te laetificum gau)
were happily regarded as failures, and never came into real use. His
syntax is simple and straightforward, with the occasional pleonasms
of a rude style, and conjunctions are comparatively rare. From this
time forward the literary language of Rome parted company with the
popular dialect. Even to the classical writers Latin was in a certain
sense a dead language. Its vocabulary was not identical with that of
ordinary life. Now and again a writer would lend new vigour to his
style by phrases and constructions drawn from homely speech. But
on the whole, and in ever-increasing measure, the language of
literature was the language of the schools, adapted to foreign
models. The genuine current of Italian speech is almost lost to view
with Plautus and Terence, and reappears clearly only in the semi-
barbarous products of the early Romance literature.

49. Pacuvius, Accius and Lucilius.—Pacuvius is noteworthy

especially for his attempt to introduce a free use of compounds after
the fashion of the Greek, which were felt in the classical times to be
unsuited to the genius of the Latin language, Quintilian censures
severely his line—
Nerei repandirostrum incurvicervicum pecus.

Accius, though probably the greatest of the Roman tragedians, is

only preserved in comparatively unimportant fragments. We know
that he paid much attention to grammar and orthography; and his
language is much more finished than that of Ennius. It shows no
Welcome to our website – the perfect destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. We believe that every book holds a new world,
offering opportunities for learning, discovery, and personal growth.
That’s why we are dedicated to bringing you a diverse collection of
books, ranging from classic literature and specialized publications to
self-development guides and children's books.

More than just a book-buying platform, we strive to be a bridge

connecting you with timeless cultural and intellectual values. With an
elegant, user-friendly interface and a smart search system, you can
quickly find the books that best suit your interests. Additionally,
our special promotions and home delivery services help you save time
and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Join us on a journey of knowledge exploration, passion nurturing, and

personal growth every day!

ebookbell.com