issue with him, showing that, rich as his collection is, it is by no means complete, and that its demonstrable inaccuracy is such as greatly to impair the value which it would otherwise possess.

The second collection is that of P. Porphyr, attached to the account of his journey to Mount Sinai, published in 1857, in the Russian language. It embraces eighty-nine inscriptions, mostly new.

But the most serviceable collection of the three is that by Lepsius, and published in his great work entitled "Monuments of Egypt and Ethiopia." The copies are taken with the greatest accuracy, and amount to one hundred and sixtyseven, extending in length from one line to ten each.

One result of these renewed and extended investigations was the discovery of the fact that the inscriptions in the ancient character, instead of being limited, as had previously been supposed, to the western portion of the peninsula, were to be found in all the passes of the entire peninsula leading either east or west from Sinai or from Serbal. Another important fact was the discovery of monuments in Petra and the surrounding region, bearing the same identical character of the Sinaitic inscriptions. And a further fact was brought out by the publication of fac-similes of a number of Nabatean coins, with the name of Aretas and other kings of Petra stamped upon them in this same letter. This settled the question of the Nabatean origin of the inscriptions at Sinai, as Beer had claimed, but which Tuch had denied; and it afforded the opportunity of stirring the inquiry, upon which Levy heartily entered and for which his Chaldee studies so admirably fitted him, whether the language of the inscriptions is, after all, so thoroughly Arabic as Tuch had insisted, and whether it is not more properly, according to Beer's original idea, an Aramaic dialect with a considerable admixture from the Arabic. Levy is one-sided and extreme in his advocacy, refusing to admit Arabisms, even where they are most palpable, and explaining away what is most clear and evident. He goes so far even as to say that the article al and the vowel endings for cases are not peculiarly Arabic. He, however, points out many words and forms which have as much or more claim to

be regarded as Aramæan than Arabic. The most interesting case of the sort, and, if it shall be verified, the most important for the understanding of the inscriptions, is a new reading which he proposes for the word which recurs so often, and which Beer and Tuch took to be "a pilgrim." According to Levy it is "for good," for which he argues on palaographic grounds, and which seems to be confirmed by the corresponding ev åɣalo(s) in a bilingual legend.

The inscriptions in which it is found will then read, "May So and So be remembered for good." This he supposes to be not a friendly salutation, carved upon the rocks as a greeting to those who shall follow him upon the same pilgrimage, but a prayer addressed to the deity that he worshipped, and to which he would give new emphasis and force by putting it in solid stone and leaving it as his perpetual supplication. The words, thus understood are almost identical with those of Nehemiah, v. 19, "Remember (Eng. ver., think upon) me, my God, for good."

This view, both of the meaning of this phrase and of the character of the language, he labors to confirm still further by another word, which he finds often appearing in the same connection, "to eternity" or "forever." "May So and So be remembered for good forever." Or in connection with b, which is so frequently repeated at the beginning of the inscriptions, and which he translates, not as Beer, "the salutation of So and So;" nor as Tuch, who makes it a verb, "So and So salutes;" but according to its strict Hebrew and Aramean import," the peace of So and So be forever;" again a prayer addressed to the God he worshipped, and of substantially the same sense as before. The word "pilgrim" being thus erased from these inscriptions, Levy thinks it is not necessary to assume that the writers were at the time on their way to holy places. They may have been or they may not. These pagan Nabateans may upon other occasions likewise have uttered their prayer that God would remember them for good, and that their peace might be made perpetual; and they may have left that prayer on record in these walls of stone, perhaps with attendant solemn rites, of which there is here no mention or suggestion, but which Levy thinks not improba

ble, from a comparison of such language as Numbers v. 15, แ an offering of memorial, bringing to remembrance," i. e., before God. The figures of men and camels found conjoined with these inscriptions he takes to be pictorial representations of the petitioners themselves and their surroundings, and designed to carry out their idea yet more fully of bringing themselves into remembrance before God.

Levy brings a new criterion to bear upon the question of the age of these inscriptions. The Nabatean coins exhibit the forms of the letter in the second century before Christ; their dates can be fixed with considerable accuracy by the names of the kings under whom they were coined. Now a comparison of the letters of the coins and the letters of the inscriptions appears to him to show that very few of the inscriptions are as old as the coins. This is the limit of antiquity. His general result is, accordingly, substantially the same as that of Tuch. They belong to the two centuries before or to the two after Christ.

Levy's views of the language of these inscriptions have encountered opposition from Prof. Blau in a paper published in 1862 in the Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft (Journal of the German Oriental Society). Blau is as partisan, extreme, and indiscriminating on the side of Arabic as Levy had been on the side of Aramæan; if possible, a little more so. In fact, in his zeal he runs into excesses which are very ridiculous. Thus, to give an instance, the word by which the inscriptions are so frequently prefaced, would, in Aramæan, be a passive participle, "remembered;" and is so translated, even by Tuch, careful as he was of the Arabic type of the language. But inasmuch as this word in Arabic properly has an active signification-" remembering," or "mindful," Blau so renders it. This leads him to say that inscriptions so beginning are to be regarded as answers to another class, quite as abundant, which begin with the word "salutes." The first who passes leaves his salutation for friends who are to follow on the same route, by scratching on the rocks, at some prominent point, "So and So salutes." His friends, coming after, and recognizing their predecessor's name, write immediately under, "So and So remembers." The word

"for good," as read by Levy, he converts into "resting," or "having a holiday," and infers that the inscriptions were made by the workmen in the mines and quarries of the peninsula, to while away the leisure hours on their holidays, as they passed to and from their homes.

On the other hand, we must not fail to acknowledge that Blau has done a good service in establishing the fact more thoroughly than had previously been done, that the names on the inscriptions are such as were current in Arabia. He has identified about ninety of them with names found in Arabic writings; and he gathers from these too, by an ingenious process, an evidence of date agreeing substantially with that already reached by others from different data, and by totally distinct methods.

The most important questions relating to these inscriptions may accordingly be regarded as now settled upon a true and satisfactory basis. Correct results have, however, been reached, as is commonly the case in all intricate problems, only by a series of approximations. It seems to be ascertained that the writers were natives of Arabia Petræa, inclusive of the Sinaitic peninsula; and whether they were subjects of the kingdom centering in Petra or not, they made use of the language and the mode of writing current there. They were neither Jews nor Christians, but worshippers of heathen divinities and particularly of the heavenly bodies. They were mostly pilgrims on their way to certain celebrated sanctuaries, which were for centuries resorted to at special seasons by the pagans resident in this region. The inscriptions in the old native character belong to the period immediately preceding and following the Christian era; and they come down to the time when the Gospel and the Christian Church penetrated these localities, supplanted heathenism, and suppressed its sanctuaries. They then yield to legends in Greek and Latin, and even more recent tongues, the work of Christians, who in imitation of their heathen predecessors have left the record of their pilgrimage to hallowed spots graven on the same imperishable rocks.

It has been intimated already that the study of these inscriptions has an interest and importance beyond the mere ingenuity

displayed in solving a difficult and perplexing enigma. While it has opened no extensive fields for research and made no very considerable additions to our knowledge of antiquity and general history, it is not wholly barren of results. It has made us acquainted in some scanty measure at least, with the language of Northern Arabia at this period, and thus fills a gap of some consequence in our knowledge of the history and dialects of the Semitic tongues. It affords some glimpses into the history of religion by furnishing the names and attributes of deities reverenced by the writers. And these have been the starting points of learned and ingenious investigations, in which all that can be gathered from classic and Arabic writers has been summoned to throw light upon their character and the nature of their worship. Something may be learned likewise in respect to the civilization of this region from the proper names indicative of occupations. Those derived

from the mining and working of metals are particularly nu

אלגרפו,Artisan חריש or חרש,IIammerer לטש,. .merous, e

קין

Fireman, Smith, etc. That these arts were practised there in remote periods is evidenced by the remains of mines with hieroglyphic legends attesting their antiquity, not to speak of the confirmation and illustration afforded by the book of Job, xxviii. 1-11, whose scene is laid in this region.

The deciphering of the Sinaitic or Nabatean alphabet, also prepares the way for the reading of any other monuments in the same character that may hereafter be discovered. To what this may lead it is impossible to determine or even to conjecture. When the old Persian cuneiform character was first unriddled no one could have anticipated the use to which it was to be put upon the exhumation of Nineveh and the discovery of that rich store of inscriptions to which it supplied the only practicable key. The whole region of Petra and Hauran is yet to be minutely and thoroughly explored. Intimations from recent travellers justify the belief that such explorations would be rewarded by important and hitherto unimagined discoveries. No one can tell what monumental records may have been left by the cultivated people who once occupied this territory. One interesting result of the discovery of the Sinaitic alphabet is, as already mentioned, the identifi