Roots of Modern Arabic
Script: From Musnad to Jazm
© Saad D. Abulhab
Baruch College,
CUNY
Introduction
Studying the origins of the Arabic script is an important and
interesting undertaking since it is not merely a history topic. Understanding
how Arabic evolved to its current forms is an important step to secure its
future. Arabic script open interaction with its surrounding environment in the
past should be an inspiration today.
For many centuries, scholars of the Muslim world differed on
the origin of the script, but their differences were mainly about what group of
Arab tribes had used it first. It was not until modern inscriptions hinted at
an Aramaic Nabataean link that this topic became divisive. Since then, a lot of
articles and books had debated the subject. Many of these articles and books
simply repeated the conclusions of western scholars of the nineteenth century,
based on a handful of inscriptions, about a Nabataean transformation to Arabic,
without engaging any discussion. Few, like Mādūn, challenged this
notion with serious and interesting analysis and reasoning. He speculated with
illustrative details about a possible transformation of older Arabic Musnad
shapes to modern ones, instead.18 However, many books and articles, today,
disagree with the Aramaic Nabataean origin theory without offering a solid
alternative theory.
In this article, I will not attempt to study each early
inscription in detail since this cannot be covered in one brief essay. However,
I will not restate theories without proper analysis, either. In addition to a
brief discussion of the inscriptions available today, I will examine various
important factors surrounding the birth of early Arabic script. Speculating
about letter shapes of a few inscriptions alone does not constitute an adequate
systematic methodology to drawing definite conclusions. One should study the
origins of the Arabic script within the context of the overall scriptural, sociological,
and geographical realities of the old Near East region at that time.
Early Alphabets in the Near East
The earliest bits and pieces of an alphabet in the greater Arabian
Peninsula, including the Fertile Crescent, were found in the eastern
Mediterranean region located between ancient Mesopotamia (modern Iraq) and Egypt. They were dated back to the 14th century BC. Collectively, these ancient
shapes and forms were referred to as the Canaanite alphabet which was said to
be derived from proto-Sinaic scripts of Egyptian origin. It is commonly
believed today that this Canaanite alphabet is the progenitor of most major alphabets
of the old world.36
In the same area and during the same time period,
scientists
have also uncovered evidence for the existence of another important
alphabet
system used by the Canaanites: the Ugaritic alphabet of the city state
of Ugarit near Rās Shamrah in northern Syria. The Ugaritic script had a
long alphabet
with 30 letters and a short one with 22 letters. All letters had
Mesopotamian
cuneiform shapes and were mainly ordered from left to right. It is not
clear
whether Ugaritic was a special adaptation of an Egyptian related
Canaanite
alphabet or an earlier alphabet of Mesopotamian origin.
Inscriptions can not always determine, with absolute
certainty, precise timelines of ancient scripts. One can not always conclude
from a few found inscriptions when a specific script had started. However, it
is safe to assume based on inscriptions that around the 9th and
early 10th centuries BC, two well-formed alphabets with many common
shapes and similar overall look and feel had existed in the greater Arabian Peninsula.
One was the Phoenician alphabet of the eastern Mediterranean
shores, which scholars think was directly derived from earlier Canaanite or
even a transformed replacement of it. The second was the Arabic Musnad alphabet
of the Arabian Peninsula including ancient Yemen, which most experts believe
was a more developed kin of the Canaanite script, not Phoenician. Inscriptions
further reveal that over a century later another alphabet, Aramaic, clearly a
variant of Phoenician, was in use throughout the Fertile Crescent area and may
be Persia.
 |
Table of rough shapes of
characters for few early alphabets
|
Some experts believe that the Phoenician script was derived
from Arabic Musnad. German historian, Max Muller (1823-1900) thought it was
adapted from Musnad during the 9th century B.C. when the Minaean
Kingdom of Yemen controlled areas of the Eastern Mediterranean shores. Syrian
scholar of the 19th century, Shakīb ´Arsalān shares this view.18
Because of the shape similarity
of several Greek and Musnad letters, some experts even believe that
Greek was
derived from Musnad too! After all, it is a known fact that ancient
Greece had extensive trade relations with Yemen going back to the 9th century B.C.
Moreover, unlike Phoenician, which was exclusively right to left script, Musnad
was bidirectional which may explain Greek’s left to right ordering or even the ancient
Boustrophedon practice of bidirectional writing.
Needless to say, there are few who argued that Musnad could
have been adapted from Phoenician as well, during the Minaean times, but the
restricted ordering of characters in Phoenician makes this less likely. Still,
regardless of their exact starting dates and origins, the undisputed archeological
fact is that Musnad and Phoenician had clear common roots and shapes. Furthermore,
the earliest inscriptions of clear matured forms for both scripts belong to the
same time period, around the 9th to10th centuries B.C.
The emergence of Cursive styles
Around the 3rd to 4th century
B.C.,
inscriptions of the Near East further showed that Aramaic and its
various
derived scripts had replaced Phoenician, becoming the main script of the
Fertile Crescent. Inscriptions also show that a semi cursive script,
sharing with Aramaic
its 22 letters and most shapes, was widely used by several population
centers
in the southern areas of greater Syria. This was the script of the
ancient city
of Petra, capital of the Nabataean kingdom, which was founded around the
3rd
century B.C. The Nabataeans were predominantly Arab Semitic tribes living in
the area controlling trade routes from the eastern Mediterranean shores to Ḥijāz
(Saudi Arabia) and Yemen. Evidently, they have adapted a script with a slightly
modified Aramaic shapes after centuries of economic relations with neighboring
urban centers.8
 |
A Nabataean inscription on
the walls of Petra 32
|
 |
Syriac inscription of the
Tripod Mosaic discovered by Segal in Urfa, Turkey. Dated to the 3rd
century 30
|
 |
Earliest Syriac inscription
dated 6 A.D. 12
|
Many scholars believe the Nabataean script was derived from
Syriac around the 2nd century B.C., but no evidence supports this
claim. While the Nabataean inscriptions can be photographed today on the walls
of ancient Petra, dated back to the 3rd century B.C., the earliest
inscriptions of the Syriac script are from the 1st century. Syriac,
like Nabataean is clearly derived from Aramaic. It was first used in Odessa, currently Urfa of southern Turkey. 12
By the 3rd and 4th centuries, it seems
that the practice of connecting letter forms was becoming popular in the
greater Peninsula and Persia. This trend was most likely the result of the
introduction of newer inscription media and tools. Without a doubt, connectivity
marked a new era in script development. It transformed ancient scripts the same
way complete detachment transformed modern scripts in the age of typography. Cursive
writing necessitated radical letters shapes changes. Letters were flipped, rotated,
extended, or completely replaced to adhere to the new cursive rules. The new words
absorbed the visual characteristics of individual letters. Scripts that
traditionally utilized open letter ordering, like Musnad, assumed one direction
in their cursive styles.27
Within this new cursive environment, scripts adjusted
differently. Some, like the Nabataean script, adapted full connectivity but
kept most letter forms unaltered. Others changed their letter forms radically for
the sake of connectivity, like cursive Musnad in Yemen and may be Pahlavi of Persia.
Yet other scripts, like Hebrew, ignored
this new trend all together.2
The dynamics of script evolution in that period was a classical case of how the
new emerges from the old. It was a case of dialectic interaction between the new
and old.
The development of any script is not a linear or precise
process. Because of this nonlinearity and uncertainty, scientific research and
studies regarding a script origin should involve elements of investigation,
speculation, and a probabilistic approach. Scripts rarely develop in an
isolated environment or by decree. Instead, they evolve through adaptation to
surrounding scripts and actual socioeconomic materialistic needs. Under normal
circumstances, people do not abandon their writing systems abruptly in favor of
another.
The Greater Arabian Peninsula before Islam
Prior to investigating a script origin, one should first establish
what a derived script is. Identification should take into account the number of
letters used and their dynamic and visual characteristics. Comparing few letter
shapes alone is not enough to identify a script origin. One should study a script
development within its surrounding sociological and geographical environment. A
new script can be derived from multiple scripts not only a specific one. It can
also be invented a new from scratch.
In the early centuries of the first millennium, the northern
area of the greater Arabian Peninsula was a land of several old and new
religions. Babylonia, once the undisputed cultural center in the region, was
under the Persian Sassanid rule while the eastern Mediterranean coast was controlled
by the Romans. In contrast, the regions of middle and south Arabia enjoyed a
more homogeneous religious environment. They were free of direct foreign
dominance. Still, despite sporadic presence of ancient Hebrews, Christians, and
Mandaeans in the northern urban centers, the majority of the inhabitants of the
Greater Arabian Peninsula, including the Fertile Crescent, were pagans. Like the
people of Persia, they did not fully embrace monotheism until after the
emergence of Islam
The Arab tribes of the heartland were not isolated
from the religiously
turbulent north though. Traditionally, Arab tribes enjoyed strong ties
with
each other no matter where they settled. Historically these tribes
roamed large
areas extending to the upper Tigris and Euphrates. In the course of
their
movement, they had not only connected various civilizations in the
region, but
also created new urban centers of their own. Many had settled throughout
the Fertile Crescent centuries before the Christian era, bringing north
their gods, language,
and script styles. The migration north continued unabated for centuries,
even
after Islam. Arabic speaking Muslim armies moving north during the 7th
century were at home in most population centers of Iraq and greater Syria. Many welcomed them.
It is true that on the advent of Islam, the Aramaic derived scripts
were thoroughly established in most of the Fertile Crescent cities, but unlike
older scripts of the area, like Sumerian and Phoenician, these derived scripts
had limited applications. Many were primarily religious scripts. The day-to-day
scripts for business and government were those of the occupying foreign powers.
During this period, more and more religions differentiated themselves from each
other by the creation of newer derived scripts to write their religious books.
Mandaeans, Manicheans, Christians, Zarothostians and Hebrews all had their
religious scripts.
Under foreign forces, the Fertile Crescent region was no
longer a central player internationally. Non native ruling forces, namely the Persians
and Romans, dominated the area culturally and economically. For the Arabs, however,
one positive aspect had resulted from this environment: the treasures of the Persian
and Roman civilizations were now within direct reach of the heartland of Arabia.
The development of the new Arabic script, probably in the
early centuries of the first millennium, should be studied within this diverse
environment. Scripts with visually sophisticated curves like Pahlavi and Avesta
were now in nearby Mesopotamia.23
Greek, and Aramaic scripts like Nabataean, Syriac, and Mandaen were just north
of Hijaz. Although Arabic Musnad and its derived styles continued to be the
main script of northern Najd (Saudi Arabia) and Ḥijāz, it was not
the only one anymore. Within this pluralistic environment, the new developing Arabic
script must have been affected by more than one script style.
Birth and development of the Arabic Script
The earliest style of the modern Arabic script, historically
known as al-Jazm, was a product of its surrounding environment the same way
newer scripts and re-reinvented ones became the product of an Arabic script dominated
environment after Islam when Arabic became an inspirational force. During
centuries of Arabic prominence, many older writing systems did not simply
vanish. While their use was naturally diminishing, many had survived and have adapted
to Arabic. Some were re-invented in the spirit of Arabic the same way Arabic was
re-invented in the spirit of their original forms earlier. Researchers should
not view the shapes of non Arabic scripts of the Muslim world today completely
outside the frames of the Arabic script. It is not conceivable that the
surviving Aramaic scripts were completely immune to the Arabic script environment
after the Islamic era.
An outcome of doing otherwise was that some scholars believed
that early Arabic may have been derived from Syriac or one of its closely
related scripts of the early centuries, like Mandaic, Manichean, or Palmyrene. However,
many inscriptions in that period revealed that Syriac, like early Nabataean,
and Palmyrene, was not decidedly cursive.30
& 31 A multilingual
inscription dated as late as 512 CE, from the heartland of the Syriac script,
Zabad, showed mostly isolated Syriac letter forms, side by side Greek and fully
cursive Arabic. Early Syriac inscriptions showed no signs of diacritic marks or
dots, either. Arabic-like cursive and doted Peshitta manuscripts in Syriac Estrangelo
script, believed to be from the 5th century, are more likely from the
Islamic Era. Still, from an evolutionary perspective, the Syriac scripts should
be thought of as genuine sisters of modern Arabic.
The argument above is also valid regarding further claims
that early Arabic may have been derived from one of the highly artistic Persian
scripts used in Mesopotamia during centuries of Sassanid rule.9
One can not deny that the leap of Arabic to its magnificent shapes during the
Abbasid dynasty have Persian artistic spirit all over it. This is expected
since Iraq which was the melting pot center of the Abbasids was under direct
Persian rule from the 3rd century and had continued its heavy
association with the Persian culture after Islam.
 |
Pre-Islamic trilingual
inscription of Zabad found near Aleppo, Syria, including Syriac (top left),
Greek (top right) and Arabic (bottom) scripts. Dated 512 CE.28
Arabic text is isolated below and traced for clarity.
|
However, the evolution of Arabic should not be confused with
its origin. Inscriptions of Pahlavi and Avesta in the early centuries of the
first millennium show sophisticated curves, seamlessness, and rhythm that may
have affected early Arabic letterforms.3
Then again, while both scripts showed more tendency to connect letter forms
than early Syriac, their connectivity was also a reluctant one. They surely did
not share with the newly developing Arabic its major defining dynamics.
 |
Kartirz Avesta inscription
found on the Kabah of Zartusht. Dated to the 3rd Century 5
|
In the tenth century, Ibn al-Nadīm, a well-known Muslim
librarian and historian whose background we shall present later, described several
old and new Persian scripts. His sketches of letters shapes of some of the surviving
ones in his time were not that of their original forms. Most sketches showed curves
resembling those of old Pahlavi but forms similar to those of Persian
Nasta`līq style. Referring to an earlier version of one such script, he
called Firamuz, which is sometimes cited as the Arabic-like Persian script
predating Arabic, Ibn al-Nadīm explained that it “was derived and wrote by
the Persians. It is a recent development in two forms.” His statement clearly
indicates that this Arabic derived Persian script came later.22
 |
Taq e-Bostan Pehlavi
inscription of Shapur III. Dated to late 3rd Century 36
|
Still, some theories on the origin of Arabic may support a
possible early Persian influence. Many believe that the Arabic script was first
used in the Ḥīrah and ´Anbār area of Iraq which was under the
Persian rule during that period. Many talk about al-Kindī script style of Ḥīrah
existing side by side al-Jazm of Ḥijāz.1
Some of the theories explored by Ibn al-Nadīm even listed pre-Islamic
Arabic names from that same area who supposedly designed the early forms.
It is commonly believed today that Bushr ibn `Abd al- Malik
al-Kindī, believed to be a Christian Arab, was the first to bring Jazm
from Ḥīrah to Mecca. 15 Bushr was the brother of
al-Ukaydir, a leader from ancient Dumat al-Jandal (ouside Sakākah of northern
Saudi Arabia) that is located 200 miles southwest of Ḥīrah. Dumat
al-Jandal is the earliest known northern Arab city dating back to the 10th
century B.C.36 At that
time, during the 5th - 6th centuries, it was the capital
of the Arab kingdom of Kinda. Below is a rough translation of a pre Islamic poem,
attributed to a man from Mecca or Dumat al-Jandal, 18
which is widely referenced in Arabic literature:
Do not deny Bushr’s* favors to you (*
Bushr ibn `Abd al-Malik)
He was a man of open blessed wisdom
He brought you al-Jazm calligraphy until you saved
the money that was plenty and scattered
You then moved the pens back and forth
as skilful as scribers of Kisrá* and Qaysar* (*
Sassanid and Roman Emperors)
And had no need to Musnad of father Ḥimyr* (*
Father of Yemen Himyrite tribes)
and whatever the Himyrite* kings wrote on pages
Roots of Jazm: Nabataean or Musnad?
However, today, most scholars believe that Jazm had evolved during
the 4th century from the Nabataean script. Nevertheless, a thorough
examination of early inscriptions mostly point to other roots. The author believes
that the early Arabic script, Jazm, was independently developed by the Arab
tribes settling north of Ḥijāz, and Najd from localized versions of
cursive Musnad, particularly the Safawī style, much earlier than
the 4th century. After all, early Jazm shares with Musnad its exact
28 letters. It also shares with it an early use of multiple shapes per letter that
became widely utilized later. It even used several Musnad shapes without major
modifications. Jazm may have coexisted with and influenced by more prominent Aramaic
scripts in its vicinity and particularly Nabataean. However Jazm approach to
connectivity and shapes was quite different.
The way cursive Jazm flow along a horizontal line is unique.
It lays letters shapes horizontally employing smoother curves and even
alternative shapes. It has a connectivity style and rhythm that can be better
identified with that of cursive Musnad than cursive Nabataean and it shares
with it the use of extended horizontal strokes. In fact, while Nabataean
connects vertical letters as is, cursive Musnad transforms them before joining.
With a stretch of imagination, some Nabataean shapes can be made to resemble
those of Jazm, but so do many Musnad shapes. Still, as stated earlier, shapes
similarity is not the only indication of script origin especially since Nabataean,
Aramaic, and Musnad, share the same roots.
In Arabic, the word Musnad means “supported” but in the
context of script, it means monumental or vertically standing. Like Phoenician
and Aramaic, Musnad was written with isolated unique letter shapes, and despite
occasional multi ordering, it was primarily a right to left script. Centuries
later, also like them, Musnad had witnessed the introduction of few distinct derived
styles. Most notable were the northern Lihyani and Safawī, and
nomadic Thamūdī. It is a common mistake today to treat Musnad as a single
style, Saba´ī, limited by single geographic area: south Arabia. Musnad was
as prominent and alive in the north as it was in the south.
Inscriptions dated back to the 3rd century show advanced
cursive Musnad forms clearly illustrating its flexibility and visual
adaptation. This highly cursive script, also known as South Arabian Minuscules
or popular Musnad, was utilized by ancient Yemenis to inscribe everyday
documents on softer wooden sticks. Standard Musnad was primarily used for rock-cut
monumental inscriptions.27 Clearly,
Musnad was not “fixed on stone” while its relatives in the north evolved into a
variety of other forms. Certainly, the development of a northern Musnad cursive
style can not be ruled out.
To the Arabs of Ḥijāz and the rest of the greater
Arabian Peninsula, Yemen was always the heartland of Arabia. In 615
C.E, when Prophet
Muhammad wanted to protect his followers from prosecution in Mecca, he
ordered
them south toward Yemen and Ḥabashah, modern Ethiopia. Just as Yemen
was (and still is) the Arab genealogical reference, its script was their
reference script
wherever they settled. The Arabs carried with them not only their
language and
gods but also their script. While exposure to old script among the
tribes had
probably diminished the further they moved north, away from their
original
population centers, writing had most likely regained the central stage
after
the development of newer population centers extending as far north as
the upper
Euphrates River.
 |
Cursive Arabic Musnad
transcription on wooden stick in ancient Yemen. Dated early 3rd
century 27
|
Like the word Musnad, the word al-Jazm most definitely had a
direct script-related meaning. In fact, several pre Islamic poems had mentioned
both names. In an Arabic dictionary the verb jazza means “to cut from” which
indicates that the derived noun Jazm must have referred to a script being cut
from another probably by simplification and letter shapes reduction. This fits
exactly what Jazm did in relation to Musnad.
Jazm carries clear markings of an original independent
script. Most likely, the northern Arab inventors of Jazm were familiar with Nabataean,
a prominent script in the area, but at the same time, they were even more familiar
with Musnad. Inscriptions show that they have used it during the Nabataean
period. Even though some northern tribes had adapted Nabataean Aramaic shapes, the
majority of the northern Arab tribes continued using Musnad. Monumental Musnad was
widely inscribed on Arabian gods from Yemen to Palmyra. The evidence is clear;
Musnad writings were on both early Jazm and late Nabataean inscriptions. In
fact, Musnad was utilized until the early years of Islam.
Evidently, the development of Jazm was a continuous
process
spanning over several centuries. Early inscriptions before and after the
emergence of Islam included both isolated and attached forms of the same
letters. It seems that Jazm had only matured after the emergence of the
Kufic
style. Although this style is named after Kufa in modern Iraq,
inscriptions dated to 4 Hijrī calender (625 CE) show that it was used in
Medina first. Like other religious groups around them, the Muslims
apparently wanted to
designate a unique style for the writing of their book, the Qur´ān. The
fact that the Arabic writing system matured only after the Islamic era
is natural.
Most scripts develop after being adapted in a state environment. In the
pre
Islamic era Arabic Jazm was clearly a developing script.
Work of Early Islamic Era Scholars
Before discussing the inscriptions discovered in modern
days, it is important to examine works of early prominent Muslim scholars
regarding Musnad and the origins of Jazm. Although Musnad was not used anymore
after Islam, these scholars knew much about it prior to the western discoveries
of the nineteenth century. Without a doubt, early Muslim scholars had access to
more and better inscriptions than those we have today. While most had differed
on the origins of Jazm as a writing style, it seems that they had taken it for
granted that Jazm was of a Musnad background.
One such scholar is Ibn al-Nadīm (929 CE -996 CE), a librarian
living in Baghdad during early second century of the Abbasid Caliphate. He had
direct access to major libraries of his time, including rare manuscripts in the
library of al-Ma´mūn palace. Nadīm’s father was a successful book
collector. In his introduction of al-Fihrast, a multi volume encyclopedic index
of thousands of books and authors of that time, he explored different accounts
regarding the origin of the Arabic script. While these accounts differed on
details, all seemed to indicate that the script was invented by Arab tribes
either in Hijaz, Najd, or other northern centers like Ḥīrah and ´Anbār.
Before giving his personal account, Ibn al-Nadīm
wrote
that “Ḥimyar used to write with the Musnad script, with varied forms of
Alīf, Bā´, Tā´.” The Ḥimyar refer to the people of modern Yemen. Then,
after explaining that he was put in charge of translating a Musnad
manuscript from
the Caliph al-Ma´mūn palace library, he sketched individual Musnad
letters
as he saw them indicating that they were an “exact reproduction of what
was in
the transcription.” 22
Immediately after presenting the Musnad shapes, he gave his
personal opinion. He wrote that “The first of the Arab scripts was the script
of Makkah, the Next of al-Madīnah, then of al-Basrah, then of al-Kūfah.
For the Alifs of the scripts of Makkah and al-Madīnah there is a turning
of the hand to the right and lengthening of strokes, one form having a slight
slant”. He then gave an example.22
 |
Arabic Musnad alphabet as
sketched by Ibn al-Nadīm (d 990 CE) in his book al-Fihrast written
around 970 CE. Letters order is that of old Ḥijāz and Tihāmah
which is almost identical to the one used today by Arabic dictionaries.22 Arabic letters highlighted in green by author for
clarity.
|
Another well-known Muslim scholar, al-Hamadhānī,
had also provided sketches of the Musnad alphabet in his book, al-´Iklīl,
which he wrote in 950 CE.18 His
work confirmed Ibn al-Nadīm observation of the use of varied shapes per
letter. In addition to Alīf, Bā´, and Tā´, he listed varied
shapes for Rā´, Dhā´, Zā´, Lām, Mīm, Nūn, and Hā´.
One interesting observation from his sketch was the use in Musnad of three position-dependent
shapes for the letter Hā´. Modern inscriptions had confirmed most letters shapes
of Musnad as observed by both scholars.
 |
Arabic Musnad alphabet as
sketched by al-Hamadhāmī in his book al-´Iklīl written around
945 CE.18 The Arabic letters
are ordered here according to old Najd Arabic alphabet.
26 Arabic letters highlighted in green by
author for clarity.
|
The smart note by Ibn al-Nadīm about right slanted Alīf
was confirmed by all pre Islamic Arabic inscriptions dating back to the forth,
fifth and Sixth centuries. The varied shapes of Musnad Alīf sketched by
al-Hamdhānī had even included two such right slanted Alīfs. Also,
the fact that the earliest Kufic inscriptions were found in Madīnah
indicates a trend of northward script movement from Ḥijāz, which was
Ibn al-Nadīm key observation. Considering their nomadic nature, this fact
should not exclude the possibility that tribes elsewhere in the peninsula could
have mastered the Ḥijāzī style of Jazm even before the arrival
of Islam.
Several other prominent Muslim scholars believed Arabic Jazm
was derived from Musnad. Among these was Ibn Khaldūn and al-Qalqashandī.
They both wrote that Jazm was originally known in Yemen as al-Khatt
al-Ḥimīrī and that it was brought later to the Ḥīrah
and Anbār area of Iraq before it was brought to Makkah.18
Pre-Islamic Arabic Jazm Inscriptions
There are seven pre-Islamic Jazm inscriptions available to
researchers today. The earliest one was found in Jabal al-Ramm east of Aqabah.
It dates back to 328 CE. The next earliest inscriptions are the two found in
Sakākah of northern Saudi Arabia. They were dated to the 4th or
may be early 5th century. A possible second earliest inscription may
also be the Arabic Umm al-Jimāl inscription found south of Damascus and dated to the 5th century.
 |
Table of letter
shapes of
various Arabic Musnad styles and early Arabic Jazm of the greater
Arabian Peninsula based on modern inscriptions, shown side by side
Nabataean and modern
Arabic letters. Compare Musnad to shapes revealed by early Abbasid
scholars.
|
The remaining three inscriptions are all dated to the 6th
century. The first one was found in Zabad of northern Syria, It was
dated to 512 CE. It is a multilingual inscription including Greek,
Syriac and
Arabic. The second one was found near Jabal al-´Usays south of Damascus
and dated to 528 CE. And the third one was found in Ḥarrān, also south
of Damascus and dated to 568 CE.
 |
Pre-Islamic Arabic Jazm
inscription of Jabal al-´Usays found south of Damascus, Syria. Dated 528 C.E. 28 Year is highlighted in
green.
|
 |
Pre-Islamic Arabic Jazm
from a Greek-Arabic bilingual inscription found in Ḥarrān, south
of Damascus, Syria. Dated 568 C.E.28
Year is highlighted in green.
|
It is worth noting here that dating inscriptions is dependent
on how scholars read their contents. Therefore, the above dates are not
necessarily accurate. Only the inscriptions of ´Usays and Ḥarrān
explicitly mentioned dates. Each date had two isolated parts following the word
“Sanat” (Arabic for year.) Experts read the two parts combined in each as Nabataean
numbers, 423 and 463, which can be questioned. First, looking from right to
left, it was assumed that the first part in both referred to the number 400
despite clear visual difference of the two. The first part in Ḥarrān
could be Nabataean number 200 or even the Arabic word “nahw” for
“approximately”. Second, one can not rule out the possibility that the last
identical portion of the second parts could have been a reference to a year or
event rather than the number 23, since, as we shall see later, this same final
part will appear again in another Nabataean inscription. Fortunately, the date
of the multilingual Zabad inscription was secured by the Greek inscription next
to it.
Also worth noting here is that no pre Islamic Arabic
inscription was found yet in the area around Ḥīrah and ´Anbār,
in Iraq. The closest ones are those of Sakākah, approximately 200 miles
southwest of Ḥīrah. The absence of inscriptions found in that area
may indicate that there are indeed no inscriptions to be found there and that
Jazm came later there. However, this is doubtful since many believe that Jazm
was first used among the Arab tribes in that Area.
As for Nabataean, numerous inscriptions are available today dating
as early as 3rd century BC, but only four, out of several thousands found,
had Arabic language text. These are frequently presented as evidence that Jazm was
derived from Nabataean. The earliest one had only two Arabic text lines and it was
found in Ein Avadat, present day Israel, and was dated to 88 – 150 CE. The
second earliest is the Nabataean Umm al-Jimāl found south of Damascus. It was dated to 250 CE.
Then there is the Raqqūsh inscription found in Madā´in
Sālih in northern Ḥijāz, Saudi Arabia. It was dated to 267 CE. This one had a summary in Thamūdī Musnad
script. It also contained rarely seen dots for a few letters. Some see Raqqūsh
as a proof for the transformation of Nabatean to Jazm. The third one is the famous
Namārah inscription found south of Damascus. Allegedly, this was the stone
placed on the tomb of ´Umru´ al-Qays (d.328), a well-known pre Islamic
Arab king linked to the Kindah tribes.
Undisputedly, the inscriptions listed above are all important
tools in the study of early Arabic development, but depending on these few pre
Islamic inscriptions alone can be misleading. First, etching letters on hard
surfaces can distort significantly intended forms. Second, by referencing few
inscriptions alone one would not have enough data to make informed conclusions
since only few letters shapes are revealed. Third, all referenced inscriptions
belonged to a limited geographic area which would make a comprehensive study impossible.
Evidence of Early Islamic Inscriptions
A balanced study of Arabic script roots must examine letter
forms of the early Islamic decades since they show more precise shapes on non
stone media. It is not clear as why no pre-Islamic inscriptions on such media are
available, especially knowing that we do have Arabic papyri from as early as
the second decade of the Islamic Hijrī calendar. Also recall that Ibn
al-Nadīm wrote about his handling a pre-Islamic Musnad manuscript.
The two earliest Islamic inscriptions were found in
Madīnah and are dated to 4 Hijrī calendar (625 CE.) Both had reasonably
developed Kufic shapes.11 Also
from the first Hijrī decade, we have two of Prophet Muhammad letters,
allegedly in the handwriting of his cousin `Alī ibn ´Abī Tālib,
to al-Mundhir ibn Sāwī, ruler of Bahrain and conqueror of al-Ḥasā´,
and Heraclius (Hirqal) the Byzantines emperor. They included very valuable letters
forms (like Hā´ and `ayn) that can shed a light on the characteristics of
early Arabic shapes. In total, it is believed that Prophet Muhammad had sent five
to eight letters to neighboring leaders.15
Many Islamic inscriptions dating from the first few decades
of Islam are available to researchers. Noted among them are the two earliest
Arabic papyri dated to 22 Hijrī calendar (642 CE). One is a bilingual
inscription including Greek writing which is kept
 |
One of the two earliest
Arabic Kūfī inscriptions found in Mount Sal`, Madīnah, Saudi Arabia. Dated 4 Islamic Hijrī calendar (625 CE) 28
|
today in the Austrian National Museum, Vienna. Both
manuscripts are account settlement about purchase agreements or taxes. Not
surprising, the two papyri listed above included clear dots on several letters
confirming the fact that dots were used commonly before the fifth decade of the
Islamic era when they were officially institutionalized or at least
acknowledged.
 |
Early Arabic Kūfī
inscription on a rock in Ṭa´if, Saudi Arabia. Dated to early decades of
Islam. 20
|
 |
From the earliest Arabic
papyrus dated to 22 Hijrī calendar (642 CE) containing Arabic and Greek
text. Kept in the Austrian National Museum, Vienna 28
|
 |
Arabic Kufi inscription
found near Karbalā´, Iraq, dated 60 Hijrī calendar (683 CE) 28 Notice the use of Wāw in Allah akbar
on the second line.
|
Several early papyri of Qur´ān are also available, most
written in the Kufic style. One Qur´ān papyrus from Madīnah was
identified as an example of a rare, short lived, Mā´il calligraphic style
and it was dated to the 8th century, but the author believes it is
much older, probably mid 7th century. 25
The letter forms of this papyrus are almost identical to that of the two early
papyri mentioned above, and that of early Kufic from one the oldest copies of
Qur´ān on parchment kept in the Egyptian National Library in Cairo. 14
 |
From a page of an
early Qur’ān
(Sūrah 24:37) papyrus written in Madīnah, Saudi Arabia, in the Mā´il
calligraphy style, which included hidden dots. Dated to the 8th
century. 25 The author
believes this style belongs to early Islamic decades and was written with a
formal pre- Islamic Ḥijāzī Jazm style.
|
 |
From a page in one of the
earliest Qur’an (Surah 10:59) on parchment, written in early undotted Kufic
style in Madīnah, Saudi Arabia. Dated to mid 7th century. 14
|
Another important early kufic Islamic inscription can be found
on the outer and inner mosaic of the octagonal Arcades of the Dome of the Rock
in Jerusalem, dated back to 64 Hijrī calendar (682 CE). The inscription is
well preserved and rather long. Its letterforms are clearly those of the Mā´il
style without the slant, probably due to the medium used. This inscription
includes some unique diacritics usage. The text of the inscription is Du`ā´,
which is a form of Islamic prayer that typically includes a mixture of Quranic and
non Quranic passages. The subject of the Quranic passages of this text was
about the Islamic interpretation of Jesus, which is clearly targeting the
sizable Christian community of Jerusalem. The use of Du`ā´ in inscriptions,
as well as its recital during religious occasions, was (and still is) very
common in the Muslim world. To inform the reader, the earlier Kufic inscription
near Karbalā´, Iraq, also included Du`ā´.
 |
Some of the inscriptions at
the Dom of the Rock in Jerusalem dated to 64 Hijrī (684 CE). The top one
is from the west and northwest mosaic of the inner octagonal arcade. Notice
the third word ´āmanū. The bottom one is from the west and
northwest outer octagonal arcade. 28
|
Curiously, the
inscription at the Dome of the Rock was a main ingredient of the latest
“academic coup d'état” in the field of Arabic and Islamic studies, led by a
group of German researchers. Taking advantage of western readers’ unfamiliarity
with the concept of Islamic Du`ā´, some put forward an unsubstantiated
claim that the Qur´ān
did not exist at the time period of this inscription; that is during the Umayyad
Caliphate. Despite a wealth of available information and material evidence
indicating otherwise, they further claim that the passages of this inscription
were “proto-ingredients” that were incorporated into what was to become the
Qur´ān after
the advent of the Abbasid era in 750 CE.
One of these researchers, writing under the pseudonym:
Christoph Luxenburg, believes that the Qur´ān
was originally a Syriac Christian book that was translated, sometimes
incorrectly, to Arabic.28 Fishing
out possible coincidental Syriac words combinations within pre-diacritics
Arabic script, and exploiting a few known and expected scriptural and
interpretational uncertainties in a historical book like the Qur´ān, Luxenburg
formulates rather bizarre and contradicting linguistic alternatives. However, it
is already acknowledged by Muslims that the allegories and teachings of the Qur´ān
are associated with those of Judaism and Christianity, and that the Arabic
language had commonly adapted non-Arabic words. Sharing similar roots and
timelines, Syriac Aramaic, a sister language that was itself significantly
affected by Arabic before and particularly after the Islamic dominance in the 7th
century, is therefore a poor etymological reference for Arabic. Luxenburg’s work
seems more a religious fundamentalist venture than a scholarly research.
The most striking facts of early Islamic inscriptions are
the rich and culturally diverse use of shapes, limited or slightly differing
shapes per letter, and loose observation of connectivity. One can easily spot
earlier Musnad or Nabataean shapes in various positional forms. It seems that
even in the early decades of Islam the Arabs were interchanging letter shapes
using a large cache of forms they were previously exposed to. A few obvious
examples are the use of final Yā´, medial `Ayn, medial Hā´, ligature
of medial Bā´ before Rā´, and the medial Qāf of Kufic style. One
can argue whether these shapes had come from Nabataean or Musnad, but the fact
is Jazm can not be assumed immune to the influence of either script.
The Nabataean Script Influence on Jazm
Examining early Arabic inscriptions leaves little doubt that
early Jazm was developed in northern Arabia within reasonable vicinity from the
more prominent Aramaic Nabatean environment. Early Jazm inscriptions clearly
indicate a trend of permanently borrowing or temporarily mixing Nabataean
letter shapes. This practice was common among other scripts in that area. The
early inscriptions show shapes for final Dāl, `Ayn, Wāw, Tā´,
and Nūn clearly resembling the Nabataean forms, but as indicated earlier
these shapes can also be identified with Musnad shapes.
Historically, the area of the Nabataean tribes was known to
be a refuge for persecuted people in ancient surrounding cities. Based on
geography and Roman history, it is clear that the overwhelming majority of the
Nabataeans were ethnically Arab tribes who had adapted the language and script
of neighboring Aramaic centers.8
Their adaptation of foreign culture had not only set precedents to other Arab tribes
in the north but had also created the open environment that was crucial to the
development of Jazm.
It is not clear as when the Nabataean script ceased to
exist. The dating of the earliest Arabic Jazm inscription and the latest Arabic
Nabataean inscription to one year, namely 328 CE, is too ironic. It leaves the misleading
impression that the Nabataean script had evolved to Arabic Jazm. None of the
other Aramaic scripts in the same geographic area was transformed significantly
to a completely different looking script before the Islamic era, why would the
Nabataean script be transformed?
The Nabataean kingdom lasted from around 300 BC
until its
annexation by the Roman Empire in the year 106 CE, but the city of Petra
continued its role as an important city in the area until the sixth
century.34 The question is why would people abandon their
script abruptly few decades before Islam in favor of a significantly different
one? One possible hypothesis is that the Nabataean gradual decline had opened
the doors for greater influence from surrounding Arab tribes bringing in a
newer script.
The argument above can explain why only a fraction of the
Nabataean inscriptions were in the Arabic language. It may even explain why
late Nabataean inscriptions had significantly more cursive forms than older
ones. Among the Arab tribes in the former Nabataean areas, a newly arriving Jazm
may have simply replaced the Nabataean script. Understandably, this argument
does not exclude the possibility that Arabic was derived independently from the
Nabataean script and co-existed with it before replacing it.
In the early decades of Islam, the Arabs seem to be confused
about the origins of the Nabataean people, but several early accounts from
Muslim army leaders suggested that they were ethnically a mixture of Arabs and
non Arabs.
The Fihrast of Ibn al-Nadīm indicated that they did not
speak Arabic. In several pages it referred to Ibn al-Waḥshiyah al-Kildānī,
originally from a city near Kūfah, translating numerous Nabataean texts to
Arabic. Sometimes he was named al-Kisdānī which seems to be a
scribing error of the Kāf-Lām ligature. Quoting one of their
magicians, Ibn al-Nadīm describes the Nabataeans as “black, barefoot, with
cloven heels.” Incidentally, according to al-Fihrast, it seems that the Arabs
believed that the Nabataean language was the old language of Babylon and that the
Chaldeans (al-Kildāniyyūm) and Assyrians (al-Siryāniyyūn) spoke
a varied accent of it.22
When isolated, many Nabataean letters are almost identical
to those of Aramaic or Aramaic Hebrew. Forcing connectivity seemed as an after
thought. The Nabataeans were probably exposed to scripts practicing connectivity
in their vicinity. Such cursive script could have been a cursive Musnad variant.
Possibly, they wanted to set their new script apart from surrounding Aramaic
scripts by incorporating an existing defining feature or inventing one. It is
interesting to note here that the cursive rules of late Nabataean are generally
similar to those of early Arabic.
Numerous inscriptions from the Arabian Peninsula confirm that
the northern Arab tribes had continued using Musnad.33 Some Arabs of the Nabataean lands may have
embraced an Aramaic like script to facilitate better communication and trade
relations with the surrounding cities, but it seems that they had used two
scripts all along. As a matter of fact, one cannot rule out that several Nabataean
letters could have been derived directly from Musnad.
In the early centuries, predominantly Arab Palmyra, not far
from the Nabataean area, used two writing systems, a monumental isolated script
and a cursive Mesopotamian script. This was probably due to its location on the
trade route between Persia and the Roman Empire. The Palmyra gods had Musnad
inscriptions. Even though their letter shapes were mostly derived from Aramaic,
the letters Thā´ and Rā´ seem to be directly borrowed from
Musnad.24
It is very important to observe here that evidence of
Nabataean shapes usage in early Jazm inscriptions is limited geographically to
areas of Nabataean influence. It is also limited to few pre-Islamic
inscriptions. One can not conclude with absolute certainty if these shapes
represented original Jazm shapes or just temporary localized ones.
Musnad Roots of Arabic Jazm
Despite hints of Nabataean influence, judging by available
Islamic and pre-Islamic inscriptions, it is undeniable that Jazm was primarily
derived from a Musnad background. Identical letter shapes like Rā´, Wāw,
`Ayn, and Hā´ were used in Jazm even after Islam. By examining Musnad
shapes in all its variants including cursive styles, one can easily spot common
visual characteristics with Jazm and later calligraphic styles like Kūfi.
The letters Sheen, Yā´, Mīm, Lām, `Ayn, Hā´, Jīm, Fā´,
Qāf, Dhāl, Zā´, Kāf, and Nūn, can all be traced to
Musnad.
The extent to which Musnad shapes changed to over the
centuries supports the above shapes transformations hypothesis. Evidence shows
that a typical scriptural transformation process can involve flipping and
rotating shapes along with minor or major eliminations of components. In
Musnad, this would mean rotating monumental letters to assume horizontal
positions and eliminating parts that interfere with a smooth cursive writing
process or letters shapes recognition and differentiation.
 |
The earliest pre-Islamic
Arabic Jazm inscription found near Jabal al-Ramm, east of Aqabah. Dated 328
CE. From a photograph by Lankester Harding 7
|
The earliest Arabic inscription, Ramm, did not include clear
letter forms to study, but it was important since it included a mixture of
Musnad and Jazm letters. Grimme believed the Arabic text was inscribed earlier.
Bellamy thought otherwise. The two differed completely in their readings of the
Arabic text but agreed on ignoring the Musnad text.7
Madun believes this inscription is the missing link between Jazm and Musnad. He
read both texts as one.18 The author believes that letters
of both scripts were inscribed together and the value of this inscription is
primarily in the presence of Musnad shapes side by side primitive Jazm. As we
saw earlier, the Raqqūsh Nabatean inscription included Musnad too. No one
questioned its presence there. Why should we then question it in Ramm, especially
when the quality of shapes of both texts is identical, and the usage of random
text direction within one inscription is quite common in old Arabia?
The pre-Islamic Jazm Umm al-Jimāl inscription is
probably the most significant and controversial one. Scholars differed on its
date, but most believe it belongs to the 5th or 6th
century. Some refer to it as the second Umm al-Jimāl inscription to
differentiate it from the earlier Nabataean Umm al-Jimāl inscription mentioned
above. It seems that this
inscription had used multiple shapes for Hā´ in its
final, medial, and isolated forms, twice each. This usage confirms both
al-Hamadhānī and Ibn al-Nadīm sketches regarding multiple Musnad
Hā´ shapes. Also, the medial shapes of Hā´ in this inscription
clearly match those seen in the two available letters of Prophet Muhammad,
which were written a century later. The two letters included a total of eight
words with initial and medial Musnad Hā´ shapes.
 |
Pre-Islamic Arabic Jazm
inscription of Umm al-Jimāl found south of Damascus, Syria. Dated to 4th or 5th century 18
Highlighted in green are the words
`ahada and al-hunayd, with medial Musnad letter Hā´.
|
Many today read the second word of the first line as ghafara
and the first word of the third line as al-khulayd or al-qulayd. The author reads
the first word as `ahada or ´ahuda and the second al-hunayd. Reading a
Nabataean Rā´ in ghafara would contradict with the current reading of all
previous and subsequent inscriptions. Jazm had consistently used Musnad Rā´
even in the early decades of Islam. In Arabic the word ghafara means “forgave.”
Mādūn argued ghafara here meant “to protect” or “to keep safe” but
this use is rare. The words `ahada and satara are more commonly used instead.
 |
A photograph of an original
copy of Prophet Muhammad letter to the Byzantines Emperor, Heraclius, who was
stationing in Damascus at that time. It was delivered by Diḥyah ibn
Khalīfah al-Kalbī to his minister at Tabūk, Saudi Arabia.15 This copy is owned by a Yemeni
family and dated back to 2nd or 3rd Hijrī calendar
(8th – 9th Century).29
Words with Musnad letter
Hā´ are circled.
|
 |
Re-Trace by the author of Prophet
Muhammad letter Heraclius from a previous trace of another original copy kept
in the collection of the Lebanese millionaire Henry Fir`awn.18
Words with medial Musnad letter Hā´, al-hudá (top) and ´ishhadū
(bottom,) are highlighted in green.
|
 |
A photograph of
Prophet
Muhammad letter to al-Mundhir ibn Sāwī, ruler of Bahrain, kept in the
Iraqi Museum in Baghdad, Iraq, or Tob Qabi Museum in Istanbul.,
Turkey. It was delivered by `Alā´ ibn Ḥadhramī.15
Words with Musnad letter Hā´ are circled.
|
 |
Re-Trace by the author of Prophet
Muhammad letter to al-Mundhir ibn Sāwī from a previous trace that
was compared to the original photograph. 16
Words with initial and medial Musnad letter Hā´ are highlighted in
green. They are from right to left and top to bottom: ´ishhad, ´amruhum,
lahum, ´ahl, minhum, and mahma.
|
One of the earlier inscriptions of Sakākah may have
also used medial position Musnad Hā´. Muaikel spelled the first word as Ba´,
`Ayn, Sīn, and Wāw, assumingly referring to a name, Ba`sū.21 However, this is not a known, Arabic
sounding, name. Besides, the third letter does not even remotely resemble any
Arabic or Nabataean shape for the letter Seen. Reading a hint of a middle
tooth, in an inscription full with similar slightly raised areas, is bizarre.
Clearly, this letter looks more like a Musnad Ha as discussed above. The word
is probably bā`ahū or bi`hū which in Arabic would mean “sold
him” and “sell him” respectively. At least, reading this word in this manner
would match the current reading of the inscription which is supposedly about a
slave of ´Umru´ al-Qays.
 |
One of two pre-Islamic
Arabic Jazm inscriptions found in Sakākah, Saudi Arabia. Dated 4th
or early 5th century. 28
Highlighted in green are the word bi`hū (or bā`ahū) with
medial Musnad letter Hā´ (top) and ´Umru´ al-Qays (bottom).
|
Evidence that early Arabic was independently derived from a
cursive Musnad background can be seen in its usage of a unique Alīf shape
resembling one of the variant shapes used by northern Safawī
Musnad style. That Alīf is slanted to the right with an angle identical to
slanted cursive Musnad. This unique slanted Alīf can be seen in all
inscriptions. Even Hamadhānī observed it in his sketch of Musnad
shapes. The small Nabataean shape of looped Alīf which was commonly placed
much higher above the base line is very unlikely to transform to Jazm Alīf.
Further supporting our argument are the papyri inscriptions
of that not-so-rare Quranic Mā´il calligraphic style and the two account papyri
mentioned above. The author believes that this Mail style was not unusual,
short lived, calligraphic style born after Islam as it is commonly thought
today. It seems that Mā´il was the Ḥijīzī style of early
Arabic Jazm which was gradually phased out by the Kufic and Naskh styles after
Islam. In fact, letters forms of early Kufic style are almost identical to
those of Mā´il. Examining Mā´il papyri one can easily observe not only
the slanted Alīfs but also the miniature Safawī Musnad
Wāw.
The most compelling evidence of Jazm cursive Musnad
connection is the way it joins letter shapes along a straight horizontal line. The
same extended, open-ended, horizontal strokes seen to the left of almost every
cursive Musnad letter is used in cursive Jazm. This unique approach sets it
apart from Nabataean or other scripts in the area. It is possible to imagine
that sometimes during the 3rd century the Nabataeans had altered their
letter shapes significantly to conform to complete horizontality, but the same
can be argued for Musnad.
Questioning the Nabataean Inscriptional Evidence
As was mentioned earlier, the theory of a Nabataean
transformation is completely based on three Arabic inscriptions in Nabataean
script. One of these inscriptions is Raqqūsh. It is said to represent the
earliest Arabic forms.35
& 13 However, the
existence of few Arabic looking connected words in that inscription seems to be
coincidental. The word qabrū (Arabic for grave) was repeated three times
in the inscription but only once it resembled Arabic. Raqqūsh is a classic
late Nabatean inscription, or at best it could be Nabataean inscribed by
someone with Jazm background. This would agree with experts who labeled it as a
“border dialect.”
 |
Earliest Nabataean
inscription of Arabic text found in Madā´in Salih, northern Ḥijāz,
Saudi Arabia. Dated 267 CE 28
Notice Vertical Musnad on the right. Highlighted in Green is the word qabrū
in three locations.
|
Incidentally, it is not very peculiar to see dots in the
Raqqūsh inscription. As stated earlier, dots are possibly a pre Islamic
invention. Persian scripts like Pahlavi and Avesta may have used dots earlier.
The script of Palmyra included dots which may have been picked from Persian
controlled Mesopotamia.31 It
is very likely dots were passed to late Nabataean via Palmyra. The fact that
the Arabs had called the addition of dots to Arabic during the seventh century ´i`jām
or ta`jīm proves this contention. Both of these words translates to
“de-Arabize” or “to make it un-Arabic.”
Found Earlier, but dated few decades later, the
Namārah
Nabataean inscription is also widely indicated as an early Jazm
connection. The
first abstract sketch produced from the original stone, which is kept in
the Lovure Museum in Paris, shows few words with horizontally connected
shapes resembling Arabic.
The second word of the second line was interpreted as a Lām-Alīf
ligature following an Alīf even though it appears partially
deteriorated.
In several other areas one can spot forms resembling Arabic final Baa
and
Hā´, multiple shapes per Nabataean Kāf, and even a hint of future
Arabic Tā´ Marbūtah!
Visually retracing and rereading the inscription in the 1980s
of last century, Bellamy mainly reinforced earlier Dussaud observations, but in
absence of physical examination, it is quite difficult to judge the Namārah
shapes from photographs. For example, Bellamy provided three photographs that
show significantly different letter lines in the deteriorated area on the
second text line where a Lām-Alīf ligature was supposedly used in the
word al-´Asadiyyīn. The problem is clarifying one area in a picture significantly
changed the appearance of lines in other areas. As Bellamy himself puts it, “photographs
can be deceptive.” 6
Assuming the current shapes of Namārah are accurate, problems
still exists regarding their interpretations. Current readings are not totally
objective. They assume in advance that this inscription represented a
“developed form of Nabataean alphabet, well on its way to becoming Arabic”.6 But one can argue important contradictions
in these readings.
The first line was translated as “this is the funerary
monument of ´Umru´ al-Qays,” giving the impression that the Namārah stone was
once placed on his grave, but the Arabic reading, on the other hand, was “tī
nafs mru´ l-Qays”. The two do not match since tī is not an Arabic word for
“this” and nafs in Arabic means “soul” not “grave.” Also, since the earlier
Raqqūsh inscription had explicitly and extensively used the Arabic word qabrū
for grave, why wouldn’t an inscription, only a few decades later, use this same
word?
Despite the fact that most words in the current reading of
the inscription are clearly Arabic words, `akdī is not. Experts differed
significantly about its meaning, but they believed that it could be and old
Arabic adverb word meaning “thereafter” or “forever”, which is not convincing.
The word `akdī appeared in two sentences. First in “harraba mahjū
`akdī wa ja´ ..” then in “`akdī halak sanat ..” Because it was placed,
in both cases, before a verb, the author believes that it referred to a name
and that Namarah was either a burial stone or an honorary monument for a
colleague of ´Umru´ al-Qays named `akdī. Hence, and after an opening
sentence in honor of ´Umru´ al-Qays, Namarah listed `akdī’s accomplishments
before stating the date of his death.
 |
Nabataean inscription of
Namārah found south of Damascus, Syria. Dated 328 C.E.28 Highlighted
in green are from top to bottom, right to left: tī nafs mru´ l-Qays, al-´Asadiyyīn,
`akdī (twice), and the year.
|
As for the inscriptions of Ḥarrān and ´Usays, the
dating of Namārah Nabatean inscription was also based on the reading of two
parts number following the Arabic word for year. Looking from right to left, the
last portion of the second part was identical visually in all three
inscriptions. It was read by experts as the number 23. This reading would make
dates of all three inscriptions having same least significant number, 3, which
is too ironic. Additionally, after researching Nabataean numerals, no definitive
equivalence to that shape was found.10
As mentioned earlier, it can not be ruled out that this symbol may have
represented an event or a year mark, not a number.
Dating the Namārah inscriptions is very important
since
the second oldest Arabic Jazm inscription found in Sakākah, Saudi
Arabia, explicitly mentioned an associate, admirer, or may be a son of a
slave of ´Umru´
al-Qays. Its date was estimated to be around that of Namārah or a
century
later at most. Examining how ´Umru´ al- Qays was written in both
inscriptions
few decades apart leaves one with the impression that Nabataean could
not have
transformed to Jazm but co existed and interacted with test it.
Conclusion
Arabic Jazm in its early centuries was most likely a localized
version of cursive Musnad used by northern Arabian tribes. Clearly, Musnad was
not set in stone while its relatives, Phoenician and Aramaic scripts, evolved
into a variety of other styles. Because of their nomadic nature the northern Arab
tribes were exposed to a wide range of neighboring letter forms which had
affected Jazm development. Evidently, the lack of utilization by a powerful central
state had prolonged the Jazm development cycle.
For a long time, early Arabic was torn between its Musnad
roots and the more mature Aramaic scripts around it. It may have had incorporated
several Nabataean shapes, but it is hard to definitely claim it was a
transformed Nabataean script based on a couple of inscriptions distantly
resembling Arabic, especially since Aramaic Nabataean and Musnad have similar
shape roots, and especially, since determining shapes of an inscription is not
a definite and precise scientific process.
It is not clear which northern Arab tribes had
first used
Jazm. This is not important, however, since despite their vast
geographic area,
these tribes were very close culturally. Most definitely, the emergence
of pre
Islamic Mecca as a prominent center for trade and worship in the Arabian
Peninsula had played a major role in the forming and spread of Jazm to
the extent
that it became known as the script of Hijaz.
The Arab tribes of Ḥīrah could have been the
originators of Jazm, or may be due to their exposure to Persian Sassanid
scripts, could have been the ones who had significantly transformed it by incorporating
smoother curves and rhythm. However, the direct predecessor of modern Arabic
was the Jazm style of Ḥijāz. In fact, Arabic had only developed into
clear solid script after the emergence of Islam when a derived style, Kūfī,
became the official and religious script of the new Islamic state.
Arabic Jazm was a script with powerful shapes and dynamics. Being
a true regional product shaped by the forms of both Musnad and Aramaic, it had quickly
established itself as the unifying script of the greater Arabian Peninsula, North
Africa, and Persia. In as little as two centuries after the Islamic era, Arabic
became a prominent world script with rich calligraphic traditions. The older
scripts of the area which survived until today were significantly affected by its
success. And with the expansion of Islam, even distant nation’s scripts took
Arabic shapes. This is expected since for many centuries, and in a vast area of
the earth, Arabic became the undisputed script for science and culture.
Bibliographic References
- Ancient Hebrew Research Center. Museum of Hebrew Script. Alphabet. http://www.ancient-hebrew.org
- Arab Calligraphy: Portrait of Magnificence, Majesty, and Grace. Areen: Arabcin’s Monthly Magazine. 2001. 25. http://www.arabcin.net/areen/areen_english/25/cover1.htm
- Bellamy, James A. The new Reading of al-Namarah Inscription. Journal of the American Oriental Society. 1985.105: PP 31-48.
- Farrokh, Rokn od Din Homayun. History of Book and the Imperial Libraries of Iran. 1963. Ministry of Art and Culture. Tehran
- Healey, John F. and Drijvers, Han J.W. The Old Syriac Inscriptions of Edessa and Osrhoene. 1999. Brill.
- Healey, John F. The Nabataean Tomb Inscriptions of Mada’in Salih. Journal of Semitic Studies. 1993. Supplement 1. Oxford University Press.
- Hussein, Mohamed A. Origins of the Book: From Papyrus to Codex. 1970. New York graphics Society Ltd. Greenwich, Connecticut.
- Mādūn, Muḥammad `Alī. Khatt al-Jazm ibn al-Khatt al-Musnad. 1989. Dar Ṭlās lil-Dirāsāt wa al-Terjamah wa al-Nashr. Damascus. First Edition.
- McGuire, Gibson. Nippur. The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. 2001-2002 Annual Report. http://oi.uchicago.edu/research/pubs/ar/01-02/nippur.html
- al-Muaikel, Khalil. Pre-Islamic Arabic Inscriptions from Sakaka, Saudi Arabia. Studies on Arabia in honor of Professor G. Rex Smith. Journal of Semitic Studies. Oxford University Press. 2002. Supplement 14: PP 157-169.
- al-Nadim, Ibn. The Fihrest of al-Nadim. Bayard Dodge, editor and translator. 1970. Columbia University Press.
- Rostovtzeff, M. I. The Caravan Gods of Palmyra. The Journal of Roman Studies. Part 1: Papers Dedicated to Sir George MacDonald. 1932. 22: PP107-116
- al-Saggār, Muḥammad Sa`īd. Abjadiyyat al-Saggar: al-Mashru` wa-al-Miḥnah.1998. Damascus. Dar al-Mada.
- Saifulla, M. S. M.; Ghuniem, Muhammad; Zaman, Shibli. From Alphonse Mengana to Christoph Luxenberg: Arabic script and the alleged Syriac Origins of the Qur’an. Islamic Awareness. http://www.islamic-awareness.org
- al-Sālim, Wārid Badir. Makhtutah Takshif `Anhā al-Zamān. al-Zamān Arabic Daily Newspaper. UK Edition. June 19, 2006. 10:2725. Final Page
- Segal, J. B. Four Syriac Inscriptions. Bulletin of the school of Oriental and African Study. University of London. Fiftieth Anniversary Volume.1967. 30:2: PP 293-304.
- Segal, J. B. Some Syriac Inscriptions fron the 2nd - 3rd Century A. D. Bulletin of the school of Oriental and African Study. University of London. 1954. 16:1 PP 13-36
- Sheridan, Susan Guise, Ph.D. University of Notre Dame. Department of Anthropology. Pictures from a trip to Petra.
- Smithsonian. National Museum of Natural History. Written in Stone: Inscriptions from the National Museum of Saudi Arabia. http://www.mnh.si.edu/epigraphy/
- Starcky, Jean. The Nabataean: A Historical Sketch. The Biblical Archaeologist. December 1955. 18: 4.
- al-Theeb, S.A. Two New Dated Nabataean Inscriptions from al-Jawf. Journal of Semitic Studies. 1994. XXX|X: PP 33-40.
Acknowledgement
All diagrams in this article were prepared by Hassan Jamil a
recent graduate of Baruch College.
About the Author
Type
designer,
librarian, and systems engineer, Saad D. Abulhab, was born in 1958 in
Sacramento, California, and grew up in Iraq. Residing in the U.S. since
1979, he is currently Director of Technology of the Newman Library of
Baruch
College, the City University of New York. He holds a Bachelor of Science
in
Electrical Engineering from Polytechnic University, and a Master of
Science in
Library and Information Sciences from Pratt Institute. Involved since
1992 in
the field of Arabic computing and typography, he is most noted for his
non-traditional type designs. More information about the author and his
work are
available on his site: http://arabetics.com
Tambahan :
gambar :
search.google.com
omniglot.com
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar