Hedvig Győry: Mélanges offerts a Edith Varga „Le lotus qui sort de terre” (Bulletin du Musée Hongrois des Beaux-Arts Supplément 1. Budapest, 2001)

ANDREY O. BOLSHAKOV: Osiris in the Forth Dynasty Again? The false door of 'Intj, MFA 31.781

6. The shape of a pillow on the throne of Hm.t-r

c

(w>) occurs already in the Thinite period and, thus, is of no importance for dating

. This assertion is also very strange. Indeed, early dynastic representations reveal a wide range of the shapes of the pillow,

94 but this fact has nothing to do with the Old Kingdom that does not continue archaic traditions directly. The tendencies of development of this feature were discussed in detail by Cherpion 95

; as applied to Old Kingdom monuments, this is a working dating criterion and there is no need to artificially complicate the problem. 7. The shape of the sign s is characteristic of the Fifth Dynasty in general and, thus, the dating to the reign of Userkaf cannot be excluded

. This is, of course, true (cf. feature 10 above), but I never used this attribute as a conclusive argument. Quite the contrary, it was mentioned among the features that, "though rather obscure from the chronological point of view, do not contradict the late dating".

96 Thus, this feature supports neither concept, but I listed it among those that did not disagree with mine, which is also of importance. 8. The sign hut shaped as a rack of three vessels can be found not only under the Fifth Dynasty and later, as I stated, but also under the Fourth Dynasty

. Baud is actually correct and I was wrong here, but this does not change the situation drastically - statistically the form iffl is predominant in the first half of the Old Kingdom, while W prevails in its second half. 9. T

he last censorious remark is addressed not to me. but I believe I must reply to it. Basing on the concept of the late appearance of Osiris. A.M.Roth 97 who accepts my dating of Hm.t-r

r

(w). artificially lowers the dates of Giza mastabas of the group Ci 2080 2090

. Datings of the cluster of the tombs of "palace attendants" offered by Roth are among the most substantiated ones in the history of Giza studies thanks to an application of numerous features of various types,

98 they are not artificial and they are not dependent on the time of the emergence of Osiris. Quite the reverse, they support the late date of that event. Thus, Baud's arguments are either uncertain or not of a decisive importance. Perhaps such a long discussion would be de trop were it not for the fact that the position of my opponent is typical in many respects - not as concerns a Cf., e.g., Z. Y. Saad, Ceiling Stelae in Second Dynasty Tombs from the Excavations at Helwan, Le Caire 1957, figs. 3, 15, 17, 19. Cherpion, op. cit. (note 61). pp. 26-3 1. Bolshakov, op. cit. (note I), p. 209. Roth, op. cit. (note 5), pp. 162-166. See the review by the present writer, forthcoming in CdE.