M. de Rougé, in his commentary on the 17th Chapter, gave the key to

this, by pointing out that the 30th Mechir was the last day of the sixth
month of the year; that is the 180th day after the first of Thoth, which
is supposed to coincide with the Summer Solstice. It is therefore at the
time of the _Winter_ Solstice that the Eye is said to be full. The
inaccuracy, of course, arises from the length of the Egyptian year. But
there can be no doubt that the time of the Winter Solstice is meant.

In the year 1470 B.C. the Egyptian year began on July 20, and the 30th
Mechir coincided with January 15 of the Julian calendar.

If the Eye (considered as the Sun) is said to be _full_ at the Winter
Solstice, it was most probably spoken of in the same way not only at the
Summer Solstice, but also at the two Equinoxes. And this is the most
probable reason why in the pictures representing the Four Rudders of
Heaven (North, South, East and West) an Eye ⁂ is attached to each
rudder. (See Vignettes of Chapter 148.)

The Two Eyes, considered as Sun and Moon, are attributed not only to Rā
and Osiris, but to gods identified with these. Of the two passages which
have been most frequently quoted, “Thy Right Eye is the Sun
⁂⁂⁂ and thy left is the Moon ⁂⁂,” “His Right Eye is the
Sun and his left is the Moon,” the first is addressed to Ptah (in the
Pap. Berlin, VII, l. 42), and the second, which occurs on the Neapolitan
Stele, is really addressed to Osiris as god of Suten-hunen, under the
form of the Ram-headed deity Her-śefit. Reference is made towards the
end of the inscription to the “divine Eyes which are in Suten-hunen.”

Horus according to the Pyramid Texts has two eyes, a Light one and a
Dark one. But the “Eye of Horus” is most frequently spoken of in the
singular number. It is certainly meant for the Sun, and the name of it
is given to cakes and ale, wine, corn, oil, honey, and all the good
things which come to maturity through the beneficent god: who has in
himself all the attributes of ‘Ceres and Bacchus.’

I must bring this long note to an end with one or two observations.

Many goddesses will be found bearing the title of Eye of Rā. There is
not one of these who is not identified with Isis or Nephthys, who are in
fact one, and personify the Light of the Sun.

Shu and Tefnut, who are brother and sister, play the same parts as the
two goddesses.

There is a picture, which appears in the vignette of Chapter 17 in most
of the papyri of the second and later periods, of two _male_ deities
bearing the Eyes over their heads (see Pl. XXXV). If the beards upon
their chins are not a mistake,[117] copied from one papyrus upon
another, they must represent not Isis and Nephthys but the two Rehu
⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂ Rā and Thoth, Sun and Moon, instead of the
⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂.

It is important to note that if Sun and Moon are Eyes of Osiris or Rā or
Ptah, the deity is not to be confounded with them: they are but
manifestations of himself.

3. _Kindred_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂. The sign of plurality does not
here, any more than in Chapter 1, necessarily imply more than one
person. The crime in question is one to which men are easily tempted in
certain stages of society. Abimelech, in the book of Judges (ix, 5),
“slew his brethren, the sons of Jerubbaal.” Jephthah had to “flee from
the face of his brethren.” Absalom had his brother Amnon assassinated,
and all the king’s sons fled in fear of sharing the same fate. Solomon
put to death his elder brother Adonijah. Athaliah, the queen mother,
“destroyed all the seed royal” of Judah. The annals of eastern[118] and
even western[119] nations are full of such occurrences. But, in
positions less exalted than that of claimants to royalty, ambition or
covetousness are motives to crimes like that of the wicked uncle of ‘the
Babes in the Wood.’[120] The reading ⁂⁂⁂⁂, which has for
determinative the sign ⁂ of _smallness_, seems to indicate that the
victims of the crime are _minors_, perhaps _wards_.

Some of the papyri (even that of Nebseni) have a _calf_, ⁂, as
determinative of the word, and as the ‘slaying of calves’ is not
necessarily a crime, other scribes have added ⁂⁂, ‘sacred,’ and
thus made the sin one of sacrilege.

The same word, like the Greek μόσχος and the Latin _pullus_, might be
applied to the young of all kinds of animals; but the Egyptian scribes
have in such cases a propensity to use a determinative which forces a
wrong sense upon the word.

4. _Instead of truth_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂. There are two
ways according to which this expression may be translated, but only one
of them can be the right one. ⁂⁂⁂ is a compound preposition,
_instead of_, _in loco_, _anstatt_, _au lieu de_, بمنزلة. And this is
evidently the right construction. If ⁂ be taken as the simple
preposition governing ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, the meaning will be that
the deceased did not “tell lies _in the cemetery_.” The Pyramid Texts
(Unas, 394) have the expression ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂(_sic_),
“Right instead of Wrong.”

5. This is only an approximate version of a passage, the true text of
which was lost at an early period. M. Maspero (_Origines_, p. 189)
understands it as follows: “Je n’ai jamais imposé du travail à l’homme
libre quelconque, en plus de celui qu’il faisait pour luimême!” The last
words are the translation of ⁂⁂⁂, according to _Td._ (tomb
of Ramses IV) all the other ancient texts having ⁂, ‘_for me_.’ But
the chief difficulties occur at the beginning of the sentence.

6. _Shorten the palm’s length_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂. Many papyri
read ⁂, which is a superficial measure, more in place under the next
precept.

7. _The fields’ measure_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂.

8. _The beam of the balance_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂.

_The tongue_ [rather _plummet_] _of the balance_,
⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂.

The balance is so frequently represented in false perspective by
Egyptian artists, that Sir J. G. Wilkinson has given an account of it,
which is quite unintelligible to those who have ever so moderate a
knowledge of statics. Mr. Petrie’s description is the true one. “The
beam was suspended by a loop or ring from a bracket projecting from the
stand.... Then below the beam, a long tongue was attached, not above the
beam as with us. To test the level of the beam, a plummet hung down the
tongue, and it was this plummet which was observed to see if the tongue
was vertical and the beam horizontal.”—_A Season in Egypt_, p. 42.

In Pl. XXXVI, a few pictures will be found which give a more correct
notion of the Egyptian balance than some of the absurd representations
which defy a scientific explanation.

It is evident that if the tongue is fastened at a wrong angle, the beam
will not really be horizontal when the tongue is shown by the plummet
line to be vertical. This seems to be the fraud alluded to in the text.

The word ⁂⁂, ⁂⁂, the name given to the plummet,
apparently signifies a cup _full_ of liquid. It is etymologically
identical with ⁂⁂⁂⁂, _a toper_ (ⲑⲁϧⲓ, ϯϩⲉ, _ebrius_,
_ebrietas_), ⁂⁂⁂, ⲧⲓϧⲓ, _a crane_, and ⁂⁂⁂ the
crane-god, Thoth.

The apparatus of which the plummet forms so important a part, whether
for the balance or for building purposes, is called ⁂⁂⁂
(_Denkm._, III, 26), ⁂⁂.

9. _The manors of the gods_, ⁂⁂⁂. I understand ⁂⁂ as
property acquired by royal grant. Aâhmes at El Kab says that he has
_acquired_ (⁂⁂⁂⁂) much land through the royal bounty. The
deceased in the later copies of the Book of the Dead (Ch. 1, 24),
acquires the allotment of land, ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, in the
Garden of Aarru, and Ani (Pl. III) acquires “a permanent allotment
(⁂⁂⁂) in the Garden of Hotepit like the followers of Horus.”

10. _Ponds._ The right reading is ⁂⁂⁂, as Birch already noted
in his _Dictionary_, from the excellent papyrus _Ao_ of the XVIIIth
dynasty.

Hieratic papyri also give the determinative ⁂.

The determinative ⁂ which some of the papyri give to the word, and
which is a self-evident blunder, is probably copied either from ⁂,
or from ⁂. The sign ⁂, and a man striking with an instrument,
which also occur, are mere symbols of the operation by which either
_quarries_, or _ponds_, are _cut_.

11. _Thou of the Nose_, or rather _Beak_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂, in
allusion to one of the chief characteristic features of the Ibis god
(πρόσωπον ἐς τὰ μάλιστα ἐπίγρυπον; _Herodotus_, II, 76, in his
description of the bird). Thoth, the god of Chemunnu, is meant by this
appellative.

He is so called, ⁂⁂⁂, on the statue of the King Horus in the
Museum of Turin (l. 8), and ⁂⁂⁂ on the very much more ancient
altar, of the VIth dynasty, belonging to the same museum. The same
appellative[121] is found in the list of gods upon each of the Memphite
cubits described by Lepsius.[122]

12. _Eater of the Shadow._ The Demotic version interprets this of “his
own shadow.” I am rather inclined to interpret it by “the gnomons which
were without shadows at noon,” and the “well of Syene” (Strabo, 817) at
the Summer Solstice; when the Sun was vertical.

13. _Thou of Lion form_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂. The Demotic has “Shu and
Tefnut.” But as there are only forty-two gods in all, we must here think
of a single god with a lion’s head, as in such pictures as _Wilkinson_,
III, Pl. XLIX; _Denkm._, III, 276, and many sarcophagi (_e.g._, Leemans,
_Mon._, III, L, Pl. III).

Even some of the Theban papyri have two divinities by way of
determinatives to the group.

14. _Sluggish_, ⁂⁂⁂; ⁂⁂⁂⁂, ⁂⁂⁂⁂,
_sluggishness_. Coptic ϭⲛⲁⲩ. See my note (_Proc. Soc. Bib. Arch._, XI,
p. 76) on the Inscription of Kum el Ahmar.

There are however other readings; none of them apparently of any value.

15. _Thou of the Bright Teeth_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂. The
Demotic equivalent is, “who openeth his teeth,” and so exhibits their
brightness.

16. _Âati_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, a name about which the copyists have
bungled. It is one of the names of Râ in the Solar Litany, where it
appears (l. 23) as ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, or ⁂⁂. Whether
applied to the Sun, to the Fish of the name, or to a Ship, the name
means _Cutter_, ‘that which cleaves’ its way.

17. _Ṭuṭu_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, with many variants, showing that the
scribes did not understand the sense of the syllable ⁂⁂, some of
them adding the bird of evil ⁂, others the ⁂ determinative of
_mountain_. The name on the Sarcophagus of Seti (Bon. II, A. 30) has a
snake for determinative, and some papyri call him _Ṭuṭu_. The god may be
recognised in later texts. In the Calendar of Esneh there is a feast on
the 14th day of Thoth, in honour of ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, Tutu, ‘the
son of Neith,’ and the text gives the important determinative ⁂, of a
_serpent_, _worm_, or _slug_. I feel sure, therefore, that we should in
the text read the name Tutu, and consider ⁂ as a determinative.[123]
The symbolism would then be identical with that in Pl. XXIII,
illustrative of Chapter 87. The Sun-god there rises up like a worm out
of the Lotus of Dawn, whereas in another picture a slug (⁂) is seen
moving upon the flower.

⁂⁂, _Ati_, where the god makes his appearance, is the name of the
ninth Nome of Lower Egypt.

18. _I trouble myself only with my own affairs._ I understand this of
the virtue spoken of by Cicero (_de Officiis_, I, 34), “nihil praeter
suum negotium agere, nihil de alieno anquirere, minimeque esse in aliena
republica curiosum.” It is the same to which Plato refers in the
_Timaeus_, 72 A; εὖ καὶ πάλαι λέγεται τὸ πράττειν καὶ γνῶναι τὰ τε
ἑαυτοῦ καὶ ἑαυτὸν σώφρονι μόνῳ προσήκειν, not in the sense of a selfish
indifference to a neighbour’s welfare or the public good, but in
opposition to the ways of the busybodies, who tattle and “speak things
which they ought not” (1 Tim., v, 13).

The Egyptian ⁂⁂⁂ is a rare word. Brugsch’s etymology of it is
an impossible one, and his identification of it with ϣⲱⲥⲙ is not less
unfortunate.

19. _Amu_, or _Amit_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂, ⁂⁂⁂⁂, ⁂⁂⁂.
This seems to be the favourite reading. It means the _town of Palm_.
But, as the name was written ideographically, it appears in some copies
as the town of other trees, such as _Nehait_, or _Nārit_.

Amu was a place in the north of Egypt, which Brugsch thinks he has
identified with a town called Apis (the site of which is itself
doubtful).

The most interesting thing known about Amu (Dümichen, _Rec. de M._, IV,
Pl. XV, 90 _a_), is that in the rites performed on the 16 Choiak, Horus
is represented as raising up the body of Osiris out of the water in the
form of a crocodile; and that Osiris was known under the name of
⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, _The Crocodile, Lord of Amu_.

The 142nd chapter of the Book of the Dead, which gives a list of the
names of Osiris, has (l. 17) that of ⁂⁂, ‘Osiris of Crocodile
form,’ or ‘with Crocodile head.’[124] The variants of this group,
however, show the reading ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, ‘king,’ or
⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, ‘of kingly form.’ There is but little doubt that
(as M. Naville says, _Zeitschr._, 1882, p. 190) ⁂⁂⁂⁂ on the
Turin tablet published by Professor Piehl, means ‘King of the gods,’ and
that Ptahhotep in the Prisse papyrus (IV, 1) addresses not Osiris, but
King Assa as ‘my Lord the King,’ Goodwin had already asserted this
meaning in his “_Story of Saneha_,” and in the _Zeitschr._, 1874, p. 38.

The orthography of the crocodile name here played upon is remarkably
vague, ⁂⁂⁂⁂, ⁂⁂⁂, and ⁂⁂⁂ (_rapax_,
Louvre, C, 26). It is this last form which enables us to see the
paranomasia in ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, _rapax sicut Raptor_
(_crocodilus_) of the Prisse papyrus (VII, 6), and brings the word into
connection with _ȧta_, or _ȧti_, ‘he who is seized’ of the Sovereignty
(see _supra_, Ch. 40, note 10).

20. _Chemiu_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, ‘one who overthrows.’ His
appearance is made at _Kauu_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂, the Canobic entrance
to the Nile, which the Libyan invaders had taken possession of in the
time of Rameses III (Great _Harris Pap._, 77, 2).

The _transgression_ here disavowed is understood by some of the scribes
as a violation of ritual precepts, such as those regarding sacred
seasons.

21. _Who raisest thy voice_ ... _words of Righteousness_,
⁂⁂⁂⁂ is an attribute assigned to Isis in the Hymn to Osiris
(line 14) on the Stele of Amenemhait in the Bibliothèque Nationale; and
it is there further defined through the addition of the words
⁂⁂⁂⁂, ‘with _clearness_ of utterance’ (_cf._ Ch. 1, note
2). One of the chief names of Isis is ⁂⁂⁂⁂ ‘Mighty in
Words of Power.’ She is also described in the Hymn as ‘Most potent of
tongue (⁂⁂⁂⁂) and unfailing of speech.’[125]

Her name _Urit ḥekait_ may have suggested the name _Urit_ as the place
of her manifestation. But we do not know if _Urit_ is to be taken as the
name of a town or if some papyri are correct in reading ⁂⁂⁂,
which may mean _tribunal_.

There were in ancient Egypt _six_ great courts of justice,
⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂.

A High Priest of Ptah of Memphis, named Ptahmes, in the early part
of the eighteenth dynasty, who was President of these six
Courts,[126] has left a very remarkable attestation relative to
the 24th Precept, on a beautiful scribe’s palette in basalt
(Louvre, _Inv._, 3026). The inscription, after saying that the
whole country was subject to the jurisdiction of Ptahmes, proceeds
⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂. “He
turned not a deaf ear to the truth, through the terrors of his
Eye;” that is, “the terrors of his Eye” were not used for the
perversion of Justice. But what is meant by his “Eye”? M. Pierret
(in his _Inscr. inédites du Louvre_, pt. 1, p. 96) suggested the
‘Eye of Horus.’ I think it has reference to the position of
Ptahmes as ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂. He was ‘the King’s Eye,’
ὁ βασιλέως ὀφθαλμός,[127] and had in consequence, an unlimited
power of defeating justice had he been so inclined.

It is only by a blunder[128] that the papyrus of Ani makes
⁂⁂⁂⁂ (the nineteenth Nome of Upper Egypt) the scene of
the divine Babe’s manifestation, which is unquestionably Heliopolis.
The name of the Nome has numerous variants, but they always consist of
two signs, _a crooked staff_ (⁂, ⁂, ⁂, ⁂) either double
or with _a twisted cord_ (⁂, ⁂, ⁂, ⁂), and the final
sound of the name (when expressed) is in ⁂, ⁂. The key to the
phonetic reading of the name of the Heliopolitan Nome is to be found
in the inscription at Edfu (J. de Rougé, _Edfou_, pl. 46);
⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂. Here
the _crook_ of the name is identified with the _crook_ and _flail_
⁂⁂⁂⁂ _ams_, ⁂⁂⁂ _ȧms_, ⁂⁂⁂ or
⁂⁂⁂ _emsit_ of Osiris, who is called in the Book of the
Dead (_Todt._, 142, 9) ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, _the August
Dismembered[129] one of the Powers of Annu_. And this is how, in the
important papyrus _Pc_, we find ⁂⁂⁂ in Ch. 17 as the
equivalent of ⁂⁂⁂⁂, a few words after, in the same
papyrus. Both groups are to be read _ȧmsu_; which means _furnished
with the crook_ (_or sceptre_) _and flail_, ⁂⁂ or ⁂.[130]

22. _Hot of foot_ ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂.

The Coptic ⲟⲩⲉⲙϩⲏⲧ, _poenitentiam agere_, would be the natural
representative of ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, but the meanings of the terms
cannot be the same. The latter is expressive of a passion, the
indulgence in which may be laudable in the gods and yet blameworthy in
men. For the divine wrath is necessarily just; whereas human anger, even
when it seems to listen to reason, listens, as the philosopher says, but
imperfectly.[131]

The 29th god, _Kenemta_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, has also for
determinative the sign ⁂ of a cynocephalus. This is explained by his
identity with the constellation which occupies the whole month of Thoth
in the list of the Decans. But though the name means ‘_in Ape form_,’
the word ⁂⁂⁂ in the Pyramid Texts (Pepi i, 408, and Merira
579) is used in the sense of ‘vested,’ ‘clad,’ perhaps simply ‘covered.’

Brugsch has identified the locality _Kenemit_ with the Great Oasis at
Khargeh. It may be asked if the Oasis bore this name at the time when
this chapter was composed. The determinative ⁂ proves nothing
beyond the actual sense of the word, but it suggests that the _Dark_ may
be a sufficient translation. From the etymology I should like to
assimilate it to the ποικιλείμων νὺξ of the Prometheus Vinctus, or to
the ‘furvo circumdata peplo’ of the Latin poet.

23. _Of inconstant mind_, ⁂⁂⁂.

24. Another intelligible reading of the precept is, “I rob not the dead
of their wrappings”; but the text is so corrupt that none of the
readings are of any value.

The god is called ⁂⁂⁂⁂ or ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, both of
which words I understand in the sense of _busy-minded_, _planning_,
_devising_, _crafty_, _wise_.

The appellative _Horned one_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, of the next
precept, is the exact equivalent of the Hebrew בַּעַל קַרְנַיִס, and is
the attribute of Osiris (_Todt._, 144, 4), especially in the character
of ⁂⁂⁂; under which name he was worshipped at Sutenhunen.

25. _Noisy in speech_ ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂.

26. _Striker_ ⁂⁂⁂⁂. A name of Horus, on which see ch. 103,
note.

27. There is no locality about which there is any agreement between the
older papyri, and many of them omit the mention of a locality; later
authorities, like the Turin text, read ⁂⁂ _Annu_.

28. _No unjust preferences_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂. There is no virtue more
frequently extolled on the funereal monuments than the absence of
favouritism. Great personages in their epitaphs are strong in their
declarations that they made no distinction between great and small, rich
or poor, wise or simple. The declaration of Ameni (_Denkm._, ii, 122),
⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, is a type of many
others.

29. Of _raised head_, ⁂⁂, ⁂⁂⁂, or (B.M. 9971)
⁂⁂⁂. This, like the last two, is a name of the Nile god, who
is one of the manifestations of Osiris.

30. _Who liftest an arm_, ⁂⁂, not ‘_amener_ son bras.’ ⁂, like
the Greek φέρειν, means _bear_ in the sense of _holding up_,
_supporting_. When it signifies _bring_ the collateral notion of
_motion_ is imported from the context. The god Shu, who is called
⁂⁂, _holds up_, _supports_, _the sky_, but does not _bring_ it.
The god _who holds up his arm_, is of course the ithyphallic Amon[132]
⁂, who in Ch. 17 is identified not only with Horus but with Osiris.

31. This introduction to Part III of this chapter occurs only in the
Papyrus of Nebkat (_Pe_). Another ancient manuscript (_Pb_) has the
words “Said upon approaching triumphantly to the Hall of Righteousness.”
But the texts generally begin with the invocation, “Hail ye gods, I know
you and I know your names.”

32. _Reverse of mine_, ⁂⁂, a turn of the wheel, which the
context implies to be unfortunate. A very absurd reading is
⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, as if the defendant were master of the
fates of his divine judges.

33. _The King who resideth within His own Day._ A very doubtful passage
at present. The words do not occur in the oldest text of the chapter
(that of Nebseni), and they are omitted here in the later recensions.
_Ad_ is, as far as I know, the only authority for ⁂⁂⁂⁂;
other papyri having merely ⁂, which might possibly correspond to
the ⁂⁂ immediately preceding. The Royal tombs have
⁂⁂⁂⁂, and one of the papyri has ⁂⁂⁂ instead of
⁂⁂⁂. All this reminds one of an obscure passage in Chapter
115, where Rā is speaking with ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂
according to the Text of the Turin _Todtenbuch_. Goodwin conjectured
that King Amhauf belonged ‘to the race of mythical kings who preceded
Menes,’ and that his history is ‘a legend somewhat analogous to that of
Deucalion and Pyrrha.’ There is a much more probable solution of the
matter.

⁂⁂⁂ is meant for ⁂⁂⁂ _Sut_, and it was with this god
⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂ or ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂[133] ‘in his
_course_’ that Rā was speaking when the disaster happened to the latter
divinity, who for his talk had chosen a wrong _moment_, which really
belonged to his adversary. _Cf. supra_ note 3 on Chapter 110.

And here too I would instead of ⁂⁂ read ⁂⁂, and the
sense of the passage would be “let not reverse of mine come to pass
through Sutu, when his time cometh.”

34. _Cares_, ⁂⁂ in the later texts. The older texts differ
greatly from each other: ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂ is the most frequent
reading.

35. _The Ass and the Cat in the house of Hept-ro._ The two personages
who take part in this dialogue are known from other portions of the Book
of the Dead. The Cat is Rā in the 17th chapter. And the Ass appears in
the 40th chapter, as the victim of the devouring Serpent. The Sun-god
overcome by darkness is Osiris; and he is so called by name in the
Demotic version of this chapter.

_Hepṭ-ro_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, ‘god of the gaping mouth.’ The word
⁂⁂⁂ is not found elsewhere, but the meaning of it seems to be
indicated by the determinative. It is very probably akin to the more
common ⁂⁂⁂, ⁂⁂, which does not mean ‘squat’ or ‘sit,’
but ‘stretch out,’ _distendi_. _Cf._ Note 6, Chapter 63B.

The ‘house of the god of the gaping mouth,’ seems to be the _Earth_,
considered as the universal tomb (ἀλλ’ αὐτοῦ γαῖα μέλαινα πᾶσι χάνοι,
Il. 14, 417). And here Osiris and Rā (the Ass and the Cat) meet daily,
‘Yesterday’ speaketh to ‘To-day.’

יוס ליוס יביע אמר

36. _Verdict_, ⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂, ⁂⁂⁂⁂,
⁂⁂⁂⁂, ⁂⁂⁂⁂.

A note of M. Guyesse in the _Recueil_, X, p. 64, contains references to
the chief passages in which this word occurs. I will add a very
important one, the picture of a god (Lefébure, _Tombeau de Seti_, p.
III, pl. 33) with sword in hand, whose name is this word. The
ideographic signs which express it imply (1) ‘a _cutting_ in two,
parting, division,’ (2) that the act is one of speech or intellect, such
as ‘judgment, decision, verdict.’ The phonetic equivalence of the signs
⁂ and ⁂ or ⁂ show that the value is that of _Seb_.

37. _Covereth._ The right Egyptian word here, as in a similar passage in