At a time when 'book-making' flourishes as it does, it would not be surprising to hear of the appearance, either in England or America, of a new translation of the Book of the Dead. It is net even necessary that the enterprising author of such a translation should know the Egyptian language. By dint of skilful plagiarisms from existing translations, English and foreign, a man may without knowing Greek compile a new version of the Homeric poems. Why may not the same process be applied to the Book of the Dead? By a judicious ...
Read More
At a time when 'book-making' flourishes as it does, it would not be surprising to hear of the appearance, either in England or America, of a new translation of the Book of the Dead. It is net even necessary that the enterprising author of such a translation should know the Egyptian language. By dint of skilful plagiarisms from existing translations, English and foreign, a man may without knowing Greek compile a new version of the Homeric poems. Why may not the same process be applied to the Book of the Dead? By a judicious blending of the versions of de Rouge, Pierret, Deveria, Lefebure, Guyesse and others who might be mentioned, a very plausible translation of the Book of the Dead might be composed. The impudent jackdaw of the fable would strut with borrowed plumes; or, to take the illustration from another fable, the ass would go forth under the cover of the lion's skin, and impose upon all who failed to discern the long ears occasionally protruding. To all real scholars a translation worthy of the name is a task which cannot possibly be executed until certain difficulties have been overcome, the solution of which requires very mature thought and research extending, to say the least, over very many years. It speaks well for the training of the numerous young students of Egyptology in France and Germany that no attempts in this direction have hitherto been made.
Read Less
