Ancient North Arabian-Nabataean bilingual inscriptions from southern Jordan

Archaeopress is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

Ancient North Arabian-Nabataean bilingual inscriptions from southern Jordan Author(s): Hani Hayajneh Source: Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies, Vol. 39, Papers from the forty-second meeting of the Seminar for Arabian Studies held in London, 24-26 July 2008 (2009), pp. 203-222

Published by: ArchaeopressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41223981Accessed: 09-06-2015 11:34 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/ info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

This content downloaded from 188.247.93.242 on Tue, 09 Jun 2015 11:34:22 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=archaeopress

http://www.jstor.org/stable/41223981

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp



Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 39 (2009): 203-222

Ancient North Arabian-Nabataean bilingual inscriptions from southern Jordan

Hani Hayajneh

Summary The present paper studies eight Ancient North Arabian (ANA) graffiti of the Thamudic E (Hismaic) type which concur in their contents with some accompanying Nabataean texts. The corpus is from the Hismã region of southern Jordan. The texts provide further evidence of the bilingual and bi-scribal tradition that seems to have existed in the Hismã during the pre-Islamic period. Each inscription is treated philologically. The linguistic aspects that distinguish the ANA and Nabataean versions are highlighted, especially the use of the definite article 7- in Nabataean and its corresponding absence in ANA. One text also shows that the Nabataean lexeme sr was used to express its ANA counterpart hit. An excursus appended to this paper tackles similar ANA- Nabataean bilingual texts from neighbouring regions, including eastern and northern Jordan and southern Syria. Moreover, this paper provides insights into the cultural background of the authors of these bilingual texts.

Keywords: epigraphy; Ancient North Arabian; Nabataean; bilingualism; pre-Islamic Arabian languages.

Introduction

The inscriptions were recorded in Wâdï Haffr in southern Jordan by Mr Glenn Corbett* (PhD student at the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago) during his epigraphic surveys of the wadi between 2004 and 2006. Wâdï Hafîr forms a narrow canyon stretching 1 5 km from the Ra3s al-Naqab escarpment towards Qäc ed-Dïsï in the middle of the Hismä basin.1 The stones and boulders spread along the edges of the wadi were ideal surfaces for engraving inscriptions. William Jobling (1983; 1985; 1990) and the team of the Wadi Iram Archaeological and Epigraphic Survey (directed by Saba Farès-Drapeau and Fawzi Zayadine [1997; 2004]) documented several sites in the wadi.

The present inscriptions are extracted from a larger collection of Ancient North Arabian (ANA) inscriptions that Glenn Corbett is currently studying as part of his PhD thesis. I am deeply indebted to him for giving me permission to study and publish eight texts from his collection. The inscriptions from southern Jordan and northern Saudi Arabia belong to a branch of ANA known among scholars as Thamudic E, South Safaitic, or Hismaic.2 In the current study, this last designation, Hismaic, will be used. Likewise, Nabataean3 inscriptions

have been documented throughout the Hisma region.4 The current corpus, which adds to the existing corpus

of Nabataean and ANA texts, can be introduced as follows: the first bilingual inscription occurs in the vicinity of three other texts (the second, third, and fourth inscriptions) that show the same or nearly the same content as the first inscription, i.e. personal names. Both the Nabataean and Hismaic versions of the fifth inscription show the same name, a name which occurs again in a nearby Hismaic text (sixth inscription). The seventh inscription is written in Hismaic script, although its language and content are Nabataean. The eighth inscription is a Nabataean- Hismaic bilingual text with shared content. All of the inscriptions, with the exception of the fourth, are spread across the façade of the Muqawwar (locally known as Mgor) cascade (Figs 1-2, 11) which lies near the head of Wâdï Hafîr. The site's co-ordinates are 29°51'21.2 N, 35°34'42.4 E or in UTM (Zone 36): 749087 E, 3305606 N.

First inscription (Figs 3-6)

Hismaic text: ')lcbdybhttbkr 2) bn slcd



204 Hani Hayajneh

Figure 1. A general view of the cascade with the numbers of the inscriptions discussed. (Photograph by Glenn Corbett.)

(for / cbdyb bn slcd hit bkr) Translation:

By cbdDyb son of slcd, he drew/carved a male camel Nabataean text:

')cbďlybbr 2) šcdw sr

Translation: By cbdDlDyb son of scdw he drew/carved [a male camel]

Epigraphic and palaeographic remarks

The Hismaic text: the inscription is written in typical Hismaic script. It is divided into two lines running vertically.5

The Nabataean text:6 the inscription runs horizontally

from right to left in two lines on the right side of the Hismaic text. The right stroke of the cayn is curved and consists of a half circle with a left stroke. It connects without termination with the following letter bã' which appears in the medial position in an angular shape. The leg of the dal starts a bit above its "roof, leaving a very tiny "sting" at the upper right corner.. The roof is slightly concave. The alef in cbdřl°yb is of thé looped type, where the right stroke shows a medium degree of elongation. Its form is similar to an alef m an inscription from Sinai dated to AD 231/232. (Healey 1990-1991: 48). The letter lãm appears as a one-stroke; its bottom curves to the left. According to Yardeni's palaeographic study (2000: 252), this shape is encountered in late inscriptions and in the Sinai graffiti. The j>ãJ shows a sharp angle at the meeting between the upper stroke and the lower elongated stroke,



Ancient North Arabian-Nabataean bilingual inscriptions from southern Jordan 205

Figure 2. The same cascade from a different angle with the numbers of the inscriptions discussed. (Photograph by Glenn Corbett.)



206 Hani Hayajneh

Figure 3. The first inscription. (Photograph by Glenn Corbett.)

Figure 4. The first inscription. (Drawing by Hani Hayajneh.)

Figure 5. The first inscription: the Nabataean version. (Photograph by Glenn Corbett.)

Figure 6. The first inscription: the Nabataean version. (Drawing by Hani Hayajneh.)

which is drawn towards the following letter bã' The latter is distinguished from the ba3 of cbd since it comes in the final position. It has a curved roof that merges with the down-stroke into a convex curve, while the base-stroke slants down and to the left.7 On the other hand, the curved, semi-rectangular form of bo3 in the word br is clear. The length of the shaft in the letter rã3 seems very close to that of the dal in the word cbd, but it is distinguished by its roof which shows a curve without a sting in the upper right corner. As for the sin in šcdw, the left stroke appears short and curved at its baseline. Regarding the following wãw, its appears as an uncompleted loop, which is comparable

in form to the wãw of the Raqaši inscription (AD 268/269 (see Gruendler 1993: 10f., 109). The sãd is similar to the early form of sãd with a hooked bar or angular right "arm". This form is found in a Nabataean text written in ink on a pebble (100 ВС ?) and in an inscription from Tell el-Shuqafiyeh (34 ВС). Gruendler (1993: 68) states that the looped form of sãd also existed alongside the angular form in early Nabataean. Yardeni (2000: 258) believes the angular form appears together with the curved form in the inscriptions from al-Hijr (dated to the middle of the first century; the angular form is attested in Hauran inscriptions until the end of the first century). Here, the




form bends down almost at a right angle.8 The reading of the final character as гаэ rather than dal, is certain, as the shaft of the dal in cbd and šcd is shorter than the final гаэ in sr. Accordingly, the reading sr is clear. Jobling (1990: 107f.) examined the Nabataean part of the present inscription, which he read as follows:

')cbďlybbr 2)šcdw[b]lb As seen from Jobling 's transcription of the text, he

wrongly assumed that the author had failed to include the preposition b. Jobling also misunderstood the phonological value of the last two graphemes, which he read as t and b. The image and line drawing provided here (Figs 5 & 6) leave no doubt that the last cluster of letters must be read as sr not fb.

Philological commentary

General remark: the internal partitioning of the present inscription conforms to the scheme known from other Hismaic inscriptions.

lãm auctoris + PN1 (= subject) + verb (hit) + object (bkr) + PN2 (patronymic)

The occurrence of the PN1 before the verb hft and the position of the patronymic PN2 at the end of the text may indicate that the author wanted to make clear that he was the one who took the initiative to write the text, not his father or anyone else. This scheme is not represented in the Nabataean version, which is divided as follows:

PN1 + PN2 (= patronymic) + verb (sr) ANA / = Nabataean 0 The lãm auctoris, which introduces the majority of

Ancient North Arabian inscriptions, is present in the ANA text,9 while it is absent in the Nabataean text. The non-existence of the lãm auctoris in the Nabataean text supports the argument that its usage in such a context is for the purpose of introducing rather than expressing possessiveness.

Hismaic cbďyb = Nabataean cbďlyb At first glance, it is noticed that the Nabataean version

cbďlyb contains three morphological elements: cbd "servant", the Arabic definite article 7 (= al-' and yb, while in the Hismaic version, the definite article 7 does not appear. Other variants of the name were identified and photographed in King's 1986 exploratory survey of Wadï Judayyid and the Hismä, including cbdyb and cbďlyb (King 1990: 522). 10 For the etymology of the theophoric element yb, the following suggestions can be presented:

1) It may be derived from the roots "-y-b or Mv-6. a) The element yb could be traced back to Akkadian

y(y)ãbu (von Soden 1965-1981: 23f.), Ugaritic 4b (del Olmo Lete & Sanmartín 2003: 4), Hebrew эоуёЪ "enemy" (Koehler & Baumgartner 1967-1990: 37), cf. also *ëbah "hostility" (1967-1990: 37). (For a further discussion, see Cohen 1970: 16). b) The element yb could be based on the Semitic root 3-w-b, cf. Arabic "aba "to return" (Lisãn, i: 217), and the participle 3ãyib from the same root" (Lisãn, i: 218), "ayyãb "porteur d'eau" (Cohen 1970: 11). The introduction of the element by the definite article

7 leaves no doubt that we are dealing here with a nominal form which could morphologically be built as an active participle, i.e. "ãyib (/Sc//-form) or a nominal form "ayyãb, in a genitive compound: cbd+ Hyb. With regard to the first etymology, it is difficult to describe a worshipped deity as an "enemy", unless the name is meant to imply that he, the deity, is the opponent of one's own enemy. Accordingly, the name could mean "Servant of the Antagonist (God Nn) (of/against the Enemies)". As for the second etymology 3-w-b "to return", the element yb could be understood again as an active participle, i.e. *3ãwib - > °dyib. We have to keep in mind that the basic meaning "return" leads us to the concept that deities return benefactions and favours to their worshippers. In other words, it is the god who brings back or returns favour to his worshippers as a kind of compensation or reward. Thus, the translation, "Servant of the Recompensing (God Nn)", can be proposed.

2) Less probable is to divide the element yb into two parts in light of West Semitic languages: a) the interrogative element y "where", and b) ЭЪ "father", in which the alef of the word Db could have been elided, as in the biblical name "ahumay (see Layton 1990: 100, 101 n. 296). In the Amarna texts, we encounter the name a-ia- ab which was placed by Hess (1993: 24) under the West Semitic rubric and treated as a sentence name composed of an interrogative element followed by a theophoric noun functioning as subject, i.e. the first element is у "where?" and the second element is "b "father". Hess (1993: 24) compares the name with a-ia-a-bi and a-ia- bi from Alalakh, ayab in Ugaritic, ha-a-ia-a-bu-um from Mari, a-a-bi/bum in Old Akkadian, a-a-ab-bu and a-a-b in Assyrian, a-a-bi in Babylonian, and Dîyôb in biblical Hebrew (see Hess 1993: 23f). Unless we assume that the North Arabians considered yb to be an inherited11 single onomastic unit and were unaware of its original etymology and internal division, it is hard to accept this etymology for the present name.

W.W. Müller (1962: 28) examined the Sabaic name ybm (Ry 541/1) which occurs in an invocation to a series of Ancient South Arabian deities: s2crm ... bny ... bcttr/w



208 Hani Hayajneh

hwbs1 [/wDlmqh/w dt/hjmym w dt/bcdnm/wb °bym (s2crm ... has built ... by cttr and hwbs1 [and °lmqh and dt h]mym and dt bcdnm and by Dbym). In studying the name ybm, he argued for the etymology presented under la above and saw the biblical name Hyôb as an onomastic parallel. G. Ryckmans (1957: 99) explained the Sabaic name as a dissimilated and contracted form of °Ayyďabum, thus suggesting the etymology presented under lb and the translation, "où est [mon] père".

On the definite article э/ in cbd°lyb

A comparison of the Hismaic and Nabataean shows that the latter maintained the Arabic definite article °l while it was left out of the Hismaic counterpart.12 This might enhance the theory that Hismaic had no visible mark for definition, meaning it either had no definite article or

employed a vocalic affix which was not represented in the script (Macdonald 2000: 45). However, the presence of the Arabic definite article in a name should not lead us to conclude that we are dealing with an Arabic text. From the writing of the Hismaic version, in comparison to its Nabataean counterpart, one may conclude that we are

dealing with a morphological and phonetic convention which was understood by the scribe composing the texts, i.e. the morphological differences that were supposed to be

represented in the orthography or phonetic transcription of the texts. The name cbd°yb occurs in two inscriptions in the

present collection (see the second and third inscriptions), which means that this writing was the conventional one and accorded with conventional pronunciation. The name

cbďlyb quoted by King (1990: 522), in which the alefoî yb does not appear graphically, lacks the visual support for a clear reading. In addition, the reading of the name in the fourth inscription (see below) as cbdl{l)yb is uncertain, although reference is to the same name and patronymic as above (the fourth character is not easily ascertainable). We cannot, therefore, draw any conclusions from the absence of an alefin these cases.

Hismaic slcd= Nabataean šcdw The name is attested several times in Nabataean

inscriptions in the same form (Negev 1991: 99) and in ANA epigraphy (Harding 1971: 318; for the name's

etymology and parallels in other Semitic languages, see Hayajneh 1998: 160). The suffix -w may represent the nominative suffix, which the Nabataean onomastic tradition may have inherited from a time when Nabataean was an inflected language.13

Hismaic htt = Nabataean sr htt- this occurs often in ANA texts, especially in

Hismaic inscriptions (see King 1990: 597f.). It is also attested, but in a different word order, in the Safaitic inscriptions: h( "drawing, writing" (SIJ 289), htt "inscription" (WH 57); cf. Nabataean hf "to engrave (sc. inscription)" (Hoftijzer & Jongeling 1995: 363).14 Geraldine King (1990: 80) provided a thorough treatment of this lexeme, where she tried to understand it as an active

participle {hãtit or hattãf) "inscriber" (see below). sr : most likely, this is a suffix conjugation form

derived from the root s-w-r, cf. swr "drawing" in Safaitic

(WH 351 : / °h bn yd w slrh sr hyt "By 3h son of ydc and it gave him pleasure the drawing of the animal"), swr

"image" in Sabaic (Beeston et al 1982: 146), sawwara in classical Arabic "to form, fashion, sculpture" (Lisãn, vii: 287ff.), srw in Palmyrene: in srw swrť hd[°] "they have painted this painting"; °nšy> dsyryn inn "the men who have been painted here"; swrh "painting" (Hoftijzer & Jongeling 1995: 965), sãr in Syriac "to form, fashion, paint, draw with figures, images; to describe, depict, delineate", sayyãra "painter" (Payne Smith 1903: 476), and cf. biblical Hebrew swr "form, cast" (Koehler &

Baumgartner 1967-1990: 952). That the form is a form of suffix conjugation, rather than a nominal form, i.e. an active participle, is evidenced by the absence of a medial wãw/yã' in accordance with the morphology of the formation of the first stem forms derived from media

wãw/yãD in Aramaic. When the verbal form Qal of the third person singular is derived from media infirmae roots, the medial wãw/yãD is usually elided in the script, e.g. the forms mi "he died", šm "to put, to place, to set up", and qm "to stand up" (see Hug 1993: 84f.), sr-w "they painted" in

Palmyrene (Hoftijzer & Jongeling 1995: 965). From this, we conclude that the long ã in such a perfect form is not

represented in the epigraphical scripts (Degen 1969: 75). The medial wãw/yã3 usually appears in participles and Paccel forms (see Hug 1993: 84f.), i.e. the participles hyb "to be reckoned" (singular masculine; see also Hoftijzer & Jongeling 1995: 35 If.), and qymyn "are standing up" (plural masculine; Segert 1990: 292f.).

That the Nabataean verbal form sr is used in the

present inscription as a counterpart to Hismaic htt -

which Géraldine King translates as a participle form -

("inscriber") leaves no doubt that the word htt in this text, and in other Hismaic texts where it occurs in the same

position, should be treated as a form of suffix conjugation (perfect) of the third masculine singular, "he carved/ drew/inscribed". The verb does not necessarily imply the

inscribing of the text, but rather the carving/drawing of the "male camel" which is seen on the left side of both texts. I would translate the verb as "carve, engrave; draw", since




Figure 7. The second inscription. (Photograph by Glenn Corbett.)

this implies also the physical scratching of marks into the surface of the rock. On the syntactical level, there is no problem in concluding that in the Hismaic text, the verb should come after the subject, i.e. cbďlyb (subject) + hit (verb) + bkr (object). This was often the case when the author wanted to focus on the subject who performed the action (see Macdonald 2004: 524 for the word order in ANA).

Hismaic bkr = Nabataean 0 The word bkr is known in many Semitic languages:

Arabic bikr/bakr "a youthful he-camel", bikr/bakr (Lisãn, iv: 79), Safaitic bkr "young camel" (SIJ 18, etc.), Hebrew bkrt "young she-camel" etc.15 The drawing of the male camel is clearly attached to the present texts rather than to neighbouring ones, as there are no additional textual references to camels in the vicinity. The sex of the animal can be concluded from the shape of the tail, which hangs downwards, indicating a male. The tail of the she-camel appears curled upwards. A rider is seen on the camel's hump with some weaponry depicted on the left side of the camel's back. The rider seems to raise a long object, i.e. a stick or spear, in his right hand.

Second inscription (Fig. 7)

The inscription is written on the top edge of the cascade directly above the right side of the first inscription. It

Figure 8. The third inscription. (Photograph by Glenn Corbett.)

reads as follows: / cbďyb bn slcd It represents a copy of the name and patronymic

attested in the first inscription. It is also notable that here, as in the first inscription, the name cbďyb appears without insertion of the Arabic definite article 3/ before the element yb.

For philological comments on the names, see the discussion under the first inscription.

Third inscription (Fig. 8)

This inscription is engraved on the right side of the cascade, opposite the first inscription. There is an accompanying rock drawing of a she-camel to the left of the text. The reading of the text is the same as the second inscription:

/ cbdyb bn shd For etymology and parallels, see the discussion under

the first inscription.

Fourth inscription (Figs 9 & 10)

This inscription was found in the wadi below the cascades. It reads as follows:

/ cbdl(?)yb bn shd The reading of the fifth character as / is uncertain, as

the upper and lower parts of the shaft are not clear in the image.

For etymology and parallels, see the discussion under the first inscription.

Fifth inscription (Figs 11-13)

The fifth inscription is a Hismaic-Nabataean bilingual



210 HaniHayajneh

Figure 9. The fourth inscription. (Photograph by Glenn Corbett.)

Figure 10. The fourth inscription. (Drawing by Hani Hayajneh.)

Figure 11. Showing the position of the fifth inscription on the right side of the first inscription. (Photograph by Glenn Corbett.)

inscription. It is engraved to the right of the first inscription. The following reading can be provided.

Hismaic text: / "ďn bn zyd(i) (or: zbd(t))

Nabataean text: ')šlm 2) yďn br zydw (or: zbdw)

Epigraphic, palaeographic, and philological commentary

Hismaic °ďn = Nabataean yďn King (1990: 470) gives two Hismaic attestations of the

name Dďn (AMJ 141, 158). See also Safaitic ďn (Harding

1971: 241). The name could be etymologically traced back to the root d-c-n, cf. Harsusï dacan, "branches de palmier attachées ensemble pour que les grappes de dates s'y appuient", Arabie Datïna dialect dďan "campagne", Jibbalï "plaine déserte", Arabie dacin, muďin "méchant, qui a mauvais caractère, mal nourri" (Cohen 1993: 29 If). The graphemic sequence of the Hismaic version suggests the morphological form °fl. However, the presence of a yãD after the initial alef in the Nabataean version is remarkable. It is hard to explain its function. One may suggest that the inserted yãD could, if we accept a derivation from the root d-c-n, represent a short vowel-/-, i.e. *4ďan (°if al- form?), as a variant of the elative form Dafal. Another etymological possibility is a derivation



Ancient North Arabian-Nabataean bilingual inscriptions from southern Jordan 2 1 1

Figure 12. The fifth inscription. (Photograph by Glenn Corbett.)

from the root y-d-c cf. yď "to know" (see e.g. Beeston et al 1982: 167; Hoftijzer & Jongeling 1995: 439ff.; Koehler & Baumgartner 1967-1990: 373ff.). If we accept the explanation of an inserted yã' one may cautiously assume that the word is built as a fin-form in which the first radical of the root is represented by an alef}6 In light of this etymology, we may also consider the inserted -y- as a graphical representation on an accompanying short vowel -/-. * Hdãn = Yidãn.

Hismaic 0 = Nabataean šlm

šlm: this word is a nominal form and appears in a wide range of Nabataean graffiti from northern Arabia and Sinai with the meaning, "Peace!", cf. e.g. šlm hn'w br hryšw b-tb "Peace! H. ... in good (memory) (Negev 1981 : 66; see also Meshel 2000: 148f. and al-Dyěb 2002 for more examples). Others have suggested the translation "may he be safe and sound" (Macdonald 2003: 40).

Hismaic zyd(t) (or zbd(t) = Nabataean zydw or zbdw) The letters are written in typical Hismaic script.

What is most remarkable here is the reading of the ninth graphical sign. Two readings are given here: cither zyd(t) or zbd(t).

In the first case, the Hismaic ya-3-form (a shaft with a circle or a loop at one end) is expected between the zayn and dal, since this reading is provided by another inscription from the present collection (the sixth inscription): °dn bn zd .... In this inscription, however, it seems that instead of inserting a Hismaic yã' the scribe used a grapheme which could be recognized as Nabataean ya* with a missing upper stroke (compared to the j^-form in the name °ydn in the second line). Therefore, the reading as zyd(t) is suggested. Confusion comes also from the fact

Figure 13. The fifth inscription. (Drawing by Hani Hayajneh.)

that in some Nabataean inscriptions, the left-connected ya3 (i.e. in the Mona daughter of cAmru inscription of AD 355/356; Gruendler 1993: 12, 113) is similar to the left- connected bã' which takes the form of a large, backward- leaning crescent17 (as in the Ñamara inscription of AD 328 and Mona daughter of cAmru inscription of AD 355/356; 1993: 11, 12, 36). Therefore, we must not exclude the possibility of reading the name as zbd(t), although the bet3 form of the sixth and ninth characters, which appears as a widely curved, backward-leaning crescent without an upper arm, is not the expected Hismaic form. The form here can be compared with the typical bo3 shape in Hismaic, which appears "as 1) a curve or 2) square shape, with a vertical back and arms at right or obtuse angles facing in the direction of the text" (King 1990: 30). Therefore, one may assume that the scribe used one graphical sign to express bã3 or yã3 (without the upper roof/arm) in both versions.

It is also notable that the last character in the Hismaic version, -/ (which can hardly be seen in the photograph because of the shadow) does not correspond to the last character, -w, in the Nabataean version. For onomastic parallels derived from the root z-y-d, cf. zd, zyd and zydt in Hismaic, see King (1990: 506f.); for etymology and parallels, see Hayajneh (1998: 158); for parallels derived from the root z-b-d, cf. Hismaic zbd, see King (1990: 505); zbď, zbdw, and zbdt in Nabataean (Negev 1991: 25); dina zbdw, zbydt, zbydh, zbydw in Aramaic (Maraqten 1988: 157f.).

Sixth inscription (Figs 14 & 15)

/ 3dn bn zd bn °dn wdc w d krt Ityqm



2 1 2 Hani Hayajneh

Figure 14. The sixth inscription. (Photograph by Glenn Corbett.)

By Dďn son of zd son of Dďn and he invoked and may Lt remember yqm

For the names Dďn and zd, see the previous inscriptions.

ďc' in Hismaic, we encounter the verb ď which has been translated by King (1990: 99f.) as "call". It is used in the context of prayers addressed to a deity {It and ds2ry) mentioned after the verb. King (1990: 99) based her translation on Arabic dďa "he called or summoned him", and dďa al-mayyit "he called upon the dead", cf. the example: w ď ds2ry grfw эпст hit, "And may ds2ry call grf, and 3ncm is [the] inscriber" (KJC 171, see King 1990: 100). However, the verb appears in our inscription as ďc (with cayn repeated twice. It could be presumed that we are dealing here with a scribal error committed by the writer. However, we should consider the possibility that it represents another morphological form, i.e. the suffix conjugation of the second stem dďca (faccala) of the root ďw; or it could be a tafaccala-i brm, pronounced as *iddďca (from *itdacca), and written as ďc. In the latter case, the initial vocalic affix *i- is not represented in the script, while the prefix */- is assimilated to the following dal, since both sounds are dental. As a third explanation, we could treat the word as a normal suffix conjugation, i.e. ďc against dďa, as in Safaitic gzz against gaza (Macdonald 2004: 510).

w dkrt It: the verb dkrt is a form of suffix conjugation of the third person feminine singular. As seen here, the invocatory clause is introduced by the conjugation w "and" followed by the verb dkrt in the optative meaning "may Lt remember!" and the object of the verb is yqm (see King 1990: 94 for details and parallels). For the various spellings of the Arabian goddess Allât as It and % see Krone (1992: 96).

yqm: the name is attested in the Hismaic texts from Wadï Judayyid (KJA 95, 299; KJC 147c, 149) and as yqwm in Safaitic (Harding 1971: 680). It is a shortened form, containing a prefix conjugation of the root qwm "to stand up, erect", with an unnamed theophoric element

Figure 15. The sixth inscription. (Drawing by Hani Hayajneh.)

(God Nn) functioning as a subject. Compare the name yqm°l "II möge aufstehen" in Qatabanian and Sabaic inscriptions, and see Hayajneh (1998: 281) for etymology and parallels.

Seventh inscription (Figs 16 & 17)

2)ybfb^ l)lcbd--> (for / cbdy bib) By cbdy (may he be remembered) for good The inscription, which is engraved on the upper edge

of the cascade, runs from left to right. It is divided into two lines, with the second above the first. The text is written in Hismaic script, though its contents are more typical of Nabataean inscriptions.

/ cbdy: the text begins with the lãm auctoris which introduces the name cbdy. Both the form of the name (with the suffix -y) and the formula b-tb are uncommon within Hismaic epigraphy. The name cbdy occurs in Nabataean (Negev 1 99 1 : 47). Diem (1973:231) argued that the suffix -y can be considered a nisba suffix. Since some Nabataean names are written with -y and an additional suffix -w, i.e. -yw as in cbdy/cbdyw, Diem (1973: 231) argued that the suffix -y does not represent the genitive form of the name of cbdw, but rather the form cbdyw without a w.

The Nabataean nature of the text is conveyed by the invocation, which is usually encountered in Nabataean inscriptions, cf. for example, the Nabataean texts from Sinai: šlm hny'w br hryšw blb "Peace! hny'w son of hryšw in good (memory)" (Negev 1981: 66). J. Healey (1996) provided a thorough study of occurrences of this formula in Nabataean, Jewish Aramaic, Syriac, Palmyrene, and Hatran. In Nabataean, it occurs in different formulas: dkyr PN/PN "Remembered be PN", dkyr PN bib (wbryk) "Remembered be PN for good (a blessing)", dkyr bib PN "Remembered for good be PN", etc. (Healey 1996: 178) or "in well-being" (Macdonald 2003: 40). The occurrence of the word dkyr in Nabataean inscriptions of this nature



Ancient North Arabi an-N abat aean bilingual inscriptions from southern Jordan 2 1 3

Figure 16. The seventh and eighth inscriptions. (Photograph by Glenn Corbett.)

leads one to assume that the present inscription includes an implied nominal form, i.e. passive participle, which equals the form dkyr in Nabataean. We can thus assume that the author of the text hoped to be ''remembered4', an assumption which is reflected in my translation. According to Healey (1996: 185), 'The invocation implied in dkyr ... is to the passer-by or visitor to a sanctuary who sees the inscription and is required to say something, viz. 'Remembered be PN' a formula which perpetuates (in a positive way) the memory of the person concerned (whether he is dead or alive)..."

Eighth inscription (Figs 16 & 17)

Hismaic-Nabataean text Hismaic text:

/ ntn bn sIcd By ntn son of skd

Nabataean text: ntnw br šydw ntnw son of šcydw

Epigraphic and palaeographic notes

Both inscriptions are carved on the top of the cascade beneath the seventh inscription and run vertically on the

Figure 17. The seventh and eighth inscriptions. (Drawing by Hani Hay aj neh.)

rock façade. The ANA version is written in the typical Hismaic script. Because the Nabataean text is inversely engraved on the rock, one may conclude that the author oriented himself according to the direction of the Hismaic version. Moreover, the shape of the Nabataean letters is inverted, their faces turned to the left side. To my knowledge, this phenomenon is unparalleled in Nabataean epigraphy. Both mlns in the Nabataean version appear connected to the /a' and wãw from the baseline. The upper part of the wãw is bent down; its tail extends to the middle of the letter's body. The vertical of the sin looks short and bends (here, to the right) forming the connection. The V-shape of the letter cayn stretches with its tail from the ceiling line to the baseline, where it is connected with the following letter yã'

Philological commentary

Hismaic ntn = Nabataean ntnw The etymology of this name is from the root ntn

"to give" (Koehler & Baumgartner 1967-1990: 692), nadánu (von Soden 1965-1981: 701). The name can be interpreted as "(God NN) has given". It is attested in Nabataean (Negev 1991: 45), Ancient North Arabian (Harding 1971: 581), and Minaic (al-Said 1995: 167). Here, the Nabataean version ends with the suffix wãw.

Hismaic sud= Nabataean sLdw For a discussion, see the first inscription.



2 1 4 Hani Hayajneh

Excursus

ANA-Nabataean bilingual inscriptions from the Nabataean cultural area

1) ANA (Safaitic)-Nabataean bilingual inscription from Bãyir

The inscription was discovered 1993 in the Bãyir area of south-eastern Jordan (see Calzini 1995). The ANA text was examined and labelled by al-Khraysheh (1994) as Safaitic. He gave the following transliteration and translation:

ANA (Safaitic) text: / qdmt bn km dD-l s2om w-ťy 3b3r von Qudämat, dem söhn des Kaumu von der

Sippe ŠaDm; und er weidete bei den Brunnen (von Bäyir) Nabataean text: Al-Khraysheh's reading (1994)

/ qdmt br kwmw w-rsc von Qudämat, dem söhn des Kaumu; und er

weidete (?) (bei den Brunnen von Bäyir). Hani Hayajneh 's reading:

qdmt br kwmw w-rf qdmt son of kwmw and he lifted (the water from

the wells of Bäyir?) After checking the photograph in al-Khraysheh 's

publications, it is clear that there are no traces of the graphical sign läm at the beginning of the Nabataean version. Moreover, the graphical sign which has been read by al-Khraysheh as sãd in the verb rsc, could not be read as such. Palaeographically, the letter sãd should appear in a position where the closed loop is attached to the upper right side of the shaft, not to the left side. Instead, this character should be read as ja' which is "usually made with one continuous movement, starting with the lower end of its closed or open upper part and continuing clockwise with the right downstroke and curving to the left at bottom" (Yardeni 2000: 257). Less probable is the reading of the sign as qãf. There is only one case of this letter in which the loop appears to the left of the top of the down-stroke, similar to the closed^, where the down- stroke is crooked (Yardeni 2000: 260). To conclude, the letter in the present inscription is to be read asy5J or less probably as qãf, but not as sãd.

2) ANA (Safaitic)-Nabataean bilingual inscription from Jabal al-cArabf south Syria

Zeinaddin (2000: 281, fig. 63) published this inscription

with other Safaitic inscriptions from the same area: ANA (Safaitic) text:

Is2"lbnhlfbnsbh Von Šay°il, Sohn des Hulaif, Sohn des Sabbäh

Nabataean text: šyH br hlyfw Von ŠayCDil, Sohn des Hulaif

3) ANA (Safaitic)-Nabataean inscription from Deir al- Kahf, northern Jordan

The inscriptions in question were recently treated and published by Šděfat and Harähseh (2007). The inscriptions were discovered in a cave near Dayr al-Kahf, a site located about 80 km east of Mafraq and about 40 km to the southeast of Busrã. The site was first discovered by Macdonald (1982: 172), who mentioned the inscriptions as part of a short report on the Roman-style tomb containing several sarcophagi cut into the living rock. The rocky hill in which the cave tomb was hewn is known among the locals as Tell Mišwar (Šděfat & Harähseh 2007). According to them, the ANA names were treated in the Nabataean version as a single text. The text runs in a single line beneath the ceiling of the tomb hall. It starts from the right side of the entrance and continues above the burials. The height of the letters varies between 9 and 16 cm. Some of the letters cannot be discerned due to damage on the surface of the rock. Macdonald (1982: 172) has stressed the significance of the discovery, as it is the first square-script Safaitic text discovered in a monumental context. The Nabataean text is engraved on the upper part of the internal walls of the tomb hall, whereas the Safaitic versions, which contain the names of the deceased and their patronymic, were engraved in Safaitic script on each of the sarcophagi. The Nabataean text informs us that the tomb was built by one person, whose name is h lypw br Jwšw. Later, D. Graf (2003: 35) also mentioned the cave's inscriptions.

ANA texts: a) / hlfbn У b) / У bn У c) / Dbgr bn 3sx d) / hď bn У

Nabataean text: ďnfrť dycbdhlypw I °hwhy bny °wšw bn hrtw bn Dwšw bkmw (?) ... npšthm

Arabic translation by Šděfat and Harähseh (2007: 153)

hadihi al-magara aliati sanacahã hulayf li-




Figure 18. Л H ismaic-Nabataean bilingual. (Photograph by Géraldine King.)

"ihwatihi эаЬпаэ ̂aws bin hanP English translation (by Hani Hayajneh)18

This hypogée which hlyfw has made for his brothers, the sons of Dwsw son of hn'w son of 3wsw bkmw (?)... their tombs

There are no problematic issues in the first three parts of the Nabataean version. However, the beginning of the last part of the text was read by Šděřat and Harãhseh (2007) as bnmw, which is highly doubtful. According to the line drawing and photograph provided, the second letter should be read as a kãf not a nun. The remaining portion of the last part is more problematic, particularly the word npšthm. It has been translated by Šděfat and Harãhseh (2007: 153) as "anfusihim "themselves", which is quite unsuitable to the present context, since the form nßt is an external feminine plural form attached to the pronominal suffix of the third person plural. The translation given by Šděfat and Harãhseh would be suitable if the form is formed as *:)nfihm. Therefore, I would cautiously suggest (because of the poor quality of the available images of the texts) that the word npšt refers to "funerary monuments" (cf. the text npš° dh wrďrť "this funerary monument and hypogée") as elsewhere in North West Semitic epigraphy (Hoftijzer & Jongeling 1995: 748). As we are dealing here with a funerary context, the word npšthm could be understood as "their tombs", where the pronominal suffix, according to this interpretation, refers to the deceased persons.

4) H ismaic-Nabataean bilingual inscription from Hismã (Wadi Judayyid), southern Jordan (Figs 18 & 19)i9

Hismaic text = KJC 380

Figure 19. A H ismaic-Nabataean bilingual. (Drawing by Géraldine King.)

l-W bn fth Nabataean text = Nab.l (King 1990: 585, 769)

The contents of the two texts are not equivalent. The Hismaic version seems to be primary, since it contains the patronymic. The patronymic is absent from the Nabataean version.

Some concluding remarks

Although the texts, including those presented under the "Excursus", are rather short and uninformative in terms of their cultural background, some observations can be gleaned from the present corpus.

A) On the texts

1) The term "bilingual" is "used loosely to describe a text (usually an inscription) which has versions in two or more languages, but in fact exact equivalence between the versions is unusual" (Adams & Swain 2002: 7). The Nabataean-Hismaic bilingual inscriptions presented here show partial rather than complete overlap with each other.20 As noted in the previous section, the differences between the versions (Hismaic and Nabataean) relate primarily to the desire of the author to adhere to the respective textual conventions of the two languages. In addition, the information presented within each version may have been intended for two different readerships.21 One may deduce that in most cases, the Hismaic version is the primary text, while the Nabataean represents a kind of translation. The differences between the versions, however, are not dramatic and it must be remembered, as



216 HaniHayajneh

we noted in our earlier philological discussion, that each version was an independent creation, a product of the accepted textual conventions of the time.22

2) The scribes were fully aware of the style and formulaic structure of the Nabataean and Hismaic texts. In other words, the formulaic structure in both versions conformed to the separate traditions operating in the two languages. For example, in the fifth inscription, the Nabataean version is introduced by the word šlm "peace!", while this introduction is absent in the Hismaic version.23 Likewise, the seventh inscription, which reads / cbdy b-fb, conforms to the Nabataean formulaic structure, although it is written in Hismaic script. Moreover, in the Nabataean version of the inscription from Deir al-Kahf (Excursus no. 3), the author followed a style known from monumental Nabataean inscriptions, while in the ANA version, the name of each deceased person was preceded by the lãm auctoris, as is typical for inscriptions of this type. Again, in most cases, the ANA text seems to represent the primary version, while the Nabataean counterpart could be considered secondary. A possible exception is the bilingual text from Deir al-Kahf, where the Nabataean version appears to be primary.

3) The lãm auctoris: the presence of this particle in the ANA texts and its absence in the Nabataean versions leaves no doubt that it functions in such contexts to introduce the text rather than to indicate possessiveness. Therefore, it should be translated as "by" instead of "for".

4) The definite article H-' the presence of the definite article in the Nabataean version of the name cbd-H-yb and its non-appearance in the Hismaic version may support the argument that Hismaic either did not have a definite article or that the definite article was implied and thus did not appear graphically in the consonantal script, i.e. it was a vocalic affix. It should be remembered, however, that names do not necessarily reflect the linguistic system used by their bearers. I believe that the scribe was intent on showing the differences between the versions in this particular set of bilingual inscriptions. The other spelling of the name as cbďlyb in Hismaic, if we accept the reading, may indicate that this name was written in different ways in other contexts, i.e. in non-Nabataean contexts. In spite of the latter conclusion, it should be kept in mind that the lack of clear photographic support for this name and the poor quality of the image bearing the fourth inscription (where we read cbdlÇ?)yb) weaken any conclusions drawn from such variant spellings.

5) The authors had knowledge of both the Hismaic and Nabataean language systems. On the morphological

level, the author used the correct morphological form of the Nabataean verb sr, "to paint", in order to represent the corresponding Hismaic verb hit. When using the verb sr, he was aware of the orthography of the form, in which the medial wãw must not appear in the script, since it is a perfect form, not a participle. On the syntactical level, both the Hismaic and Nabataean versions conform to their respective syntactic systems. In both the first inscription and Excursus no. 1, the three structural elements appear in the ANA version as S + V+ O, while in the Nabataean counterpart, the object is left unstated. The inscription from Deir al-Kahf (Excursus no. 3) shows no parallelism at all, as each version is composed in a different style and formula.

6) As for the names, there is no doubt that the authors tried to adhere to the conventional orthographic rules followed in both languages:

Nabataean ANA šcdw, šydw = slcd °yďn = Dďn ntnw = ntn hlypw = hlf Dwšw = ^s1 hrťw = hrť °ršw = Drs2 The comparison also reminds us that we should not

rely on the external written form of the name to explain its morphology. For example, the Hismaic variant slcd, occurs in Nabataean as šydw. One may assume that we are dealing here with two different morphological forms, i.e. fifi and fifayl. However, in light of the Nabataean version šydw, it is hard not to conclude that the Hismaic form slcd is built as a/y/ diminutive form.

B) On the authors of the Hismaic-Nabataean inscriptions and the question of bilingualism in the Hismä region

The Hismä seems to have been a region populated by camel-breeding nomads.24 These nomads were either in regular contact with Nabataean culture or they belonged to the Nabataean political entity at a certain point in their history, as evidenced by some onomastic relics that show names of Nabataean kings, etc. Furthermore, even though the contents of the Hismaic texts do not reveal their precise chronological context, the overall epigraphical corpus does suggest a Nabataean context.25 The Hismä region, being an important corridor through North Arabia and the Near East more broadly, witnessed religious, commercial, and social activities that required people to




speak or write in more than one language, a phenomenon we call "bilingualism" or "multilingualism". With the accumulating textual evidence for this phenomenon from different parts of the ancient Near East, including North Arabia, the study of bilingualism is significant not only for its linguistic aspect, but also for the light it sheds on the social, political, and intellectual perspective of the region's inhabitants.26

In terms of linguistics, the Hismä region could be considered as a "speech community" where, as a result of different patterns of social interaction, more than one language could have been used. The inscriptions give us some clues concerning the social life of this community, which tend to indicate some form of tribal society. Such a community would have had external relations with other groups, either through trade, intermarriage, or other relationships. Since we are dealing with dead languages known only from inscriptions, it is largely impossible to discern the degree to which the two languages were used in daily communication. In the Hismã, the widespread occurrence of ANA inscriptions and the relative dearth of Nabataean texts would lead one to assume that ANA was the predominant language of the area. In the Nabataean- Hismaic case, therefore, we are certainly not dealing with "balanced bilingualism".27

If we agree that a form of tribal society was dominant in the Hismä region, we may suggest that Hismaic was the usual spoken "tribal language/dialect" of the area's inhabitants, as it represented a form of communal identity. For the purpose of external communication, however, these tribes might have used Nabataean, i.e. as the language of trade within their communications matrix. Moreover, although the presence and use of two languages within the same area may indicate the existence of multiple ethnic groups, it is impossible to determine if this was the case with Hismaic and Nabataean in the Hismä. The epigraphic remains do not provide us with any clues regarding how the inhabitants identified themselves ethnically or politically.28 1 believe, however, based on the epigraphic evidence, that the same people left inscriptions in Hismaic and Nabataean. As noted by Jobling (1990), the linguistic and epigraphic situation in the Hismã suggests a complicated cultural phenomenon in which no clear distinction between Nabataeans and North Arabians can be made.

The present corpus of Nabataean inscriptions alongside the Hismaic texts leaves no doubt that their authors belonged to a segment of the population that was able to communicate in both languages. The occurrence of such "bilingual" texts, however, does not indicate

the true bilingual competence of the writers29 or the existence of equal bilingualism. The repeated Hismaic versions of the first inscription (cbďyb bn sIcd, occurring four times) and the fifth (Dďn, occurring twice) indicate that the scribes spoke Hismaic as their first language and Nabataean as their second. In addition, the seventh inscription (/ cbdy b-tb), which is written in Hismaic script but with a Nabataean formulaic structure (excluding the use of the lãm auctoris, of course), provides evidence that even though some North Arabian scribes were bilingual (in Hismaic and Nabataean), they were not necessarily biliterate. In other words, as the text was transliterated in Hismaic script, this could indicate that the author could not write in Nabataean script, even if he could speak the language.30

Notes * I am thankful to Glenn Corbett (Oriental Institute

- The University of Chicago) for editing and commenting on an early version of the present paper. I am, however, solely responsible for its final content.

1 For an overview on the geographical setting of Hisma, see King 1990: 13ff.

2 For an overview on the classification of the ANA epigraphic groups, see Macdonald & King 1999 and Macdonald 2000; 2004: 490ff. Géraldine King (1990) identified certain characteristics of the script, which Winnett labelled "Thamudic E". Due to the geographical provenance of the texts in the Hisma desert, King and Macdonald (1999) have termed the inscriptions "Hismaic".

3 For a recent survey on the Nabataean language and inscriptions, see Healey 2007.

4 See Hackl, Jenni & Schneider 2003: 280-295, Strugnell 1959, and Hayajneh 2006я.

5 For a detailed palaeographic description of the Hismaic script see King 1990: 29ff. 0 The palaeographic and physical descriptions of the Nabatean letters are based on some studies known for this domain. See Healey 1990-1991, Gruendler 1993, and Yardeni 2000.

7 See Yardeni 2000: 239 for a more physical description of this letter shape in Nabataean.

8 For an overview on the palaeographic development of the letters treated, see Yardeni 2000.

9 See Macdonald 2004: 518 for more details on this issue.

10 King (1 990: 522) cites the name cbďyb from the brief



218 HaniHayajneh

study of the inscriptions treated by al-Muhaysin (1988: 7). He mistakenly read the name as cbdhyr, without taking into consideration the Nabataean version.

11 It is true that names are chosen on the basis of semantics, but names go back to earlier stages before their time (see Sima in Hayajneh 2006&: 386), i.e. people are not always aware of the meaning and morphology of the names they give.

12 See Beeston (1981) for a comprehensive survey on the distribution of the forms of definite articles in the Arabian languages; see also Mascitelli 2006: 225ff. for a fresh analytical treatment.

13 For more details, see Diem 1973: 231, 234. 14 Some scholars believe that it entered Nabataean as a

result of Arabic interference (see Colombo 1994: 73). 15 For a full etymological study and parallels, see Sima

2000: 43f 16 The interchange between alef and the consonants

y and w is known in other Semitic languages, e.g. in the Ancient South Arabian anthroponymy and lexicon. For example cf. the name s2DCn for s2w°n and sb6 for s2yb in Qatabanian anthroponymy (Hayajneh 1998: 15f.). See Höfner 1943: 26 for the interchange between w/y and alef, e.g. whr = Dhr and bn° - bny, and Beeston 1984: §2/5 for other examples: hwtw = h°tw , tsPn (derived from the root s/w).

17 See Yardeni 2000: 239 for comments and a discussion of the palaeographic development of this particular shape.

10 1 coula not verity me readings or me texts, as me photographs provided in the paper are of poor quality. The reading is quoted directly from the mentioned publication.

19 I am deeply grateful to Dr Géraldine King who kindly gave permission to quote her dissertation and reproduce the photograph of this inscription (see Figs 18 & 19) in the present paper.

20 On the question of the equivalence and partial overlap between the two versions of a bilingual text, see Lei wo in Adams & Swain 2002: 7.

21 For the theoretical context, see Adams & Swain 2002: 7.

22 See Taylor 2002 for a definition, discussion, and examples of similar cases.

23 As a parallel example, cf. the funerary inscription in Greek and Palmyrene; the Greek opens with the name of the honorand in the accusative, whereas the Aramaic has the opening formula, "This is the statue of..." (Taylor 2002: 321).

24 See Macdonald 2003 : 4 1 ff. for a discussion. 25 See Graf 2003: 39. 26 See Huehnergard 2003: 295. Several contributions

dealing with the question of bilingualism in the ancient world have appeared in recent years. See Bilingualism in Ancient Society, edited by Adams and Swain (2002); and also Mosaïque de lange, mosaïque culturelle: Le bilinguisme dans le Proche-Orient ancien: Actes de la Table-Ronde du 18 novembre 1995 organisée par FURA 1062, edited by Françoise Briquel-Chatonnet (1996). On the latter, see Huehnergard 2003.

27 This results in a situation where the "political and economic interaction may have the effect of giving languages of different ethnic groups formal or informal parity, and this may cause a widespread learning of both languages, leading to a balanced bilingualism" (Adams & Swain 2002: 10).

28 On the problem of the identity and ethnicity of the Nabataeans, see Graf 2004 (esp. 15 If.). See also Healey 2007 for a thorough discussion of the languages used by the population of Nabataea. He presents the possibility that the population of Nabataea, i.e. the elite - probably the population of the southern provinces of Nabataea, and those who wrote the Safaitic inscriptions who owed their allegiance to the Nabataean state - spoke a language akin to Arabic Í2007: 48Ì.

29 On this issue of bilingual competence, see Adams & Swain 2002: 3.

30 As a parallel example, one may refer to a short Palmyrene graffito from Dura Europos written in Greek script. Taylor explained that the inscription had been produced by a person who was familiar with the spoken language of Palmyra, but did not have sufficient formal training in the Palmyrene script. See Taylor 2002: 318 (also quoted in Adams & Swain 2002: 6).

Sigla

AMJ Inscriptions in W. Jobling's reports on the cAqaba-Macan Survey (according to G. King's list of abbreviations, 1990: 711).

KJA, KJC Hismaic inscriptions in King 1990. Lisan ibn Manzur i у ъ i . ку inscriptions in KycKmans 1УЭ /. SU Safaitic inscriptions in Winnett 1957. WH Safaitic inscriptions in Winnett & Harding

1978.




References

Adams N.J. & Swain S. 2002. Introduction. Pages 1-20 in J.N. Adam, M. Janse & S. Swain (eds), Bilingualism in Ancient Society:

Language Contact and Written Text. Oxford: Oxford University. Beeston A.F.L.

1981 . Languages of Pre-Islamic Arabia. Arabica 28: 178-186. 1984. Sabaic Grammar. (Journal of Semitic Studies, Monograph 6). Manchester: University of Manchester.

Beeston A.F.L., Ghul M.A., Müller W.W. & Ryckmans J. 1982. Sabaic Dictionary (English-French- Arabic) . Louvain-la-Neuve: Peeters.

Calzini J.G. 1995. A preliminary report on a reconnaissance survey in Southeast Jordan (region of Wãdí Bãyir). East and

West 45/1^:23^4. Cohen D.

1970. Dictionnaire des racines sémitiques ou attestées dans les langues sémitiques. (Fase. 1 : DH-3TN). Paris: Mouton.

1993. (in collaboration with Bron F. de & Lonnet A.) Dictionnaire des racines sémitiques ou attestées dans les langues sémitique., (Fase. 3: GDL-DHML/R; Fase. 4: DHMM-DRR). Louvain: Peeters.

Colombo V. 1994. "Interferenza" lessicale dell'arabo sul nabateo. Pages 63-76 in Vermondo Brugnatelli (ed), Sam Cam

lafet: Atti della 7a Giornata du Studi Camito-Semitici e Indeuropei (Milano, 1- giugno 1993). (Studi Camito-Semitici, 1). Milan: Centro Studi Camito-Semitici.

Degen R. 1969. Altaramäische Grammatik der Inschriften des 10-8. Jh. v. Chr. Mainz: Deutsche Morgenländische

Gesellschaft. Diem W.

1 973. Die nabatäische Inschriften und die Frage der Kasusflexion im Altarabischen. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 123: 227-237.

al-Dyěb S.CA. 2002. Nuqüs jabal "umm jadäyid al-nabatïya: diräsa tahlJ li-ya. Riyadh: Maktabat al-Malik Fahd al-

Watanïya. Farès-Drapeau S. & Zayadine F.

1 997. Epigraphical survey in Wadi Iram (Jordan) 1 996. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 4 1 : 37-44.

2004. Preliminary report of the sixth archaeological and epigraphic survey at Wadi Ramm/Iram. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 48: 357-371.

GrafD. 2003. Language and lifestyle as boundary markers: The North Arabian Epigraphic evidence. Mediterranean

Archaeology 16: 27-56. 2004. Nabataean identity and ethnicity: the epigraphic evidence. Pages 145-154 in F. al-Khraysheh, Kh.Amr,

H. Taher & S. Khouri (eds), Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan VIII. Amman: Depart- ment of Antiquities.

Gruendler B. 1 993. The Development of the Arabic Scripts from the Nabatean Era to the First Islamic Century According

to Dated Texts. (Harvard Semitic Series, 43). Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press. Hackl U., Jenni H. & Schneider С

2003. Quellen zur Geschichte der Nabatäer: Textsammlung mit Übersetzung und Kommentar (mit Beiträgen von Daniel Keller). (Novum Testamentům et Orbis Antiquus, 51). Freiburg, Switzerland/Göttingen: Universitätsverlag und Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.



220 Hani Hayajneh

Harding G.L. 1971. An Index and Concordance of Pre-Islamic Arabian Names and Inscriptions. (Near and Middle East

Series, 8). Toronto: University of Toronto. Hayajneh H.

1998. Die Personennamen in den qatabaenischen Inschriften: Lexikalische und grammatische Analyse im Kontext der semitischen Anthroponomastik. (Texte und Studien zur Orientalistik, 10). Zürich/New York: Georg 01ms.

2006a. The Nabataean camel burial inscription from Wadi Ram/Jordan (based on a drawing from the archive of Professor John Strugnell). Die Welt des Orients 36: 104-115.

20066. Review of P. Streck & S. Weninger (eds), Altorientalische und semitische Onomastik (2002). Journal of Semitic Studies 51: 381-387.

Healey J.F. 1990. 1991. Nabataean to Arabic: Calligraphy and script development among the Pre-Islamic Arabs. Manu-

scripts of the Middle East 5: 41-44. 1996. 'May he be remembered for good': An Aramaic formula. Pages 177 in K.J. Cathcart and M. Maher

(eds), Targumic and Cognate Studies: Essays in Honour of Martin McNamara. (Journal of the Study of the Old testament, Supplement Series 230).

2007. Nabataean inscriptions: language and script. Pages 45-53 in K.D. Politis (ed.), The World of the Naba- taeans: Volume 2 of the International Conference The World of the Herods and the Nabataeans held at the British Museum, 17-19 April 2001. (Oriens et Occidens: Studien zur antiken Kulturkontakten und ihrem Nachleben, 15). Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag.

Hess R. 1993. Amarna Personal Names. (American School of Oriental Research Dissertation Series, 9). Winona Lake,

IN: Eisenbrauns. Höfner M.

1943. Altsüdarabische Grammatik. (Porta Linguarum Orientalium, 24). Leipzig: Harrassowitz. Hoftijzer J. & Jongeling K.

1995. Dictionary of the North-West Semitic Inscriptions, i-ii. (With Appendices by R.C. Steiner, A. Mosak Moshavi & B. Porten). (Handbuch der Orientalistik, 1. Abteilung: Der Nahe und Mittlere Osten, 21). Leiden: Brill.

Huehnergard J. 2003. Review of Françoise Briquel-Chatonnet (ed.), Mosaïque de langues, mosaïque culturelle: Le bilinguis-

me dans le Proche-Orient ancien: Actes de la Table-Ronde du 18 novembre 1995 organisée par TURA 1068 "Etudes Sémitiques". (Antiquités Sémitiques, 1). Paris: Maisonneuve/Librairie d'Amérique et d'Orient. (1996). Journal of Near Eastern Studies 62/4: 294-298.

Hug V. 1993. Altaramäische Grammatik der Texte des 7. und 6. Jh.s v.Chr. (Heidelberger Studien zum Alten Orient,

4). Heidelberg: Heidelberg Orientlverlag. Ibn Manzür, Abu al-Fadl Jamal al-Dïn Muhammad Ibn Mukarram ibn Manzür al-Ifhqï al-Misrî

1981. Lisãn aUarab. (15 volumes). Al-Qähira: Dar al-Macärif. Jobling W.

1983. Preliminary report on the fourth season of the Aqaba-Macan archaeological and epigraphic survey, 1982-1983. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 27: 197-208.

1985. Preliminary report of the sixth season of the Aqaba-Macan epigraphic and archaeological survey. An- nual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 29: 21 1-220.

1990. Some Nabataean and North Arabian inscriptions of the Hisma in Southern Jordan. ARAM2/Ì, 2: 99- 11.

al-Khraysheh F. 1994. Eine safaitisch-nabatäische bilingue Inschrift aus Jordanien. Pages 109-1 14 in N. Nebes (ed.), Arabia



Ancient North Arabian-Nabataean bilingual inscriptions from southern Jordan 22 1

Felix. Beiträge zur Sprache und Kultur des vorislamischen Arabien: Festschrift Walter W. Müller zum 60. Geburtstag. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.

King G.M. 1990. Early North Arabian Thamudic E. A Preliminary Description Based on a New Corpus of Inscriptions

from the Hisma Desert of Southern Jordan and Published Material. PhD thesis, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London. [Unpublished].

Koehler L. & Baumgartner W. 1967. 1990. Hebräisches und aramäisches Lexikon zum Alten Testament, i-iv. Leiden: Brill.

Krone S. 1992. Die altarabische Gottheit al-Lät. (Heidelberger Orientalistische Studien, 23). Frankfurt-am-Main: Pe-

ter. Layton S.C.

1990. Archaic Features ofCanaanite Personal Names in the Hebrew Bible. (Harvard Semitic Monographs, 47). Atlanta, GA: Scholars.

Macdonald M.C.A. 1982. (With a contribution by Ann Searight Macdonald). The inscriptions and rock-drawing of the Jawa area:

a preliminary report on the first season of field-work of the Corpus of the Inscriptions of Jordan Project. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 26: 159-172.

2000. Reflections on the linguistic map of pre-Islamic Arabia. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 11: 28- 79.

2003. Languages, scripts, and the uses of writing among the Nabataeans. Pages 37-56 in G. Markoe (ed.), Petra Rediscovered: Lost City of the Nabataeans. New York: Harry N. Abrams.

2004. Ancient North Arabian. Pages 488-531 in R.D. Woodard (ed.), The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the World s Ancient Languages. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University.

Macdonald M.C.A. & King G.M.H. 1999. Thamudic. Pages 436-438 in The Encyclopedia of Islam, x. Leiden: Brill.

Maraqten M. 1 988. Die semitischen Personennamen in den alt- und reichsaramäischen Inschriften aus Vorderasien. (Texte

und Studien zur Orientalistik, 5). Hildesheim: 01ms. Mascitelli D.

2006. L 'Arabo in epoca preislamica: formazione di una lingua. (Arabia Antica, 4). Rome: L'Erma di Bretsch- neider.

Meshel Z. 2000. Were the Sinai rock inscriptions really inscribed by "Nabataeans"? Pages 143-151 in Ze'ev Meshel

(ed,), Sinai: Excavations and Studies. (British Archaeological Reports, International Series, 876). Oxford: Archaeopress.

al-Muhaysin Z. 1 988. Nuqüs jadïda min janaub aPurdunn. Newsletter of the Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology 5/1 :

6-8. Müller W.W.

1962. Die Wurzeln mediae und tertiae W/Y im Altsüdarabischen. Eine etymologische und lexikographische Studie. Tübingen: E. Huth.

Negev A. 1981. Nabataean, Greek and Thamudic Inscriptions from the Wadi Haggag- Jebel Musa Road. Israel

Exploration Journal 3 1 : 66-7 1 , Plates 6-11. 1991 . Personal Names in the Nabatean Realm. (Qedem, 32). Jerusalem: The Hebrew University.

Ulmo Lete О. del & Sanmartín b./translated irom Spanish by W.O. E. Watson. 2003. A Dictionary of the Ugaritic Language in the Alphabetic Tradition. (Handbook of Oriental Studies.

Section 1 : The Near East and Middle East, 67 = Handbuch der Orientalistik). Leiden/Boston: Brill.



222 Hani Hayajneh

Payne Smith J. 1903. A Compendious Syriac Dictionary founded upon the Thesaurus Syriacus ofR. Payne Smith. Oxford:

Clarendon. Ryckmans G.

1957. Inscriptions sud-arabes. (Quinzième série). Le Muséon 70: 97-126. al-Said S.F.

1995. Die Personennamen in den minäischen Inschriften: Eine etymologische und lexikalische Studie im Bereich der semitischen Sprachen. (Veröffentlichungen der Orientalischen Kommission der Akademie der Wissenschaften und Literatur in Mainz, 41). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.

ŠděfatY.&HarahšehR. 2007. Malämih min suwar al-caläqät al-nabatïya - al-safawïya fî nuqüs madfan fî deir al-kahf/samäl al-

Durdunn. Al-Manãra li-l-Buhüt wa-d-Dirãsãt (Ãl Ai-Bay t University - Jordan) 13/1: 149-169. Segert S.

1990. Altaramäische Grammatik mit Bibliographie, Christomathie und Glossar. Leipzig: Verlag En- zyklopädie.

Sima A. 2000. Tiere, Pflanzen, Steine und Metalle in den altsüdarabischen Inschriften: eine lexikalische und re-

alienkundliche Untersuchung. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. Soden W. von

1 965 . 1981. Akkadisches Handwörterbuch. Unter Benutzung deslexikalischen Nachlasses von Bruno Meiss- ner. (3 volumes). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.

Strugnell J. 1 959. The Nabataean goddess Al-KutbaD and her sanctuaries. Bulletin of the School of Oriental Research 1 56:

29-36. Taylor D.O.

2002. Bilingualism and diglossia in Late Antique Syria and Mesopotamia. Pages 298-331 in J.N. Adam, M. Janse & S. Swain (eds), Bilingualism in Ancient Society: Language Contact and Written Text. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Winnet F.V. 1957. Safaitic Inscriptions from Jordan. (Near and Middle East Studies, 2). Toronto: University of Toronto.

Winnet F.V. & Harding G.L. 1978. Inscriptions from Fifty Safaitic Cairns. (Near and Middle East Series, 9). Toronto: University of

Toronto. Yardeni A.

2000. Textbook of Aramaic, Hebrew and Nabataean Documentary Texts from the Judaean Desert and Related Material: Translation, Palaeography, Concordance. Jerusalem: Ben-Zion Dinur Center for Research in Jewish History, The Hebrew University.

Zeinaddin H. 2000. Safaitische Inschriften aus dem öabal al-cArab. Damaszener Mitteilungen 12: 265-289, Plates 58-69.

Author s address Hani Hayajneh, Faculty of Archaeology and Anthropology, Yarmouk University, College of Archaeology, Tourism and Hotel Management - Al-Hussein Bin Talal University, Mailing address: P.O. Box 3557, 21110 Irbid, Jordan.

e-mail [email protected]



Documents

Ancient North Arabian-Nabataean bilingual inscriptions from southern Jordan