ARAM, 7 (1995) 183-187 183 NABATAEANS AND PALMYREANS: AN ANALYSIS OF THE TELL EL-SHUQAFIYYE INSCRIPTIONS V. COLOMBO In 1956 J. Starcky, discussing some archaic Palmyrene inscriptions from the first century B.C.,1 catalogued and compared their script with the script of some Nabatean inscriptions from the same period to check whether it was likely that there was any genetic connection between the two kinds of script. As a matter of fact, in the Nabatean inscription from Tell el-Shuqafiyye (Pl.1) which we are going to discuss, some typical Palmyrene traits are easily recognisable. The conclusion Starcky drew at the end of his article was that although they are very similar – since both stemming from the imperial Ara- maic script – there could be no way of considering the Palmyrene script a derivation from the Nabatean.2 We cannot but agree with Starcky. What we would like to show, however, is the relevance and the peculiarity of the afore- mentioned Nabatean inscription among the ones which Starcky studied. Firstly, it must be emphasised that the most ancient Palmyrene inscrip- tions3 date back to the first half of the first century B.C. while the most archaic Nabatean inscription4 – if we do not take into account the Elusa/Kha- lasa inscription5 written in a sort of late Aramaic script– is older, going back to 95 B.C. At Tell el-Shuqafiyye – literally the “tell of sherds” – in Lower Egypt, two Nabatean inscriptions – the first one found at the end of the last century,6 the 1 Starcky, J., “Inscriptions archaïques de Palmyre”, in Studi orientalistici in onore di Giorgio Levi della Vida, II, (Rome, 1956), 509-528. 2 Starcky, “Inscriptions”, 525. 3 The dedication to the daughter of Bel (24 B.C.), dedication of the priests of Bel (44 B.C.), dedication to Bel, Belhammon and Manawat (44 B.C.) in Starcky, “Inscriptions”, 525. 4 The Aslah inscription from the Bab al-Siq in Petra in Répertoire d'épigraphie sémitique, 5 vols., (Paris, 1900-1968) n. 1492. 5 Cantineau, J., Le nabatéen, (Paris, 1930), 43-44. 6 Clermont-Ganneau, Ch., “Les Nabatéens en Égypte”, in Recueil d'archéologie orientale, VIII, (Paris, 1898), 229-268. 184 AN ANALYSIS OF THE TELL EL-SHUQAFIYYE INSCRIPTIONS second one found in the Eighties7 – have been brought to light to date. Both of them are very important since they are the only Nabatean texts found in the Egyptian mainland. The Tell el-Shuqafiyye inscription n. 1 goes back to a date between 77 and 44 B.C., that is to say that it is almost contemporary with the Palmyrene ded- ication to the priests of Bel and with the dedication to Bel, Belhammon and Manawat, both from 44 B.C. Since its publication by Clermont-Ganneau,8 the Tell el-Shuqafiyye in- scription n. 1 has been very much discussed and studied by scholars. The main problem with it – as with most inscriptions – was that the stone on which it had been carved was very badly damaged so that the inter- pretation of the first line and of some words presented some difficulty of intepretation. We shall see that none of the three interpretations which have been pro- posed until now has sufficiently stressed the link of this Nabatean text either with the Palmyrenes themselves or with Palmyrene writing or language. Clermont-Ganneau proposed the following translation: 1 [A Allat?, la dèesse?, a érigé? (un tel?), 2 fils? de Yarhibo]la?, et a écrit [l'épigraphe? 3 pour la] vie de (notre) seigneur?…iou, l'aphkal 4 et (pour) la vie de lui-même et (de celui) dont le nom sera 5 mentionné devant elle et à Aouitou 6 [En?] salut! Le 21 (du mois de) Pakhonsi, 7 de l'année 4 de Ptolémée, le roi, la quelle est 8 [l'année 1? de] (notre?) seigneur?… iou, l'aphkal [salut?] Many doubts are registered in his reading, but from the beginning of Cler- mont-Ganneau's explanation we find traces of Palmyrenes. Firstly, we find a comparison with other Palmyrene inscriptions to be found in RES 30, 131, 286 where we find Nabatean deities, the afkal and the patronimic Yarhi- bola. Secondly, the reconstructed proper name is typically Palmyrene, and Cler- mont-Ganneau underlined the fact that tight relations between the two peo- ples existed over the ages and that the Palmyrene presence in Egypt was well attested. Thirdly, he noticed that the kaf in the third line has the typical Pal- myrene shape. The expression mrn could be interpreted, in his opinion, as a 7 Jones, R. N. – Hammond, Ph. C. – Johnson, D. J. - Fiema, Z. T., “A Second Nabatean Inscription from Tell esh-Shuqafiya, Egypt”, BASOR, 269 (1988), 47-57. 8 Clermont-Ganneau, “Les Nabatéens”. VALENTINA COLOMBO 185 defective Palmyrene form (sic!), and finally the term afkal is common both in Nabatean and Palmyrene inscriptions as a religious title.9 The second and, as we will see, the best interpretation, was by E. Littmann10 who rendered the inscription as follows: 1 …………………….. 2 (son of Yarhib)ola. And he wrote a con(tract of lease) 3 (for) the life of Master Fusaiyu (or: Rudaiyu) the p(riest) 4 (and for the li)fe of himself and of him whose (name) shall be 5 (mention)ed before him and at {awitu 6 It was completed on the 21st of (the month of) Pahonsi of the 7 (year) 4 of Ptolemy the king which is (the year) 8 (1 of Master) Fusaiyu (or:Rudaiyu) the pri(est). Hail! In his commentary, Littmann states that whatever Ptolemy we assume to be the one in our inscription – either Ptolemaios Philopator XIV or XV or XVI – the inscription can probably be dated to between 48 and 30 B.C.. This is about the time from which some of the early Nabatean inscriptions from Syria – more precisely, from the Hauran area – can be dated. As far as the author of the text is concerned, Littmann concluded that he could have been a Nabatean who had come to Egypt from Palmyra and that Yarhibola, if the reading was correct, might have been a Nabatean who adopted a Palmyrene name or was given such a name by his parents who lived at Palmyra. The third – and up to now considered almost definitive – interpretation of the Tell el-Shuqafiyye inscription was put forward by J. Strugnell in 1959.11 Here is his interesting and, as we will show, not so reliable translation: 1 This is the temple? which X 2 son of Y built for al-Kutba}, the goddess, 3 for the life of our lord Seyô, the priest, 4 and for his own life and in order that his name 5 be remembered in her presence and in }wytw 6 Peace. On the 21st of Pahonsi in the 7 fourth year of Ptolemy the King 8 which is the first (?) year of our lord Seyô, the priest. 9 In Nabatean inscriptions we find either the form afkal or akfal. For an explication see Colombo, V., “Interferenza lessicale dell'arabo nel nabateo”, in Sem Cam Iafet. Atti della VII Giornata di Studi Camito-Semitici e Indoeuropei, (Milan, 1994), 74. 10 Littmann, E., “Nabatean inscriptions from Egypt II”, BSOAS, 16 (1954), 227-230. 11 Strugnell, J., “The Nabatean Goddess al-Kutba’ and her sanctuaries”, BASOR, 156 (1959), 29-38. 186 AN ANALYSIS OF THE TELL EL-SHUQAFIYYE INSCRIPTIONS The most important statement here was the one about the identification of the deity al-Kutba}, a scribal god of the Nabu/Thoth/Hermes/Mercury pattern who could be identified with the much more famous pre-Islamic deity al- {Uzza. Another particular which we would like to emphasise in this Nabatean inscription is the expression “and in }awytw”. Almost everybody nowadays agrees with the identification of }Awitu with Qasrawet, a village not very far from Tell el-Shuqafiyye itself. The expression is very similar to the one we find in a Nabatean inscription from Hauran (56 A.D.) in which we find “to Allat, their goddess, who is in Salkhad”. J. Teixidor noticed the importance of this sentence since it clearly means that the goddess had not initially been worshipped in the region and that her cult had been imported from far afield.12 The same could have happened to the divinity al-Kutba}. The goddess is to be found in another Nabatean inscription from the temple of Ramm13 in the al- Hisma region where we find “al-Kutba} who in Gaia is al-{Uzza”. The origin of al-Kutba} is very likely a Lihianite one – see the Lihianite han-Aktab – but if we consider the identification Strugnell made with Mer- cury to be correct, we must answer a question left unanswered by him, as to why Mercury is called al-Katib even by the Arabs and why nobody gives an explanation for this name. If al-Kutba} is in some way identifiable with Mer- cury, we also know that another pre-Islamic deity identified with him was Ruda, whose worship was widely spread by the Tamudenes but reached Palmyra and the Safa region. In Palmyra the god Arsu – that is Ruda – was worshipped together with Azizos (a masculine version of al-{Uzza?). In addi- tion, the meaning of the word Arsu is “the one who loves and makes true people's wishes”, just like the Arabic word }Utarid, one of the names of Mercury. We could then assume that the deity al-Kutba} entered the Nabatean pantheon from the south. If the writer of the Tell el-Shuqafiyye inscription is of Palmyrene origin, he could have found in it the counterpart of a deity he already knew, Arsu.14 Another feature of this inscription which has not been sufficiently stressed, in my view, is its script: it lacks the typical features of Nabatean script and, in particular, displays two characteristics of the archaic Palmyrene script.