78 EGYPTOLOGICAL RESEARCHES. 
THANKS AND HONORS TO THE ROYAL COUPLE DECREED BY THE 
PRIESTS—Continued. 
HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. DEMOTIC TEXT. 
13d 
Me re eee eh ee oe: nm t-f\|  shmt 
[and his sister-wife, | the queen [and his] wife, 
Iog 
nb(t)-twy] Orw’w)p3dr[;t] | prt [Glw]pir(l)® 
(and) mistress of both countries, Cleopatra, the queen Cleopatra, 
roh 
[ nirwy pr(wy)] » 4 ‘ne 2 Slee etre nt] pr hn n- | 'rpyw 
[the Gods Epiphanes, | [in the temples ?] [the Gods EpiJphanes, in the temples 
Iria 
Rea Ses Se AM ee nm nry—nt = [nt(u)] n— ntrw | [mr—yt(i) 
[and the honors! of the Gods Philopator who] with those which (are) [of] the Gods | Philopator 
I3e 
hm-f shpr(—sn? !!)? hr | ’r-t(y)-hpr-f(?)] nm nj-[nt]  nt(u) 
begat His Majesty, and who had begotten him(?)]!! and those belonging to 
ntrwy mnhwy gm;—sn n—-ntrw [nt] mnh [er t(y)-hpr n—e—'? 
the Gods Euergetes who created them (i. ¢., these) | theGods Euergetes [whohad begotten those who had 
1b 
t(y)-hpr-f] nm n—nt | nt(u) [n— ntrw snw] 
begotten him]!’and those of the [Brotherly Gods 
h‘ nirwy snwy h‘ ntrwy newy Prue nm n—nt nt(u) n—nirw| nt nhm 
and the Brotherly Gods and_ the Gods Soter, who begat them“ and those of the gods} Soter, 
13f 
zfnyw—s[n? |? [gm;}?] | —sn n-yt(i)w [n nf ytwi 
[their] ancestors [who created?] them‘ the ancestors [of his fathers?]' 
THE STATUES COMMEMORATING THE VICTORY. 
mtwtw)? s—‘h* shmty(!)" 
and [that] be set up a statue 
n—-st ’byty s;-R' 
(of) the king of S. and N. Egypt, the son of the Sun, 


! The ample space shows that these words were expressed (and the text read not merely: “‘and of the gods,’’etc.)* 
> The text seems to be in disorder; as it stands, we read: ‘‘ His Majesty (who) begat”’ (shpr rather than shr?)° 
Probably the plural was written first (‘who begat them’’) and the correction to the singular was hastily executed, 
If the traces before the secondary vertical line are indeed /:‘, we must suspect more corruptions. 
’ The traces above represent a horizontal s, although this ends much like a waved n. 
*It remains doubtful whether we have to read as is given above (cp. decree I, 1. ga) or with Ros. 6: “the 
parents of their begetters,”’ — tevt-sn (written there playfully, as though it meant “of their image’’). 
> The determinative (thinking man) seems to be visible. 
° Strangely abridged orthography (by confusion with the following sim). See next note. 
’ Written shtht (with the determinative of a clumsy double crown). ‘The repetition of /t expresses the dual 
ending: -ty. The preceding ‘h‘, engraved very much like shm, may have had a part in the omission of the sign sm 
which we should expect. ‘The origin of this curious word, “‘the powerful (image),” is but a playful, incorrect 
etymology of the word /inty, “‘statue,” which we find in the corresponding passage, Ros. 6. Compare the parallel 
etymological struggles with the words yxevr, shmit “crown” above, p. 43, note 7. 
* Thus quite distinctly. 
* Only here this demonstrative form for the ordinary plural article n— before the relative. 
The trace of a dash behind is strange and superfluous. 
Thus, after Ros. déemot. 22. 
® After Ros. without consideration of the extant traces. 
13 Possibly shortened, as the space is small. 
4 After Ros., not with full certainty of the single words. 
on ih Ss ee Oe 
