Go to the Egyptian Dreams shop
Egyptian Dreams
Ancient Egypt Discussion Board
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Budge: An Egyptian Hieroglyphic Dictionary

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Egyptian Dreams Forum Index -> Books
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Daughter_Of_SETI
Divine Adoratrice


Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 2563
Location: Hull, UK

PostPosted: Tue Jan 18, 2011 8:05 pm    Post subject: Budge: An Egyptian Hieroglyphic Dictionary Reply with quote

Can be downloaded in two parts from here:

Volume 1 Arrow http://www.archive.org/details/egyptianhierogly01budguoft
Volume 2 Arrow http://www.archive.org/details/egyptianhierogly02budguoft

Enjoy! Very Happy
_________________


In ancient times cats were worshipped as gods; they have not forgotten this - Terry Pratchett.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Toth
Account Suspended


Joined: 07 Jun 2010
Posts: 1781
Location: Amsterdam, The Netherlands

PostPosted: Tue Jan 18, 2011 9:09 pm    Post subject: Re: Budge: An Egyptian Hieroglyphic Dictionary Reply with quote

Daughter_Of_SETI wrote:
Can be downloaded in two parts from here:

Volume 1 Arrow http://www.archive.org/details/egyptianhierogly01budguoft
Volume 2 Arrow http://www.archive.org/details/egyptianhierogly02budguoft

Enjoy! Very Happy


Wow, Daughter_of_SETI, that is quite a read! While the introduction is interesting, but "brief" wasn't his style right? But I would love to have it printed (and not by my poor printer Smile )

Richard, aka
_________________
[img]http://www.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/8fc1c47be2.png[/img]
[i][b][color=#0080FF]Toth[/color][/b][/i]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ranoferhotep
Vizier
Vizier


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 1197
Location: Ghent (Gent - Belgium)

PostPosted: Wed Jan 19, 2011 5:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

@ Toth, I still use them to write my own texts in hieroglyphs. They aren’t reprinted anymore, but you can still find them on several book sites to buy. I wouldn’t buy them second hand though, if you miss some pages, you can’t find all the words back you are looking for.

If you can download the pdf file, and you save the pdf files to your hard disk, you can mail it to a copy center who can print it for you. I do that always with large pdf files, they print them recto/verso and even bundle them at very low prices.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Toth
Account Suspended


Joined: 07 Jun 2010
Posts: 1781
Location: Amsterdam, The Netherlands

PostPosted: Wed Jan 19, 2011 5:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ranoferhotep wrote:
@ Toth, I still use them to write my own texts in hieroglyphs. They aren’t reprinted anymore, but you can still find them on several book sites to buy. I wouldn’t buy them second hand though, if you miss some pages, you can’t find all the words back you are looking for.

If you can download the pdf file, and you save the pdf files to your hard disk, you can mail it to a copy center who can print it for you. I do that always with large pdf files, they print them recto/verso and even bundle them at very low prices.


I know, Ranoferhotep
. I may have to consider the copy-shop option 760 pages in part one, I even haven't looked at part 2, I fear for a cardiac arrest (hartstilstand) Wink

Richard, aka
_________________
[img]http://www.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/8fc1c47be2.png[/img]
[i][b][color=#0080FF]Toth[/color][/b][/i]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ranoferhotep
Vizier
Vizier


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 1197
Location: Ghent (Gent - Belgium)

PostPosted: Wed Jan 19, 2011 6:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Toth wrote:
Ranoferhotep wrote:
@ Toth, I still use them to write my own texts in hieroglyphs. They aren’t reprinted anymore, but you can still find them on several book sites to buy. I wouldn’t buy them second hand though, if you miss some pages, you can’t find all the words back you are looking for.

If you can download the pdf file, and you save the pdf files to your hard disk, you can mail it to a copy center who can print it for you. I do that always with large pdf files, they print them recto/verso and even bundle them at very low prices.


I know, Ranoferhotep
. I may have to consider the copy-shop option 760 pages in part one, I even haven't looked at part 2, I fear for a cardiac arrest (hartstilstand) Wink

Richard, aka


I have the two books. Can’t download the two pdf files to my computer, damn, would be more easy to find something back.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Toth
Account Suspended


Joined: 07 Jun 2010
Posts: 1781
Location: Amsterdam, The Netherlands

PostPosted: Wed Jan 19, 2011 6:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ranoferhotep wrote:
Toth wrote:
Ranoferhotep wrote:
@ Toth, I still use them to write my own texts in hieroglyphs. They aren’t reprinted anymore, but you can still find them on several book sites to buy. I wouldn’t buy them second hand though, if you miss some pages, you can’t find all the words back you are looking for.

If you can download the pdf file, and you save the pdf files to your hard disk, you can mail it to a copy center who can print it for you. I do that always with large pdf files, they print them recto/verso and even bundle them at very low prices.


I know, Ranoferhotep
. I may have to consider the copy-shop option 760 pages in part one, I even haven't looked at part 2, I fear for a cardiac arrest (hartstilstand) Wink

Richard, aka


I have the two books. Can’t download the two pdf files to my computer, damn, would be more easy to find something back.


If you have a large enough mailbox, I can mail them, but..uhm they are garphic scans for hieroglyphic pages, and those are non-searchable , I have both versions, your current mailbox won't work, that one stops at 10 MB, even GMail wouldn't ork, they allow attachments also up to 10 MB and the two together is around 80 MB, so.. if you have a solution to get them to you, PM it to me, I'll be happy to send them to you!

Richard, aka
_________________
[img]http://www.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/8fc1c47be2.png[/img]
[i][b][color=#0080FF]Toth[/color][/b][/i]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Unas
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 13 Oct 2010
Posts: 245
Location: Wisconsin, USA

PostPosted: Sat Feb 05, 2011 2:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have the Dover edition of Volume 1---bought it without realizing that it only included half of the work! Laughing It is, however, a very nice book and looks great on the shelf inbetween "Royal Families" and "Daily Life in Ancient Egypt."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ranoferhotep
Vizier
Vizier


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 1197
Location: Ghent (Gent - Belgium)

PostPosted: Sat Feb 05, 2011 9:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Toth wrote:
Ranoferhotep wrote:
Toth wrote:
Ranoferhotep wrote:
@ Toth, I still use them to write my own texts in hieroglyphs. They aren’t reprinted anymore, but you can still find them on several book sites to buy. I wouldn’t buy them second hand though, if you miss some pages, you can’t find all the words back you are looking for.

If you can download the pdf file, and you save the pdf files to your hard disk, you can mail it to a copy center who can print it for you. I do that always with large pdf files, they print them recto/verso and even bundle them at very low prices.


I know, Ranoferhotep
. I may have to consider the copy-shop option 760 pages in part one, I even haven't looked at part 2, I fear for a cardiac arrest (hartstilstand) Wink

Richard, aka


I have the two books. Can’t download the two pdf files to my computer, damn, would be more easy to find something back.


If you have a large enough mailbox, I can mail them, but..uhm they are garphic scans for hieroglyphic pages, and those are non-searchable , I have both versions, your current mailbox won't work, that one stops at 10 MB, even GMail wouldn't ork, they allow attachments also up to 10 MB and the two together is around 80 MB, so.. if you have a solution to get them to you, PM it to me, I'll be happy to send them to you!

Richard, aka


I’ve installed another version to download pdf files and succeeded in downloading them. And I can use the search function. Still thanks for trying to help me out.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Toth
Account Suspended


Joined: 07 Jun 2010
Posts: 1781
Location: Amsterdam, The Netherlands

PostPosted: Sat Feb 05, 2011 1:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

@Ranoferhotep: You're welcome!

Richard, aka
_________________
[img]http://www.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/8fc1c47be2.png[/img]
[i][b][color=#0080FF]Toth[/color][/b][/i]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sam.Raman.na.Marú:t.Nahah
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 27 Oct 2011
Posts: 8
Location: Boston

PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 3:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Interesting dictionary.
Although some things are indeed outdated, I admit I'm still using it for translations, along with other more modern dictionaries.
It does give a good insight and better understanding for some terms.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BobManske
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 24 Nov 2007
Posts: 350

PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 6:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I agree. Budge's dictionary contains very useful information which is difficult to obtain from elsewhere. Of course, caution is required. caveat lector! But I have found it at times indispensable.

Bob
_________________
In the beginning the universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.
- Douglas Adams

Good bye, Doug, thanks a lot, and you're welcome for all the fish. Stop by our way again.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
neseret
Vizier
Vizier


Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Posts: 1033
Location: United Kingdom

PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 7:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sam.Raman.na.Marú:t.Nahah wrote:
Interesting dictionary.
Although some things are indeed outdated, I admit I'm still using it for translations, along with other more modern dictionaries.
It does give a good insight and better understanding for some terms.


I can't really think of a worst source for rendering translations, quite honestly. Many of Budge's terms in his dictionary are not only outdated, but mistranslated, and thus, are wrong.

I would go with something like the following, were I attempting to get an accurate translation, for not only the terms, but also grammar:

Allen, J. P. 2000. Middle Egyptian: An Introduction to the Language and Culture of Hieroglyphs. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Faulkner, R. O. 1991 (1962). A Concise Dictionary of Middle Egyptian. Oxford: Griffith Institute.

Gardiner, A. H. 2005 (1957). Egyptian Grammar: Being an Introduction to the Study of Hieroglyphs. Third Ed., Revised. Oxford: Griffith Institute.

Hannig, R. 1995. Die Sprache der Pharaonen: Großes Handwörterbuch Ägyptisch-Deutsch (2800 - 950 v. Chr.). Kulturegeschichte der Antiken Welt 64. Mainz: von Zabern.

Hannig, R. 2000. Die Sprache der Pharaonen: Großes Handwörterbuch Deutsch-Ägyptisch (2800 - 950 v. Chr.). (Lexica 3.). Kulturegeschichte der Antiken Welt 86. Mainz: von Zabern.

Shennum, D. 1977. English-Egyptian Index of Faulkner's Concise Dictionary of Middle Egyptian. ARTANES [Aids and Research Tools in Ancient Near East Studies] I. Malibu: Undena Publications.

As the work, Who Was Who in Egyptology, Morris Bierbrier (ed), [Third Revised Edition] (EES: London, 1995) noted in its discussion of Budge's life and work:

"In his text editions, Budge was too prolific for careful work, and many of them are inaccurate by modern standards; he persisted in the use of an old system of transcription, and did not utilize many of the grammatical discoveries of the Berlin School." [p. 72]

In a review of Budge's life, Dennis Forbes of KMT: A Modern Journal of Ancient Egypt, was more detailed, noting that:

After Howard Carter, Budge is, arguably, the Egyptologist best known to the English-speaking public. This is due in large part to the plethora of books by him which have, in recent years, been re-issued by Dover publishers, now that they are in the public domain. Regrettably, many lay individuals who are just discovering ancient Egypt as a topic of personal research and study turn to Budge's wide-ranging volumes -- chiefly because of their easy availability -- without realizing they were written, many of them, nearly a century ago and are very much out of date. This is because a great deal of the author's scholarship was flawed in its time, or today has been negated by new discoveries and a far-better understanding of the ancient Egyptian culture than was possessed by Budge during his heyday. In the world of modern scholarship, matriculating students and Ph.D's alike are particularly careful not to cite E.A. Wallis Budge as a source of authority for their own research or writings, unless it is a negative reference.
<...>
But Wallis Budge is to be most faulted for his extraordinarily prolific output of 140 separate books and editions (some of the latter running into several volumes), a great many, if not most, of which failed to achieve the highest critical standards of scholarship, as a result of too speedy publication and Budge's habit of disregarding the work and publications of his Egyptological contemporaries, many of whom were advancing understanding of the written language and cultural nuances of ancient Egypt somewhat beyond Budge's own.

Forbes, D. 1997. Giants of Egyptology: E.A. Wallis Budge (1857-1943). KMT: A Modern Journal of Ancient Egypt 8/2 (Summer 1997): 78-80.

When a modern scholar today refers to Budge's work, it is for his rendering of hieroglyphic texts in a printed format, in my experience (not his transcription NOR his translation) . However, even these texts must be occasionally corrected against the actual texts in Egypt (where they still exist) and more updated information on Egyptian language. Budge's printed hieroglyphic texts are useful for many scholars as a starting point for additional and more extensive research, but is never relied upon totally.
_________________
Katherine Griffis-Greenberg

Doctoral Candidate
Oriental Institute
Oriental Studies
Doctoral Programme [Egyptology]
Oxford University
Oxford, United Kingdom
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BobManske
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 24 Nov 2007
Posts: 350

PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 11:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bierbrier thus:

"In his text editions, Budge was too prolific for careful work, and many of them are inaccurate by modern standards;"

That's true, but there is more that bears on this subject, see below.

" he persisted in the use of an old system of transcription, and did not utilize many of the grammatical discoveries of the Berlin School."

Absolutely true. But, although transliteration schemes have largely converged, there is still no universally adopted or followed method for doing so. So, just like all the others, you have to get used to whatever one you encounter.

So much for Bierbrier.

As far as Dennis Forbes is concerned, I must agree with many of his assertions but observe that he seems to have missed the point. Perhaps deliberately.

He says: "Regrettably, many lay individuals who are just discovering ancient Egypt as a topic of personal research and study turn to Budge's wide-ranging volumes -- chiefly because of their easy availability -- without realizing they were written, many of them, nearly a century ago and are very much out of date."

This is a presumption which insults the intelligence of many lay readers. It was clear to me, and to many others when I first encountered Budge, that all this was true. More on this later.

Forbes goes on: "But Wallis Budge is to be most faulted for his extraordinarily prolific output of 140 separate books and editions (some of the latter running into several volumes), a great many, if not most, of which failed to achieve the highest critical standards of scholarship, as a result of too speedy publication and Budge's habit of disregarding the work and publications of his Egyptological contemporaries, many of whom were advancing understanding of the written language and cultural nuances of ancient Egypt somewhat beyond Budge's own."

This is all true (except that Budge is not to be "faulted" for his output in my view, considering his (Budge's) intentions), and it misses the point, as I said earlier, perhaps deliberately. The issue is that Budge's intention was NOT necessarily to produce scholarly works. It would be nice but his main intention seems to have been to create a wave of popular interest in Egyptology - and thereby increase patronage at the British Museum, where he was employed. In this he succeeded wildly, better than anyone else of his time with the possible exception of Carter. In fact, much of the residual popularity of Egyptian art (primarily) and culture (rather less so) evident today seems to be due in no small part to Budge's work. I could be wrong, but it's hard for me to think that Forbes didn't know that. It's probably impossible to produce 140 volumes, not very many short ones at that, focus on getting people to pay admission to see the B.M. galleries, acquire funds and stock those galleries with artifacts acquired in - well, whatever way you can, and stay current in scholarship, etc., etc.

This is a perfect example of Academia thinking in terms of Academia only (by the way, I love Academia, but it has some shortcomings). In space sciences, for example, we find many researchers inveighing against crewed missions, sending people into space, and they produce an incredible number of reasons to support their views. What it really comes down to so often, however, is that such missions would compete for funds very strongly with their own research projects. It's often a matter, as here with Budge, with whose ox is facing the gore.

Budge bashing has become popular among some Egyptologists and the virulence is sometimes over the top as we can see in the following example from one of the internet sources providing a free, and legal, download of one of the editions of Budge's reading book:

Reviewer: W.M. van Haarlem - 1.00 out of 5 stars - July 6, 2007
Subject: An Obsolete Readingbook
I seriously wonder why anybody would take the trouble to digitize this book. It has only a antiquarian and curiosity value, but no scientific or educational value at all. Wallis Budge was already an eccentric in his own time, using an antiquated transliteration script; all his publications on Egyptian writing and language are hopelessly out of date. To use this as a readingbook to study Egyptian language and writing is the same as using 19th century textbooks on physical or chemical studies in present-day classes: the study of the Egyptian language and writing has made huge progress since then. A far better advice for a readingbook would be A. de Buck's 'Egyptian Readingbook'.


Wallis Budge was an "eccentric"? Really? And just how was he more eccentric than anyone else in Egyptology? More eccentric than anyone on this forum? Hardly.

The book contains "no scientific ... value"? Duh, it wasn't to supposed to. Neither Budge nor van Haarlem have much experience in science, so what's van Haarlem carrying on about science for? Actually, Budge may have had a bit more experience. "No educational value at all"? The only way I can personally characterize that statement is that it's an outright lie. See below. More vituperation, more spittle from van Haarlem: "the same as using 19th century textbooks on physical or chemical studies"? How would van Haarlem know? Actually, those textbooks can produce significant insights into techniques and observations. Relativity Theory, published in 1905 and 1917, is based entirely on 19th century science. Maxwell's Field Equations, for example, are just as valid today as when they were published in 1861 and 1862. That's right, during the American Civil War. They are seminal to Relativity Theory which is still going pretty strong. Incredibly, Herschel's star gauging technique from the (not 19th but...) 18th century, is being reintroduced into modern astronomy. It would be nice if van Haarlem actually knew what he was talking about.

"Antiquated transliteration script"? True. I'll give him that, Budge has to raise his hand and acknowledge the foul, just like in basketball. There's only one problem. The particular edition of the book that van Haarlem was "reviewing" didn't have any of that. Just bare naked glyphs. van Haarlem, it seems, NEVER BOTHERED TO LOOK at the edition he was "reviewing". This is sloppy work. It raises the suspicion that perhaps we can ascribe the same adjective to the rest of van Haarlem's publications. That might be worse than Budge.

"A far better ... readingbook would be ... de Buck's"? Well, that's opinion. By the way, I like de Buck. Actually, Budge's book, umm, the one that van Haarlem THOUGHT he was reviewing and wasn't, the one that IS useful, with caution, for a reader contains both transliteration AND a vocabulary. Yes, yes, you have to get used to Budge's system, yes, it can be a pain, and yes, you know that the transliteration is not recognized in modern work, and yes, the vocabulary MIGHT contain some errors, but if the idea is just to gain some familiarity, use the crutches given all in the same book - not having to use outside resources - and if you do so carefully, you can, and I have, and so have others, used this book to advantage. To compare it with de Buck's, well de Buck has a very atrocious hand when it comes to producing hieroglyphs, a fault which seems to be endemic in the field. At least Budge's glyphs are typeset. Better for a reader. And there's no transliteration, no vocabulary, no nuthin' in de Buck. And there are cases where the text could be improved, or at least criticized. Nothing different than Budge's. We still need a good reader with vocabulary and notes. I haven't seen one.

To go back to Forbes, the quote in the post above concludes: "In the world of modern scholarship, matriculating students and Ph.D.'s alike are particularly careful not to cite E.A. Wallis Budge as a source of authority for their own research or writings, unless it is a negative reference." Of course not. It's not fashionable. But if I was sitting on the committee and a student presented a citation like that I'd ask "why the h--- did you include it in the first place if you didn't like it, unless you were trying to score points with the board." And then most probably dock the student for it. Submitting an unhelpful citation. Caveat: there are circumstances in which such citations might be permissible. For example, to cite competing views, and then state the reasons for your preference. Be careful that you' re not trying to score points with the board. I want research, not stroking.

To conclude. I'm not defending Budge by any means. There is much to be criticized. But the criticism must come from valid, repeat - valid, motives, and it doesn't seem to me that any of the items listed above fit that category. Caution is the keyword. But perhaps, not much more so than with any resource. Research must be a careful activity.

One final item. In his will, Budge created, in his wife's name, a fellowship, the Lady Wallis Budge Junior Research Fellowship which is still very active to this day. Here are some of the requirements:

"The primary criterion for appointment will be research excellence. Candidates must have a strong educational record; be approaching the end of their doctoral research or have begun post-doctoral study; have research expertise as demonstrated by publications, or demonstrate promise of such achievement; and have a coherent plan of research for the duration of the fellowship. In addition they will have to be able to demonstrate an ability to teach and a willingness to develop their pedagogical skills.

The successful candidate will be required to be research active and will be expected to publish his or her research. In addition, the Fellow will be expected to teach three hours per week for the Faculty, normally in each of the 8 weeks of the three terms making up the academic year. However, there will be provision for research leave in the case of a candidate who needs to carry out archaeological fieldwork at fixed periods of the year."

Whatever Budge's failings as a scholar (which he doesn't seem to have had as a profession,so it's not valid to criticize him for that), this is an enduring, and endearing, legacy. The current holder, at least in January of this year, 2011, is Chloe C. D. Ragazzoli. Hopefully she obtained her doctorate this fall. I wonder how many of Budge's multitude of self-appointed critics have produced a comparable legacy, is the number closer to one or is it closer to zero?

I think that Neseret and I are a lot closer on this than it seems and I'm not criticizing her at all. It seems to me that she's presenting some current views on the subject and trying to educate people about the issues. Which is a very good thing and I applaud her intentions and effort. For example, I think she is especially being very fair in her closing remarks when she says: "

When a modern scholar today refers to Budge's work, it is for his rendering of hieroglyphic texts in a printed format, in my experience (not his transcription NOR his translation) . However, even these texts must be occasionally corrected against the actual texts in Egypt (where they still exist) and more updated information on Egyptian language. Budge's printed hieroglyphic texts are useful for many scholars as a starting point for additional and more extensive research, but is never relied upon totally." I would add only, never, if you can avoid it, rely on only one thing totally, regardless of whether your source is named Budge or something else.

I just wanted to point out that some of the criticisms of Budge themselves need to be criticized. In all cases: caveat lector.
_________________
In the beginning the universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.
- Douglas Adams

Good bye, Doug, thanks a lot, and you're welcome for all the fish. Stop by our way again.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Egyptian Dreams Forum Index -> Books All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group