The Narmer Catalog

Inscription Detail

4746 (Unusual Narmer(?) serekh from Kharga Oasis)

Source No: 4746

Date: Narmer(?)

Dated by: royal name

Type: rock inscription

Material: rock

Region: Western desert

Site: Kharga Oasis

Locality:

Depository: in situ

Registration No.

References

Ikram and Rossi, 2004

pp. 211-15

p. 212, fig. 1; p. 213, fig. 2

Jiménez-Serrano, 2007

p. 309 (4D-KHR1)

Darnell, 2011

p. 1181

p. 1181, fig. 16

Alejandro Jiménez-Serrano, personal communication, 2015

J.-P. Pätznick, personal communication, 2017

Regulski, Database of Early Dynastic Inscriptions

Comments

Ikram and Rossi 2004 say that the name is unlikely to be Narmer, but might be "Aa" ('3), a previously unattested king belonging to Dynasty 0 or the First Dynasty.
According to Jiménez-Serrano (personal communication, 2015), "... this representation is a schematic version of the "classical" representaion of the royal
serekh. Ikram & Rossi's reading of '3 has no evidence from the archaeological or epigraphic point of view. Thus, the existence of a new king called '3 or the representation of a royal concept inserted into a serekh has no parallel as far as I know. The closest representation of this depiction is Narmer's name, in this case the schematic sign must be read as Nar."
Darnell 2011 says that the inscription "may" be Qa'a, based on his interpretation of the sign in the
serekh as a forearm (D36), which is one of the two constituents of name of Qa'a.
According to Pätznick (personal communication, 2017) this is not Narmer. It could be a cursive form of Den, or a previously unattested local king.
Regulski dates it by paleography to "(Naqada III - dyn. 2)". She reads the sign in the
serekh as a firearm (O33), which would be consistent with a reading of Qa'a, but leaves the name of the king undetermined.

Editor's Note: In the name panel of the
serekh is an inscription that could be interpreted as a stylized catfish, to which is appended a vertical line, carved at the left end of the horizontal catfish sign. If one were to disregard this vertical line, it would be reasonable to read the name of Nar(mer) . However, to be able to do so, one needs to interpret the vertical line as being spurious – either an error on the part of the scribe or a later addition. This vertical line is unlikely to be the representation of the chisel hieroglyph - the chisel is never simply represented by a line, nor is it ever shown upright in the name panel. No convincing reading incorporating the vertical line has been proposed, thus strengthening the hypothesis that the vertical line should not be taken into consideration when reading the inscription.
This inscription was listed earlier in the Narmer Catalog as 6015.

4746 (Unusual Narmer(?) serekh from Kharga Oasis)

Ikram and Rossi, 2004, p. 213, fig. 2

4746 (Unusual Narmer(?) serekh from Kharga Oasis)

Ikram and Rossi, 2004, p. 212, fig. 1


The Narmer Catalog

Inscription Detail

Source No:4746
Date:Narmer(?)
Dated by:royal name
Type:rock inscription
Material:rock
Region:Western desert
Site:Kharga Oasis
Locality:
Depository:in situ
Registration No.
References Discussion Figure/Plate
Ikram and Rossi, 2004 pp. 211-15 p. 212, fig. 1; p. 213, fig. 2
Jiménez-Serrano, 2007 p. 309 (4D-KHR1)
Darnell, 2011 p. 1181 p. 1181, fig. 16
Alejandro Jiménez-Serrano, personal communication, 2015
J.-P. Pätznick, personal communication, 2017
Regulski, Database of Early Dynastic Inscriptions

Comments: Ikram and Rossi 2004 say that the name is unlikely to be Narmer, but might be "Aa" ('3), a previously unattested king belonging to Dynasty 0 or the First Dynasty. According to Jiménez-Serrano (personal communication, 2015), "... this representation is a schematic version of the "classical" representaion of the royal serekh. Ikram & Rossi's reading of '3 has no evidence from the archaeological or epigraphic point of view. Thus, the existence of a new king called '3 or the representation of a royal concept inserted into a serekh has no parallel as far as I know. The closest representation of this depiction is Narmer's name, in this case the schematic sign must be read as Nar." Darnell 2011 says that the inscription "may" be Qa'a, based on his interpretation of the sign in the serekh as a forearm (D36), which is one of the two constituents of name of Qa'a. According to Pätznick (personal communication, 2017) this is not Narmer. It could be a cursive form of Den, or a previously unattested local king. Regulski dates it by paleography to "(Naqada III - dyn. 2)". She reads the sign in the serekh as a firearm (O33), which would be consistent with a reading of Qa'a, but leaves the name of the king undetermined. Editor's Note: In the name panel of the serekh is an inscription that could be interpreted as a stylized catfish, to which is appended a vertical line, carved at the left end of the horizontal catfish sign. If one were to disregard this vertical line, it would be reasonable to read the name of Nar(mer) . However, to be able to do so, one needs to interpret the vertical line as being spurious – either an error on the part of the scribe or a later addition. This vertical line is unlikely to be the representation of the chisel hieroglyph - the chisel is never simply represented by a line, nor is it ever shown upright in the name panel. No convincing reading incorporating the vertical line has been proposed, thus strengthening the hypothesis that the vertical line should not be taken into consideration when reading the inscription. This inscription was listed earlier in the Narmer Catalog as 6015.


Images

4746 (Unusual Narmer(?) serekh from Kharga Oasis)

Ikram and Rossi, 2004, p. 213, fig. 2

4746 (Unusual Narmer(?) serekh from Kharga Oasis)

Ikram and Rossi, 2004, p. 212, fig. 1

Inscription not found

Ok