THE BILINGUAL DECREES OF PHILAE. 53 
THE PRIESTHOOD FOR THE NEW CULT. 


HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. DEMOTIC TEXT. 
W‘bw' nw prw-—m;‘t(?) m N-w‘bw nt n mn-—rpyw (n) t—-Kmy 
_ The priests of the holy places in The priests who (are) in thetemples of Egypt, 
r5e 
r—prw’-[nb| hr rn—f? Prpyw—nb(?) | nt(u)-w]  2(Z) 
[all] the temples on (i. ¢., bearing) his name [all the temples, be] called 
15f 
k; (w-) | -tw n(?)-sn [hm(w)-nirl’ nirwy | n-w'bw n n-nirw 
(shall) be called prophet(s) (of) the two | the priests of the Gods 
pr(wy) m hriw) +r yvwt-w ‘bw [nt] prw (2!)  e(?)!4—-wih n(?) kw 
Gods Epiphanes in addition to the priestly offices Epiphanes in addition (to) (the?) other 
16a 
n(?)> ‘m|y-sn(!) rn{w] [n—w‘d] 
to which they belong. [priestly] names 
ht(?) —sn sw(?)® hr-th-t}  . . -[s|n | [nt(u)-w sh(G)-f on giy-n-sl' mt—nb 
They (may)engrave(?) it upon’ their [documents?]* | and they shall write it as protocol’ (of) everything, 
ere So yy WN Se, nt(u)—w sh; t;wt (n?) 
[and they (may) write] and they shall write the office of 
16b ; r5f 
Peo, § [y3wt?] wh nm nirwy | w‘d] (1?) n—nirw pr 
[the office of a] priest of the two Gods priest] of the Gods Epiphanes 
159 . oT 
[ prwy | hr ht(m)* di-—sn(?)" | [(e) nw glt(iw)" nt] é-w 
[Epiphanes] on theseal (on) their hands [on their seal-ring(s) which] they 
(r?)-rdt ~ hi-sn ht-(s?) hr—t-w(?) 
causing it™ to be engraved. (have) engraved on them 
(i.e , on which they used to have engraved signs). 




1 The determinative “‘man’”’ evidently to be restored above the plural strokes. 
* Determined by “‘city”’ exactly as in Ros. 12. 
3 Three to four signs here very big and clumsy (as though over erased signs?). 
* Omitted by the engraver, who was confused by the three-fold repetition of the sign for ‘“‘god.”’ 
* The first sign is not high n, rather a vertical stroke, the lowest of the 3 plural strokes of w‘bw. The n 
of the very archaic expression n—sn ’my-s[n] of Ros. 12 seems to have been engraved over ’m (or the expression 
was unintelligible to our redactor, who shortened it erroneously ?). 
* Sw in rather probable traces. The preceding verb is, probably, fii ‘‘to engrave.” What looks like a small w 
may be the hook held by the strong arm. Before it, ) and t. 
’ The senseless #; “‘ground”’ (literally ‘‘on the ground of’), might have crept in by a popular etymology of 
hi-o(0)t- “‘on”’ and by its analogy to /ir-sp; but see the following note. 
* The traces of this word are very uncertain. ‘The first group does not show a bird’s feet; after it a b might be 
found; the following round sign is not the disk with asp, but probably only a secondary hole. The whole com- 
pound reminds of tp—(t;)—rd “ precept(s)’’ as written in the second decree, line 8), and the upper part of the bent 
leg is possible for the third sign, but the lower traces are unfavorable to this reading. Hardly htmw “seals.” 
* Good traces of a high x. 
© The word is abbreviated or mutilated. ‘The determinative “‘seal ring” of the hieratic model copy is dis- 
figured to a crude book roll and a (correcting?) blotch below. Without Ros. 13 it would hardly be possible to 
recognize the word /itm. 
4 The probable ’7(y) ‘belonging to”’ of Ros. 13 is erroneously omitted. Behind, over an erroneously engraved 
bird like “‘eagle”’ or “chicken,” the engraver seems to have tried to put a high m. 
12 St “it”? ought to be read in place of sv ‘‘them,”’ or after it. 
8’The group is written very strangely, perhaps by correction, but the stroke which seems to make here the 
declension of pr is noticeable as quite an unusual detail. 
4 Read e (in place of nt) —w,h ‘‘to add,” which is better than the seeming n—w,h ‘“‘in addition” of Ros. 30. 
4 The word is engraved in an indistinct way, which suggests that the engraver at first did not recognize its 
meaning and had to make corrections. 
'6 The word, corresponding with Greek ypnuariouds, Ros. Gr. 51, Canop. Gr. 22 =dem. 24, means ‘‘ documents, 
documentary expressions, legal titles of a person in writing.” 
1” The word, see Griffith, Rylands Pap., III, 237, 400. Ros. Greek 51 has generally been restored: kai eis rovs 
a[AAous .. .] (see Strack, Dynastie der Ptolemaer, 244, etc.); could it not be possible to restore d[axruAtous], if the last 
letter before the break is not quite certain and might be 6 instead of a? 
