The paper presents the study of the inscriptions on the coffins from the Pushkin Museum of Fine Arts nos. I.1.a.5250 and I.1.a.5302. The first belongs to Horunnefer and containts the fragment of BD 89, the second, with the name of Tashet, is decorated with the image of a winged goddess Nut, the scenes and the text passage of the Fourth Hour of the Amduat.

The paper aims to offer the rendering of the legend of the god Nemti preserved in pCairo JE 86637. Other sources bearing on this maimed character, namely pCh. Beatty I, pSallier IV, pJumilhac and pFlorenz PSI I 72, are also discussed. The author presents the translation and comments on some disputable fragments. The plot of the story occurred in the description of the 13th day of the third month of the season of inundation centers on the evil plan of the gods’ adversaries, the crime of Nemti, a ferryman, who violated a strict warning, and an inevitable penalty for his disobedience. Key-note comments: Rt. 13:7-8: n tm DAj Ddfwt <r> TA[j…] For n with the meaning “for, in order”, see KRI. II. 106:12-16. The reconstruction is based on the parallel in “Haremhab’s decree” (stCG 34162: 23; 33 = Urk. IV. 2147:12; 2152:5). Also records of great tomb-robberies (pBM EA 10052, vs, 12:5 = KRI. VI. 793:7-8). Rt. 13:9-10: jstw jr.n=<f> xprw=f m wa n jsw<t> Srj m onjw xnmtj[=f...] C. Leitz understands the phrase as “und zwar hatte sich seine Gestalt in einem kleinen alten Mann verwandelt in der Umarmung der xnmyt (?)”. However, the author approves the following statements: the omission of the determinative after the word jsw and the omission of the feminine ending –t, cf. pCh. Beatty I, rt. 6:4-5; pCh. Beatty I, C vs. 4:10; pSallier IV, rt. 5:5 etc. Thus, the replacement of the character (Isis by Seth) transforming himself into an old woman-jsw<t> has resulted in a simple adoption of the goddess’s image. For transformation of one god into another, see pJumilhac 3:13; 6:17-18; 20:7-8; 20:11; 22:1-2. For xnmtj (Wb III, 293:11-13), see pAnastasi IV, rt. 10:3 and pBM EA 75015, vs. 3-4. Rt. 13:10: m foAwt n nmtj m hAw The meaning “fare” for m hAw supposed by C. Leitz (“als Fährlohn”) is disputable since the gold were given as foAwt, furthermore, there is a particular word hmt (сf. pCh. Beatty XI, vs. 2:4). The specificity of receiving a gift implies the fact of taking into possession (m hAw), see pCambridge (DZA 26.327.800): rxt hAw nbt jr.n=f “a list of earned possessions”; pBoulaq X (= CG 58092), vs. 2: r dj.tw=w n nAj=f Xrdw m hAw “(properties) to be assigned to his children into possession” (cf. DZA 26.327.440: “als Eigenthum” and its debatable reading in KRI. V. 450:11 and RITA. V. 368: “(to)day”). Rt. 13:11: [xtm] Hr For xtm Hr + n “seal, seclude one’s face from smth.” (considered to be the most preferable variant), see pRamesseum II, 2:2. All possible renderings suppose that the ferryman has known the crimanal intention of the passenger. Rt. 13:11, 13:13: n ssrt The particular writing of the verb is not recorded in dictionaries but obviously shows the word sr (Wb. IV. 189-190) that could provide a clue to the core of the story. The author opposes the opinion of C. Leitz to render the phrase as “cut off head” (Wb. IV. 192:10), argues several possible interpretations (sr <aHA> and sr with the meaning approximate to rx (cf. CD. P. 235)) and asserts the reading srt nTr “to pronounce aloud the god’s name”. For this meaning, cf. BD, Ch. 130 (Naville, Taf. CXLIII:21: m=k wsjr jw m sr=f); BD, Ch. 144 (pBM EA 10477), 26:13-14: sr wsjr NN ra Hr arrwt Axt Ha r=f nTrw m xsfw); “The Book of the Gates”, hour 11 (DZA 29.385.760: ntsn sr ra jmj Axt jAbtt nt pt); hour 12 (DZA 29.385.750: sr=sn nTr pn). Thereby, Seth aimed to reach the West and reveal the secret name of the god, a source of divine potency (or reveal the secret place of his sacred relics), cf. the epithet jmn rn=f and the purpose of Ukha’s passing in pFlorenz PSI I 72 x+2:11: jw HHj p<A> ntj jmn. See also the legend of Isis and Re (pTurin 1993, 31+77:1-3; pCh. Beatty XI, rt. 1:3-4:2) telling that in order to learn the hidden name of the god Isis created a venomous serpent (Ddfwt – likewise in pCairo). The Calendar recounts on Seth’s confederates: “they got to know those gods (i.e. their names)” and were slaughtered thereafter. Rt. 13:11; 13:13: nTr <m> Haw=<f> C. Leitz reads “Gottesglieder”, i.e. Haw-nTr; however, most likely it is a shortened form of nTr <m> Haw=<f>, cf. Peas B1, 114; CT I, 216c; pSallier III, 4:10. Undoubted reading Haw + nTr as Haw-nTr occures fourteen times in late myphological texts (e.g. pBrooklyn 47.218.84, 2:6 etc.). For the meaning “god himself”, cf. the events described in pCh. Beatty VIII, rt. 2:2-2: aHa.n sft [sn m-bAH-a Hm] n nTr pn Spsj. Rt. 14:1: mw m-sA=f The sentence consists of two parts, the first one ends with preposition m-xft-Hr, cf. KRI. II. 9:6-10. For the construction NN m-sA=f as an independent sentence, cf. “The 2nd Kamose stela” (= Luxor 43), 7. Rt. 14:2: aHa.n jrw xt m ns n xftj n nmtj C. Leitz’s assertion that two different versions occured in pCairo and pJumilhac because of the confusion of signs Möller 81 and 161 as determinatives for jmn is unlikely regarding late hieratique and paleography of pJumilhac in particular. It is more reliable that exactly “tongue” from pCairo was rendered later as a determinative (or a short writing) for “skin”. For interpretation of the phrase as “cut off”, see the description of the day that comes after (cf. jrw xrt in pSallier IV, rt. 23:2). For “cutting off the tongue”, cf. also pSallier IV, rt. 6:5-6; pCairo JE 86637, rt. 14:6. On a significance of this organ see also pHerm 1116A, 32; Peas B1, 197; LeM, § 9:5; stMetternich (= MMA 50.85), 43, 236; pBoulaq IV (= CG 58042), 15:9; pPushkin 127, 1:13 and pBM ЕА 10474, 20:5. Hence, the peculiarity of the Calendar text lies in employment of two plot lines - the struggle between the deities and Seth with his followers in the guise of a small cattle and the myth of Nemti, whose neglectful actions including the acceptance of the gift (Ssp fqA) have led to severe punishment.

The paper is devoted to the Egyptian records of the IV-Ist centuries BC and presents a publication of three little-known monuments supplied with a commented translation, namely: the inscription of Psamtikseneb, preserved in the State Hermitage Museum (St. Petersburg), the Statue of Imhotep, a supposed author of Taimhotep’s and Psherenptah’s biographies, from the Pushkin Museum of Fine Arts (Moscow) and a small ointment/paint container of Horimhotep from the Walters Art Museum (Baltimore). The last object presumably belongs to a person from the Memphite priestly family.

This new study of the well-known funerary stela from the late Ptolemaic Period aims at clarifying the reading of a number of troublesome lines and argues their eventual interpretations. Comparative analysis of the earlier editions has provided a ground for revealing inaccuracies occurred in the text. The paper contains a hieroglyphic transcription based on a thorough examination of the original by its photo, transliteration and translation accompanied by philological notes; as a supplementary a list of dictionary slips with the entire text copied by K. Sethe for the Wb (from the Digital Slip Archive) is given.

A brief note provoked by the publication of the catalogue of objects found during the excavation work Matariya in 2001- 2003 (GM 218 (2008): 49-56). Basing on the restoration of the royal titulary and epithets the author disputes the dating of an architrave (GM 218 (2008): 50) to the reign of Amenhotep IV.

The paper presents a description of egyptological software designed by E. Baluk and M. Panov. The first one, Corpus, is aimed to be a useful tool for systematization of all kind of data of linguistic research. The second, Hieroglyphica, is an editor for creating hieroglyphic inscriptions. The reader will find the information on main features of these programmes.

Additional notes to the previous article containing a list of errors (about twenty cases) occurred in the editions of pBM 10509 (L2). The verification is based on the facsimile of the source.

The paper discusses several variants for the reading of the royal epithet in lines 2-3 of the stela of Nestesen (stBerlin 2268).

The work is a result of a thorough study of all known editions of “The Maxims of Ptahhotep”. The author establishes the classification of the errors made by the editors of the hieroglyphic text and supplies every type of mistakes with numerous examples from the publications of different literary records. According to the proposed classification a group of common inaccuracies includes an absence of rubrication, an omission of signs, incorrect transliteration etc. Thus, more than 80 cases of discrepancy are revealed. Besides, a general description of all publications of the sources with the text of the Instruction is given.