Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m42fx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-19T08:52:45.231Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Notes on the Mureighan Inscription

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 December 2009

A. F. L. Beeston
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Ry. 506 is an inscription of some importance for an otherwise obscure period of Arabian history. G. Ryckmans, in his editio princeps of the inscription,3 and J. Ryckmans in his comments thereon,4 have made very valuable contributions to the understanding of this far from easy text. A few notes may, I think, be nevertheless added.

At the outset, one point to be remembered in dealing with this text is that Abraha, its author, is frequently referred to in the plural, as we see from sṭrw in line 2 here (with Abraha as the subject), as well as throughout C. 541. Consequently, plural verbs and the plural pronoun -hmw can refer to Abraha himself.

Line 1. It is interesting to confront the form of titulature here used with that found in C. 541/4–8. The comparison allows us to make some deductions about the name or epithet zybmn (so spelt here, against zbymn in C. 541):—

Type
Notes and Communications
Information
Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies , Volume 16 , Issue 2 , June 1954 , pp. 389 - 392
Copyright
Copyright © School of Oriental and African Studies 1954

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 389 note 1 ‘ The Persian Conception of Artistic Unity in Poetry … ’, BS0AS., 14, pp. 239–43Google Scholar; ‘ An Analysis of Primary and Secondary Significations … ’, BSOAS., 14, pp. 627–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

page 389 note 2 ‘ A Novel Interpretation of Hafiz ’, BSOAS., 15, pp. 279–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

page 389 note 3 ‘ Inscriptions sud-arabes, dixième série ’, Le Muséon, 66, pp. 278–284.Google Scholar

page 389 note 4 ‘ Inscriptions historiques sabéennes ’, op. cit., pp. 339–342.

page 390 note 1 This reading, based on Fakhry's copy, is (as J. R. remarks) certainly better in sense than the inexplicable of Glaser; and in fact, in these relief texts, it is almost impossible to distinguish between z and t.

page 391 note 1 Less likely, ‘ from Ma‛ ’, since the latter had already given hostages after the battle. The first set of hostages were exacted from the defeated tribesmen immediately after the battle; the second set were exacted from Ma's overlord al-Mundhir as the price of a definitive peace.

page 391 note 2 According to the revised chronology which I have proposed in ‘ Problems of Sabæan Chronology ’ (BSOAS., 16, p. 40)Google Scholar our text would have to be dated c. 552. In either case, al-Mundhir (who survived until 554) was still on the throne of Ḥira at the period of our text.

page 391 note 3 J. R. considers it more likely that the ‘ son ’ in question was the son of and not himself, al-Mundhir's son.

page 391 note 4 Alternatively, ‘ when Ma had made a raid ’.