82 EGYPTOLOGICAL RESEARCHES. 
SMALLER REPRODUCTIONS OF THOSE STATUES. 
HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. DEMOTIC TEXT. 
r2d 
Persie Pages } P-|twt n pr- nt é-w -t(y)-h'-f 
The image of the king which is paraded in procession’ 
Sim n [hlmf (—) ht bay ths 
an image of His Majesty (be?) engraved on the stela [shall also be engraved on a stela?.*| 
15d 12e 
n|ty?|? | sh;w-pn [hr-tp—f?]? | mt(u)—w ’r(?) 
of(?) this decree [on top of it?]. | and that be made(?) 
'y-wi-f  hri-sm,  sb()w 
It is executed slaying an enemy, (while there) is 
p;—nir—nty(?)® rdt(!) nf Soa ek te el 
the local (?) god giving to him ea» wl. Js oS 
hps n—st n [q]n(w) See 3 Oe qn 
the royal sickle sword of victory. [giving him a sickle sword] (of) victory. 
FESTIVALS COMMEMORATING THE VICTORY. 
Miwtw ’r-w(!) ['bdIV] Smwi(!) Nt(u)-w = (dt) IV Sm, (hw) ITI, 
And be made [the 12th] month (Mesoré), | And that be made the r2th month, day 3, 
r2f 
hrw III {hrw|) nn sm’w-s Ww p- | hw n ‘n-—smy [hr] 
day 3, [the day] of reporting it towards the day of bringing report [about] 
I2g 
[h|m—f ae et ee a rys(!)  i(?) ws oss; »rst|nyqst 
His Majesty [through the mouth of a Friend of | Aris[toni](q?)os,!2 son of Aristonikos, 

‘The text contains a serious gap. It jumps from the portable, statuary, picture of the king mentioned 
in the demotic text (apparently much more briefly than in Ros.), to a flat picture on an immovable stone. The 
mentioning of both pictures close together seems to have created confusion. We have noticed some rash and 
unsuccessful shortening before. Perhaps we should place that gap in the line below, for s‘m seems to stand usually 
for images in the round. Otherwise we might fill the gap simply with méztw “‘and that be.” 
2 If we supply “of stone” (m—nr), then the next word would need an n ‘‘of’’ as connection. 
’’The chief difficulty of this restoration is the small space left for —/. Read smply “‘on top,” hr-tp? 
4 As though a vertical stroke had been changed to /ir, or rather vice versa? How would the gap be filled in the 
first case? 
> See above, p. 80, note 2, on the corresponding uncertainty of r4d. 
® Less direct expression than the ordinary m of the dative and more respectful, consequently. Cp. the “before 
His Majesty”’ of line 4f. (Or simply e as a mistake for (e)—?). 
"The text of Ros. 24 has here: ‘‘and that be paraded the image of the king,” so that it looks as though our 
relative clause nt-ew had been confounded with the conjunctive nt(e)—w-: “and they.’’ Otherwise, however, the 
wording differs. We have not read anything on bringing forth that picture. See on the hieroglyphic text, note r. 
* Thus I try to bridge over the apparent gap between the last and the present section. This is, of course, a 
rather violent expedient. See on the hieroglyphic version of this passage. 
* I have not attempted to explain all isolated traces, e. g., plate d. 
'’ | believe that to the scribe of the demotic text the suppression of the name of the courtier who had brought 
that important report to the king seemed as strange as it does to us; he inserted there the name of the probable 
prime minister and victor in the Thebais, leaving this name, however, also in its proper, later, place, so that a 
doublet resulted, each time with some mutilations of the name, showing how hastily the scribes worked. This 
theory seems to me easier than to assume that we have a correct tradition of a second name suppressed by the 
other passages, although the hieroglyphic parallel, likewise, may be not quite in order, as said above. ‘The incredi- 
ble confusion of the names seems to have been caused also by confounding the title strategumenos with them, 
which title, apparently, has been omitted. 
One small letter effaced after s; less probably another over this. The ¢-like next letter may be read g with- 
out too great difficulty, but we gain nothing by this. 
” Preserved either —gs(/), or —w(?)s preceded by ¢ or g (or parts of a round /?). 
a 
