OCR
he words wb3 and wdpw 1.1. wb3 VS. wdpw — THE READING OF THE TWO WORDS Although the usage of the two words, wb3 and wdpw was very similar, their readings are clear and definitely not interchangeable. Observing the presence and forms of the appearance of the two words may help to clarify this in regard to their usage. In one of his articles, Malek deals with the tomb of Hori in Saqqara,° who bore — among others — the official title wb3 nswt ‘royal wb3’. In one of his notes, Malek mentions the interchangeability of the reading of its hieroglyphic sign group as wb3 or wdpw, furthermore, he consistently uses the transcription wdpw/wb} for the title. The note in question says the following: ‘wdpw/wb3 nswt. The former reading is currently preferred, but a convincing demonstration of its merits is still lacking.” He does not make it clear whether his statement concerns the reading of the particular hieroglyphic sign group appearing in the tomb of Hori or the sign group itself generally, but the latter seems likely. Looking at the occurrences of the title in the tomb and their description in the article, it can be observed that in all four cases it is written in the same way as the sign group +7 ‘the reading of which is certainly wb3 nswt." Although some variations of the sign group of wb3 might actually be similar to that of wdpw,’ there were, nevertheless always some differences between the two sign groups. Based on these differences, which could be a single characteristic sign, a phonetic complement or a determinative, it is possible to tell which reading is proper in a particular case. The reading of the two sign groups is obvious and definitely not interchangeable; neither of them is preferable to the other since they are 6 Malek, 1988, 125-136. 7 Malek, 1988, 134, n. 33. Malek, 1988, 128, figs. 2a, b, d; 130, fig. 3. ° Gardiner, 1947, 43*-44"; Erman — Grapow, 1971, Bd. I, 292; Schulman, 1976, 217, n. 11. © Cf. Erman — Grapow, 1971, Bd. I, 292, 388; as well as Tables 1-4. of the present work on pp. 26-29.