Byrd Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Short answer: No.
>
> Shorter answer: Budge's translations are very
> "iffy" and in any case are more than 120 years out
> of date, as is Maspero's.
>
> Allen's translation is reliable.
>
> In that intervening 120+ years, thousands of more
> texts have been found (many bilingual or
> trilingual so that the interpretation can be
> crosschecked with other known languages.)

>Always
> go with the most recent translation.

THanks very much for the response, Byrd. I am aware that many of Budge's translations have been criticized, and his work disparaged. But history is loaded with examples of specialists throwing out babies with bath water, and that many of those babies were later revived.

So, when I get interested in something, I often like to examine the bath water that specialists threw out before I'm convinced that they didn't throw any babies out along with that bath water.

Moreover, as I mentioned, Allen parenthesized his translation of the the glyphs in question, evidently because he himself wasn't very sure of its correctness, which gives me all the more reason to take his translation with a grain of salt.

Bill