The Actual Translation of the Wadi el-Hol Inscriptions

I realized today that this blog advertises the translation of the Wadi el-Hol Inscriptions but does not exactly deliver. I have just finished a forthcoming paper in which the Wadi el-Hol Inscriptions make up the first part (alongside Sinai 365 and Sinai 375, the inscription Colless calls Thebes 6, the Grossman Seal, and a better translation of the Timna Inscription; with the Plates also the Lachish Dagger, Sinai 346, Sinai 376, and Sinai 357).

Below is the part of the paper specifically concerning Wadi el-Hol, alongside the first few plates. I may edit it over time to make it more relevant because the section is clipped, but generally the information will not change.

//

The Wadi el-Hôl Translation Hypothesis (1830-1800 BC South Egypt)

In 1999 two presumably alphabetical inscriptions were found on a desert trade road forty or so kilometers northwest of Luxor. They have been dated tentatively to 1850-1700 BC (Darnell et al. 2005: 90). This translation is basically unexceptional, the grammar and lexicon being standard Northwest Semitic with the exception of one Egyptian loanword. There is some consensus between this study and previous identifications (Darnell et al. 2005; Hamilton 2006) over the letters ’, B, Ḫ, P, R, Ṯ, and T. Most previous readings omit a character prior to the P in the Vertical Inscription. Hence the initial incomplete:

Vertical: ?ṮTRH??T?PṮ’L

Horizontal: RB?N?NḤNP?H’??ḪR

Vertical Inscription:

This examination will concentrate on reconciling the characters on which there is not the aforementioned agreement with the paleographic schema presented below (Plates I & II). The first unknown character in the Vertical Inscription (see, Plate III) appears as a three-peaked character in the Horizontal Inscription. In the Vertical Inscription, these peaks are joined to a fourth, and the third peak is bisected (Hamilton 2006, 327). Upon closer examination, the third peak is actually bisected by N, and both three-peaked characters are Ḏ. This makes the first “character” actually three characters (see, Plate Va) – ḎN ?.

Because early Ḏ had specifically three peaks, the fourth then represents an additional character, despite the current academic oddity of suggesting it is an ^c. A line below it corresponds with a line above the following Ṯ, above which is a second, smaller ^c (see Plate Va). This then spells ^cṮTRH, the H possibly specifically being styled after Gardiner C10 – Ma’at. The non-feminized divine name might reflect similarity with either Akkadian Ištar, or with Proto-Semitic “*?aθtar- ‘morning/evening star’” (Huehnergard 2008, 243) [Venus]. The next character is a Q flattened on its left side, followed by S₁,[i] and T. The inscription continues K, P, Ṯ, ending with ’, L.

The text thus begins with a demonstrative, ḎN. This orthography is attested in South Arabian as a singular masculine demonstrative, the similar ḏyn acting as the dual (Nebes and Stein 2008, 154). It may occur alongside ZN in Thamudic D (Macdonald 2008, 199). The name ^cṮTR is followed by an enclitic, the locative case equivalent to Hebrew ā and Ugaritic H (Bubenik 2010, 171), meaning for either Athtar or the goddess. The flattening of the left side of the Q may reflect it being a “bow,” which is the word it begins – QS₁T (Murtonen 1990, 389). A bow is in fact drawn (partly cut off in photographs) to the left of the depicted figure in the Vertical Inscription.

The next word, KPṮ may then be the crooked staff to the right of that depicted figure. In Ugaritic, kpṯ occurs in an epithet to Anat. Juxtaposed with “the high heavens”, some have argued kpṯ means “earth” (Rahmouni 2007, 110). It has also been linked with Akkadian kub/pšu, “headdress” (ibid, 111), and Aïcha Rahmouni notes that it occurs amidst terms of authority (ibid). The root [KBS₃^[ii]] may also mean “Syr … wether; Amor … lamb, young sheep; Akk … =; Arab … ram; chef; ram, pillar, buttress; Mhr … lamb; Soq ram … Syr entry is loan from Arab.” (Murtonen 1990, 227). Arabic further evidences a split sibilant descent through “kubš… ram… kubša… hook, clamp” (ed. Cowan 1994, 950) and “kafisa… to be bandy-legged” (ibid, 976), as in the bow-legs of an animal. Indeed, the shape of the Egyptian ḫpš-scimitar has been described as the “foreleg of an ox” (Hayes 1935: 34), and Gardiner F23 (ḫpš) may also appear this way. Egyptian ḫpš has been connected with Greek κόπις (kopesh) of similar meaning (Gordon 1958: 24). This divine or royal scimitar can now be connected with Anat’s epithet and the usage here. The last word is ’L (Darnell et al. 2005: 85), either meaning god or El.

Horizontal Inscription

The bow and scimitar are divine symbols, but there are no epithets explicitly analogous with bow- or scimitar- of-El or of-a-god. These two inscriptions are the only known examples of this script; they are present on the same boulder; they are only several meters apart.^[iii] These facts at least demand the consideration of the possibility that they represent a singular text. A line beneath the Vertical Inscription changes orientation at the end, maybe indicating the scribe ran out of space and continued writing several meters to the left on another inset surface of the same rock spur. Alternatively, the same scribe or another might have later added the Horizontal Inscription as a response to the Vertical Inscription. But they do appear to be substantively and paleographically related. The first two words of the Horizontal Inscription occur above a logogram (see, Plate Vb).

The Horizontal Inscription (see, Plate IV) clearly begins with the word RB (Hamilton 2006, 325), which could connote ‘many or great,’ or ‘chief or lord’ (Murtonen 1990, 391). If not for the logogram, a temporal authority might be considered. A divine connotation of RB is known in Classical Arabic, and in Ugaritic as the masculine analogy to “rbt ’ṯrt ym … lady ’Athir(a)t of the sea” (Gordon 1965, 75). The next word, DN could connote “mighty” or “judge” in Ugaritic (de Moor and Spronk 1987, 134). The former is more likely, and is also present in Amorite as “/dnn/ be strong; /dunn/ strength” (Murtonen 1990, 151), and in Akkadian as dannū “powerful” and in Amarna Canaanite (Huehnergard 1998: 66). RB DN then means “Powerful Lord” in reference to El of the Vertical Inscription.^[iv] Next, Ḏ is a relative pronoun, i.e. “who,” like Ḏ in Ancient North (Macdonald 2008, 199) and South Arabian (Nebes and Stein 2008, 162), usually D in Ugaritic (Pardee 2008, 16).

The following word NḤ is one of only two suggested cases of Semitic borrowing of Egyptian words in this paper. It may be connected with Egyptian NWḤ, “to get drunk,” which would reinforce a connotation of Hathoric drunkenness (see, Darnell 1995: 54). However, the (at this point likely) context and the grammar clearly demand a causative verb. A W is drawn on the “arm” of the Ḥ (see, Plate Vc), perhaps evidencing the equivalent of a Ugaritic C-stem.^[v] It is equally plausible that W was not included in the orthography due to the abjadic nature of the writing system, and NWḤ can regardless reflect a causative form in Egyptian. The connotation fits with rituals to appease Hathor through “drunken, nocturnal revels… the fiery power of the solar deity, an unquenchable flame to destroy the souls of the damned and a brilliant torch to illumine the paths of the blessed dead in the necropolis” (Darnell 2002: 133).

The following word NPS₂, regardless of Hamilton’s uncertainty over the S₂ (Hamilton 2006, 325), is “soul.” The possessive pronoun H’, “her [soul],” and the locative case both mark this dialect as West Semitic. Two unknown characters remain: W and an archaic Ṣ, then finally Ḫ and R. In Qur’anic Arabic, ṢḪRT connoted rock or boulder (18:63), and (BN) ṢḪR is a Biblical name (Genesis 23:8, 25:9). But W implies either an object or verb. The medial radical might reflect Ġ,^[vi] the alphabetical character perhaps not yet having been devised (Pardee 2008, 6). This could then reflect a cuneiform-based orthography for the root ṢĠR, “(to be) small” (Rendsburg et al. 2008: 535).

Meaning “child,” ṣġr is the name of a Ugaritic god, son of Ba’al and either Anat or a mysterious cow (Day 1992: 185). There are thematic similarities between this story and the return of the oft-bovine Hathor to Abydos, with the “conception, birth, and care of the child god” (Darnell 1995: 48). But the lack of stylization or logograms around ṢḪR, and its inclusion at the end of the inscription on a rougher rock surface may cast doubt on the divinity of its meaning. The W might actually precede a second verb, Ṣ[Ġ]R “small,” in this case specifically connoting to “reduce, squander, deplete” (ed. Black 1999, 335). The scribe likely participated in nearby Hathoric celebrations, and the inscriptions are “ideally located to be integral in processions related to… the welcoming of the returning goddess of the wandering eye of the sun” (Darnell 2002: 133).

The connection of the final verb to the previous verb could parallel Qur’anic Arabic “صَلُّواْ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلِمُواْ تَسْليماً … bless him [the Prophet] and salute him with greetings of peace (or, surrender yourselves completely to his guidance)” (Badawi and Abdel Haleem 2008, 450). The conjunction w connects the object of the initial verb to the final verb, though there is no object explicitly following the second verb. Otherwise, a similar idea is known from Biblical Hebrew, as in Judges 18:5, …wnd^ch ‘…that we may know.’ In this goddess’s context, her soul would be ‘depleted’ of violence through intoxication. The connotation of direct divine participation in pacifying a violent Hathor-like goddess may be reflective of a later version of the Egyptian story (see, Walls 1992, 53).

^VḎN . ^cṮTRH . QS₁T . KPṮ / ’L . ^HRB DN . Ḏ NwḤ . NPS₂H’ . W ṢḪR

^V“These are for Athtar (the goddess), the bow and the scimitar. El (the god)... ^H…[is] the Powerful Lord who intoxicates her soul, that it may be exhausted.”

Hence, the first inscription depicts a warrior-goddess; the second depicts a powerful god who causes the goddess to become drunk thereby exhausting the violence of her soul. The offering of alcohol to the returning goddess Sekhmet (Hathor) was probably not uncommon (Darnell 1997, 47). Additional paleographic features must be discussed. The depiction of a bow may similarly correspond with the depiction of a staff forked in the middle to the right of the Vertical Inscription depiction. The stylization of the Q as a bow might correspond with the depiction of two scimitars to the left of KPṮ (see, Plate Vd). The Egyptian divine-determinative nṯr is drawn in a few places, notably next to the names Athtar and El. Finally, the Horizontal Inscription evidences what might be a simplification of the cuneiform divine determinative. This overtly appears in two related cases (see, Plate Vb) – in Sinai 365 and a ‘South Arabian’ inscription in which it was described as a monogram (Jamme and Albright 1955: 34). Hamilton speculates that this character may be a “subscript y?” (Hamilton 2006, 325).

First, the Horizontal Inscription is so far the only explicit evidence of an anthropomorphic origin for Ḥ. Second, the depiction in the Vertical Inscription is neither an “ankh-sign” (ibid, 328) nor a woman (Altschuler 2002: 39). It does have a vaginal slit at its base, but it is undoubtedly the goddess whose name appears directly below the figure itself. Both inscriptions contain graphemes that stylistically might relate to nearby Egyptian prototypes from regnal years 26-30 of Amenemhat III (Darnell 2002: 195-204). The content may relate to Middle Kingdom holidays (ibid: 129-138) and to a Hathoric myth perhaps originating in the XIII^th Dynasty (Id. 1995: 47). So at the earliest these are likely from 1830-1800 BC.

^[i]The suggested prototype for S₁, Gardiner O29, appears flipped vertically but otherwise basically identical in a late XII^th Dynasty hieroglyphic inscription ([top left character in] Darnell 2002: 95, and ibid: Plate 74).

^[ii]This final sibilant (S₃) in the reconstructed root could be consistent with the Ugaritic Ṯ.

^[iii]Some authors of Darnell et al. (2005) repeatedly stressed to me that the inscriptions were far away. However, Plate II (Darnell et al. 2005: 116) suggests they are at most two or three meters apart.

^[iv]With hesitation, ’L / RB DN seems similar to האל הגדול הגבור – The Great and Powerful God.

^[v]For the importance; see, David Marcus, “Review: A New Ugaritic Grammar.” JAOS 107.3 (1987): 488.

^[vi]Interchange of Semitic ġ and Egyptian ḫ is not unknown either (Leslau 1962: 48).

Partial Works Cited:

Altschuler, Eric L.

“Gloss of One of the Wadi el-Hol Inscriptions,” Ancient Near Eastern Studies 39 (2002): 201-4.

Badawi, Elsaid M. and Muhammad Abdel Haleem.

Arabic-English Dictionary of Qur'anic Usage (Leiden, 2008).

ed. Black, Jeremy A., Andrew George and Nicholas Postgate.

A Concise Dictionary of Akkadian, 2nd (corrected) printing (Wiesbaden, 1999).

Bubenik, Vit.

“Change in Grammatical Categories.” in The Continuum Companion to Historical Linguistics, ed. Silvia Luraghi and Vit Bubenik (New York, 2010), 161-200.

Butin, Romain F.

“The Protosinaitic Inscriptions,” HTR 25:2 (1932): 130-203.

ed. Cowan, J. M.

Arabic-English Dictionary: The Hans Wehr Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic (Urbana, IL, 1994).

Darnell, John C.

“Hathor Returns to Medamûd.” SAK 22 (1995): 47-94.

“The Apotropaic Goddess in the Eye.” SAK 24 (1997): 35-48.

“Volume 1: Gebel Tjauti Rock Inscriptions 1-45 and Wadi el-Ḥôl Rock Inscriptions 1-45.” UCIOP 119 (Chicago, 2002).

Darnell, John Coleman et al.

“Two Early Alphabetic Inscriptions from the Wadi el-Ḥôl: New Evidence for the Origin of the Alphabet from the Western Desert of Egypt,” ASOR 59 (2005): 63-124.

Day, Peggy L.

“Anat: Ugarit’s ‘Mistress of Animals.’” JNES 51.3 (1992): 181-190.

de Moor, J. C. and K. Spronk

A Cuneiform Anthology of Religious Texts from Ugarit, (Leiden, 1987).

Gordon, Cyrus H.

Ugaritic Textbook, Revised Reprint 1998, Volume 1 Part 2, Analetica Orientalia 38 (Rome, 1965).

Gordon, D. H.

“Scimitars, Sabres and Falchions.” Man 58 (1958): 22-7.

Hackett, Jo Ann.

“Chapter 3: Phoenician and Punic,” in The Languages of Syria-Palestine And Arabia, ed. Roger D. Woodward (Cambridge, MA, 2008), 82-107.

Hamilton, Gordon.

The Origins of the West Semitic Alphabet in Egyptian Scripts, CBQMS(Washington DC, 2006).

Hayes, William C.

“The Tomb of Nefer-khēwet and His Family.” MMAB 30:11 (1935): 17-36.

Huehnergard, John.

“Review: A Grammar of Amarna Canaanite.” BASOR 310 (1998): 59-77.

“Appendix 1: Afro-Asiatic.” in The Languages of Syria-Palestine And Arabia, ed. Roger D. Woodward (Cambridge, MA, 2008), 225-46.

Jamme, A. and W. F. Albright.

“An Archaic South-Arabian Inscription in Vertical Columns,” BASOR 137 (1955): 32-8.

Leslau, Wolf.

“Semitic and Egyptian Comparisons.” JNES 21.1 (1962): 44-49.

Macdonald, Michael C. A.

“Chapter 6: Ancient North Arabian,” in The Languages of Syria-Palestine And Arabia, ed. Roger D. Woodward (Cambridge, MA, 2008), 179-225. XXX

Murtonen, A.

Hebrew in Its West Semitic Setting: Part One, A Comparative Lexicon, Volume 3, Sections Bb. Root System: Comparative Material and Discussions. Sections C, D and E: Numerals under 100, Pronouns and Particles (Leiden, 1990).

Nebes, Norbert and Peter Stein.

“Chapter 7: Ancient South Arabian,” in The Languages of Syria-Palestine And Arabia, ed. Roger D. Woodward (Cambridge, MA, 2008), 145-78.

Pardee, Dennis.

“Chapter 1: Ugaritic,” in The Languages of Syria-Palestine And Arabia, ed. Roger D. Woodward (Cambridge, MA, 2008), 5-35.

Pitard, Wayne T.

“The Shape of the ʿAyin in the Ugaritic Script,” JNES 51.4 (1992): 261-79.

Rahmouni, Aïcha.

Divine Epithets in the Ugaritic Alphabetic Texts. Handbook of Oriental Studies. Section 1, The Near and Middle East. tr. J.N. Ford (Leiden, 2007).

Rendsburg, Gary A., Aaron D. Rubin, and John D. Huehnergard.

“A Proper View of Arabic, Semitic, and More.” JAOS 128.3 (2008): 533-41.

Walls, Neal H.

The Goddess Anat in Ugaritic Myth (Atlanta, 1992).