Journal of Semitic Studies LV/2 Autumn 2010 doi: 10.1093/jss/fgq004 © The author. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the University of Manchester. All rights reserved. A REVISED READING OF A NABATAEAN INSCRIPTION FROM UMM AL-JIMAL AARON MICHAEL BUTTS AND HUMPHREY HILL HARDY II Abstract A new reading and interpretation are proposed for line two of a Nabataean inscription from Umm al-Jimal that was recently published in this journal by S. Said and M. al-Hamad (JSS 48 [2003], 29–34). In a recent issue of this journal, S. Said and M. al-Hamad presented a new Nabataean inscription from Umm al-Jimal in the southern Îawran.1 In their edition, Said and al-Hamad noted several outstanding difficulties with the analysis of this inscription, but they published it ‘in the hope that new solutions may be found by other scholars’ .2 It is in response to that invitation that we present this new reading and interpretation. Said and al-Hamad transcribe and translate the inscription as follows: Transcription 1 [d]} nps} dy bnh shymw 2 [br] ¨lt bn} lh }bwhm 3 [..l]rb}l mlk} mlk nb†[w]… Translation This is the tomb which SHYMW son of ‘LT built. He built (it) for himself ’BWHM … of king Rabel, king of the Nabataeans … We would like to thank D. Pardee and L. Van Rompay for their helpful comments on this article. All errors are, of course, ours alone. 1 Said and al-Hamad 2003. For an overview of Nabataean inscriptions from the Îawran, see Starcky 1985. Other Nabataean inscriptions from Umm al-Jimal can be found in CIS ii 190–93; Littmann 1914: nos. 38–68; Knauf 1985; Said and al-Hamad 1994; Khairy 2000; al-Muheisen and Ajlouni 2005; Graf and Said 2006. 2 Said and al-Hamad 2003: 29, see also 34. 385 Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org at Serials Department on June 29, 2010 UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO A REVISED READING OF A NABATAEAN INSCRIPTION FROM UMM AL-JIMAL 3 Said and al-Hamad 2003: 33–4. See, e.g., CIS ii 333.2 5 See Cantineau 1930–2, I: 83. Said and al-Hamad (2003: 32) attempt to explain the contrasting orthographies of bnh (l. 1) and bn} (l. 2) by parsing bnh as a suffix-conjugation verb plus a 3fs pronominal object suffix. This analysis of bnh is, however, unlikely. According to Cantineau (1930–2, I: 56), a pronominal object suffix is rarely attached to a verb, being more commonly found with a nota objecti, such as yt. It should also be noted that a resumptive pronoun is not necessary when it would be the accusative in a relative clause, as is demonstrated by locutions such as dnh kpr dy ¨bd PN … ‘this is the tomb which PN made …’ (Healey 1993: 3.1). 6 See Cantineau 1930–2, I: 57. In the inscriptions from Mada}in ∑aliÌ that were (re-)edited in Healey 1993, for instance, the reflexive is expressed by lnps- plus a pronominal suffix a total of twenty-two times (1.2; 3.1; 4.2; 7.1; 8.2; 9.1; 10.1; 11.2; 14.2; 16.2; 19.1; 25.2; 26.1; 27.2; 28.2; 29.3; 30.2; 32.2; 34.1; 35.2; 36.1; 38.2) as compared to only four examples of l- plus a pronominal suffix (5.2; 12.2; 20.2; 22.2). 7 Said and al-Hamad (2003: 33–4) admit as much. 8 The handcopy of Said and al-Hamad (2003: 31) is representative of their interpretation of the inscription, but it appears not to reflect accurately what is visible in the photograph published conveniently on the same page. It should be noted that our reading is based solely on the photograph and so should (ideally) be verified epigraphically at the source. 9 Compare the two other uses of this letter in shymw (l. 1) and }bwhm (l. 2). This is the ‘second type’ of <h> in the terminology of Said and al-Hamad (2003: 32). 4 386 Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org at Serials Department on June 29, 2010 The principal difficulties with this interpretation are found in line 2. Said and al-Hamad analyse bn} as a 3ms suffix-conjugation of the third weak verb √BNY ‘to build’.3 While the orthography with final <}> is occasionally attested in Nabataean Aramaic,4 the expected form is bnh as occurs in line 1 of this inscription.5 In addition, though lh is occasionally attested, lnpsh is the usual way of expressing the reflexive ‘for himself’ in Nabataean (as elsewhere in Aramaic).6 Finally and most importantly, the syntactic analysis of }bwhm remains unresolved in the interpretation of Said and al-Hamad.7 These morphosyntactic problems result from an unsatisfactory reading of line 2 of the inscription. This is most clearly demonstrated by the fact that Said and al-Hamad do not take into account a vertical stroke between what they read as <t> in line 2 and the top of an extended <l> from line 3. Based on the published photograph (reprinted here as Fig. A),8 we propose the following reading for line 2: -¨brhb}lh}bwhm. The traces at the beginning of this line could possibly be read as <y>, but this is tentative. The first fully visible letter is <¨>, which is followed by <b>. Then, there is <r>, which is composed of two strokes — a full length, slightly angled vertical line and a short angular stroke connected to the top of this line. The fourth character corresponds to one of the two types of <h> found in this inscription.9 A REVISED READING OF A NABATAEAN INSCRIPTION FROM UMM AL-JIMAL This correction, thus, eliminates the possibility of reading the small stroke above the right side of <h> as <b>, and what remains is the extended left side of <h> connecting with <b> and <}> successively. With this new reading of line 2, the inscription becomes more intelligible. Revised Transcription 1 [ ]} nps} dy bnh shymw [ ] 2 [ ]¨ brh b}lh }bwhm [ ] 3 [ ]rb}l mlk} mlk nb†[ ] Revised Translation (1) [Th]is is the tomb which SHYMW … built … (2) … [for P]N, his son, through (the help of) the god of their father … (3) … king Rabel, king of the Nabataeans … According to this interpretation, the initial letter of line 2 is the end of the name of the person for whom the tomb was built.10 This is fol10 Several names ending in <¨ >, such as myd¨ and mn¨, are attested in Nabataean inscriptions from the Îawran. For Nabataean prosopography in general, see Negev 1991 with important corrections in Macdonald 1999. Names ending in <¨ > are also not infrequent in Palmyrene Aramaic (see Stark 1971). 387 Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org at Serials Department on June 29, 2010 Fig. A: Nabataean Inscription from Umm el-Jimal (Said and al-Hamad 2003: 31) A REVISED READING OF A NABATAEAN INSCRIPTION FROM UMM AL-JIMAL Address for Correspondence: amb@uchicago.edu, hardyhh@uchicago.edu Department of Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations, University of Chicago, 1155 East 58th Street, Chicago, IL 60637, USA REFERENCES Brock, S.P. 1992. ‘Some Notes on Dating Formulae in Middle Aramaic Inscriptions and in Early Syriac Manuscripts’, in Z.J. Kapera (ed.), Intertestamental Essays in Honour of Józef Tadeusz Milik (Kraków). 253–64 11 Cantineau (1930–2, II: 69) gives ‘par, grâce à’ as a gloss. To our knowledge, this formula is not otherwise attested in Nabataean; nevertheless, a similar expression does occur in Palmyrene Aramaic: … wqrbw … lsms }lh byt }bwhn ‘… and they dedicated … to Shamash, the god of their father’s house’ (Hillers and Cussini 1996: C3978). 13 While there is a noticeable space at the end of line two, this space is not so great, in our opinion, as to rule out the possibility that additional text could be missing from the left side of the inscription (contra Said and al-Hamad 2003: 30). 14 According to Brock’s study of dating formulae in Middle Aramaic, snt plus a numeral is the shortest dating formula attested in Nabataean (Brock 1992). 15 A hypothetical expanded reading could look something like the following: [d]} nps} dy bnh shymw [br PN lnpsh wl-PN]¨ brh b}lh }bwhm [DN byrÌ X bsnt Y l]rb}l mlk} mlk nb†[w dy }Ìyy wsysb ¨mh] ‘[Th]is is the tomb which SHYMW, [son of PN,] built [for himself and for P]N, his son, through (the help of) the god of their father [DN. In the month of X in year Y of] king Rabel, king of the Nabatae[ans, who provides life and salvation for his people]. 12 388 Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org at Serials Department on June 29, 2010 lowed by the appellation brh ‘his son’ in apposition; the referent of the suffix is SHYMW. The preposition b- is, then, to be understood as ‘through the help of’ or simply ‘by’.11 The final two words of line 2 consist of a construct phrase ‘the god of their father’ according to which ‘father’ refers to the paternal progenitor of SHYMW and his son.12 Because it is uncertain how far the left side of the inscription originally extended, one can only speculate as to the exact composition of the inscription.13 At the very least, the present interpretation requires space for <d> at the beginning of line 1, for the preposition l- plus the beginning of a personal name between the end of line 1 and the beginning of line 2, and for a minimal dating formula composed of (b)snt plus a numeral between the end of line 2 and the beginning of line 3.14 This could, however, be expanded with various formulae if the left side of the inscription was originally larger.15 Thus, while the exact composition of this inscription will in all likelihood remain conjectural, it is our hope that the new reading and interpretation [ ]¨ brh b}lh }bwhm [ ] ‘…PN, his son, through (the help of) the god of their father…’ provides a plausible solution to the previous morphosyntactic difficulties. A REVISED READING OF A NABATAEAN INSCRIPTION FROM UMM AL-JIMAL 389 Downloaded from http://jss.oxfordjournals.org at Serials Department on June 29, 2010 Cantineau, J. 1930–2. Le Nabatéen. 2 vols, (Paris) Graf, D.F. and S. Said. 2006. ‘New Nabataean Funerary Inscriptions from Umm al-Jimal’, JSS 51, 267–303 Healey, J.F. 1993. The Nabataean Tomb Inscriptions of Mada}in Salih. (JSS Supplement 1. Oxford) Hillers, D.R. and E. Cussini. 1996. Palmyrene Aramaic Texts. (Baltimore, London) Khairy, N.I. 2000. ‘New Nabatean Inscriptions from the 1996 Survey in the Umm el-Jimal Area’, in L. Stager, J.A. Greene and M.D. Coogan (eds), The Archaeology of Jordan and Beyond. Essays in Honor of James A. Sauer (Winona Lake). 255–65 Knauf, E.A. 1985. ‘A New Nabatean Inscription from Umm el-Jimal’, AION 45, 17–18 Littmann, E. 1904. Semitic Inscriptions. (New York) —— 1914. ‘Nabataean Inscriptions’, in Publications of the Princeton University Archaeological Expeditions to Syria in 1904-1905 and 1909 (Leiden). Division IV, Section A Macdonald, M.C.A. 1999. ‘Personal Names in the Nabataean Realm: a Review Article’, JSS 44, 251–89 Al-Muheisen, Z. and A. Ajlouni. 2005. ‘A Nabataean Inscription from Northern Jordan Survey (Umm al-Jimal area)’, Syria 82, 167–72 Negev, A. 1991. Personal Names in the Nabatean Realm. (Jerusalem) Said, S. and M. al-Hamad. 2003. ‘A New Nabatean Inscription from Umm el-Jimal’, JSS 48, 29–34 —— 2004. ‘Three short Nabataean inscriptions from Umm al-Jimal’, Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 34, 313–18 Stark, J.K. 1971. Personal Names in Palmyrene Inscriptions. (Oxford) Starcky, J. 1985. ‘Les inscriptions nabatéennes et l’histoire de la Syrie méridionale et du nord de la Jordanie’, in J.-M. Dentzer (ed.), Hauran I. Recherches archéologiques sur la Syrie du Sud à l’époque hellénistique et romaine (Bibliothèque Archéologique et Historique 124.1, Paris). 167–81