Tory
Re: anx-xprw-ra is Nipḫururias
Wed Dec 21, 2011 03:25
112.201.228.88

Hi Joe

In post 12394 you showed us how you get Nipḫururia from ‘nḫ-ḫprw-r‘, The last stage was via
The /p/ in xprw is transposed as usual.
But in EA 41 addressed to Ḫururia, tell us where does this /p/ go.


I read carefully the 1994 paper by authors A. C. V. M. Bongenaar and B. J. J. Haring in JCS 46. They assume the name An-ḫa-pu in a Neo-Babylonian tablet (BM 57701 = CT 56, 87 col. III, line 21) is an abbreviation of anx=f-n-(DN) 'He lives for (DN)'. They also think the name In-ḫa-hu-ú (BM 59410 rev. 23') also begins with "ankh" but they are not sure what the Egyptian name is behind the Akkadian cuneiform script. They propose anx-ḥr (not to be confused with Ankh-Hor) and they think it means 'The face (of a god?) may live'. I have not been able to find any example of a proper name like this in Egyptian.

The co-authors' think the above two names begin with "ankh" largely because of the idea of Vittmann in a 1984 GM article, "Zu einigen keilschriftlichen Umschreibungen agyptischer Personennamen", GM 70 (1984), p. 65. So much has changed since 1984 I wonder how many would still stand by Vittmann. An-ḫa-pu and In-ḫa-hu-ú may have been Egyptians in Babylon during the Neo-Babylonia period, but their names do not have to be Egyptian. In the Late Period Egyptians often had non-Egyptian names.

The exact pronunciation of 'nḫ (anx) in ancient Egyptian is unknown. The guttural word-initial ayin is represented in writing graphically in old Egyptian but scholarship believes it began to weaken in Ptolemaic times. We see this weakening, I would say loss, in Ακεγ- (from Ακεγχερὴς) which would be a metathesis of Αγκε (anke) + χερὴς (x[p]r-ra) = anx-xpr.w-ra. The ayin vanished in spoken Egyptian and no symbol for it survives in the Coptic script. These are some of what remain of "ankh" in Coptic and other African languages.

Coptic: onh (“life, live”)

Songhai: ahona (“life”)

Akan: nkwa (“life”)

Nobiin/Nubian: ang (“to live, be alive”)

Fulani: yonki (“life”); yunki (“to live, be alive”)

Soninke: yonki (“breath, soul”)

Kanuri: nenga (“life”)

In the Coptic example the ayin is lost and a vowel remains, but one expects at least /a/ and not the long ō vowel. Some of these examples look as if the guttural ayin is interchanged with another guttural (ayin > y) and that the vowel was a historically long vowel. In other examples the ayin + vowel are elided and /n/ becomes the initial consonant producing a deep guttural sound. I will come back to this last example in a moment.

"praenomina incorporating ḫprw-r‘ were bound to give non-Egyptians trouble, especially since we know that these tended to be abbreviated in speech by the elision of the distinctive first element" (D.B. Redford, BASOR 211 [1973], p. 49).

Redford means the /p/ in xpr.w-ra is lost in Akkadian transliteration leaving just xr.w-ra (ḫuriya).

Actually the labial is not always lost. Νεφερχερης shows that the "nfr" element was fully articulated in the Hellenistic period. Hard to believe it was not the case in the New Kingdom, but in spoken Egyptian the royal name nfr-xpr.w-ra (Neferkheperure) lost the second syllable and was replaced by the /p/ from xpr:

nfr-xpr.w-ra < np-xr.w-ra < na-ap-ḫu-ru-ri-ia (EA 8)
nfr-xpr.w-ra < np-xr.w-ra < nap-ḫur-i-ri-ia (EA 28)

And since /p/ is also a labial consonant it can interchange with another labial. Here is an actual case.

nfr-xpr.w-ra < nm-xr.w-ra < nam-ḫur-ri-ia (EA 55)

This example is known whereas labial /p/ interchanging with the dental /n/ in the element "nb" is imaginary.

If we anticipate the complete loss of /p/ the possible Akkadian transliteration of Ankhkheperure would be:

anx-xpr.w-ra < anx-xr.w-ra < an-ḫa-ḫu-ru-ri-ia-aš

Joe: But in EA 41 addressed to Ḫururia, tell us where does this /p/ go?

Here is your answer in the Wilhelm and Boese theory.

Going back to the previous example of ayin in anx eliding with /n/. I have been saying that depending on the contemporary articulation of the name Ankh-kheperu-re, which we do not know, the Egyptian form of the name might easily appear in the Akkadian literature as:

anx-xpr.w-ra < npxrwra --- ni-ip-ḫu-ru-ri-ia-aš
anx-xpr.w-ra < ppxrwra --- pi-ip-ḫu-ru-ri-ia-aš

In both examples ayin has been elided and the /p/ has been transposed from xpr just as in Nap-ḫurreya. The second example is exactly what happened with Nim-murreya > Im-murreya > Mim-murreya. The /n/ was lost and the labial /m/ was doubled -- Mi-im. The cuneiform script allows for several interpretations. These are mine.

Tory

  • Re: anx-xprw-ra is NipḫururiasJoe Baker, Tue Dec 20 06:20
    Hi Tory In post 12394 you showed us how you get Nipḫururia from ‘nḫ-ḫprw-r‘, The last stage was via The /p/ in xprw is transposed as usual. But in EA 41 addressed to Ḫururia,... more
    • Re: anx-xprw-ra is Nipḫururias — Tory, Wed Dec 21 03:25
      • This is getting ridiculousMarianne Luban, Wed Dec 21 08:43
        Tory: "Going back to the previous example of ayin in anx eliding with /n/. I have been saying that depending on the contemporary articulation of the name Ankh-kheperu-re, which we do not know, the... more
        • Nib > Pip is where it got ridiculousTory, Wed Dec 21 09:20
          The only consonants that elide [which means are absorbed into the next consonant] are the labials and /n/ is often replaced by /m/. But /a/? Not a chance. Ridiculous was the meaningless excerise you... more
          • Repetition Doesn't Make It SoMarianne Luban, Wed Dec 21 16:09
            Tory: "The ayin is a weak consonant and I showed plenty of examples where it falls away leaving a vowel or nothing at all. Absurd to say ayin which vanished in spoken Egyptian" It didn't vanish!... more
Click here to receive daily updates