Dariusz Niedziôlka

VANDERSLEYEN(op. cit., p. 291), who does
not suggest, however, which title might have been
originally there. In SCIEULMAN’s opinion
(Some Remarks on the Alleged ‘Fall’ of Senmut,
JARCE 8 (1969-1970), p. 45) the damage of
the text was an effect of the natural rock ero-
sion, and he did not attempt to restore the la-
cuna. Similarly GABOLDE {BiOrM (1990), col.
640), in his review of the just mentioned
DORMAN’s work, recognised there the effect
of erosion. He concurrently suggested, that be-
fore the birth-name of Hatshepsut, one should
not assume the title nzw bjtj which was related
to her throne-name Maatkare, but rather the ti-
tle [hnw.t] Sm3 [Hl] should be restored there.
Apart from the correction of GABOLDE’s read-
ing to Smcw [Mhw], it seems that his suggestion
as well as reasoning, are highly probable, if not
certain. Moreover, in the quasi facsimile published
by HABACHI, there is no trace of the t sign,

and perhaps there is no place for such an emen-
dation. This, consequently, would be an obsta-
cle to the interpretation of the fragmentarily pre-
served sign as vw, and concurrently would speak
against the restoration of the lacuna with the ti-
tle nzw bjtj. Moreover, the title hnw.t Smcw
Mhw is frequently attested for queens of the
New Kingdom (see TROY, op. cit., pp. 134-
35 and 195, who incorrectly, however, reads
rsy instead of Smcw), including Hatshepsut,
though in the case of the latter, very seldom and
only directly after the assuming of the kingship
(see GABOLDE, RONDOT, op. cit., p. 191
and fig. 7 on p. 192).

* * *

In the following part of the inscription,
there is a legend relating to Senenmut, arranged
in three columns of text

sjcr.tkS.tt[n]
n hm.t ntr
hnw.t ß.wj tm.w
jn htm.tj bjtj
smr cj nj mrw.t
jmj-rl pr wr
Sn-n-mw.t mSc hrw

“Presentation of this worka
to the god’s wife,
Mistress of the complete Two Landsb
by the seal-bearer of the king of Lower Egypt,c
a great and beloved friend,d
the great steward6
Senenmut, true of voicef.”

a. As regards the verb sjcr, here used as the in-
finitive form, see Wb IV, pp. 32,14-33,4;
FAULKNER, CD, p. 214; MEEKS, AL I, p.
306, 77.3382; II, p. 308, 78.3325; III, p. 240,
79.2426.

b. Another queenly titie of Hatshepsut, sometimes
attested for queens of the Middle and New King-
dom (as regards the list of occurrences, see
TROY, op. cit., p. 195). In the case of Hatshepsut,
it is not known in her other inscriptions.

c. As regards the reading htm.tj instead of pre-
viously accepted sdSw.tj, see E. EICHLER,
Untersuchungen zum Expeditionswesen des
ägyptischen Alten Reiches, GOF IV.26,
Wiesbaden 1993, pp. 235-36 and H.G. FI-

SCHER, VariaNova, Egyptian Studies III, New
York 1996, pp. 50-52. In the case of Senenmut,
the title is attested both on early and on later
monuments of this official (the list of monuments,
on which it occurs has been worked out by
DORMAN [op. cit., p. 211]). This title had, be-
yond any doubt, the honorific function only (see
W. HELCK, Rang, LA V, Wiesbaden 1983,
cols. 146-47) and was not a sign of duties actu-
ally performed by Senenmut.

d. BREASTED translated this epithet as “com-
panion, great in love” (op. cit., p. 151).
BURKHARDT (op. cit., p. 51) suggested “der
große Freund und Beliebte”. Thus, their transla-
tions seem to imply, that these authors recognised
here a pair of epithets. HABACHI (op. cit..

94