- mḏḥ: Plantikow-Münster (in: ZÄS 95, 1969, 134) transliterates this word wḏḥ which may be a typographical error for mḏḥ ‘to carpenter (especially boats)’ (Wb. II, 190). The same word is used by Roma-Roy in his narration of barque building (KRI IV, 208,14).
- snw: Flagpoles are more usually associated with pylons, complicating earlier interpretations of Bakenkhons’ inscription. For example, both Yoyotte (in: Kêmi 14, 1957: 88) and Barguet (Le temple d'Amon-Rê à Karnak: essai d’exégèse (re-edition). Cairo 2006: 302 with n. 7) suggested that snw here might refer to elements in Heliopolitan architecture, and so would be appropriate to a solar temple. Wallet-Lebrun considers (Le grand livre de pierre: les textes de construction à Karnak. Études d'égyptologie 9; Mémoires de l'Académie des inscriptions et belles-lettres, nouvelle série 41. Paris 2009: 258) that the flagpoles were replacements commissioned by Bakenkhons for the second pylon. If correct, Bakenkhons’ text would associate major points of entry into temple at either end of the east-west axis, generating a claim to both. Konrad (Architektur und Theologie, Wiesbaden 2006: 39–41) also argues that the ḏꜣḏꜣ would have been located at the western, riverine entrance. However, Laetitia Gallet observes (Karnak: the temple of Amun-Ra-who-hears-prayers. Edited by Willeke Wendrich. UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology 2013 (July): 2) that the battered door jambs of the long entrance corridor evoke pylon architecture, so that the temple’s entrance could have been an appropriate place for flagpoles. Thus all the elements in Bakenkhons’ text can belong to the eastern temple.

Autor:in des Kommentars: Elizabeth Frood