The pehu Hp (Sn) of the Western Harpoon nome: physical geography vs. sacred geography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Among the wide range of ‘geographic procession’ types, scholars have identified the so-called ‘pehu processions’, which represent the personification of the marshlands of the nomes of Upper and Lower Egypt. The first attestations of ‘pehu processions’ are carved on the north \nside of the Red Chapel in Karnak, on the temples of Ramses II at Luxor and Abydos, and on the temple of Seti I on the west bank of Thebes. The toponyms here used do not follow any precise geographical arrangement. Among these representations of pehu, there is the pehu \ncalled ‘ Hp (Sn) (?)’. According to Lacau and Chevrer, the reference to Hp (Sn) would have pointed out to the marshland of the 7th nome of Lower Egypt, though without any substantial argument for such an association. Three inscriptions, recorded on the Ptolemaic statue YPM 264191, on the Cairo sarcophagus of Tjaihorpata (CG 29306), and on the coffin of Padi-khonsu (unknown accession number and place of conservation) present a spelling of a toponym ( Hp.wy/HpHp), which seems to be located in the maritime area of Delta. The analysis of the titles and toponyms of these texts has shown the missing link between the later spelling \nHp.wy/HpHp and the pehu of New Kingdom Hp (Sn), thus sustaining the hypothesis of Lacau and Chevrier.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".