From: owner-ane To: ane-digest@oi.uchicago.edu Subject: Ancient Near East Digest V4 #17 Reply-To: Errors-To: owner-ane Precedence: bulk Ancient Near East Digest Saturday, 20 July 1996 Volume 04 : Number 017 On-line public education at OI-Chicago Re: On-line public education at OI-Chicago [none] CORRECTION: On-line public education at OI-Chicago Women as Regents/Pharoahs in Ancient Egypt Ancient Egyptian Pronunciation FWD: re: ANE textbook... [none] Re: Ancient Egyptian Pronunciation Re: On-line public education at OI-Chicago Re: Ancient Egyptian Pronunciation l/r Re: l/r Beirut excavations Ancient Egyptian pronunciation Re: Ancient Egyptian Pronunciation Mother Sarah Re: Mother Sarah Re: l/r Re: Ancient Egyptian Pronunciation Unfinished mail Re: Mother Sarah Re: l/r Re: Ancient Egyptian Pronunciation Re: On-line public education at OI-Chicago Re: Mother Sarah (Oy vey!) Re: l/r -- mixed phonemes ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: cejo@midway.uchicago.edu (Charles E. Jones) Date: Fri, 19 Jul 1996 12:29:21 -0500 (CDT) Subject: On-line public education at OI-Chicago Posted on behalf of the Oriental Institute Museum Education Department. Please respond directly to them at: adult-ed.orinst@memphis-orinst.uchicago.edu +++++++++++++++++++++++ The Oriental Institute Museum Education Department is preparing to begin a series of courses taught entirely on the Internet. The first of these courses will be an introduction to the history and culture of ancient Egypt. Using electronic mail and the World Wide Web, students will come together to form an electronic forum with the instructor. Readings will include original materials distributed over the WWW as well as paper-based texts. The Museum Education office is interested in finding out how much serious interest there is in this kind of undertaking. There will be a fee which is expected to be in the normal range for adult education programs. If you are interested, please send a message stating your interest, and requesting a more detailed prospectus to: adult-ed.orinst@memphis-orinst.uchicago.edu +++++++++++++++++++++++ ------------------------------ From: adler@pulsar.cs.wku.edu (Allen Adler) Date: Fri, 19 Jul 1996 14:28:20 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: On-line public education at OI-Chicago I'm glad to hear about the On-line course. What exactly is one paying for? Is it the information or the opportunity to interact with the instructor and to get criticism of work submitted? Or, to put the matter differently, are the course materials going to be available to those who don't want to pay a fee? Allan Adler adler@pulsar.cs.wku.edu ------------------------------ From: cejo@midway.uchicago.edu (Charles E. Jones) Date: Fri, 19 Jul 1996 16:10:38 -0500 (CDT) Subject: [none] who mane who mane-digest ------------------------------ From: cejo@midway.uchicago.edu (Charles E. Jones) Date: Fri, 19 Jul 1996 15:36:11 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CORRECTION: On-line public education at OI-Chicago In place of the address mentioned in my previous post on On-line public education at OI-Chicago, please use the following: Carole_Krucoff@memphis-orinst.uchicago.edu Sorry for the error. - -Chuck- ------------------------------ From: dgrimm@artic.edu (Deidra Grimm) Date: Fri, 19 Jul 1996 16:30:13 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Women as Regents/Pharoahs in Ancient Egypt I am a graduate student at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago, currently working on narrative portraits of women in ancient Egypt. I would like to focus on women who either acted as interum rulers, or full-fledged pharoahs (such as Hatshepsut). I am having difficulty in finding information on this subject and I hope that list members will offer their insight. I believe that there may be 5 women in this category, with Hatshepsut and Cleopatra as obvious rulers. Please inform me of any sources, books etc. which might be of value to me. Please respond on private e-mail, I don't want to bother the list order with my personal inquiries. Thanks! DiDi Grimm ------------------------------ From: Saida@aol.com Date: Fri, 19 Jul 1996 17:57:57 -0400 Subject: Ancient Egyptian Pronunciation From Saida (Marianne Luban) I is said that the ancient Egyptians could not distinguish between the letters "r" and "l". I think they probably could, when other peoples pronounced them, but had simply developed a national peculiarity of speech that caused them to say these letters in more or less the same way. In old Egyptian (but not Coptic) there are no words containing an "l". Whenever an Egyptian word is taken from a Semitic one, like Hebrew, the sign (the little mouth), which has been deciphered as an "r", takes the place of the Semitic "l". For example, the Hebrew shalom (peace) is "shar-m" in Egyptian and shekel (monetary unit) becomes "shaker". I used to take it for granted that the ancient Egyptians employed the same strong, hard, burring "r" as their Arabic-speaking modern counterparts because most of the sounds peculiar to Arabic seemed already evident in Egyptian. Now I tend to believe otherwise. Such an "r" would have been an unlikely substitute for the Semitic "l", which is more emphatic and deeper in the throat than out English one. Can that mean that the Dynastic Egyptians made their "r's" seem negligible in the way that a public school educated Englishman would pronounce "car"? Or was the Egyptian "r" pronounced the way a small child, or an adult who has difficulty with "r's" says it, making it more like a "w" such as Bawbawa for Barbara/ Some people make their "l's" into "w's" as well, which is what I think the ancient Egyptians probably did with both "r" and "l", making Kleopatra come out Kweopatwa. Kleopatra, remember, was a Greek name and not Egyptian. When this name is written in hieroglyphs, the letter "l" is represented by the figure of a recumbent lion. Yet I have often noted that this sign is most often shown as "r", which is quite confusing except if one knew that both "r" and "l" were actually pronounced alike, just as the people of Spain know that the letters "s","c" and "z" are spoken as "th" in the Castilian accent. The manner in which foreign peoples wrote out what they heard can provide clues to Egyptian pronunciation. A very good example is the complete name of the pharaoh Ramesses II. In modern-day textbook Egyptian, this name would be written: User-ma'at-Re-setep-en-Re-Ramesses-mery-Amun. The cunieform version is: Was-mu-Ria-satep-na-Ria-Riamesesa-mai-Amana. Much later, the Greeks wrote the words User-ma'at-Re as "Osymandias". From all this we can deduce several things: !. That the "u" in User was said as either a "w" or as an "o" so short as to seem nearly a "w". 2. That the "r" in User was negligible. It was heard by neither the people who wrote it in cunieform nor by the Greeks. 3. That the word "ma'at" was heard by both peoples as a nasal, either because the "ayin" sound was strange to them or perhaps "ma'at" did not actually contain a true double gutteral, but was sounded like the French say "moh" when they mean "mon". 4. That the word "Re" was actually duo-syllabic as in "Ria" and "Dia". It was usually written with the sign of the solar disc or with the "r" (little mouth) and "ayin" (outstetched arm). Again, it is unclear whether this supposed "ayin" was a true double gutteral or a nasal sound. The "d" in "Osymandias" is what would naturally have occurred when the weak Egyptian "r" was pronounced with any speed in this sequence of letters. The "s" on the end is a Greek habit of long duration. 5. The word for "of" may be "na" instead of the "en" we now use in Egyptology. 6. The word "mery" (beloved) comes out "mai"--again a negligible "r". It is rather funny to think of the mighty pharaohs of Egypt prattling away in accents evocative of baby-talk. Yet the modern Hebrew speaker has adopted a rather weak "r", also and I imagine the ancient Egyptians, especially by the time of the New Kingdom, to have had a pronunciation rather like this, only perhaps the "r" being more a "w" than that of the Israeli. In the New Kingdom, the sons of Ramesses II had names like Amenhiwonemef (or Amenhikhopeshef) Montuhikhopeshef (or Montuhiwonmef). At least, this is how they were spelled in the last book I saw. Yet, at other times, I have seen Montuhirkhopeshef, for example, spelled that way with an "r" after the "hi". Perhaps someone can tell me which is right because I have not had access to the heiroglyphic spelling. Also, I would appreciate any thoughts on Egyptian pronunciation here or by E-mail. ------------------------------ From: cejo@midway.uchicago.edu (Charles E. Jones) Date: Fri, 19 Jul 1996 17:13:32 -0500 (CDT) Subject: FWD: re: ANE textbook... >Recently there was an inquiry from Riza Tuncel of Mersin, Turkey (e-mail= > hera23@simurg.iau.edu.tr) concerning the availability of textbooks suitable= > for general courses of the history and culture of the civilizations of the= > ancient Near East. May I suggest to Riza Tuncel (and anyone else looking= > for a new, one volume text on the subject) that they contact me for an= > examination copy of my new book entitled First Civilizations: Ancient= > Mesopotamia and Ancient Egypt. > >This introductory level (college/university) textbook is an overview of= > ancient Mesopotamia and Egypt containing seven charts, 25 maps, 95 line= > drawings, and 45 black and white photographs. Soft cover, 240 pages. It was= > specifically designed for students with no previous knowledge of ancient= > history or archaeology, most of whom will take only one course on the ANE= > as part of their general education.=20 >There are a limited number of free examination copies available to teaching= > professionals. Those wishing a complimentary copy for possible course= > adoption are invited to contact me at: > >Les Editions Champ Fleury >841 Chemin Amy >Ayers Cliff, QC >JOB 1CO=20 >CANADA >(819) 876=A97916 >FAX (819) 876=A95755 > >Since I have formed my own company with limited resources to promote this= > book, I would ask that only those serious about course adoption ask for a= > free copy. All others may purchase a copy by sending a cheque or money= > order for $30.00 US or $35.00 CDN to the above address. Price includes= > shipping and handling.=20 >Thanks to those who have already received copies and have sent along their= > valuable comments and criticisms. > >Dr. Robert Chadwick >Humanities Department >John Abbott College=20 >Ste=A9Anne de Bellevue, QC >H9X 3L9 >CANADA >(514) 457=A93935 #421 (September to May) > >--=====================_837808260==_ >Log Cabin Chronicles: http://www.tomifobia.com >Features, fiction, poetry, opinion, photography, and art >from the culturally rich Anglo/French/Yankee communities >in the Lake Memphremagog watershed on the Vermont/Quebec border >--=====================_837808260==_-- ------------------------------ From: frank murray Date: Fri, 19 Jul 96 16:22 PDT Subject: [none] - --------------------------------------------------------------------- ***WARNING*** This post contains material that may offend anyone who views genesis as founding document to their system of belief. My intent though, is not to offend, but rather to enquire openly and honestly. Please correct me where i err in fact or thought. - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- THE TROUBLE WITH YUYA: egypt entombed yuya in the valley of the kings at a time when burial within that valley was limited to members of the house of pharaoh...yet, yuya does not look like an egyptian...his ears wern't even pierced...his mummy looks semitic...to understand why egypt may have buried a semite in the royal cemetary, we might look to semitic records... the book of genesis tells us of one semite who went to egypt, rose to great power, considered himself "a father to pharaoh" (gen 45-8)and was embalmed and put into a coffin in egypt...joseph...further, the book of genesis gives us reason to suspect that joseph was a relative of the royal housen of egypt... THE TROUBLE WITH SARAH: joseph's great grandfather, abraham, had toured egypt...he took his beautiful half-sister, sarah, who was also his wife, along with him...afraid that the egyptians might take a look at his lovely wife and decide that he was expendable, abraham skipped mention of the man/wife relationship and introduced sarah as his sister...(the "hey mister, wanta meet my sister" game of the powerless towards the overwhelmingly more powerful)...sarah must have been strikingly attractive...pharaoh not only wants to meet her, but to bed her as wife...and abraham does rather well on the deal...pharaoh pays him off with lots of sheep, camels, servants, etc... but the deal sours...it seems that sarah's sweet little body, carries within it a thing not so sweet, a thing which the divorce statutes of many states in the u.s. formerly refered to, euphemistically, as "loathesome disease"...a plague strikes at pharaoh and his house... THE TROUBLE WITH PLAGUE: to understand that this "plague" was likely a venereal disease of one sort or another, we must first deal with an obvious objection on the language of genesis, and then take a look at that strange correlate of the sarah/pharaoh marriage, sarah's marriage to abimalech... THE TROUBLE WITH ABSTINANCE: the phrase in the king james version of genesis: (questionable on a textual basis) "so i might have taken her to me as wife", rings falsely to my male nature...that pharaoh, his hormones at flow under the attractive beauty of sweet sarah, should pay a mighty fee for her and then leave her lying alone, does not speak accurately of male sexuality...that twist of the story speaks more to the sense of squeam among some translator or conveyor of the tale...further, it is obvious from genesis that abraham has already collected his loot from the deal...and keeps that loot when he and sarah leave egypt... THE TROUBLE WITH THE GENITALIA OF ABIMALECH AND HIS HOUSE: whether the tale in genesis of sarah's marriage to abimalech is a misnaming garble of the sarah/pharaoh tale, (the localizing trait found so often in rumor) or a comparable occurance with another ruler of the same sequence of bigamy and subsequent disease, is a question best settled by scholars of the text and period...but given the human appetite for gossip about royalty, it seems unlikely that abraham could have gotten away with this ruse of sleeping his wife around for profit without punishment, eventual and severe... whichever the case, the abimalech tale adds evidence of the venereal nature of the "plague" that accompanied sarah's charms...gen 20(17&18) leaves no doubt that the ruler's marriage with sarah resulted in problems of the sexual organs...that sarah passed a venereal disease to the royal house is strong evidence that her royal marriage was consumated... THE TROUBLE WITH LINEAGE: according to genesis, abraham and sarah had fertility problems, but she does eventually become pregnant...and at the time of her pregnancy, three strangers show up to discuss its outcome...abraham's reaction to their visit indicates that he considers the strangers to be the representatives of some great power...if sarah is pregnant with pharaoh"s child, it is not unlikely that someone near the seat of pharaonic power keeps track of that pregnancy... the talmudic tale, of abraham being mocked because isaac bears no resemblance to his supposed father, adds credence to sarah's bearing some other man's child, as does abraham's later attempt to kill isaac... if isaac was begotten of sarah by pharaoh, then the burial of isaac's grandson, joseph, within the valley of the kings becomes quite reasonable...and if a semitic looking mummy, one of who's titles was "the holy father of the lord of the two lands" (akin to joseph's self-describing phrase: "the father of pharaoh") is dug up in the valley of the kings, then we might consider further whether joseph and yuya were the same man... frank ------------------------------ From: Saida@aol.com Date: Fri, 19 Jul 1996 19:40:11 -0400 Subject: Re: Ancient Egyptian Pronunciation The print-out of my article, "Ancient Egyptian Pronunciation" shows me that I transposed the i and the e in the word "cuneiform" at least twice. I do know better, but sometimes am an eccentric typist. ------------------------------ From: frank murray Date: Fri, 19 Jul 96 16:37 PDT Subject: Re: On-line public education at OI-Chicago At 12:29 PM 7/19/96 -0500, it was written: >There will be a fee which is expected to be in the normal range for adult >education programs. > might it be possible to translate this into the more widespread language of dollars and cents?... frank ------------------------------ From: Gonzalo Rubio Date: Fri, 19 Jul 1996 21:20:58 -0400 Subject: Re: Ancient Egyptian Pronunciation On Fri, 19 Jul 1996 Saida@aol.com wrote: > I is said that the ancient Egyptians could not distinguish between the > letters "r" and "l". I think they probably could, when other peoples > pronounced them, but had simply developed a national peculiarity of speech > that caused them to say these letters in more or less the same way. That's a very interesting point. However, I thought, the current communis opinio among Egyptologist who work on hisrtorical linguistics, was that Afroasiatic (AA) *r became /R/ in Egyptian (written with the grapheme <3>, the vulture, tradicionally understood as a glottal stop, but now thought to be a uvular trill). On the other hand, AA *l presents several (inconsistent, one might say) correspondences in Egyptian: (Sem. *lis, Eg. ns, Akk, li$a:nu, Ar. lisa:n, etc., tongue), (Sem. *'a%l or *'athl, Eg. jzr, tamrisk), <3> (Sem. *lg^z or just *lag^, Eg. 3``, Heb. l``, Arab. lg^w, West Cushitic *lag^, to speak [foreign languages]), (AA. *lib, Eg. jb, Sem. *libb, Akk. libbu, etc., heart --though one might argue that *l- > j- before a front vowel). Since I am not an Egyptologist, but a mere "Assyriologist in progress", these remarks are based on Antonio Loprieno's recent book, _Ancient Egyptian: A Linguistic Introduction_ (Cambridge 1995), and on a constant use of Orel-Stolbova's Afroasiatic ("Hamito-Semitic") dictionary (Leiden 1995). > figure of a recumbent lion. Yet I have often noted that this sign is most > often shown as "r", which is quite confusing except if one knew that both "r" > and "l" were actually pronounced alike, just as the people of Spain know that > the letters "s","c" and "z" are spoken as "th" in the Castilian accent. In Castilian Spanish, is always pronounced /s/, is always pronounced "/th/", and is pronounced "/th/" when followed by or (front vowels), but /k/ before , , or . In general, in Andalucia, Canary Islands, and Latinamerica, a neutralizing phenomenon takes place, and the sound [th] practically disappears (well, in Andalucia, sometimes the phenomenon is the opposite, and many are pronounced /th/, the so-called "ceceo", but that's not just a matter of geography but rather a diastractic phenomenon). So, I (a Castilian native speaker) say "/catha/" for (haunting), while my relatives in Sevilla say /casa/ (actually, /caza/ with a voiced s, full of beautiful and diverse nuances) --so, when talking to them, I can hardly distinguish between (house) and (haunting). - --------------------------- Gonzalo Rubio Near Eastern Studies Johns Hopkins University gonzalor@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu - --------------------------- ------------------------------ From: Peter Daniels Date: Sat, 20 Jul 1996 00:50:41 -0500 Subject: l/r Regarding Marianne Luban's query: It is fairly unusual among the languages of the world for a language to have both and [l] and an [r] (of whatever variety). Americans have been making fun of Chinese and Japanese accents on exactly those grounds for decades, and probably for centuries. So if this distinction did not exist in Ancient Egyptian, you must not think of "pharaohs prattling away in accents evocative of baby-talk"! Every language must be taken on its own terms; I'm sure many French- and German-speakers find it risible that English speakers can't manage the difference between (what is spelled in French as) ou and u. ------------------------------ From: Gonzalo Rubio Date: Sat, 20 Jul 1996 04:01:30 -0400 Subject: Re: l/r On Sat, 20 Jul 1996, Peter Daniels wrote: > It is fairly unusual among the languages of the world for a language to have > both and [l] and an [r] (of whatever variety). Americans have been making fun I think you are right, Peter. But, in this concrete case, some people have pointed to a substratum that would go from Anatolia to Egypt, which would not have "distinguished" between /r/ and /l/ --well, von Soden mentions that "substratum" in his _Einfuehrung in die Altorientalistik_ (Darmstadt 1985 --BTW, please, before even trying the English so-called "translation", read Prof. Cooper's review in _JAOS_ 115 [1995]: 531 ff.). I'd rather stick with approaches like yours, in which the fact that some languages have only one of the phonemes (either trill, /r/, or lateral, /l/) of this subset of the alveolar set, is just a mere and widespread typological feature, with no (necessary) historical implications. - --------------------------- Gonzalo Rubio Near Eastern Studies Johns Hopkins University gonzalor@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu - --------------------------- ------------------------------ From: englund@fub46.zedat.fu-berlin.de Date: Sat, 20 Jul 1996 11:30:54 +0100 Subject: Beirut excavations Karin Bartl has put up some information about the Beirut excavations (Beirut Central District; UNESCO Project), conducted by the Free University of Berlin and the University of Freiburg, at: http://fub46.zedat.fu-berlin.de:8080/~uruk/Bartl ------------------------------ From: David Lorton <103204.562@compuserve.com> Date: 20 Jul 96 09:22:41 EDT Subject: Ancient Egyptian pronunciation Gonzalo Rubio made mention of Egyptian ns "tongue" = Akk. li$a:nu, Ar. lisa:n. It needs to be added that in Coptic we find las (Sahidic, Bohairic) and les (Fayumic). In Antonio Loprieno, Ancient Egyptian: A Linguistic Introduction, p. 31, there is a paragraph devoted to the consonants Egyptologists have traditionally transliterated as 3, i, l, n, and r. Comparisons of Egyptian words with evidently related Semitic words shows that there is indeed some problem with our understanding of how these consonants were actually pronounced. The evident equation (see the Wb.) i'h (with dotted h) = Hebrew yareaH suggests that Egyptian ayin needs to be added to this list of problematic consonants. David Lorton ------------------------------ From: Patrick Ryan Date: Sat, 20 Jul 1996 09:17:02 -0700 Subject: Re: Ancient Egyptian Pronunciation Saida@aol.com wrote: > > >From Saida (Marianne Luban) > > It is said that the ancient Egyptians could not distinguish between the > letters "r" and "l".{snip} Dear Marianne: This will be a minority point of view so use the information discreetly. Please write to me directly if you wish to pursue any point I make. I believe that AA, shortly after its separation from Nostratic, developed a pronounced difference in pronunciation between C[w], i.e. a consonant with a velar glide; and C[y] and C[-]. Nostratic had only the central vowel and a close allophone <6> (schwa). In the Semitic languages, this still shows up as a contrast between apical stops and fricatives (d, d.; t, t.; z, z.; s, s.); this contrast, which is termed "emphatic", is realized in a number of different ways. However, the earliest pronunciations will have been developments from the extreme backing of the tongue, i.e. retroflex. An interesting related phenomenon is that Arabic is what is termed a "dark" in IE studies, a back , often indicated with a diagonal bar through the . As you may know, this dark is a feature of Polish where it is often heard by non-Poles as a . Arabic dialects do not, to my knowledge (there may be a small exception someplace) have a palatal . The question is why? Most languages choose between an or an . But a few seem to show an alternation between before front and central vowels, with a change to before back vowels. I believe that mankind's earliest language (and Nostratic) had only one phoneme , that later developed an allophone before back vowels or velarization (w-glide). This difference was so pronounced that Egyptian consonant pairs like are not the result of voicing or glottalization, etc. contrasts but glide-contrasts; Egyptian represents Nostratic t[?/h][-/y] while represents Nostratic t[?/h][w]. So, to properly compare an Arabic word with an Egyptian one in , you need to know whether it was glottalized or aspirated in Nostratic (t[?]/t[h]); this is easiest to determine by the IE cognate in or if it exists. Then, if it was velarized (Egyptian ), it will correspond to Arabic ; if non-velarized (Egyptian ), it will correspond to Arabic . It is well-known that Egyptian <3>, the vulture, represented in foreign words; and I assert that <3> is the palatal-central reflex of Nostratic , paired with Egyptian , the velar reflex of Nostratic . As a consequence, Egyptian <3> will normally correspond to Arabic while Egyptian normally is Arabic . [snip] > figure of a recumbent lion. [snip] Gardiner E23 should be regarded as a sign for not simple . You will also notice that this sign is often used to transcribe a foreign . The reason is, probably, that the following also pred-disposed an pronunciation. Although many Egyptologists regard the with an ideograph stroke, meaning "mouth, opening", to be reconstructed differently, I suspect that it is, in many cases, an ancient dual in -w, since the Nostratic r[w]a has the primary meaning of "lip" (cf. "edge"). After Egyptian <3>, originally a trill, developed into , an opening in the sound-system for an came into existence; and whether Egyptian had been consistently pronounced (l-) or not (perhaps some dialects had a uvular for it), sequences like *ri/y either re-introduced or had previously helped to maintain an allophonic pronunciation of for Egyptian , which may have been trilled but more probably was "the "retroflex" of Midwestern English, a final easily lost when final. Hope this is, if not helpful, at least interesting. "Pat Ryan" ------------------------------ From: Saida@aol.com Date: Sat, 20 Jul 1996 12:01:33 -0400 Subject: Mother Sarah Frank Murphy seems to suggest that Sarah, the wife of Abraham (or Abram) gave Pharaoh VD! Genesis XII:17 says, "And the Lord plagued Pharaoh and his house with great plagues because of Sarai Abram's wife". First of all, every "plague" in ancient Egypt was mysterious, due to a lack of medical knowledge (even though Egyptians were considered the best doctors in the known world). However, I give the ancients enough credit to know when someone had, begging your pardon, the "clap". In fact, medical papyri describe this condition. Secondly, since venereal diseases are sexually transmitted, how did the entire household come down with it? Presumably, when Pharaoh spoke to Abram about all of this, Abram revealed the truth of his relationship with Sarai and Pharaoh says "Why didst thou not tell me that she was they wife?" Yet Pharaoh already knew the answer to his own question and Freud would have said his own guilt caused him to rationalize that the "sicknesses" (the Bible states more than one) came about because of his own misbehaviour past and present. Therefore, he tells Abram to take Sarai and go, hoping perhaps for a cure as a result of this generosity. Several persons have tried to equate Yuya, the father of Queen Tiye, with the Biblical Joseph. However, in Exodus, it states that Joseph's bones (read mummy) were taken to the Promised Land. Yuya's,obviously, remained in Egypt. Yuya does look like a member of a Semitic-speaking people, but, then, so do most of the pharaohs of the 18th and 19th Dynasties and beyond (my opinion). The fact that his name is spelled a couple of different ways in his tomb seems to be an indication that Yuya was a foreigner whose name seemed odd to the Egyptians. It is also possible that Yuya was one of the Hyksos who had assimilated into Egyptian society because his job was "master of the horse" and the Hyksos had introduced the use of horses and chariots in warfare. ------------------------------ From: frank murray Date: Sat, 20 Jul 96 12:02 PDT Subject: Re: Mother Sarah At 12:01 PM 7/20/96 -0400, saida wrote: >Frank Murphy seems to suggest that > as i'd hate to have poor mr. murphy, whoever he might be, held responsible for what are likely to be unpopular views, i suggest that you refer to me as frank murray... >Genesis XII:17 says, "And the Lord plagued Pharaoh and his house >with great plagues because of Sarai Abram's wife". > > >Secondly, since venereal diseases are sexually transmitted, how did the >entire household come down with it? "pharaoh and his house" can be legitimately interpreted as meaning that pharaoh and his women, whether wives or spares, were infected...your changing of the phrase to "the entire household" doesn't fit so well into that interpretation...i suggest you return to the written phrase... > >Presumably, when Pharaoh spoke to Abram about all of this, Abram revealed the >truth of his relationship with Sarai and Pharaoh says "Why didst thou not >tell me that she was they wife?" Yet Pharaoh already knew the answer to his >own question and Freud would have said his own guilt caused him to >rationalize that the "sicknesses" (the Bible states more than one) came about >because of his own misbehaviour past and present. not only am i unsure of what a dead psychotherapist would have said to or about an already long dead pharoah, but i am even more unsure of what relevance such hypothetical comment might have...perhaps you might explain... > >Several persons have tried to equate Yuya, the father of Queen Tiye, with the >Biblical Joseph. However, in Exodus, it states that Joseph's bones (read >mummy) were taken to the Promised Land. Yuya's,obviously, remained in Egypt. yes...an obvious conflict...but exodus 13:19 seems the type of comment that would have to have been made...further, no details are given of any exhumation...just the statement that what should have been done, was done...a perfunctory comment...i found that statement easier to discard than the remainder of the evidence that joseph and yuya might be the same man... > Yuya does look like a member of a Semitic-speaking people, but, then, so do >most of the pharaohs of the 18th and 19th Dynasties and beyond (my opinion). yes...i've followed your posts elsewhere and put great stock in your opinion because you were working so closely with the faces...working with the eye of an artist, as i understand it...and the meshing of several genetic strains in the royal houses is most probable...but yuya's face is quite distinct... and one irrelevant question from the side...were you drawing at the cairo museum during november of last year?... frank > > The fact that his name is spelled a couple of different ways in his tomb >seems to be an indication that Yuya was a foreigner whose name seemed odd to >the Egyptians. It is also possible that Yuya was one of the Hyksos who had >assimilated into Egyptian society because his job was "master of the horse" >and the Hyksos had introduced the use of horses and chariots in warfare. > yes...and i believe the first mention of the chariot in genesis is in connection with joseph... ------------------------------ From: SheMichael@aol.com Date: Sat, 20 Jul 1996 15:20:39 -0400 Subject: Re: l/r Don't know Egyptian, but I _have_ studied Chinese. In Japanese, there are some necessaries I picked up by being married. Korean, I heard bountiously on a two-month visit which included a lot of coaching from new-found friends. So what I'm jumping in to say is the _r-l_ or "rul" sound is a single sound, which _I_ can hit maybe once in five tries. ------------------------------ From: Patrick Ryan Date: Sat, 20 Jul 1996 14:55:19 -0700 Subject: Re: Ancient Egyptian Pronunciation Dear Saida: After having read other contributions to the subject, I realized that what I wrote earlier might have been a little misleading. PL (and Nostratic) did have another phoneme which shows up as in IE and AA: . This phoneme is written in Egyptian, which has the well-known variant reflexes of and in Coptic. Since, in Egyptian, palatalized consonants seem to have generally been merged with consonants with NO glide (earlier Ca), this is not a palatal ; and also not in Semitic, since we would expect occasional for if it had been. The set "AA. *lib, Eg. jb, Sem. *libb, Akk. libbu, etc., heart" is incorrect for the Egyptian cognate. Egyptian ib primarily means "insides" not "heart", and is cognate with Sumerian ip-2, "waist"; Egyptian "heart" is properly H3tii, which is cognate with IE k^erd-, "heart". Egyptian <3> was not a uvular sound; if there was a uvular variant of in Egyptian, it would have had to be represented by Egyptian . Egyptian <3> is not cognate properly with any word in Semitic or IE with an . "Pat Ryan" ------------------------------ From: SheMichael@aol.com Date: Sat, 20 Jul 1996 16:51:52 -0400 Subject: Unfinished mail While I was off looking at a chinese dictionary to try to figure out whether the difference between the chinese & japanese words for the ideogram of my husband's name ("Kwan or Huang", in Chinese, for which the old Japanese is "Hikaru") would account for the "(d)r" emphasis in the _r-l_ sound.....while I was away from this half written letter, the pre-set Flash Session turned on & spirited the letter away to the ane list. I wasn't quite sure I was going to send it; was it germane? But it's sent. Whatever. ------------------------------ From: SheMichael@aol.com Date: Sat, 20 Jul 1996 16:52:08 -0400 Subject: Re: Mother Sarah The inference --in modern feminist thought & some older guy-thought-- is not that Pharoah is the father of Isaac & Joseph, but that God is. (We're talking the gendered, sexually male persona of God in this case, I guess.) (Take a look at Savina Teuval's books.) When the messengers announce Isaac's birth, Sarah laughs & says, "Shall I again know pleasure, my husband is old, and [BTW], I am old too." *[n.b.]This is one of the least quoted passages of the Bible. What do _you_ [unbiased you] think she's trying to say? She is long gone from Pharoah and Abimelech. That's not the miracle. When Rachel demands, "Give me children, lest I die", Jacob replies, "Am I in God's place, that I should give you children?" Rachel picks herself up, eats some magic roots, for which she trades her husband's favours with Leah, & both sisters become pregnant. We haven't seen Pharoah in _YEARS_, any of us. ------------------------------ From: SheMichael@aol.com Date: Sat, 20 Jul 1996 17:05:17 -0400 Subject: Re: l/r Stranger & stranger. The letter which went out was about a quarter of the letter I was composing at the time the Flash Session took it away. Sorry to keep bothering people. ------------------------------ From: Gonzalo Rubio Date: Sat, 20 Jul 1996 17:59:42 -0400 Subject: Re: Ancient Egyptian Pronunciation It has been suggested that the set of correspondences AA *lib, Eg. jb, SEm. *libb, Akk. libbu, etc., is wrong for Eg. jb. I repeat I'm not an Egyptologist, and I don't have Erman-Grapow's right here either. However, Rainer Hannig's _Grosses Handwoerterbuch Aegyptisch-Deutsch_ (Mainz 1995) gives "Herz" as the first and basic meaning of jb (p. 38). Also Loprieno's book (see my previous message) gives the same meaning. For the correspondences between AA *r and *l and Egyptian , , and r, one may find useful to check both Lopreino's book (p. 31) and Orel-Stolbova's dictionary (esp. p. XX). Regarding Sumerian ib2 (= Akk. qablu --the reading ip2 should be used only in Akkadian texts), any comparison is, at least, highly expeculative. - --------------------------- Gonzalo Rubio Near Eastern Studies Johns Hopkins University gonzalor@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu - --------------------------- ------------------------------ From: mike shupp Date: Sat, 20 Jul 1996 15:34:12 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: On-line public education at OI-Chicago On Fri, 19 Jul 1996, Charles E. Jones wrote: > Posted on behalf of the Oriental Institute Museum Education Department. > Please respond directly to them at: > adult-ed.orinst@memphis-orinst.uchicago.edu > > +++++++++++++++++++++++ > > The Oriental Institute Museum Education Department is preparing to begin a > series of courses taught entirely on the Internet. The first of these > courses will be an introduction to the history and culture of ancient > Egypt. > > Using electronic mail and the World Wide Web, students will come together > to form an electronic forum with the instructor. Readings will include > original materials distributed over the WWW as well as paper-based texts. > > The Museum Education office is interested in finding out how much serious > interest there is in this kind of undertaking. There will be a fee which > is expected to be in the normal range for adult education programs. > > If you are interested, please send a message stating your interest, and > requesting a more detailed prospectus to: > adult-ed.orinst@memphis-orinst.uchicago.edu > > +++++++++++++++++++++++ For college credit? At what level? - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ms44278@huey.csun.edu Mike Shupp California State University, Northridge ------------------------------ From: Saida@aol.com Date: Sat, 20 Jul 1996 18:40:49 -0400 Subject: Re: Mother Sarah (Oy vey!) Apologies to Mr. Frank Murray for screwing up his name. I wrote: >...Yet Pharaoh already knew the answer to his own question and Freud would have >said his own guilt caused him to rationalize that the "sicknesses" (the Bible states >more than one) came about because of his own misbehaviour past and present. Frank replied: >not only am i unsure of what a dead psychotherapist would have said to or about an >already long dead pharoah, but i am even more unsure of what relevance such >hypothetical comment might have...perhaps you might explain... You're right, it was hypothetical, so let's get real. I'll amend my comment. Freud had a lot to say about guilt but my mother is an expert, so let's just say my mother would have said what I wrote only much worse! If these "great plagues" visited upon "Pharaoh and his house" were of a venereal nature (How many diseases do you suppose poor Sarah had? She wasn't exactly following Napoleon's army, you know!) and since Pharaoh had so many wives, why should Sarah, specifically, be blamed? I asked Mom if she had ever known (in the old days) of a Jewish woman having VD and her first response was "What! Are you crazy?" On further consideration she added rather cryptically, "Sure the Greeks do everything but the Jews always get the blame!" All in all, I would say there is a far better chance of Yuya being Joseph (When is the Exodus, then?) than for an Egyptian king to catch something unmentionable from anyone my mother would be named after. ------------------------------ From: mike shupp Date: Sat, 20 Jul 1996 16:40:01 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: l/r -- mixed phonemes On Sat, 20 Jul 1996, Gonzalo Rubio wrote: > > On Sat, 20 Jul 1996, Peter Daniels wrote: > > It is fairly unusual among the languages of the world for a language to have > > both and [l] and an [r] (of whatever variety). Americans have been making fun > > I think you are right, Peter. But, in this concrete case, some people have > pointed to a substratum that would go from Anatolia to Egypt, which would > not have "distinguished" between /r/ and /l/ --well, von Soden mentions > that "substratum" in his _Einfuehrung in die Altorientalistik_ (Darmstadt > 1985 --BTW, please, before even trying the English so-called > "translation", read Prof. Cooper's review in _JAOS_ 115 [1995]: 531 ff.). > I'd rather stick with approaches like yours, in which the fact that some > languages have only one of the phonemes (either trill, /r/, or lateral, > /l/) of this subset of the alveolar set, is just a mere and widespread > typological feature, with no (necessary) historical implications. I apologize in advance since this question is not an ANE issue, but I'm curious about it and it touches this topic: apparently in 19th century Cockney, initial /w/ and /v/ were pronounced as the same intermediate sound, which explains why Charles Dickens got so much mileage out of characters who said things like "Wery good veather, zur!" My question is, given that /v/ is a bilabial fricative and /w/ is a velar glide, how does one mix them up? (I think I'm demonstrating that a little bit of phonetics is a dangerous thing in the hands of the unwary, but you people armed me, so to speak...) BTW, does anyone know where I'd find lists for Dickens, Austen, or Thackery? - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ms44278@huey.csun.edu Mike Shupp California State University, Northridge ------------------------------ End of Ancient Near East Digest V4 #17 ************************************** Back issues are available by two means: anonymous FTP at oi.uchicago.edu in pub/ane/ OR on the World Wide Web (WWW) at ftp://oi.uchicago.edu/pub/ane/