Hedvig Győry: Mélanges offerts a Edith Varga „Le lotus qui sort de terre” (Bulletin du Musée Hongrois des Beaux-Arts Supplément 1. Budapest, 2001)
KATALIN ANNA KÓTHAY: Houses and households at Kahun: Bureaucratic and Domestic Aspects of Social Organization During the Middle Kingdom
gmyw iw rfr wpwt nt rnpt-sp 40 (?) Concerning whom an extension has been found according to the wpwt-hst of year 40 (?). The list mentioned in the latter phrase may be that of the king's acquaintance Senwosret who, according to the text, had given three persons to the lector priest in year 3 of an unnamed ruler. The man whose name is followed by the foregoing insertion makes part of the transferred personnel. The remark might indicate the date when this man was registered in Senwosret's list. Similarly, the note concerning the lector priest's wife may be interpreted as her enrollment into his father's list. The lector priest's list was drawn up in year 1 of Sekhemra-khutawy, i.e. about 30 years after the mentioned 40th year, evidently of Amenemhat III. The woman appears to have been dead or divorced at the time of the compilation of her husband's list since she was not enumerated. Considering that the children of the couple were still very young, the wife must not be more than 30. It is thus reasonable to think that she was born in year 40, and that her father's wpwt-list was modified ('extended') at this event. A third example of the crucial term iw occurring in the foregoing insertions appears in the same text in a rather obscure passage. 31 The text seems to concern dr-people of the lector priest's paternal uncle 32 passed on to Khakaura-sneferu. The date associated with the 'extension' is year 26, referring to Amenemhat Ill's reign again, and concerns another paternal uncle. Thus the people appear to have been transferred from brother to brother and then to nephew. Since the reading of the word ' i offered by Griffith is not certain, an alternative explanation wants to see the verb 'deceased' in it. 33 If we accept this suggestion the remark concerning the priest's wife would mean that she died or divorced in regnal year 40, i.e. about 30 years before the compilation of the list, when her children were evidently still minor: the daughter's name is followed by the sign J implying that she was a baby. 34 This interpretation is obviously implausible. 11 Griffith, op. cit. pl. XI, 1-8. " The word in the second line is transcribed snt 'sister' by Griffith, though no female name in the remaining part of the text can be detected. Since the word can equally be read sn, 1 suggest that the transferred personnel originally belonged to Khakaura-sneferu's uncle, rather than his aunt. " See G. Posener, Notes de transcriptions, RdE 28 (1976) p. 146; W. Helck, Altägyptische Aktenkunde des 3. und 2. Jahrtausends v. Chr., MAS 31, München 1974, p. 127. ÎJ For the sign as abbreviation in administrative documents referring to a child being not able to walk ('being carried') see Griffith, op. cit. (note 16), p. 28; and Helck, op. cit. (note 33), p. 61.
