possible to connect the era of the Seleucida with this part of the world, the only remaining supposition seems to be, that, as the rupture of the dyke constituted an era, so the erection of it had previously formed one, which naturally ended with the structure itself, and was succeeded by the other. Indeed, the three inscriptions copied by Arnaud from the remains of that wonderful structure (in Fresnel's Collection, 12-14.*) speak of the royal overseers of the dyke and its waters; the one under a king of Saba, Muhett Balaq, the other under a king Ben Dhamarati. Neither of these names is found among the kings of the later Himyaric empire; and, combining this fact with the other, it will not perhaps appear an unwarrantable assumption that the dates a least of 604 and 573 are years of Locman's era, for the duration of which we have thus documentary evidence as far as its 7th century, or down to the middle of the 5th century before Christ. Locman's era must have begun about 1750, or four centuries before the Exodus. Ewald, who refers those dates to the era of the rupture, adds, that at all events he thinks the inscriptions bear the character of high antiquity.† I think, therefore, it requires further research to see whether all those dates, of which one is of the year 30, may not belong to the Locman era. This is, in itself, the most reasonable assumption: otherwise, if the dates on the monuments in this place represent two different eras, there probably would have been some additional mark for the second. But, besides, what occasion could there be for inscriptions at these places after the destruction of the dyke? If, then, we have a second Himyaric empire in the 18th century before our era, perhaps with monuments and inscriptions from its commencement, there is no difficulty in assuming that the first Joktanide settlement, of which this empire forms the second period, was much anterior to the Abrahamic movement, which (as I shall prove elsewhere by cogent arguments) belongs to the 28th or 29th century B. C. * Arnaud's 3rd in Fresnel's collection. See Rödiger, p. 38. Ewald, in Höfer's Journal, p. 308. Ewald, in Höfer's Zeitschrift, 1846, p. 309.: Jadeal, lieutenant of Ben Samihati, King of Saba, does homage to the temple of Almaqa (probably a goddess of the moon), day (number wanting) of the year 30. II. The North Arabian Settlement and the Sinaitic Inscriptions. I. The relative Antiquity of Arabic and Hebrew. We have, comparatively speaking, but few documents of the language of the Koran anterior to Mohammed, and those remains are not of a very early date, although they record remote events. All was traditional among these tribes before Mohammed, and rested upon memory. This circumstance, together with the highly intellectual and proud character of the nation and the independence of Arabian life, must account for the fact that the language, when it appears in a literature, exhibits a fulness and richness of forms which may be compared, in this sphere, to that of Sanskrit. The following facts will suffice to show that the system of sounds is more primitive in Arabic than in Hebrew. The Comparative Tables appended to this chapter will exhibit proof of the higher antiquity of the grammatical forms. Comparative Table of the System of Vocalization of Arabic and Hebrew. 1. Long Vowels. The long vowel A and the diphthongs exist in Arabic in the original state, whilst Hebrew gives them in a somewhat modified form. Thus: Arabic â Hebrew ô (rarely â) ai ê, æ (rarely aji); au corresponds to ô (rarely ave) The vowels and û occur in the same words in both languages. The first of the above commutations, that of Arabic â, of Hebrew ô, is the most important, because the ô occurs in no part of any Arabic word. The following may serve as examples of monosyllables: Arabic lâ (not) ra's (head) ça'n (herd) likewise, in the first syllable of the bisyllabic derivations: in the syllable ân, added to the root to form substantives: Arabic soltan (ruler) Hebrew shiltôn but rahmân ramhân In Hebrew the syllables âm and ân at the end of substantives are frequently found together with the later forms ôm and ôn. 2. Short Vowels. The Arabic alphabet designates only the three original short vowels, a, i, u. These three original vowels are found in the corresponding Hebrew words only where the following consonant is doubled and the accent of the word does not fall upon it, e. g. Arabic kul (all) Hebrew kullâm (they all) sin (tooth) yam (sea) shinnâm (their tooth) When these syllables stand alone and are accentuated, the i and the u are transformed into e and o. The a remains unchanged. In this case the Hebrew a, e, o receive what I propose to call a half-length, which may be designated by ā, ē, ō. In the above cases Arabic kul is changed into Hebrew kōl These half-long vowels are changed into short ones, as soon as they lose their accents. Thus the Hebrew for Lastly, even this small portion of vowel sound is very commonly impaired almost to extinction, and the uniform half-vowel placed in its stead, which the old grammarians foolishly called shwa-mobile (literally, movable rest). This is best exemplified by such common monosyllables, as Arabic ba (in) ka (as) la (to) wa (and) ya (prefix of future) Hebrew be ke le we ye Vestiges of the original form are still preserved in Hebrew for each of the monosyllables here mentioned. Thus bāzeh (here) and kāzeh (so) are merely compounds of ba and ka with the demonstrative pronoun zeh. Similarly, bô (in it, in him) and lô (to it, to him) are evident contractions of ba-hû and la-hû, as is proved by the existing uncontracted form la hem (to them). The form wa still exists in such compounds as tôb wārā' (good and evil), or in wayyômer wayyiqra, &c. (he spoke, and he called, &c.). Lastly, the future pre fix ya is to be found in yaqûm, yabîn (he will rise, separate). The same will apply to innumerable cases where the so-called shwa mobile or half-vowel is introduced instead of a, i, u. The following are a few instances, in the first syllable: Arabic sabil (path) 'amânah (covenant) kitâb (writing) in the second syllable: 'amânah ketâb Arabic qatalû qattalû yaqtulû-na yoqattilû-na We subjoin a comprehensive table to show what changes the simple. Arabic vowels undergo in the Hebrew formations: Arabic a i u ē i, e e, a ō u, o e, o Hebrew ā a, ä e, a The half-vowels, which are put in the third place, are expressed by smaller types. A great multitude of Arabic short vowels are besides entirely thrown off and lost, particularly at the end of Hebrew words. II. Sinaitic Inscriptions. 1. The Alphabet and the Language. The inscriptions on the rocks surrounding the road which lead on the west side of the Sinaitic Peninsula to Mount Sinai, had already occupied the attention of Cosmos Indicopleustes, who noticed them in the earlier part of the sixth century. He could find nobody able to read the characters, and hence concluded them to be the records of the Israelites in their passage through the desert. Pococke gave some specimens of them: Niebuhr divined their contents, and scorned the idea that they could be anything but greetings and memorials of travellers in different ages. Lepsius discovered thousands of them on and round Mount Serbal which never had been observed before, and Wellsted saw the mountain which closes the Valley of Inscriptions (Wadi Mokatteb) towards the south, the Djebel Mokatteb, covered with similar ones towards the sea-side. It has been the fashion of late years, particularly among English travellers, to sentimentalize upon these records; but, since Grey's useful contributions, none of them, as far as publications go, has taken the trouble of copying them. Lepsius brought away with him more than twice the number we previously possessed, and we may soon hope to see them published and explained by Professor Tuch of Leipzig, whose treatise on those hitherto known (Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft, 14th Bd., 1849, pp. 129-215.) is conclusive as to all the essential points. The alphabet was discovered by Eduard Beer of Leipzig, who gave an account of it in his "Inscriptiones veteres Litteris et Lingua huc usque incognitis ad Montem Sinai servatæ," (Fasc. I. Lips. 18401843). He proceeded to decipher them so methodically and so successfully, that Tuch, after the most searching inquiry and with fresh materials, did not discover one single letter of Beer's alphabet which required correction. The monument placed on his tomb, the characters of the Sinaitic alphabet, as found by himself, is therefore a well-deserved trophy of this self-sacrificing inquirer, who lived and died in starvation, a martyr to his zeal for truth and science. Supposing that this alphabet would bear a resemblance to the Phoenician, the type and key of all the others, and that the language |