Chapter 140: ? The moon, which is always represented as full on the

fifteenth of the month, cannot be full on the thirtieth. It must be the other Eye, the Sun. Now we know what is meant by the Full Moon, the Plenilunium, but what is the Full Sun?

M. de Rougé, in his commentary on the 17th Chapter, gave the key to this, by pointing out that the 30th Mechir was the last day of the sixth month of the year; that is the 180th day after the first of Thoth, which is supposed to coincide with the Summer Solstice. It is therefore at the time of the _Winter_ Solstice that the Eye is said to be full. The inaccuracy, of course, arises from the length of the Egyptian year. But there can be no doubt that the time of the Winter Solstice is meant.

In the year 1470 B.C. the Egyptian year began on July 20, and the 30th Mechir coincided with January 15 of the Julian calendar.

If the Eye (considered as the Sun) is said to be _full_ at the Winter Solstice, it was most probably spoken of in the same way not only at the Summer Solstice, but also at the two Equinoxes. And this is the most probable reason why in the pictures representing the Four Rudders of Heaven (North, South, East and West) an Eye ⁂ is attached to each rudder. (See Vignettes of Chapter 148.)

The Two Eyes, considered as Sun and Moon, are attributed not only to Rā and Osiris, but to gods identified with these. Of the two passages which have been most frequently quoted, “Thy Right Eye is the Sun ⁂⁂⁂ and thy left is the Moon ⁂⁂,” “His Right Eye is the Sun and his left is the Moon,” the first is addressed to Ptah (in the Pap. Berlin, VII, l. 42), and the second, which occurs on the Neapolitan Stele, is really addressed to Osiris as god of Suten-hunen, under the form of the Ram-headed deity Her-śefit. Reference is made towards the end of the inscription to the “divine Eyes which are in Suten-hunen.”

Horus according to the Pyramid Texts has two eyes, a Light one and a Dark one. But the “Eye of Horus” is most frequently spoken of in the singular number. It is certainly meant for the Sun, and the name of it is given to cakes and ale, wine, corn, oil, honey, and all the good things which come to maturity through the beneficent god: who has in himself all the attributes of ‘Ceres and Bacchus.’

I must bring this long note to an end with one or two observations.

Many goddesses will be found bearing the title of Eye of Rā. There is not one of these who is not identified with Isis or Nephthys, who are in fact one, and personify the Light of the Sun.

Shu and Tefnut, who are brother and sister, play the same parts as the two goddesses.

There is a picture, which appears in the vignette of Chapter 17 in most of the papyri of the second and later periods, of two _male_ deities bearing the Eyes over their heads (see Pl. XXXV). If the beards upon their chins are not a mistake,[117] copied from one papyrus upon another, they must represent not Isis and Nephthys but the two Rehu ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂ Rā and Thoth, Sun and Moon, instead of the ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂.

It is important to note that if Sun and Moon are Eyes of Osiris or Rā or Ptah, the deity is not to be confounded with them: they are but manifestations of himself.

3. _Kindred_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂. The sign of plurality does not here, any more than in Chapter 1, necessarily imply more than one person. The crime in question is one to which men are easily tempted in certain stages of society. Abimelech, in the book of Judges (ix, 5), “slew his brethren, the sons of Jerubbaal.” Jephthah had to “flee from the face of his brethren.” Absalom had his brother Amnon assassinated, and all the king’s sons fled in fear of sharing the same fate. Solomon put to death his elder brother Adonijah. Athaliah, the queen mother, “destroyed all the seed royal” of Judah. The annals of eastern[118] and even western[119] nations are full of such occurrences. But, in positions less exalted than that of claimants to royalty, ambition or covetousness are motives to crimes like that of the wicked uncle of ‘the Babes in the Wood.’[120] The reading ⁂⁂⁂⁂, which has for determinative the sign ⁂ of _smallness_, seems to indicate that the victims of the crime are _minors_, perhaps _wards_.

Some of the papyri (even that of Nebseni) have a _calf_, ⁂, as determinative of the word, and as the ‘slaying of calves’ is not necessarily a crime, other scribes have added ⁂⁂, ‘sacred,’ and thus made the sin one of sacrilege.

The same word, like the Greek μόσχος and the Latin _pullus_, might be applied to the young of all kinds of animals; but the Egyptian scribes have in such cases a propensity to use a determinative which forces a wrong sense upon the word.

4. _Instead of truth_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂. There are two ways according to which this expression may be translated, but only one of them can be the right one. ⁂⁂⁂ is a compound preposition, _instead of_, _in loco_, _anstatt_, _au lieu de_, بمنزلة. And this is evidently the right construction. If ⁂ be taken as the simple preposition governing ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, the meaning will be that the deceased did not “tell lies _in the cemetery_.” The Pyramid Texts (Unas, 394) have the expression ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂(_sic_), “Right instead of Wrong.”

5. This is only an approximate version of a passage, the true text of which was lost at an early period. M. Maspero (_Origines_, p. 189) understands it as follows: “Je n’ai jamais imposé du travail à l’homme libre quelconque, en plus de celui qu’il faisait pour luimême!” The last words are the translation of ⁂⁂⁂, according to _Td._ (tomb of Ramses IV) all the other ancient texts having ⁂, ‘_for me_.’ But the chief difficulties occur at the beginning of the sentence.

6. _Shorten the palm’s length_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂. Many papyri read ⁂, which is a superficial measure, more in place under the next precept.

7. _The fields’ measure_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂.

8. _The beam of the balance_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂.

_The tongue_ [rather _plummet_] _of the balance_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂.

The balance is so frequently represented in false perspective by Egyptian artists, that Sir J. G. Wilkinson has given an account of it, which is quite unintelligible to those who have ever so moderate a knowledge of statics. Mr. Petrie’s description is the true one. “The beam was suspended by a loop or ring from a bracket projecting from the stand.... Then below the beam, a long tongue was attached, not above the beam as with us. To test the level of the beam, a plummet hung down the tongue, and it was this plummet which was observed to see if the tongue was vertical and the beam horizontal.”—_A Season in Egypt_, p. 42.

In Pl. XXXVI, a few pictures will be found which give a more correct notion of the Egyptian balance than some of the absurd representations which defy a scientific explanation.

It is evident that if the tongue is fastened at a wrong angle, the beam will not really be horizontal when the tongue is shown by the plummet line to be vertical. This seems to be the fraud alluded to in the text.

The word ⁂⁂, ⁂⁂, the name given to the plummet, apparently signifies a cup _full_ of liquid. It is etymologically identical with ⁂⁂⁂⁂, _a toper_ (ⲑⲁϧⲓ, ϯϩⲉ, _ebrius_, _ebrietas_), ⁂⁂⁂, ⲧⲓϧⲓ, _a crane_, and ⁂⁂⁂ the crane-god, Thoth.

The apparatus of which the plummet forms so important a part, whether for the balance or for building purposes, is called ⁂⁂⁂ (_Denkm._, III, 26), ⁂⁂.

9. _The manors of the gods_, ⁂⁂⁂. I understand ⁂⁂ as property acquired by royal grant. Aâhmes at El Kab says that he has _acquired_ (⁂⁂⁂⁂) much land through the royal bounty. The deceased in the later copies of the Book of the Dead (Ch. 1, 24), acquires the allotment of land, ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, in the Garden of Aarru, and Ani (Pl. III) acquires “a permanent allotment (⁂⁂⁂) in the Garden of Hotepit like the followers of Horus.”

10. _Ponds._ The right reading is ⁂⁂⁂, as Birch already noted in his _Dictionary_, from the excellent papyrus _Ao_ of the XVIIIth dynasty.

Hieratic papyri also give the determinative ⁂.

The determinative ⁂ which some of the papyri give to the word, and which is a self-evident blunder, is probably copied either from ⁂, or from ⁂. The sign ⁂, and a man striking with an instrument, which also occur, are mere symbols of the operation by which either _quarries_, or _ponds_, are _cut_.

11. _Thou of the Nose_, or rather _Beak_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂, in allusion to one of the chief characteristic features of the Ibis god (πρόσωπον ἐς τὰ μάλιστα ἐπίγρυπον; _Herodotus_, II, 76, in his description of the bird). Thoth, the god of Chemunnu, is meant by this appellative.

He is so called, ⁂⁂⁂, on the statue of the King Horus in the Museum of Turin (l. 8), and ⁂⁂⁂ on the very much more ancient altar, of the VIth dynasty, belonging to the same museum. The same appellative[121] is found in the list of gods upon each of the Memphite cubits described by Lepsius.[122]

12. _Eater of the Shadow._ The Demotic version interprets this of “his own shadow.” I am rather inclined to interpret it by “the gnomons which were without shadows at noon,” and the “well of Syene” (Strabo, 817) at the Summer Solstice; when the Sun was vertical.

13. _Thou of Lion form_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂. The Demotic has “Shu and Tefnut.” But as there are only forty-two gods in all, we must here think of a single god with a lion’s head, as in such pictures as _Wilkinson_, III, Pl. XLIX; _Denkm._, III, 276, and many sarcophagi (_e.g._, Leemans, _Mon._, III, L, Pl. III).

Even some of the Theban papyri have two divinities by way of determinatives to the group.

14. _Sluggish_, ⁂⁂⁂; ⁂⁂⁂⁂, ⁂⁂⁂⁂, _sluggishness_. Coptic ϭⲛⲁⲩ. See my note (_Proc. Soc. Bib. Arch._, XI, p. 76) on the Inscription of Kum el Ahmar.

There are however other readings; none of them apparently of any value.

15. _Thou of the Bright Teeth_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂. The Demotic equivalent is, “who openeth his teeth,” and so exhibits their brightness.

16. _Âati_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, a name about which the copyists have bungled. It is one of the names of Râ in the Solar Litany, where it appears (l. 23) as ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, or ⁂⁂. Whether applied to the Sun, to the Fish of the name, or to a Ship, the name means _Cutter_, ‘that which cleaves’ its way.

17. _Ṭuṭu_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, with many variants, showing that the scribes did not understand the sense of the syllable ⁂⁂, some of them adding the bird of evil ⁂, others the ⁂ determinative of _mountain_. The name on the Sarcophagus of Seti (Bon. II, A. 30) has a snake for determinative, and some papyri call him _Ṭuṭu_. The god may be recognised in later texts. In the Calendar of Esneh there is a feast on the 14th day of Thoth, in honour of ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, Tutu, ‘the son of Neith,’ and the text gives the important determinative ⁂, of a _serpent_, _worm_, or _slug_. I feel sure, therefore, that we should in the text read the name Tutu, and consider ⁂ as a determinative.[123] The symbolism would then be identical with that in Pl. XXIII, illustrative of Chapter 87. The Sun-god there rises up like a worm out of the Lotus of Dawn, whereas in another picture a slug (⁂) is seen moving upon the flower.

⁂⁂, _Ati_, where the god makes his appearance, is the name of the ninth Nome of Lower Egypt.

18. _I trouble myself only with my own affairs._ I understand this of the virtue spoken of by Cicero (_de Officiis_, I, 34), “nihil praeter suum negotium agere, nihil de alieno anquirere, minimeque esse in aliena republica curiosum.” It is the same to which Plato refers in the _Timaeus_, 72 A; εὖ καὶ πάλαι λέγεται τὸ πράττειν καὶ γνῶναι τὰ τε ἑαυτοῦ καὶ ἑαυτὸν σώφρονι μόνῳ προσήκειν, not in the sense of a selfish indifference to a neighbour’s welfare or the public good, but in opposition to the ways of the busybodies, who tattle and “speak things which they ought not” (1 Tim., v, 13).

The Egyptian ⁂⁂⁂ is a rare word. Brugsch’s etymology of it is an impossible one, and his identification of it with ϣⲱⲥⲙ is not less unfortunate.

19. _Amu_, or _Amit_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂, ⁂⁂⁂⁂, ⁂⁂⁂. This seems to be the favourite reading. It means the _town of Palm_. But, as the name was written ideographically, it appears in some copies as the town of other trees, such as _Nehait_, or _Nārit_.

Amu was a place in the north of Egypt, which Brugsch thinks he has identified with a town called Apis (the site of which is itself doubtful).

The most interesting thing known about Amu (Dümichen, _Rec. de M._, IV, Pl. XV, 90 _a_), is that in the rites performed on the 16 Choiak, Horus is represented as raising up the body of Osiris out of the water in the form of a crocodile; and that Osiris was known under the name of ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, _The Crocodile, Lord of Amu_.

The 142nd chapter of the Book of the Dead, which gives a list of the names of Osiris, has (l. 17) that of ⁂⁂, ‘Osiris of Crocodile form,’ or ‘with Crocodile head.’[124] The variants of this group, however, show the reading ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, ‘king,’ or ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, ‘of kingly form.’ There is but little doubt that (as M. Naville says, _Zeitschr._, 1882, p. 190) ⁂⁂⁂⁂ on the Turin tablet published by Professor Piehl, means ‘King of the gods,’ and that Ptahhotep in the Prisse papyrus (IV, 1) addresses not Osiris, but King Assa as ‘my Lord the King,’ Goodwin had already asserted this meaning in his “_Story of Saneha_,” and in the _Zeitschr._, 1874, p. 38.

The orthography of the crocodile name here played upon is remarkably vague, ⁂⁂⁂⁂, ⁂⁂⁂, and ⁂⁂⁂ (_rapax_, Louvre, C, 26). It is this last form which enables us to see the paranomasia in ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, _rapax sicut Raptor_ (_crocodilus_) of the Prisse papyrus (VII, 6), and brings the word into connection with _ȧta_, or _ȧti_, ‘he who is seized’ of the Sovereignty (see _supra_, Ch. 40, note 10).

20. _Chemiu_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, ‘one who overthrows.’ His appearance is made at _Kauu_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂, the Canobic entrance to the Nile, which the Libyan invaders had taken possession of in the time of Rameses III (Great _Harris Pap._, 77, 2).

The _transgression_ here disavowed is understood by some of the scribes as a violation of ritual precepts, such as those regarding sacred seasons.

21. _Who raisest thy voice_ ... _words of Righteousness_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂ is an attribute assigned to Isis in the Hymn to Osiris (line 14) on the Stele of Amenemhait in the Bibliothèque Nationale; and it is there further defined through the addition of the words ⁂⁂⁂⁂, ‘with _clearness_ of utterance’ (_cf._ Ch. 1, note 2). One of the chief names of Isis is ⁂⁂⁂⁂ ‘Mighty in Words of Power.’ She is also described in the Hymn as ‘Most potent of tongue (⁂⁂⁂⁂) and unfailing of speech.’[125]

Her name _Urit ḥekait_ may have suggested the name _Urit_ as the place of her manifestation. But we do not know if _Urit_ is to be taken as the name of a town or if some papyri are correct in reading ⁂⁂⁂, which may mean _tribunal_.

There were in ancient Egypt _six_ great courts of justice, ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂.

A High Priest of Ptah of Memphis, named Ptahmes, in the early part of the eighteenth dynasty, who was President of these six Courts,[126] has left a very remarkable attestation relative to the 24th Precept, on a beautiful scribe’s palette in basalt (Louvre, _Inv._, 3026). The inscription, after saying that the whole country was subject to the jurisdiction of Ptahmes, proceeds ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂. “He turned not a deaf ear to the truth, through the terrors of his Eye;” that is, “the terrors of his Eye” were not used for the perversion of Justice. But what is meant by his “Eye”? M. Pierret (in his _Inscr. inédites du Louvre_, pt. 1, p. 96) suggested the ‘Eye of Horus.’ I think it has reference to the position of Ptahmes as ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂. He was ‘the King’s Eye,’ ὁ βασιλέως ὀφθαλμός,[127] and had in consequence, an unlimited power of defeating justice had he been so inclined.

It is only by a blunder[128] that the papyrus of Ani makes ⁂⁂⁂⁂ (the nineteenth Nome of Upper Egypt) the scene of the divine Babe’s manifestation, which is unquestionably Heliopolis. The name of the Nome has numerous variants, but they always consist of two signs, _a crooked staff_ (⁂, ⁂, ⁂, ⁂) either double or with _a twisted cord_ (⁂, ⁂, ⁂, ⁂), and the final sound of the name (when expressed) is in ⁂, ⁂. The key to the phonetic reading of the name of the Heliopolitan Nome is to be found in the inscription at Edfu (J. de Rougé, _Edfou_, pl. 46); ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂. Here the _crook_ of the name is identified with the _crook_ and _flail_ ⁂⁂⁂⁂ _ams_, ⁂⁂⁂ _ȧms_, ⁂⁂⁂ or ⁂⁂⁂ _emsit_ of Osiris, who is called in the Book of the Dead (_Todt._, 142, 9) ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, _the August Dismembered[129] one of the Powers of Annu_. And this is how, in the important papyrus _Pc_, we find ⁂⁂⁂ in Ch. 17 as the equivalent of ⁂⁂⁂⁂, a few words after, in the same papyrus. Both groups are to be read _ȧmsu_; which means _furnished with the crook_ (_or sceptre_) _and flail_, ⁂⁂ or ⁂.[130]

22. _Hot of foot_ ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂.

The Coptic ⲟⲩⲉⲙϩⲏⲧ, _poenitentiam agere_, would be the natural representative of ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, but the meanings of the terms cannot be the same. The latter is expressive of a passion, the indulgence in which may be laudable in the gods and yet blameworthy in men. For the divine wrath is necessarily just; whereas human anger, even when it seems to listen to reason, listens, as the philosopher says, but imperfectly.[131]

The 29th god, _Kenemta_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, has also for determinative the sign ⁂ of a cynocephalus. This is explained by his identity with the constellation which occupies the whole month of Thoth in the list of the Decans. But though the name means ‘_in Ape form_,’ the word ⁂⁂⁂ in the Pyramid Texts (Pepi i, 408, and Merira 579) is used in the sense of ‘vested,’ ‘clad,’ perhaps simply ‘covered.’

Brugsch has identified the locality _Kenemit_ with the Great Oasis at Khargeh. It may be asked if the Oasis bore this name at the time when this chapter was composed. The determinative ⁂ proves nothing beyond the actual sense of the word, but it suggests that the _Dark_ may be a sufficient translation. From the etymology I should like to assimilate it to the ποικιλείμων νὺξ of the Prometheus Vinctus, or to the ‘furvo circumdata peplo’ of the Latin poet.

23. _Of inconstant mind_, ⁂⁂⁂.

24. Another intelligible reading of the precept is, “I rob not the dead of their wrappings”; but the text is so corrupt that none of the readings are of any value.

The god is called ⁂⁂⁂⁂ or ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, both of which words I understand in the sense of _busy-minded_, _planning_, _devising_, _crafty_, _wise_.

The appellative _Horned one_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, of the next precept, is the exact equivalent of the Hebrew בַּעַל קַרְנַיִס, and is the attribute of Osiris (_Todt._, 144, 4), especially in the character of ⁂⁂⁂; under which name he was worshipped at Sutenhunen.

25. _Noisy in speech_ ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂.

26. _Striker_ ⁂⁂⁂⁂. A name of Horus, on which see ch. 103, note.

27. There is no locality about which there is any agreement between the older papyri, and many of them omit the mention of a locality; later authorities, like the Turin text, read ⁂⁂ _Annu_.

28. _No unjust preferences_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂. There is no virtue more frequently extolled on the funereal monuments than the absence of favouritism. Great personages in their epitaphs are strong in their declarations that they made no distinction between great and small, rich or poor, wise or simple. The declaration of Ameni (_Denkm._, ii, 122), ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, is a type of many others.

29. Of _raised head_, ⁂⁂, ⁂⁂⁂, or (B.M. 9971) ⁂⁂⁂. This, like the last two, is a name of the Nile god, who is one of the manifestations of Osiris.

30. _Who liftest an arm_, ⁂⁂, not ‘_amener_ son bras.’ ⁂, like the Greek φέρειν, means _bear_ in the sense of _holding up_, _supporting_. When it signifies _bring_ the collateral notion of _motion_ is imported from the context. The god Shu, who is called ⁂⁂, _holds up_, _supports_, _the sky_, but does not _bring_ it. The god _who holds up his arm_, is of course the ithyphallic Amon[132] ⁂, who in Ch. 17 is identified not only with Horus but with Osiris.

31. This introduction to Part III of this chapter occurs only in the Papyrus of Nebkat (_Pe_). Another ancient manuscript (_Pb_) has the words “Said upon approaching triumphantly to the Hall of Righteousness.” But the texts generally begin with the invocation, “Hail ye gods, I know you and I know your names.”

32. _Reverse of mine_, ⁂⁂, a turn of the wheel, which the context implies to be unfortunate. A very absurd reading is ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, as if the defendant were master of the fates of his divine judges.

33. _The King who resideth within His own Day._ A very doubtful passage at present. The words do not occur in the oldest text of the chapter (that of Nebseni), and they are omitted here in the later recensions. _Ad_ is, as far as I know, the only authority for ⁂⁂⁂⁂; other papyri having merely ⁂, which might possibly correspond to the ⁂⁂ immediately preceding. The Royal tombs have ⁂⁂⁂⁂, and one of the papyri has ⁂⁂⁂ instead of ⁂⁂⁂. All this reminds one of an obscure passage in Chapter 115, where Rā is speaking with ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂ according to the Text of the Turin _Todtenbuch_. Goodwin conjectured that King Amhauf belonged ‘to the race of mythical kings who preceded Menes,’ and that his history is ‘a legend somewhat analogous to that of Deucalion and Pyrrha.’ There is a much more probable solution of the matter.

⁂⁂⁂ is meant for ⁂⁂⁂ _Sut_, and it was with this god ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂ or ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂[133] ‘in his _course_’ that Rā was speaking when the disaster happened to the latter divinity, who for his talk had chosen a wrong _moment_, which really belonged to his adversary. _Cf. supra_ note 3 on Chapter 110.

And here too I would instead of ⁂⁂ read ⁂⁂, and the sense of the passage would be “let not reverse of mine come to pass through Sutu, when his time cometh.”

34. _Cares_, ⁂⁂ in the later texts. The older texts differ greatly from each other: ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂ is the most frequent reading.

35. _The Ass and the Cat in the house of Hept-ro._ The two personages who take part in this dialogue are known from other portions of the Book of the Dead. The Cat is Rā in the 17th chapter. And the Ass appears in the 40th chapter, as the victim of the devouring Serpent. The Sun-god overcome by darkness is Osiris; and he is so called by name in the Demotic version of this chapter.

_Hepṭ-ro_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, ‘god of the gaping mouth.’ The word ⁂⁂⁂ is not found elsewhere, but the meaning of it seems to be indicated by the determinative. It is very probably akin to the more common ⁂⁂⁂, ⁂⁂, which does not mean ‘squat’ or ‘sit,’ but ‘stretch out,’ _distendi_. _Cf._ Note 6, Chapter 63B.

The ‘house of the god of the gaping mouth,’ seems to be the _Earth_, considered as the universal tomb (ἀλλ’ αὐτοῦ γαῖα μέλαινα πᾶσι χάνοι, Il. 14, 417). And here Osiris and Rā (the Ass and the Cat) meet daily, ‘Yesterday’ speaketh to ‘To-day.’

יוס ליוס יביע אמר

36. _Verdict_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, ⁂⁂⁂⁂, ⁂⁂⁂⁂, ⁂⁂⁂⁂.

A note of M. Guyesse in the _Recueil_, X, p. 64, contains references to the chief passages in which this word occurs. I will add a very important one, the picture of a god (Lefébure, _Tombeau de Seti_, p. III, pl. 33) with sword in hand, whose name is this word. The ideographic signs which express it imply (1) ‘a _cutting_ in two, parting, division,’ (2) that the act is one of speech or intellect, such as ‘judgment, decision, verdict.’ The phonetic equivalence of the signs ⁂ and ⁂ or ⁂ show that the value is that of _Seb_.

37. _Covereth._ The right Egyptian word here, as in a similar passage in