Further observations on Ugarit and Egypt in the Early New Kingdom

Julien Cooper, Anna-Latifa Mourad

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

A recent and elucidating article by Federico Zangani has rightly sought to integrate the name Ugarit into records of the earlier New Kingdom by associating the word IkAT of the Memphis and Karnak stele of Amenhotep II with Ugarit. The argument as to whether these texts mention historical Ugarit has undergone extensive debate by both Egyptian philologists and Semiticists, with several waves of revision and acceptance.The main point of dissension is whether the writing and phonetics of IkAT accurately transcribe Ugarit or rather another placename entirely. This small contribution builds on Zangani’s work and also proposes another possibility, that the Amenhotep II orthography is indicative of an earlier epoch of knowledge of Ugarit in the Middle Kingdom. It additionally clarifies the situation of writing foreign toponyms in this text and the period more generally.
LanguageEnglish
Pages63-74
Number of pages12
JournalGöttinger Miszellen
Volume258
Publication statusPublished - 2019
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

New Kingdom
Egypt
Ugarit
Orthography
Place Names
Karnak
Indicative
Egyptians
Stelae
Acceptance
Middle Kingdom
Toponyms
Waves
Philologists
Names
Transcribe

Keywords

  • Ugarit
  • Egypt
  • Near East
  • Middle Bronze Age
  • New Kingdom
  • Middle Kingdom
  • Toponyms
  • Orthography
  • Amenhotep II
  • Foreign relations
  • Late Bronze Age

Cite this

@article{23c8aebdc9bd4fc9ac40a1e18014ee4a,
title = "Further observations on Ugarit and Egypt in the Early New Kingdom",
abstract = "A recent and elucidating article by Federico Zangani has rightly sought to integrate the name Ugarit into records of the earlier New Kingdom by associating the word IkAT of the Memphis and Karnak stele of Amenhotep II with Ugarit. The argument as to whether these texts mention historical Ugarit has undergone extensive debate by both Egyptian philologists and Semiticists, with several waves of revision and acceptance.The main point of dissension is whether the writing and phonetics of IkAT accurately transcribe Ugarit or rather another placename entirely. This small contribution builds on Zangani’s work and also proposes another possibility, that the Amenhotep II orthography is indicative of an earlier epoch of knowledge of Ugarit in the Middle Kingdom. It additionally clarifies the situation of writing foreign toponyms in this text and the period more generally.",
keywords = "Ugarit, Egypt, Near East, Middle Bronze Age, New Kingdom, Middle Kingdom, Toponyms, Orthography, Amenhotep II, Foreign relations, Late Bronze Age",
author = "Julien Cooper and Anna-Latifa Mourad",
year = "2019",
language = "English",
volume = "258",
pages = "63--74",
journal = "G{\"o}ttinger Miszellen",
issn = "0344-385X",
publisher = "Gottingen: Seminar fur Agyptologie und Koptologie",

}

Further observations on Ugarit and Egypt in the Early New Kingdom. / Cooper, Julien; Mourad, Anna-Latifa.

In: Göttinger Miszellen, Vol. 258, 2019, p. 63-74.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Further observations on Ugarit and Egypt in the Early New Kingdom

AU - Cooper, Julien

AU - Mourad, Anna-Latifa

PY - 2019

Y1 - 2019

N2 - A recent and elucidating article by Federico Zangani has rightly sought to integrate the name Ugarit into records of the earlier New Kingdom by associating the word IkAT of the Memphis and Karnak stele of Amenhotep II with Ugarit. The argument as to whether these texts mention historical Ugarit has undergone extensive debate by both Egyptian philologists and Semiticists, with several waves of revision and acceptance.The main point of dissension is whether the writing and phonetics of IkAT accurately transcribe Ugarit or rather another placename entirely. This small contribution builds on Zangani’s work and also proposes another possibility, that the Amenhotep II orthography is indicative of an earlier epoch of knowledge of Ugarit in the Middle Kingdom. It additionally clarifies the situation of writing foreign toponyms in this text and the period more generally.

AB - A recent and elucidating article by Federico Zangani has rightly sought to integrate the name Ugarit into records of the earlier New Kingdom by associating the word IkAT of the Memphis and Karnak stele of Amenhotep II with Ugarit. The argument as to whether these texts mention historical Ugarit has undergone extensive debate by both Egyptian philologists and Semiticists, with several waves of revision and acceptance.The main point of dissension is whether the writing and phonetics of IkAT accurately transcribe Ugarit or rather another placename entirely. This small contribution builds on Zangani’s work and also proposes another possibility, that the Amenhotep II orthography is indicative of an earlier epoch of knowledge of Ugarit in the Middle Kingdom. It additionally clarifies the situation of writing foreign toponyms in this text and the period more generally.

KW - Ugarit

KW - Egypt

KW - Near East

KW - Middle Bronze Age

KW - New Kingdom

KW - Middle Kingdom

KW - Toponyms

KW - Orthography

KW - Amenhotep II

KW - Foreign relations

KW - Late Bronze Age

M3 - Article

VL - 258

SP - 63

EP - 74

JO - Göttinger Miszellen

T2 - Göttinger Miszellen

JF - Göttinger Miszellen

SN - 0344-385X

ER -