Chris Tedder Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sat: N37a (S) D36 (a) X1 (t) N33a (plural) + D53
> det., + bovine in recline det.
>
> Depending on the determinative, Sat had many
> meanings – knife, slaughtering, terror, ‘top of
> the Djed column’, document… (Faulkner 2002 (1962):
> 262)
>
> Budge’s ‘IV’ reference is ‘Urkunden der 18
> Dynastic, Band III und IV’
>
> The word referenced by IV 501 is found at the end
> of line 13 of IV 501
>
> I can’t find any occurrences of ‘white cake’ or
> ‘bull / goose / obelisk cakes’ in Budge’s IV 956
> reference, so without seeing the appropriate
> texts, I can only presume Budge’s translations are
> based on his reading of the texts that provided
> the context.
>
> Chris
Thanks very much for investigating this for me, Chris. The funny thing is that I downloaded Urk. III & IV from the Case Digital Library, but IV starts with p. 937, and the link to III also gives me IV? Am I missing something?
In any event, the word that Budge interpreted as bull cakes is a variant of the word for cakes just above it, and it is translated on page 420 & 421 of the Worterbuch (WB ) as kuchen ‘cake’. Similarly Paul Dickson has it as Sayt (N37 D36 X1 Z8) ‘a type of cake or biscuit’ in his dictionary, based on Faulkner, and he also show the definitions you gave. But neither the WB nor Dickson shows it with the determinatives that Budge shows.
Did Budge make the words up or translate them incorrectly? I don’t think so for a number of reasons. First, they agree quite well with many phonetically and semantically identical or readily associable Semitic words.
Second, the words are deducibly extended forms of the Egyptian word “sha” (N38 D36), which Budge interprets as ‘barren ground’ and ‘sandy soil’ etc. at the bottom of column A on p. 730, and that word has a number of variants — including two with terminal t’s (x1), and others with one or more N33's — that clearly identify them as relatives of the words for cakes.
The WB shows “sha” on p. 420, but interprets it as sand — evidently based on the generally accepted practice of regarding N 33's relatively narrowly as grains of sand, rather than more broadly as dirt balls. Nevertheless, Budge’s translation of “sha” as ‘ground, and ‘soil’ is better because “sha” refers to dirt and filth in a number of Semitic languages.
Third, that the Egyptian word for cow dung “shat” is obviously cognate with and was probably derived from a word for dirt “sha” perfectly parallels the derivation of a myriad of Indo-European words for dung from words for dirt or from the same root, evidently because the association between dirt and dung is deeply rooted in the human mind.
Bill
