Navigation – Plan du site

AccueilNuméros118The Book of Caverns in Theban Tom...

The Book of Caverns in Theban Tomb 33

Late Period Reception Process and Individual Adaptation
Daniel A. Werning
p. 525-554

Résumés

Le présent article résume, met à jour et complète les précédentes recherches de l’auteur sur la copie du Livre des Cavernes dans la tombe thébaine du prêtre lecteur en chef Padiaménopé (TT 33), datée du début de la Basse Époque (XXVe-XXVIe dynastie). La première partie est consacrée à la réception du Livre à la fin de la Troisième Période intermédiaire / début de la Basse Époque. Nous avons pu mettre en évidence que la source de la copie de Padiaménopé était le résultat d’une recherche « archéo-philologique » : la collation d’une copie reliée à la version de l’Osiréion, ainsi que d’une copie de la tombe de Ramsès VI (KV 9). Une série d’éléments démontre que la réception du Livre reposait originellement sur la volonté d’une reproduction « authentique » (bien qu’amendée par des ajouts au bénéfice du défunt), ce qui n’excluait pas pour autant les variantes, la mise à jour et la créativité. Outre les indispensables mises à jour d’ajouts (personnalisés à la fois dans le texte et l’iconographie) qui furent originellement créées pour les rois ramessides, on rencontre des changements modérés dans l’orthographe, le vocabulaire et la grammaire, de même que de légères modifications dans les scènes. On peut en outre identifier quelques rares cas de changements d’ordre textuel, de conjectures et d’additions. La seconde partie de l’article présente et discute le modèle sophistiqué de la version du Livre des Cavernes sur les parois des salles XVII à XIX de la tombe TT 33, qui reflète « indexicalement » (C.S. Peirce) le voyage du dieu soleil – et avec lui, celui de Padiaménopé – d’ouest en est à travers l’au-delà.

Haut de page

Texte intégral

1. Introduction

  • 1 Hornung 1999. For the character of a loose set of scenes of the traditionally called “Book(s) of th (...)
  • 2 Abitz 1995.
  • 3 Cf. Werning 2011, vol. 1, pp. 5–8 with fig. 1.
  • 4 Werning 2011, vol. 1, pp. 74–77; compare a text reproduced in Roberson 2012, pp. 485–487.

1All three Underworld Books from the New Kingdom, i.e., the Amduat, the Book of Gates, and the Book of Caverns (henceforth simply “Caverns”),1 made it into the Late Period Theban Tomb 33 of Petamenophis. The topic of these books is the travel of the sun god through the underworld and, more importantly, his interactions with its inhabitants. The books include images, annotations to the images, descriptive texts, offering statements, and/or litanies. Furthermore, some copies exhibit personalized additions for the respective book “owners.”2 Originally, Caverns has to be imagined as a long papyrus with seven large image tableaus including ca. 80 scenes and accompanying texts.3 Between the tableaus, there were long texts, which included 21 “great litanies” (see figure 1). There are hints that these papyri were written in cursive hieroglyphs with some hieratic sign shapes.4

Fig. 1. Sequence of image tableaus and text blocks in the Book of Caverns.

Fig. 1. Sequence of image tableaus and text blocks in the Book of Caverns.

Part of Werning 2017, fig. 1 (p. 42).

  • 5 Werning 2011, vol. 1, ch. II; additions in: Werning 2017, fig. 2 (p. 4). For some more texts or ima (...)
  • 6 See section 2.1, below.

2The topic of this article is the copy of Caverns in TT 33. It is one of a dozen true-to-original text attestations—henceforth, in terms of textual criticism: “text witnesses”—of this Underworld Book that we know of today.5 From a modern philological perspective, it is one of the three very important ones (in addition to those in the Osireion [tO] and in the tomb of Ramesses VI [RVI]), since it is a complete and largely intact copy. It is simultaneously a very interesting text witness, since it testifies for some “archaeo-philological”6 endeavors that took place shortly before or even during the time of Petamenophis and the creation of his tomb TT 33. Furthermore, it sheds light on the reception process of Caverns in the early Late Period. Generally speaking, this reception can be described as “authentically reproducing.” However, we also find some remarkable instances of intentional grammatical updates, textual emendation, and textual and pictorial collation. This article is partially a summary of results from different earlier publications by the present author. It focuses on Caverns in TT 33 and discusses certain findings that have not been highlighted before. In addition, some photos and line drawings from TT 33 are published here for the first time.

3Firstly, we look at the interesting reception process of Caverns in the Late Period (section 2). Afterwards, I present and discuss the layout of Caverns on the walls of the rooms XVII–XIX of TT 33 (section 3).

2. Reception of Caverns in the Early late Period

  • 7 See Werning 2011, vol. 1, ch. III.A (pp. 51–53) with references.
  • 8 For the reception of Caverns in general, see Werning 2017.

4With the help of the method of textual criticism, we are often able to classify and date deviations that we observe in various text witnesses of the Underworld Books more precisely. In addition to applying this method to texts, we can also fruitfully apply it to images, as demonstrated in Werning (2011, vol. I, ch. III). The method of textual criticism works best for textual histories that (i) are completely reproductive, i.e., non-creative, and (ii) have not been subject to any acts of collation of manuscripts, i.e., in which copies have always been drawn from one and only one model.7 In case of very creative transmissions or collated texts, the method cannot be easily applied. However, if one can pinpoint the acts of collation and creativity, i.e., if one can describe in which parts and under which circumstances they happened, one can still apply the method in a fruitful way. Fortunately, these requirements are met in the case of the textual history of Caverns.8

2.1. The source of Petamenophis’s copy: an archeo-philological endeavor

  • 9 Werning 2011, vol. 1, ch. III.C.6 (pp. 68–73). See also the discussion in Werning 2011, vol. 1, p.  (...)

5Elsewhere, I have argued that a text critical investigation of the text witnesses of Caverns reveals that Petamenophis’s copy was the result of what I suggested calling a “archaeo-philological” endeavor that took place in the early Late Period, in the later 8th or 7th century.9 More specifically, I showed that the version in TT 33 was the outcome of a collation of two copies of Caverns. It seems, however, that it was a quite selective collation process. In this section, I summarize the basic arguments.

  • 10 Werning 2011, vol. 1, ch. III.C.4 (pp. 64–66).
  • 11 Werning 2011, vol. 1, pp. 68–71; Werning 2017, pp. 44–47. For a earlier evaluation, see Abitz 1995, (...)
  • 12 For an exception, see table 2 in section 2.2.4 below.

6The main text of Caverns comes from a copy related to the text witness in the Osireion (tO, late 13th century BCE).10 On the other hand, certain textual additions to the main text, which relate the deceased to the circumstances described in this Underworld Book, are adaptations of a set of basically identical personalized additions that are attested in the text witnesses from the Valley of the Kings (copy γ; tombs of Ramesses IV, VI, VII, and IX, 12th century BCE).11 Both parts were combined. However, it seems that the core text of Caverns, i.e., the text proper without the personalized textual additions, from the Osireion, has normally not been checked against the texts from the branch of the Valley of the Kings, i.e., it has not itself been collated.12 The scenario can nicely be exemplified by the case of the great litanies in Caverns (figs. 2 and 3).

Fig. 2. The reception of the “great litanies” within the Book of Caverns in TT 33.

Fig. 2. The reception of the “great litanies” within the Book of Caverns in TT 33.

Translation of Werning 2011, vol. 1, fig. 7 (p. 70), with a few changes. Copies marked by “*” are textcritically reconstructed copies.

  • 13 Werning 2011, vol. 1, pp. 68–73 and tab. 32 (pp. 330–331).

7As illustrated in figure 2, the copy in TT 33 attests the complete set of 21 great litanies. However, there are text additions to only a selection of them. Moreover, some litanies with additions don’t have additions to all of their verses but only to some of them. Now, this pattern of additions (but not of the verses) is nearly exactly the fingerprint of the abbreviated attestations of the litanies’ verses (including their additions) in the tomb of Ramesses VI (KV 9).13

  • 14 Hb. 25.21Z, similarly in Hb. 80.31Z, 80.35Z, 80.37Z, […], 80.49Z (but all “harmonized” to the stand (...)

8That the main text came from the branch from the Osireion (β) and the text additions came from the branch of the Valley of the Kings (γ) is also very obvious when we look at the spelling of the root tm “to destroy” in some litany verses and their additions.14 Compare figure 3 (photo of the yet unpublished text witness in TT 33: fig. 4).

Fig. 3. Spelling of tm in a litany stanza to scene XXII (Hb. 25.21–21Z).

Fig. 3. Spelling of ḥtm in a litany stanza to scene XXII (Hb. 25.21–21Z).

Werning 2017, fig. 4 (p. 47), with a few changes and one correction.

Fig. 4. Hb. 25.21 in TT 33. CC BY-SA 3.0 DE.

Fig. 4. Hb. 25.21 in TT 33. CC BY-SA 3.0 DE.

© Daniel A. Werning (2015). For a digital arbeitsphoto, see Werning 2018, DOI: 10.17171/2-8-282-2.

  • 15 For the term “phono-repeater,” see Werning 2015, §13.

9While the text witnesses, notably also the Osireion branch (β), always have a standard bird shape for the phono-repeater15 tm, i.e., Image, the text witnesses in the Valley of the Kings, especially the tomb of Ramesses VI, exhibit the New Kingdom shape Image. In accordance with the additive collation technique (combination), in TT 33, we find the standard shape Image in the main text (from the Osireion branch) and the New Kingdom shape Image  only in the text additions (which come from the Valley of the Kings branch).

10When it comes to the images, however, a more complex pattern emerges. At least occasionally, the Late Period scribes truly collated the two model copies, i.e., two copies of an image were compared and, if there were obvious differences, the more plausible or more “fitting” details were chosen for a merged new version. This is especially obvious in the case of scene XXI (fig. 5).

Fig. 5. Transmission of scene XXI from Caverns (schematic, orientation of scenes normalized to left-right).

Fig. 5. Transmission of scene XXI from Caverns (schematic, orientation of scenes normalized to left-right).

Werning 2017, fig. 3 (p. 45), with a few changes and one correction. Copies marked by “*” are textcritically reconstructed copies.

  • 16 Werning 2011, vol. 1, pp. 68–69 with fig. 6.
  • 17 Piankoff, Rambova 1954, vol. 2, pl. 12–14.

11Scene XXI displays a casket of Osiris with some gods and emblems around it.16 The original version had four adoring gods standing around the casket. In TT 33, however, the scene exhibited two additional gods, for a total of six (though one of them is destroyed today, see figure 6). Now, we find the same mistake—the text literally speaks about “four gods” (Hb. 24.17)—also in, and only in, the tomb of Ramesses VI. It was obviously in the context of this specific text witness, i.e., the tomb decoration of Ramesses VI, that the mistake was made. The scene is located partially inside a niche in the wall and partially outside the niche (fig. 7).17 At the very edge of this niche, the decorators accidentally doubled two of the adoring gods in front of the casket. This is why Ramesses VI exhibits six instead of four adoring gods. It is most unlikely that this particular mistake could have happened a second time independently. This strongly suggests that a copy directly related to the tomb of Ramesses VI served as one source for the images in Petamenophis’s copy.

Fig. 6. Line drawing of scene XXI in TT 33, with partial reconstruction. CC BY-SA 3.0 DE.

Fig. 6. Line drawing of scene XXI in TT 33, with partial reconstruction. CC BY-SA 3.0 DE.

© Daniel A. Werning (line drawing by Antonio Cantele, reconstruction by D.A. Werning, collated by and based on orthophotos from D.A. Werning).

Fig. 7. Perspectival line drawing montage of the niche with scene XXI in the tomb of Ramesses VI.

Fig. 7. Perspectival line drawing montage of the niche with scene XXI in the tomb of Ramesses VI.

Montage based on the line drawings in Piankoff, Rambova 1954, vol. 1, figs. 11, 11a.

  • 18 Werning 2017, pp. 44–46; Werning 2011, vol. 1, p. 68. Moreover, we find two other specificities in (...)

12This source copy, however, cannot be the only one. This becomes obvious when one examines another aspect of the same scene, the scene XXI. Namely, it happens to be the case that all text witnesses from the kings’ tombs exhibit a common mistake. Originally, the round black discs in front of the four “necks of Ra” had some kind of red rays coming down from them. In the master copy γ for decoration in the Valley of the Kings, the copyist accidentally forgot or overlooked these red rays and left them out. So, if the Late Period scribes had used a copy from the kings’ tombs as the only source, Petamenophis’s copy would have lacked the rays as well. However, this is not the case. It includes the rays, which the scribes obviously collated from the other copy that they used, i.e., their copy from the Osireion.18

13Another phenomenon points to the same scenario. Some of the images in the 3rd tableau in TT 33 display a layout very similar to the compressed layout in the tomb of Ramesses VI (see figures 8 and 9). At first sight, this looks like a direct copy from the RVI version. However, a closer look reveals that the scribes predominately followed the copy from the Osireion branch as far as the details are concerned. In scene XXXIII (fig. 9), for example, the orientation of the snake and its “content” in TT 33 form a faithful mirror image of the Osireion version, in line with the reversed reading direction in TT 33, and therefore does not simply copy the RVI version, which uses the opposite orientation. Similarly, in scene XXXVI (fig. 10), the Osireion and TT 33 share the upright orientation of the “enemies,” as opposed to the upside-down orientation in RVI. It seems that it was, basically, the idea to stack some figures above each other which had been taken over by the early Late Period author. Note that, in the case of scene XXXVI, the stacking has been applied to some figures independently of any model.

Fig. 8a–c. Scene XXIX.

Fig. 8a–c. Scene XXIX.

a. From Frankfort 1933, pl. xxxiii, xxxii (indications of colors removed).
b.
CC BY-SA 3.0 DE, © Daniel A. Werning (line drawing by Antonio Cantele, collated by and based on orthophotos from D.A. Werning; partial reconstruction of Fig. 10b by D.A. Werning).
c. From Piankoff, Rambova 1954, vol. I, fig. 12.

Fig. 9a–c. Scene XXXIII.

Fig. 9a–c. Scene XXXIII.

a. From Frankfort 1933, pl. xxxiii, xxxii (indications of colors removed).
b.
CC BY-SA 3.0 DE, © Daniel A. Werning (line drawing by Antonio Cantele, collated by and based on orthophotos from D.A. Werning; partial reconstruction of Fig. 10b by D.A. Werning).
c.
From Piankoff, Rambova 1954, vol. I, fig. 12.

Fig. 10a–c. Scene XXXVI.

Fig. 10a–c. Scene XXXVI.

a. From Frankfort 1933, pl. xxxiii, xxxii (indications of colors removed).
b. CC BY-SA 3.0 DE, © Daniel A. Werning (line drawing by Antonio Cantele, collated by and based on orthophotos from D.A. Werning; partial reconstruction of Fig. 10b by D.A. Werning).
c.
From Piankoff, Rambova 1954, vol. I, fig. 12.

  • 19 See Werning 2011, vol. 1, pp. 333–337, deviation tabs. 2–5.
  • 20 For more allusions of TT 33 to the Osireion, cf. Traunecker, in: Traunecker, Régen 2015–2016, pp. 6 (...)

14Altogether, this and further evidence19 show that the Late Period copy (ζ'), which the text witness of Caverns in TT 33 comes from, was a collation of a copy connected to the Osireion20 copy and another copy connected to the copy in the tomb of Ramesses VI. The core text seems to have been taken from the Osireion branch, the text additions came from the tomb decoration of Ramesses VI, and the images were collated from both sources (with the copy from the Osireion branch, it seems, as the more trusted source).

  • 21 Werning 2017, p. 48; Werning 2011, vol. 1, p. 71 with nn. 31, 73, 81, with reference to Der Manueli (...)

15The case of Caverns in TT 33 also contributes to the question of whether the scribes of the Late Period “renaissance” were using secondary copies drawn from the finished monuments or whether they had copies of the original “master copies” for the decoration of these monuments. Since the mistaken number of six adoring gods can only be explained by the very specific architectural setting of the niche in the tomb of Ramesses VI (see above), I believe that the RVI-related copy was a copy drawn from the finished tomb of Ramesses VI itself. I suggest calling this surely costly process of copying texts from much older monuments an “archaeo-philological” endeavor. In the case of the Osireion copy, on the other hand, there is no comparable hint about the particularities of the finished decoration in the entrance corridor of the Osireion. At the current state of research, it therefore may seem more reasonable to assume that this was (a copy of) the original master copy for the decoration of the Osireion that made it into the early Late Period and served as the other input for the collation (fig. 11).21

Fig. 11. Collation of copies for an early Late Period tomb decoration copy of Caverns.

Fig. 11. Collation of copies for an early Late Period tomb decoration copy of Caverns.

Updated version of Werning 2017, fig. 5 (p. 48).

  • 22 Compare the titles r(.ï)-ȝb r(.ï)-dp “chief lector priest,” r(.ï) sštȝ n(.ï) mdw(.w)-nr “maste (...)
  • 23 Compare the title zȝ w.t-nr ʾsỉr nb-ȝbw “ scribe of the temple of Osiris, lord of Abydos” (Wern (...)
  • 24 Traunecker 2008, p. 43 called him “un de premiers égyptologues, visitant les monuments anciens, cop (...)
  • 25 Confirmed during a visit to the tomb in 2012, upon invitation by Prof. Louise Gestermann (mentioned (...)
  • 26 Cf. Traunecker 2008, pp. 41f., Werning 2011, vol. 1, pp. 44f with n. 106, Traunecker 2018, p. 129, (...)

16Naturally, we would like to know whether it was Petamenophis himself who launched the archaeo-philological endeavor. After all, he was what one may call the chief ritualist of his time, obviously in charge for important religious documents,22 and he was also connected to Abydos.23 Consequently, he most probably had the possibility and authority to initiate and direct such a project.24 On the other hand, there was also the roughly contemporary copy of Caverns in the tomb of Monthemhet (TT 34).25 Unfortunately, it is almost entirely destroyed, so that it is methodologically impossible to place it in the transmission stemma. In addition, the tricky question of the relative dating of the decorations in TT 34 and TT 33 is not yet solved.26 However, since both tombs are located at the same place and are nearly contemporary, it is not unlikely that Monthemhet’s copy was connected to the Late Period copy ζ'. So while, under certain circumstances, it could have been an archaeo-philological project of Petamenophis that resulted in TT 34 and TT 33, it could also have been a project of someone else. The task of collating the personalized text additions was obviously an act that specifically aimed at a tomb decoration. And the replacement of the name of the beneficent in these additions was, of course, executed for Petamenophis specifically.

2.2. The reception process between authentic reproduction, emendation, update, and creativity

17Generally speaking, we find that text and images of Caverns have been transmitted from the 13th century as basically authentic reproductions. However, in addition to some lapsus, which inevitably occur during copying processes, we also find some intentional updates and conjectures/emendations, as well as a creative addition.

2.2.1. Update of the personalized textual and pictorial additions

  • 27 Werning 2017, p. 49f. Einaudi 2018, p. 118 points out that the same appears in Der König als Sonnen (...)

18The most obvious and mandatory “update” is the replacement of the titles and names of the king in the text additions by those of the new beneficiary, in this case, “(the chief lector priest) Petamenophis (—justified).”27 Somewhat more demanding was the substitution of the images of two kings and their names at the beginning of the 1st image tableau of Caverns. In the version of Caverns in the Osireion (and only there), king Merenptah was placed before the sun god in scene II. In addition, another king was inserted behind Ra, entering the underworld together with him. The corresponding part of the tableau with king Merenptah is destroyed in TT 33. However, the king—“justified with Ra”—behind Ra was substituted with Petamenophis himself, as clearly identified by the caption “The chief lector priest, Petamenophis—justified” (compare the figures 12 and 13). Above this scene, a newly composed text was added (see section 2.2.5 below).

Fig. 12. Line drawing of the beginning of the 1st tableau of Caverns in the Osireion.

Fig. 12. Line drawing of the beginning of the 1st tableau of Caverns in the Osireion.

From Frankfort 1933, pl. XXIII.

Fig. 13. Line drawing of scene II in TT 33 (room XVII, west wall). CC BY-SA 3.0 DE.

Fig. 13. Line drawing of scene II in TT 33 (room XVII, west wall). CC BY-SA 3.0 DE.

© Daniel A. Werning (line drawing by Antonio Cantele, collated by and based on orthophotos from D.A. Werning).

19Besides the update of the personalized additions, we also find some changes to the core text, which we explore in the following section.

2.2.2. Orthographical, lexicographical, and grammatical changes

  • 28 Cf. also Werning 2011, vol. 1, pp. 177–186 (§§102–111).
  • 29 The plural form “Égyptiens de tradition” is meant to highlight the phenomenon that there are differ (...)

20In this section, we are going to explore intentional changes to the core text of Caverns in the course of Late Period reception: systematic orthographical changes, changes of lemmata, as well as morpho-syntactic changes. It is largely a reprint of Werning 2017, section 6.2.2.28 It is important to remark that the content of the text is almost never changed in a substantive way. These changes may, therefore, be classified as updates. It seems to be the purpose of these updates to make the text slightly easier to understand. Often the new spellings, words, or grammatical features seem to be closer to the Late Period Égyptiens de tradition29 than the original ones.

21First of all, we find some characteristic hieroglyphic renderings of sign shapes in TT 33:

(Ex-1) Image  (Hieroglyphica no. D129), besides Image (source copy probably * Image);

(Ex-2) Image  (Hieroglyphica no. I24), once for the lexeme pr(ỉ)Image “to come forth”;

(Ex-3) Image/Image (Gardiner no. N38 and variants), besides Image/Image (source copy probably *Image/*Image);

(Ex-4) Image (Gardiner no. W12) instead of Image (source copy probably * Image).

  • 30 See Gardiner 1957, p. 529 (W12). Cf. the attestation of (...)
  • 31 The cursive hieroglyphic sign shape are taken from various sheets of the papyrus of Ani from the 19 (...)

22The last shape resembles a form that is commonly held to be characteristic for the time of the Old Kingdom (2nd half of the 3rd millennium BCE).30 However, it may also simply reflect characteristics of the cursive hieroglyphic model (Image).31

23We occasionally find the graphical merging of two signs into a single combined sign:

(Ex-5) ImageImage in nz Image “to transit” and šȝs Image “to hurry” (cf. Gardiner no. O35; note that the function Image of is still equivalent to Image),

(Ex-6) ImageImage in, e.g., ḥḏ.wtImage “light” and mȝw.tImage “shine” (cf. Gardiner no. N8).

  • 32 For the term “grammato-classifier” (German “Grammato-Klassifikator”), see Werning 2011, vol. 1, pp. (...)
  • 33 Cf. Edel 1955–1964, §§159, 161, 166. For the term “emulation” (French “émulation”), cf. Stauder 201 (...)

24The occasional omission of the grammato-classifier32 [plural] in personal pronouns ultimately seems to emulate orthographic habits of the 3rd  millennium BCE:33

(Ex-7) Image  n Image Image tn “you, your (1pl).”

  • 34 Cf. Gardiner 1957. p. 535; Jansen-Winkeln 1996, §§216, 223, 227, 120; Der Manuelian 1994, p. 68.

25Another spelling change concerning the grammato-classifier [1st person singular] is in line with orthographic habits of Égyptiens de tradition of the 1st millennium BCE:34

  • 35 Werning 2011, vol. 1, pp. 102f. (§6), 153f. (§§67f.).

(Ex-8) Image [1sg] in w(ỉ)Image  and for (ï)Image  “I, me, my.”35

  • 36 References to and discussion of Leahy 1979, pp. 142, 149 in Werning 2017, p. 52, n. 35.

26An informative orthographical change attested in the copy in TT 33 is the spelling of the theonym “Osiris” with the classifier Image [divine]. It points to the later 8th century as a terminus ante quem non for at least parts, if not most, of the following changes, i.e., the reception process as a whole.36

(Ex-9) ImageImage ʾsỉr Image “Osiris.”

27For selected lemmata, we find changes towards characteristic logographical spellings relatively often, e.g.,

(Ex-10) Image/Image/ImageImage bȝba, manifestation,”

(Ex-11) Image/ImageImage  dwȝ.t Image “netherworld, underworld,”

(Ex-12) ImageImage  nm.wt ImageImage “slaughtering places,”

  • 37 For the spellings of the lexeme mȝȝ in Caverns, see Werning 2011, vol. 1, tab. 31 (pp. 327–329), §1 (...)

(Ex-13) ImageImage (quasi-logogram) mȝȝ “to see.”37

28There is a tendency to omit certain phonetic complements. This is especially frequent with the phonetic complement Image, e.g.,

(Ex-14) ImageImage wȝ (e.g., in wȝš Image, dwȝ.t Image, wȝȝ.t Image); Image → Image tȝ (e.g., in štȝ Image, sštȝ Image);
ImageImage mȝ (in mȝȝ); ImageImage mȝ (e.g., in qm(ȝ) Image); ImageImageʿȝ (in ʿȝ Image);
ImageImage zȝ (e.g., in zȝ(w) Image, zȝ.wt Image); Image → Image bȝ (e.g., in dbȝ Image); ImageImage ẖȝ (in ȝ.t Image).

29Other omissions of phonetic complements are much less frequent, e.g.,

  • 38 For the meaning “the one in the form of” (German “in Form von jemandem”) of ỉm.ï, cf. Werning 2011, (...)

(Ex-15) ImageImage  ỉm(ï) “the one in, the one in the form38 of.”

  • 39 Cf. Peust 1999, pp. 127–130, 142; F. Kammerzell, in Hannig 1995, pp. xlvii, xlix.

30The omission of, specifically, the phonetic complement Image, originally /ʀ/, may reflect a reaction to the general sound changes of /ʀ/. The Image might have been deleted, since its spoken correspondence has become rather weak or semi-vocalic in most cases ([ʔ] ~ [j] ~ ø).39

31There are, on the other hand, also two cases in which a phonetic complement is occasionally added:

  • 40 Note that this phonetic complement already occurs twice in the copies of the kings’ tombs (RVI, Hb.(...)

(Ex-16) ImageImage  ỉr in Image  ỉr.w Image “form,”40

(Ex-17) ImageImager (status pronominalis) “on, above.”

32In plural word forms, the grammato-classifier Image substitutes for Image (the w is still meant to be present), e.g., in

  • 41 See footnote to Ex-15.

(Ex-18) Image ỉm(ï).wImageImage ỉm(ï).(w)Image “the ones in, the ones in the form41 of,”

Image ḫt.wImage Imaget.(w)Image “following, behind,”

Image ḫpr.w Image / Image ḫpr.w ImageImage  pr.(w) Image / Image ḫpr.(w) Image “the ones that transformed (participle),”

Image sr.w ImageImage sr.(w) Image  “affairs,”

but also in

Imageft.(ï)w Image → Image ḫft.(ïw) Image  / Image ḫft.(ïw)Image   “enemies” and

Imagepr.w(w) Image →  Imagepr.(ww) Image “the transformations (noun).”

33Besides deviations with respect to Image as a phonetic complement, we also find some other changes, which clearly reflect changes in the pronunciation of specific lemmata:

(Ex-19) Image ṯ /c/ ~ /t/ → Image  t /t/, e.g., occasionally in

Image ṯp.t Image  →  Image tp.t Image  (*/cVpħVt/ > */tVpħVt/) “cavern, cavity, pit,”

ImagenImageImage  tnImage/ Image tn (*/cVn/ > */tVn/, Copt. ⲧⲛ) “1pl: you, your;”

(Ex-20) Image  ȝ (*/ʀ/) [ʀ] ~ [ʔ] ~ [j] ~ ø → ø, usually in

ImageȝkbImageImage ỉkbImage (*/ʔVʀkVb/ > */ʔVːkVb/, cf. Copt. S,A2ⲱⲕⲙ?) “to lament;”

(Ex-21) Image w (/w/) [w] ~ *[uː] ~ ø → 〈ø〉 *[u(ː)] ~ [ə] ~ ø, e.g., in

Image kk.w Image → Image kk Image (*/kVːkVw/ > */kVːkV/, cf. OCⲕⲱⲕ) “darkness,”

Image I͗npwImageImage I͗npImage (*/ʔanaːpVw/ > */ʔanuːpV/, cf. OCⲁⲛⲟⲩⲡ) “(god) Anubis,”

ImagefȝwImageImagefȝImage  (*/ħafʀVw/ > */ħɔfʔV/, cf. OCϩⲟϥ) “snake.”

A special case is the following spelling change, occasionally found in TT 33:

  • 42 Cf. Werning 2011, vol. 1, p. 252, with references to literature on the various spellings of “Tatene (...)

(Ex-22) Image Tȝ.wnn ImageImage Tȝnn Image “Tatenen.”42

  • 43 Cf. Werning 2011, vol. 1, p. 179 (§§106f.), with references. Note that the spellings of “t”s are ge (...)

34Especially remarkable are the occasional hybrid spellings ḏt, which reflect a sound change */tˀ/ > */t/ (de-emphatization) that happened in the early 1st millennium BCE:43

  • 44 For the meaning “to care for” (German “sich kümmern um”) of n, see Werning 2011, vol. 2, pp. 495–4 (...)

(Ex-23) Image n Image  (*/nVcˀ/ > */nVtˀ/) → Image n{ Image }t Image (*/nVt/) “to care44 for,”

(Ex-24) Image ḥḏImage (*/ħVcˀ/ > */ħVtˀ/) → Image ḥ{}tImage  (*/ħVt/) “bright” (cf. Copt. SBϩⲁⲧ).

  • 45 For an unclear case in the text of the Amduat in TT 33, see Régen 2014, pp. 315f.

35Furthermore, we find a few cases of the update of lemmata:45

(Ex-25) Image ḥʿ.(w)ImageImage ḥʿ.t Image “body,”

  • 46 Wb II, 180–182; Copt. SAⲙⲛⲧ-/Sⲙⲧ- [fem.]; Werning 2011, vol. 1, p. 179 (§107).

(Ex-26) Image mdw(.w) Image Image md.t Image “matters, affairs, words.”46

36Above the level of individual words, we find one systematic phraseological alteration:

(Ex-27) Image ḫft(ï).w Image-ʾsỉr Image  “enemies of Osiris” (direct genitive)

  • 47 Note that attributive nisbe n(.ï) usually displays number and gender inflection in the original ker (...)

Image ḫft(ï).(w) Image n(ï)47 ʾsỉr Image “enemies of Osiris” (indirect genitive).

  • 48 “Reduplicating” verb forms (like mrr) are not to be confused with “geminating” verb forms (like ȝmm(...)
  • 49 Werning 2011, vol. 1, pp. 181f. (§109), cf. also pp. 118–121 (§29). For an evaluation of the spelli (...)

37Another remarkable change is a frequent morpho-syntactic alteration that affects reduplicating48 verbal forms. The archetype of Caverns contained many such forms, specifically distributive participles (ỉrr(.ï) / ỉrr.w), the imperfective relative form (ỉrr.w), and the imperfective nominal verb form (ỉrr). In the copy in TT 33, many instances of these reduplicating forms have been changed to simple non-reduplicating forms:49

(Ex-28) Image ʿpp ImageImage ʿp Image “passing,”

(Ex-29) Image  s:qdd ImageImage s:qd Image “traveling,”

(Ex-30) Image prr ImageImage  pr Image “coming forth,”

(Ex-31) Image ỉrrImage ỉr  “doing.”

  • 50 See the more detailed discussion in Werning 2017, pp. 55f., with reference to Der Manuelian 1994, W (...)

38This is in line with observations about the fate of reduplicating verb forms in Égyptiens de tradition from the 1st millennium BCE, i.e., that they seem to die out and be replaced by other forms or constructions. Interestingly, we find that the scribes did not treat all reduplicating verb forms in the same way. They more often changed the thematic/nominal verb forms than the adjectival verb forms. Furthermore, they (still) left the stems Image ḏḏ “giving” and Image wdd Image “putting” unchanged.50

39References to examples: (Ex‑1) Hb. 21.1,8,23,48; (Ex‑2) Hb. 71.16; (Ex‑3) e.g., Hb. 1.19, 2.31; (Ex‑4) e.g., Hb. 1.2, 76.58; (Ex‑5) e.g., Hb. 29.29, 39.25, 76.58, 81.84; (Ex‑6) e.g., Hb. 31.8,12,16, 43.10; (Ex‑7) Hb. 32.28,29, 97.26,27; (Ex‑8) e.g., Hb. 32.18,20,28, 76.54,55,63; (Ex‑9) e.g., Hb. 52.12, see also Ex-26 below; (Ex‑10) e.g., Hb. 20.31,43, 29.16; (Ex‑11) e.g., Hb. 2.23, 24.12, 20.1; (Ex‑12) e.g., Hb. 2.19; (Ex‑13) Werning 2011, vol. I, pp. 327–329 (tab. 31); (Ex‑14) e.g., Hb. 2.3; (Ex‑15) e.g., Hb. 2.18; (Ex‑16) Hb. 8.1, 101.21; (Ex‑17) e.g., Hb. 32.8, 40.27, 99.8; (Ex‑18) e.g., Hb. 21.48, 32.25; 44.19; 25.23, 19.7; 2.17, 3.7; 2.19, 45.13; 32.12, 76.6, 104.1; (Ex‑19) e.g., Hb. 76.62,66, 81.84,89; 1.12,15,19; (Ex‑20) e.g., Hb. 21.8,34; (Ex‑21) e.g., Hb. 2.31, 97.12, Werning 2011, vol. I, p. 179 (§105); 64.5, 78.4ff., cf. also 34.3; 92.21; (Ex‑22) Hb. 78.36, 79.53; (Ex‑23) Werning 2011, vol. I, p. 179 (§106); (Ex‑24) Werning 2011, vol. I, p. 179 (§106); (Ex‑25) cf. Werning 2011, vol. II, p. 499; (Ex‑26) Werning 2011, vol. I, p. 179 (§107); (Ex‑27) e.g., Hb. 80.7,8,12; (Ex‑28–Ex-31) Werning 2011, vol. I, pp. 181f. (§109).

2.2.3. Changes to the images

  • 51 Whether these changes are to be attributed to the early Late Period recension (copy ζ) or, more spe (...)
  • 52 For LXXVII, there is only one other text witness with an intact bird (RVI), so that we cannot safel (...)

40Besides the collation of scene XXI (section 2.1) and the update of the personalized pictorial addition that was inherited from the Osireion branch (section 2.2.1), we find only a few meaningful changes in the images from TT 33.51 The only clear case is the substitution of the animal head of a snake with a human head in scene LIX, i.e., the “cave of Osiris” (fig. 14). We find similar human-headed snakes in two other scenes in the same tableau (scenes L and LI). In particluar, scene L, the “cavern of the Mysterious (Netherworld),” which is parallel to scene LIX, was probably the model and inspiration. Another possible, but not indisputable,52 case is the long feathers on the back of the head of the Osirian ba-bird in the scenes XLVI (fig. 15) and LXXVII, which makes it look more like a phoenix-bird (figs. 16 and 17).

Fig. 14. Detail from scene LIX in TT 33. CC BY-SA 3.0 DE.

Fig. 14. Detail from scene LIX in TT 33. CC BY-SA 3.0 DE.

© Daniel A. Werning (2015).

Fig. 15. Detail from scene XLVI in the Osireion.

Fig. 15. Detail from scene XLVI in the Osireion.

From Frankfort 1933, pl. XXXV (bird filled with black in accordance with color indication).

Fig. 16. Detail from scene XLVI in TT 33. CC BY-SA 3.0 DE.

Fig. 16. Detail from scene XLVI in TT 33. CC BY-SA 3.0 DE.

© Daniel A. Werning (2015).

Fig. 17. Detail from scene LXXVII in TT 33. CC BY-SA 3.0 DE.

Fig. 17. Detail from scene LXXVII in TT 33. CC BY-SA 3.0 DE.

© Daniel A. Werning (2015).

2.2.4. Textual emendations, conjectures, and additions

  • 53 Cf. Werning 2011, vol. 1, deviation tabs. 1 (p. 333), 9 (p. 341).

41Occasionally the responsible scribes seem to have felt the need to “correct” or better emend a passage by conjecture. In this section, we explore emendations that we find in TT 33, which can be attributed to the early Late Period recension (copy ζ) and/or the tomb decoration of TT 33 (Pet).53

42Firstly, we find one obvious correction of an erroneous sign:

(Ex-32) Image (Hb. 80.52, α/β)

Image wbȝ Image.ns “(it) has opened” (ζ/Pet).

43In context, the following erroneous flipping of signs could be identified and was corrected by the scribes of the early Late Period copy ζ:

(Ex-33) Image  sqr Image “(your throats) may strike (?)” (Hb. 1.14; α/β)

Image srq Image “(your throats) may breathe” (ζ).

44Occasionally, whole words were apparently missing in the model copies. The following two cases exemplify emendation based on parallel phraseology in other parts of Caverns:

(Ex-34) Image Ḥr(w) ỉrw Image “Horus <…> form” (Hb. 104.11, α)

Image Ḥr(w) ʿn ỉrw Image “Horus with living form” (ζ/Pet),

analogous to Image r(w) ʿn pr.wImage “Horus with living transformation” (Hb. 104.10);

(Ex-35) Imagenr pn ʿȝ Image “The Great <God>” (Hb. 88.10, α)

Image nr pn ʿȝ Image “The Great God” (ζ/Pet),

as passim in Caverns.

  • 54 The Égyptien de tradition of the Underworld Books exhibits a peculiar use of the singular demonstra (...)

45Near the latter text, an analogous—however unnecessary54—emendation was made:

(Ex-36) Image pn s.pr Image sn Imagethe one who created them” (Hb. 88.24, α)

Image nr pn s.pr Image  sn Imagethis god who created them” (ζ/Pet).

  • 55 However, what seems to be an apposition at the end of the addition, “May you (also) attach the head (...)

46An example of another addition and a change based on parallel phraseology is the middle of the 11th great litany (Hb. 78.10–19Z); compare table 1. In the tomb of Ramesses VI, the 5th stanza is mistakenly left out. If—as I argued above (section 2.1)—the personalized text additions did not come from the decoration master copy (which could have included the stanza) but rather were copied from the actual tomb, the text addition that we find in TT 33 had no ancient model. It had to be invented by the Late Period scribes. Looking at the wording of the preceding and succeeding stanzas, we find that this was actually quite a simple task: the surrounding stanzas all follow the same pattern: “O Anubis, power of the west! (You) who attached the head of [various designations for Osiris].—May you (also) attach the head of NN—justified.”55

Table 1. Middle of the 11th great litany (Hb. 78.10–19Z) in copy β, TT 33, and the tomb of Ramesses VI.

Image

a. For the copy in the Osireion (tO), see Frankfort 1933, pl. xl. See also n. 59.
b. Piankoff 1946, pl. xc–xci.

  • 56 The wording in RVI is somewhat “imbalanced,” since the ones with the power are two different deitie (...)
  • 57 Three deviations in tO, on the other hand, may not necessarily have existed in the model copy from (...)

47Interestingly, we also find the same text addition in the 8th stanza (verse 19Z)—in contrast with the addition in RVI. This, however, is seemingly a conjecture, inspired by the very probably mistakenly56 expanded wording of verse 19 in RVI (see the table). Note, moreover, that an obvious error in the text addition of the 4th stanza has been corrected in the process: “May you (also) attach {my}<the> head of NN—justified” (verse 11Z).57

  • 58 Frankfort (1933, pl. XXXVI, cols. 24–29) marks the 3rd–6th stanzas, but not the 1st–2nd stanzas, as (...)
  • 59 Already suggested in Werning 2011, vol. 2, p. 217, n. a.

48Most tricky is the evidence from the 5th great litany (table 2). In the first five stanzas (Hb. 57.55–66Z), TT 33 seems to exhibit a wording that resembles RVI not only—as expected—in the additions but also in the verses themselves. Furthermore, we have reason to assume that the wording at least in the 3rd–5th stanzas that was copied from RVI was not the original reading of the stanzas in the archetype α, but a conjecture by scribes from the branch of the Valley of the Kings (copy γ). They are suspiciously similar (“I pass by you—[you in the netherworld!]—and by my corps [in the the west/the cavern]”) and the main verses do not form complete clauses as in all the other stanzas (“and by my corps…”). Probably not coincidentally, the attestation in the Osireion seems corrupt as well. The first six stanzas all seem to lack some words at the end.58 The combined evidence from the three text witnesses makes sense, I argue, if we assume that the wording was partially corrupt already in copy α, and subsequently also in copy β and in the Late Period copy ζ from the Osireion branch. Making an exception, the Late Period scribe would then have collated not only the personalized text additions, but also the wording of the main text from RVI.59

Table 2. Beginning of the 5th great litany (Hb.57.55–66Z) in the Osireion, TT 33, and the tomb of Ramesses VI.

Image

a. Frankfort 1933, pl. xxxvi.
b. Cf. Piankoff 1946, pl. liv; Lefébure 1889, pl. 39–40; photos: Piankoff, Rambova 1954, vol. 1, fig. 149 (left), vol. 2, pl. 24.

49The changes and emendations discussed above needed some kind of reflection on the part of the scribe. But still the process was in the spirit of a reproductive working mode. The scribe did not aim at creating an innovative text but at recreating a wording that he believed to be along the lines of the “authentic” original.

2.2.5. Creative textual additions

50After a text that relates to the sun god standing on the hand of “The Mysterious (Netherworld)” (scenes L and LI), we find two columns of texts in TT 33 that stand out from the rest of the text, semantically and orthographically. From a text critical point of view, we cannot say whether these columns are secondary or not, since the whole text block did not survive in any text witness other than TT 33. However, the peculiarities are telling, I believe. The text starts “In this very form is this god (i.e., Ra). The God gives Osiris his hands and illuminates him” (Hb. 60.31–33). It continues:

(Ex-37) Hb. 60.34Z–35Z

ImageImage
|579p?[///?⸣ ḥȝp Image.t(w) ʾsỉr Image ỉmn.t(w) |580  hy Image [///…///]ḥȝ[///…///]

“⸢///…/// (?)⸣Osiris was (?) veiled, the husband was (?) hidden [///…///].”

  • 60 Cf. Werning 2011, vol. 2, pp. 238–243.
  • 61 Cf. Werning 2011, vol. 1, p. 324 (ȝp).
  • 62 Werning 2011, vol. 1, pp. 166f. For an alternative interpretation as resultatives (⸢p[.t]?⸣ ȝp.t (...)

51First of all, this information does not fit the context.60 The word “husband” does not occur in Caverns, apart from here. And the elaborate classifier group Image in ȝpImage is unusual,61 as is the logographic spelling of ỉmn with Image (Hieroglyphica no. A5A). Moreover, passive forms of the suffix conjugation are quite rare in Caverns.62 Altogether, it seems to me that this is an accidental addition in the course of the Late Period recension, rather that a creative addition.

52On the other hand, an “intrusive” text block above the initial scene II (see figure 13 above) is clearly a creative addition (see Werning forthcoming). It is partially inspired by and composed with the help of the beginning of Caverns (Hb. 1–2), including a verbatim quote of the very first phrases of Caverns, quotes augmented with some additional phrases, as well as compilations and rephrasings of pieces from model sentences. Introducing Petamenophis, it was probably specifically created for his tomb.

3. Distribution of Caverns in the Rooms XVII–XIX

53As mentioned in the introduction, Caverns has to be imagined as a long papyrus with seven large image tableaus and long text blocks between them (fig. 18).

Fig. 18. Sequence of image tableaus and text blocks in the Book of Caverns. Schema from Werning 2017, fig. 1 (p. 42), with new captions. CC BY-SA 3.0 DE.

Fig. 18. Sequence of image tableaus and text blocks in the Book of Caverns. Schema from Werning 2017, fig. 1 (p. 42), with new captions. CC BY-SA 3.0 DE.

© Daniel A. Werning.

  • 63 Cf. Werning 2011, vol. 1, fig. 2 (p. 15), fig. 11 (p. 30).

54It was surely by means of such a papyrus that the decoration in TT 33 was planned. While the other two (nearly) complete copies in the tomb of Ramesses VI and in the Osireion were executed, basically, linearly along a sequence of walls on only one side of a corridor,63 the copy in TT 33 is distributed over both sides of a sequence of rooms, thereby splits into two sequences of walls (nos. 1–6 and 7–13, see figure 19).

Fig. 19. Sequence of the Book of Caverns on the walls of rooms XVII–XIX in TT 33. CC BY-SA 3.0 DE.

Fig. 19. Sequence of the Book of Caverns on the walls of rooms XVII–XIX in TT 33. CC BY-SA 3.0 DE.

© Daniel A. Werning. Cf. Werning 2011, vol. 1, fig. 20 (p. 43).

  • 64 Following Dümichen’s map, Piankoff 1947, pp. 86f. (map on p. 75) erroneously indicates that Caverns (...)
  • 65 This copy could not yet become included in Roberson 2013.

55The first sequence starts on the west wall of room XVII and goes along the south and rightmost east walls of this room and the south walls of the following corridor XVIII and room XIX. It bears approximately the first half of Caverns up to the 4th tableau (Hb. 1–56). The second sequence starts from the east wall of, again, room XVII and goes along the north wall of the corridor and the west and north walls of room XIX (Hb. 57ff.).64 The only wall that is not decorated with parts of Caverns is the east wall of room XIX. It is decorated with the “Awakening of Osiris”65 and a door decoration with an offering scene.

3.1. Reading Direction and Orientation

  • 66 Werning 2011, vol. 1, p. 74.
  • 67 Clear cases of an orientation change in RVI are the scenes XXI (fig. 5 above) and LXIII. Further po (...)

56The reading direction of texts and figures is from right to left on the first sequence of walls, but from left to right on the second sequence. The latter orientation is the one that we have to assume for the archetype of Caverns and for the Osireion branch of the transmission,66 i.e., the first source of Caverns in the Late Period (see section 2.1 above). The orientation of the first sequence, on the other hand, is the same as in RVI, i.e., the second source of Caverns in TT 33. However, in contrast with the case of RVI, TT 33 does not exhibit any clear case of an orientation change compared with the reconstructed archetype and the Osireion copy.67

  • 68 See Werning 2011, vol. 1, ch. II, figs. 2, 7–8, 11–16. A notable exception is the opposite reading (...)

57First of all, the resulting reading direction is in line with the direction in nearly all the other text witnesses of Caverns on tomb/temple walls,68 namely towards the inside. Furthermore, however, the result is that one starts to read Caverns on the westernmost wall, reads eastwards (on all west–east oriented walls; in various ways on south–north oriented walls) and ends on the north-eastern corner of the sequence of rooms. Apart from the somewhat inevitable return from room XIX to room XVII after the first half of the book, this reading sequence from west to east is obviously in line with the general orientation of the journey of the sun god through the underworld as described in this very book, i.e., from the western horizon to the eastern horizon.

3.2. Layout of text blocks and image tableaus on the walls

58Generally, the text and tableaus were arranged on the walls as they were on the original papyrus version of Caverns (and in the Osireion). However, the ceiling of the third room XIX was considerably higher than the one in the other two rooms, so that, keeping roughly the same scale as in the other rooms, more space was available on these walls. In this higher room, the image tableaus were placed in the lower part of the walls, whereas the upper parts were filled with the texts from text blocks between the tableaus (fig. 20). On all three walls, these text block are to be read before the registers below them (e.g., no. 7 before 8/9 on the south wall). Interestingly, the west and north walls in room XIX are to be considered one common decoration space. The text blocks in the uppermost registers of both walls are to be read in one go (nos. 13–14). Similarly in the lower register: the 6th tableau goes around the corner of both walls as if the corner didn’t exist (no. 15). It is followed by a text block of the 21st great litany on the same level (no. 16). Somewhat special, however, the final sunrise tableau (no. 17) is placed between the text block in the upper(most) text register and the lower(most) tableau register.

Fig. 20. Layout of the Book of Caverns on the walls of rooms XVII–XIX in TT 33 (schematic), with indication of the reading sequence. CC BY-SA 3.0 DE.

Fig. 20. Layout of the Book of Caverns on the walls of rooms XVII–XIX in TT 33 (schematic), with indication of the reading sequence. CC BY-SA 3.0 DE.

© Daniel A. Werning. Corrected and expanded version of Werning 2011, vol. 1, fig. 21 (p. 43).

  • 69 A comparable, but not similar solution has been chosen for the tomb of Ramesses VI. The sunrise tab (...)

59The resulting layout is—if one may say—a quite elegant solution. This way, the 1st–6th image tableaus are all on more or less the same level and in the same scale. Only the final sunrise tableau is different in many respects: position, scale, and proportion (as compared with the archetype of Caverns). However, since the sunrise tableau displays the opening of the netherworld to the upper world and the sky, it makes sense to place it higher than the other tableaus.69 For this specific placement, the decorator even took into account that they had to reduce the relative height and stretch the length of the sunrise tableau in order to make it fit nicely into the space between the lunette and the lower register.

4. Summary

60The Book of Caverns in TT 33 is one of the few (almost) complete copies of this Underworld Book. It is the result of a collation of two copies of Caverns in the early Late Period (section 2.1). One source is related to the copy in the Osireion, and the other one comes from the tomb of Ramesses VI, very probably a copy of the actual walls of the finished monument. While the core text comes from the Osireion branch, it was the personalized text additions for the king that interested the ancient redactors the most in the copy from the Valley of the Kings. Naturally, they replaced the names and titles of the king with those of Petamenophis. In the case of the images, we see that the scribe eventually compared both model copies and created a merged version. A single pictorial addition of the king behind Ra from the Osireion branch was replaced with an image of Petamenophis (section 2.2.1).

61In the context of the reception in the Late Period, the scribes also made some changes to spellings, lexemes, phrases, and verbal reduplication morphology (section 2.2.2). However, these did not actually change the intellectual content of the book. Some partially creative emendations were also made based on parallel phraseology, in order to fill obvious or apparent gaps in the attestation. Probably in the same spirit, the head of a snake was changed in one scene in accordance with a snake’s head in a parallel scene (section 2.2.3). The aim of all these activities was obviously to create an “authentic” copy of Caverns, with additions to the benefit of a deceased. Apart from this, there is one indisputable case and two possible, though disputable, cases of creative additions in the course of the Late Period redaction. A text block above the initial scene II is clearly an intentional creative addition, probably specifically composed for this tomb (Werning forthcoming). On the other hand, two strange columns of texts between the scenes L and LI are probably accidental additions (section 2.2.5). Another change that seems to date to the early Late Period is the addition of some feathers to the back of the head of the Osirian ba-bird, which makes it look more like a phoenix-bird (section 2.2.1).

62The copy of Caverns was distributed over a sequence of three rooms, XVII–XIX (section 3). It was directed into the interior of the tomb, towards the burial chamber. Moreover, it starts on the westernmost wall of the first room and ends in the north-eastern corner of the third room, thereby mirroring the journey of the sun god—and with him Petamenophis (fig. 13)—through the netherworld.

Acknowledgements

  • 70 On the project, see the homepage Tombe thébaine no 33 (TT 33): Carnet de la mission épigraphique fr (...)

63The figures 4, 6, 8b, 9b, 10b, 13, 14, 16 and 17 in this contribution are among the first published outcome of the author’s epigraphic work on the Book of Caverns in the Theban Tomb 33 between 2012 and 2018, as part of the IFAO Mission épigraphique française dans la tombe de Padiaménopé, directed by Prof. Dr. Claude Traunecker (Université de Strasbourg) and co-director Dr. Isabelle Régen (Université Paul-Valéry Montpellier 3).70 I am indeed very grateful for the invitation to work on this text, the support consisting of logistics and workmen-power, as well as the warmly welcome to the team. I also have to thank the Excellence Cluster 264 “Topoi” for the financial support of my work, travel, and equipment, as well as for the granting of twelve months of help by a student assistant, namely Antonio Cantele, who produced most of the line drawings for me.

Abbreviations

NN = Name (and titles)

PN = Personal name

T = Title

TN = Throne name

Haut de page

Bibliographie

Abitz 1995
Abitz, F., Pharao als Gott in den Unterweltsbüchern des Neuen Reiches, OBO Subsidia didactica 146, Freiburg, Göttingen, 1995.

Assmann 1970
Assmann, J., Der König als Sonnenpriester: Ein kosmographischer Begleittext zur kultischen Sonnenhymnik in thebanischen Tempeln und Gräbern, ADAIK Ägyptologische Reihe 7, Glückstadt, 1970.

Budge 1913
Budge, E.A.W., The Papyrus of Ani: A Reproduction in Facsimile, Edited, with Hieroglyphic Transcript, Translation and Introduction, London, New York, 1913.

Der Manuelian 1994
Der Manuelian, P., Living in the Past: Studies in Archaism of the Egyptian Twenty-sixth Dynasty, StudEgypt, London, New York, 1994.

Edel 1955–1964
Edel, E., Altägyptische Grammatik, AnOr 34, 39, Rome, 1955–1964.

Einaudi 2018
Einaudi, S., “Combination of Tradition and Innovation in the Decorative Programme of the Tomb of Padiamenope (TT 33)”, in Pischikova, Budka, Griffin (eds.) 2018, pp. 117–125.

Frankfort 1933
Frankfort, H., The Cenotaph of Seti I at Abydos, 2 vols., MEEF 39, London, 1933.

Gardiner no. [plus text no.]
Gardiner 1957, pp. 438–543

Gardiner 1957
Gardiner, A.H., Egyptian Grammar: Being an Introduction to the Study of Hieroglyphs, 3rd ed., London, 1957.

Gestermann, Gomaà 2018
Gestermann, L., Gomaà, F., “Remarks on the Decoration and Conception of the Theban Tomb of Montuemhat (TT 34)”, in Pischikova, Budka, Griffin (eds.) 2018, pp. 152–161.

Hannig 1995
Hannig, R., Die Sprache der Pharaonen: Großes Handwörterbuch Ägyptisch-Deutsch (2800–950 v. Chr.), KAW 64, Mainz, 1995.

Hb. [plus text no.]
Werning 2011, vol. 2.

Hieroglyphica
Grimal, N.-C., Hallof, J., van der Plas, D., Hieroglyphica: Sign List – Liste de signes – Zeichenliste, 2nd ed., PIREI 1, Utrecht, Paris, 2000.

Hornung 1999
Hornung, E., The Ancient Egyptian Books of the Afterlife, Translated from the German by David Lorton, Ithaca, London, 1999.

Jansen-Winkeln 1996
Jansen-Winkeln, K., Spätmittelägyptische Grammatik der Texte der 3. Zwischenzeit, ÄAT 34, Wiesbaden, 1996.

Kahl 1999
Kahl, J., Siut – Theben: Zur Wertschätzung von Traditionen im alten Ägypten, PdÄ 13, Leiden, Boston, Köln, 1999.

Leahy 1979
Leahy, A., “The Name of Osiris Written …”, SAK 7, 1979, pp. 141–153.

Lefébure 1889
Lefébure, E., Les hypogées royaux de Thèbes. Seconde division : notices des hypogées, MMAF 3/1, Paris, 1889 [Available from: Gallica], <http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k6278100f> accessed 6 Sept 2018.

Peust 1999
Peust, C., Egyptian Phonology: An Introduction to the Phonology of a Dead Language, MonÄS 2, Göttingen, 1999.

Piankoff 1946
Piankoff, A., Le Livre des Quererts. Extraits du Bulletin de l’Institut français d’archéologie orientale, t. XLI, XLII, XLIII, XLV (1941-1947), Cairo, 1946.

Piankoff 1947
Piankoff, A., “Les grandes compositions religieuses dans la tombe de Pédéménope”, BIFAO 46, 1947, pp. 73–92, <http://www.ifao.egnet.net/bifao/046/03/> accessed 6 Sept 2018.

Piankoff, Rambova 1954
Piankoff, A., Rambova, N., The Tomb of Ramesses VI, ERTR 1, BollSer 40, New York, 1954.

Pischikova, Budka, Griffin (eds.) 2014
Pischikova, E., Budka, J., Griffin, K. (eds.), Thebes in the First Millennium BC, Conference Acts, Luxor, 2012, Newcastle, 2014.

Pischikova, Budka, Griffin (eds.) 2018
Pischikova, E., Budka, J., Griffin, K. (eds.), Thebes in the First Millennium BC: Art and Archaeology of the Kushite Period and Beyond, GHP Egyptology 27, London, 2018.

Régen 2014
Régen, I., “The Amduat and the Book of the Gates in the Tomb of Padiamenope (TT 33): A Work in Progress”, in Pischikova, Budka, Griffin (eds.) 2014, pp. 307–320.

Régen 2018
Régen, I., “The Book of Nut in the Late Period Tombs of the Asasif Necropolis: With a Focus on the Decorative Layout in the Tombs of Padiamenope (TT 33) and Montuemhat (TT 34)”, in Pischikova, Budka, Griffin (eds.) 2018, pp. 162–176.

Roberson 2012
Roberson, J.A., The Ancient Egyptian Books of the Earth, Wilbour Studies in Egypt and Ancient Western Asia 1, Atlanta, 2012.

Roberson 2013
Roberson, J.A., The Awakening of Osiris and the Transit of the Solar Barques: Royal Apotheosis in a Most Concise Book of the Underworld and Sky, OBO 262, Freiburg, Göttingen, 2013.

Stauder 2013
Stauder, A., “L’émulation du passé à l’ère thoutmoside. La dimension linguistique”, in S. Bickel (ed.), Vergangenheit und Zukunft: Studien zum historischen Bewusstsein in der Thutmosidenzeit, AegHelv 22, Basel, 2013, pp. 77–125.

Traunecker 2008
Traunecker, C., “Le palais funéraire de Padiaménopé redécouvert (TT 33)”, EAO 51, 2008, pp. 15–48.

Traunecker 2014
Traunecker, C., “The ‘Funeral Palace’ of Padiamenope: Tomb, Place of Pilgrimage and Library – Current Research”, in Pischikova, Budka, Griffin (eds.) 2014, pp. 205–234.

Traunecker 2018
Traunecker, C., “Abydenian Pilgrimage, Immortal Stars and Theban Liturgies in the Tomb of Padiamenope (TT 33)”, in Pischikova, Budka, Griffin (eds.) 2018, pp. 126–151.

Traunecker, Régen 2015–2016
Traunecker, C., Régen, I., “La tombe du prêtre Padiamenopé (TT 33). Éclairages nouveaux”, BSFE 193–194, 2015–2016, pp. 52–83.

Vernus 1982
Vernus, P., “Deux particularités de l’égyptien de tradition : nty iw + présent 1 ; wnn.f r sm narrativ”, in L’égyptologie en 1979. Axes prioritaires de recherches, vol. 1, Colloques internationaux du Centre national de la recherche scientifique 595, Paris, 1982, pp. 81–89.

Vernus 2016
Vernus, P., Traditional Egyptian I (Dynamics), 2016 [Available from: UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology], <http://escholarship.org/uc/item/0bg342rh> accessed 28 May 2018.

Wb [plus page no., attestation nos.]
Erman, A., Grapow, H., Das Wörterbuch der aegyptischen Sprache, Leipzig, 1926–1931.

Werning 2011
Werning, D.A., Das Höhlenbuch: Textkritische Edition und Textgrammatik, GOF IV Reihe Ägypten 48, Wiesbaden, 2011.

Werning 2013
Werning, D.A., “Linguistic Dating of the Netherworld Books Attested in the New Kingdom: A Critical Review”, in G. Moers, K. Widmaier, A. Giewekemeyer, A. Lümers, R. Ernst (eds.), Dating Egyptian Literary Texts: Göttingen, 9–12 June 2010, vol. 1, LingAeg Studia Monographica 11, Hamburg, 2013, pp. 237–281 [Available from: PropylaeumDok], <http://archiv.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/propylaeumdok/volltexte/2018/3833>, accessed 28 May 2018.

Werning 2015
Werning, D.A., Einführung in die hieroglyphisch-ägyptische Schrift und Sprache: Propädeutikum mit Zeichen- und Vokabellektionen, Übungen und Übungshinweisen, 3rd ed., Berlin, 2015, <http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:11-100233225>, accessed 1 May 2017.

Werning 2017
Werning, D.A., “Inner-Egyptian Receptions of a Theological Book Between Reproduction, Update, and Creativity: The Book of Caverns from the 13th to the 4th Century BCE”, in T. Gillen (ed.), (Re)productive Traditions in Ancient Egypt: Proceedings of the Conference Held at the University of Liège, 6th–8th February 2013, AegLeod 10, Liège, 2017, pp. 41–67.

Werning 2018
Werning, D.A., The Book of Caverns in Theban Tomb 33: Arbeitsphotos, Berlin, 2018, DOI: 10.17171/2-8.

Werning forthcoming
Werning, D.A., “Following the Sun God into the Netherworld: The Chief Lector Priest Petamenophis in the Footsteps of a Pharaoh”, forthcoming.

Haut de page

Notes

1 Hornung 1999. For the character of a loose set of scenes of the traditionally called “Book(s) of the Earth,” see Roberson 2012, pp. 8f.

2 Abitz 1995.

3 Cf. Werning 2011, vol. 1, pp. 5–8 with fig. 1.

4 Werning 2011, vol. 1, pp. 74–77; compare a text reproduced in Roberson 2012, pp. 485–487.

5 Werning 2011, vol. 1, ch. II; additions in: Werning 2017, fig. 2 (p. 4). For some more texts or images that are results of a creative reception of Caverns, see Werning 2017, pp. 59–61.

6 See section 2.1, below.

7 See Werning 2011, vol. 1, ch. III.A (pp. 51–53) with references.

8 For the reception of Caverns in general, see Werning 2017.

9 Werning 2011, vol. 1, ch. III.C.6 (pp. 68–73). See also the discussion in Werning 2011, vol. 1, p. 73 (“Nebendiskussion 2”). For the term “archaeo-philologist,” see also Werning 2017, p. 48. For a terminus ante quem non, based on the spelling of the theonym “Osiris,” see the footnote before Ex-9 in section 2.2.2 below.

10 Werning 2011, vol. 1, ch. III.C.4 (pp. 64–66).

11 Werning 2011, vol. 1, pp. 68–71; Werning 2017, pp. 44–47. For a earlier evaluation, see Abitz 1995, pp. 126–133.

12 For an exception, see table 2 in section 2.2.4 below.

13 Werning 2011, vol. 1, pp. 68–73 and tab. 32 (pp. 330–331).

14 Hb. 25.21Z, similarly in Hb. 80.31Z, 80.35Z, 80.37Z, […], 80.49Z (but all “harmonized” to the standard bird in 80.51Z, […], 80.55Z, and displaced 80.33Z).

15 For the term “phono-repeater,” see Werning 2015, §13.

16 Werning 2011, vol. 1, pp. 68–69 with fig. 6.

17 Piankoff, Rambova 1954, vol. 2, pl. 12–14.

18 Werning 2017, pp. 44–46; Werning 2011, vol. 1, p. 68. Moreover, we find two other specificities in scene XXI in RVI also in TT 33: a 4th red sun in front of the heads of Ra and a flipped orientation of the casket. As opposed to the addition of two more gods, however, these could possibly have happened independently (although I don’t believe that they did).

19 See Werning 2011, vol. 1, pp. 333–337, deviation tabs. 2–5.

20 For more allusions of TT 33 to the Osireion, cf. Traunecker, in: Traunecker, Régen 2015–2016, pp. 65–73, Traunecker 2018 (architecture), Régen 2018, p. 167 (parts of the Book of Nut), Einaudi 2018, pp. 122f. (Awakening of Osiris, 36 deities).

21 Werning 2017, p. 48; Werning 2011, vol. 1, p. 71 with nn. 31, 73, 81, with reference to Der Manuelian 1994 and Kahl 1999. For possibly comparable receptions of other texts in TT 33, see Einaudi 2018, pp. 117f. (ceiling ornaments, summing up research of Jochem Kahl), 122 (Pyramid Texts, rooms X/XI).

22 Compare the titles r(.ï)-ȝb r(.ï)-dp “chief lector priest,” r(.ï) sštȝ n(.ï) mdw(.w)-nr “master of the secrets of the hieroglyphs” and zȝ mȝ.t-nr nzw “royal scribe of the divine books;” see the discussion in Werning 2011, vol. 1, pp. 43f. with footnotes. Traunecker 2008, p. 43 imagined that he was a “conseiller pontifical” to the rulers.

23 Compare the title zȝ w.t-nr ʾsỉr nb-ȝbwImage “ scribe of the temple of Osiris, lord of Abydos” (Werning 2011, vol. 1, p. 44 with n. 103; for the indeed correct spelling of w.t, see the photo in Régen 2018, fig. 10, p. 176). For more, probably not coincidental links to Abydos, see Régen 2018, p. 167.

24 Traunecker 2008, p. 43 called him “un de premiers égyptologues, visitant les monuments anciens, copiant les textes et accumulant des notes.” For a more detailed, developing discussion of Petamenophis’s position in society, see Traunecker 2008, pp. 19, 38–43, Traunecker 2014, pp. 209–211, Traunecker, in: Traunecker, Régen 2015–2016, pp. 74–76, Traunecker 2018, pp. 146–148.

25 Confirmed during a visit to the tomb in 2012, upon invitation by Prof. Louise Gestermann (mentioned in Gestermann, Gomaà 2018, p. 160).

26 Cf. Traunecker 2008, pp. 41f., Werning 2011, vol. 1, pp. 44f with n. 106, Traunecker 2018, p. 129, Einaudi 2018, p. 121, Régen 2018, pp. 168f.

27 Werning 2017, p. 49f. Einaudi 2018, p. 118 points out that the same appears in Der König als Sonnenpriester (see Assmann 1970, pp. 16, 17–19 [text G]).

28 Cf. also Werning 2011, vol. 1, pp. 177–186 (§§102–111).

29 The plural form “Égyptiens de tradition” is meant to highlight the phenomenon that there are different varieties of grammar in the corpus of texts that is commonly labeled as “Égyptien de tradition;” cf. Vernus 1982: J’ai proposé d’appeler ‘Égyptien de tradition’, ou, plus précisément, mais moins commodément, ‘Égyptiens de tradition’ ces langues mimétiques d’un état révolu; note, however, that P. Vernus does not normally use the plural form; cf. Vernus 2016.

30 See Gardiner 1957, p. 529 (W12). Cf. the attestation of Image (Y2) in text witnesses from the 6th century BCE (Der Manuelian 1994, p. 66).

31 The cursive hieroglyphic sign shape are taken from various sheets of the papyrus of Ani from the 19th Dynasty (Budge 1913).

32 For the term “grammato-classifier” (German “Grammato-Klassifikator”), see Werning 2011, vol. 1, pp. 102–104 (§6).

33 Cf. Edel 1955–1964, §§159, 161, 166. For the term “emulation” (French “émulation”), cf. Stauder 2013.

34 Cf. Gardiner 1957. p. 535; Jansen-Winkeln 1996, §§216, 223, 227, 120; Der Manuelian 1994, p. 68.

35 Werning 2011, vol. 1, pp. 102f. (§6), 153f. (§§67f.).

36 References to and discussion of Leahy 1979, pp. 142, 149 in Werning 2017, p. 52, n. 35.

37 For the spellings of the lexeme mȝȝ in Caverns, see Werning 2011, vol. 1, tab. 31 (pp. 327–329), §110 (pp. 182–185).

38 For the meaning “the one in the form of” (German “in Form von jemandem”) of ỉm.ï, cf. Werning 2011, vol. 2, p. 478.

39 Cf. Peust 1999, pp. 127–130, 142; F. Kammerzell, in Hannig 1995, pp. xlvii, xlix.

40 Note that this phonetic complement already occurs twice in the copies of the kings’ tombs (RVI, Hb. 100.9,14) and may have been spelled this way in the archetype α in those two instances.

41 See footnote to Ex-15.

42 Cf. Werning 2011, vol. 1, p. 252, with references to literature on the various spellings of “Tatenen.”

43 Cf. Werning 2011, vol. 1, p. 179 (§§106f.), with references. Note that the spellings of “t”s are generally to be taken seriously in all copies of Caverns.

44 For the meaning “to care for” (German “sich kümmern um”) of n, see Werning 2011, vol. 2, pp. 495–497.

45 For an unclear case in the text of the Amduat in TT 33, see Régen 2014, pp. 315f.

46 Wb II, 180–182; Copt. SAⲙⲛⲧ-/Sⲙⲧ- [fem.]; Werning 2011, vol. 1, p. 179 (§107).

47 Note that attributive nisbe n(.ï) usually displays number and gender inflection in the original kernel text of Caverns (cf. Werning 2011, vol. 1, p. 131, §48). Therefore, the regular use of the uninflected form n(ï) in this phrase clearly stands out as secondary.

48 “Reduplicating” verb forms (like mrr) are not to be confused with “geminating” verb forms (like ȝmm).

49 Werning 2011, vol. 1, pp. 181f. (§109), cf. also pp. 118–121 (§29). For an evaluation of the spellings Image, Image, Image, and Image, see Werning 2017, p. 55, n. 51.

50 See the more detailed discussion in Werning 2017, pp. 55f., with reference to Der Manuelian 1994, Werning 2011, vol. 1, p. 182, and Jansen-Winkeln 1996, §764.

51 Whether these changes are to be attributed to the early Late Period recension (copy ζ) or, more specifically, to only the copy in TT 33 cannot be determined.

52 For LXXVII, there is only one other text witness with an intact bird (RVI), so that we cannot safely attribute this change to the Late Period. In XLVI, the bird in the Osireion is largely destroyed today and the beak is curiously long (fig. 15), so that we cannot safely exclude an imprecise rendering in the publication, and, subsequently, an attribution of the feathers to the New Kingdom copy β.

53 Cf. Werning 2011, vol. 1, deviation tabs. 1 (p. 333), 9 (p. 341).

54 The Égyptien de tradition of the Underworld Books exhibits a peculiar use of the singular demonstrative pronouns pn/tn, pw/tw, and pf/tf. Used as determiners, they can not only follow a noun, but they may also precede a noun or a nominalized adjective; see Werning 2011, vol. 1, pp. 186–191 (§§112–119), Werning 2013, §2 (case 27).

55 However, what seems to be an apposition at the end of the addition, “May you (also) attach the head of Petamenophis—justified—, who hides his name” (cf. verse 13), is curious in two respects. I feel that its “style” is not quite in line with the style of the other personalized additions attested in Caverns. Also the spelling of ỉmn with Image as a logogram is untypical. I believe that both peculiarities are a hint on the Late Period origin of this addition.

56 The wording in RVI is somewhat “imbalanced,” since the ones with the power are two different deities: “(You) who has attached the head of the one who has put his power into its sarcophagus.—May you make NN powerful.” The shorter wording as we find it in the Osireion and in TT 33, i.e., in β, was most likely the original (“[You—i.e., Anubis] who has put his power into its sarcophagus.”) and the model for the royal addition (“May you make king NN—justified—powerful.”).

57 Three deviations in tO, on the other hand, may not necessarily have existed in the model copy from the Osireion branch (Hb. 78.11: nt(ï)-qrr.t Image Imagef, 78.15: ʿȝ-r.t Image, 78.17: ỉmn[-dwȝ.t Image] Image). These deviations might have happened during the decoration of the wall of Osireion, so they have not been necessarily in the New Kingdom master copy β. Probably, they are simply lacunae.

58 Frankfort (1933, pl. XXXVI, cols. 24–29) marks the 3rd–6th stanzas, but not the 1st–2nd stanzas, as destroyed at the end. However, probably none of these stanzas is actually destroyed in the Osireion.

59 Already suggested in Werning 2011, vol. 2, p. 217, n. a.

60 Cf. Werning 2011, vol. 2, pp. 238–243.

61 Cf. Werning 2011, vol. 1, p. 324 (ȝp).

62 Werning 2011, vol. 1, pp. 166f. For an alternative interpretation as resultatives (⸢p[.t]Image?⸣ ȝpImage.t(ỉ) ʾsỉrImage ỉmn{.t(ỉ)} hyImage[///…///] “The s[ky] (?) is veiled, Osiris is hidden{ed}, the husband [///…///]”), the position of the t after the classifiers of ȝpImage would be unusual, and the t behind ỉmn would be superfluous after the masculine word “Osiris.”

63 Cf. Werning 2011, vol. 1, fig. 2 (p. 15), fig. 11 (p. 30).

64 Following Dümichen’s map, Piankoff 1947, pp. 86f. (map on p. 75) erroneously indicates that Caverns starts on the southern wall. Traunecker 2008, p. 36 describes the sequence basically correctly. However, his description is based on an older appointment of certain parts of Caverns to certain sections, revised in Werning 2011, vol. 1, pp. 5–8: “début IV” = first part of section “Litanies 1–3,” “section V” in XVII = section “Litanies 4–6”; “Litanies 7–20” which indeed belong to “section V” further extent into room XIX, west/north.

65 This copy could not yet become included in Roberson 2013.

66 Werning 2011, vol. 1, p. 74.

67 Clear cases of an orientation change in RVI are the scenes XXI (fig. 5 above) and LXIII. Further possible cases are the cases of the scenes XXVII, XXXII (lower register), and XXXIII. Cf. Werning 2011, vol. 1, p. 74.

68 See Werning 2011, vol. 1, ch. II, figs. 2, 7–8, 11–16. A notable exception is the opposite reading direction on the north wall of the 3rd corridor in the tomb of Ramesses IV (op. cit., fig. 8).

69 A comparable, but not similar solution has been chosen for the tomb of Ramesses VI. The sunrise tableau has been inserted into the upper register of the preceding 6th tableau—to the expense of the scene LXV, which—as also the final of all three registers—was displaced to a pillar (see Piankoff, Rambova 1954, vol. 1, figs. 20, 21).

70 On the project, see the homepage Tombe thébaine no 33 (TT 33): Carnet de la mission épigraphique française dans la tombe de Padiaménopé (Pétaménophis) (7e s. av. J-Chr.) <https://tombett33.hypotheses.org>, edited by Isabelle Régen.

Haut de page

Table des illustrations

Titre Fig. 1. Sequence of image tableaus and text blocks in the Book of Caverns.
Crédits Part of Werning 2017, fig. 1 (p. 42).
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bifao/docannexe/image/5059/img-1.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 388k
Titre Fig. 2. The reception of the “great litanies” within the Book of Caverns in TT 33.
Crédits Translation of Werning 2011, vol. 1, fig. 7 (p. 70), with a few changes. Copies marked by “*” are textcritically reconstructed copies.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bifao/docannexe/image/5059/img-2.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 501k
Titre Fig. 3. Spelling of tm in a litany stanza to scene XXII (Hb. 25.21–21Z).
Crédits Werning 2017, fig. 4 (p. 47), with a few changes and one correction.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bifao/docannexe/image/5059/img-3.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 288k
Titre Fig. 4. Hb. 25.21 in TT 33. CC BY-SA 3.0 DE.
Crédits © Daniel A. Werning (2015). For a digital arbeitsphoto, see Werning 2018, DOI: 10.17171/2-8-282-2.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bifao/docannexe/image/5059/img-4.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 98k
Titre Fig. 5. Transmission of scene XXI from Caverns (schematic, orientation of scenes normalized to left-right).
Crédits Werning 2017, fig. 3 (p. 45), with a few changes and one correction. Copies marked by “*” are textcritically reconstructed copies.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bifao/docannexe/image/5059/img-9.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 605k
Titre Fig. 6. Line drawing of scene XXI in TT 33, with partial reconstruction. CC BY-SA 3.0 DE.
Crédits © Daniel A. Werning (line drawing by Antonio Cantele, reconstruction by D.A. Werning, collated by and based on orthophotos from D.A. Werning).
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bifao/docannexe/image/5059/img-10.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 291k
Titre Fig. 7. Perspectival line drawing montage of the niche with scene XXI in the tomb of Ramesses VI.
Crédits Montage based on the line drawings in Piankoff, Rambova 1954, vol. 1, figs. 11, 11a.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bifao/docannexe/image/5059/img-11.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 1,0M
Titre Fig. 8a–c. Scene XXIX.
Crédits a. From Frankfort 1933, pl. xxxiii, xxxii (indications of colors removed). b. CC BY-SA 3.0 DE, © Daniel A. Werning (line drawing by Antonio Cantele, collated by and based on orthophotos from D.A. Werning; partial reconstruction of Fig. 10b by D.A. Werning). c. From Piankoff, Rambova 1954, vol. I, fig. 12.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bifao/docannexe/image/5059/img-12.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 304k
Titre Fig. 9a–c. Scene XXXIII.
Crédits a. From Frankfort 1933, pl. xxxiii, xxxii (indications of colors removed). b. CC BY-SA 3.0 DE, © Daniel A. Werning (line drawing by Antonio Cantele, collated by and based on orthophotos from D.A. Werning; partial reconstruction of Fig. 10b by D.A. Werning). c. From Piankoff, Rambova 1954, vol. I, fig. 12.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bifao/docannexe/image/5059/img-13.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 283k
Titre Fig. 10a–c. Scene XXXVI.
Crédits a. From Frankfort 1933, pl. xxxiii, xxxii (indications of colors removed). b. CC BY-SA 3.0 DE, © Daniel A. Werning (line drawing by Antonio Cantele, collated by and based on orthophotos from D.A. Werning; partial reconstruction of Fig. 10b by D.A. Werning). c. From Piankoff, Rambova 1954, vol. I, fig. 12.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bifao/docannexe/image/5059/img-14.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 284k
Titre Fig. 11. Collation of copies for an early Late Period tomb decoration copy of Caverns.
Crédits Updated version of Werning 2017, fig. 5 (p. 48).
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bifao/docannexe/image/5059/img-15.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 326k
Titre Fig. 12. Line drawing of the beginning of the 1st tableau of Caverns in the Osireion.
Crédits From Frankfort 1933, pl. XXIII.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bifao/docannexe/image/5059/img-16.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 457k
Titre Fig. 13. Line drawing of scene II in TT 33 (room XVII, west wall). CC BY-SA 3.0 DE.
Crédits © Daniel A. Werning (line drawing by Antonio Cantele, collated by and based on orthophotos from D.A. Werning).
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bifao/docannexe/image/5059/img-17.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 258k
Titre Fig. 14. Detail from scene LIX in TT 33. CC BY-SA 3.0 DE.
Crédits © Daniel A. Werning (2015).
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bifao/docannexe/image/5059/img-208.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 209k
Titre Fig. 15. Detail from scene XLVI in the Osireion.
Crédits From Frankfort 1933, pl. XXXV (bird filled with black in accordance with color indication).
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bifao/docannexe/image/5059/img-209.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 38k
Titre Fig. 16. Detail from scene XLVI in TT 33. CC BY-SA 3.0 DE.
Crédits © Daniel A. Werning (2015).
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bifao/docannexe/image/5059/img-210.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 170k
Titre Fig. 17. Detail from scene LXXVII in TT 33. CC BY-SA 3.0 DE.
Crédits © Daniel A. Werning (2015).
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bifao/docannexe/image/5059/img-211.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 237k
Titre Fig. 18. Sequence of image tableaus and text blocks in the Book of Caverns. Schema from Werning 2017, fig. 1 (p. 42), with new captions. CC BY-SA 3.0 DE.
Crédits © Daniel A. Werning.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bifao/docannexe/image/5059/img-244.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 118k
Titre Fig. 19. Sequence of the Book of Caverns on the walls of rooms XVII–XIX in TT 33. CC BY-SA 3.0 DE.
Crédits © Daniel A. Werning. Cf. Werning 2011, vol. 1, fig. 20 (p. 43).
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bifao/docannexe/image/5059/img-245.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 325k
Titre Fig. 20. Layout of the Book of Caverns on the walls of rooms XVII–XIX in TT 33 (schematic), with indication of the reading sequence. CC BY-SA 3.0 DE.
Crédits © Daniel A. Werning. Corrected and expanded version of Werning 2011, vol. 1, fig. 21 (p. 43).
URL http://journals.openedition.org/bifao/docannexe/image/5059/img-246.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 481k
Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence papier

Daniel A. Werning, « The Book of Caverns in Theban Tomb 33 »Bulletin de l’Institut français d’archéologie orientale (BIFAO), 118 | 2019, 525-554.

Référence électronique

Daniel A. Werning, « The Book of Caverns in Theban Tomb 33 »Bulletin de l’Institut français d’archéologie orientale (BIFAO) [En ligne], 118 | 2019, mis en ligne le 11 janvier 2021, consulté le 26 janvier 2021. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/bifao/5059 ; DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/bifao.5059

Haut de page

Auteur

Daniel A. Werning

Excellence Cluster 264 “Topoi,” Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin

Haut de page

Droits d’auteur

Bulletin de l’Institut français d'archéologie orientale (BIFAO)

Haut de page
  • Logo Institut français d'archéologie orientale
  • OpenEdition Journals
Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search