Lesson 7: Strange spellings

← Previous

Index

Next β†’

More biliterals

𓏇 mj
Milk jug with handle		π“ˆ ḫ꜀
Sun rising behind hill		𓍇 nw
Adze
π“‚Ÿ mj
Arm holding loaf		π“„« ꜒w
Backbone with spine at both ends		𓃭 rw
Resting lion
π“˜ tj
Pestle		𓃛 jw
Baby hartebeest		π“„‘ αΈ₯w or bαΈ₯
Tusk
π“Œ‘ w꜀
Harpoon		π“Œ nw
nw-pot		π“‚€ αΈ«w
Arm with flail

Note that both 𓏇 and π“‚Ÿ can stand for mj, and both π“Œ and 𓍇 can stand for nw. Even worse, the one glyph π“„‘ can stand for either αΈ₯w and bαΈ₯. In practice one can usually tell which one is meant by the determinatives of the words and, of course, context.

Honorific transposition

Many Egyptians’ personal names contained the names of gods, called theophoric (“god-bearing”) names. In such names, the divine element is usually written at the beginning of the name, even if we know it wasn’t actually pronounced there according to grammar. The Egyptians thought writing has magical power, so one had to honor the divine in writing, even more than in spoken words. We can see this in Tutankhamun’s name:

The quail chick faces to the left, so we read left-to-right, and you can now read the cartouche: j-mn-(phonetic complement n)-t-w-t-꜀nαΈ«. Notice that Amun’s name (j-mn-complement n) is before the “Tut-ankh” bit (t-w-t-꜀nαΈ«). The god’s name must be written before the rest of the name, even though it’s actually pronounced at the end of the name.

Another fine example of a name like this is that of the 5th dynasty royal manicurist Niankhkhnum. His name means “Life belongs to Khnum”, and Khnum’s name is pronounced last in that sentence. But it is written as though it were “Khnum-ni-ankh”.

We know the correct order of names because of grammar. Knowing the how word order works in sentences, we can consider the possible meaning and determine which makes the most sense. Even so, there are still some names, like that of the 12th Dynasty pharaoh Sobekneferu (or Neferusobek), where we aren’t so sure.

The word “god” itself (π“ŠΉπ“€ nαΉ―r) gets this honored treatment as well. The Egyptian phrase π“ŠΉπ“› αΈ₯m-nαΉ―r, literally “servant of the god” and usually translated “priest”, is written with nαΉ―r first, even though nαΉ―r-αΈ₯m would mean “god of the servant” in that order, as you will see in a future lesson.

The word nswt

nswt is a special word: it means “king of Upper Egypt” specifically, or the king of the gods of Egypt. (For most of dynastic history, of course, the king of Upper Egypt was the king of all Egypt.)The word contains the biliteral 𓇓 sw, but the glyphs are not arranged π“‡“π“π“°π“ˆ– as though it were pronounced “swtn“. And indeed, some early texts (notably Budge) say the word is swtn and not nswt.

Like π“ŠΉ “god”, nswt (usually abbreviated just 𓇓) will be written at the beginning of compound words: 𓇓𓍛 αΈ₯m-nswt “servant of the king”.

One other oddity with nswt: it is a masculine noun ending in -t.

Aesthetic transposition

In some cases, glyphs may be rearranged just to make them look neater or more symmetrical. Here are the throne name cartouches of two pharaohs. Note that both of them have the “basket” biliteral, π“ŽŸ nb, at the bottom, and the sun disk 𓇳 r꜀ at the top.

r꜀
αΈ₯jpt
nb

r꜀
pαΈ₯tj
nb

r꜀ comes first in both names, because Ra is the sun god, so that makes sense. You might think the rest of the name on the left would be αΈ₯jpt-nb, and the one on the right would be pαΈ₯tj-nb, because nb is last in both cartouches, but not so: the names are nb αΈ₯jpt r꜀ (“possessor of the rudder of Ra”) and nb pαΈ₯tj r꜀ (“possessor of the might of Ra”).

So if nb comes before αΈ₯jpt and pαΈ₯tj in the actual names, why is it written below those words? Most likely, just because of its semicircular shape; it “nestles” nicely in the bottom of the cartouche. It looks good!

The cartouches of pharaohs were obviously an important place where glyphs had to look good. But they rearranged glyphs in more ordinary words to make them look neater as well. For example, the word 𓐍𓐱𓏏𓐰𓆑 actually has the order 𓐍𓆑𓏏 αΈ«ft, not αΈ«tf as the arrangement might suggest. If you tried to put them in the order αΈ«-f-t, the options are all imbalanced as the examples below, so the Egyptians just went with the last option and wrote it as though it were αΈ«-t-f.

𓐍𓆑𓏏
αΈ«ft

𓐍𓐰𓆑𓏏
αΈ«ft

𓐍𓆑𓐰𓏏
αΈ«ft

𓐍𓐰𓆑𓐰𓏏
αΈ«ft

𓐍𓐱𓏏𓐰𓆑
looks like “αΈ«tf”
but really αΈ«ft

Pronunciation issues

The sounds of Egyptian changed over time, but there were also different dialects in different areas at the same time. Hieroglyphic writing did not always reflect those differences, but sometimes it did.

꜒ and n

The sound of the Latin letter “L” probably existed in some dialects of Middle Egyptian, but it did had no distinct uniliteral. Scribes therefore usually wrote it as either ꜒ or n, but there was not consistency on which to use in a given word. For example, the word π“‚§π“„Ώπ“ŽΌπ“€€ d꜒g or π“‚§π“°π“ˆ–π“ŽΌπ“€€ dng “dwarf” was probably pronounced with an L in the middle in some parts of Egypt. It could even rarely be written with both consonants: π“‚§π“„Ώπ“ˆ–π“°π“ŽΌπ“€€ d꜒ng!

r as nothing, j, or jr

The sound -r sometimes disappeared at the end of a syllable, so sometimes a word lacks it: for example, 𓂧𓄿𓂋𓐰𓂑 d꜒r “subdue” could be written 𓂧𓄿𓂑 d꜒. If there was a vowel there, sometimes the scribe may have written a reed instead, or even both: 𓂧𓄿𓇋𓂑 d꜒j, 𓂧𓄿𓇋𓂋𓐰𓂑 d꜒jr.

The “Two Consonants Together” Rule

In some words, a change in grammatical form can result in consonants which seem to “disappear” as well. This is the result of the missing vowels. Egyptian seems to have a rule which is, if two of the same consonant end up adjacent, without a vowel between them, they are only written as one copy of the consonant.

For example, the word π“ƒΉπ“°π“ˆ–π“°π“ˆ– wnn was probably pronounced something like *wanan. But if the suffix 𓆑 f was attached to it, it would be pronounced *wannaf, with the two Ns coming together. So in hieroglyphs, it would usually be written π“ƒΉπ“°π“ˆ–π“†‘, with only one copy of the N, and an Egyptologist will transliterate it as written: wnf or wn.f.

When a grammatical form causes this rule to apply fairly consistently, we’ll explain so.

Summary: Strange spellings

  1. The names of gods, or the word “god” itself, normally get written at the beginning of phrases or personal names which include them. This is honorific transposition, writing the divine word first.
  2. The word nswt “king” is used only for the king of Egypt or of the Egyptian gods, never for foreign rulers. Its glyphs are arranged in an odd order, π“‡“π“π“°π“ˆ–, as though it were to be read sw-t-n instead of nswt. There are theories about why this might be so.
  3. Phrases or titles of officials which include nswt, such as “the king’s servant”, write nswt honorifically at the beginning, just like with divine names; the short way to write nswt is to just write the “sedge plant” glyph 𓇓.
  4. In some situations, particularly but not only in a pharaoh’s cartouche, glyphs might be rearranged simply for aesthetic reasons.
  5. The “L” sound probably existed in Middle Egyptian, but it might be written as ꜒, n, or even both.
  6. Sometimes the sound r disappears at the end of a syllable and is replaced by j, or may still be there but with a j before it: jr.
  7. If two instances of the same consonant are not separated by a vowel, the consonants is only written once. Therefore, the same word might be written with a double consonant in some forms but not in others, e.g. π“ƒΉπ“°π“ˆ–π“°π“ˆ– wnn versus π“ƒΉπ“°π“ˆ– wn.

Vocabulary

  • π“―π“π“°π“ˆ w꜒t “road, way, path”
  • π“…‘π“Ž‘π“€€ b꜒k “servant, underling”
  • π“‡“π“π“°π“ˆ– nswt “king” (of Egypt, or of Egypt’s gods)
  • π“ŠΉπ“€ nαΉ―r “god”, var. π“ŠΉπ“€­
  • 𓂋𓐰𓏀 r “mouth”; “speech, utterance”
  • π“‚‹π“°π“ˆ™π“‚‰π“€ rΕ‘w “rejoice”
  • 𓍛𓀀 αΈ₯m “servant” var. 𓍛𓏀, 𓍛𓏲𓀀 αΈ₯m.w
  • 𓆼𓄿𓉹 ḫ꜒ “hall, office”
  • π“ˆ™π“°π“ˆ‡π“±π“€ Ε‘ “pool”
  • 𓂓𓐰𓏏𓀋 k꜒t “construction, work”
  • 𓂧𓄿𓂋𓐰𓂑 d꜒r β€œsubdue, restrain, suppress”
    • var. π“‚§π“„Ώπ“‚‘ d꜒, π“‚§π“„Ώπ“‡‹π“‚‘ d꜒j, π“‚§π“„Ώπ“‡‹π“‚‹π“°π“‚‘ d꜒jr
  • π“‚§π“°π“ˆ–π“ŽΌπ“€€ dng β€œdwarf”
    • var. π“‚§π“„Ώπ“ŽΌπ“€€d꜒g, π“‚§π“„Ώπ“ˆ–π“°π“ŽΌπ“€€d꜒ng

Exercises

(forthcoming)

There is some debate about the origin of π“‡“π“π“°π“ˆ– nswt “king (of Upper Egypt)”. One major hypothesis is that it comes from a phrase nj swt, which means “to whom the sedge belongs”. The idea is that the sedge plant is symbolic of Upper Egypt, and so, the sedge belongs to the ruler of Upper Egypt, the nj swt. If this idea is correct, then the weird spelling of the word might itself be honorific transposition: the sedge plant (swt) is being written before the “belongs to” word (nj), to honor it as the symbol of the country. Or it could just be aesthetic transposition, since in order, the word would be π“ˆ–π“‡“π“, which has the gaps above and below both ends.

Some argue that the word does not come from nj swt. Nonetheless, there are titles which contain nswt to indicate that the person works for the king; for example, αΊ–rj tp nswt “under the king’s head”, probably the person responsible for overseeing the palace’s staff like cooks, cleaners, and such. The title is written: π“‡“π“Œ¨π“°π“Ά, as though it were sw αΊ–rj tp. So the sedge plant is the only part of the word nswt written in this title, and it stands at the beginning. I think this is a strong argument for the sedge plant theory, but it’s not the only theory, and I am not an Egyptologist. It could just be because sw was the most distinctive of the three glyphs in nswt.

← Previous

Index

Next β†’