THE PROHIBITIONS: A NEW KINGDOM

DIDACTIC TEXT*
By FREDRIK HAGEN
The article presents a little-known wisdom text of the New Kingdom attested on a handful of ostraca
from Deir el-Medina. The text is interesting for its rare stichical structure, each line beginning with
imi=k, 'You should not...', and for the thematically independent nature of the sentences. Included is
the hieroglyphic text and a translation with a philological commentary, as well as a discussion of the
text's place within the ancient Egyptian didactic literary tradition.

Introduction

THE Prohibitions, a New Kingdom didactic text preserved on six fragmentary ostraca, has
been known to Egyptologists for some time1 under various names-'Thou shalt not', 'Du
sollst nicht' and 'Recueil de prohibitions'. Perhaps due to the fragmentary nature of the
sources (OPetrie 11 is the best preserved), the text has never been published with all the
sources or with a philological commentary.2 The Prohibitions has been included in
anthologies of translations of ancient Egyptian literature,3 but with no analysis of the
language or the text's place in Egyptian (didactic) literary tradition.4 The text remains
highly interesting, not least because of its rare (for the period) stichical structure, each line
beginning with 'You should not...', and also for the thematically independent nature of the
various sentences.
This article presents a synoptic edition of the known sources of the text,5 a translation
with commentary, and some suggestions as to how the text should be understood in relation
to ancient Egyptian didactic literary tradition.

Sources

1. ODeM 1090 (fig. 10).

Published: G. Posener, Catalogue des ostraca hieratiqueslitterairesde Deir el Medineh, I (DFIFAO
1; Cairo, 1938), pls. 49 and 49a.
Limestone ostracon, 9 x 9 cm, Ramesside (possibly Twentieth Dynasty),6 from Deir el-Medina.

* My thanks are due to Stephen Quirke, Richard
Parkinson and the JEA referees for reading drafts of this
article. All made valuable suggestions and corrections, but
all opinions expressed and any mistakes present remain
my own. Photographs, and permission to publish them,
were generously supplied by the Petrie Museum of
Egyptian Archaeology (London), L'Institut Frangais
d'Archeologie Orientale (Cairo) and Museo delle
Antichita Egizie (Turin). I gratefully acknowledge their
help.
1 First mentioned by G. Posener, 'Les richesses incon-
nues de la litterature egyptienne (Recherches litteraires,
I)', RdE 6 (1951), 43 n. 56 and 'Ostraca inedits du Musee
de Turin (Recherches litteraires, III)', RdE 8 (1951),
184-5.
2 A. H. Gardiner's brief translation of OPetrie 11, 'A
New Moralizing Text', WZKM 54 (1957), 43-5, lacked
that author's usually thorough philological commentary.
3 H. Brunner, Die Weisheitsbiicher der Agypter
(Duisseldorf, 1988), 215-17; A. G. McDowell, Village Life
in Ancient Egypt: Laundry Lists and Lovesongs (Oxford,
1999), 142-3 and, most recently, P. Vernus, Sagesses de
l'Egypte pharaonique (Paris, 2001), 291-7.
4 M. Lichtheim, Late Egyptian Wisdom Literature in
the International Context (OBO 52; Gottingen, 1983),
7-10, briefly discussed the relationship between the text
and Late Egyptian wisdom instructions, but based only on
OPetrie 11. Her arguments are outlined under
Interpretation below.
5 I have examined and collated OPetrie 11 as well as
OBM EA 5631 and OPetrie 45 (see Other possible sources
below) in person, and OTurin 57089, ODeM 1632 and
1633 from photographs. Unfortunately, photographs of
ODeM 1090 were not available, so the text of that ostra-
con is reproduced from Posener's line drawing in the
IFAO catalogue.
6 The dates were suggested to me by R. J. Demaree of
the University of Leiden (personal communication). He
based this partly on the palaeography and partly on the
findspots. The IFAO ostraca (ODeM 1090, 1632 and
1633) were found in the 'Koms du sud' south of the vil-
lage by Bruyere in 1930, and, as Demaree points out, 'as
far as we know at least, all non-literary ostraca from this
spot date to the mid-20th dynasty-which may also point
towards a similar date for the literary ones'.
126 FREDRIK HAGEN JEA 91

0- MN (N) cr -
rq (N
'CS N
T-4< N-0 Lf

*0 .0
v 00
_4 Q v * 0. tf)0
¢ 0 ¢q O -O 0 0
Lf

- -

T" +i- 0

- ; I7 /
~~Z~ lc~~ lz~ /

(I

/
/

I
0

0
Al

I e
N

ODeM 1632 1(a), 1: Traces at the end are obscure. Posener tentatively read F7 :

A4

OTurin 57089, 1: Traces of a sign preceding ,

A5

4 4"

ODeM 1631 1(a), 5: The signs I <=: have been'isre between line Sand 4, aoeL
 ®

128 FREDRIK HAGEN JEA 91

- o
OC) ,
, -4
C114 o)
C0 0C No
0 0
e I c0 Lf)
^? 0 * ^0 *u

0
©
C-
'I 00 C

I I

,,,
Q 0io{
<217/ D
D

Q
O- 0
0]
\\t -1
Id 4 ia7 G\
/ 0 0.

G',
D
4-
O® c j

G\

te,<:1-

J
I®
o<)

Co©
-,

G\
b
F7
0G
GJ
(^^
{L_

IL I

0
** aA
A6

ODeM 1632 I(a), 6: Traces at the end suit f: \

OTurin 57089, 2: Traces of two horizontal signs at the end, is probable: "

A7

OTurin 57089, 4: ( is certain, the faint traces following were read as// and l^ (?) by Lopez. I cannot see

although the position is curious (after rather than under ( ). There are traces of a sign below//:

A9

'
OTurin 57089, 5: The traces at the beginning are unusual, but can hardly be anything but^ X:

/J L a-|I. Although not impossible, the traces would also suit I =- I as suggested by OPetrie 11 (th
singular here). The final traces are the top of the [sign (for an example with rounded top, see G. M6ller, H

1909), 547, under 'Gurob P9784, 2', and compare OTurin 57048, 3). The apparent tick is simply a smudg

OPetrie 11, 1: The last four signs were written on the side of the ostracon (see fig 14).
130 FREDRIK HAGEN JEA 91

_ __+

m^sasc u

-^^^^^ -_) - - -

e; ;, ;H: ^ : ax ;,
X,] - j

A I C

II
H I

0
^S_ n CD

C< 7

Il Il Il
A10

OPetrie 11, 2: There are no traces after , so the line may be complete (see below). (3): Beginning has trac

a verb is probably missing in the lacuna: |

All

OPetrie 11,3 (continued): The at the end of the line appears to have gone beyond the current edge of
,erny to suggest that a thin ledge may have broken away from this line and onwards (Hieratic Ostraca, p
uncertain, but as the text on the corresponding part of the verso is complete, probably not more than 5-10

A12

ODeM 1632 I (c), 12: Traces of a tall sign after , possibly the tick of a :
132 FREDRIK HAGEN JEA 91

- -5 s ?
C" C'
oB c" cl t'
,O O" ',O ',.O O'~ ,O .O
',O O

n Lfn

r4 4 ®
0^ m C C

0,

(] S^ "i
o
^ ^ ~
o

7;
A13

The determinative of rbron ODeM 1632 I and OPetrie 11 (here and in C2 and C8) is curious: ::, ,

Gardinder and C(erny (Hieratic Ostraca, plate 1 note c on the recto) thought it resembled ,/ with a diagon
Moller, Paldographie II, 501), but their transcription has r with a diagonal line across. I read) with a cord
Paldographie, II.

ODeM 1632 I(c), 13: End has traces of ~ under the X of the preceding line:

OPetrie 11, 5: . and o are plausible: \ . The read by Gardiner and Cerny is difficult, but perh

the traces preserved (but compare the writing of -on line 4).
Q' _

A15

ODeM 1632 I (d), 15: the traces were read as jf9 by Posener, but the shape of the l is doubtful and l |

1T. n
h^i..
OPetrie 11, 7: The end has illegible tracesafter--, which is certain: '.
134 FREDRIK HAGEN JEA 91

('q Cxl C Cl Cl Ctl

QQ 4Q Q . ---
-Q iQ vQ
0 mm 0 0 m 0 m m 0 V 0
N b oo
o00

^~~~~~-0~~~~~~~~~~ Cl^~~~~ CCl

^6

GX

8O
B1

ODeM 1632 I (e), 16: Only faint and illegible traces left.

B2

ODeM 1632 I (e), 17: Of the rubric, only smudged traces of az:: remain. -k99
'y is faint but certain.

B3

ODeM 1632 I (e), 18: Faint traces of two signs above z:7, possibly x ?o:

B6

ODeM 1632 I (e), 21: X is probable, with faint traces of a tall sign following:
136 FREDRIK HAGEN JEA 91

4~ ~4.0
>4.<4J 4-0J

U ~
U 0 0Q O 0r
In O 00

d6d d d 6 d d

Ccl Ccl

C~- y^A ^-o10

f- xI- _
^ -
(___.,r
i ji,t»j- 0 ^~ t
c
oCA>i- I

^r^?^reo m
C2

OPetrie 1 1, vo. 2: The^ in appears to have been written first as the plural determinative i i and th

C4

OPetrie 11, vo. 4: <=> is certain, but, as noted by Gardiner and 1erny, grammatically one would expect,

C6

OPetrie 11, vo. 6: Gardiner and (erny noted that 'The lower- [in-- @A ] is a correction of the half

Alternatively it could be disproportionate writing of ; the faded appearance of the upper sign n

erased, because the scribe re-dipped his brush at this point and this may account for the difference in colo
end of the line where a thin flake has come off the surface.

C8

"e
OPetrie 11, vo. 8: At the end of the line Gardiner and (erny suggested restoring which mak
138 FREDRIK HAGEN YEA 91

0 CN o0N 0
ON
T-4 T-4
'-4
0a 0 0
'--4

0-0
o0 o Q
0(u Q
UQ 0 04 o 00 0

_ _ '7 c
©
11-
4;
m c
6 1-1 4
4;4

-4;

x'
0

('
I.D 6

G\ a® 0

<:2s
(A
%at q
I£
Gr
-4

40
C9

OPetrie 11, vo. 9: Approximately two to three groups are missing at the end of the line. The last sign is o

C10

OPetrie 11, vo. 10: Approximately three groups are lost at the beginning of the line. The first sign is obsc
read (.

D2

ODeM 1632 III, 1: Red traces of the o; of the rubric. The traces at the end suit 99
9D
- 9(as on ODe

:'J
ODeM 1632 III, 2: The tick above the-is probably a mistake:

D3 :.y

ODeM 1632 III, 3: Traces of ~ at the end: . Line four underneath has illegible traces, but in bl
continuation of line three; compare lines one and two on this fragment.
140 FREDRIK HAGEN JEA 91

o 0 N N N
0o 0 <o
in ~0 ~ ^~-0 -0 0-

0) ^0 0-I z 0-1 r0-

Ln c m
N

_ _ s /
y////K 7<X

g
c ^~~

K'
2005 THE PROHIBITIONS 141

'.
.

CZ
CM

I_

.7.

cl-

m 0~
142 FREDRIK HAGEN JEA 91

No findspot or date is recorded. It has six lines written in black, without any versepoints or
rubrics. The verso has some individual signs (see Interpretation below). The handwriting is
distinct from OPetrie 11 and OTurin 57089, and similar (probably not identical, but the
fragmentary nature makes a thorough analysis impossible) to the other IFAO ostraca.
Structure: The beginning of each line marks the start of a new sentence.

2. ODeM 1632 I + II + III (figs. 1-7, 9).

Published: G. Posener, Catalogue des ostraca hieratiques litteraires de Deir el Medineh, 111.3
(DFIFAO 20; Cairo, 1980), pls. 62 and 62a.
Limestone, in three parts, 30 x 11 cm (I), 3.5 x 5 cm (II) and 2.8 x 5.6 cm (III), Ramesside
(possibly Twentieth Dynasty), from Deir el-Medina. It was excavated by Bruyere in 1930 in the
'Koms du sud' of the village.7 ODeM 1632 I now consists of five separate pieces (la-Ie), II and
III of a single fragment each. No join can be made between the latter two and I.
The five pieces that constitute ODeM 1632 I preserve the beginning of twenty lines, fragment II
has the beginning of three lines, while fragment III has remains of three lines. It is written in
black ink with red rubrics. The handwriting is distinct from OPetrie 11 and OTurin 57089, but it
is similar (probably not identical) to the other IFAO ostraca.
Structure: As ODeM 1090, except on fragment III, which appears to have parts of a single
sentence preserved on both lines 1 and 2 (perhaps similarly on lines 3 and 4).

3. ODeM 1633 (fig. 8).

Published: G. Posener, Catalogue des ostraca hieratiqueslitteraires, 111.3, pls. 62 and 62a.
Limestone, 4.6 x 4.6 cm, Ramesside (possibly Twentieth Dynasty), from Deir el-Medina. No
findspot or date is recorded. It has four lines written in black with a single versepoint preserved.
The handwriting is distinct from OPetrie 11 and OTurin 57089, and similar, but probably not
identical, to the other IFAO ostraca.
Structure: Probably similar to OPetrie 11.

4. OTurin 57089 (fig. 11).

Published: J. Lopez, Catalogo del Museo Egizio di Torini, 11I.1. Ostraca ieratici N. 57001-57092
(Milan, 1978), pls. 38 and 38a.
Limestone, 14 x 14.5 cm, Ramesside (possibly Nineteenth Dynasty), from Deir el-Medina. It was
excavated by Schiaparelli in 1905, with no exact findspot recorded.
It has five lines written in black with red rubrics and versepoints. The handwriting is distinct from
both the IFAO ostraca and OPetrie 11.
Structure: It lacks the stichical structure of the other ostraca.

5. OPetrie 11= UC 39614 (figs. 12-14).

Published: A. H. Gardiner and J. '(erny, Hieratic Ostraca, I (Oxford, 1957), pls. 1 and la.
Limestone, 18 x 24 cm, Ramesside (possibly Twentieth Dynasty), possibly from Deir el-Medina.
The recto has seven lines, verso has ten, all written in black ink, with no versepoints or rubrics.
The handwriting is distinct from both the IFAO ostraca and OTurin 57089.
Structure: As ODeM 1090 and 1632 except for line 2 which continues partly on line 3.

Order

As all the sources preserve their respective lines in the same sequence, the internal order of
the ostraca can be established with certainty in most cases, but there are some points of
uncertainty. Firstly, the last lines (16-20) of ODeM 1632 I are preserved on a fragment that
does not join the others directly. According to Posener, the fragment belongs immediately
after line 15. Although possible, it is not certain, as there is no a parallel text to verify that
this is the fragment's correct position, and there is no apparent join between this and the
other pieces. It seems better to err on the side of caution, and my division between sections
A and B here is meant to signal the possibility that a line or more may be lost. The fragment

7 B. Bruyere, Rapport sur lesfouilles de Deir el Medineh the ostracon bears no date, while II and III have '15.1.30'
(1930) (FIFAO 8; Cairo, 1933), 6 and Posener, Catalogue and '17.1.30' respectively.
des ostraca hieratiques litteraires III. 3, 87. Fragment I of
2005 THE PROHIBITIONS 143

ODeM 1632 II, if originally a part of ODeM 1632 I, can only belong after the latter, as the
areaabove the first line there bears no trace of ever having been inscribed.
I have divided the text into five sections (A-E). Section A consists of lines 1-15 of ODeM
1632 I and parallel sources. Section B is composed of lines 16-20 of ODeM 1632 I, and has
been separatedfrom A for reasonsoutlinedabove.The lines on the verso of OPetrie11 have
been labelled section C. The placing of this part of the text after section A (rather than before)
is somewhat arbitrary. It rests on the assumption that the text on the designated recto of the
ostracon (as proposed by Gardiner and Cerny) precedes that on the 'back', but strictly
speaking there is no evidence for this.8 Section D consists of ODeM 1090 and the parallel lines
of ODeM 1632 III. ODeM 1632 II has been designated as section E, and although it has been
placed here after section D, their original positions relative to each other are uncertain.

Structure

Four of the five sources are written stichically: ODeM 1632 (I, II and III), OPetrie 11,
ODeM 1633 and ODeM 1090. Although ODeM 1633 is missing the beginning of all four
lines, a comparison of the positions of the signs on the respective lines with the positions of
the same signs on OPetrie 11 suggests a similar structure. The stichic writing is not always
consistent. Line 2 of OPetrie 11 continues on part of line 3, and on ODeM 1632 III, lines
1 and 2 appear to preserve parts of the same sentence (as perhaps on lines 3 and 4). The only
source not written stichically is OTurin 57089, which not unexpectedly employs both
rubrics and versepoints. Rubrics are also found on ODeM 1632, but not on OPetrie 11 or
ODeM 1090. ODeM 1633 preserves a single red versepoint on line 3.

Translation
SectionA

Al: You should not damagea tomb (?) [...]

A2: You should not be lazy (?) [...]
A3: You should not be hard-headedconcerningthe property[of] an[other(?)...]
A4: You should not praise because of [...] as what is brought, and they will love you (?).
A5: You should not seize (?) [...] from him; it will be bad for him.
A6: You should not speakwith your mouth without (?) [...] upon what is done (?).
A7: You should not take a wife more powerful than yourself, lest you [...] the heart (?).
A8: You should not walk upon the road without (?) knowing [...]
A9: You should not prepare on this day for tomorrow when it has not yet come, as yesterday
is not like today upon the hands of god.
A10: You should not be disrespectful to an old man or woman when they are old, lest they
[mock?]you at the beginning of your old age.
All: You should not satiatee your mother is a have-not. Look, now, it
will be heard by [all?].
Al 2: You should not straighten what is crooked, (but) do what is loved (?); every man is led
according to his character like (it is) a part of his body.
Al 3: You should not boast about your strength when you are young; one finds tomorrow for
you as dribble upon [your] lips.
8 Gardiner and (Cerny, Hieratic Ostraca, ix. The writ- form and more careless on the verso, perhaps supporting
ing of imi=k at the beginning of each line appears less uni- this designation.
144 FREDRIK HAGEN JEA 91

A14: You should not take a big bite of wealth belonging to the king, lest one swallow [...]
A15: You should not roam freely (?) [in] the royal palace, l.p.h., at the door [of...]

Section B

Bl: [...only faint traces left...]

B2: [You should not] thank [...]
B3: You should not divide (?) [...]
B4: You should not sit [...]
B5: You should not be in a hurry (?) [...]
B6: You should not [...]

Section C

Cl: You should not spare your limbs when you are young; sustenance happens through one's
(lit. his) arms and nourishment through the legs.
C2: You should not boast about wealth that is not yours; another time <it> will be stealing
or transgressing commands.
C3: You should not raise up a wrong that becomes minor (?); one has seen a mast lying down
(looking?) like a leg.
C4: You should not raise up a minor wrong; beware lest it become major-it is the
shipwright who raises it up like a mast.
C5: You should not make plans for tomorrow when it has not yet come; it is today until (?)
tomorrow comes.
C6: You should not ignore your neighbours (on) the days of their need, and they will
surround you in [your moment?].
C7: You should not celebrate your festival without your neighbours, and they will surround
you, mourning, on the day of burial.
C8: You should not boast about grain at the time of ploughing; one shall see (it) on the
threshing-flo[or].
C9: You should not be hard-headed in fighting with your neighbours; your helpers [will
fall?...]
C10: [...] watching, knowing [...]

Section D

Dl: You should not raise your hand against [...]

D2: You should not steal anything from an[other?...] of the Qenbet; it (is?) under [...]
D3: You should not speak a report [...]
D4: You should not [...]
D5: [You should no]t raise [...]
D6: [You shoul]d not [...]
2005 THE PROHIBITIONS 145

SectionE

El: You should not [c]ause misery [...]

E2: [You should not] build a house (?) [...]
E3: You should not make [...]

Commentary

A2: A close parallel is found in P. Chester Beatty IV, vs. 1, 5: [...] sp=k imi=k nny smnht
shr.w=k nb, '[...] your deeds. You should not be lazy, but cause all your affairs to be
efficient'.9 The provenance of both the Chester Beatty papyri and the ostraca with The
Prohibitions is Deir el-Medina, so a connection is plausible. Unfortunately the remains on
ODeM 1632 I are too fragmentary to establish the extent of any intertextual relationship.

A4: The construction hsi hr is normally followed by an object (here lost), meaning to 'praise
because of something' (Wb. III, 154). Alternatively hs might be a Late Egyptian spelling of
hs, 'be grim'. The end of the sentence preserved on line 1 of OTurin 57089 is difficult to
connect to the beginning in any meaningful way. The final -tw must be the second person
singular masculine pronoun, and so the object of mry=sn.

A6: Richard Parkinson suggested to me that the translation could also be related to direct
speech: 'You should not say with your mouth "There is no [...]"'.

A7: For ir hmt meaning 'marry', 'take a wife', see Wb. III, 77 and C. Cannuyer, 'L'Obese de
Ptahhotep et de Samuel', ZAS 113 (1986), 96-8.

A8: Ankhsheshonqy17, 14 may have a similar sentiment: m-ar sm r myt iw mn sbt (n) drt=k,
'Do not walk upon the road without a stick in your hand',10 although the traces (rh?) on
ODeM 1632 I indicate a different second part here.

A9: The relationship of the form bw ii.t=f to Middle Egyptian n sdm.t=f and Late Egyptian
bw iri.t=f sdm (Coptic un1Trqc6Tiu) is not entirely clear. Both here and in C5 the sense is
active, disproving earlier attempts at differentiating between an active bw iri.t=f sdm and a
passive bw sdm.t=f.11More recently Junge has suggested that in addition to the well attested
passive bw sdm.t=f there is an active bw iri.t=f sdm in which verbs of motion take the form
bw ii.t=f.12 This would seem to agree with the two cases in The Prohibitions, as well as with
a similar example from a papyrus in
Turin.3 However, among the instances of the bw
sdm.t=f / bw iri.t=f sdm form listed by Jean Winand in his Etudes de neo-egyptien I14 there is
an active example with the verb iri: ist bw iri.t=k p3 i.dd=f, 'Have you still not done what he
said?'15Winand suggested that the active bw sdm.t=f form was used, but only briefly, and
that sometime between the reigns of Seti I and Ramesses III it was replaced by the
periphrastic bw iri.t=f sdm construction.16

9 A. H. Gardiner, Hieratic Papyri in the British
Museum. Third series. The Chester Beatty Gift (London,
1935), II, pl. 18.
10 S. R. K. Glanville, Catalogue of Demotic Papyri in
the British Museum, II. The Instructions of Onchsheshonqy
(British Museum Papyrus 10508) (London, 1955), 40-1
and pl. 17.
1l P. J. Frandsen, An Outline of the Late Egyptian Verbal
System (Copenhagen, 1974), 39-41 and J. Cerny and S.
Groll, A Late Egyptian Grammar (Rome, 1975), 321-6.
12 F. Junge, Einfuiihrung in die Grammatik des
Neudgyptischen2 (Wiesbaden, 1999), 104-5.
13 P. Turin B verso 3, 6-7: A. H. Gardiner, Late-
Egyptian Miscellanies (BAe 7; Brussels, 1937) 127, 8-9.
14Etudes de neo-egyptien, I (AEgyptiaca Leodiensia 2;
Liege, 1992), 290-1.
15His example 677: Gardiner, LEM 9, 7.
16 Etudes de neo-gyptien I, 291.
146 FREDRIK HAGEN JEA 91

The second part of the sentence was tentatively translated by Gardiner as a rhetorical
question:'...is not (?) yesterdaylike today upon the hands of God?'17As Lichtheimpointed
out,18 nn does not normally introduce rhetorical questions, and there is no need to assume
that it does so here. It is a simple adverbial sentence, explaining how although both today
and tomorrow are upon the hands of the god, they are not the same. A similar phrase occurs
as part of the epistolographicformulaein a late Ramessideletter (P. Leiden I 369, 1): tw=i
fnh m p3hrw dw3hr mwyntr, 'I am alive today, but tomorrowis upon the hands of God'.19
The same phrase reappears below in C5, in a sentence with a very similar sense: 'You should
not make plans for tomorrow when it has not yet come; it is today until (?) tomorrow comes'.
Thematically, the literary motif of the unknowable tomorrow is common in Egyptian
literature;20the closest parallelis found in The EloquentPeasantBl 214: m grg dw3n ii.t=f,
'Do not plan (for) tomorrowwhen it has not yet come, (one does not know the troublefrom
it)'. Other occurrencesare:Ptahhotep343 (Prisse 11, 2): n rh.n.twhprtsif=f dw3,'One does
not know what will happenwhen thinkingabouttomorrow';Kagemni(Prisse 2, 2): n rh.n.tw
hprtirrtntr hft=f, 'One does not knowwhat may happen,what God does when he punishes';
Amenemope19, 13:p s hmdw3mi ih, 'Mandoes not knowwhattomorrowis like';Amenemope
21, 5-6: bw rh=k shrw n ntr tm=k tm dw, 'You do not know the plans of God, so do not cry (?)
for tomorrow'; and a Ramesside magical papyrus in TurinTurin has the formula nk sf nk p hrw
ink dw bw ii=f ..bn ntk sf bn [ntk pa] hrw bn ntk dw bw ii=f, 'I am yesterday, I am today, I am
tomorrow before it has come...you are not yesterday, you are today, not today, you are not
tomorrow before it has come'.21 The Prohibitions may be alluding to The Eloquent Peasant
is
here, as that text atte sted indirectly at Deir el-Medina through an allusion in the literary
'letter' of Menna,22 but it need not be. The identification of unmarked quotations and
allusions in ancient Egyptian literature is highly problematic, and there is considerable
danger of underestimating thegeneral influence of the 'universe of texts' that is the
contextual background for any 'new' literary creation.23 I prefer the cautious approach,
seeing the phrases in The Prohibitions as formulae, i.e. 'a phrase that carries a ring of
familiarity , and may be used time tiand me again in different texts, in identical or slightly
varied form, but is not intended to recall a specific text',24 and not as an allusion to, or
quotation of, The Eloquent Peasant.

A1 0: On trh, see H.-W. Fischer-Elfert, Die satirische Streitschrift des Papyrus Anastasi I (AA
44; Wiesbaden, 1986), 82-3, R. A. Jasnow, A Late Period Hieratic Wisdom Text (pBrooklyn
47.218.135) (SAOC 52; Chicago, 1992), 85; and J. E. Hoch, Semitic Wordsin Egyptian Texts
of the New Kingdom and Third Intermediate Period (Princeton, 1994), 370-1.
hr tp appears not to be the compound preposition hr-tp, but the preposition hr in the
sense of 'about', 'because of', followed by tp in its temporal meaning 'beginning of a time
period'.25 The expression is not attested in connection with i3wt, 'old age', elsewhere, but is

17 WZKM 54, 44. Hornung and 0. Keel (eds), Studien zu altdgyptischen

18 Late Egyptian Wisdom Literature, 8-9.
19 J. Cerny, Late Ramesside Letters (BAe 9; Brussels,
1939), 1 and la.
20 J. G.
Griffiths, 'Wisdom About Tomorrow',
Harvard Theological Review 53 (1960), 219-21.
21 F. Rossi and W.
Pleyte, Papyrus de Turin (Leiden,
1869-76), 134, 8-9. The formula recalls Coffin Text Spell
335 (CT IV, 193 = Book of the Dead Chapter 17): ink sf
iw=i rh.kw dw3 ir sf ssir pw ir dw3 rr pw, 'I am yesterday. I
know tomorrow. As for yesterday, it is Osiris. As for
tomorrow, it is Re'.
22 R. B.
Parkinson, The Tale of the Eloquent Peasant
(Oxford, 1991), xxix-xxx.
23 R. B.
Parkinson, Poetry and Culture in Middle
Kingdom Egypt. A Dark Side to Perfection (London, 2002),
48 and 60-3. Other works on quotations and use of formu-
lae are H. Brunner, 'Zitate aus Lebenslehren', in E.
Lebenslehren (OBO 28; Wiesbaden, 1979), 105-71; C. J.
Eyre, 'The Semna Stelae: Quotation, Genre and Functions
of Literature', in S. Israelit-Groll (ed.), Studies in
Egyptology Presented to Miriam Lichtheim (Jerusalem,
1990), 134-65, esp. 153-60; W Guglielmi, 'Zur Adaption
und Funktion von Zitaten', SAK 11 (1984), 347-64; P.
Derchain, 'Allusion, citation et intertextualite', in M.
Minas and J. Zeidler (eds), Aspekte spdtdgyptischer Kultur:
Festschrift fiir Erik Winter zum 65. Geburtstag (Aegyptiaca
Treverensia 7; Mainz, 1994), 69-76; and R. Jasnow,
'Remarks on Continuity in Egyptian Literary Tradition',
in E. Teeter and J. A. Larson (eds), Gold of Praise: Studies
on Ancient Egypt in Honor of Edward F. Wente (SAOC 58;
Chicago, 1999), 193-210.
24 Eyre, in Israelit-Groll (ed.), Studies in Egyptology,
155.
25 Wb. V, 269-70: 'Anfang eines Zeitabschnittes'.
2005 THE PROHIBITIONS 147

frequent with similar 'temporal' nouns such as hrw, 'day', grh, 'night', dw3yt, 'morning', and
rnpt, 'year'.26
Lichtheim restored: '...lest [they utter curses] against you upon your old age',27 and
similarly McDowell rendered: '...lest they [place a curse] on your old age',28 but without
justification. I would expect a semantic parallel to trh, 'be disrespectful, mock'. Compare
perhaps Amenemope25, 17-26, 1: m ir shwr f3r=k iw ptr=f p3 rr r-h3t=k m-di smi.tw=k n p;
itn m wbn=f dd iry ky sri shwr 's mr mr m-b;hps rr srriiw=f shwr r3,'Do not mock one older
than you, for he has seen Re before you. Do not cause people to accuse you to the Aten at its
rising, saying "Another youth has mocked an old man"; very painful before Re is a youth
who mocks an old man',29and P. Louvre 2414 II, 1: m ir stmbw ir=w stm=k, 'Do not slander
lest you be slandered in turn'.30

Al1: Lichtheim suggested reading s3i, 'satisfy/be satisfied',31 instead of s3, 'know/recognise',
as Gardiner did ('Recognise not one <as> thy mother, who is not').32Vernus followed her in
this, but saw it as a self-reflexive statement ('Ne te rassasie pas tout seul quand ta mere se
trouve une indigente'),33 which is also a valid grammatical alternative. I have followed
Vernus's interpretation. The writing of ODeM 1632 I differs slightly from OPetrie 11.
Firstly, s{3}i is written with an additional causative s (sss), which supports Lichtheim's and
Vernus's reading, because a causative of s33, 'know/recognise', makes little sense here.
Secondly, ODeM 1632 I has a slightly different spelling of wrt (wrti). Thirdly, it has the
addition of iw before mwt=k, yielding a Late Egyptian circumstantial construction.
In mk -3 -tw sdm (...), -; can only be the enclitic article -; (Wb. I, 1; see also A. H.
Gardiner, 'The Two First Pages of the Worterbuch',JEA 34 (1948), 12-13). I am unaware
of any other examples of mk -3 written with the determinative J.
The end is difficult. I take the suffix pronoun =f as referring to the act of 'satiating
yourself alone while your mother is a have-not', with in introducing the missing subject
(perhaps nb, 'all'?) of the passive sdm.tw=f.

Al2: Contrary to the Worterbuch(V, 160-1), gws is attested in the Middle Kingdom.34
it.h literally means 'drag', so 'every man is dragged according to his character...' The
sense seems to be that a man is as much subject to his character as to the movements of his
limbs.35Compare Ankhsheshonqy11, 14: smyt rmt wlt rytn-im=f t3y, 'A man's character is one
of his limbs'.36 For a parallel with the opposite meaning, see P. Chester Beatty IV, 6, 5-7: sw
dd s nb r bit=f hm rhy m sp wz s3yt rnnt hr bit m ssw ntr ds=f, 'Beware of saying "Every man
is according to his character, ignorant and wise alike. Destiny and fortune are inscribed on
the character in the writing of god himself" '.37

A13: On bsy, 'spit, slobber' (Wb. I, 417, 11-12), see W. A. Ward in The Four Egyptian
HomographicRoots b?(Studia Pohl 6; Rome, 1978), 95-6.
ODeM 1633 has iw=k m rnn instead of OPetrie 11's iw=k rnn;compare the writing of line
All on ODeM 1632 I and OPetrie 11. Similar advice is found in the Middle Kingdom
26 Ibid.269-70. 33Sagesses,293.
27Late Egyptian WisdomLiterature,7. 34 D. Meeks, 'Les emprunts egyptiens aux langues
28 VillageLife, 142. semitiques durant le Nouvel Empire et la Troisi&me
29 On the expression sri shwr %r,see A. Manisali, Periode Intermediaire',BiOr 54 (1997), 53 n. 509.
',,Imitate but innovate" oder: Eine G6tterbedrohung mit 35 On
fate, personality and predestination in wisdom
hymnischer Struktur im Papyrus Genf MAH 15274', literature, see J. E Quack, Die Lehrendes Ani. Ein neu-
SAK 32 (2004), 304-7. dgyptischeWeisheitstextin seinemkulturellenUmfeld(OBO
30 Lichtheim, Late Egyptian WisdomLiterature,94-5 141; Wiesbaden, 1994), 187-8 and E Lacombe-Unal, 'Les
and A. Volten, 'Die moralischen Lehren des demotischen notions d'acquis et d'inne dans le dialogue de
Pap. Louvre 2414', in Studi in memoria di Ippolito l'Enseignement d'Ani', BIFAO 100 (2000), 371-81, esp.
Rosellini (Pisa, 1955), II, 271-80 and pls. 34-5. 378.
31 Late
Egyptian Wisdom Literature, 9. 36 Glanville, Onchsheshonqy, pl. 11.
32 WZKM 54, 44. 37Gardiner, Chester Beatty II, pls. 20-1.
148 FREDRIK HAGEN JEA 91

Instruction of Kagemni (Papyrus Prisse, 2, 1-2): m 3 ib=k hr hps m-hry-ib d3mw=k, 'Do not
be proud of your strength among your contemporaries'. The theme recurs in lines 12-13 of
the Victory Stela of Pi(ankh)y, of the Twenty-fifth Dynasty: m rbrm nb phty, 'Do not boast
about being strong (lit. a lord of strength)'.38

A14: The use of rm, 'swallow', at the end of the line continues the theme of 'taking a bite'.
The expression sounds idiomatic but is not attested elsewhere.39Similar uses of imagery are
found in P. Chester Beatty IV, 5, 2-4: saw -tw hr dpt ht=f nb, 'Guard against tasting any of
his (god's) property',40 and the Demotic wisdom text on P Louvre 2377, vs. 10: p3 nty iw=f
mh r;=f bw-ir=f cm=f my Zn<=f> wr hm r-bnr n-im=f, 'As for him who will fill his mouth,
(but) he cannot swallow it, let <him> take a little out from it'.41

A15: ODeM 1633 and OPetrie 11 preserve two distinct versions, with ODeM 1633 lacking
the preposition hr. I read sb3 as 'door' with Gardiner, Lichtheim and Vernus (against
McDowell),42 based on the traces after sb3 on OPetrie 11 (ODeM 1633 preserves no
determinatives) which can hardly represent any other sign than .

B4: 'Sitting' (hms) and the behaviour associated with it is a common theme in Egyptian
wisdom literature. The closest parallels are Any B 19, 10-12: imi=k hms iw ky 'rr iw=f (m)
iIwt ir=k m-r-pw iw=f sr3y{k}ir<=k> m i;wt=f, 'You should not sit while another is standing,
if he is older than you or more important than you in his office', and Chester Beatty IV, vs.
4, 6 (= Ankhsheshonqy13, 23): m ir hms m-b3hr r=k, 'Do not sit before one who is greater
than you'.43

C2: nn tiwt -st is a Late Egyptian construction.44 The syntax of the latter part of C2 is
difficult. I read ky sp <tw> r t3wt r th3 wdwt, 'another time <one> will be stealing or
transgressing commands', as the r + infinitive construction with an omitted indefinite
pronoun tw. For examples of this construction without a preceding article or auxiliary verb,
see A. H. Gardiner, Egyptian Grammar3(Oxford, 1957), § 333.

C3: I read hpr as a participle followed by the enclitic article -rf. The second part of the
sentence (ma3.n.twht sdr mi rd) is obscure. I have rendered it literally, taking rd in its basic
meaning 'leg' (with Gardiner, Lichtheim and McDowell). Vernus suggested that rd should
be understood more abstractly as the base of the mast, rendering '(Ne denonce pas une faute
en la minimisant;) c'est a la mesure de la base qu'on apprecie un mat qui git'.45

C4: shr is found twice on this line. In both cases it refers to a but,'wrong' (compare C3), but
in the last occurrence it is also likened to the 'raising up of a mast' (shl ht) by a shipwright,
and so plays with the different literal and abstract meanings a word can employ in different
contexts.
Grammatically,one would expect in and not ir (Gardiner and &erny, Hieratic Ostraca,pl. 1
note verso a), which would yield a participial statement.
C4 appears to be a variant of C3, with a comparable sense (not to blow a wrongdoing out
of proportion) and a similar choice of words.
38 N. C. Grimal, La Stele triomphale de 42Gardiner,WZKM 54, 44; Lichtheim, Late Egyptian
Pi(ankh)y
(MIFAO 105; Cairo, 1981), 26-7. WisdomLiterature,7; and Vernus, Sagesses,294; Brunner
39 Wb. I, 550. did not translate this line. McDowell, Village Life, 143,
40 Gardiner,ChesterBeatty I, 30 and II, pl. 14. read sb3,'teach'.
41 R.
J. Williams, 'Some Fragmentary Demotic 43Gardiner,ChesterBeatty II, pl. 19.
Wisdom Texts', in J. H. Johnson and E. F. Wente (eds), 44 S. Israelit Groll, Non-verbal Sentence Patterns in
Studies in Honor of George R. Hughes (SAOC 39; Chicago, Late Egyptian (Oxford, 1967), 111-12.
1976), 263-7; cf. R. Jasnow, review of M. Lichtheim, Late 45 Sagesses, 294.
Egyptian Wisdom Literature, in BiOr 44 (1987), 108.
2005 THE PROHIBITIONS 149

C5: ww, 'to plan, think', is attested only from the Eighteenth Dynasty and onwards (Wb. I,
249); it may or may not be related to the Middle Kingdom economical term ww, 'interest,
obligation' (Wb, I, 250). The determinatives are a mix of flmi- sh (Wb. III, 464: 'Zelt,

Halle'), and T-m sh (Wb. III, 464-5: 'Ratsversammlung, Ratschlag, Plan').

On bw ii.t=f, and the 'tomorrow that has not yet come', see A9 above. Read r ii<.t> dw3
at the end of the line.

C6: The use of 'neighbours' (s3hw)here and in C7 and C9 supports the impression that the
text is more than a random collection of sayings (see Interpretation below).
At the end a restoration of [. / ] 3t=k, 'your moment (of need)', [t' // ]
3ty=k, 'your distress', or similar is probable.

C7: On the festival (hb) mentioned here, see A. I. Sadek, 'Les fetes personelles au Nouvel
Empire', in S. Schoske (ed.), Akten des Vierten Internationellen Agyptologen Kongresses
Muiinchen1985 (SAK Beihefte 3), 353-68. For an archaeological context, compare A. H.
Bomann's remarks on the private chapels at Deir el-Medina, and their possible functions.46
Similar sentiments occur in the fifteenth instruction of P. Insinger47but with no parallels
in phraseology.

C8: Not much is missing from the end, probably only the determinatives of dnw, and the
sense is clear: 'Don't count your chickens before they hatch'.

Dl: Perhaps cf. P. Insinger 27, 4: tm fiy drt=k iw wn p; nty iw-iw=f sdm, 'Do not raise your
hand while there is one who will listen'.48 The construction f5i + r + infinitive can mean 'to
start to do something' (Wb. I, 573), but the presence of r=k, 'your arm', here seems to
require a literal translation.

D2: The apparent female determinative after qnbt is strange, but is probably just a slip of the

pen, due to confusion between the correct plural determinative ]L and the common SL .
On the structure and function of the qnbt at Deir el-Medina, see A. G. McDowell,
Jurisdiction in the Workmen'sCommunity of Deir el-Medina (EU 5; Leiden, 1990), 143-6.
How much is lost between the end of line 2 of ODeM 1090 and the beginning of line 2 of
ODeM 1632 II is impossible to estimate.

El: The first line appears to have traces of imi=k [i]rt wg(g). On wg(g), 'misery', see J.
Vandier, La famine dans l'Egypte ancienne (Recherches d'archeologie, de philologie et
d'historie 7; Cairo, 1936), 69-70. The only case I know of where wg(g) is being inflicted on
somebody comes from the late Middle Kingdom Hekanakhte letters, where it is constructed
with rdi and not ira.49

E2: The Demotic instruction on P. Louvre 2414 may have some parallels: 'Do not build your
house until you have... [lost]' (2, 4) and 'Do not build your house upon your house of
eternity. Do not build your house near a temple' (3, 9-10).50

46 The Private Chapels in Ancient Egypt (London, 48 Ibid. 86.

1991), 40-51 and 69-76.
47 E Lexa, Papyrus Insinger; les enseignements moraux
d'un scribe ggyptien du premier siecle apres J.-C. 1. Texte,
transcription, traduction et commentaire (Paris, 1926),
47-53.
49Hekanakhte letter I, verso 15 and letter II, recto 31:
J. P. Allen, The Heqanakht Papyri (New York, 2002), 36
and pls. 9-10 and 28-31.
50 Lichtheim, Late Egyptian Wisdom Literature, 94-5
and Volten, in Studi Rosellini II, 271-80 and pls. 34-5.
 150 FREDRIK HAGEN JEA 91

Date

All the ostraca have been dated to the Ramesside Period,51 but the date of composition for
the text itself is problematic. It largely retains Middle Egyptian syntax and grammar as its
linguistic register, but with a number of influences from Late Egyptian,52 so the language is
perhaps best described as Late Middle Egyptian.53 The examples of Late Egyptian
influences in The Prohibitions are less numerous and less consistent than those found in
comparable didactic compositions (e.g. The Instruction of Amennakhte, dated to the
Twentieth Dynasty, in the reign of Ramesses IV),54 but dating based on linguistic criteria
remains problematic.55
The Prohibitions may be a product of the community at Deir el-Medina (the text is
unattested elsewhere), and if so, the date of composition must fall within the period of
activity at that site, i.e. between the Eighteenth and Twentieth Dynasty.56 The text is not
associated with any historical figure, as in the case of other didactic compositions produced
at the site like the instructions of Amennakht and Hori.57 It cannot therefore be dated
securely to a certain point within that period, although the vast majority of textual material
from (and therefore presumably literary activity at) the site is post-Amarna Period, from the
beginning of the Nineteenth Dynasty and onwards.58The fragmentary nature of the sources
for The Prohibitionsaside, few textual variations are attested. These variations do not appear
to be corruptions,59and the sequence of the sentences is identical in all the sources, despite
being thematically independent. Both features may, but need not, indicate a short
transmission history.60These are far from absolute dating criteria, but they suggest to me a
date of composition sometime during the Nineteenth Dynasty.

Other possible sources

Two other ostraca have been associated with the text. One is OBM EA 5631 (verso),61which
Posener first conjectured might belong to the text.62He was followed in this by some previous

51 See under Sources above as well as the

publications idem, 'Monumental-Demotisch', in L. Gestermann and
quoted there. H. Sternberg-El Hotabi, Per aspera ad astra. Wolfgang
52 On a grammatical level there are several Late Schenkel zum neunundfiinfzigsten Geburtstag (Kassel,
Egyptianisms: A9 and C5 have bw ii.t=f for Middle 1995), 107-21; idem, review of J. Zeidler,
Egyptian n sdm.t=f; All11 and A13 have a Late Egyptian Pfortenbuchstudien: Textkritik und Textgeschichte, in
use of zw as a circumstantial marker; C2 has a Late BiOr 57 (2000), 541-59.
Egyptian non-verbal pattern (nn tiwt st); and C9 has the 56 For an overview of the occupation and activity at
Late Egyptian possessive n3y=k mwnf. Lexicographically a the site, see McDowell, Village Life, 18-23.
number of words employed are not attested in the Middle 57 S. Bickel and B. Mathieu, 'L'ecrivain Amennakht et
Kingdom: trh (A10), hwrr (D2) and dnw (C8). son Enseignement', BIFAO 93 (1993), 31-51; Dorn, ZAS
53 What Junge, Grammatik des 131, 38-55.
Neudgyptischen2, 21,
calls 'Spitmittelagyptisch', and Winand, Etudes de neo- 58 Ibid. 20-1.

igyptien I, 13, calls 'neo-6gyptien partiel'.
54 A. Dorn, 'Die Lehre Amunnachts', ZAS 131
(2004), 38-55.
55 See,
e.g., G. Bjorkman, 'Egyptology and Historical
Method', Orientalia Suecana 13 (1964), 9-23; D. van der
Plas, 'On Criteria for the Dating of Egyptian Texts', GM
73 (1984), 49-56; J. Winand, 'La grammaire au secours de
la datation des textes', RdE 46 (1995), 187-202; P. Vernus,
'La date du paysan eloquent', in Israelit-Groll (ed.),
Studies in Egyptology, 1033-47; idem, 'La position lin-
guistique des textes des sarcophages', in H. Willems (ed.),
The World of the Coffin Texts (EU 9; Leiden, 1996),
143-96; A. J. Baumann, The Suffix Conjugation of Early
Egyptian as Evidenced in the Underworld Books
(Dissertation; Chicago, 1998); J. F Quack, 'Sprach- und
Redaktionsgeschichtliche Beobachtung zum Choiak-Text
von Dendera', in C. J. Eyre (ed.), Proceedings of the
Seventh International Congress of Egyptologists, Cambridge
3-9 September 1995 (OLA 82; Leuven, 1998), 921-30;
59All and A13. On A15, see the commentary.
60 Parkinson, Poetry and Culture, 47-8, with references
to G. Burkard, Textkritische Untersuchungen zu altdgyptis-
chen Weisheitslehren des Alten und Mittleren Reiches (AA
34; Wiesbaden, 1977), 115 and 316-17; R. B. Parkinson,
'The Date of the "Tale of the Eloquent Peasant"', RdE 42
(1991), 180; and J. Kahl, "'Es ist vom Anfang bis zum
Ende so gekommen, wie es in der Schrift gefunden wor-
den war": Zur Uberlieferung der Erziihlung des Sinuhe',
in M. Dietrich and I. Kottsieper (eds), 'Und Moses schrieb
dieses Lied auf': Studien zum Alten Testament und zum
Alten Orient. Festschrift fur Oswald Loretz zur Vollendung
seines 70. Lebensjahres (Munster, 1998), 383-400.
61 S. Birch, Inscriptions in the Hieratic and Demotic
Characters (London, 1868), pl. 18 (facsimile); Gardiner
and ierny, Hieratic Ostraca, pl. 88 (hieroglyphic tran-
scription); and R. J. Demaree, Ramesside Ostraca
(London, 2002), 17 and pls. 19-20.
62 RdE 6, 42 n. 54.
2005 THE PROHIBITIONS 151

translators of the text,63as well as others.64The other ostracon is OPetrie 45 (= UC 39644),65

whose relationship to the text (suggested by Gardiner and (erny)66 has been doubted.67

1. OBMEA 5631 (verso)

The verso of this Nineteenth Dynasty68 ostracon preserves two lines written in black ink.
The text reads:
(1) [.ht-]r m sb3ytmtrt dd [m snt?] r ssw iswt (2) imi=k wd r3=k r rnh (end),
(1)[Be]ginning of the educational instructiona spoken [according]b to the ancient writings.
(2)You should not take an oathc...(end)'

(a) sb;yt mtrt, 'educational instruction',69 is a designation only found in the New Kingdom
instructions of Any and Amennakhte.70
(b) In the lacuna after dd I tentatively suggest restoring m snt on the basis of the similar
wording of the introduction to the Second Intermediate Period Rhind Mathematical
Papyrus: '(Now this papyrus roll was copied in year 33, during the fourth month of Akhet,
under the Majesty of King Aa-woser-re) ' li m snt r ss.w n
iswt according to the ancient writings'.71 Examination of the ostracon was inconclusive
concerning the lacuna: there is enough space to restore m snt, but only if the groups were
written in a slightly squashed hand.72 Such a writing would not be inconsistent with the
handwriting in question, which varies considerably in terms of the size of signs and groups,
seen most clearly on the recto of the ostracon.
(c) The normal expression when making an oath is iri rnh or rdi rnh (Wb. I, 202-3); the
construction on this ostracon is unparalleled, but the sense is clear. See also the various
examples of wdi r; listed in the Wb. I, 386.

There is no formal evidence to link The Prohibitions to OBM EA 5631, only indications
of an indirect nature. The corpus of the 'instruction' genre (sb5yt) appears to have been
limited, and this title is unattested for any of the known instructions. None of the known
Middle and New Kingdom instructions where the beginning is preserved starts with a
negative exhortation immediately after the title (cf. Hordedef, Ptahhotep, Merikare, Khety,
Amenemhat I, Loyalist, Man for his Son, Any, Amenemope,Amennakht and Hori). This may
suggest that the title 'Beginning of the educational instruction spoken [according] to the
ancient writings' on OBM EA 5631 belongs to The Prohibitions. In addition, the vast
majority of ancient Egyptian wisdom texts had a title and/or a narrative introduction,73 and
these often draw upon the past for authority,74a practice which the title on OBM EA 5631,
63
Brunner, Die Weisheitsbiicher der Agypter, 215 and Agypten: Verzeichnis der Buch- und Spruchtitel und der
Vernus, Sagesses, 291. Termini technici (Wiesbaden, 1990), 303 (nos. 1394-7);
64 K. Kitchen, 'The Basic Literary Forms and Dorn, ZAS 131, 50-1.
Formulations of Ancient Instructional Writings in Egypt 71 A. B. Chace, L. Bull and H. P.
Manning, The Rhind
and Western Asia', in Hornung and Keel (eds), Lebenslehren, Mathematical Papyrus (Oberlin, OH, 1929), pl. 1 and G.
260, and Bickel and Mathieu, BIFAO 93, 32 n. 14. Robins and C. Shute, The Rhind Mathematical Papyrus
65 Gardiner and Cerny, Hieratic Ostraca, pl. 7 n. 2. (London, 1987), pl. 1.
66 Ibid. 1. 72The space available is 13 mm, which is slightly more
67 Vernus, Sagesses, 295 n. 5: 'l'attribution est tres than the drawing in Gardiner and cIerny, Hieratic Ostraca,
incertaine'. pl. 6 n. 1, indicates.
68 Winand, RdE 46, 196-7. 73Kitchen, in Hornung and Keel, Lebenslehren, 265-8.
69 W.
Spiegelberg, 'Varia', ZAS 53 (1917), 115; Dorn, 74Parkinson, Poetry and Culture, 45; J. Baines,
ZAS 131, 50-1; H.-J. Thissen, Die Lehre des Anch- 'Classicism and Modernism in the Literature of the New
scheschonqi (P BM 10508) (Bonn, 1984), 3-6; idem, Kingdom', in A. Loprieno (ed.), Ancient Egyptian
'Achmim und die demotische Literatur', in A. Egberts, B. Literature: History and Forms (Probleme der Agyptologie
P. Muhs and J. van der Vliet (eds), Perspectives on Tanopolis. 10; Leiden, 1996), 157-74; L. Morenz, Beitrdge zur dgypt-
An Egyptian Town from Alexander the Great to the Arab ischen Schriftlichkeitskultur des Mittleren Reiches und der
Conquest. Acts from an International Symposium Held in Zweiten Zwischenzeit (AAT 29; Wiesbaden, 1996), 190-3
Leiden on 16, 17 and 18 December 1998 (Papyrologica and A. McDowell, 'Awareness of the Past in Deir el-
Lugduno-Batava 31; Leiden, 2002), 253 n. 25. Medina', in R. J. Demaree and A. Egberts (eds), Village
70 S. Schott, Biicher und Bibliotheken im Alten Voices (Leiden, 1992), 95-109.
152 FREDRIK HAGEN JEA 91

though brief, explicitly conforms to through the claim of having been composed '[according]
to the ancient writings'. The Prohibitionsmay be a result of the considerable literary activity
that characterised Deir el-Medina following the post-Amarna Period,75 an activity that also
produced such didactic works as Hori, Amennakht and the literary 'letter' of the
draughtsman Menna, all of which draw on the classical literature of the Middle Kingdom
in one way or another.76Yet The Prohibitionsdiffer from these texts in one important regard.
Fischer-Elfert recently remarked that 'one observable consequence of the individual
authorship of these texts (Hori, Amennakht and Menna) is the emphasis placed on the
personal past of the author and the sense that the instructions were written for a specific,
individual recipient'.77This emphasis is not found in The Prohibitions, and the anonymity of
both author and audience may also support an identification of the 'neutral' titlehnt-r m sb3yt
mtrt dd [m snt?] r ssw iswt on OBM EA 5631 as belonging to this text.
Alternatively OBM EA 5631 may not be related to The Prohibitions at all. Ostraca that
contain only the title h3t-rm sb3ytand little else are not uncommon, and there is some doubt
as to how they should be interpreted. Two examples from the Ramesseum78have such a title
preserved, without any signs of further writing (the space below is empty), and ODeM 1246
has what appears to be a sarcastic play on the common title, where again there is unused
space under the two lines: h3t-rmsmt bin ir.n p3-tw-m-di-imn, 'Beginning of the evil going
which Patjaemdiamun made'.79This raises the question of whether such fragments could be
mere literary 'doodles', rather than the beginning of a copy of a more substantial text.
Without any formal evidence linking The Prohibitions and OBM EA 5631, positing a
relationship between the two would be speculative, although it remains a possibility.

2. OPetrie 45 (= UC 39644)

This ostracon preserves five lines written in black ink, with versepoints and a rubric on the
first line. Only the first line has any similarity with the text of The Prohibitions:

> P i& ^ ^ I which is close but not identical to ODeM 1632 I,

line 4. The last two signs preserved on ODeM 1632 I, line 4 are clearly 1| and not q,
and the word hs has different determinatives on the two ostraca. The
similarity need not imply that the ostracon belongs to The Prohibitions:it also contains the
phrase pbwy nn m ih, 'How will this end?' (line 3) which recurs in both Papyrus Anastasi I
28, 4,80 and in Amenemope6, 19, but without OPetrie 45 sharing any other similarities with
those texts. The use of the negative imperative in line 4 of OPetrie 45 also speaks against the
fragment belonging to The Prohibitions, as that verb form is not employed anywhere in the
text. There each sentence is begun with the negative construction imi=k + sdm, and in the
case where the second part of the bipartite structure is also negative, the construction used
is tm (A7). It would also be difficult to reconcile the sense of line 4 of OPetrie 45 (m ir sdm
n=-, 'Do not listen to me...') with that of The Prohibitions,which by its didactic nature relies
on the authority of the speaker or 'author' towards the audience addressed. The arguments
seem, on balance, to dismiss OPetrie 45 as a possible source for the text.

75See under Date above. ORamesseum 4 = UC 32932 (ibid., pl. i).

76H.-W Fischer-Elfert, 'Representations of the Past
in New Kingdom Literature', in J. Tait (ed.), 'Never Had
the Like Occurred': Egypt's View of its Own Past (London,
2003), 120-3.
77 Ibid. 123.
78 ORamesseum 3 = UC 71099 (W Spiegelberg,
Hieratic Ostraka and Papyri (London 1898), pl. i) and
79 Posener, Catalogue des ostraca hieratiques litteraires
II. 3, pis. 61 and 61a.
80 In H.-W. Fischer-Elfert, Die Satirische
Streitschrift
des Papyrus Anastasi I. Ubersetzung und Kommentar (AA
44; Wiesbaden, 1986), 240 and Die satirische Streitschrift
des Papyrus Anastasi I: Textzusammenstellung (Wies-
baden, 1992), 156.
2005 THE PROHIBITIONS 153

Interpretation

The two most striking stylistic features of the text are the consistent use of imi-k, 'You
should not...', as an introductory device for each saying, and the stichic writing which is rare
in both Middle and New Kingdom literary manuscripts.81 The earliest example of stichic
structure in a literary text is the late Middle Kingdom P Ramesseum II ( P. BM EA
10755).82The manuscript has didactic maxims on the recto and the first column on the verso
written stichically, but from the second column of the verso onwards, the text is written
continuously, and versepoints are introduced here. The manuscript is fragmentary, but the
maxims appear, like The Prohibitions,to be thematically independent from each other. There
the similarities between these two texts end; there are no semantic parallels or similar uses
of formulae to be found. The Twentieth Dynasty composition The Instruction of Hori83 is
also consistently written with one sentence per line (no versepoints or rubrics), a structural
parallel to The Prohibitionsthat appears to be the product of the same site, the village of Deir
el-Medina. Later manuscripts written stichically include P. BM EA 10474 from the Twenty-
sixth Dynasty with the The Instruction of Amenemope, as well as Demotic works, where
stichic writing dominates in wisdom instructions, as in Ankhsheshonqy,84P. Insinger85and P.
Louvre 2414.86
Miriam Lichtheim has noted the structural similarities between The Prohibitionsand the
Demotic instructions, but she downplayed its importance, and dismissed the idea that the
composition could represent a step in the development of ancient Egyptian wisdom
literature that eventually led to the Demotic instructions.87 She did not consider The
Prohibitions a comprehensive composition in its own right, choosing to see it as a 'collection
of raw material' of wise sayings for later use,88 and she argued that the structural similarity
was superficial as 'the essential feature of the Demotic Instructions was the replacement of
the bipartite precept by the single sentence'.89 There are a number of arguments to suggest
that this view needs adjustment. Firstly, the existence of five separate ostraca with parts of
this text preserved, as well as the fixed sequence adhered to by all the sources, indicates a
substantial composition (41+ lines) with a transmission history that exceeds what one may
reasonably expect of a simple notebook collection of 'raw material'. Secondly, although the
individual sentences of The Prohibitionsare thematically independent from each other, there
are loose groupings of words and themes. Boasting (rbr)occurs in A13, C2 and C8. C3 and
C4 both deal with 'raising up an insignificant wrong' (sr.h bt3 hpr -rf m s.ri/ s.hr btusri) with
similar naval imagery (ht, 'mast', and also, in C4, mdhw, 'shipwright'). Behaviour towards
neighbours (s.hw) is the theme of C7, C8 and C9, and the morning which 'has not yet come'
(dw~bw ii.t=f) can be found in both A9 and C5. A further example may be present in Dl and
D5 (imi=k fi ...) but the context is damaged. All of the above suggest that the text was
composed and copied with a sense of unity. Thirdly, the change from bipartite precept to

81 Parkinson, Poetry and Culture, 113.
82 A. H. Gardiner, The Ramesseum Papyri (Oxford,
1955), pls. 3-6; J. W. B. Barns, Five Ramesseum Papyri
(Oxford, 1956), 11-14 and pls. 7-9.
83 Bickel and Mathieu, BIFAO 93, 49 and pl. 8.
84 See n. 10.
85 No
synoptic edition of the text has appeared. Cf.
Lexa, Papyrus Insinger (n. 47); G. P. G. Sobhy, 'Mis-
cellanea', JEA 16 (1930), 3-5; A. Volten, Kopenhagener
Texte zum demotischen Weisheitsbuch (Pap. Carlsberg II,
III verso, IV verso und V) (AnAe 1; Copenhagen, 1940);
idem, Das demotische Weisheitsbuch: Studien und
Bearbeitung (AnAe 2; Copenhagen, 1941); G. Botti and A.
Volten, 'Florentiner Fragmente zum Texte des Pap.
Insinger', Acta Orientalia 25 (1960), 29-42; K.-T.
Zauzich, 'Berliner Fragmente zum Texte des Pap.
Insinger (Papyri Berlin P 23726, P 23728, P 23824,
P 23825)', Enchoria 5 (1975), 119-22; M. Pezin, 'Premiers
raccords effectues sur les documents demotiques de Lille',
CRIPEL 8 (1986), 89-98; F. de Cenival, 'Fragment de
Sagesse apparentee au Papyrus Insinger (P. Universite de
Lille III Inv. P. dem. Lille 34)', CRIPEL 12 (1990), 93-6;
and J. R. Houser Wegner, 'Missing Fragments of P.
Insinger in the University of Pennsylvania Museum', in
Eyre (ed.), Proceedings of the Seventh International
Congress of Egyptologists, 569-74.
86 Lichtheim, Late Egyptian Wisdom Literature,
93-100 and Volten, in Studi Rosellini II, 271-80 and pls.
34-5.
87 Late Egyptian Wisdom Literature, 9-10.
88 Ibid.
89 Ibid. 10.
 154 FREDRIK HAGEN JEA 91

single sentence in Demotic instructions is not all-pervasive, and traces of the bipartite
structure displayed in The Prohibitionsremain. Ankhsheshonqy11, 5-6 reads, in Lichtheim's
translation: 'Do not be a hindrance often, lest you be reviled. Do not get drunk often, lest
you rave'.90 This is very close to the structure employed by The Prohibitions, most explicitly
in A7: 'You should not take a wife more powerful than yourself, lest [...]'.
There are few indications in the text itself of who its imagined audience might be, and
the same is true about the imagined author, who remains anonymous. With no narrative
prologue setting the scene, we are left without a social context for the distribution of the
wisdom contained in the text.91 Few, if any, of the maxims are socially bound, and so reveal
little about the imagined audience: although A14 warns against taking advantage of the
property of the king, it does not specify if this is property controlled by the individual in
question. A1 5 mentions the royal palace, and D2 concerns a member of the Qenbet, but
both appear in damaged contexts. Cl and C8 may indicate an audience used to physical
labour but this could equally well be the use of rural practices and settings as metaphors.92
The warnings in A1 3 and Cl both concern behaviour 'while you are young' (iw=k m rnn),
perhaps indicating a youthful audience. This would be in line with the narrative
introductions provided by other instructions where the beginning is preserved.93
The actual audience of the text can be inferred from the provenance of the sources, Deir
el-Medina, although no specific individuals can be linked to its creation or reception. The
presence of the text on ostraca raises the question of whether these could be student
exercises. Of the sources for The Prohibitions, the only ostracon that shows any hint of
having been used for 'practice' (which is not necessarily connected to organised education)
is ODeM 1090. Its verso has the title ss qd n imn m st [mrt ...], 'Draughtsman of Amun in
the Place [of Maat...]', written twice (horizontally and vertically), as well as some individual
signs.94However, the identification of literary ostraca as primarily exercises is problematic,95
and in the absence of dates96and dedicatory colophons97 on any of the ostraca in question,
I would hesitate to associate the text with a formal educational context.
The exact relationship between The Prohibitions and both earlier and later wisdom
instructions cannot be reconstructed due to the fragmentary nature of the text. The low
number of sources, as well as their limited geographical and temporal distribution, makes it
difficult to assess its position in the literary tradition, although links with the later Demotic
instructions can be demonstrated.98 The composition is found on five (or six if OBM EA
5631 is included) separate sources at Deir el-Medina, which places it among the better

90 Ibid. 10. and McDowell, in Demaree and Egberts (eds), Village

91 Such a narrative prologue, both in terms of audi-
ence and author, need not (and probably should not) be
taken literally: Parkinson, Poetry and Culture, 75-80.
92 Compare the use of agricultural metaphors for
wealth and prosperity in Ptahhotep 161-5 (Prisse 7, 5): 'As
for when you plough, and there is plenty in the field...'
93 For Middle Kingdom
compositions, see Parkinson,
Poetry and Culture, 313-19. See the overview of narrative
prologues in instructions of all periods by Kitchen, in
Hornung and Keel, Lebenslehren, 265-8.
94Posener, Catalogue des ostraca hieratiques litteraires I,
23. As photographs of this ostracon were unavailable, I do
not know the signs which he referred to. Compare perhaps
ODAIK 85/60 (H. Guksch, 'Grabherstellung und
Ostraka-Produktion', in H. Guksch and D. Polz (eds),
Stationen. Beitrdge zur Kulturgeschichte Agyptens. Rainer
Stadelmann gewidmet (Mainz, 1998), 281-90 and pi. 14)
which preserves part of The Instruction of Amenemhat I
next to scribbles of individual signs and drawings.
95 Compare the views of B. van de Walle, La transmis-
sion des texts litteraires egyptiens (Brussels, 1948), 18; H.
Brunner, Altdgyptische Erziehung (Wiesbaden, 1957), 66
Voices, 95-6, with J. Qerny, review of van de Walle,
Transmission, in CdE 24 (1949), 68-71; J. J. Janssen,
'Literacy and Letters at Deir el-Medina', in Demaree and
Egberts (eds), Village Voices, 86; and D. van der Plas,
L'Hymne a la crue du Nil (Leiden, 1986), 12-13. For the
use of non-literary ostraca, see K. Donker van Heel and
B. J. J. Haring, Writing in a Workmen's Village. Scribal
Practice in Ramesside Deir el-Medina (EU 16;
Leiden, 2003).
96 A. McDowell, 'Student Exercises from Deir el-
Medina: The Dates', in P. der Manuelian (ed.), Studies in
Honor of William Kelly Simpson (Boston, 1996), II,
601-8.
97 A. McDowell, 'Teachers and Students at Deir el-
Medina', in R. Demaree and A. Egberts (eds), Deir el-
Medina in the Third Millennium AD. A Tribute to Jac. J.
Janssen (Leiden, 2000), 217-33.
98 Compare, for example, A7 with Ankhsheshonqy 27,
7; A8 with Anksheshonqy 17, 14; A10 with Anksheshonqy 7,
22; Cl with Anksheshonqy 6, 18-19 and 8, 15; C2 with
Anksheshonqy 6, 10 and 8, 16; and also C6 and C7 with P.
Insinger 16, 1-2, 8 and 11.
2005 THE PROHIBITIONS 155

attested literary texts at the village, ahead of such well-known Middle Egyptian classics as
and Merikare.100
Ptahhotep99

99Attested on three ostraca: ODeM 1232-34 (Posener, Catalogue des ostraca hieratique litteraires III, 48 and pl.
Catalogue des ostraca hieratique litteraires II, 34 and pls. 61 32). Identified by J. E Quack, 'Zwei Ostraka-
and 61a). Identifizierungen', GM 115 (1990), 83-4.
100Attested on one ostracon: ODeM 1476 (Posener,
156 FREDRIKHAGEN JEA91

I I I i I I

FIG. 1. ODeM 1632 Ia.

f I I I I I

FIG. 2. ODeM 1632 Ib.

2005 THE PROHIBITIONS 157

i I I ' I I
FIG. 3. ODeM 1632 Ic.

ole.~~

I f i I I 1
FIG. 4. ODeM 1632 Id.
158 FREDRIK HAGEN JEA 91

FIG. 5. ODeM 1632 Ie.

FIG. 6. ODeM 1632 II.

2005 THE PROHIBITIONS 159

I -I -----
I'-~ I I I -
·.. --- · .

FIG. 7. ODeM 1632 III.

- . T -
- I ---I l I
FIG. 8. ODeM 1633.
160 FREDRIK HAGEN JEA 91

, /

I/ \

x, /]

\ \: .....
.. i
%. ... i "'x

\ \~~~~~~
\ 1

\, )

\ k

) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~/

:- j

\< /*
.f'x
J

/
j
FG9.O
e
FI.9 162l-easmldJ'
s s DM13aIemled

FIG. 10. ODeM 1090 (after Posener, Catalogue des ostraca hieratiques litteraires I, pl. 49a).
2005 THE PROHIBITIONS 161

i~~~~~ BL ~ ~', <

:. '.

w, .·..
·XeE ~. ~~. ~~~~ .

*'J,. zw,X

FIG. 11. OTurin 57089 (courtesy of Museo delle Antichita Egizie, Turin).
162 FREDRIK HAGEN JEA 91

.
.... ·. .... . :...
....-~::.,:/i,~.~:~:~ ...... ~, ~ ~
~. ". '. ;' ;. · ..."'~.
.....·r. '..' ....7': :. I ~

7-b
· ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~s'
' ' '

'::
.....~~~~~~~~.::
. . .....
:·.:.......
'
40P*Al: "'f-"

..,!~ ~ ~·
.::'':,,"; ;

'
~ i.',.''
'""~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
·· 'I·M
l ··"' UA;~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
'"
,~ ~~·:.·.. .:

·· ":"~ ,
!}"" ~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:.
·.~~~~~ .. 0~· ~,~,~'~:'"..,Z.:,7'

· . ~~ ':..........
~.....
; ,' ~ '!'""'"
·......
·..,.IN-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
" " Q4-
:rr~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~..
'Al:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~,
~*~""7.=..:

....... i, ~ .I
Tf~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ;· . . . . ' :

.... . ... . .. ,,,..., :.

Ali;
,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
:; ·

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~·:

'~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"'!
:1";.·:
::
,";; .
}. jj~~~~J1
. . ...·.5.:~!: ., ..:;. i'. *~
;}.:{;:.:;;; .
:F ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ..;~~~~~~~·
~ i ) :I-: ....·::~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4
i·L~~~~~~~~~·
;"; ~ i:+ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q
¼ ~~~~~j~ :
~.'~.l~,!:
·I -t:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~ ·01; ;;~~~~~~~~ .............
Ud
.
C
·'

C4)
P-r~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I
 . ; ' .... s ' I . .--r . r .. --S~~~ - - .- SW-

2005 THE PROHIBITIONS 163

':%..,,;,*_
0

!,
* 1
.:.
.
...
0
A:
X
I
< ,

_o

*i'.

*- 'e S 4 . -

. ,.

'
41 ^ ^A.... ,' i

.v ' wl k;, !:.. .o

;n". < .'
1

*^ "-- Aw-
r
..
-,
.II;
.
:-, '.

-1%..N- . - -,
.
1, -z

__ -s t . t . A_
r-a
.L > i-oa
'4-
.)
2.ji
¢.i
'.S
vt
..A;
.,
. :-'"'.'
*:"-: t,~".' :}[.,. .....! ,,, . '-...'
'.' ............. r':. '

:: ..t. ·..x4< ._, _ ;S!0

....
...
.f'.
[,
..U
S"'
_EX
_tb;e,-,@;,bS,-*0
e'Akt ' * .
_nr"* . Co

:#\16F4..t . 14- . @_kteg 0,v' .0

S~~~~~U
,.1_
..-,.,
..........,
_bXe

»T:;t
t
:^itaP'..'.
s
.
ig WS~~~~~,,,;
B.<s
GgB,'.a.E,, Se_;-

I; " ; a.:.. ..M, ''#-' . _ @~~~~~0~

. i.s _ .;~~~~~~Cr
.:I- .4!
r:U
iF:# ri I | =~~~~~~~~
W. ', ''Sa ] L~~~~U

Q - O~~~~~Q
~-~~ ~$~4.~ ~~'"'~
4 ? t :s' "" S
X s XE >~~~~~~~Cr
g £ge x;
eyvb _~C
164 FREDRIK HAGEN JEA 91

.!Pt
&i:,-?

r
P~~~SK
I

FIG. 14. Photograph of OPetrie 11 (= UC 39614), side view (courtesy of The Petrie Museum of Egyptian
Archaeology, London).