THE BILINGUAL DECREES OF PHILAE. 4] 
THE ROYAL STATUES—Continued. 

HIEROGLYPHIC TEXT. DEMOTIC TEXT. 
rw gn[w-f(?) mts|w 
the reports! (of) the victories of him(?) and thlat 
ob of : 
ee. - | («dL Lm é[']qw nw . hi-nir hake tes a es ’rpywl[—nb| 
[the priests officiating] as? attendants of thesanctuary|....... . . .. . [in] [all] temples 
n(?)> r—prw—nb [hr|—rn[—f} RY/TAY 
in all temples on (i.e. bearing) [his] name* serve 
hntyw—’pn msp III | [m &rit)? hrw! 
theseimages three times [every(?) day] 
[h?\r—-rdt° dbhw(t?)® [m—b;h-sn nt(u)—w hy tbh if 
placing (sacred) apparatus [before them and that they set (sacred) apparatus before 
ew lw MD HH)" — niu) —w 'r n-w  ([p-sp 
and do to them] all [things prescribed],’ them and that they do tothem [the rest 
rod Ioh 
twiw(?!)—nb(?) | ntt?] ’r[—-tw(?) mt—nt-n—hp e-h | p-nt é-w—r-f 
everything(?) becoming which is done(?) (of) the things lawful like what they do 
hr?\ s—h' [ntrw] n nt(!) n|-k’’w | ntrw [n—|hbw 
bring[ing] out in procession [the gods] of thecity(?)®| (to) the] other gods (at) the festivals 
hbw tb trwt(/)® hr new n* 
at the festivals (of) each season and the days of 


' Lit. ‘the chapters.” 
> The n=m, ‘‘as,” suggests this restitution. 
* A very short m (in place of the older preposition m). 
* That is: where the king finds worship. 
» Accidentally the r indistinct so that we think of its disfigurement to ’v, Ros. 7; also the following r is corrected. 
° The engraver seems to have been uncertain with the last sign of the word. Probably his copy on papyrus 
had the sign for ‘‘metal.’”’ ‘The word dblit has wider sense than the Greek expression fepds xdcyos, ‘sacred outfit”’ ; 
it includes also sacrificia] vessels, etc. The pronunciation dbht for the unusual ideograph of the corresponding 
passage, Ros. 7, is to be noticed. (There that ideograph seems to be disfigured from a square sacred chest 
(mrt?) with ostrich plumes.) 
7 Although we know the general sense, the traces do not allow any safe identifications of special signs. The 
second (lower) sign after the big gap does not seem to be x. 
_ ® The stone shows that the reading n—nt ‘‘of the city, local ones’ has been corrected over the earlier reading 
spt(yw) of Ros. 7 and 8, ‘‘of the nomes”’ (as still is read in the earlier ‘‘second’’ decree 15a). Also “‘is done”’ 
stands over erasures. : 
* Literally ‘‘times, periods.” (In Ros. 7, the ordinary ideogram #7; therefore I assume that the termination 
-t is abusive, taken from the ¢ on which the ideogram often rests, so that the group looks like “‘year.’’) 
The sculptor seems to have corrected a broad s into 1; the sign could be read either way. 
"T do not dare to transliterate this obscure group. J. J. Hess read it (Ros. 9, 24) e-hre, overlooking com- 
pletely the third sign. This alone proves that it is to be read quite differently (although the Egyptian engraver, 
Ros. 25, made the same mistake of skipping this sign). In Ros. the second stroke is always bent strongly, almost 
to a half circle. Canop. 15, 16, indeed, has the first two strokes straight, like é, but our text agrees with Ros. 
in the second stroke and treats the first like b. ‘That the last sign is not hr can be concluded from the addition 
of -¢ in Philze, once written tu, once fe, ti; 7. e., like the abbreviation of fo(0)t “‘hand.’’ In place of hr we might, 
_ therefore, try to read ¢i, but the whole group, evidently, consists of abbreviations. I can not think of a hiero- 
glyphic or Coptic preposition including both the meanings “‘at the time of’’ and “‘before’’; certainly hieroglyphic 
hr does not correspond, nor m-h;(w), n-h;. See above, p. 33, line se. 
