Anthony Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hermione Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------

> > The point is that there might have been an
> element
> > of unintentional mistranslation ...
>
> I will grant you that... no questions asked.

> >
> > It's the sort of thing, of course, that's
> hardly
> > worth reporting in a travel narrative unless
> he
> > actually had seen it with his own eyes ...
>
> Agreed. Ergo, I don't think he was lying when he
> told the story.

Could the situation be summed up as follows?

Whilst in Egypt, Herodotus met various priests. It would have been interesting to know how accustomed such priests were to dealing with foreign visitors, but I haven't managed to find any information on this point. Whilst Herodotus was visiting these priests, however, he was at one point shown round the pyramids at Giza; indeed, given that the Pyramids are such impressive monuments, it is difficult to imagine foreign visitors not wanting to go and have a closer look at them. But, since it was a sacred precinct, Herodotus was accompanied by someone - presumably a priest - acting as an interpreter and guide. Herodotus gives his readers to understand that, at some point, he actually stood in front of an inscription on the Great Pyramid that, according to the interpreter, referred to the enormous amount of money that had been expended on vegetables consumed by the labourers. The quantities involved would perhaps help to convey to those of Herodotus' readers who had not seen the Pyramids for themselves some notion of the immense size of those constructions.

Because the outer casing of the Great Pyramid has deteriorated over the millennia, no inscription is now visible. But some corroboration of Herodotus' account is provided by the fact that, in recent times, an inscription on Menkaure's pyramid, albeit much damaged, has been uncovered. From the discussion here (although, unfortunately, the links to Jon's photographs are no longer working), it seems that the inscription refers to Menkaure's reburial (a post from Jon dated May 10, 2002 - 05:38 pm gives a detailed description). There doesn't seem to be any mention of offering formulae.

On the subject of offering formulae, Lee explained here that

Quote

" ... onions (HD.w) are mentioned in offering formulae dating back to the Ok (e.g., burial complex of Meresanch III (G 7530-7540) and are mentioned in the PTs. WB, by the way, translates HD.w as applying to both onions (Ger: Zwiebel) and garlic (Knoblauch), and has no separate entry under garlic except as a (late) Semitic loanword. There is no entry under “radish” at all. A word (jAq.t) translated “leek, vegetables in general” also goes back to the OK in offering formulae: see e.g./i], Giza grave of Chui-wi-wer, offering chamber. Note: I am not suggesting that the AE of Khufu’s time were unfamiliar with any of the vegetables allegedly named (though I would like to find a good article on what foods are actually attested). My point is that that inscriptions that mention payment to workmen and/or particular vegetables or foods are more likely to turn up in offering formulae and formulae of self-justification (“of course they got paid”) than as major royal inscriptions on the king’s pyramid.

Lee also pointed out here that:

Quote

Even assuming that the priest/interpretor was able to read glyhs, it does not follow that he understood them as they were originally intended to be understood, or read all of them correctly. Some 2100 years elapse between Khufu and Herodotus. The Egypyian of the OK was very different from the Egyptian the priest/interpretor would have spoken and written on a daily basis, and differed as well from Middle Egyptian, the "classic" form of the language that we learn first today and that was used for most religious writing well almost throughout Egyptian history. Thus even if the priest were well-acquinted with NE and demotic, his ready understanding of OK texts is not a foregone conclusion.

So the question arises: what exactly was the interpreter supposedly reading to Herodotus? Was he reading the hieroglyphs for the first time, perhaps with great difficulty; or was this something that he had done before? Let us recall that the priests were quite happy to pass on traditions to Herodotus, such as the one about Helen of Troy, and the tale of Khufu's daughter prostituting herself. Might there also have been a tradition amongst the priesthood that the Great Pyramid inscription - whose characters they could not understand properly - referred, like some other ancient inscriptions, to some type of offering formulae? But might the inscription shown to Herodotus have actually meant something quite different, perhaps something along the lines of the inscription on Menkaure's pyramid? Unfortunately, unless more information should come to light, there are just no answers to these questions ...

At any rate, it is, IMO, perfectly fair to question Herodotus' account of this episode. He might not always have understood what he was being told; and neither can we be absolutely sure that his hosts always understood what they were telling him.

Hermione
Director/Moderator - The Hall of Ma'at

Rules and Guidelines

hallofmaatforum@proton.me