Reflections on the linguistic map of pre-Islamic Arabia - Khalili ...

93 See, for instance, Müller, Das Altarabische und
das klassische Arabisch: 18, 22, 24; and Müller
WW. Some Remarks on the Safaitic Inscriptions.
PSAS 10: 1980: 69.
94. JSLih 81/2–3 hn-// qbr. It should be noted that
it is not clear from the published photograph
whether the first three lines of JSLih 81 are
really complete (see Jaussen A & Savignac M-R.
Mission archéologique en Arabie, 2. Paris: Geuthner,
1914: pl. LXXXV). The article hn- appears
to be at the end of line 2 and qbr at the beginning
of line 3. But the syntax of the text as recorded
by Jaussen and Savignac is awkward
and has not yet received a convincing interpretation.
The ends of lines 4–6 appear to be missing
(they are appreciably shorter than lines 1–
3) and it is possible that lines 1–3 are also incomplete.
If this is so, the definite article hn- in
line 2 would have referred to a noun no longer
visible at the ‘end’ of that line, rather than to
qbr. Only a re-investigation of the original will
solve this problem. In all other cases the article
is h- before words beginning with q (h- qbr in
JSLih 79/2–3, h- qrt in JSLih 64/1, 366/2, JaL
85d/1ΩJamme, Miscellanées 7: 73–74, pl. 19).
95. LP 87. See Macdonald, Nomads and the Hw awrān:
308 for this reading.
96. NH 6.32.157 Avalitae (oppida Domata, Haegra).
97. Thus the epithet of the goddess hn- $ lt at Tell el-
Mashūtw a and, in Hasaitic, the names $ mt-hn- $ lt
(LivH A.13/2 Pl.87A), c wd-hn- $ lt (LivH O.15/2–3
Pl.85D), $ ws 1 -hn- $ lt (Ry 155/2–3, see Ryckmans
G. Inscriptions sud-arabes. Quatrième série [Ry
155–202]. Le Muséon 50: 1937: 239–240) and {.}rmhn-
$ lt (Ja 1043, see Jamme, Sabaean and Hw asaean
Inscriptions: pl. XV). One of the exceptions is the
name hn- c bd in Ja 1044/2 (ATLAL 8: 1984: pl.
89A). The other is hn- $ mlt, on which see below.
98. JaS 162a (Jamme A. Safaitic Inscriptions from
the Country of c Ar c ar and Ra $ s al- c Anānīyah. In:
Altheim F & Stiehl R, eds. Christentum am Roten
Meer, 1. Berlin: De Gruyter, 1971: 93, 634), cf.
Ar. $ imla ‘hope’. The letters l and n are clearly
differentiated in this text.
99. Wilkinson-Mulayhw a 1 (Robin, Documents de
l’Arabie antique 3: 80) which A.F.L. Beeston read
nfs 1 w-qbr Dryt fty $ mlk n ‘gravestone and grave of
Dhariyyat servant of the kings’. However, as
Robin rightly points out, $ mlk n may be a personal
name equivalent to the Arabic clan name al-
Amlūk.
100. As in Hismaic (see below), affiliation to a social
group is always marked by the phrase d $ l ‘who
is of the lineage of’ and, so far at least, never by
the nisba.
THE LINGUISTIC MAP OF PRE-ISLAMIC ARABIA
101. For the most recent treatment of this text and its
significance see Macdonald MCA. Trade Routes
and Trade Goods at the Northern End of the
‘‘Incense Road’’ in the First Millennium B.C. In:
Avanzini A, ed. Profumi d’Arabia. Atti del
convegno. Roma: Saggi di Storia Antica, 11:
1997: 338–340, and references there.
102. The text is damaged at the beginning of the list
of scripts.
103. Lipinski E. De fenicische inscripties uit Karatepe.
In: Veenhof KR, ed. Schrijvend Verleden. Documenten
uit het oude Nabije Oosten vertaald en toegelicht.
Leiden: Ex Oriente Lux, 1983: 54; and Lipinski
E. Phoenicians in Anatolia and Assyria.
OLP 16: 1985: 82. Luwian having no exact equivalent
to /sw /, s was used as the nearest approximation.
The late Jonas Greenfield suggested that
the term ‘script of Tyre’ could have been used to
cover Aramaic as well as Phoenician since the
distinction between the two alphabets would not
have been obvious at this period (Greenfield J. Of
Scribes, Scripts and Languages. In: Baurain C,
Bonnet C & Krings V, eds. Phoinikeia Grammata.
Lire et écrire en Méditerranée. Actes du Colloque de
Liège, 15–18 novembre 1989. Namur: Collection
d’Études Classiques, 6: 1991: 179–180).
104. Greenfield, Of Scribes: 180–181 and, independently,
Livingstone A. New light on the ancient
town of Taimā. In: Geller MJ, Greenfield JC &
Weitzman MP, eds. Studia Aramaica. New Sources
and New Approaches. Papers Delivered at the
London Conference of the Institute of Jewish
Studies University College London 26th-28th
June 1991. Oxford: Journal of Semitic Studies
Supplement, 4: 1995: 133–137.
105. I am most grateful to Professor David Hawkins,
who is publishing an edition of this text, for this
information. He himself suggested that ta-i-mani-ti
referred to the Aramaean tribe of Tēmān
in northern Mesopotamia, but this was mainly
because he felt that it would be inconceivable
that Aramaic would not be among the scripts
mentioned. However, as he points out, the beginning
of the list is broken and we do not
know what has been lost. Moreover, he agrees
with Greenfield that Yariris is unlikely to have
distinguished between the Phoenician and Aramaic
scripts (pers. comm.). The gentilic form
Taymā $ is attested as tymny $ in Nabataean texts
from Hw egrā (H 1/2, 12/2) although this, of
course, is from a very much later period (first
century AD), see Healey JF. The Nabataean Tomb
Inscriptions of Mada $ in Salih. Oxford: Journal of
Semitic Studies Supplement, 1: 1993: 71.
106. I have explored these relationships in Macdo-
71